My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/3/1980
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1980
>
12/3/1980
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:48:55 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 12:44:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/03/1980
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
75
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
ATTORNEY STEVE HENDERSON INFORMED THE BOARD THAT ONE OF <br />THE PROBLEMS FLORIDA LAND COMPANY HAS HAD WITH THEIR SITE PLAN <br />APPROVAL HAS BEEN THE LACK OF ASCERTAINABLE STANDARDS THAT THEY COULD <br />GO BY TO DEMAND THE DRI BINDING LETTER. HE THEN LISTED THREE REASONS <br />THEY DID NOT WANT TO APPLY FOR A BINDING LETTER - COST, THE TIME <br />ELEMENT, AND A LITTLE BIT OF PRINCIPLE THROWN IN, THAT BEING THAT <br />THIS APPLICANT HAS GONE BY THE PLANNING OFFICE PROCEDURE AND WAS <br />SUBJECTED TO A REQUIREMENT WHICH, TO HIS RECOLLECTION, HAS NOT <br />BEEN BROUGHT UP BEFORE NOR IS IT THE SUBJECT OF AN ORDINANCE OR A <br />STATUTE. ATTORNEY HENDERSON STATED THAT MR. CLARK OF FLORIDA LAND <br />COMPANY FEELS THAT THE DEVELOPER OUGHT T0, AT LEAST, HAVE THE <br />BENEFIT OF KNOWING WHAT IS EXPECTED OF HIM IN ADVANCE, <br />ATTORNEY HENDERSON CONTINUED THAT AS TO THE DRI AND THE <br />6 UNITS PER ACRE, CONCEPTUALLY THEY WOULD HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT <br />AS LONG AS IT IS NOT APPLIED TO THEIR PROPERTY; THEY FEEL THEIR <br />ZONING WOULD BE VESTED BY THIS TIME AND WANT THAT ON THE RECORD. <br />ATTORNEY HENDERSON STATED THAT THE DEVELOPER WOULD HAVE NO PROBLEM <br />WITH REZONING THE 50 ACRES OF R-2 PROPERTY DOWN TO R -2B AS HE DOES <br />NOT INTEND TO EXCEED 8 UNITS PER ACRE, AND, IN FACT, HE MIGHT EVEN <br />BE RECEPTIVE TO GOING LOWER THAN S IF THE COUNTY SAID THEY HAD A <br />REAL PROBLEM IN THE AREA AND FELT S IS TOO MUCH. ATTORNEY HENDERSON <br />ADDED THAT CONCURRENTLY WITH ANY SITE PLAN PROCESS, THEY WOULD AGREE <br />TO APPLY FOR REZONING TO R -2B AND THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL COULD BE <br />MADE CONTINGENT ON THAT REZONING. <br />COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK DISCUSSED REZONING ACCORDING TO THE <br />1975 MASTER PLAN AND ASKED IF ANY OF THE DENSITIES CALLED FOR BY <br />THAT PLAN ARE LOWER THAN THE PROPOSED DENSITIES IN THE NEW PLAN. <br />MR. REVER BELIEVED IF THERE ARE ANY, THEY WOULD BE SMALL <br />PARCELS - MOST OF THIS PROPERTY IS ZONED R-1 OR HIGHER. <br />COMMISSIONER SUCRLOCK FELT IF THE OVERALL PRESENT PLAN IS <br />LESS RESTRICTIVE THAN WHAT WE SEEM TO BE GOING T0, HE WOULD HAVE <br />NO OBJECTION TO MOVING FORWARD, <br />DEC 31980 <br />63 <br />Boa, 45 PAGE -3915 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.