Agenda - 10-05-1987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

1 -. r>.pw-. r- P.- r--91 91 - , system, energy use, existing land use, agriculture and forestry, population density, and historic and cultural features . Evaluation of the criteria indicates partial conformity with public services/utilities and non- conformance with existing land use and population density . The Planning Staff recommends denial of the request based upon : ( 1 ) The reasons for amendments in the Procedures for Amending the Land Use Plan are not addressed ; and (2) Conformity with all applicable locational criteria in Section 3 . 4 of the Land Use Plan is not demonstrated . The Planning Board recommendation will be referred to the Board of Commissioners for decision on October 5, 1987 . Eddleman asked the linear feet that the 0 . 59 acres is on the road frontage. Phil Post, engineer on the project, responded that it was approximately sixty feet additional road frontage . MOTION : Best moved to accept Planning Staff ' s recommendation for denial . Seconded by Margison . Kramer asked about the conformity with locational criteria . Bell responded explaining the locational criteria for 10-Year and 20-Year Transition Areas and Commercial - Industrial Areas . He noted that these locational criteria are used on all of the Land Use Plan designations . Yuhasz indicated that he felt the requested land use designation was in order, would bring the existing use into compliance and presented no danger to surrounding uses . Best disagreed noting that the minutes from the public hearing indicated a Land Use Plan amendment was not necessary since sufficient acreage needed already was in the tract of land . Kramer indicated he felt the changing condition of the neighborhood uses would indicate this change is in order . Phil Post, engineer for Chandler Concrete, indicated on a map of the property, the location of the holding ponds and reclamation activity and noted again that the 0 . 59 acres would create the two-acre minimum lot size needed to meet Ordinance requirements and would not expand the use of the property . VOTE : 4 in favor (Best, Jacobs, Margison , Pilkey) . 7 opposed (Boland, Eddleman, Kramer, Lewis, Swann, Taylor, Yuhasz ) . MOTION : Yuhasz moved approval of the Land Use Plan Amendment as requested by Chandler Concrete Company . Seconded by Kramer .