My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/1/1982
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1982
>
12/1/1982
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:49:40 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 2:37:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/01/1982
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
126
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
D E C 1 1992 sea ^ 52 <br />rezoning the subject property to R -2D, with <br />the exception of the 200' on the north boundary <br />of said property from U.S.I up to the environ- <br />mentally sensitive lands, which 200' will be <br />rezoned to R -1A and subject to all R-lA re- <br />quirements, and with the exception of the <br />environmentally sensitive lands which will be <br />legally described; the entire property to be <br />considered in one site plan review. <br />Commissioner Bird stated that he will support the <br />Motion because he believes it is a reasonable compromise. <br />He complimented the River Shores group on their effective <br />organized presentation, but pointed out that this rezoning <br />will give them a 200' buffer strip of quality homes; it will <br />tie this development to a site plan approval which will give <br />us more control; it will assure that the roads will not cut <br />through into River Shores; and it will bring a water line to <br />their subdivision at no expense to them. <br />Commissioner Fletcher stated that he planned to vote <br />against the Motion. He commented that in the two years—he, <br />has been on the Board he has never heard a better presenta- <br />tion as to why something should not be done. Commissioner <br />Fletcher felt one of the strongest points in the Land Use <br />Plan is the consideration of the existing families and how <br />that Plan will affect them. He urged the Board to re- <br />consider this compromise and say to the developer that we <br />have no doubt about his integrity and work, but we are <br />listening to the people who want this used as single family <br />and not multi family. <br />Commissioner Wodtke spoke in favor of the proposed <br />rezoning, stressing the controls provided in the site plan <br />review required for multi -family. He believed if this <br />property were left totally in single family, it would be <br />68 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.