Laserfiche WebLink
Attorney Brandenburg advised the Board that they ought <br />not to consider designating other Vista properties <br />differently under the Comprehensive Plan until properly <br />advertised in order to give the abutting property owners the <br />opportunity to come in and speak on the issue. <br />Commissioner Lyons wanted to look at the whole concept <br />of the neighborhood node and also review the County's policy <br />on strip commercial.on U.S. #1. <br />Robert Keating suggested that staff be allowed some <br />time to research some alternatives prior to the Board taking <br />action. <br />Carolyn Eggert felt that a month or 6 weeks would be <br />sufficient time to come up with some solution to the problem <br />and suggested that the I-95 node, the Oslo Road node, and <br />some others be considered as a single problem to be solved <br />post haste. <br />Chairman Bird requested Administrator Wright to <br />schedule a workshop on this matter with the Planning & <br />Zoning Manager and the County Commission. <br />Commissioner Scurlock pointed out that Vista's master <br />plan showed these properties as being.commercial; there was <br />never any site plan submitted with building locations, etc., <br />and felt that there was a considerable difference between a <br />preliminary site plan and a master plan. <br />Commissioner Scurlock also expressed concern over the <br />water and sewer tap ability and.asked Attorney Brandenburg <br />what would happen if this development is allowed to take <br />place and at some future time finds the capacity <br />insufficient. <br />Attorney Brandenburg advised that if this piece of <br />property creates a greater demand than those plants can <br />handle,..then he felt that the County has the ability to go <br />back to the developer and require him to expand those plants <br />at his cost, without any cost to the County system or the <br />71 <br />BSEP 21 1983.. <br />BOOK .e PAGE �� <br />