1/19/1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The subject request essentially raises the issue of where the division between more and less intense uses should occur. Because the applicant has chosen the PD option, however, the issue is narrowed to whether or not the development project proposed by the applicant is appropriate for the subject site. eFuture Land Use Map Pattern The subject property is currently designated C/I, Commercial/ Industrial,, on the future land use map, as are the properties east and west of the subject site, as well as the Ryanwodd Shopping Center northwest of the site. The residentially _zoned property to the north of the subject site is designated L-2 on the future land use map, and the property to the south is designated L-1. The L-2 designation permits residential uses with a density up to 6 units per acre, while the L-1 designation permits residential uses up to 3 units per acre. •Zoning District Differences The substantive differences between the site's current CL/CG zoning and the PD zoning proposed for the subject property are that the proposed PD rezoning: sets no limits on the size of an individual department store (CL limits individual department stores to 40,000 square feet) . specifically allows only retail uses on the site (the CL and CG districts allow a wide range of uses such as automotive sales, hotels and motels), and - requires buffering and landscaping that is more extensive than that required of CL/CG conventional site plan developments. All other size and dimensional criteria in the proposed PD zoning district are either equal to or are more restrictive than the CL/CG zoning district standards, as previously described in this report. •Concurrency of Public Services: As per section 910.07(2) of the Concurrency Management Chapter of the county's land development regulations, projects which do not increase density or intensity of use are exempt from concurrency requirements. By changing the zoning of the subject property from CL and CG to PD, various uses (department stores over 40,000 square feet) currently not permitted would be allowed on the site. However, because the most intense use of the property would be the same in all of the districts, changing the property's zoning from CL and CG to PD will not create additional impact on any concurrency facilities. The rezoning request then is exempt from concurrency review because the requested zoning would not increase the intensity of use of the site; instead, the rezoning will only change the form that commercial development could take. Concurrency, however, is an issue with respect to the conceptual and preliminary PD requests associated with the PD rezoning. Concurrency and traffic impact issues are addressed in the PD plan analysis section of this staff report. 31 BOOK S FA;F L_JAN1 199