Agenda - 05-05-1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

• • Page O fi€ • Collins asked Board members to' state their position for information' ,to the Board of Commissioners. Smith ; added this is a critical decision and would provide direction in the future. She noted that the lack of discussion did ndt provide a clear statement of the dissenting positions. Best cited Jeerbst statement on ' page 57 of the agenda and the purpose of planned developments. Which reads as follows: - "Section 7. 15. 1 refers to all Planned Development Commercial Districts, including' the PD-GC4 requested by Scotswood. it states that . ."It is the intention of these regulations to provide for developments, in scale with surrounding .market areas, at locations appropriate in terms of the Land 'Use Plan and Orange County Thoroughfare Plan, and in accord with standards set forth herein, j serve _areas not a l roas4 conveniently gas[ adequately ',reviled N.1±Al commerc i ai and Servica fac i I itj of the kind. 9 r 9D ose�." (Emph asis added)" Kramer felt it was poor use of the node. - . Smith asked the Board members to clarify which aspect of the project they diagreed with. - Best and Kramer stated it was the commercial area. l'1argison felt the project does not enhance the town . Walters expressed concern ncern that the written comment of Jacobs and Best were their opinions, not the consensus of the Board. Pilkey expressed concern with the commercial aspects and the lack of separation between commercial areas. Jacobs cited his written statement. MOTION: Shanklin moved a positive finding on 4.2 a-c) . Yuhasz seconded the motion . Best inquired if d) concerned water. Smith said b) was the specific provision . Best expressed concern with the statement of the Sheriff . Shanklin felt The Sheriff did not ray he "had to have" the vehicles and personnel . VOTE: Unanimous MOTION: Shanklin moved a positive finding on 4.2. 11 a-c) . Walters seconded the motion.