10/16/1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1) Winn-Dixie and adjacent commercial uses west of 43rd Avenue 2) Indian River Farms Drainage District Office 3) Ed Schlitt Agency 4) First Bankers West Side Facility 5) Ryanwood Shopping Center (under construction) 6) Oak Terrace Restaurant 7) Vacant infill property east of Kings Highway zoned commercial 8) Infill property east of Kings Highway zoned RS -6 9) Vacant property zoned commercial west of Kings Highway 10) County water tower & City power substation 6.38 acres .59 acres .19 acres 1.79 acres 18.68 acres 2.1 acres 54.58 acres 16.23 acres 57.94 acres 1.53 acres Based on this acreage breakdown, there are 11.05 acres of land in the node already developed in commercial uses, 18.68 acres currently being developed for commercial uses, and 128.74 acres which could be devel- oped for commercial uses. The existing commercial development repre- sents only 7 percent of the node acreage; the commercial development under construction represents 11.7 percent of the node acreage, and the land available for future commercial development represents 80.5 percent of the node acreage. Moreover, there are still several large parcels of land in the existing node that are available for develop- ment. A vacant 17 acre parcel and a vacant 20 acre parcel are located southwest of the Kings Highway and State Road 60 intersection. Based on the facts that less than 20 percent of the node is currently being used or developed for commercial uses and that more than 80 percent of the node is available for commercial development, staff does not feel that there is justification for enlarging the node at this time. In reviewing this request, the staff also looked at the existing node boundary to determine whether or not some shifting of the boundary was justified in order to accommodate the subject property in the existing 160 acre node. Because this node boundary was established just last April, the boundaries had been under discussion for more than a year prior to be being adopted, and the fact that the node boundary is fairly specifically described in the Comprehensive Plan, there seems to be little justification for altering the boundary. Any alteration in the boundary without an enlargement of the node would require other property to be removed from the node in order to accommodate the subject property. Based on this analysis, staff does not feel that the 160 acre Kings Highway and State Road 60 node should be enlarged at this time. Since the staff does not feel that the node should be enlarged and because the node boundaries were recently adopted, staff does not see any need to adjust the boundaries to include the subject property. If the subject property is not included in the node, then the requested CG zoning would not be conformance with the Comprehen- sive Plan because the land use designation for the subject property is LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2. Moreover, the proposed CG zoning for the subject property would allow uses that would be incompatible with the single-family development to the north. 36 goon 6 2 PA;t 428 J