My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/1/1981
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1981
>
10/1/1981
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:49:19 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 1:46:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Special Call Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
10/01/1981
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
OCT 1 1981 <br />PROPERTY IN THE FELLSMERE AREA <br />BOOK47 <br />The Chairman then informed those present that the <br />Commission first will consider properties in the Fellsmere <br />area. <br />Commissioner Fletcher felt the basic question in <br />Fellsmere is why is it necessary to designate what is now <br />all agricultural land as LD -1 or RR. <br />Planning Director Rever stated that he also had <br />received this impression, but the problem that exists is <br />that there are some lands that are already subdivided or <br />under use that exceed those parameters, and the question <br />seems to be how extensive we have to be in accommodating <br />those lands. Mr. Rever reported that he reviewed the <br />proposed boundaries with Fellsmere City officials and some <br />specific suggestions were made, and they now have come up <br />with what they feel is a feasible alternative, as follows: <br />A strip from the north boundary of Fellsmere to Ditch 20 <br />west of Park Lateral would be RR on both sides of SR 512; <br />the Homewood Subdivision, which is an existing subdivision <br />with lots smaller than one acre, would be LD -1; and an area <br />designated by the City limits on the west and 512 on the <br />north, approximately h mile east of 512 and down to Ditch <br />116 on the south, will be designated to conform to the <br />development presently being undertaken in that area. - <br />probably LD -2; it would be contiguous to the City. <br />Discussion followed about accommodating development <br />without having "warts" or uneven projections, and it was <br />noted that Homewood is a platted, but unrecorded subdivision <br />which is broken up into lots of varying sizes. Discussion <br />continued as to the significance of the subdivision being <br />unrecorded. <br />In further discussion, the Board generally agreed that'� <br />the proposed compromise was a good one, and Commissioner <br />Bird noted that when he had been in this vicinity there was <br />a group very much opposed to the Plan as proposed. He felt <br />it would save time, if we now could hear if there is anyone <br />still opposed to the compromise plan just presented. <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.