My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/16/1985
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1985
>
10/16/1985
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:51:31 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 11:11:01 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
10/16/1985
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
58
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
M M <br />Chairman Lyons announced that a letter was received <br />yesterday from Chester Clem, attorney representing Development <br />Partners, Inc. requesting a postponement of this appeal. <br />Commissioner Scurlock asked what the proper procedure would <br />be, and County Attorney Vitunac recommended that the Board not <br />open the public hearing unless staff has some objection to a <br />postponement. <br />Attorney Clem reported that they have had some meetings with <br />the folks in Rivera Estates and have not had a lot of cooperation <br />since the Planning & Zoning hearing. He stated he was not here <br />to represent that they were going to be able to get everybody in <br />accord, but they do have some other things to talk over and <br />circulate with the residents, perhaps at another meeting with <br />them. Their thoughts on this is that they would like to do that <br />before bringing this back to the Board. He stated that they <br />advised as many people as possible in Rivera Estates that they <br />were going to request a continuance today as well as the Planning <br />Department and the County Attorney's office. They simply would <br />like to readvertise, if that is a necessity, or just continue it <br />to a date certain, and go ahead and get this thing off and out of <br />the way. <br />Commissioner Scurlock did not mind postponing it, but felt <br />that if they reduced their request for the rezoning to something <br />less and left out the -approximate 6 acres which they are <br />declaring as a buffer area, that they might find some more <br />acceptance than they would by including it. <br />Attorney Clem felt that they could get to that point with a <br />dedication as, frankly, that acreage is needed in the <br />computations. He advised that they have been working with an <br />attorney who resides in the subdivision and who represents some <br />of the people, at least, in trying to get something down so that <br />they can give the assurance that they do have a permanent buffer <br />strip there. It is not going to make everybody happy, but they <br />would like to be able to let everybody know what they have on <br />38 <br />® C r BOOK 62 ma 430 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.