My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02/06/2007 (3)
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2000's
>
2007
>
02/06/2007 (3)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/25/2017 2:46:51 PM
Creation date
10/1/2015 6:12:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/06/2007
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
Archived Roll/Disk#
3128
Book and Page
132, 178-251
Supplemental fields
SmeadsoftID
3082
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
64
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
No Board action was taken. <br />9.A.3 GRAND HARBOR NORTH LAND LLC. ET.AL.'S REQUEST <br />TO REZONE ±435.88 ACRES FROM PD TO RS -3, RM -3, AND <br />CON -2, AND BEB INVESTMENTS LTD.'S REQUEST FOR A <br />SMALL SCALE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT TO <br />REDESIGNATE ± 1.81 ACRES FROM L-1 TO CII AND TO <br />REZONE THOSE ±1.81 ACRES FROM PD TO CG; AND TO <br />REDESIGNATE ±1.81 ACRES FROM CII TO L-1 AND <br />REZONE THOSE ±1.81 ACRES FROM PD TO RM -3 <br />(QUASI-JUDICIAL) <br />Community Development Director Bob Keating explained that this is the first of <br />three consecutive public hearings relating to Grand Harbor. He requested that the Board hear all <br />three presentations (Items 9.A.3, 9.A.4. and 9.A.5) at once and vote on them separately. <br />Director Keating, through a PowerPoint presentation, displayed the area under <br />consideration, which is currently zoned PD (Item 9.A.3). He explained the differences between a <br />PD rezoning and a PD special exception, outlining that the proposal is to take the property back to <br />what it was before it was zoned PD. He provided detailed background on the request. He <br />disclosed that this request does not meet the concurrency test, it significantly exceeds the <br />concurrency limits of a PD, is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and staff recommends <br />denial of the proposed rezoning. <br />February 6, 2007 26 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.