Minutes - 19850312 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

036 Post continued noting some of the advantages of this planned development versus a subdivision for mobile homes on individual lots. He noted the recreational areas, paved roads, to state standards, and the joint water system. Preliminary Health Deartment approval has been granted for individual septic systems. Post noted the 100' buffer, the open space and clustering of mailboxes which would not be provided with an individual lot subdivision. He continued that there would be all weather parking surface for each unit. He cited this was not a rezoning, but this kind of development was a permitted use under the current zoning of the area. He noted, also, that the existing mobile home park was built in the late 1960's and many of the current adjacent residents came to the area with full knowledge of its existence. He entered a request from the applicant for a continuation of the public hearing to present appraisal data. Planning Board member Kizer inquired of Mr. Post as to the location of the dumpsters. Post responded that refuse collection would be by contract with a private firm for individual pick-up at the homes. Kizer continued by inquiring of Mr. Post what would be done with the property if the Special Use permit were not approved. Post responded that he could not speak for the applicant, but that the property had capabilities of being developed for single family residences. Planning Board member Pilkey asked if the lots would be sold or rented. Post responded that the whole parcel would remain under unitary ownership and supervision. The owner must provide certain services throughout the life of the Special Use Permit. Pilkey asked if they would be renting the lot or the mobile home. Post deferred to Mr. Sneed and the response was that he would do both, but usually the individual lessee had his own mobile home. Pilkey indicated her inquiries were specifically directed at tax base concerns. Post responded that the property value should be enhanced by the improvements of roads and street lights. It would be more valuable than as a single unimproved parcel. Kizer inquired who was responsible for grounds upkeep since there were no designated lot lines. Post responded that the holder of the permit is obligated by stipulations to maintain the property. Mr. Bill Sneed was sworn in to answer Planning Board questions. Pilkey inquired of Mr. Sneed the specific nature of the park in regard to rentals of mobile homes by Sneed or ownership by individuals. Sneed responded that at the present time he has no plans to place any units on the property himself. The plans are for the homes to be double-wide and modular type units. Sneed continued there are set rules that are signed by the homeowners that specify they must mow the grass and keep the grounds clean or pay a fee to Mr. Sneed for him to do this. Marshall asked how this arrangement was established. Sneed responded that each lot in the existing park has 60' frontage and 8' behind the mobile home. The boundaries are known at the time of rental and home owners sign statements to this effect.