My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1/26/1988
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1988
>
1/26/1988
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/2/2023 10:19:10 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 2:03:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
01/26/1988
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
71
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
request to develop the entire 19 acres should be reconsidered, <br />both legally and morally, because they feel that the development <br />as proposed would have a disastrous effect on all of the <br />residents in the entire area. He pointed out that the traffic <br />study submitted by the present developer shows that traffic in <br />that area already exceeds the amount al <br />lowed by the required <br />level of service, and emphasized that the developer's plans show <br />nothing to improve the condition. Having commercial property on <br />both sides of their entrance and the developer owning their <br />entrance, would subject 640 families to entering and exiting <br />their homes through a shopping center on a narrow and winding <br />road. The co -mingling of commercial traffic with the residential <br />traffic would not only be dangerous, but an accident blocking the <br />entrance would landlock them and emergency vehicles could not <br />enter. The ideal situation would be to rezone the entire 19+ <br />acres and make it a natural preserve, but if this proves <br />impossible, its use should be kept to a minimum. The residents <br />feel strongly that the Commissioners have the right to change the <br />zoning since the rezoning in 1983 was based on misinformation. <br />The Planning & Zoning Commission recommended against the rezoning <br />at that time, and the Board voted in favor of the commercial <br />rezoning by a slim 3-2 vote, only because they were told by the <br />present owners that they wished to develop the area similar to <br />the Village Shops on the beach and that ail of the owners in <br />Vista Gardens had been informed of their request for a rezoning. <br />Mr. Perosa stated that he was not notified of the rezoning, and <br />was not aware of anyone else who was. As a matter fact, many of <br />the residents are not and were not aware that they do not own the <br />entrance to Vista Gardens. He admitted that it was stated in fine <br />print that they don't own the entrance, but pointed out that their <br />prospectus states that they should read carefully all documents <br />and all sales material. Mr. Perosa quoted from a major piece of <br />sales material that was used at the time which described the exotic <br />,JAN 2 6 198 <br />23 <br />,OOK 70 F" c.6S1. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.