2010-05-21 TALIIBEACH - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

LEITHEAD TODD: I believe all the other routes are open, and none people are using Stardust over the other ones is because Stardust is paved. And we have speed bumps on the main access that leads up Royal Poinciana. People were speeding through there, so we put in some traffic-calming devices because, you know, itÓs a County road, we can do that. But because of that, guys are going on Stardust now to avoid going on Royal Poinciana. If we put a barricade at Kahakai, which is what I wanted to talk to the Public Works Director on because thatÓs our long-range plan anyway, then that would basically push people back onto Royal Poinciana because the other roads are not paved. BEAUDET: All right. LEITHEAD TODD: And it will be a barrier that could be moved in the event of an emergency. HOUSEL: Mr. Vitousek, I want to ask you. You mentioned the variance thing, and would the change to allow variances for Units C and E Î is that right? Is there anything that you know right now would indicate you need a variance for any of the other properties? VITOUSEK: No, Mr. Chairman, there is nothing I know right now th further variances. But IÓm just afraid that something might come up as we, because we still have to go through the plan approval process, the CPR processes. And the Planning Department has looked at it carefully, and I think they also believe that there are, no further variances will be required for us to get plan approval. But we are just concerned about the additional time that would be required to come back to the Planning Commission to get a change in that to apply for a variance to address something as minor as a setback from, you whatever it is that might come up in the future. HOUSEL: Commissioner Bowman, did you have -? BOWMAN: I was just going to ask staff what the rationale for not that requirement. DARROW: Well, the original requirement was in the original SMA Permit, and I believe that their intention from the beginning was to not allow variances for the construction of the original six dwellings, which was, so that they would, you know, just build within the area that they are building and not expand beyond that. But there are some concerns that Randy is bringing up that, again, itÓs a valid point that there may be issues that may come up in the future that may be unforeseen, so at this time weÓll discuss that issue. A consideration is that, in the wording of the condition, that we put Ðno further variance would be allowed from the minimum yard setback requirement.Ñ And thatÓs basically so that if there is a minimum lot width issue or if there is a waterline issue or whatever it could be, that those could be taken care of. But as far as minimum yard setbacks, those in this particular layout are pretty identified as to where houses can be built and so -. But just in case thereÓs other types of issues that may come up. Would that be something that you would consider? VITOUSEK: Yes, absolutely, I mean because the intent is to have these units with yards and with space around them. That was the original intent as shown on the original map; that remains the intent. But it does give us some more flexibility, and I appreciate that consideration. 13 EXHIBIT B