10/9/2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• OTHER ALTERNATIVES Since the Board of County Commissioners directed staff to develop alternatives that provide relief for Mr. Clontz, staff has identified several alternatives. Other than county purchase -of the property, the only alternatives that accomplish that task involve expanding the urban service area to include the site. Unless the Board decides to eliminate the urban service area boundary, the Board must decide which areas of the county are to be inside the urban service area and which areas are to be outside of the urban service area. The following table identifies six alternatives that the Board has with respect to expanding the urban service area In this table, parcels less than 40 acres in size are referred to as small parcels, and urban land use designations refer to residential land use designations with densities of three to eight units/acre. Because Alternatives 1 to 5 are similar in that they propose urban service area expansion, they are discussed together. Each of those alternatives provides relief for Mr. Clontz. Whether or not Mr. Clontz needs relief, however, is in doubt since both The Florida Right to Farm Act and Sheriff Department policy indicate that he can maintain his grove. Regardless of Mr. Clontz's need for relief, there are several problems associated with expanding the urban service area Those problems, which have been discussed previously, are as follows: • The urban service area already contains more than enough land to accommodate growth into the foreseeable future; • Expanding the urban service area encourages additional requests for urban service area expansion to include similar parcels. Because similar parcels must be treated similarly, it is difficult to deny those requests; and • Expanding the urban service area is likely to increase incompatibilities between agricultural activities and urban development. October 9, 2000 G] BK 115PG34 •