Laserfiche WebLink
- Concurrency Management System; <br />° Required maps showing future conditions; and <br />BOOK <br />° A copy of the Comprehensive Plan adoption ordinance. <br />The advantage of this option is that there is a specific <br />differentiation between what is adopted and legally binding and <br />what is supporting. This option also makes it easier to change <br />the data sections of the plan without going through the formal <br />plan amendment process. The staff has structured the proposed <br />adoption ordinance to reflect adoption of only the required <br />Portions (adopted portions) of the comprehensive plan. <br />Of course,'the most important consideration at this hearing is the <br />set of state objections to the plan. Most of DCA's objections can <br />be classified as falling within one of several categories. These <br />can generally be defined as: technical oversights; vagueness; <br />analysis deficiencies; and policy deficiencies in the following <br />subject areas: urban sprawl, affordable housing, and <br />environmental. The attached revisions submitted for your <br />consideration fall in one of the following categories. <br />° Revisions to the goals, objectives, and policies of each <br />plan element; these goals, 'objectives and policies are <br />part of "the adopted portion of the plan"; <br />° Revisions to the land use map, which are part of "the <br />adopted portion of the plan"; and <br />° Revisions to the data and analysis sections of each <br />element. <br />Any recommended deletions to the goals, objectives, and policies <br />are noted as a 0fhA0XiY_UA passage, and any recommended additions <br />to the goals, objectives and policies are noted as underlined. <br />The remainder of the attached pages represent changes to the body <br />of the Comprehensive Plan text. These pages address misprints, <br />new additions which were not included in the submitted draft, and <br />necessary changes to the text due to revisions in the goals, <br />objectives and policies. <br />RECOMMENDATION: <br />Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the <br />revised Comprehensive Plan and direct staff to submit 5 copies of <br />the adopted plan to the State of Florida Department of Community <br />Affairs for compliance review. <br />Commissioner Scurlock needed some clarification about <br />exactly what we are doing today. <br />Chairman Eggert believed that staff's memo sets this out, <br />and Commissioner Scurlock noted that he.read it, but he did not <br />fully understand it. Apparently the policies we adopt, we then <br />transmit to DCA, and at a point, they say we are either in <br />compliance or non-compliance. If they say we are not in -compli- <br />ance, his question is whether there is a step between that and <br />the administrative hearing process. <br />24 <br />