6/9/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

between the project site and 661 Avenue. If the county can acquire the right-of-way, a developer's agreement for the paving will be negotiated. However, neither the paving of 161 Street nor the negotiation of a developers agreement for such paving is related to PD approval of the project. In regard to the internal driveway (681 Drive) that runs through the project from SR 60 to 16' Street, the applicant is proposing to construct the southern half of the roadway as an unpaved stabilized roadway. The public works director will not approve the stabilized driveway construction. Planning staff and public works staff believe the southern portion of the road needs to be paved to ensure an adequate secondary access for such a large project. It is the opinion of public works and planning staff that such paved secondary access is necessary for the project to provide adequate connections to the public street network as required in LDR section 913.07(4)(H)l.b. and c. The applicant is already proposing the necessary roadway segment, but not proposing to surface it to the county's paved driveway standards found in LDR section 954.10. The driveway is private and will be used by residents of the project only. If paved, the driveway will provide an alternative to SR 60, especially once 161 Street is paved. According to county records, there is a Murphy Act easement for right-of-way on the property. At this point it has not yet been determined to what extent the Murphy Act easement encroaches into the property. Since no additional right-of-way is required from the site, the county has no objection to releasing the Murphy Act easement. Prior to PD plan release, the applicant will need to determine the extent of the Murphy Act easement, apply to the FDOT for release, and obtain release of the easement. 16. General Compatibility: When applicants are seeking a density bonus, compatibility with adjacent properties is a concern. In this case, the concern is with the adjacent properties to the east and west. The property to the east is vacant and has an M-1 land use designation. The most intense zoning allowed in the M-1 land use designation is the RM -8 district, a zoning district which allows multi -family development up to 8 units per acre, Tong with a variety of institutional uses. The property to the west is Lake in the Woods, a multi -family community developed under the RM -6 zoning regulations. The Lake in the Woods site plan approved 196 multi -family units, 110 apartment units and 210 ACLF units for a total of 516 units on 68 acres or 7.58 units/acre. (Note: ACLF units are generally not considered "full" units for density purposes.) The original Lake -in -the -Woods site plan was modified to convert the 110 apartments to 37 single family homes, which lowered the actual density to 6.51 units/acre. The developer of the proposed project has tried to concentrate the proposed improvements in the northern half of the site and keep the improvements as far away as possible from the majority of existing residential units located on the adjacent Lake -in -the Woods project site. As indicated in the landscaping section of this report, a Type "B" buffer will be provided on the east and west sides of the site. By clustering the improvements and using a single three story building, the applicant is able to provide over 52% green area, a percentage which does not include the 11.7% of the site developed as lake area. Building setbacks are as follows: North: 380' South: 1,500'+ East: 50' West: 85' June 9, 1998 57 BOOK oa 65