1/13/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

rBOOK 104 PAGUE7 1 The goals, objectives and policies are the most important parts of the comprehensive plan. Policies are statements in the plan which identify the actions which the county will take in order to direct the community's development. As courses of action committed to by the county, policies provide the basis for all county land development related decisions. While all comprehensive plan policies are important, some have more applicability than others in reviewing rezoning requests. Of particular applicability for this request are the following policy and objective. - Future Land Use Element Policy 1.14 Future Land Use Element Policy 1.14 states that the M-1, Medium -Density Residential -1, land use designation is intended for residential uses with densities up to eight units/acre. In addition, that policy states that these residential uses must be located within an existing or future urban service area. Because the subject property is located within an area designated as M-1 on the county's future land use plan map and is located within the county s urban service area, and the proposed zoning district would permit residential uses no denser than eight units/acre. the proposed request is consistent with Future Land Use Element Policy 1.14. - Future Land Use Element Objective 4 Future Land Use Element Objective 4 states that Indian River County will reduce the number and length of trips by implementing a land use pattern which places employment center; near residential areas. Already one of the county s major employment centers, projections indicate that the medical node near the subject property will continue to grow. This occurrence is expected to generate demand for multiple -family housing. Allowing that demand for multiple -family housing to be filled on property near the node implements Future Land Use Element Objective 4. While Future Land Use Element Policy 1.14 and Objective 4 are particularly applicable to this request. other comprehensive plan policies and objectives also have relevance. For that reason, staff evaluated the subject request for consistency with all plan policies and objectives. Based upon that analysis, staff determined that the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Staffs position is that granting the request to rezone the subject property to RM -8 will result in development which will be compatible with surrounding areas. Located near a medical commercial node and the Indian River Boulevard/41st Street intersection, and adjacent to other RM -8 zoned land, the site is more suited for medium density, multiple -family development than it is for low density, single-family uses. Several factors indicate that development under the RM -8 zoning district would be compatible with surrounding areas. The first factor involves the border between single-family and multiple -family areas. Multiple -family development on the subject property will be required to provide buffers where the site abuts a single-family use or district. A second, more important issue involves the area -s development pattern. That pattern indicates that the RM -8 district is the most appropriate for the site. Located near an employment center, a hospital, and variolas other medical uses, the site is particularly suited for the multiple -family and institutional uses permitted in the RM -8 zoning district. Finally, one other fact is applicable. On November 4. 1997, the Board of County Commissioners voted to transmit Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) based comprehensive plan amendments to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for review and comment. One portion of that amendment would add 182.5 acres to the medical node. That land would be located between the node's current north boundary and 41" Street. Based on DCA's comments associated with the adopted EAR, no objections to that provision are anticipated. Adoption of that amendment would support higher zoning densities in the following ways: • increased node size would accommodate more workers, thus generating demand for more nearby housing; and the loss of residential land due to the amendment is mitigated through higher density on the subject property. For those reasons, medium density, multiple -fancily development is appropriate for the site, and is anticipated to be compatible with surrounding areas. Environmental impacts of residential development on the subject property would be essentially the same under either the existing or the proposed zoning district, Multiple -family development, however, increases opportunities for open space preservation and for buildings to be located in areas with the least environmental impacts. In this case, the county's 10-15% native upland plant community set aside requirement would apply to development under either the requested or the existing zoning district. For these reasons, no significant adverse environmental impacts associated with this request are anticipated. - JANUARY 13, 1998 -22- 0 0