My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7/17/1990
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1990
>
7/17/1990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:02:45 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 9:11:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
07/17/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
67
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
L F <br />BOOK 80 FA- 3 <br />A second range of alternatives would be to examine the <br />applicability of another zoning district. The initial application <br />requested the RM -10 District. Staff raised several concerns <br />relating to the compatibility and concurrency of traffic facilities <br />in the review of this request. Staff subsequently determined that <br />a reduction from 10 units/acre to 6 units/acre would eliminate <br />these concerns and recommended accordingly. The applicant has also <br />amended the request to the lower density. Since the surrounding <br />residential -areas are predgminately"'zoned for 6 units per acre or <br />more, staff does not consider it necessary to further reduce the <br />zoning density. <br />The third alternative relates to the intensity of zoning or <br />permitted dwelling type. The M-2 District is intended for higher <br />densities than are generally found in the county as a whole and is <br />used primarily for multi -family housing. The highest single family <br />density is 6 units per acre. The presence of existing single <br />family residences to the north must be considered. Through the <br />site plan or PRD process, buffers would be reviewed. A more <br />drastic option would be to maintain an area of single family zoning <br />along this boundary so that any transition would occur on-site. <br />This option was used at Grove Isle where that development abutted <br />existing single-family development. <br />Conclusion <br />The requested zoning is consistent with the future land use map and <br />policies of the comprehensive plan. There are, however, concerns <br />including the compatibility with existing development and <br />transportation concurrency. The reduction in the requested density <br />reduces these issues and problems to a managable level. In <br />addition, these issues will be fully addressed during either site <br />plan or PRD review. The issue of environmental compatibility is <br />not so easily resolved, however, the comprehensive plan policies <br />place restrictions on use and promote public purchase of <br />environmentally important properties. All issues considered, staff <br />concludes that the rezoning of this property would be appropriate. <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />Based on the analysis performed, <br />of County Commissioners approve <br />the RM -6 District. <br />Attachments <br />staff recommends that the Board <br />the rezoning of this property to <br />1. Application <br />2. Location Map <br />3. Ordinance <br />4. Minutes of May 10, 1990, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. <br />21 <br />W <br />Approved Agenda Item: <br />For: -7 -1"7-10 <br />BPa. <br />S --� <br />11 i <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.