Laserfiche WebLink
for secondary wage earners currently unable to find jobs. For <br />these reasons, the proposed amendment is consistent with Economic <br />Development Objective 1. <br />As part of the staff analysis, all policies in the comprehensive <br />plan were considered. Based on this analysis, staff determined <br />that the proposed amendment is consistent with the comprehensive <br />plan. <br />Alternatives <br />With respect to this request, the Board of County Commissioners has <br />two alternatives. Those alternatives are: <br />1. Deny the request to redesignate and rezone the subject <br />property. <br />2. Approve transmittal of the proposed amendment to DCA for its <br />review. <br />Based on the analysis performed, staff supports alternative #2. <br />Transmittal Alternatives <br />In its 1993 session, the state legislature changed the statute <br />regulating amendments of local government comprehensive plans. <br />These changes were approved as part of the ELMS (Environmental Land <br />Management Study) bill. <br />With respect to the transmittal of proposed plan amendments to DCA, <br />the principal change has.been to provide local governments with the <br />opportunity to have minor amendments or amendments with few impacts <br />considered in a shorter time period. -As provided by the ELMS <br />changes, a local government, as part of its transmittal, may <br />request that DCA conduct an expedited review of a proposed plan <br />amendment. This can speed up the process for some amendment <br />requests, but lengthen the process for other proposed amendments. <br />Under the old amendment review procedure, DCA had 90 days to review <br />a plan amendment request (this included obtaining other agencies' <br />review comments) and send its ORC (Objections, Recommendations, and <br />Comments) Report back to the County. The legislature reduced this <br />90 day review time to 60 days. Regarding the subject request, the <br />60 day timeframe applies if the County opts to request that DCA <br />review the proposed amendment in generally the same manner as has <br />been done in the past. <br />If, however, the Board feels that the proposed amendment has <br />insignificant impacts and is generally non -controversial, the Board <br />may request that DCA and the other reviewing agencies not conduct <br />a full review of the proposed amendment. In that case, the review <br />process may be quicker (45 days vs. 60 days for a regular review) <br />if the various reviewing agencies agree that the amendment has <br />insignificant impacts. If the agencies and DCA agree that a <br />proposed amendment does not warrant a full review, DCA notifies the <br />County that the amendment may be approved without change. <br />Requesting an expedited review does not, however, guarantee a <br />shorter review timeframe. In opting to transmit a proposed <br />amendment to DCA with an expedited review request, the County takes <br />the risk that at least one of the reviewing agencies (state <br />agencies, regional planning council, water management district, <br />other local governments, or affected persons) will request a full <br />review of the amendment. These agencies have 45 days to decide <br />whether an amendment request needs a full review. If one or more <br />47 <br />MAR ®11994 91 PAGE 8.94 <br />