Laserfiche WebLink
-7 <br />Book it,, <br />JUL 16 1986 65 F:E 89 <br />time Indian River Estates came in and sought a higher density of <br />up to 24 units per acre, they were told that if they were a <br />congregate living facility, they would have to meet certain <br />requirements in order to have those higher densities. Those <br />requirements would have kept them from being single entity <br />apartments in the nature of those being presented today; so, they <br />returned to the 8 units or less per acre. Mr. Culbertson did not <br />see the difference between the Waterford Assoc. project and <br />Indian River Estates because the central facilities are there on <br />both projects, and it was his feeling that in order to have more <br />density, it should be more of a congregate facility beyond the <br />definitions presented by the state so the residents are more <br />dependent on those congregate facilities. As soon as they are <br />allowed to have kitchens, then they are self -existing units just <br />as an apartment unit would be, and he had trouble differentiating <br />them. Mr. Culbertson also had difficulty with the density <br />formula mixing people and units. <br />Chairman Scurlock pointed out that when Indian River Estates <br />came in, this wasn't an issue because this ordinance wasn't even <br />on the books. <br />Director Keating agreed, and explained that when Indian <br />River Estates came in, staff was faced with a new type of entity <br />and then proceeded to develop criteria for total care facilities. <br />One of the criteria related to the density of total care <br />facilities, which are different from residential centers, was <br />that the total care facility living units with cooking facilities <br />would count as one dwelling unit while living units without <br />cooking facilities would count as 2/3 of a- unit. <br />Mr. Culbertson emphasized that the one criteria there at <br />that time dealt with cooking units, and he also believed <br />Waterford probably will have in excess of one person in one <br />dwelling unit. He personally was in favor of the project which <br />he felt will be of great benefit, but he only felt that the issue <br />of density should be taken into serious consideration. <br />42 <br />