HomeMy WebLinkAboutC.054.93009_1310Commissioner Johnson asked to clarify Winthrop's suggestion
with the planning director. Mr. Allison said it was up to the
petitioner as to who could be dismissed from the rezoning request.
(During the meeting, Mr. Winthrop conferred with his client
(Dishmond), who was in agreement with eliminating the referenced
two tracts.
Commissioner Johnson asked for a percentage confirmation from
the planning director. Allison confirmed the percentage would now
be 78.5%.
Brent Hardy (Opponent): Mr. Hardy said he wanted the record to
reflect that his family was not interested in being removed from
the rezoning issue. Disputed that the percentage was 758. Hardy
said he thought the issue was not numbers, but people. Cited
numerous neighbors that started out in mobile homes, but now live
in stick -built houses. Mentioned that some people in the area who
reside in mobile homes could choose a stick -built home, but because
of numerous factors, less upkeep, etc., they have chosen
mobile/modular homes. Stated it was his understanding that the
attorney was supposed to draw up a covenant, but nothing had been
presented.
Sam Winthrop (Attorney for Petitioner): Mentioned that at the
last planning board meeting he invited anyone present to contact
him if they had questions. Also, advised that at the last
commissioners' meeting, when this matter was discussed, he met with
a group for about an hour. Stated he could not draw up an
agreement until both sides met with him.
Brent Hardy (Opponent): Asked for a percentage clarification.
William Allison said there were 60 property owners, with pages of
petitioners, and if the percentage was off it was very minor. The
protest petition had 24/258 against which is a valid protest
document.
Wayne Ball (Opponent): Mentioned the outlook did not look
optimistic that everyone in the audience would be able to .provide
a stick -built home for their children. Stated he had been in
construction work a long time and that it appeared to him that if
the area was zoned R-20 it was asking for more development to
occur.
Jeff Cashion (Opponent): Advised that the property was in a
"premium" location with easy access to the two interstates. Stated
he had problems with the way the rezoning had been handled.
Questioned the percentages given. Mentioned he had to buy land
($46,000 for 12 acres) zoned rural agricultural because he owned a
mobile home.
Kay Sherrill (Proponent): Mentioned she worked in the
judicial system and knew what "mobile home parks could do to a
community."
D.S. Brewer (Opponent) : Mentioned he was in the military
service and never at one time heard anyone being told, "You can't
go because you live in a mobile home." Advised that the
neighborhood was a good one and that everyone pulled together
during the past winter storm with tree removal, water, and heat.
Larry Dishmond (Proponent): Mr. Dishmond, the petitioner,
apologized for his rezoning request which he termed as a "fiasco."
Mentioned his only intent was to preserve the neighborhood.
Chairman Haire adjourned the public hearing and stressed the
fact that four votes would be needed in order to approve the
rezoning because a valid protest petition had been presented.
MOTION by Commissioner Stewart to approve the rezoning request
as per the recommendation of the planning board.
JUL 2 v 1993 479