Laserfiche WebLink
Commissioner Eggert's feeling was that a 20' spread on trees <br />might be an effective compromise between what the Planning & <br />Zoning Commission wants and what staff wants. She had a little <br />problem going closer without providing a better screening <br />situation. <br />Commissioner Bowman also had trouble with the 25' setback, <br />which she felt is outrageous and, in fact, almost favoring the <br />elite. The people who have to live on smaller lots are not able <br />to get the same protection that people who are able to own big <br />lots get, and she <br />did not <br />see <br />this <br />at all. <br />Commissioner <br />Eggert <br />noted <br />that <br />some smaller units are around <br />our beach clubs now. <br />Planner Boling pointed out that the areas with the higher <br />zoning and smaller lots will develop faster, and it relates to <br />who bears the burden. If the grove leaves and is replaced with <br />new development, the new development will not have a 50' buffer <br />but 251. In other words, you would be penalizing areas that are <br />zoned for high density and that have infrastructure and in a lot <br />of cases are closer in to development. . <br />Commissioner Eggert raised the question of whether we would <br />cease to be protecting them. <br />Community Development Director Keating agreed that is an <br />issue. He believed everyone agrees there are some detrimental <br />effects from building next to groves, but apparently less than we <br />thought before. The big issue is who bears the burden of trying <br />to protect the people in the residences. It is not fair to <br />require the grove owner to change his method of operation just <br />because an adjacent development is coming in, but is it fair to <br />make the development coming in provide extra setbacks even though <br />that adjacent grove may at some time come in to be developed. In <br />fact that very happening is just what precipitated this. There <br />is no perfect solution, and Director Keating felt staff's recom- <br />mendation represents a compromise. He believed the developments <br />needing protection longer are those in the outlying areas. <br />75 <br />AUG 2 3 1988 <br />BOOK 7 F-, E573 <br />