Laserfiche WebLink
absorption rates in Florida right now. Land is so expensive the only way to make the numbers <br />work is to go to smaller lots. He believed that if he had 1/2 acre lots to sell at the same price as <br />Heron Crest or Waterford Lakes he would be sold out tomorrow. We will have to move <br />development west of I-95 to 1/2 -acre or acre lot developments that we can sell for $150,000 per <br />home and lot to eliminate the problem of neighbors not liking what is being built next to them. <br />He felt we have a feudal system in the County and the royalty says, "I only like Grand Harbor, I <br />don't like Waterford Lakes or Heron Crest." However, that is where the serfs live. <br />Chairman Macht said he would hate to think that is true. <br />Peter Jones, 1924 5th Avenue SE, felt that the variety, flexibility, and economic <br />opportunities that planned developments provide for the County are a good concept. He believes <br />that we have a good process and feels that being good advocates of it is what we need today. <br />Frances Sexton, 4650 17th Street SW, questioned whether the decreasing smaller lot <br />lines increase the density of planned developments. If so, with increased density, does that factor <br />into the impacts on roads and schools? <br />Chairman Macht replied that the density is not necessarily increased and asked Director <br />Keating for an explanation. <br />Director Keating said the lot size and density are not related. When we have smaller lots <br />there are larger open areas. The smaller lots do not increase density. The important factor is the <br />planned development ordinance does not allow any planned development to exceed the Comp <br />Plan density that is used to plan for infrastructure improvements. He said density is often a <br />misunderstood term. <br />Commissioner Lowther asked if density is affected at Falcon Trace Subdivision. <br />Director Keating explained Falcon Trace Subdivision, zoned at RS -6, took advantage of <br />the small lots, building out at 2.15 units per acre, almost 1/3 of what they were allowed to build. <br />They were looking at the open space preservation, having smaller lots, and still getting financial <br />JUNE 13, 2003 6 <br />