8/23/1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I understand that the main opponent to the proposed amendments is Majestic Partners of Vero Beach, Ltd. It opposes the amendments because it wishes to develop transient rental projects in the midst of and immediately surrounding Sea Oaks. I do not know how such a plan would do anything other than result in a disorderly and illogical development pattern. To permit the renting of units to transients in buildings next to condominiums which are not rented or rented annually or seasonally would, in my opinion, have an adverse impact upon your development.. Short term renters will make a greater use of your facilities and will be less inclined to abide by the rules and regulations which were adopted by the Sea Oaks Homeowners Associations for the purpose of establishing a harmonious living environment. Finally, I think that the conflict with the public interest and the lack of harmony with the purpose and intent of the land development regulations are clear from the potential problems set forth above and those that you have expressed to me. The fact that almost every owner of property at Sea Oaks and member of the Sea Oaks Club have informed you of their concern over a residential resort being constructed in, or immediately adjacent to, the Sea Oaks development clearly indicates the public's concern that to permit such a development would adversely affect current use and enjoyment of the property. If you have any questions or comments concerning any of the above, please do not hesitate to let me know. Sincerely yours, �war- Charles W. McKinnon Bruce Barkett, attorney representing Disney Development Company, spoke in opposition to the adoption of item #5 requiring a 3 -day minimum length of stay: He felt the requirement goes beyond the scope of what the ordinances are intended to do and would have some very serious impacts on the Disney development or any other development that is built in this county. He emphasized that the 3 -day minimum stay would be a nightmare to enforce. Summarizing, Attorney Barkett stated that Disney Development opposes the minimum 3 -day stay and feels the ordinance is fine as it is. J. B. Norton and Carol Johnson of the IRC Chamber of Commerce stated that they already have presented a letter back in May stating their opposition to any changes in the LDRs from what they are at present. However, they wish to address the proposed changes tonight. They like #1 and feel that if the Board adopts amendment #1, -it would take care of the intent of #2, #3 and #4. With regard to #5, they are opposed to the 3 -day stay or any other limit because it is not economically feasible and because it is an over 21 AUG 2 3 1993 BOOK 90 PAGE281