5/5/1987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

AY 5 1987 BOOK 68 PAGE 28 Street area, said the character of the neighborhood was what was determinative in their minds. The only homes in the neighbor- hood being discussed are on Targe acreages, and they want to utilize the character of the neighborhood as an argument; also, they do not want to destroy the aquifer. They request that the Board approve the rezoning to RS -3 and not delete any portions from the area advertised. Chairman Scurlock noted that Attorney Rabin's opinion that water and sewer is unavailable is not correct; any individual who had a large enough piece of property could put in a sewer and water system. Robert Mooney, county resident since 1969, informed the Board that he represents 102 acres in the area being considered for downzoning. He stressed that when he and his family purchased this property, they did so because of the zoning, and the zoning criteria that is there today was there when the zoning regulations were adopted in 1957. He, too, therefore, would ask for consistency from the Board. Mr. Mooney noted that in October the Board voted unanimously to leave their property the way it was, and after hearing that decision, they proceeded with development plans and applied for a franchise for the area. Then, in February, the Board requested reconsideration of the area; however, the Planning & Zoning Commission in March voted 6 to 1 to leave this property at 6 upa, and staff has stated on several occasions that good zoning steps down in intensity. As to the character of the neighborhood, Mr. Mooney pointed out that their property on South Winter Beach Road is adjoined by an industrial zoned area on the east; they have a county garbage transfer station across the street; and to the west of the canal, there are smaller subdivisions and 60' frontage lots; so, their area is not an area of large tracts. He emphasized that when they purchased their property, they were aware of the zoning, and they are not asking anyone to change it for them. 18