7/7/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- Future Land Use Element Policy 1.11 Future Land Use Element Policy 1.11 states that the Low -Density Residential land use designations are intended for land that is located within the urban service area and near existing urban centers. Located within the urban service area, near the City of Sebastian, and near the intersection of US 1 and CR 510, Subject Property 1 meets those criteria. Under the proposed amendment, Subject Property 1 would have a Low -Density Residential land use designation. For that reason, the request is consistent with Future Land Use Element Policy 1.11. - Future Land Use Element Policy 1.15 Future Land Use Element Policy 1.15 states that the Commercial/Industrial land use designation shall be limited_ to lands that are located within the urban service area and near existing urban centers. Located within the urban service area, near the City of Sebastian, and near the intersection of US 1 and CR 510, Subject Property 2 meets those criteria. Under the proposed amendment, Subject Property 2 would have a CommerciallIndustrial land use designation. For that reason, the request is consistent with Future Land Use Element Policy 1.15. - Future Land Use Element Policy 1.20 Future Land Use Element Policy 1.20 states that nodes shall have a designated size based on the intended use and service area population, existing land use pattern and other demand characteristics. The amount of C/I designated land is based on service area population, the existing land use pattern, and other demand characteristics. The proposed amendment will not alter the amount of CR designated land. Therefore, the proposed amendment is consistent with Future Land Use Element Policy 1.20. - Future Land Use Element Policy 1.21 Future Land Use Element Policy 1.21 states that node boundaries should provide for efficient land uses and maximum use of transportation facilities while eliminating strip development. The proposed amendment works to eliminate strip development in two ways. First, by changing the land use designation of Subject Property 1 from CA, Commercial/Industrial, to L-2, Low -Density Residential -2, the proposed amendment creates a gap in the strip of C/I designated land along the east side ofUS I. Second, by changing the land use designation of Subject Property 2 from L-2, to CA, the proposed amendment adds depth to the existing node. For these reasons, the proposed amendment works to limit strip commercial development along US 1 and is consistent with Future Land Use Element Policy 1.21. - Future Land Use Element Policy 1.22 Future Land Use Element Policy 1.22 states that 70% of the land area of a node should be developed with non-residential and non-agricultural uses before that node is considered for expansion. The intent of this policy is to regulate increases in the amount of C/I designated land. Since the proposed amendment does not increase in the amount of C/I designated land in the subject node, Future Land Use Element Policy 1.22's 70% developed standard does not apply to this amendment. - Future Land Use Element Policy 17.1 Future Land Use Element Policy 17.1 states that the county shall not approve plan amendments that increase residential density or land use intensity within the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA). Both Subject Property 1 and Subject Property 2 are within the CHHA. Because both of those properties are the same size, and they are essentially swapping land use designations, the proposed amendment would not increase residential density or land use intensity within the CHHA. For that reason, the proposed amendment is consistent with Future Land Use Element Policy 17.1. - Economic Development Element Policy 43 Economic Development Element Policy 4.3 states that the county shall evaluate the size and location of nodes to ensure they can properly provide for growth. Since the proposed amendment reconfigures the subject node to better provide for growth, the proposed amendment implements Economic Development Element Policy 4.3. As part of the staff analysis, all policies in the comprehensive plan were considered. Based upon this analysis, staff determined that the proposed land use designation amendment is consistent with the comprehensive plan. JULY 79 1998 -23-`