Laserfiche WebLink
r N 0 V 17 1982 <br />the unique circumstances involving the gas transmission line <br />and the lake on Mrs. Neville's property. It was his opinion <br />that the main issue is the effects that will result from <br />having residential zoning in close proximity to light <br />industry and whether it is acceptable to put people next to <br />these type of activities. <br />Commissioner Lyons believed the main question is <br />whether -we want to break up the node by running residential <br />right through it. <br />Commissioner Pletcher was inclined to agree, but felt <br />Mr. Evans deserves an answer reference what he can do with <br />the property if this rezoning request is denied. <br />Mr. King stated that Mr. Evans basically could either <br />use it with its present zoning; he could come in with <br />another rezoning application; or he could wait until the <br />staff does their recommendations for administrative <br />rezoning. <br />Chairman Scurlock felt the bottom line is that the <br />property would be LM. <br />Commissioner Wodtke noted that in the Plan we adopted <br />an -area which shows an industrial/ commercial node and--also--- <br />shows MD -1. Is our policy going to be first come, first <br />served as we indicated or to wait for all the rezonings? He <br />continued that one of the original problems he had with <br />nodes is that the property owners need to know if they are <br />commercial or residential, and just how they can use their <br />land. Commissioner Wodtke felt we must address this on the <br />basis of what we have adopted and not something that will be <br />done at a future date. <br />Commissioner Bird concurred that we did proceed all <br />along on the concept that nodes would have some elasticity <br />to them and expand as demand indicated on a first come, <br />first served basis. He noted that this applicant has come <br />in pretty early in the game and indicated that they feel the <br />M <br />69 <br />M <br />