12/2/1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

y� DEC 2 1986 BOOK 66 u,EL546 that the Board by all means downzone to RS -3 as advertised, but then, in order to stem the tide of new site plans, immediately direct staff to take another look at this area giving considera- tion to RS -1 as the people who live there are entitled to protection. In discussion, it was noted that RS -1 is one unit per acre and requires a minimum of 40,000 sq. ft. lot size. There is no category between RS -1 AND RS -3. Attorney O'Haire stated that he had meant to ask for R-1AA. Planner Shearer advised that R-1AA was repealed in April of 1985 when we did the residential zoning conversion, but Municipal Code inadvertently missed this and did not take it out of the Code supplement. Chairman Scurlock believed that Attorney O'Haire is asking that we explore a new ordinance to create a new district. Director Keating presented the alternative of rezoning to RS -1 and having non -conforming lots of record which still could be developed as they would not be illegal. Chairman Scurlock felt to avoid confusion, an ordinance should reflect what you actually can do; i.e., if it is 2.5, say so, and if you can't achieve 6, say 4.6, etc., but Commissioner Bird believed the problem is that with a PUD you can achieve 6. Olske Forbes, newest resident of Rosewood Road, asked if staff isn't supposed to put up some type of signage to alert adjacent owners of a rezoning, and Planner Shearer explained that the ordinance requires that we place signs, but does not require that we maintain them. Mrs. Forbes did not believe signs were ever placed, and Planner Shearer stated that he would check on this. Mrs. Forbes also did not think the general public understands the ramifica- tions of RS -3 having special exception uses, which means you could have PRDs, etc. Commissioner.Eggert pointed out that RS -6 has PRDs also, and Director Keating noted that a PRD requires two public hearings - 22