My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8/15/1994
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1994
>
8/15/1994
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:04:26 PM
Creation date
6/17/2015 2:36:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Special Call Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
08/15/1994
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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
prohibition against such a practice is not contained in the <br />existing LDRs. The proposed LDR amendment spells -out that <br />wall and fence heights are to be measured vertically from the <br />finished lot grade (not from the top of a berm) at the <br />location of the wall or fence to the top of the structure. <br />Thus, under the proposed amendment, a property owner could not <br />gain extra fence height by building a fence on top of a built- <br />up berm. <br />5. Veterinary clinic/animal hospital special land use criteria <br />conflict. There currently exists a conflict in the 971 <br />criteria applied to veterinary clinics/animal hospitals. The <br />conflict involves whether or not commercial boarding of <br />animals is allowed at a clinic or hospital. Staff's opinion <br />is that such a use is normal and customary as an accessory use <br />to animal hospitals, and is reasonable if noise impacts are <br />adequately addressed. The recommended amendment addresses <br />these issues and eliminates the existing conflict. <br />6. Setbacks and buffers for country clubs and associated uses. <br />Recently, the LDRs were amended to allow a buffer option in <br />lieu of special setbacks for golf course buildings located <br />adjacent to non-residential uses (e.g. institutional uses such <br />as schools). The LDRs also establish buffer criteria, as <br />opposed to special setbacks, for tennis facilities. Golf and <br />tennis facilities are oftentimes included in country club <br />projects. In staff's opinion, specific criteria for these <br />kinds of specific uses should be referenced in a particular <br />LDR section that governs country club uses.' Such a reference, <br />as proposed in the ordinance, would make it clear that golf <br />course and tennis facilities associated with country clubs can <br />be governed by the specific criteria that apply to those <br />specific uses, as opposed to being governed by criteria that <br />apply only to country club buildings. <br />7. Planning and Zoning Commission representation on the Technical <br />Review Committee. Under current caselaw related to the issue <br />of ex parte communication involving elected and appointed <br />officials, it is the opinion of the county attorney's office <br />that Planning and Zoning Commissioners cannot attend TRC <br />meetings. Therefore, staff proposes that the LDR section <br />which requires that a member of the Planning and Zoning <br />Commission serve on the TRC be amended as stated in the <br />proposed ordinance. <br />8. Buff eryards in Multi -Family Projects. The wording changes are <br />proposed to make this buffer section read similarly to the <br />buffer section contained in the commercial districts portion <br />of Chapter 911. The proposed wording specifies that <br />bufferyards are required along side and rear property lines <br />and that buffer depth is measured at a right angle to such <br />property lines. <br />9. Bonding Requirements for Moving of Structures. This section <br />is proposed by the County Attorney's Office based upon <br />direction from the Board of County Commissioners. The purpose <br />of the LDR change is to allow the Board of County <br />Commissioners the authority to waive certain bond requirements <br />(related to moving structures) for projects that benefit the <br />community and that are conducted by various organizations. <br />Under the proposed amendment, such waivers would not be <br />granted automatically but could be allowed at the discretion <br />of the Board on a case by case basis. <br />August 15, 1994 <br />5 <br />BOOK . '11:_11J FACE <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.