Agenda

Back to Calendar Return

5. C.

Planning Board-Rezoning

Meeting Date:	04/07/2015
CASE : Z-2015-08
APPLICANT:	Anthony Picheo, Agent for John Martin, Owner
ADDRESS:	1100 Block of Clymil Dr
PROPERTY REF. NO.:	01-1N-31-2301-000-004
FUTURE LAND USE:	MU-S, Mixed-Use Suburban
DISTRICT:	5
OVERLAY DISTRICT:	N/A
BCC MEETING DATE:	05/07/2015

SUBMISSION DATA:

REQUESTED REZONING:

FROM: VR-1, Villages Rural Residential District (one unit per four acres)

TO: VR-2, Villages Rural Residential District (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 (CPP) 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).

CPP 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. Range of allowable uses include: 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.

CPP FLU 1.5.3 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 VR-2 is consistent with the intent and purpose of Future Land Use category MU-S as stated in CPP FLU 1.3.1 because the current future land use allows for residential uses which is consistent with the surrounding uses in the area of the subject parcel. The property is utilizing the existing public road, utilities and infrastructure.

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. Refer to Article 11 for uses, heights and densities allowed in VR, villages rural residential areas located in the Airport/Airfield Environs

FINDINGS

The proposed amendment is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Land Development Code. The subject parcel had been previously split and made the lot nonconforming with the current VR-1 zoning, which requires a minimum lot area of 4 acres. VR-2 allows for the same rural community uses as VR-1, with the VR-2 densities reflecting smaller lot sizes of one dwelling unit per .75 acre.

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 compatible with surrounding existing uses in the area. Within the 500’ radius impact area, staff observed properties with zoning districts VR-1 VR-2 and V-3. The majority of parcels within the area of the subject property are currently VR-1 or VR-2 and range from .41 acres to 5 acres in size. The request to rezone to VR-2 would allow the applicant the ability to construct a single-family residence on the 3.1 acre parcel and remain be compatible to other properties in the vicinity.

CRITERION (4)

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

FINDINGS

Staff found no changed conditions that would impact the amendment or property(s). The adjacent parcel to the south of the subject parcel was rezoned from VR-1 to V-3 in 2007.

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 request for rezoning remains in the village rural zoning designation which allows for single family with rural development patterns and smaller lot sizes.

Attachments
Z-2015-08