Laserfiche WebLink
Assistant Community Development Director Frolik noted if the grading and drainage plan <br />requires removal of the trees, the developer may not be able to keep them. <br /> <br />Mrs. l>crry stated it is disturbing to her that there can be single-family homes and multi-family <br />homes so close together. She indicated if she had wanted to live in a town.home community she <br />would have done so. <br /> <br />Vice Chairperson Van Scoy stated that density transitioning is always a consideration of the <br />Planning Commission, and they also prefer a natural buffer. <br /> <br />Mr. Demner indicated he would never intend to take down trees, but he cannot speak for the <br />person who may buy the property. He stated that concerning access, it was always the intent to <br />have the turn-off in this location. He indicated the access to Lord of Life church was designed to <br />line up with his access. He stated that on the traffic issues, if he puts his business back on the <br />property because he cannot make it feasible to sell it for residential, he would be adding twenty <br />to forty trips per day. He indicated that right now, with only him, he makes about a dozen trips a <br />day. l le stated he thinks residential would be better for traffic than a business use. <br /> <br />Vice Chairperson Van Scoy asked what zoning are on the adjoining properties. <br /> <br />Assistant Community Development Director Frolik indicated the properties to the north and <br />south arc also zoned R-2. <br /> <br />Vice Chairperson Van Scoy asked is Staff has looked at access, and the potential of three parcels <br />having access offa County road. <br /> <br />Assistant Community Development Director Frolik stated Staff felt that if the parcel to the south <br />would develop there would be shared access with the Deemer property. She indicated the church <br />that owns the property to the north has an existing access, but she is not sure what would happen <br />il'all three developed. She stated that would be up to the County. <br /> <br />Vice Chairperson Van Scoy asked if the County could take back the existing access. <br /> <br />Board Member Johnson indicated he is not sure if the County would grant the needed access, but <br />that would be a consideration for site plan review. <br /> <br />Vice Chairperson Van Scoy stated his point is if the County were to do any improvement on <br />CSAII 5 they would likely put a turn lane in the middle of the road, which would use up the <br />easement area. <br /> <br />Motion by Board Member Johnson, seconded by Board Member Brauer to close the public <br />hearing at 7:33 p.m. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Vice Chairperson Van Scoy, Board Members Johnson, Brauer, and <br />Levine. Voting No: None. Absent: Chairperson Nixt, Board Members Shepherd and Watson. <br /> <br />Board of Adjustment/June 23, 2005 <br /> Page 5 of 8 <br /> <br />P5 <br /> <br /> <br />