Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />Future Land Use Policy 14.3 <br />The most important policy to consider in evaluating a plan amendment request for consistency w ith <br />the county's Comprehensive Plan is Future Land Use Element Policy 14.3. This policy requires that <br />at least one of four criteria be met in order to approve a land use amendment request. These criteria <br />are: <br />• a mistake in the approved plan: <br />• an oversight in the approved plan: <br />• a substantial change in circumstances affecting the subject properly; or <br />• a swap or a reconfiguration of land uses at separate sites. <br />Staff's position is that this land use amendment request meets Policy 14.3's third criterion. <br />When the current Comprehensive Plan was approved on February 13, 1990, the plan assigned <br />commercial/industrial zoned properties to commercial nodes These nodes were designated various <br />sizes to reflect commercial demand and were established in certain areas to incorporate lands deemed <br />suitable for commercial development. The subject property was considered for inclusion in the node <br />at that time. <br />When the comprehensive plan was adopted, the subject property was not included in the node for <br />the following reasons: <br />• There was already sufficient land designated commercial/industrial to accommodate <br />projected demand and <br />• Given the size and shape of the subject property, residential development was determined <br />to be feasible. <br />For these reasons, staffs position is that there was no mistake nor oversight in the Comprehensive <br />Plan. <br />There have. however, been two changes in circumstances affecting the subject property. The most <br />important change relates to the ±18.7 acre tract of land abutting the subject properly on the east. <br />That land was given a residential land use designation and a residential zoning district when the <br />comprehensive plan was adopted in 1990. <br />In 1998. however. the tract east of the subject property was redesignated to C/I and rezoned to CG. <br />That action resulted in the subject properly having non-residential uses on three sides. Those non- <br />residential uses were the Sheriffs Complex and Jail (institutional) on the west. an industrial <br />subdivision (industrial) on the south, and commercially zoned land to east Combined with the <br />arterial road on the north, the airport, and other nearby commercial/industrial uses, the impacts on <br />any potential residential use were significant At that time. the county realized that the owner of the <br />subject property would eventually make a similar request. Therefore. the redesignation of the <br />adjacent land to the east of the subject property substantially impacts the subject property. and meets <br />Future Land Use Element Policy 14.3's third criterion. <br />There is also another change in circumstances that substantially impacts the subject property. That <br />change relates to the county s airport zoning regulations (Section 911.17) which were adopted, <br />pursuant to Chapters 163 and 333 of the Honda Statutes, on March 18, 1993. Those regulations <br />establish a noise impact overlay zone. Prior to building permit issuance, developers of proposed <br />May 22, 2001 <br />29 <br />Du O <br />!i l i l:1 I L f.: li <br />• <br />