2/16/1988 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Chairman Scurlock noted there is no appeal to the Commission from the Board of Adjustment, it goes from that Board to Circuit Court. Argument continued about the three options, i.e., go to court, remove the trees, or change the zoning, and Attorney Cooksey advised that the Kennedy's at this point would not want the zoning reverted to agricultural. The reason for that is because of the circumstances of having the subdivision to the east and getting complaints when they spray, etc. There comes a question of the intensity of the adjoining property's residential use and how long they can keep their property in agricultural use because of that. Chairman Scurlock felt that argument is a bit inconsistent, and Commissioner Bird pointed out that the Kennedy's use today is agricultural and he did not feel the Board can give them the best of both worlds. He believed they were operating as a bona fide agricultural operation when they took out the trees, and he could not vote as he did and still live with leaving that property residential. Commissioner Bowman believed they now are saying this agricultural use won't go on too long because of the nearby residential. Attorney Cooksey emphasized they are not saying that. The present intention is to keep the groves in business. Commissioner Eggert felt if that is the case, there then should be no problem with changing this property to an agricultural zoning, and then when the time came and pressures got too great, the Kennedys could come back and ask for residential zoning. Commissioner Bird stated that he would like to see the Kennedys voluntarily request the rezoning, and if they don't, he will initiate the rezoning on the county side because he really feels the property should be zoned agricultural to be consistent with its present use. 45 FEB 1 6 1998 L f'W 70 FA,r.863