3/18/1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Thd site also has access to 98th Avenue. North of SR 60, 98th Avenue is an unpaved local road. - Subject Property 2 9th Street S.W. (Oslo Road) and 13th Street S.W. (Kelly Road) provide access to Subject Property 2. Oslo Road is a two-lane paved road with 60 feet of existing public road right-of-way and is classified as an urban principal arterial on the future roadway thoroughfare plan map. This segment of Oslo Road is programmed for expansion to 80 feet of public road right-of-way by 2010. The portion of 13th Street S.W. that abuts the site is a two-lane unpaved road with 30 feet of existing public road right-of-way and is classified as a collector road on the future roadway thoroughfare plan map. This segment of 13th Street S.W. is programmed for expansion to 60 feet of public road right-of-way by 2010. ANALYSIS In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the application will be presented. Specifically, this section will include the following: • a response to DCA's ORC Report objections; • a discussion of node reconfiguration; • an analysis of the proposed expansion of the Urban Service Area; • an analysis of the proposed amendment's impact on public facilities; • an analysis of the proposed amendment's compatibility with the surrounding areas; • an analysis of the proposed amendment's consistency with the - comprehensive plan; and • an analysis of the proposed amendment's potential impact on environmental quality. -- County Response to DCA's ORC Report Objection As noted in the Description and Conditions section of this staff report, DCA, in its January 30, 1997 ORC Report, raised two objections. One of those objections was 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. The other objection was that the staff report accompanying the proposed amendment did not show that adequate roadway capacity would be available to serve the most intense development allowed on Subject Property 1 under the proposed land use designation. As noted in the concurrency analysis below, this request is exempt from concurrency review because the requested land use designation changes would not increase the potential land use intensity within the county (as proposed, the amendment would result in a net reduction in C/I designated land). A concurrency analysis of Subject Property 1 (the property "receiving" the C/I designation and therefore, potentially increasing its land use intensity), however, was included to ensure that the proposed amendment will not cause the provision of public services to fall below adopted levels of service. For land use amendments, the concurrency analysis is typically based upon the most intense use allowed under the proposed land use designation. For C/I land use amendments, that use is retail commercial development with 10,000 square feet of gross floor area per acre of land proposed for redesignation. In this case, using the typical method would have resulted in a concurrency analysis for 1,018,000 square feet of retail commercial development, the equivalent of a regional mall. Staff noted, however, that the intent of the request was to allow an industrial park on the site, and that the county had zoning and site plan control over the site. For this reason, the concurrency analysis was based on industrial development of the site. Upon coordination with DCA and the Florida Department of Transportation, both agencies agreed that capacity was available for industrial development of the site, but expressed concern that MARCH 189 1997 91 BOOK 100 PAGE