8/15/1989 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

AUG i 8. Stormwater Management: The Stormwater Management Plan has been approved by the Public Works Department, and a Type "A" stormwater permit has been issued. 9. Traffic Circulation: The applicant is proposing three two-way driveways to enter and exit the .project onto 99th Street. The centerline of the eastern driveway is 80 feet from the edge of the pavement of U.S. Highway 1. The public works director has now approved of this driveway separation distance. Off-site traffic safety concerns have been expressed in an 'DOT request to not allow construction or any additional development along 99th Street until a northbound left turn lane is provided on U.S. #1 to 99th Street. This left -turn lane condition was applied to the Sebastian Warehouse project on 99th Street near the subject site, and this condition must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the warehouse. Recently, the developer (Karl Hedin) requested that the public works department take the issue of the left turn lane before the Board of County Commissioners to initiate a forced petition of area property owners to fund the left turn lane. The Board of County Commissioners denied the request to initiate a forced petition but instead voted to require the developer of this project to dedicate his fairshare of the cost of the left turn lane prior to the issuance of a Certif- icate of Occupancy. �Pursuant to the Board's direction, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy the developer escrow his fairshare of the funds to construct the left turn lane. Because an existing traffic safety problem has been iden- tified, and because allowing additional development -related traffic will only exacerbate an existing problem, planning staff is still of the opinion the no Certificate of Occupancy (C.O.) should be issued for this project prior tothe construction of the left -turn lane at 99th Street and U.S. #1. However, due to the Board's previous direction on this issue, staff is recommending that fairshare funds be escrowed for the turn lane prior to C.O. 10. Landscape Plan & Tree Protection: Although the landscape plan conforms to the landscape ordinance, there is a 36" diameter live oak which the developer is proposing to remove under the provisions of the tree protection ordinance. In staff's opinion, such removal is contrary to the spirit of the tree protection ordinance. This oak is the most signifi- cant tree located on the entire site and, as such, warrants preservation. In an initial pre -application meeting and during formal application review, staff has repeatedly recommended that the project be designed and now redesigned to save this tree. The developer has refused to redesign, stating that preserving the tree would require moving the fast -lube back from U.S. #1 and would leave a canopy; both items would diminish the project's U.S. #1 exposure. Fur- thermore, the applicant states that the tree cannot be saved; his contention is that development impacts will kill it. However, according to the Urban Forester, steps can be taken to better ensure survival of the tree if the site plan is redesigned; no evidence has been submitted to substantiate this claim. In staff's opinion and the opinion of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the project should be redesigned to save one of* the few significant trees on contends that the tree protection the destruction of this oak. 18 this site. The applicant ordinance provisions allow