7/17/1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Development within the RM -6 District is likely to be compatible with existing development in this area. The existing trees and dense vegetation could easily be incorporated in perimeter buffering. Development of the site could complement the existing shopping center to the west, and the provision of internal access could eliminate some off-site traffic. The wetland area to the east is not likely to be developed due to stringent environmental protection policies thereby eliminating any compatibility problems. Compatibility issues are most likely to occur along the north and south limits of the site. In addition, the RM -6 district requires that a minimum of 50% of the lot be devoted to open space. The Forest Park subdivision contains lots which are typically 100' X 1001. This configuration results in dwelling units being placed at or near the 20' foot rear setback line. The subdivision is presently buffered from the higher density condominium units at neighboring Vista Gardens by the Vista golf course fairways. At the present time the RM -6 District does not have specific screening requirements when abutting single-family developments. Landscaping and buffering are part of the site plan review process and may be required during that process. If the site develops through the Planned Residential Development (PRD) process, buffers could be required as a part of the development approval. Since it is not certain if the site to the south which presently contains the Florida Entomology Laboratory will undergo additional development, it is difficult to assess any compatibility problems. Regardless, the review process would address the need for buffering. The environmental issue is the loss of habitat. It is certain that any development of the property will -result in the loss of trees, regardless of the density. The best way or perhaps the only way to guarantee the preservation of the on-site vegetation would be by public purchase. This has been recognized in the comprehensive plan by listing the property as a prime candidate for public acquisition. Baring public purchase, the plan requires the preservation of 10-15% of upland native vegetation. This could be applied toward meeting the RM-6.district's fifty percent (50%) open space requirements. Any additional on-site preservation will depend on the developer's ability and willingness to incorporate the unique vegetation into the site design. The final issue that needs to be discussed is the impact any potential development would have on public services and infrastructure and the ability of those services to accommodate the potential 390 units. It has been demonstrated that existing and planned facilities which provide water, sewer, solid waste, drainage and recreational services could meet or exceed the additional units from this site. The transportation system would be negatively impacted by the additional trips generated by the additional dwelling units; however, this impact will be futher reviewed by a more detailed traffic analysis when a specific development proposal is submitted. Alternatives Several alternatives exist regarding this proposal. The first of these would be to approve or deny a request based on the analysis performed. Since it has been demonstrated that the additional 390 units permitted by this rezoning would likely reduce the US #1 :.levels of service from the minimum standard identified in the comprehensive plan, the regpest could be denied. However, a detailed traffic analysis will be required prior to. site development including improvements for -which the developer will be responsible. All alternatives to this would be to delay action pending the results of a detailed traffic analysis. rr �q 4 2 0 ��f� t� BOOK