CC Min 1988-07-25 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Consent Calendar - Item No. 17 (continued) 9) To the extent, if at all, the omission of express provisions in Article 46 of the Zon . Ord. precluding a multiplicity of fil ings within a year's period is inconsistent with the provisions of Zon . Ord. Sec.42. 7, pertaining to use permits, that provision which imposes the higher degree or greater anount of regulation or control regarding the sane or similar subject matter governs (Zon . Ord. Sec.51 .1 c). Zon . Ord. Sec.42.7 governs similar subject matter as that governed by Zon . Ord. Sec. 46.7. Accordingly, the Zoning Adni nistrator was entitled to interpret the provisions of Article 46 as being governed by the express and more restrictive time limitations upon filings pertaining to use permits. 10) The application for the Revised Project relates to the sane subject matter as the a p p l i c a t i o n for the O r i g i n a l Project as follows: (a) The sane parcel of land affected by the application for the Original projec is the subject of the application for the Revised Project; (b) The nature of the use applied for in the application for the Revised Project is substantially similar to the use applied for in the application for the Original Project both qualitatively and quantitatively as f of 1 ows : (i) Both Projects involve the sane functional uses, viz., medical offi oes with a surgical center and laboratory and x -ray facilities; (ii) The building mass, location and external appearance of the Revised Project are substantially similar to that of the Original Project. 11) Because the nature of the use of the Revised Project is substantially similar to that applied for with respect to the Original Project, our fi ndi ngs appl icabl a to the deni al of the appl icati on f or the Ori gi nal Project are applicable to the Revised Project, and said findings, dated March 11 , 1988 are hereby i ncorporated herei n by ref erence. 12) Sect on 46.4 of the Zon . Ord. requi res that a d evel opment pl an submi tted wi th an appl icati on f or a pl armed devel opnent permit i ncl ude provi si ons for recreation spaces to meet the needs of anticipated p o p u l a t i o n of the area for which the planned development permit is sought. 13) The application for the Revised Project does not include provi si on for recreation spaces, but , instead, eliminates the atri un which might have served, if properly structured and aappointed, as a passive recreation area for reading, conversation, etc. 14) Secti on 46.3 of the Zon . Ord. requi res that an appl icati on f or a pl anned devel opnent permit be f 1 ed by the owner of the property affected thereby. While some of the members of the governing body of the Hos pi tal , owner of the pro per ty, support the Revi sed Proj ect, no owne r o r agency rel ati onshi p for the owner, has been establ ished by Appellant with respect to the application for the Revised Project. Reg.Mtg. 7/25/88 page 11 MINUTE BOOK NO. 48 Page No. 142