My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5/21/1980
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1980
>
5/21/1980
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:48:53 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 11:27:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
05/21/1980
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
100
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
4) A requirement should be incorporated which would bring about the <br />construction of units in proportion to the approved mix and number <br />of types. The project could be phased in such a manor to accomplish <br />this. <br />5) Overall density would be controlled by the land use designation and <br />implemented through zoning. However, a certain degree of development <br />intensification would be permitted to achieve the best land use, <br />provide protection to sensitive areas, or allow for additional open <br />or public space; but this would not exceed a factor greater than two <br />times the normal density allowed, figured on a per acre basis. <br />6) The use of deed restrictionswould be called for to insure the <br />integrity of using the P.U.D. concept in the first place. These <br />restrictions would be recorded with the zone change approval in <br />order to carry the intent of the development with the land. <br />The advantages of allowing P.U.D. development are varied, and emphasis can be <br />paced on particular community needs and desires. However, there are several <br />basic points�whic clearly standout.whic accure to the County, the developer <br />and to the public at large. <br />1) Cost savings can be achieved for the County as well as the <br />developer. <br />2) Environmental protection of lands and waters through designation <br />of specific areas within the development. <br />3) A process which can easily be adapted and incorporated in our <br />present system of operation, as well as the ability to understand <br />this tool, its advantages and limitations for users, future <br />residents and the public. <br />4) Use of this process is a positive step in proceeding toward the <br />overall aims of the goals and policies to be stated in the Com- <br />prehensive Plan. <br />It is my feeling that the development of a meaningful and usable planning <br />document along with the appropriate implementation tools, within the present <br />time frame desired, can be best met by proceeding in terms of the material <br />presented here. I would also point out that items 1, 2 and 3, immediately <br />preceding this paragraph regarding P.U.D., can also be applied to the overall <br />planning effort in Indian River County. The procedure stated here points in <br />the right direction, utilizing good planning techniques and opens the way for <br />building upon this solid base to achieve the most effective management of <br />County growth. <br />DMR: j t <br />cc: Members Planning & Zoning Commission <br />PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER REVIEWED HIS MEMO AND STATED THAT <br />BASICALLY THE FIRST PART DEALS WITH THE QUESTION OF WHAT KIND OF <br />ASSISTANCE WOULD BE NECESSARY TO ACCOMPLISH THE PLAN AND ALL THE <br />NECESSARY IMPLEMENTATION TO MAKE IT A WORKABLE ENTITY WITHIN THE <br />TIMEFRAME DESIRED. HE CONTINUED THAT WITH HIS DEPARTMENTS WORKLOAD, <br />WHICH IS CONTINUING TO GROW, HE COULD VERY EASILY USE ANOTHER STAFF <br />MAY 211980- Door 43 PACE 587 <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.