4/6/1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

F_ h r, BOOK 1 Y fAGc 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 basad 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: *2 acres 2. Land Use Designation: C/1, Commercial/Industrial 3. Existing Zoning District: CH, Heavy Commercial 4. Proposed Zoning District: CL, Limited Commercial 5. Most Intense Use Under Existing Zoning District: *20,000 sq. fL of Retail Commercial (Shopping Center in the 6'" Edition ITE Mannan. 6. Most Intense Use Under Proposed Zoning District: *20,000 sq. fL of Retail Commercial (Shopping Center in the 60 Edition ITE Mannan. 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 of the subject property from CH to CL, 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 CH to CL would not create additional impacts on any concurrency facilities. In this case, a detailed concurrency analysis will be done in conjunction with any new development or changes of use on site. That concurrency analysis will address facility service levels and demand. Located at the intersection of an arterial and a collector road, the subject property is surrounded by commercial/industrial designated land. For that reason, compatibility is not a major concern associated with this request The following four factors, however, suggest that the CL district may be more appropriate than the CH district, for the subject property. 1) The existing uses on the site include retail sales, general office, and an animal clinic. Those uses are permitted in the requested CL zoning district, but not the existing CH zoning district. 2) The existing commercial building on the site, essentially a row of offices, would be best utilized with medical and other professional services. Those uses are permitted in the requested CL zoning district, but not the existing CH zoning district 3) With the exception of the *9 acre CH district which includes the 4 acre subject property, the existing zoning pattern in this area of the county, especially east of Old Dixie Highway, is dominated by the CL district Therefore, the request is for a continuation of an existing zoning pattern. 4) The site is adjacent to a single-family house. Compared to the CH district, the CL district is structured to be more compatible with residential uses. For these reasons, development of the subject property under the requested CL district would be compatible with surrounding areas. Rezoning requests are reviewed for consistency with all policies of the comprehensive plan. Rezomngs must also be consistent with the overall designation of land uses as depicted on the Future Land Use Map, which include agriculture, residential, recreation, conservation, and commercial and industrial land uses and their densities. Commercial and industrial land uses are located in nodes throughout the unincorporated areas of Indian River County. APRIL 69 1999 —s2- 0