My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1/16/1985
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1985
>
1/16/1985
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:51:11 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 10:05:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
01/16/1985
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
165
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
ordinance, as set out in the draft with which he has been <br />supplied, is that a PRD would offer applicants greater <br />flexibility in designing and developing residential areas to <br />accommodate a more efficient and innovative residential <br />development. For the record, he wished to note that his company <br />has a 10 acre piece of property which is unique; it is laden with <br />large beautiful oak trees, and the only way they can develop, not <br />even to their allowable density, is to move around the trees <br />without taking them out. He realized Mr. O'Haire is saying let's <br />go cautiously, but reminded him there are seven stops before you <br />can even pull a permit on this, and it is an expensive process. <br />Vice Chairman Scurlock believed, from the staff's <br />standpoint, that some of the things we want to be able to <br />accomplish are on these smaller sites. <br />Attorney O'Haire emphasized that basically the Civic <br />Association just wishes the Board to be conservative and go <br />cautiously. The next specific item he wished to cover was in <br />Paragraph 4. c.ii. Transitional Area Density Credit. This states <br />that the maximum density permitted on the upland area receiving <br />the density transfer shall not increase by more than 50%. The <br />Association would like to limit this to 250. <br />Vice Chairman Scurlock asked where we got the 50% figure, <br />and Attorney Brandenburg reported that it is a compromise <br />figure. He noted that the objectives of the transfer are to <br />encourage people not to build on environmentally sensitive lands, <br />which they can do at one unit per acre. It is recognized that <br />some parcels will have a small upland area; so, there has to be a <br />cap, but if you set an unreasonable cap, you won't give them the <br />benefit of the transfer and will end up with them building on the <br />environmentally sensitive lands. He felt 50o is a reasonable <br />compromise and that a lower cap would defeat the purpose of <br />saving the environmentally sensitive lands. <br />Attorney O'Haire felt the cost of developing environmentally <br />sensitive land is such that it is quite restrictive in itself. <br />�$ `� 51 y <br />JA _[ 1 1 985 BOOK 5 Fr�L;C 589 <br />A <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.