|
Back to Calendar
Return
|
| |
7. C.
|
| Planning Board-Rezoning |
|
|
|
| SUBMISSION DATA: |
REQUESTED REZONING:
FROM: HC/LI, Heavy Commercial and Light Industrial district (25 du/acre)
TO: HDR, High Density Residential district (18 du/acre)
RELEVANT AUTHORITY:
(1) Escambia County Comprehensive Plan
(2) Escambia County Land Development Code
(3) Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County v. Snyder, 627 So. 2d 469 (Fla. 1993)
(4) Resolution 96-34 (Quasi-judicial Proceedings)
(5) Resolution 96-13 (Ex-parte Communications)
APPROVAL CONDITIONS |
| Criterion a., LDC Sec. 2-7.2(b)(4) |
Consistent with Comprehensive Plan
The proposed zoning is consistent with the future land use (FLU) category as prescribed in LDC Chapter 3, and with all other applicable goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. If the rezoning is required to properly enact a proposed FLU map amendment transmitted for state agency review, the proposed zoning is consistent with the proposed FLU and conditional to its adoption.
CPP 1.3.1 Future Land Use Category. The Mixed-Use Urban (MU-U) Future Land Use (FLU) category is intended for an intense mix of residential and nonresidential uses while promoting compatible infill development and the separation of urban and suburban land uses within the category as a whole. Range of allowable uses include: Residential, Retail and Services, Professional Office, Light Industrial, Recreational Facilities, Public and Civic. The maximum residential density is 25 dwelling units per acre.
FINDINGS
The proposed amendment to HDR is consistent with the intent and purpose of Future Land Use category MU-U as stated in CPP FLU 1.3.1. the future land use allows residential, retail and services that would be compatible with adjacent parcels. |
| Criterion b., LDC Sec. 2-7.2(b)(4) |
Consistent with The Land Development Code
The proposed zoning is consistent with the purpose and intent and with any other zoning establishment provisions prescribed by the proposed district in Chapter 3.
FINDINGS
The proposed amendment is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Land Development Code. The parcel is currently HC/LI and the request is to downzone to HDR, which is a less intense zoning.The requested zoning will be compatible with the adjacent parcels to the east and south, currently zoned HDR. |
| Criterion c., LDC Sec. 2-7.2(b)(4) |
Compatible with surrounding uses
All the permitted uses of the proposed zoning, not just those anticipated by the rezoning applicant, are compatible, as defined in Chapter 6, with the surrounding uses. The uses of any surrounding undeveloped land shall be considered the permitted uses of the applicable district. Compatibility is not considered with potential conditional uses or with any nonconforming or unapproved uses. Also, in establishing the compatibility of a residential use, there is no additional burden to demonstrate the compatibility of specific residents or activities protected by fair housing law.
FINDINGS
The proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding existing uses in the area. Within the 500' radius impact area, staff observed properties with zoning districts HC/LI, HDR, HDMU and Com. Within the area of the subject parcel, there are single family residential lots, a mobile home and vacant land. |
| Criterion d., LDC Sec. 2-7.2(b)(4) |
Appropriate if spot zoning
Where the proposed zoning would establish or reinforce a condition of spot zoning as defined in Chapter 6, the isolated district would nevertheless be transitional in character between the adjoining districts, or the differences with those districts would be minor or sufficiently limited. The extent of these mitigating characteristics or conditions demonstrates an appropriate site specific balancing of interests between the isolated district and adjoining lands.
As per LDC Chapter 6, Spot Zoning is: Zoning applied to an area of land, regardless of its size, that is different from the zoning of all contiguous land. Such isolated or “spot” zoning is usually higher in its density or intensity of use than the adjoining zoning and may, therefore, extend privileges not generally extended to property similarly located in the area. Spot zoning is not by itself prohibited, but due to its potentially adverse impacts on adjoining zoning it carries a higher burden of demonstration that, if authorized, it will contribute to or result in logical and orderly development.
FINDINGS
The HDR district would not be spot zoning due to the other similar zoning districts adjacent to and in the vicinity. |
| Criterion e., LDC Sec. 2-7.2(b)(4) |
Appropriate with changed or changing conditions
If the land uses or development conditions within the area surrounding the property of rezoning have changed, the changes are to such a degree and character that it is in the public interest to allow new uses, density, or intensity in the area through rezoning; and the permitted uses of the proposed district are appropriate and not premature for the area or likely to create or contribute to sprawl.
FINDINGS
The land uses or development conditions within the area surrounding the property of rezoning have not changed and the uses allowed in HDR zoning category would be appropriate and compatible with the surrounding properties. |
|
|
|
|