My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/21/1989
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1989
>
11/21/1989
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/2/2023 10:29:09 AM
Creation date
6/16/2015 8:15:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
11/21/1989
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
57
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
BOOK 1610 PAGE 42u <br />NOV 211 Ed9 <br />Stan Boling, Chief of Current Development, explained that <br />the Planning & Zoning Commission voted 4-3 to recommend denial of <br />this special exception request after concluding that the proposed <br />tower's location was not appropriate in a developing area with <br />existing and planned designated residential uses. The public <br />hearing on this request for special exception approval originally <br />was scheduled for the October 24th meeting and was continued at <br />the request of the applicant for consideration by a full Board of <br />County Commissioners. The determination to be made today is <br />whether this tower is appropriate and compatible, and there are <br />12 criteria in the ordinance that was adopted approximately 3 <br />months ago to serve as guidelines in determining the <br />appropriateness and the compatibility of this use. The two <br />criteria that were discussed the most are the impact on aviation <br />and the compatibility with the surrounding area. One criterion <br />states that the reviewing body shall consider the impact of the <br />proposed tower on the residential subdivision near the project <br />site. The Planning & Zoning Commissioner found this to be <br />lacking in that area. In considering the impact on development <br />in existing neighborhoods, staff looked at the situation we have <br />in the south county with the 420 -ft. tower, and feels that this <br />particular site is sufficiently removed from existing residences. <br />Staff feels that the main concern should be the impact it would <br />have on the property to the south as it develops. It is staff's <br />recommendation that the Board approve this request with a change <br />in the wording of the condition as set out in the above staff <br />recommendation. The condition, as it reads now, states: "Prior <br />to site plan release, the lighting plan shall use strobe lighting <br />appropriately shielded from shining directly toward the ground <br />unless a letter from the applicable agencies are issued which <br />prohibit strobe lighting altogether." Staff is recommending that <br />the wording of the condition end with "directly toward the <br />ground," and that the balance of that sentence be deleted, since <br />20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.