Laserfiche WebLink
PF - <br />;1!',L J, 7 `990 <br />P-Oor S0 Fd F. 65t' <br />�:The mo�,.,people Iiving'near the river, the more problems you have <br />with runoff from parking lots, driveways, etc., because it has <br />less of a chance to clean itself upIbefore it drains into the <br />river. In fact, he would like staff to look at other properties <br />down there to reduce the densities. <br />Attorney O'Haire emphasized that they will have to comply <br />with drainage and stormwater requirements. He suggested that <br />something more intensive is a fair and reasonable use of the <br />land. They are not required to preserve the environment for the <br />rest of the county. You are not required to do it at your house, <br />and Leonard Garner isn't required to do it with his property. <br />Commissioner Wheeler felt that if he had his way, we <br />wouldn't have more than 2 or 3 upa maximum, but he is only one of <br />five Commissioners. <br />MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by <br />Commissioner Bowman, that the Board deny the request <br />from Urban Resource Group to rezone approximately 65 <br />acres from RS -1 to RM -6 based on the lack of compliance <br />with the consistency of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan <br />in reference to Economical Policies 1.1, 1.4, 1.10, <br />3.1; Conservation Policies 6.2c, 6.3, 6.5c; and Housing <br />Policies 2.2.3, and because there is a substantial <br />question as to whether or not utility services are <br />available. <br />Under discussion, Chairman Eggert pointed out that they <br />thought long and hard about putting on that RS -1 zoning in the <br />first place. That just wasn't plunked down there for something <br />to do one day, and she has tremendous problems in rezoning it at <br />a greater density from all we have known about that property <br />before, and she would support the Motion. <br />45 <br />