8/23/1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

AUG 23 1993 BOOK 90 FA;E 266 the P.D. process) to properly address project appearance and aesthetics. In essence, the P.D. process can give the county more control over the appearance and aesthetic qualities of a residential resort project. Implications: This restriction would have no effect on potential residential resort sites. The review and approval process would be somewhat affected, and a greater percentage of open space would be required for RM -8 zoned projects (40% rather than 30%). Alternatives: The only feasible alternative to requiring P.D. review -and approval is merely to leave the existing special exception approval requirement unchanged. PSAC-Recommendation: At its June 17, 1993 meeting, the PSAC voted 6-1 to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the LDR amendments that would require PD approval for residential resort projects (see attachment #5). PZC Recommendation: At its July 8, 1993 meeting the PZC voted unanimously to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the LDR amendments that would require PD approval for residential resort projects. 2. The residential resort minimum project area shall be increased from 25 acres to 50 acres. [Reference: see proposed changes to the "residential resort" definition and the addition of 971.41 (11)(d)7.] Justification: The concept of the residential resort use is to allow development of a project having a size large enough to accommodate on-site recreational amenities as well as extensive buffering. Increasing the minimum project size would ensure more potential physical space for on-site project amenities. Such amenities help to keep resort vacationers on- site and less dependent on development and services located outside of the project area. By keeping vacationers within the project site, fewer impacts should occur off-site. In addition, requiring larger projects with potentially twice as many units could help ensure that the project size (in number of units) would be large -enough to sustain the costs of on- site amenities and "inwardly focused" activities. Staff notes that existing multi -family projects in the county which provide substantial on-site recreational amenities are over 50 acres in size (e.g. Sea Oaks +115 acres, Timber Ridge +53 acres). Implications: This restriction would limit the number of potential project sites but would not necessarily limit the potential amount of residential resort development since existing parcels and tracts can be assembled into larger properties. The restriction could limit the number of potential projects if market economics limit the number of potential developers. Alternatives: A range of minimum acreage figures can be considered, as well as the option of keeping the current 25 acre minimum size requirement. Based upon the county's experience with multi -family projects that have substantial on-site recreational amenities, the 50 acre minimum is a logical threshold for the "sustain -ability" of such amenities. PSAC Recommendation: At its June 17, 1993 meeting, the PSAC voted 7-0 to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners not amend the current 25 acre minimum project size requirement (see attachment #5). 6