Laserfiche WebLink
Chairman Adams suggested the matter be brought back to the PZC since the access <br />road is a new issue, and Mr. O'Haire advised that he had no problem with that. His <br />experience has been that the members of PZC relied solely on staff's recommendations and <br />presentations. <br />Director Boling believed most of Mr. O'Haire's arguments were heard by the PZC, <br />but did not recall use of the ELMO then nor whether the definition of "project site" was <br />discussed. He explained the reason for the parenthetical inclusion of the word "mining" in <br />the definition and cited 934.07(3) to be used in conjunction and read it aloud. <br />Mr. O'Haire again stressed that a property owner relies on what is in the LDR's when <br />buying and using a piece of property and reiterated the key is the definition of "project site". <br />Ralph Evans, an attorney, appeared representing RMR Partnership, owners of <br />property to the immediate south in the industrial, area who desire that the site plan be denied. <br />Warren Dill, city attorney for the City of Fellsmere, distributed some graphics <br />(copies received by the Clerk and placed in the backup for the meeting). He refuted Mr. <br />O'Haire's statements and advised that the City Council is opposed to this project and has <br />asked him to relay that to the Board of County Commissioners. He found Mr. O'Haire's <br />presentation lacked any factual reasons why the application should be approved. The site <br />plan before them was newly amended; the City was opposed because it does not meet the <br />requirements for an administrative use permit and because adverse impacts will be generated <br />by heavy truck traffic going through Fellsmere, creating noise as well as fumes. The initial <br />site plan showed 264 trips per day which for some reason has been reduced to 121 trips per <br />day while nothing else changed. Seventy percent of those trips would go directly through <br />the city. He cited statistics to illustrate this was not a small project and is expected to last <br />10 years. He reviewed the pertinence of each of his handouts. He believed that the PZC <br />denied this initially primarily because of the adverse impacts and because the applicant could <br />November 7, 2000 <br />171 OX 115 PG 380 <br />