My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8/21/1985
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1985
>
8/21/1985
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:51:31 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 10:37:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
08/21/1985
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
87
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
AUG 21.1995 <br />BOOK 61 PvUE 846 <br />2- On Industrial Property there was a 150 ft. frontage - thus Knight & Mathis -- <br />who adheres to this requirement and tries to keep some landscaping. This property <br />I believe was sold to Knight & Mathis by Mr. Stapp years ago. <br />3- The old Fletcher property - cleaned up many times by order -- now Bains Utilities - <br />no frontage requirements it seems -- now restricted industrial use. What are the <br />restrictions here? <br />4- The Commercial zoning at 12th and Old Dixie looks like cement city with chain - <br />linked six-foot fences out to the frontage and no landscaping ...... This is hardly <br />the restricted commercial of years ago. The Business (B-1 zoning)doesn't look <br />much better. <br />5- Traffic between 12th St. and 8th or Glendale is intolerable. A two-lane high- <br />way with no turning lane at 8th piles up the traffic at peek hours as far north <br />as the Stapp property, making it impossible to get into our driveway before two <br />or three lights at times. What would stores or offices do to increase this traffic? <br />6- This is to be my retirement home in a few years and do not want to be pushed out <br />of it by commercial areas. <br />7- The new building set back off Old Dixie between 10th and 12th, with cement drive- <br />way, seems to be a warehouse with huge trucking going in and out. Commercial???? <br />For these reasons above, we are against the request for Commercial zoning and ask your <br />deep consideration before making a decision. I know the argument given at the Zoning <br />meeting was that "No-one would want to live residential and look at the mess across <br />the street" --by the same token what office or store would want to either? <br />Thanking you, We ave, <br />Sry Sinc r y, <br />IRENE J. MO ISON AND MAUD M..MORRISON <br />Planner Shearer advised that it was staff's feeling that if <br />the 4 acres were rezoned from RS -6 to C-1, it would result in a <br />domino affect. Since single family zoning is no longer realistic <br />for the west side of Old Dixie, instead of going commercial which <br />would severely impact this road, staff preferred the alternative <br />of going to multiple family to encourage residential redevelop- <br />ment in this area. He pointed out that the rezoning of this <br />property commercial would lower the level of service on this area <br />of Old Dixie Highway from the current level of Service C to <br />Service level E and the Comprehensive Plan provides that we <br />cannot approve any development that exceeds level of Service C on <br />an annual basis or a level of Service D during peak season. Mr. <br />Shearer explained that the Planning g Zoning Commission <br />recommended approval of this basically because there is <br />industrial zoned property across the street, and they felt the <br />commercial would be a transition. <br />49 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.