Agenda


AGENDA ESCAMBIA COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT April 18, 2012–8:30 a.m. Escambia County Central Office Complex 3363 West Park Place, Room 104

Call to Order.

Swearing in of Staff and acceptance of staff as expert witness

Acceptance of the BOA Meeting Package with the Development Services Staff Findings-of-Fact, into evidence.

Proof of Publication and waive the reading of the legal advertisement.

Approval of the Resume Minutes for March 21, 2012.

Consideration of the following cases:

Case No.: CU-2012-07

Address:	8700 North Highway 29
Request:	Expansion of an existing borrow pit
Requested by:	W. R. Ward, Agent for C.R. & Eleanor Faye Campbell

Case No.: AP-2012-01

Address:	7253 Plantation Rd
Requested Appeal:	Appeal of the denial of Change of Use Permit #PLU120300315 (Based on Planning Board Interpretation # 2012-01)
Requested by:	Kerry Anne Schultz, Esq., Agent for CNL Funding 2000-A, LP and C.E.J. South, Inc.

Discussion Items.

Old/New Business.

Announcement.

The next Board of Adjustment Meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, May 16, 2012 at 8:30 a.m., at the Escambia County Central Office Complex, Room104, 3363 West Park Place.

10.

Adjournment.


Board of Adjustment		5.
Meeting Date:	04/18/2012

Information

Attachments
03/21/2012 Draft Resume


Board of Adjustment		6. A.
Meeting Date:	04/18/2012
CASE:	CU-2012-07
APPLICANT:	C.R. & Eleanor Faye Campbell
ADDRESS:	8700 North Highway 29
PROPERTY REFERENCE NO.:	22-3N-31-3302-000-000, 22-3N-31-3400-000-000, 22-3N-31-3301-000-000
ZONING DISTRICT:	VAG-1 Villages Agriculture, Public
FUTURE LAND USE:	Rural Community
OVERLAY DISTRICT:	N/A

Information
SUBMISSION DATA:
REQUESTED CONDITIONAL USE: The applicant is seeking conditional use approval to expand an existing borrow pit across two adjacent properties. The existing pit received conditional use approval in 2000 through the BOA (CU-2000-31). RELEVANT AUTHORITY: Land Development Code of Escambia County, Florida (Ordinance 96-3 as amended), Section:6.05.22.D.7 7. Borrow pits and reclamation activities thereof (subject to local permit and development review requirements per Escambia County Code of Ordinances, Part I, Chapter 42, article VIII, and performance standards in Part III, the Land Development Code, article 7). CRITERIA: Land Development Code of Escambia County, Florida (Ordinance 96-3 as amended), Section 2.05.03
CRITERION (1)
On-site circulation. Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, on-site parking and loading, and access in case of fire or catastrophe. FINDINGS-OF-FACT The access from Hwy. 29 is via a private drive crossing parcels owned by the applicant. The existing drive and pit will provide access to the new parcels.
CRITERION (2)
Nuisance. Adverse impact such as noise, glare, smoke, odor or other harmful effects (electrical interference, hazardous materials, etc.) of the conditional use on adjoining properties and properties generally in the District. FINDINGS-OF-FACT Staff does not anticipate any new nuisance conditions beyond those associated with the existing pit. The remote nature of the pit and surrounding woods would alleviate any nuisance conditions.
CRITERION (3)
Solid Waste. Refuse and service areas with particular reference to concurrency requirements and items (1) and (2) above. FINDINGS-OF-FACT Any solid waste service needed on site must be provided by the operator.
CRITERION (4)
Utilities. Utilities with reference to concurrency requirements, location, availability and compatibility with surrounding land uses. FINDINGS-OF-FACT No utility services are proposed for this site.
CRITERION (5)
Buffers. The buffer may be a landscaped natural barrier, a natural barrier or a landscaped or natural barrier supplemented with fencing or other man-made barriers, so long as the function of the buffer and the intent of Policy FLU 1.1.9 of the Comprehensive Plan and the provisions of Section 7.01.06 of the Land Development Code are fulfilled. FINDINGS-OF-FACT The wooded surrounding parcels will buffer the use and this requirement will be further addressed in the site plan review process.
CRITERION (6)
Signs. Signs, if any, and proposed exterior lighting with reference to glare, traffic safety, economic effect, and compatibility and harmony with properties in the District. FINDINGS-OF-FACT No signage is proposed with this project.
CRITERION (7)
Environment impact. Impacts to protected trees, wetlands, water bodies, stormwater management or other natural features of the subject parcel. FINDINGS-OF-FACT The site plan reflects avoidance of wetlands and any environmental impacts must meet the requirements imposed during the site plan review process.
CRITERION (8)
Neighborhood impact. General compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the immediate area. FINDINGS-OF-FACT The proposed use is compatible with the existing pit and surrounding vacant, wooded land.
CRITERION (9)
Other requirements of Code. The proposed Conditional Use is consistent with all other relevant provisions of this Code. FINDINGS-OF-FACT The proposed use is consistent with all other relavant provisions of the code.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff finds that the proposed use meets the required criteria and recommends approval of the request as submitted. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FINDINGS: The Board adopted Staff's findings and approved the Conditional Use as requested.

Attachments
CU-2012-07 Case File


Board of Adjustment		6. B.
Meeting Date:	04/18/2012

Information

I. SUBMISSION DATA:

APPLICANT:	Kerry Anne Schultz, Esq., Agent for CNL Funding 2000-A, LP and C.E.J. South, Inc
DATE OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION:	March 7, 2012
DATE OF APPEAL APPLICATION:	March 12, 2012
PROJECT ADDRESS:	7253 Plantation Rd
PROPERTY REFERENCE NO.:	30-1S-30-4101-010-002
ZONING DISTRICT:	C-2
FUTURE LAND USE:	Commercial

III. REQUESTED APPEAL::

Appeal of the denial of Change of Use Permit #PLU120300315 (Based on Planning Board Interpretation # 2012-01)

BOARD ACTION:

The Board voted 4-2 to reverse the staff denial, finding that the action by staff was arbitrary and capricious.

III. RELEVANT APPEAL AUTHORITY:

Land Development Code of Escambia County, Florida (Ordinance 96-3 as amended), Section: 2.04.00 & 2.04.01

Sections 2.04.00, Appeal of Administrative Decisions and 2.04.01, Procedures for the Appeal of Administrative Decisions of the Escambia County Land Development Code (Ordinance No. 96-3 as amended), provide the relevant authority for the BOA’s review of administrative decisions.

A. The BOA is authorized to hear and to rule upon any appeal made by those persons aggrieved by administration of this Code. An administrative decision, or staff interpretation, shall not be reversed, altered, or modified by the BOA unless it finds that:

1. A written application for the appeal was submitted within 15 days of the administrative decision or action indicating the section of this Code under which said appeal applies together with a statement of the grounds on which the appeal is based; and

2. That the person filing said appeal has established that the decision or action of the administrative official was arbitrary and capricious; or

3. An aggrieved party who files an appeal of a decision of the DRC approving or approving with conditions a development plan application, must show, by competent substantial evidence that:

(i) The decision of the DRC is not in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan or the Land Development Code;

(ii) Their property will suffer an adverse impact as a result of the development approval decision;

(iii) The adverse impact must be to a specific interest protected or furthered by the Comprehensive Plan or the Land Development Code; and

(iv) It must be greater in degree than any adverse impact shared by the community at large.

4. In the event the owner, developer, or applicant is aggrieved or adversely affected by a denial of a development plan application or the imposition of conditions, the owner, developer or applicant filing the appeal must show, by competent substantial evidence, that the denial of the development plan or the imposition of conditions is neither required nor supported by the Comprehensive Plan or the Land Development Code or the application of technical design standards and specifications adopted by reference in the Code, or Concurrency Management Procedures and is, therefore, arbitrary and capricious.

IV. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

On December 20, 2011 Mr. Christian Jensen requested zoning verification for the subject site with a proposed use of crematory/funeral home. Development Services staff verified the site as having C-2 zoning and that the requested use would be allowed based on initial review. As the prior use on site was a restaurant, the proposed change of use would need to comply with the County site plan review process.
Based on further staff review of the proposed use, it was determined that the crematory would not be allowed in C-2 zoning. Mr. Jensen was contacted by staff in February 2012 and subsequently applied for a Planning Board Interpretation of the Land Development Code (LDC) regulation.
At the February 13, 2012 Planning Board meeting, the Board determined that crematoriums located within a funeral home are not a permitted use in C-2 zoning (Planning Board Interpretation # 2012-01).
Based on discussion with staff regarding appeal options, the property owner (CNL Funding) applied for a change of use from restaurant to funeral home with crematory. On March 7, 2012 the application was denied by staff based on Planning Board Interpretation # 2012-01. On March 12, 2012 the applicant filed for an Administrative Appeal of the Change of Use permit denial.

Attachments
AP-2012-01 Case File