Laserfiche WebLink
APR. 1? 1990 <br />BOOK l9 PAGE, <br />F. Site Plan Extension - Christian Senior Housing Foundation, <br />Inc. - Joseph F. Glenn <br />The Board reviewed the following memo dated 3/29/90: <br />TO: James E. Chandler <br />County Administrator <br />DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: <br />Robert Keatin , A <br />Community Developme Director <br />THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP <br />Chief, Current Development <br />/\ /1 <br />FROM: Christopher D. Rison (l 1���11 <br />Staff Planner, Current Development <br />DATE: March 29, 1990 <br />SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN EXTENSION FOR JOSEPH F. GLENN ON <br />BEHALF OF CHRISTIAN SENIOR HOUSING FOUNDATION, INC. <br />SP -MA -88-05-41 <br />ORANGE BLOSSOM VILLAGE (ELDERLY LIVING FACILITY) <br />It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal <br />consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular <br />"i meeting of April 17, 1990. <br />DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: <br />On March 23, 1989, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved a <br />major site plan application, submitted by Masteller and Moler, <br />Inc. on behalf of the Christian Senior Housing Foundation Inc., to <br />construct an 80 unit elderly housing facility ("residential <br />center") to be located at 1250 30th Street. The Board of County <br />Commissioners granted special exception and conceptual plan <br />approval for the project. <br />Due to funding delays caused by processing procedures when using <br />federal funding, the Christian Senior Housing Foundation, Inc., <br />has been unable to commence construction of the approved site <br />plan. Pursuant to Section 23.1(G)(2) of the Indian River County <br />Zoning Code, Christian Senior Housing Foundation, Inc. submitted a <br />request for site plan extension prior to the expiration date of <br />the approved site plan. As provided for, the Board of County <br />Commissioners may act upon this request. <br />Some regulations have changed, since the time of site plan ap- <br />proval, that would affect the project's design if it were reviewed <br />as a new application today. However, members of the Technical <br />Review Committee concur that the changes that have occurred are <br />not significant enough to require any site plan revisions. They <br />agree that site plan extension without further conditions may be <br />granted. <br />: <br />