9/26/1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

S EP 24,1990 BOCK 81 PA[JE 549 reasons was that we had way too many dwelling units. It would have been counter productive to start talking about densities with 2 and 3 mile radii increasing all those units. That is why we put it off. Commissioner Scurlock understood that what staff is recom- mending tonight is to go ahead and convey the compliance plan without changing a letter, so to speak, but concurrent with that, try to reach a settlement with the interveners by conveying their proposed amendments concurrent with this, and Director Keating responded affirmatively. Attorney Bruce Barkett advised that they are supportive of sending up the compliance agre.ement as it stands now, and in the meantime try to work out another additional agreement with the DCA and staff and have that sent up at transmittal time. Mr. McQueen stated that at this time his client is not an intervener, and advised that Mr. Barkett was not the attorney for the SR -60 property, but is the attorney on the 1800 acre parcel on CR -512. Attorney Barkett advised that he represents J. B. Cain on the SR -60 property. Mr. McQueen explained that the 500+ acre parcel on SR -60 is industrial, commercial, residential on the south side of SR -60 and immediately on the west side of 1-95. Most of it is in the urban service area and all of it is in the utilities service area. The nodal concept would have taken care of this in that it would have allowed them to use some density out of there. This development is presently zoned at 8 upa. If this plan goes through, it will be developed at 500 units on 525 acres, or less than 1 upa. He urged the Board to include the nodal concept for these interchanges if there was any way of doing it. He repeated that, at the present time, his client is not an intervener. Attorney Collins stated that it is too late to intervene, and Commissioner Scurlock asked if there is any way that Mr. McQueen's nodal concept could be considered by the DCA. 20