Laserfiche WebLink
MAR 141992 <br />Mr. Ragsdale reported that he had been told this was <br />not a "taking" issue. <br />Michael Rhodes, representing the John's Island <br />community, came before the Board and reported that they had <br />a particular problem with the map as it was drawn. He felt, <br />under the Department of Interior criteria, they more than <br />met their definition of "developed;" as the living units <br />were there and it was a very active community. Mr. Rhodes <br />advised they have written their Congressmen, the Department <br />of Interior, and the Game & Fresh Water Fish Commission and <br />have provided the Planning Department with the same <br />material. He then requested that the Board exclude them <br />from the map in order that they not be classified as <br />"undeveloped." <br />Edgar Schlitt, Realtor, approached the Board and <br />referred to the maps prepared by the Department of Interior. <br />He stated that some of the Congressmen admitted there was <br />very little discussion at the time this item was passed; <br />therefore, it was not given a great deal of consideration. <br />Mr. Schlitt felt to be fair there should have been local <br />input, and he thought it would be well for the Board to make <br />the point that this was not given the proper consideration. <br />He stressed that if this Bill had gone into effect a dozen <br />years ago, we would not have seen a development like John's <br />Island, and there still are lands to the north of John's <br />Island that are equally as beautiful and could be developed. <br />He then talked about flood insurance, and commented that <br />maybe the people should suggest that the federal government <br />get out of the federally -subsidized flood insurance <br />business. <br />Hep Walker, citizen, came before the Board and talked <br />about the south portion of the County, which he considers to <br />be developed property. <br />