1/21/1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- Future Land Use Element Policies 2.5 and 4.4 Future Land Use Element Policies 2.5 and 4.4 state that the county will encourage and direct growth into the urban service area and areas near urban centers. Since the proposed rezoning would allow and encourage more development on the subject property, and the subject property is within the urban service area and near an urban center, the request implements Future Land Use Element Policies 2.5 and 4.4. - Economic Development Element Policies 8.1 and 8.5 Economic Development Element Policies 8.1 and 8.5 address the use of incentives, including increased densities, to reduce the cost per housing unit and to encourage the provision of affordable housing. By allowing increased density on the subject property, the request would implement Economic Development Element Policies 8.1 and 8.5. - Mass Transit Element Policy 1.2 Mass Transit Element Policy 1.2 states that the county will provide higher densities along major transportation corridors in order to facilitate future mass transit provision. Since the proposed rezoning will increase the allowed density along and near several major transportation corridors, this request implements Mass Transit Element Policy 1.2. As part of its consistency analysis, staff compared the proposed request to all the objectives and policies in the plan and found no conflicts. Therefore, staff's position is that the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Compatibility with the Surrounding Area Staff's position is that multiple -family residential development is appropriate for the site and that such development would be compatible with surrounding land uses. Multiple -family and mobile home development are already prominent in that area of the county. Located near the SR 60/58th Avenue commercial/industrial node, the subject property is particularly well suited to meet the demand for multiple -family housing generated by development within that node. In effect, the proposed rezoning would increase the opportunity for people to live near their place of employment. Development of the subject property would be expected to have little or no impact on the Vista Plantation Condominiums to the south. That project, zoned RM -4, Multiple -Family Residential District (up to 4 units/acre), contains a vegetative buffer, golf course and ponds along its north boundary, which is 26th Street. Similarly, incompatibilities between the subject property and adjacent A-1 zoned land are not anticipated. With respect to zoning, the county's policy has always been to retain agricultural zoning on property rather than changing it when the underlying land use designation increases. -This not_ only reflects the county's policy of using agriculturazoning as a "holding-"- category, but also recognizes that urbanization occurs incrementally with various tracts remaining agricultural for longer periods. Two factors, however, indicate that urban type zoning districts would be appropriate for agriculturally zoned land in this portion of the county. The first factor is the underlying designation on the future land use map. This area is within the urban service g 52 EBoor. IUO n,, Vf%W January 21, 1997