Laserfiche WebLink
s a � <br />CONCLUSION <br />As proposed, the land use designation changes at both sites are <br />consistent with the comprehensive plan, compatible with all <br />surrounding land uses, and will cause no adverse impacts on the <br />environment or the provision of public services. For these <br />reasons, staff supports the request. <br />Based on the analysis, staff recommends that the Board of County <br />Commissioners approve the subject request and thereby take the <br />following actions: <br />1. Change the Land Use Designation of Subject Property 1 from M-1 <br />to C/I. <br />2. Rezone Subject Property 1 from RM -6 to CG. <br />3. Change the Land Use Designation of Subject Property 2 from C/I <br />to L-2-. <br />4. Rezone Subject Property 2 from IL and A-1 to RM -6. <br />The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone <br />wished to be heard in this matter. <br />Attorney Christopher Marine, representing the applicants, was <br />available to answer questions. <br />The Chairman determined that no one else wished to be heard <br />and thereupon closed the public hearing. <br />ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by <br />Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously adopted <br />Ordinance 94-10, amending the Land Use Element of <br />the Comprehensive Plan by changing the land use <br />designation on properties as described. <br />ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by <br />Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously adopted <br />Ordinance 94-11, amending the Zoning Ordinance and <br />Accompanying Zoning Map for properties as described. <br />APR 121994 <br />51 MOF 9? PAGE 142 <br />