My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/21/1995
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1995
>
11/21/1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:05:13 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 3:14:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
11/21/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
73
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
On -September 20, 1995, the Wabasso'Corridor Plan was presented to <br />the public at a public meeting. A majority of the public comments <br />were positive and supportive of the pla*:: A copy of the summary of <br />public comments regarding the draft Wabasso Corridor Plan is <br />attached (see attachment #1). <br />Pn-October 26, 1995, the Planning and Zoning Commission considered <br />tAe Wabasso Corridor Plan at a public meeting. At that meeting, <br />the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend that the <br />Eoard of'County Commissioners formally adopt the Wabasso Corridor <br />Plan. <br />he Plafthing and Zoning Commission, however, did ask the task force <br />.o recolsider the plan's prohibition of certain uses, particularly <br />a proposed prohibition on the display, sales, and rentals of boats. <br />lior that reason, the task force met again on November 8, 1995. <br />At the November 8th meeting, task force members discussed several <br />Psues, including the corridor plan's prohibition of sales and <br />rentals'�'of boats and automobiles. Based upon staff's position <br />ghat, when such activities take place indoors, those activities are <br />considered general retail sales and, therefore, would be allowed <br />even under the prohibition proposed in the Corridor Plan, the task <br />force voted to retain the corridor plan's prohibition of outdoor <br />.,.ales ands" display of automobiles and boats in the Corridor Plan <br />area. <br />Plan Description <br />*Corridor Plan Boundaries <br />The corridor's planning boundaries extend along CR 510 from 66th <br />h.Yenue to -SR A1A, and along US 1 from 81st Street to 95th Street. <br />Planning area boundaries at the CR 510/66th Avenue and CR 510/AlA <br />rntersections include properties at all four corners of those <br />intersections. <br />The US 1 Corridor currently contains a mix of commercial uses, <br />single- and multiple -family residential uses, citrus groves and <br />Vacant land. Land along CR 510 between 66th Avenue and 58th Avenue <br />contains mostly residential uses. The exception is a 5.28 acre <br />commerdial`area on the south side of CR 510. Between the Florida <br />East Coast Railroad Tracks and 58th Avenue, land along CR 510 is <br />presently characterized by heavy commercial and light industrial <br />development. Between 46th Avenue and SR AlA, residential land uses <br />dominate. <br />•Private Sector Responsibilities <br />The plan~" outlines both private sector and public sector <br />responsibilities that must be fulfilled to achieve the plan's <br />vision statement. Private sector responsibilities focus on new, <br />nQn-res$d6ntial development that must comply with special <br />regulations. Within the plan area, both countywide regulations and <br />special regulations. would apply. Where there is a difference <br />between= -the countywide LDRs and the special regulations, the <br />special regulations would prevail. <br />The special regulations would apply only to new non-residential <br />development. All existing development would be "grandfathered in", <br />or exempt --from the special regulations. The plan also contains a <br />set of vifliintary architectural guidelines. The special regulations <br />primarily pertain to the following: <br />Signs. The plan reduces the maximum height limit for new signs <br />from 30"feet to 10 feet, andeliminates visible sign poles by <br />rpquiring,monument-style signs, or landscaping around poles. As a <br />tradeoff for reducing sign height, the plan also allows those signs <br />to be located closer to roadways by reducing the required front <br />yard setback of such signs from 5 feet to 1 foot. The only <br />rgductiorr in the size of the actual sign copy area proposed would <br />apply to larger, multi -tenant sites (e.g. shopping centers), where <br />signs that are normally allowed to be 150 square feet and 200 <br />square feet in area would be limited to 120 square feet and 160 <br />square feet, respectively. <br />Roofs. The plan requires all new buildings to have a sloped roof <br />on all sides, or a recognizable architectural style that uses flat <br />roofs. This regulation is intended to avoid a stark, "box -like" <br />building appearance. <br />Landscaping. The plan requires some landscaped buffers and <br />fo ndation plantings that are not now required by the LDRs. <br />Er�-anced landscaping along CR 510 and -US 1 is an essential part of <br />these requirements. There are also requirements for additional <br />u9derstory trees along local roads and in buffers required between <br />non-residential and residential uses. Landscaping materials are <br />r%"fired to follow a theme which emphasizes native plants. <br />C fors. The plan requires earth -tone and pastel colored buildings. <br />Bght, garish building colors are prohibited, although accent <br />cc <br />ors are allowed. <br />NOVEMBER 21, 1995 41 Bou 96 F -a-;► 644 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.