Laserfiche WebLink
A U G 14 1990 <br />- Solid Waste <br />'ROOK 8 ,;E 8 1 -7 <br />Solid waste service includes pick-up by private operator and <br />disposal at the county landfill. The active segment of the <br />landfill has a 5 year remaining capacity, and the landfill has <br />expansion capacity beyond 2010. The solid waste department has <br />determined that this rezoning would not negatively impact solid <br />waste services. ' <br />- Drainage <br />All development is reviewed for compliance with county stormwater <br />regulations which require onsite retention, preservation of flood <br />plain storage and minimum finished floor elevations. In addition, <br />development proposals will have to meet the discharge requirements <br />of the Indian River Farms Drainage District. Together, these <br />regulations limit the potential for onsite and off-site flooding <br />and damage. A preliminary drainage review by the Public Works <br />Department has not revealed any drainage deficiency. <br />- Recreation <br />A review of county recreation facilities and projected demand as <br />a result of this rezoning indicate that adopted levels of service <br />will be maintained. The table below illustrates the additional' <br />park space that would be needed for the proposed rezoningand the <br />existing surplus acreage by park type. This indicates that no <br />additional park space will be needed. <br />Project Demand <br />Park Type (Acres) Surplus Acreage <br />Urban District <br />1.76 <br />222 <br />Community <br />0.44 <br />77 <br />Beach <br />0.53 <br />38 <br />River <br />0.53 <br />14 <br />ANALYSIS <br />The proposed zoning change represents a substantial increase in the <br />density and a change in use. In assessing this request, three <br />major issues must be addressed,, compatibility with the surrounding <br />area, consistency with the comprehensive plan and concurrency of <br />the public facilities. <br />The State Road 60 corridor is experiencing rapid development. This <br />is largely due to the availability of public utilities and easy <br />road access. Since multi -family developments undergo either site <br />plan or PRD review, specific buffering and compatibility concerns <br />would be addressed at that time. <br />Compatibility is not a major concern for this property. It is <br />likely that any additional development along S.R. 60 would be of <br />a similar intensity or density. The residential developments to <br />the east and west are compatible with the multifamily designation. <br />The agricultural development to the south is also compatible but <br />the county code does require the placement of additional setbacks <br />and buffers along active agricultural operation. <br />The multi -family zoning would also be compatible with existing <br />zoning and large scale development in the S.R. 60 corridor. <br />A review of this rezoning with the future land use map and <br />policies, as well as the policies of the other plan elements, does <br />not reveal any inconsistency. The rezoning would further the <br />housing element objectives of providing a diversity of housing <br />types and densities. Residential development of the corridor would <br />also facilitate the non-residential development of the Kings <br />Highway and I-95 commercial nodes. <br />29 <br />M M M <br />