11/17/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Director Keating summarized that because this request is inconsistent with Future Land Use Policies 1.21, 1.23 and 13.3, staff feels it should be denied transmittal to the DCA. Chairman Eggert opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. Attorney Michael O'Haire, advised that he is representing two separate owners of two separate parcels of property. Mr. Willcock's property on the south is 6.3 acres and Mr. Korine's property to the north is 8.8 acres. He emphasized that of the two miles of frontage on U.S. #1 north of Winter Beach, his clients' parcels are the only parcels not having .some sort of commercial use. He felt it was obvious that these two parcels fell through the cracks when the Comp Plan was adopted, but staff's position, is that there was no oversight in leaving these parcels zoned residential. To the south of Mr. Willcock's property is the Ocean Spray packing house and immediately to the south is Ocean Spray's effluent field. To relegate Mr. Willcock's and Mr. Korine's property to residential use is to tell them they can continue to pay taxes on their property when there is no feasible use for it. Attorney O'Haire argued against staff's reasoning that these 15 acres are feasible for residential development and comparing them to the large developments of Vista Royale, Vista Gardens and Grove Isle which were built off U.S. #1 to the south. He stressed that no one here today would envision this property as residential use. He admitted that it is strip commercial but the property along U.S. #1 north of Vero Beach is all strip commercial and these two parcels are the last remaining remnants of residential property in that strip of commercial. The owners cannot use that property for residential and no one is going to purchase that property if it remains residential zoning. Nobody in their right mind would invest their money in purchasing residential property in this location fronting on U.S. #1. More importantly than that, nobody would want to live there if somebody were foolish enough to invest in residential construction in this location. Attorney O'Haire wished to add that at the Planning & Zoning hearing he modified the application to CL from CH at the request of the land owner to the north who owns the CL frontage. He implored the Board on behalf of his two clients to go ahead and forward this request to the DCA and approve the change in the land use plan and grant the rezoning subject to that change being final. Commissioner Bird asked why these parcels were left in residential under the Comp Plan, and Director Keating explained 37 NOV i ,i 1992 BOOK 88 PAGE 41