Laserfiche WebLink
MAR 2 0 1985 BOOK 60 F''"'r 23 <br />Ed Gentilly, 41 Vista Garden Trail, wished to go on record, <br />as a member of the Board of Directors of Vista Gardens that'the <br />majority of the residents are against the proposed Indian River <br />Boulevard since the roadway, as shown to them, will be approxi- <br />mately 55' from two story apartment buildings, which will have to <br />overlook it and any commercial development that may take place <br />there. As far as the property to be rezoned adjacent to their <br />entrance is concerned, Mr. Gentilly stated that they are neither <br />for nor against it because they do not know what the builder's <br />plan might be, but they want to be assured that they have <br />protection from encroachment on their property and adequate <br />screening. They feel the property to be rezoned to commercial <br />will have a detrimental affect on the entire Vista Gardens area, <br />which is a 20 million dollar development that brings in a <br />tremendous amount of taxes to the County. Approximately 25% of <br />the buildings in Vista Gardens are adjacent to the proposed <br />Boulevard extension, and many apartments already are for sale at <br />values lower than their original purchase price. <br />Mr. Gentilly continued that they are not against the <br />proposed roadbed if it is put in the proper position to serve the <br />county in a more feasible means. He believed the original intent <br />was to terminate the Boulevard at 12th or 8th Street, and the <br />Vista residents strongly support this as Mr. Davis was made aware <br />at a previous meeting with the residents. Mr. Gentilly further <br />stated that they strongly oppose an entranceway being cut from <br />their present roadbed shutting off their entrance to U.S.1 and <br />giving them access to the Indian River Blvd. section, and if such <br />a road were cut, he could not see any value over what they now <br />have as they still would be exiting on a four lane highway. <br />Mr. Gentilly again emphasized they are definitely against <br />rezoning to commercial and recommended that any decision on the <br />rezoning be postponed so further study can be done. He then <br />noted that the Planning Department is required to post on the <br />property to be rezoned a conspicuous notice with a map of the <br />