1/27/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

F-1 LJ ANS In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the application will be presented. Following a discussion of plan amendment review standards, this section will include the following: • 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. Plan Amendment Review Standards Unlike most land use designation amendment requests, this request does not involve an increase in land use intensity. As proposed, the request involves a minor reconfiguration, rather than an expansion, of the commercial/industrial node. ror tnis reason. the suoiect request can oe cnaractenzea aurerentiv trom most pian amendments. Typically, plan amendments involve increases in allowable density or intensity of development. As such, the typical amendment would result in impacts to public facilities and changes to land use patterns. Consequently, both the county comprehensive plan and state policy dictate that a high standard of review is required for typical plan amendments. This standard of review requires justification for the proposed change based upon adequate data and analysis. The subject amendment, however, differs significantly from a typical plan amendment request. Instead of proposing density or intensity increases, the subject amendment involves only a locational shift in future land uses with an overall decrease in land use intensity. Staffs position is that these different types of plan amendments warrant different standards of review. Since the typical type of amendment can be justified only by challenging the Projections, need assessments, and standards used to prepare the original plan, a high standard of review is justified For amendments involving just shifts in land uses and no intensity/density increase, less justification is necessary. This recognizes that no single land use plan map is correct and, that many variations may conform to accepted land use principles and meet established plan policies. In fact, the county is in the process of updating the comprehensive plan to specifically allow future land use map amendments that do not increase the county's overall land use density or intensity. That change was recommended in the county's adopted Evaluation and Appraisal Report (FAR), which was found sufficient by DCA. EAR based amendments, including that recommendation, have been transmitted to DCA for review. Based on DCA's review of the EAR, no objections to that change are anticipated. Both sites comprising this request are 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. To ensure that the minimum acceptable standards for these services and facilities are maintained, the comprehensive plan requires that new development be reviewed For land use designation amendment requests. this review is undertaken as part of the conditional concurrency determination application process. As per section 910.07(2) of the Concurrency Management Chapter of the County's Land Development Regulations, projects which do not increase land use density or intensity are exempt from concurrency requirements. For the subject request, the size of the C/I node will not change, although the node's shape will be reconfigured. Additionally, 46.4 acres of M-1 designated land with a development potential of 211 units (26.4 acres X 8 units/am = 211 units), will be eliminated, while the same amount of C-1 designated land, with no development potential, will be added. That "swap" will result in an overall decrease in land use intensity of 211 units. Therefore, this land use amendment request is exempt from concurrency review because the requested land use designation changes would not increase the potential land use intensity that the sites could accommodate. It is important to note that approval of this request will not affect service levels for any public facility. In this case, a detailed concurrency analysis will be done in conjunction with site development. That concurrency analysis will address facility service levels and demand. r� L JANUARY 27, 1998 -19- BOOK 104, PAGE:, L