Laserfiche WebLink
PR 22 6 <br />1986 <br />BOOK <br />63 F',PEA311 <br />Commissioner Wodtke understood <br />that we are going <br />to give <br />access to the three properties for existing single-family <br />dwellings only. <br />MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED <br />by Commissioner Bowman, that the Board approve <br />a single access for each of the Fultz, White and Beal <br />properties for single-family residential use only. <br />Commissioner Bowman objected to having 3 driveways accessing <br />Indian River Boulevard, and wondered if we could have just one <br />driveway with a connector to each of the 3 properties. <br />Administrator Wright stressed that they already have access <br />onto 6th Avenue. <br />Attorney Robert Jackson advised that when he represented the <br />Smeltzer family in their donation of right-of-way for the <br />Boulevard, he never heard the terms "impact credit" or "density <br />transfer." He stressed how precious our right of owning private <br />property is in America and wished to have Mrs. Smeltzer's <br />property included in those properties receiving access. <br />Chairman Scurlock ascertained from staff that Attorney <br />Jackson or his client had never been offered an "impact credit" <br />or "density transfer" during any discussions or negotiations for <br />right-of-way on Indian River Boulevard. He had assumed that if <br />we are to acquire -right-of-way for the Boulevard at the lowest <br />possible cost to the taxpayers, that every inducement, such as <br />density transfers and impact fee credits, would be used, and <br />could not understand why these people were not advised of these <br />options. However, the question now is whether the attorneys of <br />the families involved want to consider impact credits or density <br />transfers for their clients at this time. <br />Attorney Roddenberry stated that the Fultz's do not want to <br />consider these options, they just want access to the Boulevard. <br />52 <br />