Laserfiche WebLink
but unfortunately by reducing it, you will have a less desirable <br />commercial site because land planning practice looks immediately <br />at the configuration of land, the depth in relation to roadways, <br />how the access can be provided, and how the buildings, parking <br />and landscaping can be interrelated on the site. A 600' depth <br />actually is considered minimum for a commercial site. <br />Chairman asked if Mr. Parks has been around our community <br />and looked at the Village Shops, which was the type development <br />promised in 1980. <br />Mr. Parks did not think he could effectively address prior <br />representations. His next point was that the villas developed at <br />the rear provide transition and 'are a very effective buffer. If <br />you were to provide a 200' strip adjacent to that, it would lose <br />its effectiveness, and you would have two slivers running <br />adjacent to a commercial site when the first set up was adequate <br />and preferable. He contended that the site can be developed to <br />preserve vegetation; although, he realized that is not to be <br />addressed today. <br />Mr. Parks summarized that he attempted to find some merit in <br />the downzoning proposed, but as diligently as he looked, he <br />simply failed to see that the criteria customarily associated <br />with zoning are met. <br />Chairman Scurlock asked to hear next from the leaders of any <br />organized groups. <br />Attorney Robin Lloyd came before the Board speaking on <br />behalf of Vista Gardens Property Owners Association. In regard <br />to consistency'or fairness and reasonableness, he believed that <br />the Chairman mentioned what had been promised before. Attorney <br />Lloyd then quoted from Minute Book 54, Page 666, where Vista's <br />then Attorney, Gordon B. Johnston, asked to havethis property <br />returned to its previous zoning. Excerpt from those Minutes is <br />as follows: <br />51 <br />APR 26 1988 <br />!Dol: 72 pnE2lO <br />