My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/16/1985
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1985
>
10/16/1985
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:51:31 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 11:11:01 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
10/16/1985
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
58
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
OCT 16 1985 <br />Because the County's <br />cunuuercial development <br />location adjacent to <br />node, this application <br />node from 160 to 175 <br />BOOK 62 FAGE 42 I <br />Comprehensive Plan is structured to concentrate <br />in nodes, and because of the subject property's <br />the existing Kings Highway and State Road 60 <br />is considered a request to enlarge the existing <br />acres and to revise the boundaries of the node to <br />include the subject property. <br />On March 6, 1985, the Board of County Commissioners enlarged the Kings <br />Highway and State Road 60 node from 140 to 160 acres. <br />On April 10, 1985, the Board of County Commissioners adopted an <br />ordinance establishing boundaries for the 160 acre Kings Highway and <br />State Road 60 node. <br />On August 22, 1985,. the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4 -to -0, <br />with an abstention, to recommend that the request to amend the Compre- <br />hensive Plan be denied. The Commission also voted 4 -to -0, with one <br />abstention, to recommend that the node boundaries not be adjusted to <br />include the subject property. In addition, the Commission voted <br />4 -to -0, with one abstention, to deny the rezoning request. The <br />applicant has appealed that decision. The Commission gave as their <br />reasons for recommending denial the facts that there is a considerable <br />amount of vacant commercially -zoned land in this area which does not <br />justify an enlargement of the node, that the node boundary should not <br />be adjusted to accommodate the subject property, and that based on <br />these recommendations and the fact that the subject property abuts a <br />single-family subdivision, that the rezoning request should be.denied. <br />ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS <br />In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the application <br />will be presented. The analysis will include a description of the <br />current and future land uses of the site and surrounding areas, <br />potential impacts on the transportation and utility systems, and any <br />significant adverse impacts on environmental quality. <br />Existing Land Use Pattern <br />The subject property is undeveloped. North of the subject property is <br />a single-family subdivision zoned A, Agricultural District. East of <br />the subject property, across Kings Highway, is Ryanwood Shopping <br />Center, under construction, which is zoned C-1, Commercial District. <br />South of the subject property is undeveloped land zoned C-1. Further <br />south, across State Road 60, is undeveloped land zoned C-1. West of <br />the subject property is undeveloped land zoned RM -6, Multiple -Family <br />Residential District (up to 6 units/acre). The land in this area <br />zoned C-1 will be assigned to the CG zoning classification in the near <br />future. <br />Future Land Use Pattern <br />The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property and the land <br />north and west of it as LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (up to '6 <br />units/acre). The land east and south of the subject property is <br />included in the Kings Highway and State Road 60 commercial node. In <br />order to develop the subject property for a shopping center, the <br />Comprehensive Plan would have to be amended to enlarge the Kings <br />Highway and State Road 60 node; the node boundaries' would have to be <br />amended, and the property would have to be rezoned. <br />In analyzing this request, the staff first looked at the proposal to <br />enlarge the node. Currently, this node contains 160 acres with the <br />acreage broken down as follows: <br />35 <br />� � r <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.