7/9/2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• • 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 Improv, ments 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. The site information used for the concurrency analysis is as follows: 1 Size of Area to be Rezoned: ±120 acres 2. Land Use Designations: 3. Existing Zoning Districts: 4. Proposed Zoning Districts: REC, Recreation, (zero density), L-1, Low -Density Residential -1 (up to 3 units/acre) and L-2, Low -Density Residential -2 (up to 6 units/acre). RM -3 and RM -4, Multiple -Family Residential Districts RS -3 and RS -6, Single -Family Residential Districts As per section 910.07(2) of the Concurrency Management Chapter of the County's Land Development Regulations, projects that 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 potential number of units that could be built on the subject properties. In the north area (Area 1), there will be no increase in the potential number of units because the currently RM -3 zoned properties will be rezoned to RS -3 Since both districts allow up to 3 units/acre, there would be no increase in density. In fact, the actual dwelling unit yield for regular single-family subdivisions under RS -3 zoninc is between 2 and 2.5 units per acre, while the yield for multi -family projects under RSI -3 zoning can be as much as 3 units per acre. For this reason, the Area 1 rezoning will result in a decrease in allowable net density. Furthermore, approximately 53 acres of the RM -3 zoned subject properties are publicly owned lands designated as REC, recreation, on the Future Land Use Map. These properties will never be developed for residential purposes, regardless of zoning Similarly, the proposed zoning in the south area (Area 2) will not result in a density increase While the Area 2 rezoning request involves rezoning properties from RM -4 (up to 4 units/acre) to RS -6 (up to 6 units/acre), only three parcels will be affected. Because of the small sizes and particular configurations of those lots, the RS -6 zoning will result in an effective decrease in density The density decrease is attributable to the fewer units that can be built on those parcels with single-family zoning than could be built on them if they remained at their multi -family designation. In this case, a detailed concurrency analysis will be done in conjunction with any new development project on any of the subject properties. That concurrency analysis will address facility service levels and demand. Compatibility with the Surrounding Area With the subject property located in an area that is dominated by single-family, low-density development, compatibility is not a major concern for this request. Indeed, compatibility is the reason for the rezoning request. Since land to the north and west of Area 1 is currently zoned July 9, 2002 29