6/02/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

In this case, the Board will consider the proposed DO in a separate hearing to be held immediately following the final adoption public hearing for the Comprehensive Plan amendment. If the DO is approved, then the development will be subject to the standard site plan review and approval process. Consistent with state regulations, DCA reviewed the proposed amendment and prepared an Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report (dated April 10, 1998), which planning staff received on April 14, 1998. The DCA ORC Report (attachment 10) contained four objections to this proposed amendment. Those objections are listed below. The proposed land use designationicategory for Subject Property 2 of "Commercial/ Industrial" lacks density/intensity standards. Development standards for this category have not been established within the County's Comprehensive Plan. [Section 163.3177(6)(a), FS, and Rule 9J -5.006(3)(c)7., FAC] 2. The proposed designation of Subject Property 2 is internally inconsistent with the Future Land Use Element of the County's Comprehensive Plan. Objective 7, Policy 7.2, and Policy 7.4 call for the protection of floodplain on site and nearby wetlands. The proposed amendment proposes intensification of land use activities within the floodplain on site, which may pose negative potential impacts to the natural function of nearby wetlands. [Rule 9J -5.005(5)(a), FAC] 3. The County has not demonstrated the suitability of the site for the proposed use, designation, and intensification of use within the floodplain. [Rule 9J -5.006(2)(b)3. and 4., FAC] 4. The proposed amendment is inconsistent with the State Comprehensive Plan. Section 187.(8)(b)8. and 187.(16)(b)6., Chapter 187, FS promote the protection of wetlands and floodplains. Section 187.(8)(b)8. encourages the establishment of stringent floodplain management programs on all level of government to preserve hydrologically significant wetlands and other natural floodplain features. Section 187.(16)(b)6. Mandates that consideration be given to the impacts of development on water quality, quantity, and the potential for flooding. {Section 163.3184(1)(b), FS] These objections relate to inconsistencies with portions of Chapters 163 and 187, FS, Rule 9J-5, FAC, and the county comprehensive plan. Not specifically related to this land use amendment, the first objection is based on DCA's interpretation that the county comprehensive plan lacks intensity standards for the C/I, Commercial/Industrial, land use designation. The other objections relate to floodplain and wetland protection. The analysis section of this staff report contain a response to DCA's objections. - Subject Property 1 Subject Property 1 and adjacent properties to the north and west are zoned CG. Subject Property 1 consists of a :� 12.7 acre borrow pit, t7 acres of environmentally sensitive freshwater wetland, and =6.7 acres of undeveloped pine flatwoods. The Horizon Outlet Mall borders the northern portion of Subject Property 1's western boundary. Land along the southern portion of that boundary consists primarily of undeveloped pine flatwoods. I-95 borders Subject Property 1 on the east. - Subject Property 2 Subject Property 2 and properties to the east and south are zoned RM -6 and consist primarily of undeveloped scrubby flatwoods. North of Subject Property 2, land is zoned CG and primarily consists of undeveloped pine flatwoods. A-1, Agricultural District (up to Iunit/5 acres), zoned citrus groves are located west of Subject Property 2. Freshwater wetlands are located between those groves and the irregular southern portion of Subject Property 2's western boundary. The boundary of Subject Property 2 was drawn specifically to exclude those wetlands which are zoned RM -6. -Subject Property 1 Subject Property 1 and lands to the north, east, and west are designated C/I, Commercial/Industrial. This designation permits various commercial and industrial zoning districts. Land to the south of Subject Property 1 is designated M-1, Medium -Density Residential -1, on the county's future land use map. The M-1 designation permits residential uses with densities up to 8 units/acre. JUNE 291998 0 -22- .