My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/15/1980
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1980
>
10/15/1980
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:48:54 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 12:31:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Special Call Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
10/15/1980
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
OCT 15 1980 <br />BOOit 4 4 P,%� F 91�' . <br />THE APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED TO THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION, <br />AND THEY VOTED 2 TO 1 AGAINST RECOMMENDING THE REZONING. HE <br />CONTINUED THAT THE PLANNING STAFF VOTED FOR THE REZONING, BUT <br />CONDITIONS WOULD HAVE TO BE MET, SUCH AS WATER AND SEWER, ETC. <br />ATTORNEY STEVE HENDERSON, REPRESENTING MR. AND MRS. CAIN <br />AND RICHARD SCHAUB, APPROACHED THE BOARD TO EXPLAIN THE FOLLOWING: <br />THE PROPERTY IS TITLED IN THE NAME OF EDWARD D. LEWIS, TRUSTEE; <br />MR. AND MRS. CAIN ARE THE TITLE OWNERS OF THIS PROPERTY; RICHARD <br />SCHAUB AND HIS SONS, RICK AND CLEM, ARE THE DEVELOPMENT ENTITY; AND <br />THEY ARE PLANNING A JOINT VENTURE WITH THE GAINS. ATTORNEY HENDERSON <br />STATED THERE HAS BEEN NO ISSUE PRESENTED AS TO THE QUALITY OF WORK <br />THE DEVELOPERS HAVE DONE IN THE PAST. HE THEN REFERRED TO THE ZONING <br />MAP THAT WAS DISPLAYED, AND NOTED THAT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WAS <br />SURROUNDED BY MULTIPLE ZONED PROPERTY TO THE NORTH, AND IN LARGE AREAS <br />BETWEEN THIS PROPERTY AND WABASSO ROAD, THERE IS R-2, WHICH PERMITS <br />15 UNITS PER ACRE, ATTORNEY HENDERSON ADVISED THAT AT THE LAST <br />HEARING, THEY CHANGED THEIR APPLICATION SO THAT THE PROPERTY WEST <br />OF A -1-A WOULD BE REZONED TO R -2A, WHICH ALLOWS 4 UNITS AN ACRE IN <br />MULTI -FAMILY DEVELOPMENT. HE ADDED THAT THEY RETAINED THE R -2B <br />ZONING EAST OF A -1-A. THE ATTORNEY CONTINUED THAT THERE WAS SOME <br />CONFUSION AS TO WHAT THE EXISTING ZONING PERMITTED, AND WHAT THE <br />DEVELOPER ACTUALLY WANTED TO DEVELOP. HE STATED THAT THEY ARE ASKING <br />FOR A DECREASE IN DENSITY. ATTORNEY HENDERSON COMMENTED THAT THERE <br />ARE ADVANTAGES TO MULTI -FAMILY DISTRICTS, AND THERE ARE SITE PLAN <br />REQUIREMENTS NEEDED FOR APPROVAL. HE FELT THIS ZONING WAS MORE <br />RESTRICTIVE THAN THEY WERE IN R-1. ATTORNEY HENDERSON COMMENTED THAT <br />IN THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, DENSITIES ON THE WEST`SIDE OF A -1-A WILL BE <br />3.5 UNITS PER ACRE, AND DENSITIES ON THE EAST SIDE OF A -1-A WILL BE <br />6.07 UNITS PER ACRE - THIS WILL NOT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE TOTAL <br />PERMITTED DENSITIES. HE STATED IT HAD BEEN DIFFICULT, DURING THIS <br />ZONING APPLICATION, TRYING TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THIS AND WHAT WAS <br />GOING ON WITH THE MASTER PLAN. ATTORNEY HENDERSON COMMENTED THAT <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.