Laserfiche WebLink
It is the position of the Planning and Development Division and <br />the Public Works Division that the Planning and Zoning Commis- <br />sion deviated from County Commission policy, and its own <br />established precedent, in approving this site plan application. <br />The staff's appeal of the decision is an effort to uphold <br />County policy and maintain the public's health, safety and <br />general welfare. <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />The staff recommends that the Board grant the appeal of the <br />Planning and Development Division and the Public Works Division <br />and reverse the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission <br />in approving the subject site plan. <br />Planner Craver summarized that the main problem with the <br />site plan is the traffic hazard involved with access to U.S.I, <br />which problem relates to the project's dual frontage. In former <br />applications where dual frontage was involved, it always has been <br />required that access be to the lower class roadway; staff, <br />therefore, is requesting reversal of the site plan approval. <br />Commissioner Wodtke inquired where access to U.S.I would be <br />allowed, and Public Works Director Davis explained that there is <br />established criteria in the Land Use Plan allowing access in 1/4 <br />mile increments. <br />Vice Chairman Scurlock had problems with reversing the site <br />plan approval. He pointed out that, for one thing, Mr. Proctor <br />and Mr. Hodges don't own the one parcel located at the south of <br />this property, and if that property were to be considered <br />separately, it would have.to have an access on U.S.I. Next, <br />obviously if you have that access, what people are going to do, <br />unless you have some structure there to prevent it, is make their <br />own median cut as they have all along and sometimes even go down <br />the wrong side on U.S.I to get to a certain place or go to the <br />next cut and make a "U" turn. This property extends almost 5001- <br />600' from the intersection, which is a good distance. Another <br />complication is the property across the street, which had <br />objections in regard to access through an existing subdivision. <br />The Vice Chairman felt that possibly a better approach might be <br />to work out an access to both properties with a common entrance - <br />17 <br />BOOK 59 F,1 -UF 8,99 <br />