My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/19/2004
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2000's
>
2004
>
10/19/2004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/25/2018 1:18:49 PM
Creation date
10/1/2015 6:04:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
10/19/2004
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
Archived Roll/Disk#
2966
Book and Page
127, 728-787
Supplemental fields
SmeadsoftID
444
Document Relationships
2004-048
(Cover Page)
Path:
\Official Documents\2000's\2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
52
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> County Attorney Collins commented that the Board is not making rules at this time; that <br />has already been done. The Board is just deciding whether this plan is consistent with the original <br />plan and whether it conforms to the regulations. <br /> Chairman Ginn asked whether the cabanas were in the original plans, and Director Boling <br />responded that the original plans called for 91 units, plus these 72 “lock-offs”. <br />Attorney Barkett <br /> stated the plans now call for 66 units plus 12 cabanas. <br /> Commissioner Macht noted that he and Commissioner Adams both were on the Board at <br />the time of the approval of the original conceptual plan. A lot of accommodation was given to <br />Disney to obtain an economic asset. Disney even went to the State Legislature and got a special <br />act that redefined “timeshare” to avoid paying tourist taxes. The Board at that time was so <br />conscious of making these accommodations to Disney that they passed a secondary act that <br />virtually prohibited a similar development. He did not believe this property could be sold to <br />someone other than Disney to enjoy the benefits given to Disney. <br /> County Attorney Collins reminded the Board that this issue does not have to go back to the <br />Planning & Zoning Commission. <br />Attorney Barkett <br /> reminded the Board that this same problem occurred with Segovia <br />Lakes. Planning & Zoning denied the project and the developer appealed to the Board, who <br />approved the PD. He expressed the belief that this is the same type of development as Grand <br />Harbor and Fairwinds where there are more than 1 property owners in the PD. This project is <br />consistent with the conceptual PD plan. <br /> Commissioner Macht questioned limiting approval to the same number of units under <br />RM-6 zoning and dealing with the cabanas internally. <br />County Attorney Collins remarked that the applicant might feel they had an entitlement <br />and a lawsuit could result. <br />Attorney Barkett <br /> emphasized that the “lock-off” units caused a big dispute. These were 3 <br />room motel rooms and one bedroom which could be locked off to be rented as separate bedrooms. <br />That caused the Disney plan traffic count to be at 940 trips while the current plan is down to 102 <br />trips. <br />OCTOBER 19, 2004 32 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.