5/22/1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

FF", -MAY 2 2 1995 BOOK 61 N� IG Page 6 - 23.1.M - Appeals of Decisions Regarding Site Plans Delete ...having an aggrieved interest therein" and replace it with "adversely affected by the decision". Administrator Wright recommended that Item 23.1.C.1.(c) "read "Public Works Director or his appointed designee" and (d) "Chairperson of the Planning and Zoning Commission, or his appointed designee." Chairman Lyons did not feel comfortable with the wording in (h) of that item and suggested that it be changed to "Other representatives of County departments and agencies, as approved by the County Administrator." Director Keating explained the Provision of Required Access Points on Page 30 of the ordinance and how this provision would affect the development over on the barrier island. He noted that it is the very same provision that we have in the subdivision ordinance. The developer has the option to either provide a 15 -ft access easement or pay the fair market value of that easement for capital improvements to the County park system. He pointed out that several developers of subdivisions have agreed to pay fees in lieu of dedication. Attorney Brandenburg explained that the way it reads now is that the County may require it, but the developer does not have the option unless the County approves the option. Chairman Lyons opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. Margaret Mann, Attorney representing Ken Elsmore and Elgin Marble, Inc., advised that her clients have a current site plan pending before the Planning & Zoning Commission in June. She expressed their concern as to how their site plan relates to this proposed ordinance. In addition, she wanted assurance from the staff and the Commission that this ordinance will not be retroactive and will not affect any site plans that already have been submitted to staff and are up for review. 30