Laserfiche WebLink
BOOK 10.*F WE <br />Attorney Collins explained that the Board of County Commissioners had made a <br />condition of development. Staff did not want to process something in violation of the <br />condition the Commission added at that time. It was his feeling that it was illegal and should <br />be lifted. He believed the property owners would win in court if the matter went there. <br />aside. <br />County Attorney Vitunac added that it would also solve a title problem. <br />Commissioner Stanbridge asked if any other conditions like this have ever been set <br />Attorney Collins thought not. He explained that preliminary plats have many <br />conditions imposed on them. In this case the ordinance said the zoning was multi -family, <br />but the condition was added on that single family was the limitation, which was not pursuant <br />to an adopted ordinance. We have many conditions now with respect to buffering that must <br />be complied with and if the plat meets those requirements, the plat must be approved by law. <br />We cannot add conditions that are not provided for by our existing ordinances. <br />It seemed to Commissioner Stanbridge that the Commissioners in 1981 felt this would <br />provide a buffer. <br />Attorney Collins believed there were no buffering requirements, other than setbacks, <br />in 1981; but in the last 18 months, the Board has passed ordinances requiring additional <br />buffers between multi -family and single-family developments. Thus the developers will be <br />required to meet the buffering requirements now. <br />County Attorney Vitunac noted that there are some letters in opposition, which he <br />believed the Board had not read. He explained that this was a quasi-judicial hearing and the <br />applicant's attorney objected to the Commissioners reading the letters because the writers <br />of the letters were not present to be sworn as to their testimony. <br />Vice Chairman Macht thought the Commissioners knew of the opposition from the <br />prior meeting. <br />County Attorney Vitunac also noted that a letter giving case law from Buck Vocelle <br />had been received. The case does not, however, support his position. <br />Commissioner Stanbridge hoped the people living in Colonial Terrace understood that <br />they will have a better buffer. <br />Planning Director Stan Boling, who stated he had been sworn, believed that the <br />people from Colonial Terrace were invited to the pre -application conference and the buffer <br />issue was discussed there. He believed, therefore, that at least some of them were aware. <br />Any site plan for multi -family development that comes in now will require buffering on the <br />November 24, 1998 <br />W <br />