10-30-1979 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Paqe 6 Planning � Zoning Administer DEVELOPMENT GROUP, INC. October 25, 1979 Page two In approximately 1974 or 1975, consideration was given to a change of the zoning classifications of the property and Mr. McQueen went to a meeting and at the � meeting it was agreed that in this area a 200 foot commercial zone adjacent to � County Road 15, would remain and that no charge in B-1 classification would be made. Mr. McQuee�t�sere ore assumed hat a 200 foot strip of property adjacent to County Road 15,�wired�y�im, would be zoned B-1. Sometime earlier this year, Mr. McQueen in conjunction with Jon Nelson presented a plan for an office building to be constructed on this property. The exact nature of this improvement will be explained at the council meeting on Tuesday, October 30, 1979. At the time that Mr. McQueen made his presentation he was informed that a B-1 zoning classification on a strip of land 200 feet wide and adjacent to County Road 15 had been changed in 1974. Although the Planning Commission felt that the proposed development was attractive and probably a good use of the property, it made some suggestions with reference to a zoning line, a re-zoning from B-1 to B-4, a restriction by reason of the existence of a flood plain and a restriction by reason of the existence of a wetland. After discussion of these items with the Planning Commission, and having the proposal denied, Mr. McQueen contacted my office. I have discussed this matter with Mr. McQueen and I would like to make the following suggestions: With regard to a change from the B-1 to the B-4 zone, Mr. McQueen has no objec- tions to this zoning change provided that the description of the B-4 zone is such that it includes a strip of land adjacent to County Road 15 which is 200 feet wide or at least goes to a line 10 feet south and parallel to the, existing sewer line and includes all of his frontage of County Road 15 as he originally assumed was the case. It is my understanding that with such a zoning classification, the structure that is being suggested can be constructed without the necessity of any varian- ces from the zoning ordinance. Mr. McQueen was confused regarding the application of a set-back requirement of 26 feet from the flood plain line which was established at approximately the 935.1 foot level. I am not exactly sure how you arrived at the flood plain con- � tour line but an inspection of the premises would indicate that the elevation of the road on the easterly side of the wetland is such th at it would probably be impossible to pond a sufficient amount of water in the marshland ,to reacb the 935.1 foot contour line. The eatablishment of a flood plain line at 935.1 feet does not place any of the contemplated structures within the flood plain and as such, the location of this line is immaterial to the propoaed buildings with the exception of the require- ment that any development on the land outside of the flood plain be set back 26 feet from the flood plains which cause a problem with other parking lots.