My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/11/1990
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1990
>
12/11/1990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:02:47 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 10:02:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/11/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
152
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
Fr- I <br />DEC 111990 <br />Multiplier = Total number of units allowed - Existing units <br />Projected number of units needed (1990-2010) <br />O Total number of units allowed = Summation of units <br />allowed for each land use category <br />c Total number of units allowed for each land use category <br />= (total acreage of land in each land use category) X <br />(maximum number of units allowed for the appropriate land <br />use category). <br />By using this formula, the DCA's figure showed that the county <br />allocated more than 11 times as many dwelling units as <br />projected to be needed. <br />* County's Position <br />The county acknowledged that there was some over -allocation of <br />residential land, but disputed the accuracy of DCA's <br />multiplier. It is the county's position that flaws in the <br />methodology overestimate the multiplier. These flaws are <br />summarized below: <br />Historically, the county's development has not occurred <br />at or near the maximum density allowed in each land use <br />category, and the county predicts this trend to be <br />continued in the future. The DCA did not consider this <br />trend and used the maximum number of residential units <br />allowed in each land use category to determine the <br />multiplier. <br />Existing subdivisions have a much lower density than the <br />density designated in the FLUM for the areas in which <br />these subdivisions are located. This was not taken into <br />account in establishing the DCA multiplier. <br />DCA did not reduce gross acreage amounts to reflect land <br />used for infrastructure improvements (roads, stormwater <br />tracts); usually 25% or more of a development project <br />acreage will be allocated for these infrastructure <br />improvements. The 25% allowance for infrastructure <br />improvements is a conservative figure. <br />It is the county's position that the multiplier would be more <br />accurate if the formula was revised to be as follows: <br />Total number of units allowed = (net net acreage of <br />lands for each land use category) X (maximum number <br />of units allowed for that land use category) + <br />(existing number of lots/units in the major <br />subdivisions). <br />c Net net acreage = (total acreage of land in each <br />land use category) - (acreage designated for <br />commercial/industrial, recreational and <br />institutional) - (25% for infrastructure <br />improvements) -(acreage of existing major <br />subdivisions). <br />* Compromise Position <br />To reduce the 'over -al location of residential land, DCA and <br />Indian River County identified various amendments to Indian <br />River County's plan which would reduce the number_ of dwelling <br />units that could be built. These amendments are depicted on <br />the Future Land Use Plan Map and are generally as follows: <br />44 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.