What Has Changed? HINT: Not Policy.
The SOHO Dayflower property has not changed for decades. It has been in agriculture serving the same purpose, in the same way since the 1960s. The land’s characteristics and condition has remained stable all this time. Additionally, the County’s development policies in many categories have not changed since 2007. So, why is the County reversing its position from 2011 to 2021 on this property? Here are some examples:
2011 Wesley Oaks MPUD
2021 Dayflower MPUD
TRAFFIC and ACCESS
Required three (3) access points based on number of residential units.
The project of up to 1202 residential units and 10,244 additional daily trips to the existing external roads required a full traffic impact study (TIS).
The dangerous, blind Sandy Lane intersection with Quail Hollow Blvd. was required to be analyzed for engineering solution and improvements. The suggested improvement was included in the analysis.
RURAL ROAD ACCESS
Access for developments that are limited to only to rural-residential roadways shall be unacceptable for uses of urban density or intensity. (FLU 2.3.3.c)
DENSITY and BONUS CREDITS
Density/zoning bonuses were denied based on Comp Plan policy that applies only to those who choose to use current zoning. A rezoning negates eligibility for the credits.
WETLAND DENSITY CREDITS
Density credits only allowed if wetlands are not impacted. (FLU A-4)
COMPATIBILITY
Fully recognizes and requires compliance with the Comp Plan Rural Neighborhood Protection Area policies. It includes step down density against larger, rural lots. (FLU 2.3.2-2.3.3)
PROJECT ISSUES
All the issues are there in 2011.
TRAFFIC and ACCESS
Requires only two (2) access points based on number of residential units. LDR has not changed. Where did the requirement go?
This project of up to 1467 residential units and 12,250-13,309 additional daily trips was exempted from a traffic study (now called Timing and Phasing). Why does more require less?
The Sandy Lane / Quail Hollow Blvd situation is exactly the same. It was not included in any analyses.
RURAL ROAD ACCESS
The two access points for this development come out onto 2-lane, residential roadways. Now they are being allowed. Policy remains the same. Why has this changed?
DENSITY and BONUS CREDITS
Full density/zoning bonuses are allowed even though the original zoning is being changed. Comp Plan policy has not changed; why has County’s position? (FLU 1.1.4; FLU A-6.4)
WETLAND CREDITS
Credits are being allowed on all remaining “non-impacted” wetlands after subtracting impacted wetlands. Comp Plan policy has not changed.
COMPATIBLITY
No mention of step down requirement for this project. Comp Plan policy has not changed.
PROJECT ISSUES
All the same, exact issues are here, but now it’s developable as if 2011 never existed.