My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4/21/1982
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1982
>
4/21/1982
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:49:38 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 2:13:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
04/21/1982
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
71
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
2. The Agricultural property is an enclave surrounded on <br />three sides.by single family residential development of <br />various densities. Agricultural zoning is not the most - <br />appropriate for the site because of incompatibility with <br />the surrounding land uses. Multi -family development at <br />6 units/acre is also not the most appropriate zoning for <br />the site because of the incompatibility with the surrounding <br />land uses. <br />RECOMMENDATION: <br />Staff recommends denial of the request to rezone the 49-88- 36.38 <br />acres from Agricultural to R -2D, Multi -Family Residential <br />(6 units/acre). <br />Attorney Robert Jackson came before the Board representing <br />C. S. Richardson, noting that there is no disagreement that Mr. <br />Richardson's 36 acres of old grove should not remain in <br />Agricultural zoning. He pointed out that the subject property is <br />in an MD -1 zone under the Land Use Plan, but they asked for R -2D <br />to give the County maximum jurisdiction over deciding what should <br />go on there. What they are planning is cluster buildings similar <br />to those in Stuart or Palm Beach. Mr. Jackson then described the <br />surrounding property, noting that there is a subdivision of old <br />50' lots located -to the west, to the south of those, it is zoned <br />B-1, and there is also an old mobile home park, while on the east <br />is' a very nice subdivision of high quality homes. He felt it was <br />incongrous that while staff agreed that agricultural is not <br />appropriate and felt that R -2D is somewhat compatible with the <br />approximately 5 units per acre development to the west and south, <br />and also since site plan requirements include landscaping which <br />would provide a buffer to the east, they still recommended <br />denial. Attorney Jackson was of the opinion that the folks to <br />1, <br />the east, who spoke eloquently against the rezoning, are <br />objecting because they are worried about what the development <br />will look like. He stressed that the Richardsons are not <br />planning to increase density at all and are planning around 4 <br />units per acre. Attorney Jackson felt this is a good project <br />that complies with the density plan, and he believed a lot of <br />APR 211982 55 BcoK. 4 PAtE455 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.