Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />what local experience tells us is best to do. <br />MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED <br />BY Commissioner Stanbridge, to uphold the Planning and <br />Zoning Commission's denial of the application. <br />In seconding, Commissioner Stanbridge thought the Board of County Commissioners <br />was charged by the citizens for their health, safety, and welfare. She also considered the <br />people who might live on the property to be our citizens. She felt the need to protect them <br />from any grief thathas been suffered by other property owners in Summerplace. She thought <br />the site plan could be revised and felt there was plenty of room on the parcel to move the <br />construction landward. <br />Commissioner Tippin spoke against the motion. He felt the entire beach was a hazard <br />area and it is just a matter of time before some disaster occurs. He thought it was wrong to <br />make their stand on this particular property because of the court cases that might come from <br />it. He felt the Board should allow this project to proceed and consider modifying the <br />regulations at another meeting. <br />Vice Chairman Ginn wanted to uphold the PZC's decision. <br />Chairman Adams pointed out that it might be unfair to tag this project, but she felt it <br />was necessary to make a stand. If the Board is asking staff to look at Comprehensive Plan <br />changes in this realm then we need to send that message and move forward with it one way <br />or the other. The erosion of the beach will not be affected by what the Board does on this <br />property, but the Board's philosophy obviously would make a big change and she expected <br />that it would be good for everyone. <br />March 7, 2000 <br />,'•1I <br />• <br />