3/15/1988 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Transportation System The subject property will have access to 74th Avenue, classified as a primary collector on the County's Thoroughfare Plan; 82nd Avenue, classified as a secondary collector; and 5th Street S.W. to the north, also classified as a secondary collector. The eventual build -out will have a substantial impact on the thoroughfare system; however, the level of service on the existing roads in the area is currently at a level of service "A", and each has a large percentage of unutilized capacity remaining. Any development impacts on the transportation system will be addressed during the site plan or subdivision review and approval process. Environment This area is not designated as environmentally sensitive nor is it in a flood prone area. Utilities The area is not currently serviced by public water and wastewater systems. However, this area is within a service area for the Southwest Regional Wastewater plant situated on 8th Street West of 82nd Avenue. This service area encompasses from 26th Street to the North, South to Oslo Road, and from I-95 East to 43rd Avenue. Eventually this plant will be a 4MGD treatment facility. Phase two is scheduled to commence in the next two to three years. Phase two will expand the facility to a 2MGD system. ANALYSIS The Regional Planning Council has through the State Department of Community Affairs expressed concern that the change of land use of this parcel could lead to leap frog development and not utilize public facilities and infrastructure to their fullest. Although the Council did not formally object to this proposed amendment, it indicated that the proposed amendment was not consistent with its urban service area policy. Basically, this policy requires that any new urban type development be located within an urban service area that is, or will concurrent develop- ment be, provided with the full range of urban services. According to the Regional Planning Council's policies, development at interstate interchanges should be limited to uses necessary to serve the interstate, ie. gas stations, motels, restaurants, and other similar uses. Unless the interchange is within an urban service area, major employment or residential development should not be located there. The intent of this policy is to create a compact development pattern, reducing urban sprawl, leap -frog development, inefficient growth patterns, and other characteristics. The Regional Planning Council chose only to comment on, rather than object to, the proposed amendment for several reasons. First, the County's existing comprehensive plan has not yet been updated to comply with the 1985 growth management act and there- fore has not had to meet requirements of consistency with regional policies. Second, the staff indicated that urban services are programmed for the area in the future. And, third, there was no project proposed for the site necessitating the action. For the proposed amendment, the DCA/Regional Planning Council comments do not affect the Board's decision. Although the comments demonstrate inconsistency with the Council's policy, the proposed amendment does comply with County policy. As proposed, the amendment is located in an area with sufficient traffic capacity; it will not create strip commercial development; it will not result in the creation of incompatible land uses; and it 71 MAR 15 1988 BOOK - 71 PAGE 240