4/21/1976 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

i TO THE MEMBERS OF THE INDIAN RIVM COUNTY colelISSION SUBJECT: Proposed County Park on 5.3 acres AIA to Ocean Owner -Trustee Richard Gale,Ma:i.tland,Fla, DATE: April 7,1976 . The undersigned does hereby protest the purchase of subject prop- erty -for the purpose of creating a county park for the following reasons: (1) The parcel in questio•1is zoned RIA,single family dwell- ings.Parchase of this property by the County would remove from the tax rolls not only the present assessment (and taxesi but potential- ly far greater assessment (and taxes) as the property might be dev- eloped normally as presently zoned. (2) If the eonteraplated purchase is to provide access to the small parcel presently owned by the County, won't the eventual acquisition of the balance of the Tracking Station property provide this ai a much lower cost; (3) Jaycee Park/Conn Beach is less than a mile away from either the parcel in question or the Tracking Station. (4) Should the County proceed to acgmire this parcel and the Tracking Station it would effectively surround a 72 unit deluxe condiminium complex. This certainly would enable the owners of Pebble Beach Villas to demand a lowering of their tax assessment and would definitely adversely affect their ability to.sgll vacant - units with obvious consequences. (5) To reach the parcel in question county resident:: t,nll I.I.1 have to use the Barber Bridge, already an inadequate route. The pro- posed new bridge is to the SO TI3 w ch ,r uld ogically direct traffic away from the proposed park. 'seg azso ��em 8 (6) There are seven (7) "For Sale" signs between the north boundary of John's Island and State Road 510.- All of these ocean parcels are in undeveloped areas some of which may never be suitable for living developement beeause of new ocean front/dune set -back rules. (7} If the County proceeds to acquire this parcel what funds are available for park developement, maintenance and policing? If there is (or will be) money should'nt it be used for bringing Round Hill and Summer Place up to proper standards. (8) (further on Item 5) If the recent vote is indicative 1 of the desires of the people as to recreation, why not put the recr- reation in the areas where people voted for it? Or, at the least an oceanfront park not so removed geographically. (9) If the purchase is to be made because of a bargain price why penalize the adjacent property owners? And is it truly a bargain over the long run if you consider the loss of tax revenue? -1 j Respectfully submit ed, 1 Alfred E,Mac Adam •' 935 Peb l Zna,r.. n an. Ai4 S e e s ' j APS°:_