Laserfiche WebLink
Chief Planner Boling noted that the situation along 8th <br />Street is that the canal is on the right side of the road. The <br />I <br />existing 8th St. R/W is 40' in width. The house sits back <br />approximately 41' from the existing R/W. In the Subdivision <br />Ordinance and in the Zoning Code applying to single family <br />residences there is a requirement that the minimum road R/W width <br />must be dedicated by anyone building a new house - anyone doing a <br />new subdivision - or, in this case, creating these new lots; so, <br />what is required is a 20" R/W dedication along 8th St. That <br />would leave a little over 20' for the setback for the house, <br />which would be conforming to that Zoning District. Under the <br />County's R/W policy that is in effect and that is reflected in <br />the ordinances, the minimum road R/W width is dedicated without <br />compensation. It is the minimum standard for any road. Any new <br />improvements that have to be done to 8th Street in this area <br />would require a St. John's River Water Management permit and <br />would require extra R/W because 60' is the minimum. This would <br />not create a non -conforming situation with the existing <br />residence, and staff, therefore, recommends the Board approve the <br />split subject to the 20' dedication. <br />Vice Chairman Wheeler asked if anyone present wished to be <br />heard. <br />James Douglas came before the Board acting as agent for his <br />mother, Cornelia Harper, owner,of the property in question and <br />the residence depicted in the survey. He noted that the P&Z <br />staff has continuously described the situation as not creating a <br />non -conformity, but his mother's entire front yard is only 41' in <br />depth and dedication of the required 20' would put the front yard <br />of the house within 1' of a non -conformity. Mr. Douglas also <br />objected to the disallowance of any economic compensation as this <br />would affect the value of her home dramatically. He noted that <br />there is an existing structure north of this property on 8th <br />Street which sits about 12' off of 8th Street so that if staff <br />wished to increase the R/W there, they would have to buy the <br />59 <br />LUG 2 3 1988 Bm, 73 F.A u 557 <br />