5/21/1991 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

because of the way the policy is structured, it is considered adequate if you are close to 70% developed. Commissioner Wheeler believed it is appropriate to have some flexibility and felt the 70% should be used as a benchmark rather than an absolute. Commissioner Scurlock emphasized the overriding concern should be the ultimate "footprint" of this commercial node to avoid further encroachment to the west, a domino effect, and wondered if staff have the ability at some future time to advise that, "This is it, this is the logical line we cannot go past." Commissioner Eggert commented that nationwide there is a lot of multifamily residential sitting right next to commercial just like this. Director Keating advised that if the 70% criterion was met, staff would recommend approval of this transmittal and look favorably on reconfiguration of the node to achieve commercial development with depth and to avoid the strip commercial effect. He felt- the project as presented provides an opportunity for internal capture of traffic and to consolidate a project with one tract falling under one owner. In this instance, the owner has designated the balance of the site for residential, and multifamily residential is generally considered a good buffer between commercial and single family residences. Chairman Bird wished to know if the property to the west and the north was still owned by the applicant and this was confirmed by Director Keating. Director Keating emphasized the 70% criterion policy is important because if you don't have consistent criteria to evaluate node expansion you risk arbitrary expansion when it may be cheaper to buy adjacent residential property and have the node expanded than it is to purchase the already designated commercial property. The Chairman opened the public hearing. Bruce Barkett of Collins, Brown & Caldwell, came before the Board representing Sebastian Associates and related his understanding of the background of the request stressing the positive aspects of the application. Stan Mayfield of the engineering firm of Masteller, Moler & Mayfield came before the Board to enumerate the reasons for the land use application change. By means of a drawing he demonstrated the scope of the project which would involve approximately an 8 - acre expansion of the node. The retail chain that the applicant is trying to bring to this site wants to be next to Publix. He showed the Board a conceptual drawing of the proposed buildings and parking areas and mentioned that all retail chains prefer to see 29 � NAy 2 1 199i U1-