Anyone for rezoning?

Libertine · Jun 8, 2004

I know different states/localities vary widely in their "land use & planning" restrictions, but some of you are probably subject to zoning issues. I was wondering how many of you have actually done a rezoning on your property, changing it, say, from residential to commercial? I suspect in most localities that restrict property use through zoning, commercially zoned property is more valuable (all things being equal, ie. same property, same size, same street, etc.) than residential. I know it is around here.

So . . . any good experiences (or bad ones) if you have been through this process.

JEH

BobReeves · Jun 8, 2004

Haven't done it myself but my neighbor tried to get the front 2 acres of his property rezoned commercial. You must notify any neighbors within a certain distance and the county sets up a hearing date so anyone that doesn't like the idea can have their chance to protest it. In this case he didn't get his rezoning because a housing development 1/2 mile from us turned out in mass to protest the zone change.

I was hoping he would be successful because the front of both our properties face a major highway and sometime down the road it might be financially beneficial if the front one or two acres of my property was zoned commercial. I was the only one out of about 15 people at the hearing that was in favor of the zoning change.

OkeeDon · Jun 8, 2004

Not sure how much it will apply to a more rural setting, but I successfully converted a property several years ago and am in the process of selling it, now.

Our city was designed as a bedroom community without much commercial space. As the need for retail, service and warehouse space grew, the city chose several areas as "conversion areas". The first of these areas is 2 blocks wide and about 2 miles long, running along side the Florida Turnpike, which made it less desirable for residential use. Nevertheless, some people built small homes in the area.

The process our city uses is first to change the "land use designation" for an area from residential to commercial, and to revise the State-required Comprehensive Plan. This does not change the zoning; that is still up to the property owners. All of the residential lots in the area are approximately 80 x 125, 10,000 square feet, or just under 1/4 acre. The city required minimum packages of either 2 or 3 lots, depending on use.

In 1989, I bought a house and the vacant lot next door. The house is 50' x 24', 1200 square feet, just a 2 BR, 2 bath cracker box with a 1 car garage. I petitioned the P&Z committee for rezoning to General Commercial, which was pretty much automatic since I met the requirements. Then, I converted the property.

I was required to install 6 parking spots (1 for each 200 sq ft), an engineered drainage plan to mitigate storm water runoff, minimum landscaping requirements, and remove the kitchen. Over time, I gutted much of the interior, leaving only 1 former bedroom as a manager's office, and just 1 bathroom. I removed the shower and converted that rest room to handicap standards. The rest of the building, about 24' x 38', became my showroom for bbq grills, accessories, etc. I also added a roofed deck to the back to do service and repair work, and later to fabricate custom outdoor kitchens.

I paid $48K for the original property and about $25K to do the initial conversion. Over the years, I probably spent another $30K in remodeling and add-ons, fencing, etc. A lot of the work was piece-meal and patch work, as we always kept the business open while doing the work. A lot of it was "good enough" at the time. Since I closed the business and retired, I have been working at changing all the "good enoughs" into "done rights", redoing a lot of the wiring, drywall, flooring, siding, etc. I have done all the work myself, spending perhaps another $10K. It would have cost a lot more to contract it.

I think I did OK, because we are listing the property for $280K and expect a fast sale. It's unique in an area with a lot of strip warehouses in that it is a stand-alone building with lots of rear fenced storage and parking area for trucks, etc.

I would do it again, in a heartbeat. But, both our city (Port St. Lucie) and the area to which I'm moving (Okeechobee County) have very strict zoning laws, and areas in which conversions can be accomplished are strictly designated. My property in Okeechobee lies along a state highway, but it is firmly zoned as "Rural Residential", and a conversion would not be possible. Someone tried a few years ago with 2.5 acres on the next corner, about 1/4 mile away, to open a nursery, and were flatly turned down. Because of the State's requirements for Comprehensive Plans, I don't think there are very many places left, anywhere in Florida, that don't have planned zoning. Most counties have also enacted Urban Services zones, outside of which development is discouraged, to reduce sprawl.

YanmarFever · Jun 9, 2004

We rezoned the front of out property to commercial use
back in 92 for a security bussines we owned.
We have 20 acres and we used the front 2
The county even designed the plans & building for us.
We have every permit you can image on it
even a certificate of occupancy hangs on the wall.
Now I sell tractors out of the building & do repairs.
The fire marshall still comes around once a year to inspect.
All the neighbors had to approve it first,some were scared of it, but after we talked to them they calmed down a bit.
Now they are happy we are here and dont even notice
the bussiness at all.
My advice is to talk to the neighbors first -- then the county.
Ernie

Libertine · Jun 9, 2004

OkeeDon:

Sounds like you did ok. You did more or less what I am planning. Also, the process seems about the same as here. My problem is that my property fronts two streets, one of which is residential, the other on the interstate service road where everything in either direction (and the other side) is already zoned for various business use. I only have 15' of frontage to the subdivision (which was built after my house).

I recently "changed" the legal address of the property to the service road after combining by combination deed the residence & and a small parcel fronting the service road. So it is one parcel now. Prior to this change my "address" was the residential street for lower taxes, convenience, etc. Access to the residential street would be closed off prior to any actual commercial use.

The way it works here is you apply, Planning & Zoning (P&Z) notifies all property owners with 1000' offering them the opportunity to protest it. The P&Z department looks at it and makes a recommendation. The P&Z Commission then holds a public hearing. After that, it goes to the County Council.

What I have going is that frontage on the service road is 10 times the residential street, EVERYTHING on both sides of the interstate is already commercial, light industrial, etc. and there is a 6 story, multi million dollar project going up a block away. Also, the P&Z recommendation is that zoning change be approved. Against that, the people in the subdivision have more "votes" than I do. I have talked with many of them and many are neutral, but, one guy is against it (he wouldn't give a reason) mainly, I think, he had a problem with the previous owner. Another lady is afraid someone will "force her out" of her property. I don't know how you deal with irrational fears.

My fall back position is that an adjacent city wants to annex this entire area and they need a "wedge" into it. If I did that though, the subdivision would be much more vulnerable to involuntary annexation. I could probably cut a deal with the City, but don't really want to do that as it would affect all the neighbors, good and bad.

tractorErnie:
My advice is talk to neightbors first - - then the County. 
Tried that. Most could be neutralized but some are "agin" it for various personal reasons, fear etc. One lady (who wrote a letter of protest) even thanked me for plowing her drive last winter (I had forgotten about it-just did it to be neighborly). Too many people believe they have the right to interfere with their neighbor's property rights, no matter what the damage to those other people. One guy was in the process of putting on new siding and his yard was very cluttered, trailers parked around etc. After he admitted that this zoning change would not harm him in any way but he was still agin it, I tried to use the analogy of my objecting to his clutter and he was quick to point out that he was just trying to improve his property. I guess he has a right to improve his property, but I do not! In any event, I've made the effort. Even wrote a letter to everyone trying to put myself in their shoes and dealt with several issues I would be concerned with if I lived in the subdivision. We will see how it turns out. Frankly, until this I had no ill will toward any of these neighbors. Now, there are several enemies. When this is over, well, I won't say any more.

BobReeves:
 . . . didn't get his rezoning because a housing development 1/2 mile from us turned out in mass to prottest the zone change, 
See above. There is an organization that ranks all the Countries of the world according to the level of freedom. They use a large number of different criteria including the freedom to move money in and out of the country, freedom of press, etc. etc. One of these criteria is security of property rights. I hate to tell you, but the US is not at the top of the list on that one any more.

JEH

OkeeDon · Jun 9, 2004

The way it works here is you apply, Planning & Zoning (P&Z) notifies all property owners with 1000' offering them the opportunity to protest it. The P&Z department looks at it and makes a recommendation. The P&Z Commission then holds a public hearing. After that, it goes to the County Council. 

That's the way the actual rezoning petition works here, too, except that we only notify to 300', because with 80' wide lots, that takes in 15 to 20 properties in the radius. Also, recall that the City Council would have already changed the land use designation, so most of the big fights would be over. We also have some unusual provisions to prevent "widowing" a lot (that's when your package and another package near by leaves a single lot in between with no hope of going commercial).

The Land Use Designation changes are where the real battles take place. These affect sweeping areas and, while having gone through the P&Z process, are fought in the chambers of the City Council.

These changes, however, are carefully planned efforts to reduce "spot" zoning. The city tries to keep ahead of need and demand, and to use good urban planning principles to designate new commercial areas. They have an arsenal of various designations, from ROI (Residential-Office-Institutional) to GC (General Commercial) and SC (Service Commercial) to HI (Heavy Industrial), with many steps in between.

Corridors through the city have heavier zoning uses at intersections and lighter use in the middle of the block, and much thought is given to required buffers between commercial and residential. My son owns a small house which he bought right out of college. Today, it's a rental, because his job took him to another town a little South of here. It was residential when he bought it, but it faces a side street parallel to a corridor. He's about 5 lots from the corner, which was changed to SC and is now a Hess station. His property was changed to ROI, and the "package" in that area requires 6 lots (60,000 sq ft) minimum. The land use was changed about 7 years ago, but it took a while for developers to put together packages. Today, there is development at several corners, but the first couple of institutional uses (a bank and a medical office) are only now being completed between the major intersections. Several other packages have been assembled and are for sale, and one new package was just completed by moving 5 houses off of the 6 lots.

In the meantime, he keeps getting approached by developers trying to assemble a 6-lot package including his property (3 improved properties and 3 vacant lots), and their offers keep going up. He paid $42,000 for the place, and just turned down $175,000. He's young (32), single, and the place is paying for itself, so he is having a lot of fun just waiting them out. He's also a certified appraiser and a real estate broker, so he's a little more knowledgeable than most.

Oh, yeah, they use lots of tractors to clear and level all this land...mostly New Hollands!

To20Chris · Jun 10, 2004

Here in PA having the zoning changed on your property is not routine or easy. You can apply for a variance to allow for a specific use that is not permitted in the zoning ordinance, but you must go before the zoning hearing board. The board of supervisors sets the zoning ordinance after a formal procedure involving public hearings, but then they cannot allow people to violate it. They also set the subdivision ordinance, which is the detailed dimensions, setbacks, etc., and the supervisors can waive that. Changing the zoning on you property would mean showing that there is something wrong with the existing zoning map – that it is unfair, inadequate, etc.

Libertine · Jun 11, 2004

OkeeDon:

Oh, yeah, they use lots of tractors to clear and level all this land...mostly New Hollands! 

Yup. That's what I use! You see, NH's do a better job "clearing & leveling" - just kidding.

The zoning map plan keeps changing with the political winds. Seveal years ago the map on their screen showed eveything along one side of the residential street future commercial (including my property). Now, it shows something else. A few days back P&Z told me they were going to recommend the change to the planning commission. Now, after they got some letters, they withdrew their recommendation and are recommending a partial rezoning (which would leave me with something too small to do anything with, and a tiny residential lot).

Frankly, if this gets turned down I am giving some thought to having an attorney send a letter to all the folks on the street offering them the opportunity to purchase my property at its anticipated commercial value. Then, if they want it left residential, they can take the loss. I doubt it they would do that-they want me to take the loss for what they want. Then initiate legal action against all of them jointly and severally for the damages they caused me. There would be no challenge to the zoning ordinance, nor to their right to protest, just for the damages they caused. Since I could show real and actual damages while they could not who knows. In any event we will see. People have been led to believe they can do anything, regardless of how it affects others, just because they have the "votes." Maybe something like forcing them to hire lawyers, etc. and hassling them might throw a cold blanket over this sort of interference with other peoples property rights. I mean if I was going to put in a hog confinement operation, or start a toxic waste dump I could see it. But changing my zoning will make it easier if they wanted to do the same. Plus, it would certainly not hurt, and would almost certainly increase, their property values.

Looks like your son did ok. But he should be careful of getting too greedy. Around here, if a big developer wants to put something in, and they have the clout, they can get one or two holdouts "condemned" and taken for peanuts (i.e. a forced buyout).

To20Chris:

. . . something wrong with the existing zoning map - that it is unfair, inadequate, etc. 

You ought to see the map in this area. Every single piece of property within 1000 feet, without any exception, on both sides of the interstate, is already zoned commercial, light industiral, etc. Mine is the only residential zoning left. A 6 story complex is going up a block away. There is no place for development to go except west along the interstate. But P&Z changed its recommendation after they got a couple of letters from some no life, irrational neighbors who don't want anything changed.

JEH

OkeeDon · Jun 11, 2004

this sort of interference with other peoples property rights 

There are few issues which are so clear cut, and yet somewhat murky, at the same time. Clearly, you have to right to the highest and best use for your property. And yet, the residential owners also have rights, and their position also has "value", although it may not be monetary -- there is an intangible value in preserving the character of a neighborhood (which often translates to financial value as well, but rarely to the extent of commercial use).

Commercial value, of course, comes from the fact that the land will be used to produce income, while residential property (and recreational property, such as parks) is used to produce enjoyment or quality of life. Clearly, commercial use, of almost any type, has an impact on that quality of life.

All of that said, yours is a perfect example of why planning and zoning issues should be decided on the basis of good planning techniques, not on emotion. Does your municipality have a professional planning staff? In our area, the issues are researched and good techniques are applied by the staff, which then makes a recommendation to the volunteer P & Z board. The decisions of the P & Z board must still meet the scrutiny of the elected Council. You mentioned a similar process, but I think a lot of it hinges on how professional the staff is in applying good techniques. From your description, it appears that in your case, because of proximity to the interstate service road and other commercial zoning, the issue is clear. Without further examination, it would appear that the highest and best use would be commercial. Residents of the area, despite their desire to preserve their property's character, must face reality.

A quick anecdote to illustrate: We once owned a house just 200' around the corner from a collector road. That road, in the early stages of our city, was 2-lane, and properties had been zoned residential. However, the right-of-way along that road clearly indicated that it would become multi-lane at some point in the future. As part of the process I've described in other posts, our planning department decided to change the land use along that road to ROI (Residential, Office and Institutional). My daughter had been about 10 years old when we moved to that house. She was 16 when the changes were proposed. A neighbor called our house when my daughter was home alone, with a proposal that the residents in the area pool their resources to hire an attorney to fight the land use change. My daughter replied, "Oh, I'm sure my parents would NOT be willing to join you. When we moved here, I could see that road was going to be a busy road some day, and probably have businesses. If I could see it when I was 10 years old, I'm sure my parents could, also..."

Further research into zoning issues may give you enough ammunition to prepare a White Paper which you could submit to the staff, beginning the process by getting a positive recommendation. Of course, being an optimistic, idealist utopian, in my perfect world, such reason and logic would overcome emotion. /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Failing that, if the emotional response of the nearby residents overcomes reason, then you may have to counter with a heavier dose of practicality to balance the motion. You mentioned annexation, and your reluctance to provide a "wedge"; your reluctance in itself is somewhat emotional, and you may have to abandon it. Or, at least give that appearance, perhaps with formal discussions with the city and some tangible indication of intent. Perhaps a press conference, in which you reveal your discussions with the city and outline the possibilities, would be enough of a weapon without making any actual agreements.

Then, there is always the possibility of compromise. Your P & Z has appeared to have some willingness to change at least a portion of your property, but they may be taking too narrow a position, considering only commercial and residential use. Could you take an area of the property, smaller than the proposed residential portion yet still significant, and offer to deed restrict it to a buffer zone with strict landscape, barrier and noise attenuation standards for any future user?

Do you have a nearby university that offers programs in urban planning? You might approach them with your property as a perfect example of the real world decisions the students will be facing, and offer to compensate their expenses for creating a classical solution in the form of a proposal, complete with the same sort of graphics, maps, research into surrounding uses and future trends, discussion of similar areas, etc., as the P & Z staff can create for their board. In other words, play their game and overwhelm them with BS...

...As for my son's property, we're fortunate in that our city has publicly declared their unwillingness to use eminent domain, especially for private interests. They have been buying up homes and properties for the right of way for a new central corridor, but they have managed to acquire every property without eminent domain. They have gone out of their way to satisfy every property owner, and the only litigation has been about value, not a "taking".

It's nice to be one of the youngest cities (incorporated in 1958) in a region of past high growth (South Florida), and have a staff and Council who are willing to learn from history and avoid the errors made further South when areas like Fort Lauderdale were growing as rapidly. I've lived here for 32 years, observed the growth, and am very proud of almost every aspect of our development (for example, we have been declared the "safest" city of our size in Florida for the past 5 or 6 years). However, even with that pride and a love for the city, and even though the growth is being exceptionally well planned, it's still growth, and we yearn for more space and privacy, which is why we're leaving what we consider to be "home". Besides, if we stayed, I'd never have gotten a tractor. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Libertine · Jun 13, 2004

OkeeDon:

 "Oh, I'm sure my parents would NOT be willing to join you. When we moved here, I could see that road was going to be a busy road some day, and probably have businesses. If I could see it when I was 10 years old, I'm sure my parents could, also..." 

If your kid actually said that (or words to that effect) you've done a good job raising her.

Could you take an area of the property, smaller than the proposed residential portion yet still significant, and offer to deed restrict it to a buffer zone with strict landscape, barrier and noise attenuation standards for any future user? 

Problem is actual size of property (stuff around here sells by the square foot). There are only two properties that would actually be affected in any way. Both owners said they would give me a letter supporting (or at least not objecting) to the zoning change. We'll see-should get them today. Being a firm believer in entropy (as you are aware from other posts) I don't have much confidence this will go through.

You mentioned annexation, and your reluctance to provide a "wedge"; your reluctance in itself is somewhat emotional, and you may have to abandon it. 

Yeah. But I tend to not want to do things that are going to harm other people who have not themselves harmed me. If they damage me, and I have not harmed them, well, anything goes. I did talk to City Friday and they're willing to do a deal. But their "controls" (such as code enforcement, conditional use after zoning change) are much tighter. I would have to move sooner, rather than wait for developments. The head guy is going to check into some issues (mainly abeyance of enforcement of "non conforming" use issue) and let me know.

Does your municipality have a professional planning staff? 

They go with the flow. The lady I've been dealing with is very, very nice-keeps me up to date on what going on, etc. Their computer maps of "planned use" though fluctuate depending on what's going on. One person in the zoning department told me this change was a "no brainer" and that if it didn't get changed it would be "the basis for a big lawsuit".

if the emotional response of the nearby residents overcomes reason, then you may have to counter with a heavier dose of practicality to balance the motion. 

My inclination (just an inclination at this point) would be to have an attorney offer my property to the nearby residents who have protested at its anticipated commercial value. They could then leave it residential. If they declined (which they no doubt would-after all they want ME to pay for their whims and wishes) the legal argument would be that their excersize of a legal right was done irresponsibly which caused damage to me. There would be no challenge to zoning itself, nor to their right to protest. Unless they could show some actual damage from the change (very, very difficult, since there would be less traffic on the street, the way the ground lays my house isn't very visible from the street now, and, closed off with fencing would be even less visible-the residential character of the street would not be changed and more than it has already been changed by pre-existing conditions anyway). While my damages are clear and reasonably provable. Also, something like that might discourage people protesting for the sake of protesting if they realized they might be held liable for the damage they cause others. I suspect, although I havn't investigated it, there might be some under the table support from business interests. The problem is people have "power" to unreasonably interfere with others, without the "responsibility" for the consequences of their actions. Egalitarian democracy and mob rule at work.

Anyway, thanks for your interest and suggestions. Will post on how things come out-hearing is in a few days. If I get the letters today from the two adjacent property owners supporting the change might have an outside chance.

JEH

OkeeDon · Jun 13, 2004

If your kid actually said that (or words to that effect) you've done a good job raising her.


Oh, she said it, alright, and at age 16, to an adult! I don't know how much I had to do with it, however, because she has always been willing to say exactly what she thinks, regardless of the consequences. At age 34, it still gets her into occasional "trouble". I have, on occasion, mentioned the concept of "tact" to her, but for the most part, I stand back and watch, with a secret grin.

I hope you pursue your suit for damages, although for your sake, I hope it's resolved before you have to resort to litigation. One of the reasons why it's hard to pin a label on me is because I try to position myself on an issue based on common sense rather than any ideology. Property rights are considered to be a "conservative" issue, and I generally come down on the "liberal" or "progressive" side. I fully support the right of others to have a say in the outcome of property issues which affect them, but I also fully support that they have the responsibility to pay the financial cost for that right.

Libertine · Jun 18, 2004

OkeeDon et al,

Well, commission approved rezoning. So, over the big hurddle. How did I get it through? Thought I would post the presentation (below) - really just kidding, but humor always relieves tension. Some of you may get a chuckle out of it. There are a lot of allusions not obvious (for example: they are big on master plans, the staff recommendations to the commission are approved about 70% of the time, their original plan was to rezone only part of the property, they are big on "buffer" zones, one neighbor wrote a letter claiming this rezoning would increase crime, tanneries are really stinky, casinos are popping up all over etc. etc).

Anyway, thanks. Enjoy below.

JEH

My Plan
Hello. My name is, ummm, aaah, wait a minute, let me check my driver’s license. Since I only have 5 minutes, I will try to make this real, real quick.

I am asking the Commission to 30% overturn the staff recommendation for partially rezoning my property. My reasons are:
1) Partial rezoning is directly in conflict with my master plan of life.
2) Partial rezoning will not leave quite enough space for the nice sized tannery which is to serve as a “buffer” between the hog confinement operation and the toxic waste dump, leading to
3) Possible illness to the public from eating the meat to be sold in the open air, roadside butcher shop planned for the interstate side of the property.
4) Partial rezoning will not allow enough setback from the green “buffer” zone at the edge of the property for the planned homeless shelter for derelicts and drug users, leading to
5) The inmates climbing over the fence and slithering up and down the street thus damaging the peaceful, serene quality of life nearby residents now enjoy.
6) Partial rezoning will only allow for the installation of 205 slot machines instead of the 495 called for in the master plan of life, leading to
7) An inadequate number of opportunities for nearby residents to satisfy their gambling urges (63 casinos instead of the planned 64).
8) Partial rezoning will only allow 187.5 ft2 for the planned fireworks manufacturing facility, thus depriving local residents of the opportunity to purchase as many homemade explosives as they might want, and, even worse, will reduce dignified employment opportunities for residents of the homeless shelter, leading to
9) More crime in the area from the now unemployed drug addicts.

For all these reasons I am asking the Commission to revise the staff recommendation and approve it only 70% wise.

OkeeDon · Jun 18, 2004

Great! Now that they've approved it, it's too late for them when they find out you weren't kidding... /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

...which, of course, is why they are so scared of rezoning. They approve the change for that nice church group that wants to open a charity thrift store, and the next day the property is sold to the **** shop chain for more money than the thrift shop could have made in a century.

Libertine · Jun 19, 2004

OkeeDon:

Now that they've approved it . . . 

Actually, it has to be enacted into "law" via an ordinance. However, it's over the big huddle. From what I understand, unless somebody is willing to push it with some kind of big stink it's pretty much a done deal though.

sold to the **** shop chain 

ummm. Actually, there's a lot more to opening a business than just zoning (business licenses, umteen permits, etc.). If you were going to do something they really didn't want there are many choke points to stop it even after rezoning. Anyway, thanks for your interest and suggestions. Should be "official" within 30-45 days.

JEH

Libertine · Jul 28, 2004

Actually, it has to be enacted into "law" via an ordinance. 

Well, was approved unanimously by county council. So that's done. Phase two is to get agreement with another frontage owner adjacent to me to sell together - more sq ft means bigger developer means high price per sq ft (for his & mine). Phase three, help this other owner solve his problems with county so they won't try to stop someone from buying it. Phase four - hopefully, collect $20 sq ft from an interested developer. Will see.

JEH

Henro · Jul 28, 2004

I am giving some thought to having an attorney send a letter to all the folks on the street offering them the opportunity to purchase my property at its anticipated commercial value. Then, if they want it left residential, they can take the loss. I doubt it they would do that-they want me to take the loss for what they want. Then initiate legal action against all of them jointly and severally for the damages they caused me. 

JEH,

Just read this thread. Glad you got the approval. But I wonder about what I highlighted in blue above...

Seems to me that those residents would have responded to a letter from the zoning board asking for input. They offered input but really make no decision. The zoning board makes the decision. So it would really be the zoning board that damaged you if anyone did, if they did not approve the zoning change.

Somehow I doubt that approach would gain much in the way of results. Sure it could punish those people by perhaps scaring them into paying for a consultation with their own lawyer...

Seems like the return argument would be that the zoning commission listens no more to them than it does to you, and that it is an independent body that makes decisions that all must abide by.

Or maybe my view of reality is distorted. Don't really know... /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Anyway, it is great that things are going in your favor... /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Libertine · Aug 1, 2004

Henro:

 Seems to me that those residents would have responded to a letter from the zoning board asking for input. They offered input but really make no decision. 

They did get letter from P & Z - everyone within 1,000 feet did. It was their responses that triggered the P&Z staff to change their recommendation from full rezoning to partial rezoning (i.e. rezone only 1/2 of property. P & Z is a political body and thus responds to irrational inputs. I did have the two adjacent property owners write in favor of the change (they realized this would increase their property values also in the long run). The objectors caused the change from P & Z staff recommendations. If I hadn't been to over turn these objectors would suing them have accomplished much? Probably not. But it would have thrown a wet blanket on others seeking to interfere with their neighbor's property rights.

This whole process was interesting. If enough "citizens" object to something it can kill it, even if the development makes perfect sense. I saw a major corporation loose (at least for now) in another matter. Anyway, the money is not in the bank yet. But the initial hurttle is past. The neighbor I am trying to get to co-operate in selling our properties jointly doesn't really care. He prefers to fight with the county and thinks they won't simply take his property when a new $70,000,000 development is completed just across the street from him. Anyway, we'll see.

Thanks for your interest.

JEH