7/27/1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

JUL 271993 (see attachment 2). With this approach, the issue of service extension to lands adjacent to roads serving as urban service area boundaries and having utility lines within their rights-of-way can be resolved. At the same time, the geographic scope of the utility service extension can be limited, and any expansion would necessarily occur in a logical and rational manner. Of the two options for revising the policy prohibiting the extension of utility service outside of the USA, staff would recommend the one narrower in scope. As with the other alternatives for addressing the utility service/corridor issue, the change in policy 5.9 would require an amendment to the comprehensive plan. Given the alternatives referenced in the staff report for the June 22, 1993 Board of County Commissioners meeting and the options reflected in this memorandum, there appear to be several broad choices available to the Board, with several variations of each choice possible. The choices are: C No Action C Expand USA and redesignate land C Expand USA with no redesignation C Amend comprehensive plan policies prohibiting the extension of urban services outside of the USA (no USA expansion nor redesignation) Each of these alternatives and their variations are discussed in either this staff report or the report prepared for the June 221 1993 Board meeting. It is staff's position that the best alternative would be to expand the USA by 2280 acres and redesignate that land from AG -1 to R. Since any option other than the no action alternative requires a comprehensive plan amendment, the statutory amendment process will need to be followed. That process prohibits local governments from amending their comprehensive plans more than twice in each calendar year. Since Indian River County implements that requirement by accepting comprehensive plan amendment applications during the months of January and July, whichever amendment option chosen by the Board of County Commissioners can be processed with the July set of plan amendments. RECONNENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners consider the alternatives identified in this agenda item and the report prepared for the June 22, 1993 Board meeting, choose an alternative, and direct staff to process a comprehensive plan amendment to enact the chosen alternative. Staff recommends that the Board choose the alternative of expanding the USA by 2280 acres and redesignating that land from AG -1 to R. Commissioner Eggert asked, and Director Keating clarified that if the Board decided that policies 5.9 of the two sub -elements were changed to the quarter mile option, those people within that quarter mile fringe would not be redesignated or rezoned merely by that policy change; they would still have to request expansion of the urban service area and request land use redesignation and rezoning for their property. The excluded Oslo Corridor also would have those requirements. 16