Minutes - 19840409 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

~~i 6 Motion was made by Commissioner Lloyds seconded by Commissioner Walker to modify Article 7.14.3(a)4 which requires 100 feet between this district and a residential single family district. Commissioner Fihitted noted that the requirement for the 100 foot setback is to have that much of a buffer between residential areas and in this case to have that much of a buffer between a single family residence and the planned development. The purpose behind the setback is to separate residential communities and questioned haw this motion would take care of that situation. ' Commissioner Lloyd stated that a 50 foot buffer in its natural state and very possibly in the next property that is developed adjacent to that may not be in the squeeze with the topography being as it is - that the y lOD feet that he may vote against modifying anything on that if there is adequate land there to do it so assuming it could be 100 on that and a 50 on the other you are talking about 150 feet or if you did modify it in a 100 foot buffer - its natural state would be adequate. Commissioner Willhoit noted you are shifting the burden from one side to the other. Gledhill noted that if you modify the 100 foot buffer you may impose the condition that the 50 foot buffer would have to stay in a permanent open space and in its natural state. Commissioner Lloyd included this condition in his motion. Commissioner Marshall read the narrative that was put forth into evidence by the developers as follows: Article 7.I4.3(a)4 sets forth the ,-- maximum building setbacks for planned development. Housing developments meet these requirements in many areas. However, because of the physical constraints of the site, requirements are not met all along the perimeter. The developer wishes to have the site plan approved as drawn in regard to this section. The setback requirements are intended to protect adjacent property but it is the desire of the developer to .provide maximum protection for the owners of homes in the housing development also. There is na building construction proposed within 50 feet of any property line. Commissioner Vrhitted noted that it appears that the 100 foot setback required in the ordinance to separate the districts had merit and that the project under consideration does not meet the requirement. Commissioner Marshall reiterated that if you vote for the motion, you believe that the motion set forth satisfies the standard of the zoning ordinance for Article 7.14.3(a)4. If you vote against the motion you believe the modification as proposed does not satisfy the purpose of the standard that is presented in the zoning ordinance. VOTE: Ayes, 2; Noes, 3 (Commissioner Parshall, Willhoit, and Whitted) Commissioner Marshall pointed out that most of the standards had been met and the developer can redesign and present another plan that would meet the standards as stipulated in the zoning ordinance. g~4v~~r~ENT Motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Whitted to adjourn. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. Don Willhoit, Chair Beverly slythe, Clerk ~tovED 8/6/84