3/5/1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Commissioner Lyons asked if the applicant is proposing to delete the southwest 10 acres from the rezoning request, and Attorney Stewart stated that they are requesting to rezone the entire acreage to RM -6 and suggesting that the buffer zone be accommodated through the site plan process. Director Keating pointed out that the site plan process and the rezoning requests go through different avenues. The site plan process is final at the P & Z stage, while the rezoning must eventually come before this Board. Coupling the site plan with the rezoning does not give any more feeling of security than going ahead normally. Chairman Scurlock felt the most logical approach would be to omit the agricultural land and track that along and have the site plan and rezoning approved at the same time. That procedure, along with the deed restriction that the developer has most graciously offered, would put the residents in the area more at ease even though the process might take a little longer. Commissioner Lyons understood that Attorney Stewart had made that offer, and Attorney Stewart stated that if the 10 acres is omitted, that is certain an avenue they would pursue. Lengthy discussion ensued regarding the possibility of omitting the southwest 10 -acre parcel and bringing it back through the cumbersome procedure of getting the rezoning and site plan approval simultaneously. Attorney Vitunac believed the advisability of the rezoning for its own protection should depend on our Zoning Code and not a promise from the developer to give us an easement. Even if he gives us an easement, there is some doubt whether it would be enforceable if he were to take it back because it is a gratuitous offer to buy a zoning that he would not have received under the County's zoning protection. He pointed out that the County has a PRD process where the zoning and site plan are considered at the same time. 23 BOOK 63 798 MAR 5 1986