My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8/25/1998
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1998
>
8/25/1998
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:10:58 PM
Creation date
6/17/2015 11:13:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
08/25/1998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
67
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
Staff s position is that multiple -family residential development is appropriate for the site and that <br />such development would be compatible with surrounding land uses. Because adjacent land to the <br />east of the subject property is zoned RM -6, the request is for a continuation of an existing zoning <br />pattern. In fact, multiple -family and mobile home development are already prominent in this area <br />of the county. Located near the SIR 60/53" Avenue commercial industrial node, the subject property <br />is particularly well suited to meet the demand for multiple -family housing generated by development <br />within that node. In effect, the proposed rezoning would increase the opportunity for people to live <br />near their place of employment. <br />Development of the subject property would be expected to have little or no impact on the Vista <br />Plantation Condominiums to the south. That project, zoned RM -4, Multiple -Family Residential <br />District (up to 4 units/acre), contains a vegetative buffer, golf course and ponds along its north <br />boundary, which is 26" Street. <br />Similarly, incompatibilities between the subject property and adjacent A-1 zoned land to the north <br />are not anticipated. The land north of the subject property is designated L-1 and is expected to be <br />eventually converted to residential uses. Regardless of the adjacent use, county regulations require <br />that multiple -family residential buildings maintain a rear yard setback of at least 25 feet. At 9.55 <br />acres in size and nearly a quarter mile in length, the subject property has sufficient dimensions to <br />accommodate larger setbacks and buffers if desired by a developer. <br />Additional county regulations apply to subdivision and planned development projects located within <br />the urban service area and proposing new residential lots adjacent to active agricultural operations. <br />In that situation, the residential project, at a minimum, must provide a 25 foot wide setback with a <br />type B vegetative buffer and a six foot high opaque feature. <br />With respect to zoning, the county's policy has always been to retain agricultural zoning on property <br />rather than changing it when the underlying land use designation increases. This not only reflects <br />the county's policy of using agricultural zoning as a "holding" category, but also recognizes that <br />urbanization occurs incrementally with various tracts remaining agricultural for longer periods. <br />Two factors, however, indicate that urban type zoning districts would be appropriate for this portion <br />of the county. The first factor is the underlying designation on the future land use map. This area <br />is within the urban service area and is deemed appropriate for residential development with densities <br />of up to 6 units/acre. <br />Equally important is the development pattern in that portion of the county. Located near two C/I <br />nodes, a regional mall, Dodgertown, and Vero Beach Municipal Airport, the site is within one of the <br />fastest growing areas of the county. Additionally, that area has convenient access to the county's <br />transportation system. These factors indicate a trend toward continued urbanization in that portion <br />of the county. <br />For these reasons, staff feels that the requested RM -6 zoning would be compatible with development <br />in the surrounding area. <br />The environmental impacts of development on the subject property are not a major concern. Being <br />a citrus grove, the site is disturbed and contains no environmentally important land, such as wetlands <br />or sensitive uplands. For those reasons, no adverse environmental impacts associated with this <br />request are anticipated. <br />August 25, 1998 <br />33 <br />:100K 106PAGE O92 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.