11/17/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- M When the current Comprehensive Plan was approved on February 13, 1990, the plan assigned commercial uses to commercial nodes. These _nodes were designated various sizes to reflect commercial demand and were established in certain areas to incorporate lands deemed suitable for commercial development. The subject property was considered at that time and was not included in the original node configuration. Therefore, it is staff's position that there was no mistake nor oversight in the Comprehensive Plan. - A common rationale given by applicants to justify a land use change for property fronting U.S. Highway #1 and other arterial roads is that residential development of such a parcel is unfeasible. Applicants often use this reasoning to argue that designation of such property as residential constitutes a mistake in the approved plan. Historically, however, residential development has been feasible along the east side of U.S. Highway #1, and it still is. In fact, single- and multiple -family development exist in numerous places along U.S. Highway #1 in Indian River County. Changing past policy and amending the plan for. -this request would affect other residential parcels abutting U.S Highway #1. In fact, it would affect other residential parcels that have frontage along any major road. Circumstances are not substantially different for most of these parcels, and their residential designations do not constitute mistakes in the approved plan. The third criterion of policy 13.3 allows the county to amend the land use map if changes in circumstances affecting the subject property have occurred since the 1990 adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. In this case, there have been no new uses established in proximity to the subject property since the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. The circumstances affecting the subject property are generally the same as they were when the Comprehensive Plan was adopted. Therefore, the third criterion of policy 13.3 has not been met. While preparing the Comprehensive Plan, the county looked at each commercial node and determined node size based upon the amount of existing development and potential growth projected for the next twenty years within the general market area of the node. The county then adopted the node boundaries. For any of these node boundaries to be changed through a Comprehensive Plan amendment, a change in circumstance affecting the amount of developed land in that node would need to occur. In fact, Policy 1.23 of the Future Land Use Element specifically addresses that issue. - Future Land Use Policy 1.23 Policy 1.23 of the Future Land Use Element states that no node should be considered for expansion unless 708 of the land area (less rights of way) is developed or approved for development with non-agricultural and non-residential uses, unless otherwise warranted. Otherwise -warranted includes but is not limited to: • substantial changes in circumstances affecting property adjacent to a node; • instances when expansion of a node is necessary to accommodate a use (such as a regional mall) which. has substantial land area requirements and no alternative suitable site is available in existing nodes; • instances when expansion of a node is necessary to include existing adjacent non -conforming uses that cannot otherwise be eliminated; • instances when 608 to 708 of a node is developed and: 33 NV J'i 1992 BOOK 88 FAGS 0