9/22/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

C� Policy 3.2 of the -Future Land Use Element states that no development shall be approved unless it is consistent with the concurrency management system component of the Capital Improvements Element. For rezoning requests, conditional concurrency review is required. Conditional concurrency review examines the available capacity of each facility with respect to a proposed project. Since rezoning requests are not projects, county regulations call for the concurrency review to be based upon the most intense use of the subject property based upon the requested zoning district. For commercial rezoning requests, the most intense use (according to the county's land development regulations) is retail commercial with 10,000 square feet of gross floor area per acre of land proposed for rezoning. The site information used for the concurrency analysis is as follows: 1. Size of Area to be Rezoned: ±.94 acres 2. Land Use Designation: CA, Commercial/Industrial 3. Existing Zoning District: CL, Limited Commercial 4. Proposed Zoning District: CG, General Commercial 5. Most Intense Use Under Existing Zoning District: ±9,400 sq. ft. of Retail Commercial (Shopping Center in the 6th Edition ITE Manual) 6. Most Intense Use Under Proposed Zoning District: ±9,400 sq. ft. of Retail Commercial (Shopping Center in the 6`h Edition ITE Manual) As per section 910.07(2) of the Concurrency Management Chapter of the County's Land Development Regulations, projects which do not increase density or intensity of use are exempt from concurrency requirements. This rezoning request is exempt from concurrency review because the requested zoning would not increase the use intensity of the site. By changing the zoning ofthe subject property from CL to CG, some commercial uses not currently allowed would be permitted on the site. However, because the most intense use of the property would be the same with either zoning district, changing the property's zoning from CL to CG would not create additional impacts on any concurrency facilities. In this case, a detailed concurrency analysis will be done in conjunction with site development. That concurrency analysis will address facility service levels and demand. Generally, sites such as the subject property that front on major roads may be appropriate for any one of several different commercial zoning districts, including CL and CG. In fact, this area of the county already reflects that type of mixed zoning. Staff's position is that both the CL and the CG zoning districts are appropriate for land along US 1 in the US 1/CR 510 (north) commercial/industrial node. Applying either of those zoning districts to the subject property would result in development compatible with surrounding property. In terms of permitted uses, the CL and CG zoning districts are similar. Both districts generally allow retail, restaurant, and office uses. Because the CL district is intended to be more compatible with residential areas, it is more restrictive. Therefore, each use permitted in the CL district is also permitted in the CG district. In contrast, the CG district allows some land uses such as general automotive repair, car dealers, and drive through restaurants that are considered too intense for the CL district. Development of the subject property with such uses, however, would be compatible with surrounding areas. That is because the subject property is surrounded by commercial areas, and therefore does not abut any residential uses or zoning districts. For that reason, compatibility is not a major concern for the subject property. Additionally, the subject property is subject to the provisions of the Wabasso Corridor Plan. That plan includes special standards for signs, roofs, building colors, buffers, and landscaping. For those reasons, development of the site under the requested CG district would be compatible with surrounding areas. September 22, 1998 29 • BOOK 107 PAGE Z