HomeMy WebLinkAboutC.054.93008_1116669
Mr. Edwards, attorney for Mr. Kindley spoke in reference to the rezoning request. He believes
that Mr. Lundy could approve this as a minor modification. He said his client cannot proceed with
single family dwelling structure unless they get a zoning that allows them to get a building permit.
He again said he did not think they were talking about a major modification. If the board is
inclined to go through the procedural hearing for the modification, then he and his client would be
ready to do so.
Mr. Kindley said that Mr. Lundy was worried about Heronwood's position, but they were not at
the meeting tonight, they advertised the property for sale, thoy sold it, they signed a contract,
they dated it, and he thinks they showed a pretty strong intent to do something. He asked for a
show of hands for himself and for Heronwood.
Vice Chairman Mills said the board would have a voicing of opinion a little later. He thought
most of the board's questions would be directed to the county attorney.
Mrs. Clark said that it was their understanding when they came before the former board that a
motion was made that all the property that bordered on Clark Cove would be single-family units. Mr.
Kindley's property borders on Clark Cove, and they feel that the ordinance (sic) has already been
passed, that that property was rezoned at that time for single-family use. She saw no reason at all
for this property to be brought before this board again, because it was settled at that time. Mr.
Campbell made the motion that all the property that bordered on Clark Cove would be single-family
units, and Mr. Kindley's property is included on Clark Cove.
Vice Chairman Mills asked her to look at the map and see what was zoned as R-20 and how far
around it went.
Mrs. Clark said she realized what the map shows now because she went to the planning board
meeting, but they were under the impression from the very beginning at all those meetings that there
would be only one family on the lots that were on the Cove.
Vice Chairman Mills said that was correct. It is just a matter of how far around that cove it
goes. This particular piece of property is not included in those R-20 lots.
Vice Chairman Mills asked for additional comments for the rezoning.
No one else spoke.
Vice Chairman Mills asked for comments in opposition.
No one else spoke.
Vice Chairman Mills asked for the comments of William P. Pope, County Attorney. Vice Chairman
Mills said he thought it was a legal question. He said he did not agree with Mr. Edwards' comments
that Mr. Lundy could make a change of this nature, especially under the circumstances of the nego-
tiations and all the problems that we have had with this one particular subdivision. Vice Chairman
Mills said legally he wanted the board to be as right as it could be.
County Attorney Pope said he expressed an opinion to Mr. Lundy that he felt this was a spot
zoning request to rezone a spot single-family in the middle of a PRD, and that the county would have
a problem rezoning it to single family without rezoning the adjoining property, of which he doesn't
think there is a request.
�. Mr. Pope said he also expressed the opinion that he agrees with Mr. Edwards in all probability
the court would determine that the developers of Heronwood are estopped to do anything about Mr.
Kindley's development of his property for single-family purposes; however, Mr. Pope does not think
it is encumbent upon Mr. Lundy to make judicial interpretations. He does not think it is fair to
subject him to that under the circumstances. Mr. Pope said he suspected it is a minor modification;
however, Mr. Edwards is calling upon Mr. Lundy to make a decision that he is not sure it is fair to
call upon him to make. If Mr. Kindley's property joined the other R -20's, then you would be
clearly confronted with the question of whether it is a minor modification. In conclusion, he said
he thought it was a spot zone.
Vice Chairman Mills asked Mr. Edwards if he wished to make further comments.
Mr. Edwards said he could understand the board's position, and he would be willing to go back
and petition and ask for the modification of that special use permit. Rather than withdraw, he
asked that the board allow them the opportunity to continue this hearing and allow them to make the
efforts, and he did not believe it would be any question then.
Vice Chairman Mills said the board was not changing anything that is on the ground, but they
would be changing a basic approval that was made for the PRD, the basic location of the units. He
spoke again of the legal hearings, etc., in this particular matter, and there was nothing easy about
it. He asked Mr. Lundy if the board did not deny this, as Mr. Edwards has requested, what would be
the procedure through the planning board and the planning department.
Mr. Lundy said the board could continue this public hearing at a later date, upon which the
parties involved would be notified. It would save having to advertise another public hearing and it
would save Mr. Edwards having to file a rezoning application. Mr. Lundy said his concern is that
in order to make what he considers a simple decision for Mr. Edwards is creating a major change to
something that the board has already approved under a very legalistic required hearing. He believes