08/2/2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

with the backup.) They are concerned about privacy for their subdivision and requested a 500’ buffer on the park side, want to make sure it is in the contract, and want to make sure the active part of the park is designed away from their property. They do not want people sitting on their seawall and fear loss of property value after spending a lot of money to build that seawall. Commissioner Davis understood the concerns but could not give any assurance on their requests because we do not know what will happen in the future. He believed the park would be designed with a buffer but not 500 feet. Commissioner Neuberger agreed with Commissioner Davis’ remarks. County Attorney Collins recounted the legal steps already taken in this matter and read out the specific actions in the agreement. He believed there would be a legal issue to placing a conservation buffer on the property that has a recreation restriction placed on it by the State because they contributed to the development of the park in the late 1980s. He advised the State has agreed to the swap. The closing would not occur until the park has been built out. MOTION WAS MADE by Vice Chairman Neuberger, SECONDED by Commissioner Davis, to approve staff’s recommendation. There was a suggestion that if Sanderling is not getting the $650,000 maybe the County could get that money. Ms. McCune reminded them that beachfront property is worth a lot of money, and the County would only get $1 million. She noted that the County would get a FEMA reimbursement from the hurricanes and that the park is not in bad shape so the County is not getting that much from this agreement. County Administrator Baird specified that repairs to the park have been kept at a minimum in anticipation of this agreement/exchange. It is due for an update or renovation. The County believes they will be getting a brand new park and facility plus the million dollars, but he August 2, 2005 22