Laserfiche WebLink
1. FIRE PROTECTION IS INADEQUATE IN THIS AREA. <br />2. POLICE PROTECTION IS INADEQUATE IN THIS AREA.. <br />3. HE DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS PRESENTLY IN <br />THE PROPER FORM FOR DEVELOPMENT, DUE TO PERCOLATION AND <br />TOPOGRAPHY PROBLEMS. <br />4. IN HIS OPINION, IT DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE PROPOSED MASTER PLAN <br />WHICH IN HIS UNDERSTANDING WAS ADOPTED IN PRINCIPLE BY THE <br />COUNTY COMMISSIONERS; AND <br />5. HE QUESTIONED THE PROCEDURE USED FOR MAKING APPLICATION FOR <br />REZONING, INASMUCH AS THE APPLICATION WAS NOT MADE BY ALL THE <br />PROPERTY OWNERS INVOLVED, NOR TO THE BEST OF HIS KNOWLEDGE, ON <br />THE INITIATIVE OF THE ZONING COMMISSION. <br />COMMISSIONER MASSEY STATED THAT HE DENIED THE ABOVE REZONING <br />REQUEST FOR ALL OF THE SAME REASONS STATED BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT AND <br />ADDED THAT TO HIS KNOWLEDGE THIS IS PRIMARILY AN AGRICULTURAL AREA <br />AND THE LAND IS BEST SUITED FOR THIS USE. <br />CHAIRMAN LOY STATED THAT SHE DENIED THE ABOVE REZONING REQUEST <br />FOR ALL OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED REASONS AND ADDED HER CONCERN ABOUT: <br />1. THE LACK OF INFORMATION'REGARDING THE ECONOMICS TO INDIAN RIVER <br />COUNTY THAT WOULD DEVELOP AS A RESULT OF THIS ZONING CHANGE.; <br />2. THIS IS IN A FLOOD PRONE AREA AND IT DID NOT HAVE ANYTHING <br />SUBMITTED THAT WOULD MAKE HER FEEL THAT IT IS IN THE BEST <br />INTEREST OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY; <br />3. SHE QUESTIONED THE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNERS <br />WHO WOULD BE INVOLVED IN THIS CHANGE; AND <br />4. SHE STATED THAT IT IS A PREMATURE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS AREA. <br />COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED THE FOLLOWING REASONS FOR HIS <br />DENYING THE ABOVE REZONING REQUEST WHICH ARE IN ADDITION TO ALL OTHER <br />REASONS STATED: <br />1. HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE WAY THE APPLICATION WAS MADE, THE <br />LEGALITY OF THE APPLICATION WITH THE OTHER 32 PROPERTY OWNERS <br />AND HE CERTAINLY FEELS IT SHOULD BE A JOINT VENTURE BECAUSE <br />PRESUMING THAT APPROVAL WOULD HAVE BEEN MADE, THERE IS NO WAY <br />THAT YOU CAN RESUBDIVIDE THIS WITHOUT THE COMPLETE APPROVAL OF <br />THE OTHER 32 PROPERTY OWNERS. .HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE 32 <br />PROPERTY OWNERS, AS WELL AS THE PEOPLE REQUESTING THE ZONING <br />CHANGE; <br />-27- <br />JAN 81975 <br />OOOk 21 :AGE 449 <br />