5/4/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The primary reason staff has initiated the proposed changes is because some of the existing LDRs are out of date and do not refer to all of the existing commercial land use designations. Staff is also initiating changes that would more narrowly define which zoning districts are appropriate within certain land use designations. For example, within the M-1 designation (Medium Density Residential up to 8 unitstacre), staff is proposing to allow 6 and 8 units per acre zoning districts but not 3 and 4 unit per acre districts. The proposed changes are reflected in the following sections of the LDRs: - 911.06(3)(a) for Agricultural and rural districts - 911.07(3) for Single-family residential districts - 911.08(3) for Multiple -family residential districts - 911.10(3) for Commercial districts - 911.11(3) for Industrial districts - 911.13(3)(b) for Special districts (Rose -4) - 911.14(2)(a)L, 2., 3., 4., and 5., for Planned Development district - 911.03 zoning district/land use designation matrix. The reasons for recommended changes are as follows: •To modify the matrix by including all land use designations. On the existing matrix the following land use designations were not included: Pub, Rec, RC, Mixed Use, and BCID. The proposed changes add these designations. •To modify the matrix for CRVP and R-BCID zoning districts to indicate where they are allowed. The proposed changes address this oversight. *To modify the matrix for the districts listed below to ensure compatibility among residential development, to reduce density variation among residential projects and to provide a better base for future planning as it relates to the provision of infiwtructure. These changes will prevent rezonings to very low density residential districts in areas designated on the future land use map for higher density residential developments. There are many areas in the county that are designated for low or very low density developments. If rezonings to very low density residential districts are allowed in areas designated for higher density, such rezonings could result in a constituency that objects to appropriate but higher density residential development nearby even though the land is designated for that density of development. The proposed amendments would not allow the following: — A-1 district rezonings under R, L-1, & L-2 land use designations — A-2 district rezonings under AG -1 land use designation — A-3 district rezonings under AG -1 and AG -2 land use designations — RFD district rezonings under L-1, and L-2 land use designations — RS -1 district rezonings under L-1 and L-2 land use designations — RS -3 district rezonings under M-1 land use designation — RM -3 district rezonings under M-1 land use designation — RM -4 district rezonings under M-1 land use designation Staff Recommendation: Approve the requested changes for consistency and to ensure a closer density "match" between a site's comprehensive plan allowable density and zoning allowable density. PSAC Recommendation: Voted 7-1 for the same recommendation as staff. PZC Recommendation: Voted 5-1 for the same recommendation as staff. May 4,1998 D C,pnKi u FAGS. J i