Agenda - 08-24-1987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

approach, including site plan approval and the issuance of a Special Use 13 Permit provides better control over such development in a watershed. Planning Board Chair Jacobs asked for an explanation of the changed conditions in the findings of fact. Szymik responded that the allegation is that the land uses in the general area are compatible with those in CC-3 zoning. There is EC-5 zoning on property to the west and E- I on property to the east. Since there are existing commercial and industrial activities in the area, this property is no longer suitable for residential purposes. Mr. Thomas Chandler president Chandler Concrete Company, stated his desire to have the property zoned CC-3 primarily for the storage of excess plant equipment such as bins and hoppers. None of the equipment stored would be mobile and could only by moved with the aid of a crane. He noted that Planning Staff had recommended that he apply for a CC-3 zoning which would be proper for the use he intended. He continued that at no time had Staff indicated to him that CC-3 was inappropriate or that they would not recommend approval of the requeste that he felt all of the documentation was s pportiveeofn�ag�CC-3e zoning noted classification. Mr. Chandler presented a map showing the location of his property and indicated that the majority of surrounding properties are industrial. He indicated that there was no water course across the property and the proposed use does not present a problem of water pollution to the reservoir. He addressed documentation included in the agenda which indicated a CC-3 rezoning would be appropriate. Planning Board Member Best asked why Mr. Chandler did not know about the Planning Staff recommendation for Planned Development before this date. Planning Director Marvin Collins responded that he changed the recommendation prior to agenda delivery. Mr. Chandler was in attendance at the Planning Board meeting on8/17/87dandteexpressed that he his willingness at that time to answer questions on the items going to public hearing for Chandler Concrete. He noted that no questions were asked at that time by Planning Board members or Planning Staff. Planning Board Chair Jacobs asked what Mr. Chandler's response would have been to a previous recommendation of planned development. Mr. Chandler noted that he did not care for a planned development, noting that such a recommendation would require screening and buffers which he did not need simply for the storing of stationary equipment. Planning Board Member Yuhasz asked if this were to be long-term storage. Mr. Chandler responded that he did not know, since several factors would be involved in the possible use of the equipment at another point in time. He noted that the property was maintained by mowing. John Ca swell real estate appraiser reemphasized the fact that this property was bordered on both sides with commercial and industrial uses. He noted that he felt Residential zoning of this inappropriate. property is Joyce Garrett attorney representing Chandler Concrete, restated that the basic criteria for a CC-3 zoning had been met. She addressed the concern with protection of the watershed. She indicated that a change in the underlying zoning should not have an affect on watershed protection. Planning Board Chair Jacobs asked that Mr. his recommendation. Collins responded that he was concerned Collins use of the property and future protection of the watershed. With a straight rezoning, the County would lose control of the future development of the site. THERE BEING NO FURTHER COMMENTS, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.