Laserfiche WebLink
-I <br />BOOK ilk. PAGE 36."_ <br />Since the subject property is located within an area designated as L-2 on the county's future land use <br />plan map and is located within the county's urban service area, and the proposed zoning district <br />would allow residential uses no greater than the 6 units/acre permitted by the L-2 designation, the <br />proposed request is consistent with Policies 1.11 and 1.14. <br />Future Land -Use Element Policy 2.2 <br />Future Land Use Element Policy 2.2 states that the county shall encourage and direct growth into <br />the urban service area through zoning and LDRs. Since the proposed rezoning would allow and <br />encourage development on the subject property and the subject property is within the urban service <br />area, the request implements Future Land Use Element Policy 2.2. <br />As part of its consistency analysis, staff compared the proposed request to all the objectives and <br />policies in the plan and found no conflicts. Therefore, the request is consistent with the <br />comprehensive plan. <br />Due to the established single-family zoning pattern in this area of the county, compatibility is not <br />a major concern with respect to this request to change the subject property from a multiple -family <br />to a single-family zoning district. Since RS -6 zoning abuts the subject property on two sides, the <br />request is for an extension of an existing zoning pattern. <br />Staffs position is that single-family residential development is appropriate for the site and that such <br />development would be compatible with surrounding land uses. Since single-family residences can <br />be built within the existing RM -4 zoning district, this request is primarily for a density increase <br />(consistent with the comprehensive plan). Since the density increase meets the concurrency test and <br />is consistent with the site's future land use designation, the request is not anticipated to negatively <br />impact surrounding areas. For these reasons, staff feels the requested zoning district would be <br />compatible with adjacent residential development. <br />Enviromnental protection regulations are the same under both the existing RM -4 and the requested <br />RS -6 zoning districts. Prior to site development, the applicant will be required to submit an <br />environmental survey. If that survey indicates that a wetland exists on the site, then federal, state, <br />and county wetland protection regulations apply. Additionally, the county's 10/15% native upland <br />habitat preservation requirement applies. For these reasons, rezoning the subject property from RM - <br />4 to RS -6 is not anticipated to generate any adverse environmental impacts. <br />Based on the analysis, staff has determined that the requested zoning district is compatible with <br />surrounding areas, is consistent with the comprehensive plan, meets all concurrency criteria, will <br />have no negative impacts on environmental quality, and meets all applicable rezoning criteria. Most <br />importantly, the subject property is located in an area deemed suited for single-family residential . <br />uses. For these reasons, staff supports the request. <br />NOVEMBER 16, 1999 <br />0 -86- 0 <br />