9/7/1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

V ` BOOK 90 PAGE 373 -7 fee simple units, or as individual rental units held under single ownership. 18. DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI): The Department of, Community Affairs (DCA) has reviewed the proposed project relative to DRI project thresholds. The DCA considers this proposal a residential project, since the units will be sold as timeshare condominium units. DCA has determined that this project does not constitute a DRI, since the project is well below the 750 unit DRI threshold applicable within Indian River County. Please see attachment #4. 19. STREET NAME REQUEST: The applicant has proposed the use of street names rather than street numbers. Generally, it has been the county policy to require the use of street numbers. However, on the barrier island a pattern of street names has been well established, and similar street name requests have been granted for barrier island projects. Therefore, the staff has no objection to the use of street names. At its August 12, 1993 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved the use of street names subject to staff approval of the names selected. Therefore, no Board action is required regarding this request. 20. REQUESTED WAIVERS: Pursuant to section 915.15(1), PD applicants may request waivers from standard LDR criteria. The applicant is requesting the following waivers: eParking Proximity: The applicant is requesting a waiver from the requirement that parking spaces be located within 200' of a multi -family unit for owners' spaces and 250' for guests' spaces. The applicant is requesting that the distance requirement be waived entirely. The staff has no objection to this waiver being granted, since the proposed units and project layout are designed as 'a residential resort (with possible -Valet services) rather than as a conventional multi -family project. •25' Perimeter Buffer Encroachment: The applicant is requesting that certain improvements be allowed to encroach into the 25' buffers adjacent to the thoroughfare roadways, mostly adjacent to S.R. A -1-A. The applicant is requesting that drainage improvements and other at- grade or below grade "soft improvements" (e.g. swales, berms, etc.) be allowed in the 25' buffer. In the past, the county has allowed such encroachments as long as all required elements of the Type "B" buffer are planted and installed, and effective screening is maintained. In addition, the applicant is requesting that retaining walls, other structural elements necessary to construct a pedestrian crossing (overhead, at -grade, or underground), signs, and structures such as gatehouses, entry pavilions, covered stairs, etc., be allowed to encroach into the 25' PD buffer. Staff has no objection to minor encroachments into the buffer area where the encroachments do not compromise the buffer's aesthetic function. In staff's opinion, the aesthetic function could be compromised if the applicant's current request is granted, given the scope of improvements, proposed to encroach in the buffer. It is staff's position that no structures. associated with an overhead pedestrian crossing of S.R. A -1-A and no entry 36