My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7/21/1992 (2)
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1992
>
7/21/1992 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:03:32 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 11:09:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Special Call Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
07/21/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
49
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
JUL M V992 GOOK 81 rAUE 4S <br />DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS <br />This is a county initiated request to rezone approximately 210,364 <br />acres of land within the unincorporated portion of Indian River <br />County. The purpose of this request is to rezone all parcels which <br />currently have zoning classifications inconsistent with their <br />corresponding land use designations. Those parcels proposed for <br />rezoning are shown on attachment 4. <br />The Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development <br />Regulation Act of 1985 not only requires that each local government <br />in the state prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; it also <br />mandates that within one year of submission of its plan each <br />jurisdication must "adopt or amend and enforce land development <br />regulations that are consistent with and implement their adopted <br />comprehensive plan". <br />By adopting its land development regulations on September 11, 1990, <br />Indian River County achieved substantial compliance with the Act's <br />implementation requirement. One aspect of making the land <br />development regulations consistent, however, was not undertaken at <br />that time. That aspect involves the administrative rezoning of <br />property to make the zoning designation of each parcel in the <br />county consistent with its land use plan designation. <br />The reason that the rezoning issue was not addressed when the land <br />development regulations were prepared relates to the status of the <br />county's comprehensive plan. Although the plan was adopted in <br />February, 1990, the plan was not found in compliance by the state <br />until August, 1991. During the period between adoption and <br />compliance, the staff realized that substantial changes in the <br />adopted plan would probably be required to achieve compliance. In <br />fact, major land use changes were made as part of the compliance <br />process. <br />With the knowledge that plan amendments to achieve compliance would <br />result in major changes, the staff opted not to initiate the <br />administrative rezoning process until the plan had been found in <br />compliance. Now that the plan is in compliance, the county must <br />undertake the administrative rezoning process. <br />Once the comprehensive plan was found in compliance, the staff <br />undertook an analysis to determine the magnitude of these <br />rezonings. This analysis involved a comparison of the adopted <br />future land use map with the county's official zoning atlas. In <br />undertaking this effort, the staff compared the zoning designation <br />to the land use designation for every parcel in the county. <br />Through this process, the staff not only determined the number of <br />parcels and amount of acreage to be affected by the administrative <br />rezonings, but also identified each affected parcel by tax parcel <br />identification number as well as by current and proposed zoning <br />designations. <br />Based upon the analysis, staff has determined that approximately <br />2,132 parcels will need to be administratively rezoned. While that <br />represents only about two percent of all parcels in the county, the <br />acreage amount is more substantial. Staff estimates that <br />approximately 210,364 of the county's 318,000 acres will be <br />affected by the administrative rezonings. <br />Most of the acreage and slightly more than half of the parcels <br />involved are situated west of I-95: This is because the county's <br />adopted land use plan assigns almost all land west of I-95 to <br />designations with densities of either 1 unit/10 acres, 1 u^it/ 20 <br />acres, or no density (conservation areas owned by the St. Johns <br />River Water Management District), whereas the lowest density <br />residential zoning district presently applied to these areas is 1 <br />unit/five acres. 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.