My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5/5/1992
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1992
>
5/5/1992
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:03:31 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 10:56:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
05/05/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
151
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
F_ <br />MAY 0 5 1992 <br />80pp //�� yy <br />00 FrlllE d�, <br />Potential Impact on Environmental Quality _0 <br />The subject property is located within floodplain zone AE. Being <br />within an AE zone, the property is subject to the provisions of <br />Conservation Element Policy 4.3. Conservation Policy 4.3 of the <br />Comprehensive Plan states that the lands within flood prone areas <br />shall have a low residential density, up to three units to the <br />acre. Since the requested land use designation for the subject <br />property is R -Rural and that land use designation allows <br />development at a maximum density of 1 dwelling unit to the acre, <br />the applicant's request would be consistent with Conservation <br />Policy 4.3. <br />While staff has concern regarding any potential increase in the <br />allowable residential density within a floodplain, there does not <br />appear to bea problem with the subject request. Not only is the <br />proposed density substantially less than the maximum allowed by <br />policy 4.3, but other requirements, including county stormwater <br />management rules and Indian River Farms Water Control District <br />regulations, will further mitigate any potential impact. <br />Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan <br />Land use amendment requests are reviewed for consistency with all <br />policies of the comprehensive plan. As per section 800.07(1) of <br />the County Code, the "Comprehensive Plan may be amended only in <br />such a way as to preserve the internal consistency of the plan <br />pursuant to Section 163.3177(2)F.S." Amendments must also show <br />consistency with the overall designation of land uses as,depicted <br />on the Future Land Use Map. These land uses include agricultural, <br />residential, recreation, conservation, and commercial and <br />industrial land uses. <br />The goals, objectives and policies are the most important parts of <br />the Comprehensive Plan. Policies are statements in the plan which <br />identify the actions which the county will take in order to direct <br />the community's development. As courses of action committed to by <br />the county, policies provide the basis for all county land <br />development related decisions - including plan amendment decisions. <br />While all comprehensive plan policies are important, some have more <br />applicability than others in reviewing plan amendment requests. Of <br />particular applicability are the following policies. <br />-Future Land Use Policy 13.3 <br />In evaluating a land use amendment request, the most important <br />consideration is Future Land Use Element Policy 13.3. This policy <br />requires that one of three criteria be met in order to approve a <br />land use amendment request. These criteria are: <br />* a substantial change in circumstances affecting the <br />subject property <br />* a mistake in the approved comprehensive plan, or <br />* an oversight in the approved.comprehensive plan. <br />Based upon staff's analysis, the subject land use amendment request <br />meets one of the three criteria and is therefore consistent with <br />policy 13.3. <br />The first criterion of Policy 13.3 allows the county to amend the <br />land use map if changes in circumstances affecting the subject <br />property have occurred since the 1990 adoption of the comprehensive <br />plan. Such changes could relate to the property itself, such as <br />unforeseen adjacent incompatible uses being established, or <br />significant changes in adjacent development patterns having <br />occurred. In this case, the densities of surrounding properties <br />have not changed, and no incompatible uses have been established. <br />There has also not been any new development in the area to <br />adversely affect the subject property. <br />F_� <br />74 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.