My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/13/2005
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2000's
>
2005
>
12/13/2005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/13/2018 2:49:36 PM
Creation date
10/1/2015 6:00:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/13/2005
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
Archived Roll/Disk#
3096
Book and Page
129, 1016-1068
Supplemental fields
SmeadsoftID
270
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
42
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
Administrator Baird agreed, but understands Attorney Barkett is requesting the <br /> <br />Board to make an exception only for his client. <br />Spencer Simons, <br /> Simons Homes, spoke in favor of the “pending ordinance <br />doctrine”, and felt the Board needs to look at road safety issues. He did not feel it was right that <br />whoever had the most money wins. <br />th <br />Andy Bindorf, <br /> 65 13 Place, President of Indian River National Bank, said his <br />Bank is paying on property that they purchased four months ago, and then found a very large <br />rd <br />developer absorbed all concurrency preventing them from building off of 43 Avenue. He felt the <br />Board needed to look at all aspects, but he was confident they would come up with a solution. <br />Commissioner Bowden was opposed to approving his request. <br />Attorney Ernie Cox, <br /> 777 S. Flagler Drive, W. Palm Beach, said the action taken on <br />October 4, 2005 has a legal problem because there was no notice or opportunity to be heard. He <br />does not believe the pending ordinance enactment is valid. He informed the Board there is a <br />process for invoking a pending ordinance or moratorium, and they need to follow it and evaluate <br />the issues. He asked the Board not to proceed under the pending ordinance. If they need to adopt <br />something he preferred being able to work with the Board and staff to see if they can come up with <br />a long-term solution. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued regarding due process. Attorney Collins admitted the process <br />was wrong and it would have been better if this item came through staff. The pending ordinance <br />was specifically clear that you would not allow people to vest concurrency and tie up road capacity <br />until the time of pulling a building permit. He stated that Mr. Cox’s clients are now aware of this <br />pending doctrine and any future expenditure might not arise at an estoppel. If the Board decides <br />not to grant relief, then Attorney Barkett can make a record and take them to court. <br />Commissioner Neuberger and Chairman Lowther rescinded their motion. <br />Attorney Collins advised the Board not to rescind the pending ordinance, but to <br />move forward through the process. <br />December 13, 2005 31 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.