5/23/1979 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

SYSTEM. SHE CONTINUED THAT THE ROAD WILL BE PRIVATE AND WILL BE AN EXTENSION OF 78TH STREET; ALSO THE ROAD WILL BE PAVED TO A WIDTH OF 12 FEET. MISS LANCASTER STATED THAT THE OWNER HAS COMPLIED WITH THE REQUIRE- MENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDS TENTATIVE APPROVAL. COMMISSIONER'SIEBERT ASKED IF CONSIDERATION HAD BEEN GIVEN TO REZONING AND MISS LANCASTER REPLIED NEGATIVELY. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT VARIOUS ZONINGS SHOWN ON THE MAP; AND M-1 ZONING, IN PARTICULAR, DID NOT LOOK APPROPRIATE TO THAT AREA. MR. HOWARD ASKED IF THERE WAS SOME REASON WHY IT SHOULD BE REZONED AND THE ATTORNEY REPLIED THAT -SOMEONE COULD BUY A LOT AND BUILD A MULTI -FAMILY UNIT THERE. COMMISSIONER LYONS NOTED THAT THE R-1 ZONING EXTENDS FROM LOTS 1 THROUGH 37 AND DOES NOT TAKE IN THE ENTIRE SUBDIVISION. MR. HOWARD COMMENTED THAT HE DID NOT SUPPOSE THERE WOULD BE ANY OBJECTION TO REZONING THE PROPERTYIBUT HE WOULD HAVE TO DISCUSS THE MATTER WITH HIS CLIENT, HE FURTHER STATED THAT TRACT C, LOCATED AT THE EAST END OF THE SUBDIVISION, WOULD NOT BE A PART OF THE PLAT, AS IT IS ONE OF THE FEW ACCESSES TO THE INTERCOASTAL. ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT MR. HOWARD COULD GET TENTATIVE APPROVAL OF THE SUBDIVISION SUBJECT TO REZONING AND SAID HIS ADVICE WOULD BE NOT TO APPROVE THE FINAL PLAT UNTIL THE REZONING IS ACCOMPLISHED. HE CONTINUED THAT HE WOULD NOT RECOMMEND RELIANCE ON THE DEED RESTRICTIONS AS THE PROPERTY OWNERS COULD AMEND THE DEED RESTRICTIONS AT A LATER DATE. FURTHER DISCUSSION ENSUED, AND CHAIRMAN VJODTKE SUGGESTED THAT MR. HOWARD GET TOGETHER WITH HIS CLIENT TO DISCUSS THE MATTER OF CON- FORMING TO SINGLE FAMILY ZONING AND GET BACK WITH THE BOARD LATER IN THE DAY. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED REGARDING THE EXISTING DRAINAGE DITCH AND THE PAVEMENT. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AGREED TO TABLE THIS ITEM PENDING FURTHER ADVICE FROM THE -OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. k MAY 2 31979