3/5/1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r --MAR 5 198 600K 63 Ftj.GE791 a 25 -ft, setback requirement from the rear lot line and houses would be very close to the project. 2) Take an equivalent piece of property, 250 -ft. which is the width of a standard subdivision, and leave it vacant. That proposal had its drawbacks in that vacant property draws trash and rodents. 3) Go ahead and rezone the entire property to RM -6 with the developer agreeing not to locate any buildings closer to the common property line than 250 feet and maintaining the area between the buildings and the property line, either in the form of lawns, ponds, landscaping, etc. Of the three alternatives discussed, the consensus of the 12-15 people at the meeting was that #3 was the best alternative. Chairman Scurlock asked how they would accomplish that since we cannot contract for zoning. Attorney Stewart stated that Dave Quigley, President of Wedgewood Park, Inc., has every intention of building this project in the above manner if he receives the rezoning. Then, if they were so bold as to submit a different site plan he would not have much of a career in this county as an attorney, nor would Mr. Quigley have much of a career as a developer. Chairman Scurlock asked about the possibility of leaving the 10 acres as agricultural and submitting their site plan with that portion deleted. Attorney Stewart emphasized that the problem with leaving some portion as agricultural is that they would lose the densities on that portion. Another alternative, although it seems like a cumbersome procedure, would be to leave a portion of the 10 -acre tract zoned agricultural and come back later for site plan approval and rezoning simultaneously, so that one would not happen without the other. They have no objection to that procedure as they have every intention of doing what they have said. 16