My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4/1/1997
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1997
>
4/1/1997
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:10:03 PM
Creation date
6/17/2015 9:58:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
04/01/1997
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
62
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
BOGY ME 44, <br />Transportation System <br />The property abuts CR 510. Classified as an urban principal <br />arterial roadway on the future roadway thoroughfare plan map, this <br />segment of CR 510 is a 2 -lane road with approximately 80 feet of <br />existing public road right-of-way. This segment of CR 510 is <br />programmed for expansion to 4 lanes and 160 feet of public road <br />right-of-way by 2010. <br />ANALYSIS <br />In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the <br />application will be presented. The analysis will address: <br />• concurrency of public facilities; <br />0 compatibility with the surrounding area; <br />0 consistency with the comprehensive plan; and <br />• potential impact on environmental quality. <br />Concurrency of Public Facilities <br />This site is located within the County Urban Service Area, an area <br />deemed suited for urban scale development. The comprehensive plan <br />establishes standards for: Transportation, Potable Water, <br />Wastewater, Solid Waste, Drainage, and Recreation (Future Land Use <br />Policy 3.1). The adequate provision of these services is necessary <br />to ensure the continued quality of life enjoyed by the community. <br />To ensure that the minimum acceptable standards for these services <br />and facilities are maintained, the comprehensive plan also requires <br />that new development be reviewed. For rezoning requests; this <br />review is undertaken as part of the conditional concurrency <br />determination application process. <br />As per section 910.07 of the County's LDRs, conditional concurrency <br />review examines the available capacity of each facility with <br />respect to a proposed project. Since rezoning requests are not <br />projects, county regulations call for the concurrency review to be <br />based upon the most intense use of the subject property based upon <br />the requested zoning district. For conservation zoning district <br />requests, the most intense use (according to the County's LDR's) is <br />the maximum number of units that could be built on the site, given <br />the size of the property and the maximum density allowed under the <br />proposed zoning district. The site information used for the <br />concurrency analysis is as follows: <br />I. Size of Area to be Rezoned: <br />2. Existing Zoning District: <br />Maximum Number of Units with <br />Existing Zoning District: <br />4. Proposed Zoning District: <br />tlll acres <br />RM -6, Multiple -Family <br />Residential District <br />(up to 6 units/acre) <br />666 <br />Con -1, Public Lands <br />Conservation District <br />(zero density) <br />5. Maximum Number of Units with Proposed Zoning District: 0 <br />As per section 910.07(2) of the Concurrency Management Chapter of <br />the County's LDRs, projects which do not increase density or <br />intensity of use -are exempt from concurrency requirements. This <br />rezoning request is exempt from concurrency review, because the <br />requested zoning district would not increase the total number of <br />potential units that the site could accommodate. <br />It is important to note that there will be no effect on service <br />levels for any public facility as a result of the proposed <br />rezoning. <br />Compatibility with the Surrounding Area <br />Under the requested Con -1 zoning district, there will be no <br />development on the subject property except for minor facilities <br />associated with passive recreation activities. For that reason, <br />the subject request will enhance compatibility between development <br />on the site and surrounding land uses. <br />APRIL 19 1997 38 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.