My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4/6/1983
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1983
>
4/6/1983
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:50:00 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 2:53:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
04/06/1983
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
139
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
F"_ <br />APR 1983 <br />aQaK 53 Pnc( �. <br />omission by the county would apply. Attorney Brandenburg <br />felt that could relate to the act of approval knowing of the <br />sizing of the lines for the number of anticipated units. <br />Commissioner Wodtke asked if the Board should make a <br />decision based on individual ownership of -a lot or whether <br />Mr. Zorc was acting as trustee. <br />Mr. Zorc stated that he is trustee only for Lot 5; Mr. <br />St. Pierre is here as owner of Lot 2; he himself still owns <br />lots 11 and 12; Mr. Bergamino owns lot 6 and Mr. Trout Lot <br />7. Mr. St. Pierre intends to build 8 units per acre. <br />Attorney Brandenburg noted that the reason this vested <br />rights clause was included in the Comprehensive Plan was to <br />give a person ability to address the Commission and show he <br />has a vested right rather than have to go to court. <br />The Board continued to discuss the three criteria, and <br />it was felt these should be emphasized so that this will not <br />cause us difficulty in the future. Commissioner Bowman felt <br />it was plain the applicants acted in good faith and they <br />have made a large investment., <br />ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED <br />by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unani- <br />mously found that the owners of lots in <br />Orange Terrace Subdivision, with the excep- <br />tion of Lot 6, have a vested right to construct <br />8 one -bedroom units on each of these lots, <br />based on the fact that they acted in good faith; <br />they have made a substantial investment; and <br />the county approved the project as it proceeded, <br />knowing how it was intended to be and required <br />sizing of the water and sewer system based on <br />that assumption and based on the impact fees. <br />94 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.