10/10/1989 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-Indian River Boulevard), the county will purchase all needed '-right-of-way.. So timing is an issue. Where an applicant proposes =even one single-family house, the county has determined that 60 feet of right-of-way is needed to accommodate it, and his share of any deficiency must be dedicated. Yet, if an individual never develops his property, the county will purchase the entire right-of-way, when needed for roadway improvements. In the subject case, Neal Jackson's parcel abuts 8th Street which has only 30' of existing right-of-way and is bounded to the south by an Indian river Farms Drainage District canal. To accommodate minimum local road standards, 30' of right-of-way is required (see att. #4). Mr. Jackson proposes a residence on his 10 acre grove parcel which would set back over 100' from the existing 8th Street right-of-way. Thus, there is no building setback or potential encroachment problem; the dedication requirement does not affect the proposed house plans. Furthermore, the County Attorney's Office has tried to work with the applicant and has proposed legal arrangements whereby Mr. Jackson could continue to farm and use the citrus trees in the 30' dedicated area until the County needs it for the actual road construction project. Thus, interim use of the dedicated area is not at issue. The County Attorney's office also informed Mr. Jackson that his permit need not be held up; he was informed that he could dedicate the land in question under protest and proceed with his appeal after securing his permit. STAFF POSITION: It is staff's position that Mr. Jackson's September 28, 1989 letter is incorrect. The purpose of the right-of-way dedication requirement is not as Mr. Jackson indicates in his letter "to require access from property to a main arterial road." Instead, it is to ensure that new construction pays for itsproject related impacts by dedicating the land required for minimum local road standards. These are the standards required for local roads in new subdivisions, and they are standards which are technically and legally defensible. In that existing residents may not have to dedicate property without compensation, the requirements may not be equitable. However, when the county needs to expand Glendale, it will be acquiring right-of-way, whether there are houses along the right-of-way or not. Consequently, some people may be compensated for their right-of-way, but they may lose their front yard or even their house. There are many roads in the county like Glendale with only a 30 foot right-of-way and a drainage district canal precluding expan- sion on one side. For the county to go and acquire all of the needed right-of-way at this time would be financially infeasible. Therefore, the policy of requiring dedication without compensation for the "project related" right-of-way needs makes sense. RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners uphold the staff's position. 1O C T i i989 14 ROOK 8 F. f.105