7/27/1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Chairman Scurlock noted that the higher density abuts Hobart Road. Ms. Miner stated that a portion of it does and the other portion is Mr. Wilson's property on which she believed a site plan has just been approved for multiple units. She stressed the problem is that this land was divided on the section line, and the owner is requesting that the LD -1 be redesignated LD -2 so the entire parcel can be developed under the LD -2 designation. Mr. Challacombe reported that staff does not recommend any change. He pointed out that we have the right-of-way for Hobart road, as well as the section line, separating this property currently. Hobart Landing is to the north, but as you go south, there really isn't any development, r which is one of the reasons for the LD -1. He felt if we allow the extension of LD -2 south, there will be more requests to keep on moving it further south. Commissioner Bird asked if a developer can average densities when a line bisects his property. Attorney Brandenburg reported that State Law says very plainly that you cannot issue a development order contrary to your Plan. The Zoning Code says the majority of the zoning on the property will apply to the entire parcel, but you don't have anything like that in the Land Use Plan. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unani- mously denied the request for the change in designation requested by the Van Cortland Corporation on their property on the east of U.S.1. Mrs. Miner informed the Board that the remainder of - this property was zoned Commercial and it today sits in an 32 JUL 2 71982 50 Feu.