10/16/2001 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

For this reason , the subject request can be characterized differently from most plan amendments . Typically , plan amendments involve increases in allowable density or intensity of development . As such , the typical amendment would result in impacts to public facilities and changes to land use patterns . Consequently , both the county comprehensive plan and state policy dictate that a high standard of review is required for typical plan amendments .This standard of review requires justification for the proposed change based upon adequate data and analysis . The subject amendment, however, differs significantly from a typical plan amendment request . Instead of proposing a density or intensity increase , the subject amendment involves only a locational shift in future land uses and an overall decrease in land use intensity . These different types of plan amendments warrant different standards of review . Since the typical type of amendment can be justified only by challenging the projections , need assessments , and standards used to prepare the original plan , a high standard of review is justified . For amendments involving just shifts in land uses and no intensity/density increase , less justification is necessary . This recognizes that no single land use plan map is correct and that many variations may conform to accepted land use principles and meet established plan policies . In fact , in March 1998 , the county amended its comprehensive plan to allow land use designation swaps . " At that time , Future Land Use Element Policy 14 . 3 was amended to specifically allow future land use map amendments that do not increase the county ' s overall land use density or intensity . That change was recommended in the county ' s adopted Evaluation and Appraisal Report EAR) , which was found sufficient by DCA . EAR based amendments , including that recommendation , were adopted by the county and found "in compliance " by DCA . Concurrency of Public Facilities Both sites comprising this request are located within the County Urban Service Area, an area deemed suited for urban scale development . The comprehensive plan establishes standards for : Transportation , Potable Water, Wastewater, Solid Waste , Stormwater Management, and Recreation Future Land Use Policy 3 . 1 ) . The adequate provision of these services is necessary to ensure the continued quality of life enjoyed by the community .To ensure that the minimum acceptable standards for these services and facilities are maintained, the comprehensive plan requires that new development be reviewed . For land use designation amendment and rezoning requests , this review is undertaken as part of the conditional concurrency determination application process . As per section 910 . 07 of the County ' s Land Development Regulations (LDRs ) , conditional concurrency review examines the available capacity of each facility with respect to a proposed project. Since land use amendment and rezoning requests are not projects , county regulations call for the concurrency review to be based upon the most intense use of the subject property based upon the requested land use designation . For conunercial/industrial land use amendment requests , the most intense use (according to County LDRs ) is retail commercial with 10 , 000 square feet of gross floor area per acre of land proposed for redesignation . The site information used for the concurrency analysis of Subject Property 1 , the commercial/industrial portion of the proposed amendment, is as follows : 1 . Size of Area to be Redesignated : 15 .46 acres 2 . Existing Land Use Designation : M- 1 , Low-Density Residential - 1 up to 8 units/acre ) October 16 , 2001 71