|
Back to Calendar
Return
|
| |
Growth Management Report 14. 1.
|
| BCC Regular Meeting |
|
|
|
| RECOMMENDATION: |
Recommendation Concerning the Review of the Rezoning Cases Heard by the Planning Board on July 1, 2013
That the Board take the following action concerning the rezoning cases heard by the Planning Board on July 1, 2013:
-
Review and either adopt, modify, or overturn the Planning Board’s recommendations for Rezoning Cases Z-2013-13, Z-2013-14, and Z-2013-15 or remand the cases back to the Planning Board; and
-
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-2013-13 |
|
|
Address: |
12511 Lillian Highway |
|
|
Property Reference No.: |
02-2S-32-6000-005-002 |
|
|
Property Size: |
3.26 (+/-) 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-S, Mixed-Use Suburban |
|
|
Commissioner District: |
1 |
|
|
Requested by: |
Bobby and Sally Reynolds, Owners |
|
|
Planning Board Recommendation: |
Denial |
|
|
Speakers: |
Bobby Reynolds, Lisa Minshew, Barbara Lenn, John Catchoh, Kara George Oshana, Dorothy Oshana, Les Senft, Debra Warren, Betty Catchoh |
|
|
|
|
|
2. |
Case No.: |
Z-2013-14 |
|
|
Address: |
7585 Mobile Highway |
|
|
Property Reference: |
16-1S-31-3304-000-003 |
|
|
Property Size: |
3.92 (+/-) acres |
|
|
From: |
R-2, Single-Family District (cumulative), Low-Medium Density (seven du/acre) |
|
|
To: |
AG, Agricultural District, Low Density (1.5 acres/du) |
|
|
FLU Category: |
MU-S, Mixed-Use Suburban |
|
|
Commissioner District: |
1 |
|
|
Requested by: |
Albert and Marie Jones, Owners |
|
|
Planning Board Recommendation: |
Approval |
|
|
Speakers: |
Albert Jones, Matthew Mosley |
|
|
|
|
|
3. |
Case No.: |
Z-2013-15 |
|
|
Address: |
6365 Helms Road |
|
|
Property Reference: |
21-1S-31-2101-001-001; 20-1S-31-1101-000-000 |
|
|
Property Size: |
99.97 (+/-) acres |
|
|
From: |
AG, Agricultural District, Low Density (1.5 acre/du) |
|
|
To: |
R-1, Single-Family District, Low Density (four du/acre) |
|
|
FLU Category: |
MU-S, Mixed-Use Suburban |
|
|
Commissioner District: |
1 |
|
|
Requested by: |
Brian Brown, Agent for Figure 8 (Florida), LLC, Owner |
|
|
Planning Board Recommendation: |
Approval |
|
|
Speakers: |
Brian Brown, Matthew Mosley, Karen Qualls, James Higdon, Elizabeth Zdunich |
|
| BACKGROUND: |
The above cases were owner initiated and heard at the July 1, 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: |
|
|
| 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.
|
|
|
|
|