04/09/2013AP - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

recommended that the application be denied. At its October 25, 2012 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission considered and voted unanimously to table the applicant's small scale land use amendment and rezoning request (see attachment#3). After the October meeting,the applicant and staff met to discuss the property. At that time, staff acknowledged that limited commercial uses would be appropriate for the site, but a new commercial node would not. With that in mind, staff indicated that the applicant could do a mixed use project on the site. To address some of the applicant's concerns, staff indicated that it could support minor changes to the comprehensive plan's mixed use policy. As a result, staff and the applicant agreed to the subject text amendment changes referenced above. If adopted, those changes will allow the applicant to develop his C.R. 510/661h Avenue properly as a mixed use PD in a manor acceptable to the applicant and staff. Consequently, this .text amendment replaces the applicant's previous commercial land use re-designation and rezoning request for property at the northeast corner of C.R. 510 and 66th Avenue. Planninix and Zoning Commission Action On March 14, 2013, the Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC)voted 5 —0 to recommend that the Board approve this comprehensive plan text amendment request with the following two changes. The first change involves the percent of the total mixed use project site that can be developed with commercial uses. Currently,sites with L-1 or L-2 land use designations have a lower percentage(20%) of commercial allowances than sites designated M-1 or M-2 (25%). After considering the proposed amendment,the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that L-1 and L-2 sites be allowed the same commercial percentage that M-1 and M-2 sites are allowed.The second change recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission is to allow up to 3 acres or 50%of total allowed commercial area, which ever is greater,to be developed prior to construction of any residential development. Those two changes are analyzed in this report and have been incorporated into the text amendment proposal now under consideration. ANALYSIS When staff drafted Future Land use Element Policy 5.6, the mixed use policy adopted as part of the county's 2010 EAR based comprehensive plan amendments,the policy was structured to be somewhat restrictive. As such, the policy limited the allowable uses in a mixed use project, established timing requirements for permitting and constructing commercial square footage, required certain design elements, and imposed various other restrictions and limitations. In terms of uses, mixed use projects are permitted to have uses comparable to those allowed in the neighborhood commercial (CN) zoning district. As with the CN district, the mixed use regulations prohibit gasoline service stations. Unlike the CN district, however, the county's mixed use policy prohibits fuel sales. Besides the use limitations, development timing restrictions also apply to mixed use projects. Those restrictions were structured to ensure that commercial portions of mixed use �-- projects were not built without the residential component being constructed. Both the use and timing provisions of the mixed use regulations are the subject of this text amendment. 3 17