Quote:
Originally Posted by MartinSE
It does seem that no one is talking about if property owned by the developers (I assume this is, if not, the entire conversation makes no sense) should not be allowed to be repurposed if the developers are not making as much money as they would like to from that property.
For people that seem to enjoy capitalism, that enjoyment only extends to what they think a company should do?
|
And now for the rest of the story:
The area is zoned by Lady Lake as commercial not residential. The developer in essence is asking to change the law for their particular interests (a variance) thus in this case the developer is not allowed to do whatever they wish carte blanche with "their property". Only within the law. The citizens of Lady Lake have every right to their input to the change. The elected officials have an obligation to make a decision that will ultimately benefit all the citizens.