My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6/11/1986
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1986
>
6/11/1986
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:53:02 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 12:32:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
06/11/1986
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
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
pay any special fee in excess of $50 to operate in areas zoned <br />residential use." This bill becomes effective in October, 1986. <br />Chairman Scurlock remained convinced that the increased <br />traffic and stacking conditions are the main problems, not the <br />residential use. He pointed out that the traffic engineering <br />consultant agrees that expansion will be forthcoming and that <br />20th Avenue will be 4-laned in the future. Whether the traffic <br />level is classified as Level A or B is not the question; the <br />question is how well traffic moves through that intersection. <br />Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked if <br />anyone wished to be heard in this matter. <br />Standish Crews, 1135 20th Avenue, reported that at peak <br />times during school hours the northbound lane backs up to his <br />south lot line, which is 500 feet from the corner. Traffic has <br />increased and there have been serious accidents -at this corner. <br />Recently, a car went into the yard across the street from them. <br />He felt another 50-70 cars coming in twice a day would create <br />more havoc than they already have at that corner. <br />Attorney Christopher Marine, of Gould, Cooksey, Fennell, <br />Appleby, Barkett & O'Neill, appeared representing many property <br />owners in the vicinity who are opposed to this project and urged <br />the Board to deny this special exception approval. He explained <br />that many of those inlopposition to the child care facility <br />attended the Planning & Zoning hearing on this matter but could <br />not be here this morning because they had to go to work. He <br />submitted a petition signed by 142 people in opposition to the <br />child care center being located at this intersection. <br />SAID PETITIONS ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE <br />BOARD <br />Attorney Marine believed that an institutional use is much <br />closer to a commercial use and is not appropriate in an RS -6 <br />zoning district. A child care facility is allowed in unique <br />circumstances, but the Code says it has to be compatible with <br />15 <br />BOGS 64 FADE 677 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.