|
Back to Calendar
Return
|
| |
4. A.
|
| Planning Board-Rezoning |
|
|
|
| SUBMISSION DATA: |
REQUESTED REZONING:
FROM: RMU, Rural Mixed-use district (two du/acre)
TO: LDMU, Low Density Mixed-use district (seven 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 a., LDC Sec. 2-7.2(b)(4) |
Consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Whether the proposed rezoning is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and not in conflict with any of its provisions.
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.
FLUM Mixed-Use Suburban (MU-S)
General Description: Intended for a mix of residential and non-residential uses while promoting compatible infill development and the separation of urban and suburban land uses.
Range of Allowable Uses: Residential, retail sales & services, professional office, recreational facilities, public and civic.
Standards:
Residential Minimum Density: 2 du/acre
Maximum Density: 25 du/acre
Non-Residential Minimum Intensity: None
Maximum Intensity: 1.0 Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
FINDINGS
The proposed amendment is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and FLUM. Although the increased density of the proposed LDMU zoning is consistent with that allowed by the pending Mixed-Use Suburban FLU, and the permitted uses of the proposed LDMU are consistent with the stated intent of MU-S to allow for a mix of residential and non-residential uses, compatible infill would not be promoted by the range of LDMU allowed uses.
Alternatively, Low Density Residential (LDR) zoning would be compatible and remain consistent with both the allowed uses and density of MU-S. Consistency with other applicable policies of the Comprehensive Plan would be confirmed during review of proposed development for compliance with implementing Land Development Code regulations. |
| Criterion b., LDC Sec. 2-7.2(b)(4) |
Consistent with The Land Development Code.
Whether the proposed rezoning is consistent with the stated purposes and intent of the LDC and not in conflict with any of its provisions.
LDC Sec. 3-2.4 Rural Mixed-use district (RMU).
(a) Purpose. The Rural Mixed-use (RMU) district establishes appropriate areas and land use regulations for a mix of low density residential uses and compatible non-residential uses within areas that have historically developed as rural or semi-rural communities. The primary intent of the district is to sustain these communities by allowing greater residential density, smaller residential lots, and a more diverse mix of non-residential uses than the Agricultural or Rural Residential districts, but continue to support the preservation of agriculturally productive lands. The RMU district allows public facilities and services necessary for the health, safety, and welfare of the rural mixed-use community, and other non-residential uses that are compact, traditionally neighborhood supportive, and compatible with rural community character. District communities are often anchored by arterial and collector streets, but they are not characterized by urban or suburban infrastructure. Residential uses are generally limited to detached single-family dwellings, consistent with existing rural communities and limited infrastructure.
LDC Sec. 3-2.5 Low Density Residential district (LDR).
(a) Purpose. The Low Density Residential (LDR) district establishes appropriate areas and land use regulations for residential uses at low densities within suburban areas. The primary intent of the district is to provide for large-lot suburban type residential neighborhood development that blends aspects of rural openness with the benefits of urban street connectivity, and at greater density than the Rural Residential district. Residential uses within the LDR district are predominantly detached single-family dwellings. Clustering dwellings on smaller residential lots may occur where needed to protect prime farmland from non-agricultural use or to conserve and protect environmentally sensitive areas. The district allows non-residential uses that are compatible with suburban residential neighborhoods and the natural resources of the area.
LDC Sec. 3-2.6 Low Density Mixed-use district (LDMU).
(a) Purpose. The Low Density Mixed-use (LDMU) district establishes appropriate areas and land use regulations for a complementary mix of low density residential uses and compatible non-residential uses within mostly suburban areas. The primary intent of the district is to provide for a mix of neighborhood-scale retail sales, services and professional offices with greater dwelling unit density and diversity than the Low Density Residential district. Additionally, the LDMU district is intended to rely on a pattern of well-connected streets and provide for the separation of suburban uses from more dense and intense urban uses. Residential uses within the district include most forms of single-family, two-family and multi-family dwellings.
(f) Rezoning to LDMU. Low Density Mixed-use zoning may be established only within the Mixed-Use Suburban (MU-S) and Mixed-Use Urban (MU-U) future land use categories. The district is suitable for suburban or urban areas with central water and sewer and developed street networks. The district is appropriate to provide transitions between areas zoned or used for low or medium density residential and areas zoned or used for high density mixed-use. Rezoning to LDMU is subject to the same location criteria as any new non-residential use proposed within the LDMU district.
(e) Location criteria. All new non-residential uses proposed within the LDMU district that are not part of a predominantly residential development or a planned unit development, or are not identified as exempt by district regulations, shall be on parcels that satisfy at least one of the following location criteria:
(5) Documented compatibility. A compatibility analysis prepared by the applicant provides competent substantial evidence of unique circumstances regarding the parcel or use that were not anticipated by the alternative location criteria [along an arterial or collector street], and the proposed use will be able to achieve long-term compatibility with existing and potential uses.
FINDINGS
The proposed rezoning to LDMU is not consistent with stated purposes of the LDC and is in conflict with some provisions. The primary intent of the LDMU district, (to provide for a mix of neighborhood-scale retail sales and services, professional offices, and greater dwelling unit density and diversity than LDR) cannot be appropriately fulfilled at the location proposed. The location does not comply with the arterial or collector street criteria of the district, and there are no unique circumstances regarding the subject parcels that were unanticipated by those criteria.
Rezoning to LDMU is appropriate where there is a pattern of well-connected streets, but the surrounding streets are within substandard rights-of-way and not well-connected. The district is also appropriate to provide separation between suburban and urban uses, but that function is not applicable to the subject parcels. Conversely, some LDMU allowed uses at the location proposed could create a need for separation.
Alternatively, the LDR district would allow an increase in the density of single-family detached dwellings. LDR would also be consistent with the purposes of the LDC and not in conflict with its provisions. Consistency with other purposes of the LDC would be confirmed during review of proposed development for compliance with applicable regulations. |
| Criterion c., LDC Sec. 2-7.2(b)(4) |
Compatible with surrounding uses.
Whether all land uses, development activities, and conditions allowed by the proposed zoning are compatible with the surrounding conforming uses, activities, and conditions and able to coexist in relative proximity to them in a stable fashion over time such that no use, activity, or condition negatively impacts another. The appropriateness of the rezoning is not limited to any specific use that may be proposed, but is evident for all permitted uses of the requested zoning.
FINDINGS
All land uses, development activities, and conditions allowed by the proposed zoning are not compatible with the surrounding conforming uses, activities, and conditions. Unlike the current RMU or alternative LDR, uses allowed by LDMU include new or expanded manufactured home parks and subdivisions, townhouses, zero lot line subdivisions, and retail sales and services within a neighborhood retail center up to 35,000 square feet. Uses, activities, and conditions allowed by LDR would, however, be compatible with those surrounding the subject parcels.
The area of existing LDMU on the east side of Tower Ridge Road is limited to a county parcel used for storage of road maintenance materials (e.g., milled asphalt, concrete pipe). As established by the original county zoning, the area of MDR immediately south of the subject parcels was zoned to accomodate medium density single-family and two-family (R-3)uses, but through a recently approved subdivision plan the area will be developed for detached single-family dwellings at less than two units per acre. Neither of these areas support the establishment of LDMU on the subject parcels. |
| Criterion d., LDC Sec. 2-7.2(b)(4) |
Changed conditions.
Whether the area to which the proposed rezoning would apply has changed, or is changing, to such a degree that it is in the public interest to encourage new uses, density, or intensity in the area through rezoning.
FINDINGS
In February, 2015 the county approved the preliminary plat and construction plan for Vintage Creek Subdivision, a 161-lot single-family detached dwelling development on 115 acres immediately south of the subject parcels. That use represents a change to such a degree that it could be in the public interest to encourage similar new uses and density in the area through rezoning. The LDR district would allow such use and density. |
| Criterion e., LDC Sec. 2-7.2(b)(4) |
Development patterns.
Whether the proposed rezoning would contribute to or result in a logical and orderly development pattern.
FINDINGS
The proposed amendment would not result in a logical and orderly development pattern due to the incompatible land uses and residential density that it would allow. Alternatively, uses and density allowed by LDR would contribute to a pattern of logical and orderly development.
CRITERION f., LDC Sec. 2-7.2(b)(4
Effect on natural environment.
Whether the proposed rezoning would not increase the probability of any significant adverse impacts on the natural environment.
FINDINGS
The proposed rezoning would not increase the probability of any significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. The approximately 12.5 acres of jurisdictional wetlands preliminarily identified within the subject property require protection from most uses. The actual presence and extent of adverse impacts from future development on the parcel would be confirmed through review of the development for compliance with applicable Land Development Code regulations regardless of the zoning
|
|
|
|
|