4/5/1988 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Chairman Scurlock pointed out that there still would be the public hearing process to allow the public an opportunity to react to any factual change. Attorney Vitunac believed the ball is in the applicant's court, and that the applicant should state whether he wants to proceed now without the benefit of any changes from the site plan that was reviewed by the P & Z, or whether he wishes to send it back voluntarily for full review of any modifications. Attorney Vitunac stressed that he did not say the Board could not look at this new information; however, they do have the right to send it back to the P & Z for further review. Attorney Michael O'Haire, representing Farber, Inc., stressed that the changes to which the members of the Commission are alluding originated with staff, not the applicant, subsequent to the meeting. He stated that the applicant will proceed with the appeal. Commissioner Eggert asked if the improvements that are being alluded to are improvements that Farber, Inc. has agreed to, and Attorney O'Haire stated that they have formally agreed to them and are on record with staff as having agreed to them. Commissioner Wheeler asked what the specific improvements were that Farber, Inc. agreed to, and Director Keating advised that the one major change since the P & Z meeting is the proposal for the applicant to request the County to approve the prohibiting of left turns from eastbound 1st Street to northbound U.S. #1 and prohibiting that through movement. Chairman Scurlock understood that the applicant's improvement is to limit straight across access into Vista Gardens, and Planner Boling explained that the left turn and through movement are both considered problems, and both have to be removed in order to raise the level of service to an acceptable standard. Chairman Scurlock understood that if the Commission decided that was not an acceptable alternative, the developer would be 28 it 51988 BOOK 71 PAGE457