Laserfiche WebLink
BOOK 85 FAGE <br />Commissioner Scurlock understood the concern for setting a <br />precedent and the possible domino effect on other properties. In <br />this particular case he felt the applicant had planned to retire to <br />a small estate -type homesite. He also felt the entire area of 66th <br />Avenue from 4th to 6th Streets will grow and will have different <br />densities assigned. He asked if staff could find something that <br />would apply to the applicant as a vested right since he was in the <br />process of rezoning and splitting his property and was not aware of <br />the 13 -month time frame. Commissioner Scurlock felt, under those <br />circumstances, it would not set a precedent. <br />Planning Director Boling enumerated cases where people <br />effected splits on property bef'&re the comprehensive land change <br />but stressed that we no longer allow them to contradict the comp <br />plan when there is a zoning conflict. He felt that for the subject <br />case the argument could be made that a rezoning was granted, but it <br />is also an argument against in that there was a 13 -month time <br />period in which to act. It was not an immediate change after the <br />rezoning was granted. <br />Commissioner Scurlock noted that on site plans, if somebody <br />has not been able to get financing, we allow one extension for up <br />to 12 months. He also stated he would be happy if the entire area <br />A <br />bounded by 4th and 6th Streets and 66th and 74th Avenues would <br />develop at one unit to two and a half acres. Of course, the comp <br />plan focus is on the urban service area concept which does not take <br />into consideration a person in Mr. Schlitt's position. He just <br />wants to live in a low density area that is buffered. Commissioner <br />Scurlock did not like being in a position where the Board cannot, <br />or it is suggested that the Board cannot do anything about it. <br />Commissioner Bowman felt we cannot allow it because of our <br />stipulated agreement with Department of Community Affairs (DCA). <br />Commissioner Scurlock, asked whether this deviation is so <br />substantial that DCA would call us on it. <br />Commissioner Bowman believed if we have one we could have <br />more. <br />Chairman Bird asked, and Community Development Director Bob <br />Keating used the enlarged map to indicate the dividing line in the <br />comp plan between this agricultural zone and the residential zone <br />to the east. <br />Commissioner Wheeler asked what our legal position is on this <br />and County Attorney Vitunac advised that zoning cannot be changed <br />except by going through the process of changing the comp plan. He <br />further advised that the only present method the Board has to grant <br />the request of this applicant is to make a finding that the_County <br />is equitably estopped from enforcing the existing zoning because of <br />MV <br />M <br />