9/4/1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

2. There was virtually no comment on our proposal to change the agricultural density west of 1-95 to 1 unit per 10 acres. The DCA staff seemed satisfied with this approach and did not ask for anything more on that Issue.. 3. Virtually all the discussion over the day and a half we spent with DCA Involved the issue of allocating 11.6 times more land area for urban development than is •projected to be needed over the next 20 years. I presented the proposal to roll back the 25% increase in urban population allocations under. our new plan by returning to the land uses as they eiiisted on our 1985 plan for the urban fringe area. Mr. Keating argued strenuously the entire first day for retention of certain aspects of our current plan. As a result of this, on day two the DCA staff presented a map which reflected a compromise between our existing plan and a total rollback to the 1985 plan. The solution DCA staff suggested allowed the corridor between the 1-95 nodes of Oslo Road and S.R. 60 to be developed as an•urban corridor between 82nd Avenue and 1-95. They also recommended densities of 1 unit per acre north of C.R. 510 immediately south of the City of Sebastian. The DCA's main objection and recommendation was to bring the agricultural zoning district east to approxi- mately mid -way between King's Highway and 66th Avenue In the central county and to expand AG in the south county. One objective was to put existing citrus groves within the agricultural district. By pulling in the urban service area in this vicinity, it also addresses the concerns they have with our water/sewer connection matrix. They were very uncomfortable with that matrix because people leapfrog within the urban service area where no public facilities exist presently. By pulling in the urban service area, these concerns with our water/sewer connection policies.are minimized. CONCLUSION We left Tallahassee with the understanding that we would present .the results of the negotiations to our Board of County Commissioners and that the DCA staff would present the results to Secretary Pelham. The next step is to hold a public hearing for the purpose of the Board approving a stipulated settlement agreement with DCA which would set out t e specific amendments to the land use map and the .comprehensive plan document itself. If both the Board and the Secretary approve the agreement, it would then be the County'!s responsibility to hold a transmittal public hearing within 60 days, regarding plan amendments which accomplish the remedial actions and plan amendments set out in the agreement. The Department would then review the transmitted plan amendments to see that they are consistent with the agreement, make their comments, and then the Board would hold a final adoption hearing on the remedial plan amendments. Both parties would reserve their right to an administrative hearing (asking for a continuance until the remedial action can be accomplished). If the remedial action is accom- plished pursuant to the agreement, DCA would then recommend that the Governor and Capinet find the plan, as amended, in compliance. RECOMMENDATION Authorize the staff to September 25, 1990, for stipulated settlement specific -.land use map and remedial actions. L_ SEP 04 1990 advertise for a public hearing on the Board to consider approving the agreement, which would include all changes and specific policy changes 50 6", ROOK