Agenda

Back to Calendar Return

5. A.

Planning Board-Rezoning

Meeting Date:	06/03/2014
CASE : Z-2014-08
APPLICANT:	Wiley C. "Buddy" Page, Agent for Gene Foster,Trustee
ADDRESS:	2161 Hwy 97 South
PROPERTY REF. NO.:	30-1N-31-1300-000-000
FUTURE LAND USE:	MU-S, Mixed-Use Suburban
DISTRICT:	5
OVERLAY DISTRICT:	None
BCC MEETING DATE:	07/10/2014

SUBMISSION DATA:

REQUESTED REZONING:

FROM: V-1 Villages Single-Family Residential District, Gross Density (one du/acre)

TO: V-2A Villages Single-Family Residential District, Gross Density (three 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)

CRITERION (1)

Consistent with the Comprehensive Plan (CP).
Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.

CP Policy FLU 1.1.1 Development Consistency. New development and redevelopment in unincorporated Escambia County shall be consistent with the Escambia County Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map (FLUM).

CP Policy FLU 1.3.1 Future Land Use Categories. The Mixed-Use Suburban (MU-S) future land use (FLU) category is intended for a mix of residential and nonresidential uses while promoting compatible infill development and the separation of urban and suburban land uses. The range of allowable uses includes: residential, retail and services, professional office, recreational facilities, public and civic. The minimum residential density is two dwelling units per acre and the maximum residential density is ten dwelling units per acre.

CP Policy FLU 2.1.2 Compact Development. To promote compact development, FLUM amendments and residential rezoning to allow higher residential densities may be allowed in the Mixed-Use Urban (MU-U) and Mixed-Use Suburban (MU-S) future land use categories.

FINDINGS

The proposed amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and FLUM. The permitted uses of V-2A are consistent with the stated intent and purpose of the MU-S future land use category. The increased maximum residential density is consistent with that allowed by MU-S and with the allowance of higher residential densities to promote compact development. Consistency with other applicable policies of the Comprehensive Plan would be confirmed during review of development for compliance with implementing Land Development Code regulations.

CRITERION (2)

Consistent with The Land Development Code (LDC).
Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any portion of this Code, and is consistent with the stated purpose and intent of this Code.

LDC 6.00.01. Legislative intent of residential districts. The residential districts established in this section (AG, RR, SDD, R-1, AMU-1, AMU-2, R-1PK, R-2, R-2PK, R-3, R-3PK, R-4, R-5, R-6, V-1, V-2, V-2A, V-3, V-4, V-5, VR-1, VR-2, VR-3, and residential portions of GMD, VM-1 and VM-2 and PUD/PUD-PK districts) are designed to promote and protect the health, safety, convenience, order, prosperity and other aspects of the general welfare. The general goals include:
H. To promote the most desirable use of land as well as the appropriate location and density of development, to promote stability of residential areas by providing for smooth transitions in residential density, to effectuate and maintain adequate levels of public services, to conserve the value of land and buildings, to protect the county's present and future tax revenues and to achieve the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.

LDC 6.05.24. V-2A Villages Single-Family Residential District, Gross Density (three du/acre).
A. Intent and purpose of V-1 through V-3 districts. Single-family detached residential district characterized by urban land development patterns with residential subdivision densities varying from one unit per acre to five units per acre. Mobile homes are not allowed. No minimum lot size is required for new subdivisions with the exception of V-1, which has a minimum lot size of one acre, but development must meet overall maximum density requirements. V-2A may be used in any AIPD overlay area with a compatible future land use designation. Density will be determined by the accident potential zone density allowed for their property, not to exceed three d.u./acre. In AIPD-2, density is limited to three d.u./acre. Refer to article 11 for uses and densities allowed in V, villages single-family residential areas located in the Airport/Airfield Environs. Structures within Airport/Airfield Environs, Zones, and Surfaces remain subject to the height definitions, height restrictions, and methods of height calculation set forth in article 11.

FINDINGS

The proposed amendment is not in conflict with the LDC and is consistent with its stated purposes and intent, including the general goal to promote appropriate density of development and smooth transitions in residential density. Lands surrounding the subject parcel are predominantly zoned V-1, VR-1, VR-2 and VAG-2; low density residential districts limited respectively to 1.00, 0.25, 1.33, and 0.20 dwelling units per acre. The small portion of parcel boundary adjoining R-2 zoning appears to be buffered by off-site wetlands from the potential density of seven dwelling units per acre. The existing V-1 zoning and proposed V-2A zoning have the same allowed uses, but the amendment would increase maximum density from one to three dwelling units per acre. Based on the subject parcel’s reported 17.845 acres, rezoning to V-2A represents a potential increase from 18 to 54 single-family dwellings.

CRITERION (3)

Compatible with surrounding uses.
Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses in the area of the subject property(s).

FINDINGS

The proposed amendment allowing low density single-family residential development is compatible with existing low density single-family residential as the predominant use in the area of the subject property. The proposed residential density is greater than the maximum allowed density of a substantial majority of surrounding parcels, but remains low density.

CRITERION (4)

Changed conditions.
Whether and the extent to which there are any changed conditions that impact the amendment or property(s).

FINDINGS

No changed conditions were identified that significantly impact the amendment or property. The R-2 district adjoining a small portion of the subject parcel was rezoned from several low density districts in 2008. Other development around the parcel, including rezoning, has retained the established low density residential uses of the area.

CRITERION (5)

Effect on natural environment.
Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment.

FINDINGS
Wetlands and hydric soils are not indicated on the subject property according to the National Wetland Inventory. The presence and extent of adverse impacts from future development on the largely wooded parcel would be confirmed through review of the development for compliance with applicable Land Development Code regulations.

CRITERION (6)

Development patterns.
Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern.

FINDINGS
The proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern, creating a related zoning district having maximum residential density compatible with the majority of adjacent and nearby zoning districts.

Attachments
Z-2014-08