06-21-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Integra Homes Request June 21, 2006 Page 4 The residents have expressed concern regarding traffic and access onto County Road 10, limitation of future development, opposition to residential development and inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Traffic. According to Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE), a 19-unit townhome development would generate on average 112 vehicle trips per day. An office building would generate much more traffic, though without knowing the potential area of the office development, it would be difficult to arrive at a suitable comparative figure. For the sake of discussion only, if a 15,000 square foot office building were constructed on the site, depending upon the type of office usage, the trips generated would range from 174 to 542 vehicle trips per day. (Medical and dental offices tend to generate the highest traffic levels among the “office” uses.) Access. The site would be served by a single right-in right-out access point onto County Road 10. The number of vehicle trips per day generated by a 19-unit townhome project would not exceed the capacity of the access point. There are other examples of commercial and residential development on County Road 10 served only by a single right-in right-out access, a customary and typical characteristic of mid-block development. While perhaps less convenient than developments at signalized intersections or those served by a cross street or service road, such mid-block developments do not pose a safety hazard. Limitation of Future Development. The project is in the middle of a Mixed Use (MU) Planned Unit Development (PUD) district as designated in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. While it is true if the Integra project is allowed to proceed as requested neither the area to the southeast or northwest could be developed as a PUD, either area could be developed either in conjunction with the Integra project or as a stand-alone project. The Integra project does not preclude or hinder redevelopment of either area. Comprehensive Plan Inconsistency. As stated earlier in this report, the site is designated as Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development. This designation was established to encourage and provide maximum flexibility for future redevelopment in this area. A mixed use development implies a mix of uses and defined by the Comp Plan to include a significant amount of residential development. For that reason, staff would assert the proposed project is not inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. While staff appreciates the concerns expressed by the residents, it appears that project as proposed would not adversely affect the neighborhood, would generate comparatively less traffic than would an office or commercial development, would not preclude or prevent adjacent redevelopment and would not be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Summary The only question that remains at this point is whether the Planning Commission and neighbors believe an alternative land use would be more appropriate than the proposed medium density, owner-occupied townhome development. If that is the case, the “preferred” land use should be articulated, and if warranted, consideration be given to an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Finally, if the proposed rezoning and townhome project is not the preferred development opportunity for this site, the request should be denied.