Print Back to Calendar Return
  Growth Management Report     10. 1.    
BCC Regular Meeting
Meeting Date: 06/20/2013  
Issue:    Review of Rezoning Cases Heard by the Planning Board on May 6, 2013
From: T. Lloyd Kerr, AICP
Department: Development Services  

RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation Concerning the Review of the Rezoning Cases heard by the Planning Board on May 6, 2013

That the Board take the following action concerning the rezoning cases heard by the Planning Board on May 6, 2013:
  1. Review and either adopt, modify, or overturn the Planning Board’s recommendations for Rezoning Cases Z-2013-02, Z-2013-05, Z-2013-06, Z-2013-07, Z-2013-08, Z-2013-09, and Z-2013-10 or remand the cases back to the Planning Board; and
  2. Authorize the Chairman to sign the Orders of the Escambia County Board of County Commissioners for the rezoning cases that were reviewed.
1. Case No.: Z-2013-02
  Address: 9900 BLK Sorrento Road
  Property Reference No.: 05-3S-31-1500-004-009
  Property Size: 13.07 (+/-) acres
  From: SDD, Special Development District, (noncumulative), Low Density (three du/acre)
  To: AMU-2, Airfield Mixed Use-2 District (cumulative to AMU-1 only) (three du/acre)
  FLU Category: MU-S, Mixed-Use Suburban
  Commissioner District: 2
  Requested by: Wiley C. "Buddy" Page, Agent for Gerald S. Chernekoff, Owner
  Planning Board Recommendation: Approval
  Speakers: Buddy Page
     
2. Case No.: Z-2013-05
  Address: 7481 N Palafox Street
  Property Reference: 21-1S-30-1101-007-029
  Property Size: 1.94 (+/-) acres
  From: R-5, Urban Residential/Limited Office District (cumulative) High Density (20 du/acre)
  To: C-2, General Commercial and Light Manufacturing District (cumulative) (25 du/acre)
  FLU Category: MU-U, Mixed-Use Urban
  Commissioner District: 3
  Requested by: Christin Taylor, Agent for Kenneth Knowles, Owner
  Planning Board Recommendation: Approval
  Speakers: Kenneth Knowles, Michael Ritz
     
3. Case No.: Z-2013-06
  Address: 9200 BLK University Parkway
  Property Reference: 14-1S-30-3101-000-004
  Property Size: 1.76 (+/-) acres
  From: R-4, Multiple-Family District, (cumulative) Medium High Density (18 du/acre)
  To: C-1, Retail Commercial District (cumulative) (25 du/acre)
  Flu Category: MU-U, Mixed-Use Urban
  Commissioner District: 4
  Requested by: Eleanor K. Flowers, Owner
  Planning Board Recommendation: Approval
  Speakers: Eleanor Flowers
     
4. Case No.: Z-2013-07
  Address: 2755 Fenwick Road 
  Property Reference: 42-1S-30-3001-001-003
  Property Size: 2.14 (+/-) acres
  From: R-5, Urban Residential/Limited Office District, (cumulative) High Density (20 du/acre)
  To: C-2, General Commercial and Light Manufacturing District (cumulative) (25 du/acre)
  FLU Category: MU-U, Mixed-Use Urban
  Commissioner District: 1
  Requested by: Wiley C. Buddy Page, Agent for Robertson Brazwell, LLC, Owner
  Planning Board Recommendation: Denial
  Speaker: Buddy Page, Robin Foster, and Jenifer Suarez
     
5. Case No.: Z-2013-08
  Address: 4940 Saufley Field Road
  Property Reference: 39-1S-31-3312-000-000
  Property Size: 2.11 (+/-) acres
  From: R-5, Urban Residential/Limited Office District, (cumulative) High Density (20 du/acre)
  To: R-6, Neighborhood Commercial and Residential District, (cumulative) High Density (25 du/acre)
  FLU Category: MU-U, Mixed-Use Urban
  Commissioner District: 1
  Requested by: Wiley C. Buddy Page, Agent for Teramore Development, LLC, Owner
  Planning Board Recommendation: Approval
  Speaker: Buddy Page, Rev. Kevin Krist, Paul Brantley, Phyllis Brantley, Richard Lawrence, and Andrew Blewer
     
6. Case No.: Z-2013-09
  Address: 3720 Navy Boulevard
  Property Reference: 38-2S-30-1000-013-002
  Property Size: 1.54 (+/-) acres
  From: R-2/C-1, Single-Family District (cumulative), Low-Medium Density (seven du/acre) and C-1, Retail Commercial District (cumulative) (25 du/acre)
  To: C-1, Retail Commercial District (cumulative) (25 du/acre)
  FLU Category: C, Commercial
  Commissioner District: 2
  Request by: Larry Richardson, Agent for William Welch, Owner
  Planning Board Recommendation: Approval
  Speaker: Larry Richardson and Edward Robinson
     
7. Case No.: Z-2013-10
  Address: 707 New Warrington Road
  Property Reference: 34-2S-30-0183-000-000
  Property Size: 1.82 (+/-) acres
  From: C-2/R-2, General Commercial and Light Manufacturing District (cumulative) (25 du/acre) and R-2, Single-Family District (cumulative), Low-Medium Density (seven du/acre)
  To: C-2, General Commercial and Light Manufacturing District (cumulative) (25 du/acre)
  FLU Category: C. Commercial
  Commissioner District: 2
  Request by: Jill Stewart, Agent for Joseph E. Mercer, Owner
  Planning Board Recommendation: Approval
  Speaker: Jill Stewart
BACKGROUND:
The above cases were owner initiated and heard at the May 6, 2013 Planning Board meeting. Under the Land Development Code (LDC) 2.08.00.E.1., “the Board of County Commissioners shall review the record and the recommendation of the Planning Board and either adopt the recommended order, modify the recommended order as set forth therein, reject the recommended order, or remand the matter back to the Planning Board for additional facts or clarification. Findings of fact or findings regarding legitimate public purpose may not be rejected or modified unless they are clearly erroneous or unsupported by the record. When rejecting or modifying conclusions of law, the Board of County Commissioners must state with particularity its reasons for rejecting or modifying the recommended conclusion of law and must make a finding that its substituted conclusion of law is as or more reasonable than the conclusion that was rejected or modified. However, the Board of County Commissioners may not modify the recommendation to a more intensive use than recommended by the Planning Board; rather the matter shall be remanded with instructions. The review shall be limited to the record below. Only a party of record to the proceedings before the Planning Board or representative shall be afforded the right to address the Board of County Commissioners and only as to the correctness of the findings of fact or conclusions of law as based on the record. The Board of County Commissioners shall not hear testimony."
 
To further the County’s policy of “decreasing response time from notification of citizen needs to ultimate resolution,” the Board is acting on both the approval of the Planning Board recommended order and the LDC Map Amendment for this month’s rezoning cases. This report item addresses only the review and upholding of the Planning Board’s recommendation. The next report item will address the Public Hearing for the LDC Zoning Map Amendment.
BUDGETARY IMPACT:
This action may increase the ad valorem tax base for Escambia County.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS/SIGN-OFF:
The recommended order is the result of deliberations by the Planning Board based on staff analysis, public testimony, and knowledge of the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code as well as case law and Florida Statutes.
PERSONNEL:
N/A
POLICY/REQUIREMENT FOR BOARD ACTION:

The Chairman will need to sign the Orders of the Escambia County Board of County Commissioners either denying or approving the rezoning requests.

IMPLEMENTATION/COORDINATION:
The cases under review are presented to the Planning Board for collection of evidence. The Planning Board conducts a quasi-judicial public hearing and issues a recommended order to the Board.

Attachments
Z-2013-02
Z-2013-05
Z-2013-06
Z-2013-07
Z-2013-08
Z-2013-09
Z-2013-10

AgendaQuick©2005 - 2024 Destiny Software Inc., All Rights Reserved