8/1/2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Since the subject right-of-way is only 280' in length, does not provide access to any property that is not already accessed by another road, and terminates at the river, the subject right-of-way will not be used for roadway construction in the foreseeable future. Despite that, Public Works staff has indicated that, if abandoned, a drainage easement should be retained over the abandoned right-of- way. Please see the attached memo from Public Works (attachment #4), which indicates that, if the applicants object to a drainage easement condition, then the applicants must provide a topographic survey and prove that the area topography would render such an easement useless. No such topographic information has been submitted, although the applicants have expressed objections to a drainage easement condition. Although Public Works does not object to abandonment of the subject right-of-way, county planning staff opposes the abandonment request based on a potential for future use of the right-of-way as a public river access. Such access may be the reason that 5 such right-of-way segments were platted between 83'd Avenue and the Sebastian River via the Townsite of Roseland subdivision. In response to planning staff's objection, the applicant has asserted that ample public river access exists a short distance northeast of the subject right-of-way segment at a public park, and that the existing shoreline topography does not lend itself to access. Regardless. staff believes that there may be some future public benefit for retaining the right-of-way. A number of letters have been received from area residents objecting to the proposed right-of-way abandonment. Please see attachment #5. Also, staff has received conflicting reports regarding historical use of the subject right-of-way by area residents for access to the river. In addition, some area residents have stated that their deeds include river rights, but no verification of such deed language has been provided to staff as of this time. In general, area residents seem concerned that granting the abandonment request would preclude use of the right-of-way by area residents. Staff s conclusion is that there may be some historical use of the subject right-of-way segment for river access and that granting the request would certainly extinguish any future potential river access for the public over the subject right-of-way. Per guidelines established by the Board of County Commissioners, this petition was reviewed by all county divisions and utility providers having jurisdiction or potential interests within the right-of- way. With the exception of the county Planning Division, all other divisions and utility providers have recommended approval of the requested abandonment, with the condition that a drainage easement be retained over the abandoned right-of-way. The subject right-of-way is not part of the roadway system as noted on the County thoroughfare Plan, and is not needed for the major thoroughfare system. Furthermore. the abandonment would not affect the rights of convenient access to the subject property or to surrounding properties. Attached to this staff report is a resolution that if adopted, would abandon the subject right-of-way. The County Attorney's Office has reviewed and approved the attached abandonment resolution for legal form and sufficiency. August 1, 2000 Alternatives The Board of County Commissioners have four alternatives in relation to this request. These are: 1. Deny the request and maintain the status -quo. This would preserve any rights that the county has to use the right-of-way, unless the applicant is successful 43 BK 114 PG 383