Laserfiche WebLink
MR. CAIRNS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE IS THE OWNER OF THE <br />PROPERTY IN QUESTION, AND FLORIDA LAND CO. IS THE OPTIONEE. <br />ATTORNEY HENDERSON, REPRESENTING FLORIDA LAND COMPANY, <br />COMPLAINED OF COMMUNICATION PROBLEMS WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT <br />WHICH ARE CAUSING THEM COSTLY DELAYS. HE ASKED IF THE COUNTY WISHED <br />TO INITIATE THE REZONING RATHER THAN HAVING THEM FOLLOW THROUGH <br />ON THEIR APPLICATION, AND THEN BROUGHT UP THE QUESTION OF THIS POSSIBLY <br />BEING AN INTERIM ZONING PENDING ADOPTION OF THE NEW LAND USE PLAN. <br />HE POINTED OUT THAT IT IS IMPORTANT FOR THE DEVELOPER TO KNOW IF THEY <br />CAN RELY ON THE PROPOSED R -2B ZONING SO THEY CAN PLAN FUTURE DEVELOP- <br />MENT. <br />IT WAS NOTED THAT IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION <br />BECAUSE WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE NEW PLAN WILL BE; ALTHOUGH, IT IS <br />APPARENT THERE IS PRESSURE FOR LOWER DENSITIES. <br />COMMISSIONER FLETCHER ASKED WHY THE DEVELOPER DID NOT PRO- <br />CEED TO DEVELOP HIS PROPERTY AT THE DENSITY ALLOWED UNDER THE PRESENT <br />R-2 ZONING. <br />.JAMES CLARK OF FLORIDA LAND COMPANY AGREED THAT THEY HAVE <br />THE RIGHT TO DEVELOP THEIR 84 ACRES UNDER THE R-2 ZONING, BUT THEY <br />DID NOT FEEL IT WAS DESIRABLE TO PLAN TO THAT DENSITY. HE NOTED <br />THAT ALTHOUGH THEY SUBMITTED A PRELIMINARY PLAT AND OVERALL FINAL <br />PLAN TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT OVER HALF A YEAR AGO, THEY HAVE BEEN <br />CONSTANTLY FRUSTRATED IN THEIR EFFORTS TO GET THIS PROCESSED, <br />DISCUSSION CONTINUED AS TO DEFINITION OF MEDIUM DENSITY, <br />AND MR. CLARK ASKED IF MR. REVER AGREED THAT THE S UNITS AN ACRES <br />SUBMITTED IN THEIR PLAN WOULD CONFORM TO THE INTENT OF THE BOARD'S <br />REQUEST. MR. REVER AGREED THAT IT WOULD. <br />CHAIRMAN LYONS FELT IF WE INITIATE REZONING FOR THE REMAIN- <br />ING PROPERTY, WE SHOULD INCLUDE THESE PROPERTIES ALSO AND PICK UP THE <br />TAB. <br />GORDON NUTT, OWNER OF APPROXIMATELY HALF THE LAND UNDER <br />DISCUSSION TODAY, FELT THERE WAS A PROBLEM IN THAT THE PROPERTY UNDER <br />CONSIDERATION DOES NOT CONFORM EXACTLY TO THE EXISTING LAND USE PAP <br />AND THERE MAY BE AN OVERLAP WITH THE DIFFERENT ZONINGS, HE URGED, <br />43 <br />EER -198. <br />� <br />