Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ON MOTION by Commissioner Lowther, <br />SECONDED by Commissioner Davis, the Board <br />unanimously adopted Resolution 2006-070 <br />providing for the closing, abandonment, vacation <br />th <br />and discontinuance of a portion of 13 Street lying <br />nd <br />east of 32 Avenue in Vero Park Subdivision, an <br />unrecorded subdivision, reserving a drainage and <br />utility easement over the entire right-of-way, said <br />land lying in Indian River County, Florida. <br /> <br />9.B. PUBLICDISCUSSIONITEM <br /> <br /> <br />9.B.1. REQUESTTOSPEAKFROMMARKBRACKETTREGARDING <br /> <br />INTERPRETATIONOFAVOTEFORTHEPDAPPROVALON <br /> <br />BLUEWATERBAY <br /> <br /> <br />TH <br />Mark Brackett <br />, 1915 34 Avenue, had a PD application before the Board on February <br />15, 2005 for the Bluewater Bay project. The PD was approved with condition 2F which read <br />“convey or have conveyed to the County all off-site right-of-way necessary to construct the <br />thth <br />required 89 Street improvements.” 89 Street borders Mr. Brackett’s project on one side. This <br />property has three neighbors on the other side of the street, so it requires the cooperation of four <br />different property owners to build this road. This road is not a county road or a platted road. Mr. <br />Brackett’s question was how did the Board interpret 2F? Staff’s interpretation was 2F requires the <br />dedication of right-of-way from all four parcels—his parcel and the three that he does not control. <br /> <br />Mr. Brackett <br /> reaffirmed that he was not requesting abandonment, but was asking the <br />Commissioners to look back on what they voted. Did the Commissioners vote to require him to <br />dedicate the right of way that is not in his control? <br />May 23, 2006 <br />22 <br /> <br />