7/13/1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r � BOOK iUJ PAGE 7U 7 TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator D HEAD CONCURRENCE: Ro ert M. g, AICP Community Development Direct1r, THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP Planning Director FROM: John W. McCoy ,Xr (� Senior Planner, Community Development DATE: July 6, 1999 SUBJECT: Suntree Partners Inc.'s Request to Rezone Approximately 21731 Acres from A- 1 1 (Agricultural) and RS -3 (Single -Family up to 3 units/acre) to PD (Planned Development) and to Receive Conceptual PD Plan Approval for a Development to be Known as Citrus Springs It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of July 13, 1999. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS: This is a request by Suntree Partners, Inc., through its agent Knight, McGuire and Associates, Inc., to rezone approximately 217.31 acres. Approximately 207 acres are zoned A-1, while the remaining 10 acres are zoned RS -3. As part of the PD rezoning request, a PD conceptual plan has been submitted for review and approval. The subject site is located northeast of the intersection of 581 Avenue and 9m Street SW, and runs from 9t' Street SW to the South Relief Canal. The purpose of this request is to secure a zoning which allows construction of single-family homes on lots of various sizes, many of which are smaller that the RS -3 zoning district's minimum lot size, and also to allow multi -family units and an accessory commercial use area that is internal to the project. • Board of County Commissioners Consideration Pursuant to Section 971.05 of the LDRs, the Bbard of County Commissioners is to consider the appropriateness of the requested conceptual PD plan based on the submitted PD plan and suitability of the site for that use. The Board may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the special exception use. The County may attach any conditions and safeguards necessary to mitigate impacts and to ensure compatibility of the use with the surrounding area. ♦ Planning and Zoning Action At its regular meeting of June 10, 1999, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously (6-0) to approve the project. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended some modifications to the originally proposed buffers which the staff has incorporated into the analysis section of the report regarding buffers. Some of the buffer recommendations are in response to concerns expressed by surrounding property owners at the Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing. Thus, the staff s recommendation includes the increased buffers recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission. July 13, 1999 40