11/12/1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Bou 99 Pm 757 As per section 910.07(2) of the Concurrency Management Chapter of the County's Land Development Regulations, projects which do not increase land use intensity are exempt from concurrency requirements. For the subject request, the amount of land to be removed from a C/I node exceeds the amount of land to be added to another C/I node. Therefore, this land use amendment request is exempt from concurrency review because the requested land use designation changes would not increase the potential land use intensity that the sites could accommodate. Nevertheless, to ensure that the proposed amendment will not cause the provision of public services to,fall below adopted levels of service, a concurrency review is included in this report. That review will focus on Subject Property 1, the property "receiving" the C/I designation and therefore, potentially increasing its land use intensity. The concurrency review examines the available capacity of each facility with respect to a proposed project. Since Comprehensive Plan amendment requests are not projects, the concurrency review is based upon the most intense use of the subject property based upon the requested land use designation. Typically, for commercial/ industrial Comprehensive Plan amendment requests, the most intense use is retail commercial with 10,000 square feet of gross floor area per acre of land proposed for redesignation. In this case, however, the intent of the request is to allow development of light industry on Subject Property 1. That intent is consistent with the county's Overall Economic Development Plan and with the Comprehensive Plan's Economic Development Element. Therefore, the county has additional control over development on Subject Property 1. That control can be exercised during the rezoning and the site plan approval phases of the development process. Both of those phases would be necessary to develop Subject Property 1. For those reasons, the concurrency review for Subject Property 1 will be based on industrial development of the entire 101.8 acre site. The site information used for the concurrency analysis is as follows: 1. Size of Area to be Redesignated: 2. Existing Land Use Designation: 3. Proposed Land Use Designation: 4. Most Intense Use of Subject Property under Current Land Use Designation: *101.8 acres *72.3 acres of M-1, Medium -Density Residential -1 (up to 8 units/acre) and *29.5 acres of AG -2, Agricultural -2 (up to 1 unit/10 acres) C/I, Commercial - Industrial Node 580 Dwelling Units 5. Most Intense Use of Subject Property under Proposed Land Use Designation: 101.8 acres of Industrial - Transportation A review of the traffic impacts that would result from industrial development on Subject Property 1 indicates that the existing level of service (LOS) "C" or better on SR 60, from 100th Avenue to I-95, and "D" or better on other impacted roads would not be lowered. Because it is part of the Florida Intrastate Highway System, state regulations require that LOS "C" be maintained on that portion of State Road 60. The site information used for determining traffic impacts is as follows: Existing Land Use Desicmation 1. Residential Use Identified in 5th Edition ITE Manual: Single -Family NOVEMBER 12, 1996 92