11/17/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r"- Oo®K �J V Pa�F 74 NOV 17 1992 Development of the Subject Property Each lot comprising the subject 'property is appropriate for a single-family home as allowed under the current land use designation and zoning. Single-family homes are already on four of the six lots. The northern -most parcel could comfortably accommodate a house on the western half of the lot, facing 10th avenue. Vegetation and/or a fence could buffer this property from commercial uses to the north and east. The other parcels are surrounded by residential uses. These parcels face land that is commercially designated but used as a Mobile Home Park, a residential use. If the owner was so inclined, the southern -most parcel could accommodate a house facing 8th Street -and the single-family neighborhood to the south. Alternatives There are three alternatives which the Board of County Commissioners can take concerning this request. The first is to deny transmittal -of this amendment to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA). Staff supports this alternative. The second alternative is to approve transmittal of this amendment to the DCA for their review. The third alternative is to deny transmittal of the land use amendment, but rezone the land to a more intense use allowed under the present, L-21 land use designation. Practically, this would allow multiple -family zoning, such as RM -6, without allowing an increase in density. If the property owners consolidate their separate parcels, an RM -6 zoning designation would allow multi- family development on the subject property. Conclusion The subject property is located in an area designated for low density single-family residential development. With its present zoning and land use designation, the subject property is compatible with the surrounding single-family development. With the requested zoning and land use designation, it would not be. Historically, Old Dixie Highway has been the boundary between residential land uses on its west side and commercial land uses on its east side. In evaluating this request for a land use amendment and rezoning, the staff has determined that the request is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. There was no oversight or mistake in the approved plan, nor has there been a change in circumstances affecting the subject property, which would warrant _approval of a comprehensive plan amendment. In addition, approval of the subject request would promote strip commercial development along the west side of Old Dixie Highway. Despite the Planning and Zoning Commission's 3-2 vote in favor of the proposed land use amendment, staff does not support the request to change the site's current land use designation for the reasons stated above. Recommendation Based on its analysis, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners deny transmittal of this land use amendment to the Department of Community Affairs and deny the request to rezone. 70 IN s � _I