My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2/17/1987
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1987
>
2/17/1987
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:59:17 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 1:44:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/17/1987
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
86
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
Lloyd believed there is nothing else in Rosewood that has tried <br />to meet just "minimum" requirements. He further noted this plat <br />originally was used as a threat to show what the developer would <br />do it the community didn't support their PRD project. As to the <br />Planning 6 Zoning Commission just recently downzoning the <br />property, Mr. Lloyd pointed out that the developer originally <br />bought the property as agricultural. He contended that if it is <br />left at RS -3 and developed with 90' lots, it will make his <br />client's property practically unusable because no one will want <br />to buy a lot which backs up to one a good deal smaller. This <br />definitely will affect the neighborhood adversely, and he felt <br />there is no basis to say that the subject property cannot be <br />developed at a low density with larger lots. <br />Tom Schlitt, 47th Terrace, suggested that this is a unique <br />area that needs to be considered based on the time it has taken <br />to develop. This neighborhood just does not warrant larger <br />densities. There are several trees that encroach on 16th St. <br />now, and as Jungle Trail has its uniqueness and should be <br />protected, there are areas on the west of the river that have <br />their own uniqueness and should be protected also. <br />Elmer Barker, Rosewood Rd., noted that he has 550' frontage <br />and two houses on five acres, and he concurs with all that has <br />been said about the area having a distinct character. He would <br />seriously urge the Board to keep it in the RS -2 range. Mr. <br />Barker felt there other places for project of this nature - the <br />concept is good, but the location is bad. <br />Dr. Robert Vinson, resident of Rosewood Rd. for over 26 <br />years, advised that he chose this community to settle in and <br />raise a family because of the quality of the community, and he <br />took pride in its development and its "snob"'appeal. He <br />emphasized that the people in this area have been very active in <br />doing constructive work in the county, and they do not want <br />minimal standards. He believed the people are happy with RS -2, <br />but felt even that is a minimal standard. <br />61 BOOK 57 <br />FEB V <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.