10/16/2001 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4 f y The request is for the continuation of the existing Land use designation pattern from the north and west . 0 The residentially designated property to the east and southeast is under the same ownership as Subject Property 1 . Only the 208 foot long southern boundary of the site would actually abut residentially designated land not owned by the applicant . County land development regulations somewhat mitigate potential impacts through site design and by requiring commercial/industrial development to provide vegetative buffers . Property to the south and east is designated M- 1 ( up to 8 units/acre ) , one of the county ' s most intense residential land use designations . That property , which is zoned RM - 6 , Multiple - Family Residential District ( up to 6 units/acre) , is currently vacant . Generally , multiple-family development is more dense than single -family development and has more flexibility , in terms of site design that could mitigate impacts from adjacent commercial/industrial development, than single- family development . For those reasons , multiple-family projects are more compatible with commercial/industrial uses than single - family projects , and the RNI - 6 zoning district is an appropriate district for residential land that abuts commercial/industrial uses . Subject Property 2 The following factors indicate that a residential land use designation is appropriate for Subject Property 2 . Adjacent land to the north and south , and land to the east , across Indian River Boulevard , is residentially designated ; therefore , the request is for the continuation of the existing land use designation pattern . Subject Property 2 is an existing residential development. As part of the larger Grand Harbor Development of Regional Impact, Subject Property 2 has been planned in coordination with surrounding areas , to be compatible with surrounding areas . For these reasons , staff feels that the proposed land use amendment would not increase potential incompatibilities with surrounding areas . Consisteney with Comprehensive Plan Land use amendment and rezoning requests are reviewed for consistency with all policies of the comprehensive plan . As per section 800 . 07 ( 1 ) of the land development regulations , the comprehensive plan may only be amended in such a way as to preserve the internal consistency of the plan pursuant to Section 163 . 3 L77 ( 2 ) , FS . " Amendments must also show consistency with the overall designation of land uses as depicted on the Future Land Use Map , which includes agricultural , residential, recreational , conservation , and comnercial and industrial land uses and their densities . The goals , objectives and policies are the most important parts of the comprehensive plan . Policies are statements in the plan which identify actions which the county will take in order to direct the community ' s development . As courses of action committed to by the county , policies provide the basis for all county land development related decisions --including plan amendment and rezoning decisions . While all comprehensive plan objectives and policies are important , some have more October 16 , 2001 73 9:Sly 2