6/18/1991 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

JUN Is 1991�,�� ,r�r , ROOK. 83 Fk,AE 18 the remedial actions specified in the compliance agreement. Changes proposed to bring the county's plan into compliance consist of revisions to the future land use plan map as well as revisions to the text, objectives and policies for several elements as shown on attachment "A". Proposed text or policy changes are indicated -by strike-throughs and underlines. Summary of Remedial Actions In order to address the DCA's objections and bring the county's plan into compliance, the county negotiated an agreement with the DCA. The main points of the compliance agreement are as follows: o Over -allocation of Residential Lands: Over -allocation of residential land was DCA's principal objection to Indian River County's comprehensive plan. According to DCA, this over -allocation could produce urban sprawl. * DCA's Position DCA's position was that the county allocated more than 11 times as many dwelling units as projected to be needed through the planning horizon (1990-2010). The DCA used the following formula'to calculate the multiplier: Multiplier = Total number of units allowed - Existing units Proiected number of units needed (1990-2010) c Total number of units allowed = Summation of units allowed for each land use category C Total number of units allowed for each land use category _ (total acreage of land in each land use category) X (maximum number of units allowed for the appropriate land use category). By using this formula, the DCA's figure showed that the county allocated more than 11 times as many dwelling units as projected to be needed. * County's Position The county -acknowledged that there was some over -allocation of residential land, but disputed the accuracy of DCA's multiplier. It is the county's position that flaws in the methodology overestimate the multiplier. These flaws are summarized below: - Historically, the county's development has not occurred at or near the maximum density allowed in each land use category, and the county predicts this trend to be continued in the future. The DCA did not consider this trend and used the maximum number of residential units allowed in each land use category to determine the multiplier. - Existing subdivisions have a much lower density than the density designated in the FLUM for the areas in which these subdivisions are located. This was not taken into account in establishing the DCA multiplier. DCA did not reduce gross acreage amounts to reflect land used for infrastructure improvements (roads, stormwater tracts); usually 25% or more of a development project acreage will be allocated for these infrastructure improvements. The 25% allowance for infrastructure improvements is a conservative figure. 38