• No results found

PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY OF DELAND PLANNING BOARD. September 16, Newkirk Engineering

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY OF DELAND PLANNING BOARD. September 16, Newkirk Engineering"

Copied!
5
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO

THE CITY OF DELAND PLANNING BOARD September 16, 2020

A. APPLICATION NO.: Z20-106 - The Reserve at Victoria

APPLICANT: Harry Newkirk Newkirk Engineering

REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a PD amendment to the Reserve at Victoria PD to:

• Add on on-street parallel parking spaces within the right of way and reduce overall number of required spaces.

• Approve a reforestation plan.

• Add provision for the HOA to maintain trees Also:

• Reduce the natural trail to resolve permitting issues with SJRWMD with respect to impacts to wetland

areas.

• Adjust the phase lines of the development (redlined PD agreement attached)

APPLICABLE ORDINANCES:

Article XII ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT

Sec. 33-135 – Procedure for text amendments and rezoning

B. ANALYSIS:

The property was originally part of the Royal Oaks Planned Development. The development agreement was drafted to separate the property from the Royal Oaks planned development and amend and restate the entitlements for the property with a new planned development agreement known as The Reserve at Victoria PD. The Reserve at Victoria PD was approved in November of 2019. In general, the PD proposed:

• Phases 1 – 3 Single family residential uses (408 units as previously approved)

• Phase 4 Multi-family residential uses (162 units as previously approved)

Other provisions in the agreement were:

• There was to be no on-street parking and overall a minimum of 2,040 parking spaces throughout the development including within garages

• 50% of the driveways were required to hold up to 4 vehicles outside of the garage and were to be no less than 725 sq. feet in area.

• The HOA was responsible to monitor the driveways per phase measuring less than 725 sq. ft. to ensure they didn’t outnumber those over 725 sq. ft.

• Front facing garages had a minimum 15-foot front setback

The applicant now would like to propose the following amendments to the newly adopted PD as follows:

1. Permit on-street parking - A total of 104 on-street spaces is proposed within the development. (Phase 1 – 40, Phase 2 – 27, Phase 3 – 37)

(2)

2. Reduce the overall minimum number of parking spaces from 2,040 to 1,736 throughout the development including those located within garages.

3. Reforestation of the site in the area designated as the conservation area 4. Require trees within the rights-of-way to be maintained by the HOA

5. Include a minimum number of trees per lot and require the HOA to monitor removal of trees on lots with more than the minimum.

Additionally, the proposal calls for the following amendments:

6. Reduction of the length of the nature trail

7. Change the phasing lines such that Phase 2 on the plat now includes the front entrance and a portion of the stormwater pond.

On-street parking – The Reserve at Victoria PD called for a minimum of 2,040 parking spaces for the development. This averages 5 parking spaces per single family unit which seems excessive considering that the LDR requires only a minimum of 2 spaces per unit. The amended development agreement states the following regarding this issue:

Item 6 pg. 7 of 16 - “On-street parking shall be permitted within the development.”… “There shall be a minimum of one thousand seven hundred thirty sixty (1736) parking spaces, including parking spaces within garages, in phases 1, 2 and 3 combined.”

Reduction of nature trail - The project includes a nature trail that is located within the conservation area. The water management district has requested that the applicant reduce the length of the nature trail due to permitting impacts for wetlands that exist on the site.

(3)

Reforestation – In Phase 1 of the development, along the southeast corner of the site, is an area that is to remain natural as a conservation area. The applicant proposes that this area be supplemented with the planting of new seedlings in areas where there are bare spots in order to improve the quality of the forested area.

R.O.W. tree maintenance – The streets within this development are dedicated to the public and maintained by the city, however, the maintenance of the trees will be the responsibility of the HOA.

Monitoring of minimum trees per lot by the HOA – The landscape plan proposes a greater number of trees per lot than what is typically required within the county, and in order to prevent individual property owners from removing trees to this minimum level, this requirement has been requested. The amended development agreement states the following regarding this issue:

Item 4 pg. 10 of 16 - “Tree replacement/mitigation credits for the project shall be granted for onsite reforestation performed pursuant to a Forestry Management Plan approved by City staff.”

(4)

Item 5 beginning on pg. 10 of 16 - “All required trees planted within rights-of-ways shall be regulated by the homeowners association for the development.”

Item 6 pg. 11 of 16 - “Each lot within the development shall contain the minimum of tree plantings required of the Land Development Regulations Ordinance #2013-11, as amended. The homeowners association for the development shall monitor and provide an enforcement mechanism to ensure all trees planted on lots, as depicted on the Planned Development Plan, remain in place and are not removed by lot owners.”

This language ensures that the HOA is responsible to monitor trees per lot in addition to regulating their removal.

Regarding the plat approvals, the applicant has stated that Phase 2, which is pending approval, will be completed prior to the approved Phase 1. Staff recommends the approval of the development in the order that it will actually be completed and that the numbering of the phases be updated to reflect the actual order in which it will be built. Staff suggests an additional amendment to the PD agreement:

• Update the phasing that was proposed to list Phase 2 as Phase 1

Section 33-135 provides the following criteria, which the City Commission shall utilize in reviewing a rezoning request:

1. Is the proposed rezoning consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, the land use, zoning pattern and character of the surrounding area?

The changes are compatible and impact only the existing PD which was deemed compatible with the comprehensive plan. The revised parking for single family use averages out to 4.25 spaces per unit (1,736 total space/408 units) and the LDR requires a minimum of 2 spaces per unit.

2. Will the proposed rezoning have an impact upon the environment or natural resources?

The elimination of a portion of the nature trail has an impact on the environment, in that as required by the water management district, it will resolve permitting issues in regard to the wetlands.

3. Will the proposed rezoning have an impact upon the economy of the affected area?

The rezoning action will not impact the economy of the area.

4. Will the proposed rezoning have an impact upon governmental services?

The rezoning action will not impact governmental services. The property is located within the urban area and such services are already provided. No new services are anticipated beyond what was expected when the original rezoning was requested.

5. Are there changes in the circumstances or conditions affecting the area since the original assignment of zoning that will support the proposed zoning?

The change in circumstance was that the desire to require the individual lots to provide the parking was delegated to the public right-of-way. This creates a smaller obligation

(5)

for the homeowners and possibly a smaller impact to the amount of impervious surface for the overall development.

6. Was there a mistake in the original classification?

No mistake is known.

7. Will the proposed rezoning have any effect upon the use or value of the affected area?

The addition of the on-street parking will lessen the requirement for the individual lots.

8. Will the proposed rezoning have an impact upon public health, safety and welfare?

The reduction of the length of the nature trail results in the elimination of a portion of an amenity that could have health benefits for the members of the community.

However, it also impacts the wetlands in a beneficial manner.

On August 20, 2020 this request was heard by the TRC and the following comments remain to be resolved:

Planning Preliminary Comments

1. Verify if the recording of the PD had taken place, as required by the Planning Board, prior to this request to amend the PD.

2. The PD calls for a total of 1,728 parking spaces within garages and that some of the lots provide space to park 4 cars outside of garages. Will these additional on- street spaces impact the overall total or fit within the total meaning that fewer homes will be required to provide those 4 outside spaces?

3. There appears to have been a change in the phasing line as well. Phase 2 on the plat now includes the front entrance and a portion of the stormwater pond. Please verify.

4. Amend the exhibits to reflect the changes requested in the agreement.

5. The structure located in Phase 4 at the northeast corner has no setback which will be a concern as development proceeds.

6. Add revision dates to the exhibits.

C. CONCLUSION:

This rezoning request appears to be compatible. Because the proposed zoning results in a reduction of the total parking required for the individual lots and the requested reduction of the nature trail is to support the environment, the proposal is one that staff can support.

D. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the Planning Board forward to the City Commission a recommendation of approval for the rezoning to add on-street parking, reduce the length of the natural trail, approve the reforestation plan and adjust the phase lines as proposed by the applicant.

Additionally, Staff recommends that the order of the phasing of the plats be changed such that Phase 2 becomes Phase 1. It is anticipated that the outstanding comments will be satisfactorily addressed. (The City Commission will address the proposed rezoning for first reading at 7 p.m., October 19, 2020.)

References

Related documents

A fund manager who has not used the service of third-party screeners usually picks stocks of companies that are present in the Sharia- compliant list published

This cascade is initiated at the primary tumor where CCL2 induces the expression of IL1b in TAMs leading to the systemic induction of IL17 production by gd T cells,

Madeleine’s “belief” that she is Carlotta Valdez, her death and rebirth as Judy (and then Madeleine again) and Scottie’s mental rebirth after his breakdown.. All of these

Online community: A group of people using social media tools and sites on the Internet OpenID: Is a single sign-on system that allows Internet users to log on to many different.

As inter-speaker variability among these the two groups was minimal, ranging from 0% to 2% of lack of concord in the 21-40 group and from 41% to 46% in the 71+ generation, we

First of all, we should notice that most of the results on individual-speci…c variables of the two-stage electoral choice model also hold true in the modi…ed structure of the

Virtually all paid WiFi hotspots are public, relying on MAC address filtering to control access.. The MAC address filter is easily defeated, as

Babitha and Sunil [Soft set relations and function, Computers and Mathematics with Applications 60 (2010) 1840–1849] introduced the notion of soft set relations as a soft subset of