My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4/28/1998
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1998
>
4/28/1998
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:10:56 PM
Creation date
6/17/2015 10:56:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
04/28/1998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
113
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
6 02K I <br />pQ +(7 rr C, '-" " 0-pp <br />• a mistake in the approved plan; <br />• an oversight in the approved plan; <br />• a substantial change in circumstances affecting the subject property; or <br />• a swap or a reconfiguration of land uses at separate sites. <br />Staff s position is that this land use amendment does meet the second criterion of policy 14.3 <br />When the current Comprehensive Plan was approved on February 13, 1990, the plan assigned a <br />residential land use designation to the subject properties. At the time of plan adoption, the existing <br />uses on the subject properties were single family homes. At that time, the land owners expressed <br />interest in retaining a residential designation on the properties. For those reasons, the subject <br />properties were not designated for commercial/industrial uses and not included in the <br />commercial/industrial node. <br />While the existing use of the properties is single family residential, the location of the subject <br />properties between Old Dixie Highway and U.S., 1, as well as the character of the surrounding uses, <br />indicates that these properties should have been designated for commerciaUmdustrial uses when the <br />plan was originally adopted. The residential designation of the subject properties was an oversight <br />of the approved plan; therefore, this request meets the second criterion of policy 14.3. <br />Future Land Use Policy 1.15 <br />This policy defines the areas that are suitable for a commercial/industrial land use designation. <br />Suitable areas must be within the urban service area and near existing urban centers. The subject <br />properties are within the urban service area and are near existing urban centers. Both Gifford and <br />Grand Harbor are existing urban centers that are near the subject properties and could be serviced <br />by various commercial/industrial uses that might locate on the subject properties. <br />Future Land Use Policy 1.18 <br />Policy 1.18 requires that commercial industrial nodes be located along roads with functional <br />classifications appropriate to the level of activity. Being bordered on the east by U.S. 1, a rural <br />principal arterial roadway, and on the west by Old Dixie Highway, a rural major collector roadway, <br />the subject properties have adequate access to accomodate any commercial/industrial uses. <br />Additionally, both roadways are appropriate to handle traffic that may be generated by a <br />commercial/industrial land use. <br />Future Land Use Objective 4 <br />Redesignating the subject properties to a commercial/industrial land use may reduce the length of <br />daily automobile trips for residents in this part of the county. A reduction in trip length is the <br />purpose of objective 4 of the Future Land Use Element. <br />A commercial/industrial use that locates in the subject area may eliminate the need for residents to <br />travel to a similar use that is located further from their home. This will reduce the length of daily <br />automobile trips generated by those residents and in turn will contribute to attaining objective 4 of <br />the Future Land Use Element. <br />While the referenced objectives and policies are particularly applicable to this request, other <br />comprehensive plan policies and objectives also have relevance. For that reason, staff evaluated the <br />subject request for consistency with all plan policies and objectives. Based upon that analysis, staff <br />determined that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. <br />April 28, 1998 <br />0 <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.