My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/1/1978
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1970's
>
1978
>
11/1/1978
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:40:09 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 10:44:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
11/01/1978
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
85
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 />0 <br />HE WOULD AGREE WITH ALLOWING THIS, BUT HE DOES NOT AGREE WITH 1EDIUM <br />DENSITY WHICH MILL ALLOW 5-19 UNITS ON OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE <br />CHAIRMAN STATED THAT HE IS IN FAVOR OF WHAT PIR' PADGETT IS PROPOSING, <br />BUT HE IS NOT IN FAVOR OF THE ONLY WAY IT IS POSSIBLE TO DO THIS <br />NOW, WHICH IS WITH 'IEDIUM DENSITY. HE ONCE AGAIN DISCUSSED THE DESIR- <br />ABILITY OF HAVING P.U.D. TO CONTROL SUCH PROJECTS, <br />COMMISSIONER SIEBERT NOTED THAT THOUGH THE COMMISSIONERS <br />MAY NOT ALWAYS AGREE WITH EACH OTHER, THEY RESPECT EACH OTHER'S VIEWS <br />AND ALWAYS PULL TOGETHER WHEN A DECISION IS REACHED. 11E STATED THAT <br />HE WILL VOTE FOR THE CHANGES, BUT WILL SUPPORT WHATEVER DECISION IS <br />MADE BY THE BOARD. HE STATED THAT THE ONLY REASON HE IS IN FAVOR <br />OF THE °MEDIUM DENSITY IS THAT IT ALLOWS MULTIPLE FAMILY IN THE SOUTH <br />BEACH AND HE FELT WE DO HAVE ADEQUATE SAFEGUARDS BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER <br />WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE DPI PROCESS, WHICH TAKES I/ITO CONSIDERATION <br />DRAINAGE, LOCAL TRAFFIC CONDITIONS, ETC. HE COTITI4 UED TO DISCUSS THE <br />PHILOSOPHY OF THE "ASTER PLAN AND AGREED WITH COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER <br />THAT WE ARE MAKING SOME PEOPLE RICH BY PLACING A PARTICULAR SLOB ON <br />THE MAP, WHICH HE FELT IS DISCRETIONARY. HE ASKED THE COMMISSIONERS <br />IF THEY FEEL WE ARE TRULY TALKING ABOUT DENSITY OR ARE WE TALKING <br />ABOUT MULTIFAMILY. <br />CHAIRMAN 11ODTKE STATED THAT HE FEELS THE DECISION IS FOR <br />EITHER LOW DEIISITY OR MEDIUM DENSITY, AND WE HAVE NO WAY TO HAVE <br />MULTI -FAMILY IN LO14 DENSITY. HE WOULD PREFER TO MAKE THAT AVAILABLE <br />IN THE P.U.D. METHOD WHERE WE CAN PROTECT THE OPEN SPACE. HE STATED <br />THAT HE IS FEARFUL OF PUTTING ANYTiING ON THE LAND USE PLAN IN A <br />5-12 DENSITY UNTIL WE HAVE A CHANCE TO GET P.U.D. <br />ATTORNEY COLLINS POINTED OUT -THAT THE MATTER BEFORE THE <br />BOARD IS THE QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE <br />76-12 AS ADVERTISED AND AS APPLIED TO ITEM 9 WILL BE AMENDED. <br />COMMISSIONER LOY AGREED WE HAVE A SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION <br />IN FRONT OF US AND MUST ACT ON IT. SHE ALSO FELT P.U.D. IS A74 ESSENTIAL <br />TOOL FOR GOOD DEVELOPMENT. SHE AGREED THAT MR. PADGETT HAS DOME A <br />VERY FINE JOB IN THE AREAS HE HAS DEVELOPED IN THIS COUNTY, BUT DID <br />NOT BELIEVE WE ARE IN ANY POSITION TO MAKE A CHANGE IN OUR °'ASTER PLAN <br />BASED ON WHAT WE THINK IS A PROPOSAL BY A DEVELOPER. <br />56 <br />V 1 1978 37 <br />�F <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.