6/7/1988 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Transportation System Parcel 1 has access to 69th St., classified as a local road by the County Thoroughfare Plan, and parcel 2 has access to Massey Road to the east and Bridge Road to the south, each classified as a local road. Environment The eastern 1100+ feet of parcel 1 are considered to be environmentally sensitive. As such, no alteration of the environmentally sensitive areas could occur unless 'those areas are determined to have been impacted. Even if impacted areas are altered, this would require 1:1 mitigation. Any fill activities - which may take place on this parcel will also require DER/Army Corp. review, and any alteration to mangrove wetlands will be covered under the mangrove protection portion of the Tree Protection Ordinance. Further, all of parcel 1 is situated within an area designated as lying within a 100 year flood plain. Parcel 2 is not designated as environmentally sensitive; however it also lies entirely within the area designated as a 100 year flood plain. Utilities Neither parcel is currently serviced by public utilities. Conclusion When reviewing a request to rezone land from a residential district to agriculture, staff must look at the potential impacts which agricultural uses may have on the surrounding area. In regard to parcel 1, even though the zoning of the surrounding parcels is residential, the predominant existing land use consists of active grove land and mosquito impoundment areas. Even if adjacent land were developed for single family use, the County Code requires that such new development provide a buffer from adjacent active agricultural operations in order to mitigate any adverse impacts of the existing agricultural operations. Such a buffer is required regardless of what the active agricultural land is zoned. The fact that any new residential development would have to provide its own buffer on its own site to protect the future residents from aerial spraying and other potential impacts associated with active agricultural operations [required by Sec. 3(1) .1 (e) (3) (f) of the Zoning Code] initiated substantial discussion by the Planning and Zoning Commission during its consideration of the item. Concern was expressed that by rezoning the subject property to the agricultural district the existing grove use could be expanded and impose the buffer requirement on adjacent residentially zoned property when it is submitted for development. Another concern was that the downzoning would reduce the property's assessed value, hence reducing ad valorum tax revenue. Staff's position is that this rezoning would make the sites' zoning designation consistent with the existing al use, groves. Since most of the land surrounding prthelpsubject properties is also currently in groves, there is no problem at present. Staff does concede, however, that should the adjacent properties submit for residential development, the buffering burden would be placed upon the developer. The rationale for JUN 71988 37 BOOK 72 FAH 536