Laserfiche WebLink
BOOK <br />F'AEE <br />Commissioner Bird understood that the object of the "use it or <br />lose it" rule of a neighborhood commercial node is that if it is <br />not used it would revert back to residential to blend in with the <br />adjacent and surrounding properties. However, in this particular <br />situation, because this parcel is at SR 60 and 74th Avenue, which <br />are two heavily traveled routes, and because this is a small 3 -acre <br />parcel, it becomes somewhat impractical for that site to be <br />developed as a stand-alone multi -family site. He felt it would be <br />impractical for a developer to build 12 or 15 apartments, which is <br />the most that could be built on it with all the setbacks and other <br />requirements. He could envision an office building on the site <br />which would be an asset to this huge residential center which he <br />expects will grow as the County grows. Commissioner Bird believed <br />this site would serve a more useful purpose under a Professional <br />Office District (PRO) zoning than multi -family. <br />Commissioner Bowman agreed and commented that we do not need <br />more residences in that area. <br />The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone <br />wished to be heard in this matter. <br />Attorney Bill Stewart, 3355 Ocean Drive, representing the <br />property owner, Dr. and Mrs. Minotty, agreed with Commissioner <br />Bird's opinion. He felt the Planning and Zoning Commission's <br />conclusion was that a professional office zoning is more rational <br />than multi -family on this parcel. He pointed out that rezoning the <br />property to PRO fulfills one future land use policy, to encourage <br />infill development. He pointed out this parcel is on an arterial <br />roadway and this would be infill development. With regard to the <br />requirements when a PRO is under 5 acres, the minutes of the P & Z <br />meeting reflect that the County Attorney's office rendered an <br />opinion that any requirement must be met rather than all of them <br />which was certainly a permissible interpretation. That is the <br />basis upon which the P & Z made their recommendation because we <br />meet two of the criteria listed, and obviously not the third. If <br />there is any ambiguity in the language an old legal maxim states if <br />it is going to be construed against anybody it should be construed <br />against those who drafted it rather than against those who are <br />trying to read it and understand it. He thought the language is <br />clear and that the P & Z came to the correct conclusion on this <br />parcel. Attorney Stewart hoped the Board would consider rezoning <br />it PRO, Professional Office District. <br />Commissioner Scurlock looked at the area as dominated by non- <br />residential use abutting a commercial node or corridor. He listed <br />34 <br />