Agenda

Back to Calendar Return

5. B.

Planning Board-Rezoning

Meeting Date:	03/03/2015
CASE : Z-2015-04
APPLICANT:	Cary Godwin, Owner
ADDRESS:	4631 Highway 164
PROPERTY REF. NO.:	33-5N-32-2102-000-000
FUTURE LAND USE:	AG, Agriculture
DISTRICT:	5
OVERLAY DISTRICT:	N/A
BCC MEETING DATE:	04/09/2015

SUBMISSION DATA:

REQUESTED REZONING:

FROM: VAG-1, Villages Agriculture District, (five dwellings units per 100 acres on one-acre parcels)

TO: VR-2, Villages Rural Residential Districts, (one unit per .75 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.
Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.

Comprehensive Plan Policy (CPP) FLU 1.3.1 Future Land Use Categories.
The Agriculture (AG) Future Land Use (FLU) category is intended for routine agricultural and silvicultural related activities and very low density residential uses. Also allows for commercial activity limited to those endeavors ancillary to agricultural and silvicultural pursuits or in support of agricultural activities such as seed, feed and food outlets, farm equipment and repair and veterinary services. Range of allowable uses include: Agriculture, Silviculture, Residential, Recreational, Public and Civic, Limited Ancillary or Supportive Commercial. The maximum residential density is one dwelling unit per twenty acres.

FINDINGS

The proposed amendment to VR-2 is not consistent with the intent and purpose of Future Land Use category AG, Agriculture as stated in CPP FLU 1.3.1. Although this does not imply a minimum lot size, the proposed request to rezone a one and a half acre parcel within the future land use category is less than the minimum acreage required by the FLU. From a rational perspective staff agrees that the proposed lot size does not conflict with the intent and purpose of the AG future land use category which allows for large lot development.

CRITERION (2)

Consistent with The Land Development Code.
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 6.05.23. VR Villages Rural Residential Districts.
A. Intent and purpose of districts. Single-family residential district characterized by rural land development patterns. Rural community nonresidential uses are allowed. Home occupations are considered permitted uses. Mobile homes are allowed as single-family dwellings. Mobile home subdivisions are allowed. Mobile home parks are allowed as conditional uses. Parcels designated as VR are generally not assessed as agriculturally productive parcels. VR-1 densities reflect large lot rural land development patterns, while VR-2 densities reflect the need for more affordable lot sizes for single-family and mobile home development.

FINDINGS

The proposed amendment is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Land Development Code. The request to VR-2 is still in character for the VR districts with rural land development patterns and the lot size fits the intent of the surrounding VAG zoning in order to protect the areas of prime farmland. Creating a smaller, more affordable lot size protects viable farm production activities currently ongoing on the adjoining parcel. A single-family dwelling currently exists on the subject parcel.

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 is not compatible with surrounding existing uses in the area.
Within the 500’ radius impact area, staff observed properties with zoning district VAG- 1. The majority of the surrounding parcels are large lots used for agriculture. There are a number of smaller residential parcels within the area.

CRITERION (4)

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

FINDINGS

Historically, the subject parcel was a five acre portion that was split from the parent parcel, and later incorporated back into the overall parent parcel. Therefore, the request would not impact the amendment or property.

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
According to the National Wetland Inventory, wetlands and hydric soils were not indicated on the subject property. When applicable, further review during the Site Plan Review process will be necessary to determine if there would be any significant adverse impact on the natural environment.

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 because the area consists of large agricultural parcels with smaller associated residential acres. The request to rezone the smaller portion of this parcel will maintain the integrity of the portion of the land that is currently being used for agriculture, while keeping the single-family portion in the smaller section to maintain the affordable lot size for the current use of single-family.

Attachments
Z-2015-04