Laserfiche WebLink
Y 19182 _ <br />new Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and they have eliminated a <br />commercial tract which was not called for. They propose <br />construction of multi -family structures to meet consumer <br />needs and also propose to develop the parcel in three tracts <br />to provide flexibility to respond to marketplace acceptance. <br />Planner Dennis Ragsdale reemphasized the staff <br />recommendation of approval, noting that the proposed <br />development is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan's <br />intent that proposals for residential development shall <br />compliment existing residential patterns and provide <br />f <br />adequate neighborhood facilities. He believed the open <br />space provided by the multi -family development will blend <br />with the General Development community. <br />Planning Manager Art Challacombe pointed out that while <br />discussing alternatives for multi -family housing in the <br />South County area at the CLUP hearings, consideration was <br />given to the General -Development site as being appropriate <br />for affordable housing. <br />Chairman Scurlock noted that on different pages of the <br />back-up material there seemed to be a conflict as to the <br />number of units that could be developed, i.e., 200-215 as <br />opposed to 172. <br />Mr. Ragsdale stated that it basically depends on how <br />the subdivision is laid out, and he felt that allowing 1/4 <br />of the area for streets, you probably could get around 194. <br />Chairman Scurlock felt item 2(a) re water and sewer <br />services being presently available through General <br />Development Corporation's facilities needed some clarifica- <br />tion as significant expansion will be necessary before these <br />services actually are available. <br />Commissioner Fletcher questioned site plan approval <br />being required for multi -family and not single family, and <br />was informed that is correct, and the requirements for <br />