AG19900521 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

STAFF ANALYSIS-PETITION 90-06 This request for a change from ARR to ~-30 zoning i5 much more than a simple lot size reduction request due to the dil fere~ces iff allowed uses. The analysis gl this rezoning, therefore, must concentrate on the compatibility gl both the proposed lot sizes and the possible uses. The first consideration is the compatibility of the et sizes. The area around this property has developed as a large lot residential area with large tracts still vacant or used for agricultural put@asea, The immediate area gl the requested rezoning also includes at least two mobile I~ome parks with much smaller lot s zes. The Lun.d. Developmenl GuiA~ ~ndicates that this area is best suited for large lot residential, and is reinforced by the tact that this area is outside ol the Ten Year Growth Area. These two lacts alone indicate that tho lot size reduction is inappropriate- The second cons deration is the difference n allowed uses between the ARR end R-30 zones. SpecificallY, under the g-30 zoning mobile home eubdivisions are allowed as a conditional use, and that is the use that the petitioner has proposed. Rs stated earlier, there are et least two mobile home parks in the area and also what has effectively be'come a mobile home subdivision. There is also scattered manufactured housing throughout the area as allowed under the current RRR zoning, and in fact the parcel proposed for rezoning could be developed under that ARR zoning wi Ih one acre lots and Class One Cdouble-wide) mobile homes. These facts seenl to support the rezoning- There ere st ~ I two other faclors that must be brought out. Bur wood Road is a rural road that is paved and State maintained, bul would still be marginally adequate, at best, to serve the development of the entire 120 ecf~ parcel- The other factor is that mobile home subdiVisions are a cond~ t anal use under the R-30 zoning and as such must receive a conditional u3e permit Item the County Board gl Adjustment, and subdivision approval from Ihe County planning Board. This analysis shows that there are factors that support beth the denial and approval of this petition, The I ~nsl decision~ however, seems to re~t on w~other this t20 acr~ parcel is subslantlally dilferent enough from the .area surrounding il to ~arrant a different zoning classi I cai[on, Despite thc fact that the owner plans water and sewer improvements, tho Plannrng and Zoning Staf f lecls that it ks not, and rbcommends Ihst this petition be denied.