A. General: One of the primary functions of traditional zoning is to classify land uses so that those which are not fully compatible or congruous can be geographically separated from each other. The county has opted to substitute traditional zoning with a multiple use concept in which there is no separation of land uses. Proposed incompatible uses may adversely affect existing uses, people, or lands in numerous ways: noise, odors, creation of hazards, view, water contamination, loss of needed or desired resources, property values, or infringe on a desired lifestyle. To ensure that the county can continue to grow and develop without causing such land use problems and conflicts, a mechanism designed to identify and discourage land use proposals which will be incompatible at particular locations has been devised. The compatibility evaluation of all conditional uses also provides for evaluations in a manner which is both systematic and consistent.
B. Purpose; Use:
1. The compatibility rating is to be used as a tool to assist in the determination of compatibility. The compatibility rating is not the sole deciding factor in the approval or denial of any application.
2. Staff prepares a preliminary compatibility rating for conditional use permits, except for conditional use permits for PUDs. The commission reviews the compatibility rating and may change any value.
C. General Evaluation: Completing the compatibility questions and evaluation (form):
1. All evaluations shall be made as objectively as possible by assignment of points for each of a series of questions. Points shall be assigned as follows:
Plus 2 - assigned for full compatibility (adjacency encouraged).
Plus 1 - assigned for partial compatibility (adjacency not necessarily encouraged).
0 - assigned if not applicable or neutral.
Minus 1 - assigned for minimal compatibility (adjacency not discouraged).
Minus 2 - assigned for no compatibility (adjacency not acceptable).
2. Each response value shall be multiplied by some number, which indicates how important that particular response is relative to all the others. Multipliers shall be any of the following:
x4 - indicates major relative importance.
x3 - indicates above average relative importance.
x2 - indicates below average relative importance.
x1 - indicates minor relative importance.
D. Matrix - Questions 1 Through 3: The following matrix shall be utilized, wherever practical, to determine response values for questions one through three (3). Uses classified and listed in the left hand column and across the top of the matrix represent possible proposed, adjacent, or vicinity land uses. Each box indicates the extent of compatibility between any two (2) intersecting uses. These numbers should not be changed from proposal to proposal, except where distinctive uses arise which may present unique compatibility considerations. The commission shall determine whether or not there is a unique consideration.
E. Terms:
DOMINANT ADJACENT LAND USE: Any use which is within three hundred feet (300') of the use boundary being proposed; and
1. Comprises at least one-half (1/2) of the adjacent uses and one-fourth (1/4) of the total adjacent area; or
2. Where two (2) or more uses compete equally in number and are more frequent than all the other uses, the one with the greatest amount of acreage is the dominant land use; or
3. In all other situations, no dominant land use exists. When this occurs, the response value shall be zero.
LOCAL VICINITY: Land uses within a one to three (3) mile radius. The various uses therein should be identified and averaged to determine the overall use of the land.
F. Questions 4 Through 9:
1. In determining the response values for questions 4 through 9, the evaluators shall consider the information contained in the application, the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan, the provisions of this title and related ordinances, information gained from an actual inspection of the site, and information gathered by the staff.
2. The evaluator or commission shall also consider proposed mitigation of the determined impacts. Adequacy of the mitigation will be a factor.
G. Compatibility Questions And Evaluation:
H. Matrix For Rating:
(Ord. 10-06, 8-23-2010)