Laserfiche WebLink
STAFF ANALYSIS - PETITION 91-03 <br /> <br /> The basic analysis of this rezoning request will concern whether <br /> the R-40 zOning is appropriate for this area. If it is not, the <br /> second question is what zoning is appropriate. <br /> <br /> The R~40 district is intended for site built <br /> zoning <br /> large <br /> lot, <br />residential uses. There are no non-resident/al uses permitted in <br />the R-40 district, with the exception of home occupation uses, and <br />manufactured housing that does not meet state building code is not <br />'allowed. <br /> <br /> The area surrounding the requested rezoning is a mixture of housing <br /> types and non-residential uses. Including the two non-residential <br /> uses on the property requested for rezoning, there are a number of <br /> other commercial uses scattered in with manufactured and site built <br /> housing. The current development of the area does not meet the <br /> intentions of the R~40 district, and much of it would not be <br /> allowed under the present zoning. It appears that the R-40 zoning <br /> was based on assumptions about how the area might re-develop, and <br /> those assumptions have not come to pass. The present R-40 zoning <br /> is not appropriate for the current development, and does not appear <br /> to be appropriate for the future development of the area. <br /> <br /> If the R-40 zoning is not appropriate, the next quest/on is whether <br /> or not.the requested ARR zoning is correct for the area. The <br /> larger parcel directly south of the parcels requested for rezoning <br /> is currently zoned ARR and agriculturally used. In addition, the <br /> residential and commercial mixture in the area is all compatible <br /> with the intent of the ARR zoning district. There is little <br /> indication that these existing uses will change, and if they do it <br /> is more likely that industrial/commercial development from <br /> International Drive will extend to this area. <br /> <br /> There are some concerns about 'this request, the lack of water and <br /> sewer service in the area, but most ARR permitted uses do not <br /> require these services. There is also some concern about traffic <br /> on Berwick Court. Once again, however, the existing and allowed <br /> uses should not generate traffic greater than that generated by <br /> existing and past uses. Berwick Court is also State maintained. <br /> <br /> The Planning and Zoning Staff recommends that this petition be <br /> approved. <br /> <br /> ~onathan B. ~arshall <br /> February 12, 1991 <br /> <br /> <br />