My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/28/1984
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1984
>
11/28/1984
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:50:26 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 9:59:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
11/28/1984
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
78
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
Environment <br />BOOK L99 PnU '34 -- <br />The- <br />The subject property has 2.1 acres of land designated as <br />environmentally sensitive. In addition, the majority of the <br />subject property is in an A-10 flood hazard zone with a flood <br />elevation of 7. The A-10 zone includes areas within the 100 <br />year flood plain. The western portion of the subject property <br />is in a B flood hazard zone which includes areas within the 500 <br />year flood plain. <br />Utilities <br />Water is available for the subject property. Wastewater <br />facilities are not currently available. <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning <br />Commission's recommendation, staff recommends approval. <br />Planner Richard Shearer pointed out this rezoning request is <br />very similar to the preceding request; however, the amount of <br />environmentally sensitive acreage of 2.1 acres is very small in <br />comparison. Another difference is that more of the land would be <br />tied up in road right-of-way, approximately 10.6 acres. <br />Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked if <br />anyone wished to be heard in this matter. <br />Richard Bogosian, attorney representing the Tanen brothers, <br />owners of the subject property, explained that neither of his <br />clients are in attendance today, and if the Board chooses to be <br />consistent and go with the density restriction of the preceding <br />rezoning, he felt that a postponement of this public hearing <br />would be best until he could confer with his client. <br />Chairman Scurlock informed him that he intended to be <br />consistent with the motion on the previous rezoning hearing for 8 <br />units per acre, even respective of the fact that the developers <br />were donating over 10 acres of the road right-of-way. <br />Attorney Bogosian withdrew his request to have the meeting <br />postponed, as he felt that his client did not have any other <br />alternative. <br />34 <br />_ M <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.