Laserfiche WebLink
Y. 0 1, <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />BOOK 59 f'�Gr 10 <br />The Planning and Zoning Commission voted to deny this rezoning <br />request for the reasons stated in the description and <br />conditions section of this memorandum. While the Planning <br />Department feels that the Planning and Zoning Commission <br />identified valid considerations, the Planning Department does <br />not feel that all of the subject property can be included in <br />the I-95/S.R. 60 node and realistically be developed for <br />industrial uses. Based on the underlying MD -1 land use <br />designation, staff feels that this rezoning request is <br />consistent with the land use plan and recommends approval. <br />Mr. Shearer reviewed the above, noting that although the <br />staff does feel the Planning & Zoning Commission presented valid <br />reasons for their denial, staff does not feel it is realistic to <br />expect all 212,acres to be used for industrial and R -2D is <br />consistent with the Land Use Plan. They do believe the applicant <br />has made plans to provide access through properties to the north. <br />Chairman Scurlock asked if the portion that lies by the gas <br />transmission has been excluded, and Mr. Shearer stated that it is <br />included in the 212 acres and they are appealing the entire <br />property. <br />Attorney Chester Clem came before the Board representing the <br />applicant and displayed an aerial of the property in this area, <br />pointing out the portion owned by Ralph Evans, Trustee, and the <br />Reed Knight acreage. The property is represented in the <br />following drawings: <br />26 <br />