7/26/1988 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

M M M 4. Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners consider reviewing regulations and/or program options that can ensure that the Thoroughfare Plan will be effectively implemented. The applicant has appealed the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision to deny the site plan modification to the Board of County Commissioners. Aside from the appeal, both the Planning and Zoning Commission and staff desire Board action on the matter. In order to satisfy the developer's request to modify the site plan and expedite issuance of a building permit, the Board would have to: a. determine that certain right-of-way reservation/dedi- cation requirements need to be changed due to legal or equity considerations; b. suspend application of certain dedication/reservation requirements in certain situations; C, approve the requested site plan modification (possibly with conditions); and d. direct staff and the Attorney's office to modify exist- ing dedication/reservation requirements. ANALYSIS AND ALTERNATIVES: There are two basic issues involved in the modification request:_ the bikepath requirement and the right-of-way dedication/ reserva- tion requirement. .. S.R. A -1-A Right -of -Way Deficiency At present, S.R. A -1-A is designated as a principal arterial roadway in the County's Transportation Thoroughfare Plan. The Thoroughfare Plan is the County's transportation plan for "build -out" conditions, while a portion of that plan, the 20 year capital improvements program, constitutes the 20 year road improvement plan. Pursuant to the Thoroughfare Plan and Section 23.3(d)4.b of the County Code, a minimum of 120' of right-of-way is required for principal arterial roadways. The 10' right-of-way dedication shown on the approved plans serves to make up the developer's share of the road right-of-way deficiency for this portion of S.R. A -1-A. Because improvements to this section of S.R. A -1-A are not on the 20 year C.I.P. (Capital Improvements Program), the 10' dedication does not qualify for traffic impact fee credit. Thus, an alter- native to dedicating this 10' strip would be to execute an agreement with the County to reserve this strip for future purchase. In doing so, the County could release the approved site plan after the reservation agreement is executed. and after all other conditions are met. This reservation alternative was :recently added to County Ordinances via Ordinance #88-4. The 'applicant, however_, does not wish to dedicate or reserve the 10' -171:7.'. strip, although the zoning code requires either dedication or j-.'''• reservation. The applicant has challenged the legality of the requirement, claiming that a forced reservation is tantamount to a .taking, which would require compensation. Although the current modification request does .not propose 'any improvements within the 10' ri ht-of-waY deficiency strip, nothingwould preclude the developer from locating improvements on' the strip if the requirement is not applied and the right-of-way is not dedicated or reserved. Constructing improvements within this strip could obstruct or limit future roadway or other related improvements or require more costly future acquisition by the County. Furthermore, locating required improvements in this strip now could later render the shopping center as a substandard development at such time that additional right-of-way is acquired. JUL 2 6 1988 13 Boos Piv 259