Laserfiche WebLink
information to do this. Based upon tax and use codes, staff <br />determined which parcels were developed with non-agricultural and <br />non-residential uses, and then calculated the acreage of these <br />parcels. Using this method, staff determined that the total non - <br />agriculturally and non -residentially used, developed acreage in the <br />node was 16.11 acres. <br />With only 16.11 acres in the node developed with non-agricultural <br />and non-residential uses, the node is considered to be <br />approximately 8% developed. This percentage indicates that there <br />is no need to increase the amount of commercial/industrial <br />designated lands in this portion of the county. Since 8% is much <br />less than 70%, expansion of this node at this time is premature, <br />and this amendment request is inconsistent with Future Land Use <br />Policy 1.23. <br />- Future Land Use Objective 1 and Policy 4.1 <br />Future Land Use Objective 1 and Policy 4.1 state that the county <br />will have an efficient and compact land use pattern which reduces <br />urban sprawl. An overallocation of C/I designated land is an <br />indication of urban sprawl. Currently, the county -has <br />approximately 5,500 acres of C/I designated land. Based on <br />population projections, only 2,800 acres of the C/I designated land <br />will be needed for the county by the year 2010, leaving <br />approximately 2,700 excess acres of C/I designated land. This fact <br />indicates that no additional C/I designated land is needed at <br />present. As proposed, the subject amendment would add to the <br />excess of C/I designated land, thereby increasing urban sprawl. <br />For that reason, this amendment request is inconsistent with Future <br />Land Use Objective 1 and Policy 4.1. <br />- Future Land Use Policy 1.20 <br />Future Land Use Policy 1.20 states that node size shall be based on <br />population and other demand characteristics within the general <br />market area of the node. Since there is already a sufficient <br />amount of land within the subject node to serve its general market <br />area, enlarging the subject node at this time is premature. <br />Therefore, this amendment request is inconsistent with Future Land <br />Use Policy 1.20. <br />- Future Land Use Policy 1.21 <br />The proposed land use change would also be inconsistent with Future <br />Land Use Policy 1.21. This policy states that node boundaries are <br />designed to eliminate strip commercial development and urban <br />sprawl, and to provide for maximum -use of transportation and public <br />facilities. Staff feels that a change in the subject property's <br />land use designation would contradict Future Land Use Policy 1.21 <br />by creating a long, narrow, unbroken strip of C/I designated land <br />fronting U.S. #1. Additionally, this land is not substantially <br />different from other residentially zoned land along U.S. #1. <br />Granting this request would provide an impetus for other property <br />owners to submit comprehensive plan amendment requests for a <br />commercial/ industrial land use designation. The result would be <br />strip commercial development all along the east side of U.S. #1. <br />This directly contradicts Future Land Use Policy 1.21. <br />- Future Land Use Policy 1.24 <br />Future Land Use Policy 1.24 states that any property redesignated <br />commercial through a land use plan amendment shall revert to its <br />former designation if construction on the site has not commenced <br />within a two year period, unless such timeframe is modified by the <br />Board of County Commissioners as part of a development agreement. <br />This policy decreases land speculation, and helps ensure that <br />demand for additional C/I designated land is present before <br />requests to expand nodes are approved. This policy also allows for <br />61 <br />MAY 51993 BOOK �� P,q;F 669 <br />