|
Back to Calendar
Return
|
| |
6. E.
|
| Planning Board-Rezoning |
|
|
|
| SUBMISSION DATA: |
REQUESTED REZONING:
FROM: LDR, Low Density Residential district (4 du/acre)
TO: Com, Commercial district (25 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 FLU 1.3.1 Future Land Use Categories. The MU-S category is intended for a mix of residential and non-residential uses while promoting compatible infill development and the separation of urban and suburban land uses.
Range of Allowable Uses: Residential, retail sales & services, professional office, recreational facilities, public and civic, limited agriculture. The maximum residential density is 25 dwelling units per acre.
CPP FLU 1.5.1 New Development and Redevelopment in Built Areas. To promote the efficient use of existing public roads, utilities and service infrastructure, the County will encourage redevelopment in underutilized properties to maximize
development densities and intensities located in the Mixed Use-Suburban, Mixed Use-Urban, Commercial and Industrial Future Land Use districts categories (with the exception of residential development).
FINDINGS
The proposed amendment to Commercial is consistent with the intent and purpose of Future Land Use category MU-S, as stated in CPP FLU 1.3.1. Based on public records, the parcel was previously developed and used as an operational plant nursery/landscape business, a listed use under the retail sales and services of the MU-S FLU category. Redevelopment of this property will promote the efficient use of utilities and infrastructure and redevelopment of an under-utilized property making the proposed use compatible with the intent of CPP FLU 1.5.1. |
| 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 not consistent with the intent and purpose of the Land Development Code. All new non-residential uses proposed within the Commercial district that are not part of a planned unit development or not identified as exempt by the district shall be on parcels that satisfy the location criteria requirements. The proposed location, if the rezoning is approved, would encourage the creation of strip commercial development. The applicant did not provide a compatibility analysis for review. |
| 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 not compatible with surrounding existing uses in the area. Adjacent parcels are zoned low-density residential with some large tracks of Conservation zoning. Within the 500 foot radius, there are properties with zoning districts Commercial, Low-Density Residential and Conservation. One storage-warehouse business across Lillian Hwy to the North, five vacant residential parcels, two single-family residences, two large parcels owned by the State of Florida and one mineral processing plant parcel, zoned low-density residential in place since 1993, based on public records. The applicant did not provide a compatibility analysis for review. |
| 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 proposed zoning will create spot zoning, based on the LDC definition in Chapter 6, as the requested Commercial zoning is different from the zoning of all contiguous land. Site visit reveals the parcel's location about midway between Bauer and Blue Angel to be sparsely developed as compared to the East and West major intersections. Due to the parcel's location, the proposed zoning request would not create a logical zoning transition between the low-residential districts and other existing zoning districts in the adjacent area. The applicant did not provide a compatibility analysis for review. |
| 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. Based on public records, both of the current commercial uses have existed since 1984 and 1993. The site is located midway between Blue Angel and Bauer roads in an area that is currently scarcely developed. Allowing a commercial zoning for the property would contribute to commercial development sprawl. The applicant did not provide a compatibility analysis for review.
|
|
|
|
|