Laserfiche WebLink
DISRUPT THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN. HE STATED THAT THERE IS NO <br />POTABLE DRINKING WATER IN THAT AREA NOW OR IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE; <br />REVERSE OSMOSIS CAN BE USED, BUT IT IS EXPENSIVE. MR. ACOR REFERRED <br />TO A MEETING HELD RECENTLY WHERE THE MAYOR OF VERO BEACH SAID THERE <br />WOULD BE NO WATER OR SEWER ALLOCATIONS AVAILABLE AS THE PLANTS ARE <br />AT THEIR MAXIMUM — THE CITY OF VERO BEACH JUST HAS NO MORE. HE <br />CONTINUED ON THAT THERE IS NO SEWAGE FACILITY AVAILABLE NOW OR IN THE <br />FORESEEABLE FUTURE. MR. ACOR BELIEVED THAT SEWER HOLDING PONDS FOR <br />THE PACKAGE PLANTS SHOULD NOT BE SITED BELOW THE 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAN; <br />THEREFORE, THERE WAS NO SUITABLE SITE ON THE BARRIER ISLAND FOR SUCH <br />AN INSTALLATION. HE ALSO FELT A COMPETENT TRAFFIC COUNT SHOULD BE <br />TAKEN ON A -1—A BEFORE ANYTHING IS DECIDED ONa AS WELL AS CONSULTING <br />WITH CIVIL DEFENSE REGARDING AN EVACUATION, IN CASE OF A NATURAL <br />PHENOMENON. MR, ACOR REFERRED TO A REMARK MADE BY ATTORNEY HENDERSON <br />CONCERNING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY BEING SURROUNDED BY HIGHER DENSITY, <br />BUT NOTHING WAS SAID ABOUT THE AGRICULTURAL PROPERTY TO THE WEST WHICH <br />ALLOWS Z UNITS PER ACRE. IN CLOSING, HE FELT THE BOARD WOULD MAKE <br />A WISE, INSTEAD OF A HASTY, DECISION; NOT A DECISION TO PLEASE THE <br />WHIMS OF A PARTICULAR PERSON OR DEVELOPER, AT THE EXPENSE OF THE <br />RESIDENTS IN THIS COUNTY - THE RESIDENTS THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY <br />COMMISSIONERS REPRESENT. <br />COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED IF THERE WAS A VOTE TAKEN FOR <br />THIS POSITION BY THE ASSOCIATIONS MEMBERS OF APPROXIMATELY 1,000, <br />AND MR. ACOR REPLIED THAT IT WAS THE POSITION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS <br />OF THE TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION. <br />CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED, JUST FOR THE RECORD, THAT THE <br />PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE WEST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY <br />IS ZONED R-1, AND THERE IS AGRICULTURAL PROPERTY WEST OF THAT. <br />NORMAN BADENHOP, 4601 SUNSET DRIVE, PRESIDENT OF THE VERO <br />BEACH CIVIC ASSOCIATION, CAME BEFORE THE BOARD AND ADVISED THAT HIS <br />MEMBERSHIP WAS NOT POLLED AS TO THE OPPOSITION OF THIS APPLICATION. <br />HE ADDED THAT IT WAS THE UNANIMOUS DECISION BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS. <br />7 BOOK A -PAGE 918 <br />