My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6/18/1991
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1991
>
6/18/1991
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:03:09 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 10:29:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
06/18/1991
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
175
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
M M <br />whether Mr. Feldman should apply when the window of opportunity <br />opens twice a year for land use amendments. <br />Mr. Feldman preferred his position be considered before rather <br />than after because he worried that there would be a very serious <br />problem with the State of Florida considering it after the <br />adoption. He wanted to participate in the negotiation and <br />settlement process. <br />Commissioner Eggert pointed out that we had notice of this <br />change and notice of public hearings when we originally put the <br />agreement together, which was the perfect window for this to be <br />addressed and she asked if there was a reason he did not make his <br />request at that time. <br />Mr. Feldman stated he was not made aware of it through a <br />publication because he did not see the publication. When he did <br />obtain a copy and showed it to his attorney, his attorney felt he <br />would not have understood the impact that publication could have <br />had on this particular piece of property. Mr. Feldman also <br />commented that other citizens and residents of Indian River County <br />were of the same opinion. <br />County Attorney Vitunac advised that even though the applicant <br />missed all the earlier deadlines, if he had come to the meetings he <br />might have gotten relief as five or six other people had. Mr. <br />Vitunac asked, if Mr. Feldman today presented a case that could <br />convince the Board, would that be sent to DCA as the recommendation <br />of the Board, meaning we are not precluded from changes even at <br />this late date. <br />Mr. Keating said that is correct, the Board can make that <br />decision. <br />Attorney Vitunac continued by stating that if Mr. Feldman <br />makes a case, even though it would mess everything up, the Board <br />has the power today to do something with Mr. Feldman's case. <br />Commissioner Scurlock felt we are under a hammer to go with <br />the recommendation and any changes would cause the whole process to <br />start from step one. <br />Director Keating emphasized that we have entered into an <br />agreement with DCA to make the changes that we have worked out with <br />them and felt that, if we were to make another change, probably <br />everything would be back on the table. He was sure if DCA would <br />accept an amendment that is sent today, they certainly would accept <br />it if it is done in the next time frame; there would be absolutely <br />no difference in their decision-making philosophy. <br />Chairman Bird emphasized that the amendments that are coming <br />up have had hours and hours of dialogue between the applicant and <br />the Commission and staff, as well as staff research and so forth. <br />49 <br />BOOK <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.