Laserfiche WebLink
r -1 <br />BOOK 99 mu 6 -57 <br />pointed out that the policy section says that the County should <br />limit the node to 316 acres. Since the node's current size is 296 <br />acres, this policy would allow only very minor expansion in the <br />future. Mr. Dill explained that Mr. Banack owns a 15 acre tract <br />and Wallace Acres is 5 acres and added together those two would <br />take up all the slack. He felt it is unfair to the people who have <br />been holding their property waiting for the 70% rule. Mainly, he <br />believed the concept of capping may be illegal. There are a lot of <br />people who are very concerned with what is going to happen in this <br />particular item in the land use plan. He felt the LDRs presently <br />in effect are doing an acceptable job. He was pleased to see the <br />SR -60 corridor plan coming along. They just want a chance to come <br />in and apply and show what they can do on those 17 acres. His <br />client's property abuts the back units at Sixty oaks and IRCC's <br />dorms are behind that. Mr. Dill didn't feel it is fair to pull out <br />the welcome mat at 70% and he urged the Board to consider this <br />matter very seriously before adding a cap to the plan. He advised <br />that they will be in with an application prior to this evaluation <br />report being adopted, but they would like to see it included in the <br />node. It would make a logical place to finish out the commercial <br />in that southwest corner of the node. <br />Commissioner Macht pointed out that the 70% rule doesn't say <br />that you "will", but rather that you "may". - <br />Mr. Dill asked that his client's property be included in the <br />node now before it is capped. <br />Commissioner Bird felt the solution is not to set a cap and <br />look at applications on a case by case basis. <br />Attorney Vitunac cautioned that calling it a cap makes <br />everyone rush to get it now or never. That is the difficulty. The <br />Board always has the ability to look at any application to see if <br />it makes sense to put in commercial. <br />CONSENSUS -- The Board indicated their desire to not set a cap <br />at this time, as they wished to consider each application on a case <br />by case basis. <br />Barbara Bonnah, resident of Pine Creek Condominiums, was <br />delighted about the node going no further than 66th Avenue on the <br />north side of SR -60. She recalled that for years it has always <br />been the Board's desire to not have the entrance to Vero Beach <br />develop into strip commercial but to keep it residential and green. <br />28 <br />NOVEMBER 5, 1996 <br />� � i <br />