3/18/1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BOOK 100 PAGE 94 • the county's response to DCA's ORC Report objection; • an analysis of the proposed amendment's impact on public facilities; • an analysis of the proposed amendment's impact on the county's residential allocation ratio; • an analysis of the proposed amendment's consistency with the county's comprehensive plan; • an analysis of the proposed amendment's compatibility with the surrounding area; and • an analysis of the proposed amendment's potential impact on environmental quality, County Response to DCA's ORC Report Obiection As noted in the Description and Conditions section of this staff report, DCA, in its January 30, 1997 ORC Report, raised an objection based on the fact that the county's EAR had not yet been determined to be sufficient. On February 24, 1997, DCA determined that the county's EAR was sufficient. Therefore, that objection has been addressed, and the county may amend its comprehensive plan. Concurrency of Public Facilities This site is 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, Drainage 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. The Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations (LDRs) also require that new development be reviewed to ensure that the minimum acceptable standards for these services and facilities are maintained. Policy 3.2 of the Future Land Use Element states that no development shall be approved unless it is consistent with the concurrency management system component of the Capital Improvements Element. For land use amendment and rezoning requests, conditional concurrency review is required. 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 or zoning. For residential land use amendment and rezoning requests, the most intense use (according to the County's LDRs) is the maximum number of units that could be built on the site, given the size of the -property and the maximum density under the proposed land use designation and zoning. To account for the most intense use, the concurrency review will consider the development potential of the entire 30.3 acre parcel. The site information used for the concurrency analysis is as follows: 1. Size of overall parcel: 130.3 acres 2. Size of Area to be Redesignated: 115.2 acres 3. Existing Land Use Designation: ±15.2 acres of L-1, Low - Density Residential -1 (up to 3 units/acre) and ±15.1 acres of M-1, Medium -Density Residential -1 (up to 8 units/acre) 4. Proposed Land Use Designation: S. Most Intense Use of Subject Property Under Existing Land Use Designation: 6. Most Intense Use of Subject Property Under Proposed Land Use Designation: - Transportation 30.3 acres of M-11 Medium -Density Residential -1 (up to 8 units/acre) 166 dwelling units 242 dwelling units A review of. the traffic impacts that would result= -from the development of the maximum number of units allowed on the subject property under the proposed land use designation indicates that the existing level of service "D" or better on impacted roadways would MARCH 18, 1997 72