10/24/1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

mof 96 pAtE 482 Finally, LDR chapter 926 requires perimeter landscaping, as well as landscaping of parking lots, and open space. For these reasons, the proposed amendment is not anticipated to increase potential incompatibilities associated with development of Subject Property 2. - Subject Property 3 Commercial development on Subject Property 3 is not anticipated to increase potential incompatibilities with surrounding property. The proposed amendment is to allow for the continuation of the existing land use designation from the west. Because the request is to move the location of the boundary between the commerci-allindustri-al -and residential land use designations, the primary impacts of commercial development on the site would be on the two parcels abutting Subject Property 3 on the -east. The eastern boundary of Subject Property 3, running from 81st Street to 82nd Street, is approximately 300 feet long. That boundary is shared with two parcels, each approximately 150 feet deep and developed with a single-family house. Currently, the northern of these two parcels is surrounded by residentially designated land. Adoption of the proposed amendment would result in C/I designated land to the west (Subject Property 3), abutting the parcel, and to the north (Subject Property 2.), across 82nd Street. The southern parcel that abuts Subject Property 3 on the east currently faces a commercial development on C/I designated land to the south, across 81st Street. Adjacent land to the east, west, and north is presently residentially designated. Adoption of the proposed amendment would result in a second side of this parcel being designated C/I. Each of the previously mentioned factors that work to mitigate potential incompatibilities also apply to Subject Property 3. These factors include required buffers and setbacks, and the fact that commercial development on Subject Property 3 will likely locate buildings closer to U.S. #1 and open space in the eastern portion of the site. There is another factor that suggests that commercial development on Subject Property 3 will locate on the western portion of the site. Since -Subject Property 3 and adjacent land to the east are under the same ownership, combining those parcels is possible. Such a parcel combination would eliminate the parcel boundary and, therefore, the need for required side yards. Given the narrow shape of Subject Property 3, such a parcel combination is the most efficient and likely development pattern for the site. For these reasons, the proposed amendment is not anticipated to increase potential incompatibilities associated with development of Subject Property 3. - Subject Property 4 Commercial development on Subject Property 4 would be compatible with surrounding areas. Since this property abuts commercially designated land to the northwest, the proposed redesignation would result in a continuation of an existing land use designation pattern. While the properties to the south and east are currently vacant or used for groves, they are zoned RM -6 and could be converted to residential uses. Given the current zoning of this land and the CG 98 October 24, 1995 M M