3/14/1984 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MAR 14 1984 Boulevard south to its proposed connection to hundred ;feet of right-of-way for the extension from Sixth Avenue to the proposed extension Boulevard,.South. D84(_ 56 PACE 420: U.S. 1, and one of 12th Street of Indian River Although acquisition of this right-of-way and construction of the road is a major priority for the County, the landowners from whom the land must be obtained are reluctant to dedicate the required acreage to the County. Because of the substantial amount of land involved, the several owners of the affected parcels have requested that, in exchange for ,the dedication of the land needed for the right-of-way, the County agree to take the density available to the land which is to be dedicated and transfer that density to the remaining acreage in the tract from which the right-of-way was dedicated. After considering. the cost of right-of-way acquisition through other methods such as purchasing and condemnation, the Board of County Commission- ers directed the staff to assess the feasibility of implement- ing a transfer of density policy and to initiate any required ordinance amendments to accomplish it. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS: The staff assessed the expected impacts of implementing a transfer of density policy in relation to the expected benefits of such a policy. The principal adverse impact attributable to such a policy is the increase in density which would occur on the parcels adjacent to the subject right-of-way. This, however, may not be significant. A similar situation could occur with a PUD, where much of the allowable density of a parcel may be clustered on a small part of the site, therefore increasing density in- a small area. Besides the density factor, most other potential impacts are site related and could be mitigated through adequate site design. On the positive side, though, there are a number of benefits which would accrue to the County. These include: the expe- ditious acquisition of needed right-of-way, the ability to more quickly respond to public needs by providing -required public services, and a substantial reduction in the expenditure of public funds to acquire right-of-way. After reviewing alternative means to enable the County tc transfer density for right-of-way acquisition, the staff determined that the optimal method would be to amend the Zoning Code by creating another subsection of Section 25, General Provisions. As proposed by the staff, this amendment would allow a transfer of density only in those instances where the County requests a dedication of land for right-of-way purposes and only where the land is dedicated by donation. It would also limit the transfer from the right-of-way dedicated to the parcel from which it was dedicated. The amendment also spec- ifies that the landvbeing dedicated may not be used to satisfy etback and other -zoning requirements. At its meeting of February 9, 1984, the Planning and Zoning Commission considered the proposed amendment of Section 25 of the Zoning Code. By a unanimous 4-0 vote, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted to recommend the proposed ordinance amendment to the Board of County Commissioners for adoption; RECOMMENDATION: Based upon its analysis and the Planning and Zoning Com- mission's recommendation, the staff recommends that the Board Of County Commissioners adopt the attached ordinance amending Section 25, General Provisions, of Appendix A, Zoning, to'the Indian River County Code of Laws and Ordinances by creating Subsection (t), Street and Road Right -of -Way dedication. 29