Laserfiche WebLink
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED <br />BY Commissioner Tippin, to approve Alternative 2, as set out <br />in the memorandum. <br />Under discussion, Commissioner Stanbridge understood that the public would have <br />the right to use this area and pointed out that the Board would be setting a precedent if the <br />motion is adopted. <br />Commissioner Macht pointed out that the applicant would still have the possibility <br />of relief from the Circuit Court. <br />THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and the motion <br />carried unanimously. (4-0, Vice Chairman Ginn absent) <br />(Request denied; right-of-way segment designated as a "limited <br />use right-of-way" which would preclude the county from road <br />construction but preserve the right-of-way for pedestrian, <br />drainage, and utility uses. The applicant would benefit from <br />the 128th Court frontage going from a frontyard setback of 20' to <br />a sideyard setback of 10' with the width of the building envelope <br />expanding from 30' to 40'. However, the existing residence <br />would still be located within a required sideyard setback area.) <br />August 1, 2000 <br />52 <br />BK l 14 PG 392 <br />I <br />