03/07/2017 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

commercial development. Staff notes that the County's limited experience with mixed use projects fronting SR 60 (Pointe West and The Reserve at Vero) indicates that commercial development may actually lag the residential development. In developing the proposed modifications to the mixed use policy, staff coordinated with IRSC staff and the adjacent land owner and his project engineer and attorney. Through that process, the proposed amendment went through several revisions and is currently in a form consistent with the Board's direction and acceptable to IRSC and the adjacent property owner. If adopted, the proposed Policy 5.6 changes will accommodate the mixed use PD concept discussed by IRSC, the adjacent land owner, and staff but will leave the Board as the ultimate decision -maker for any specific mixed use PD project proposal. Any project -specific decision will be made through the PD review and approval process which will involve a public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission and a public hearing before the Board. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan Comprehensive Plan amendment requests are reviewed for consistency with all applicable policies of the comprehensive plan. As per section 800.07(1) of the county code, the "Comprehensive Plan may only be amended in such a way as to preserve the internal consistency of the plan. For a proposed amendment to be consistent with the plan, the amendment must be consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan. Policies are statements in the plan, which identify actions the county will take in order to direct the community's development. As courses of action committed to by the county, policies provide the basis for all county land development related decisions -including plan amendment decisions. While all comprehensive plan objectives and policies are important, some have more applicability than others in reviewing plan amendment requests. Of particular applicability for this request is Policy 14.3. Future Land Use Element Policy 14.3 In evaluating a comprehensive plan amendment request, the most important consideration is Future Land Use Element Policy 14.3. This policy requires that one of four criteria be met in order to approve a comprehensive plan amendment request. These criteria are: • The proposed amendment will correct an oversight in the approved plan; • The proposed amendment will correct a mistake in the approved plan; • The proposed amendment is warranted based on a substantial change in circumstances; or • The proposed amendment involves a swap or reconfiguration of land use designations at separate sites, and that swap or reconfiguration will not increase the overall land use density or intensity depicted on the Future Land Use Map. In this case, the proposed comprehensive plan amendment meets Policy 14.3's first and third criteria. When policy 5.6 was adopted, the policy was structured to be too restrictive. In retrospect, it appears that restricting development size and restricting development timing to the extent that the current policy 5.6 does so was an oversight with respect to the special area adjacent to IRSC and the SR60 and 66�h Avenue intersection. Due to that oversight, the existing policy does not adequately provide 0 P170