X hits on this document

40 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

14 / 19

CITY OF MELBOURNE, FLORIDA MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 27, 2004

can be addressed. The request meets the criteria for a Comprehensive Plan change. And, they would prefer to be in the City.

Mr. Contreras said that it would be prudent for the applicants to continue discussions with the area residents and work towards finding common ground and understanding.

David Armstrong, Armstrong Custom Homes, elaborated on several of the rumors about this development. He stated that they do extensive research on property. He reported that there is one gopher tortoise on the property that may be active. The wetlands on site won’t be impacted; there will be a 35’ restriction on height; and they plan to build two- story structures.

Mr. Armstrong said that the land would not have to be built up as high if they developed with City sewer (instead of septic tanks). This would result in less water run-off. He noted that they do not want to put Baker Road through. The project is recommended in the County plan for 15 units per acre; however, it is in the best interest to come into the City of Melbourne. He commented that they will not go through the cost of developing a site plan without first having this approval.

Mr. Palmer said if the property remained in the County, the density would be one unit per quarter-acre. Mr. Armstrong said it is in a holding pattern now; however, it would qualify for 15 units per acre provided that water and sewer are available. Mrs. Poole pointed out that if this is not approved, they would not be able to build that many units in the County. Mr. Armstrong said there are ways to purchase water and sewer.

In response to Mrs. Poole, Mr. Armstrong said that the flooding in the area has nothing to do with development. It is because of poor maintenance of the ditches leading to Lake Washington.

Mrs. Walker asked if they would consider changing their plans if area residents and homeowners groups felt that they were overbuilding. Mr. Armstrong replied that they have indicated that they would do almost everything Mrs. Baker has asked. He added that there is a point when the project would no longer be viable.

Mrs. Walker asked what size the units will be. Mr. Armstrong said 1,800 – 2,600 s.f. with a clubhouse and pool. He stated that they will make sure the development is nice, fits and that nobody will be impacted. Responding to Mrs. Poole, he said that at this point

they are not planning on building a “seniors only” community.

Karen Twigg, 389 Tolley Avenue, read a letter from Roy Raithel on Cobb Lane

. In the

letter, Mr. Raithel indicates that he is opposed

the

following

reasons:

low

density

housing

to the annexation and land use change for would have a detrimental effect on the

environment; compatibility – the area currently has two development could degrade the existing home values; would bring non-area drivers into the neighborhood; protection of wildlife.

homes per acre; flooding; the traffic concerns; a cut through protection of the marsh; and

Page 14 of 19

Document info
Document views40
Page views40
Page last viewedSun Dec 04 02:42:10 UTC 2016
Pages19
Paragraphs661
Words7747

Comments