My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/12/1989
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1989
>
12/12/1989
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/2/2023 10:33:12 AM
Creation date
6/16/2015 8:29:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/12/1989
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
67
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
errors in the Planning & Zoning Department, the Building Dept. or <br />the County Attorney's office do not set a precedent for the future <br />that we can never enforce our Codes again. Further, if the Board <br />gives in on this, and says that because of the mistake we are <br />going to grant some relief, it would be setting a terrible <br />precedent. It would be authorizing the doubling of a 50 -ft. lot, <br />which would apply in other portions of the county, and this issue <br />would come back to haunt us later on. <br />Commissioner Scurlock had some sympathy for Attorney <br />O'Haire's clients if they bought this property believing they <br />could build on both sides, but after listening to Attorney <br />Vitunac's opinion, he felt we would be setting a precedent here <br />for the whole county. He questioned why the Board of Adjustment <br />asked this to be heard by the Board, and Mr. Boling explained that <br />the Commission is not being asked to grant a variance today. The <br />Board of Adjustments more or less tabled this item until the <br />Commission made a decision on whether to change the regulations in <br />these situations. <br />Director Keating advised that the Board of Adjustment has the <br />ability to make quasi-judicial determinations, and they determined <br />that this is better handled through a legislative action, which <br />would be a change in the ordinance. <br />Attorney O'Haire maintained that it was the construction of <br />AIA that divided those lots, physically and legally, but <br />Commissioner Scurlock disagreed because if you go back to the 1954 <br />plat, it shows a road bisecting the property in conveyance of one <br />lot 50 -feet in width and some undetermined length. <br />Commissioner Bird admitted to vacillating back and forth on <br />this matter this morning, but he was going to go back to his <br />original feeling which is that Ambersand Subdivision was <br />originally created, and should remain, a single-family <br />subdivision, and that if you have a lot that has adequate frontage <br />on both sides of AIA, you take your choice where you want to build <br />your house, either on the river side or the ocean side. <br />t��oK <br />39 78 ra GE61C <br />DEC 12 `p 39 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.