Laserfiche WebLink
r <br />NOV 2 11979 <br />mg .42 no 137 <br />WENDY LANCASTER OF THE PLANNING STAFF STATED THAT THE <br />SUBJECT PROPERTY IS PART OF HOBART LANDING SUBDIVISION, UNIT 2, <br />LOCATED ON THE INDIAN RIVER APPROXIMATELY 650' NORTH OF HOBART ROAD. <br />SHE CONTINUED THAT HOBART BROTHERS RECEIVED TENTATIVE APPROVAL OF A <br />PLAT FOR UNIT 3 OF HOBART LANDING SUBDIVISION WHEN A ZONING CHANGE <br />FROM R-3 To R-1 WAS APPROVED BY THE BOARD ON AUGUST 22, 1979. MISS <br />LANCASTER COMMENTED THAT AT THE SAME MEETING,, THE BOARD INITIATED A <br />REZONING OF THE EAST 249.88 FEET OF TRACT B FROM R-3 TO R-1, AS <br />REQUESTED BY HOBART LANDING PROPERTY OWNERS. SHE REPORTED THAT NO <br />OPPOSITION WAS VOICED, AND STAFF RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE ZONING <br />CHANGE. <br />THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF ANYONE PRESENT WISHED TO SPEAK. <br />FRED BRIGGS, REPRESENTING HOBART BROTHERS, APPROACHED THE <br />BOARD AND STATED THAT HE WAS NOT NOTIFIED of THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED <br />MEETING HELD BY THE PLANNING a ZONING COMMISSION ON OCTOBER 11, 1979, <br />WHICH WAS POSTPONED UNTIL OCTOBER 15TH, THEREFORE, UNABLE TO VOICE <br />HIS OBJECTION TO THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE FROM R-3 To R-1. <br />ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT HE WAS AWARE OF THE SITUATION <br />THAT THE MEETING DATE HAD BEEN CHANGED DUE TO AN INTERNAL MATTER. <br />MR. BRIGGS AGAIN EXPRESSED CONCERN FOR NOT BEING NOTIFIED <br />OF THE MEETING AS HE WAS INTERESTED IN ATTENDING. HE STATED THAT HE <br />WISHED TO GO ON RECORD THAT HOBART BROTHERS COMPANY HAS NO INTENTION <br />OF MAKING THIS INTO A MULTI -FAMILY DEVELOPMENT. MR. BRIGGS SAID THAT <br />THEY DO NOT OWN PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH BUT HAVE BEEN CONSIDERING IT - <br />A GREAT DEAL DEPENDS UPON THE BOARD'S DECISION TODAY. HE STATED THE <br />R-3 PROPERTY IS WHERE THEY NOW HAVE THE BOAT HOUSE; THE ONLY WAY TO <br />DEVELOP THE LAND TO THE SOUTH, WITH PROPER PLANNING AND CONTROL, IS <br />THROUGH THE AREA UP FOR REZONING. MR. BRIGGS SAID THAT IS WHY THEY <br />REQUESTED R-3, NOT TO PUT UP A MOTEL, BUT THEY HAVE OTHER PEOPLE THAT <br />ARE INTERESTED IN DEVELOPING THE AREA FROM THE SOUTH, AND THIS COULD <br />BE THE PROPER WAY OF HAVING. ACCESS TO THE RIVER. HE FELT IT WAS NOT <br />FAIR THAT THEY SHOULD BE STOPPED BY JUST A FEW PEOPLE, AS IT WOULD <br />ENHANCE THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH TO HAVE A CANAL CUT THROUGH AT <br />THIS POINT. <br />w <br />_I <br />