5/5/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MAY 0 51992 Boa �6 P,% -E' 4 between -areas of higher residential densities and areas of higher agricultural uses. • DCA's third principal objection to the, proposed amendment focussed on the lack of data and analysis to document that the county had coordinated with -the City of Fellsmere regarding this plan amendment request. While DCA correctly noted that the staff report did not reference coordination with the City of Fellsmere, it should be noted that county planning staff did coordinate with the City during the review and analysis of this amendment request. To address DCA's objections, planning staff has revised the staff report to document its coordination actions with the City of Fellsmere. It is staffs position that the changes referenced above not only address DCA.'s three principal objections to the proposed amendment but also address ORC Report objections relating to state plan and regional plan inconsistencies. Concurrency of Public Facilities This site is not located within the County Urban Service Area (USA); therefore, this area is not deemed suited for urban scale development. Future Land Use Policy 3.2 states that "no development shall be approved unless it is consistent with the concurrency management system in the Capital Improvements Element". Thus, all proposed development must be reviewed for impacts on public services and facilities. The comprehensive plan establishes standards for: Transportation, Potable Water, Wastewater, Solid Waste, Drainage, and Recreation (Future Land Use Policy 3.1). The adequate provision of these services is necessary to ensure the continued quality of life enjoyed by the community. The comprehensive plan also requires that new development be reviewed to ensure that the minimum level of service standards for these services and facilities are maintained. As per Section 910.07 of the County's Land Development Regulations, conditional concurrency review is required for comprehensive plan amendments and rezoning requests. Conditional concurrency review examines the available capacity of each facility with respect to a proposed project. Since comprehensive plan amendments and rezoning requests are not projects, county regulations call for the concurrency review to be based upon the most intense use of the subject property based upon the requested zoning district or land use designation. For residential comprehensive plan amendment requests, the most intense use (according to the county's LDR's) is the maximum number of units that could be built on the site, given the size of the property and the maximum density under the proposed land use designation. The site information used for the concurrency analysis is as follows: 1. Size of Property: 1888 acres 2. Size of Area to be Redesignated: 1888 acres 3. Existing Zoning Classification: A-1, Agricultural District, (up to 1 unit/5 acres) 4. Existing Land Use Designation: AG -2, Agricultural -2, (up to 1 unit/10 acres) 5. Proposed Land Use Classification: AG -1, Agricultural -1 (up to 1 unit/5 acres) 6. Maximum Number of Units for Proposed Plan Amendment: 1176 Units 90