4/28/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

► Recreation Recreation concurrency requirements apply only to residential development. Therefore, this Comprehensive Plan amendment/rezoning request would not be required to satisfy recreation concurrency requirements. Based upon the analysis conducted, staff has determined that all concurrency -mandated facilities, including drainage, roads, solid waste, wastewater, and water have adequate capacity to accommodate the most intense use of the subject property under the proposed land use designation. Therefore, the concurrency test has been satisfied for the subject request. Comprehensive Plan amendment requests are reviewed for consistency with all policies of the Comprehensive Plan. As per section 800.07(1) of the County Code, the "Comprehensive Plan may only be amended in such a way as to preserve the internal consistency of the plan pursuant to Section 163.3177(2)F.S:." Amendments must also show consistency with the overall designation of land uses as depicted on the Future Land Use Map, which includes agricultural, residential, recreational, conservation, and commercial and industrial land uses and their densities. The goals, objectives and policies are the most important parts of the Comprehensive Plan. Policies are statements in the plan that 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 decisions. While all Comprehensive Plan policies are important, some have more applicability than others in reviewing plan amendment requests. Of particular applicability for this request are the following objectives and policies: Future Land Use Policy 14.3 The most important policy to consider in evaluating a plan amendment request for consistency with the county's Comprehensive Plan is Future Land Use Element Policy 14.3. This policy requires that one of four criteria be met in order to approve a land use amendment request. These criteria are: • a mistake in the approved plan; • an oversight in the approved plan; • a substantial change in circumstances affecting the subject property, or • a swap or a reconfiguration of land uses at separate sites. Staffs position is that this land use amendment request does meet the first and second criteria of policy 14.3. When the Comprehensive Plan was approved on February 13, 1990, the plan assigned a medium - density residential land use designation to the subject property. This was an oversight of that plan. At the time of plan adoption, the subject area was part of Hillcrest Subdivision, and the property was platted into five separate lots along 20 Avenue. Being part of that residential subdivision, it was anticipated that the land would be developed for residential uses. To date, 2e Avenue has not been constructed and the subject area remains vacant of residential uses. The proximity of the FEC railway as well as the agricultural packing houses, which are in a CH, Heavy Commercial, zoning district, have precluded residential development of the subject area Throughout the county, much of the land adjacent to the FEC railway has a commercial/industrial land use designation. The sound and vibration of a train in motion are less intrusive on commercial or industrial uses than on residential uses. In some cases, commercial/industrial uses can even act as a buffer between residential uses and the railway. Therefore, staff's position is that the residential designation of the subject property was also a mistake of the 1990 plan. Based on the aforementioned facts, this request meets both the first and second criteria of policy 14.3 Apri128,1998