Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 4 · column 6 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
closed session for pending litigation and contracts (the second item pertaining to a landfill). Returning to open session, Chairman Gilkey announced that the Lozano case would be taken under advisement. He indicated that a decision will be reached by the board before the 60-day time limit for preliminary plat approval expires October 1.
An exception request from J. T. Woodward was denied. Mr. Woodward had asked for administrative approval for the division of a sixth lot from a parcel originally 116 acres (five previous subdivisions had reduced it to 79.2 acres). The lot he proposed to create would have been 24.017 acres on a less than 50-foot right-of-way. In addition, he would have had 220 feet of road frontage, under the 250 feet required by the ordinance.
“It really pains me to do this,” said Supervisor Newbill Miller, offering the motion to deny Mr. Woodward’s request. “But you see the problems created from exceptions,” he added, meeting with unanimous agreement that Mr. Woodward be required to comply with the subdivision ordinance’s requirement for 25acre lots on rights-of-way less than 50 feet.
In the only other zoning matter taken up at Monday’s meeting, the supervisors confirmed that the zoning ordinance endorsed and forwarded by the Planning Commission over a year ago will be adopted without additional public hearings. Changes to the Planning Commission’s version have been minor, they agreed.
“The board is free to have another public hearing,” advised Commonwealth’s Attorney Peter Luke. “But it is not required, even if substantial changes have been made.”
Copies of the proposed ordinance , may be reviewed at either the | clerk’s or the zoning administrator’s ' office and purchased at the treasu- •; rer’s office. .;
91.9%