Laserfiche WebLink
BOOK <br />Under discussion, Vice Chairman Ginn advised that she could not support the motion <br />because she thought units were being put a lot closer together than should be allowed, and <br />she was beginning to have real concerns about PD's. <br />Commissioner Macht pointed out the alternative is to have the developer put in 3 <br />stories of condominiums at a much greater density which would not be a very pretty sight. <br />Chairman Adams thought that was what swayed her. She had been reading the letter <br />from Mr. Henry L. Pellerin*. If 36 units were built straight up, there would be no view of <br />the river. This plan, if approved, would have less impact on the river. Also, she noted that <br />there are people who enjoy living with zero -lot line zoning. <br />Vice Chairman Ginn was not convinced and felt the developer could remove one unit <br />and noted her objection to developers who go to the maximum. <br />Commissioner Stanbridge noted that all of the original conditions are still required, <br />including the walkway easement. <br />The Chairman CALLED THE QUESTION and the motion <br />carried 4-1 (Vice Chairman Ginn opposed). <br />(CLERK'S NOTE: *Mr. Henry Pellerin's letter of February <br />12, 2000 has been placed with the backup of the meeting.) <br />9.A.3. PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE NO. 2000-004 - LDR <br />AMENDMENTS - 1) DEFINING YARDS THAT ABUT LIMITED USE <br />RIGHTS-OF-WAY AS SIDEYARDS AND 2) USE OF DOCKS/PIERS ON <br />VACANT SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS (CHAPTERS 901, 911, AND 971) <br />PROOF OF PUBLICATION OF ADVERTISEMENT FOR HEARING <br />IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD <br />The Board reviewed a Memorandum of February 4, 2000: <br />February 15, 2000 <br />46 <br />