Dockets R-11-06;07;09 Zoning Regulation Amendments Proposed Amendments to the Cochise County Zoning Regulations regarding Lot Development Administrative.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Board of County Commissioners PUBLIC HEARING October 28, 2008.
Advertisements

Policy Subdivisions Recently Adopted Amendments June 23, 2009 Miccosukee Community Center Open House.
Small Zone Lot Parking Exemption in all Mixed Use Commercial Zone Districts.
Design Concept Development Districts William F. Ross ROSS+associates.
BCC APPEAL PUBLIC HEARING ON BZA #VA , OCTOBER 2, 2014 APPLICANT/APPELLANT: JOSE HOLGUIN Orange County Zoning Division DATE: December 2, 2014.
BCC PUBLIC HEARING ON BZA #VA , OCTOBER 3, 2013 APPLICANT: YURI FERRO APPELLANT: WILLIAM A DAVIS, SR. and REBECCA M. DAVIS Orange County Zoning.
CBJ Planning Commission Presentation November 9, 2010 Subdivision Ordinance Revision Update.
Accessory Living Quarters Proposed Amendments (R-12-01) Board of Supervisors May 22, 2012.
Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission ZOS Location Map Feet.
Floyd County Public Meeting Amendment to the County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance for New Albany Township Area.
Implementing State Density Bonus Law in Berkeley November 13, 2014 City of Berkeley Planning & Development Department.
Community Development Department CP AND HG RESIDENTIAL LOTS, LLC AND CITY OF PALM COAST MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT.
Chapter 22. Georgia Real Estate An Introduction to the Profession Eighth Edition Chapter 22 Land-Use Control.
Noel H. Kaplan, Senior Environmental Planner
October 4, 2004 Detrich B. Allen City of Los Angeles Environmental Affairs Department 1 Siting New Development Detrich B. Allen General Manager Environmental.
8/29/20151 Docket Z (Easter Mountain, LLC) A Request to Rezone 556 Acres From RU-4 to SR-2 Cochise County Board of Supervisors October 25, 2011.
1 Implementing the Municipal Plan. 2 Overview The plan is a vision that must be implemented Many methods of implementation Communities must work to find.
Community Development Department COBBLESTONE VILLAGE FIRST AMENDED AND RESTATED MASTER PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Application #2241.
B IG I DEAS part 2 May 19, 2014 City of Duluth Unified Development Code.
Community Development Department GRAND HAVEN DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT City Council June 3, 2014.
NBOZ Northlake Boulevard Overlay Zoning District Village of North Palm Beach Landscape Element Requirements.
Rural Residential Zoning District & Subdivision Exemptions Southampton County Board of Supervisors Presented by Jay Randolph November 28, 2005.
Docket CP-12-01/Z (Martin) Board of Supervisors August 28, 2012.
Board of County Commissioners PUBLIC HEARING January 5, 2010.
Opposition to Proposed Building Height Variance in Case No. VA
Board of County Commissioners PUBLIC HEARING February 19, 2008.
City of New Brighton Planning Commission Meeting October 18, 2005 Agenda Item: 6A (Public Hearing) Special Use Permit for Detached Garage Exceeding 624.
JUNE 19, 2012 BCC APPEAL HEARING ON BZA #SE , April 5, 2012 APPLICANT/APPELLANT: TONY RAHBANY.
Board of County Commissioners PUBLIC HEARING December 2, 2008.
Updates to Title 8. Anticipated Timeline… July - December 2013 Ideas Compiled Research and Drafting January 2014 Planning Commission Worksession Review.
Subcommittee on Heights, Massing, and Alternate Standards    Third Report – January 20, 2009 Planning & Zoning Commission.
Board of County Commissioners PUBLIC HEARING September 1, 2009.
A 1,240 Acre Master Development Plan Proposal, West of Willcox, AZ. Cochise County Board of Supervisors August 23, 2011 Docket MDP / Z
April 17, 2007 BCC Called Public Hearing on BZA #VA February 1, 2007 Applicant: Towanda Hannah.
Community Development Department GRAND HAVEN DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT Planning & Land Development Regulation Board May 21, 2014.
Board of County Commissioners PUBLIC HEARING June 8, 2010.
Board of County Commissioners PUBLIC HEARING June 9, 2009.
FEBRUARY 21, 2012 BCC PUBLIC HEARING ON BZA # SE , Nov. 03, 2011 APPELLANT/APPLICANT: CHANTEL PRESTON.
Request to Downzone from R-36 To RU-2 Zoning District Applicant: Marshall Miles of GM Propane Docket Z Request for a Rezoning Board of Supervisors.
Board of County Commissioners PUBLIC HEARING June 23, 2009.
Community Development Department APPLICATION #2457 GRAND HAVEN PUD AMENDMENT APPLICATION #2411 GRAND HAVEN NORTH: SMALL SCALE FLUM AMENDMENT APPLICATION.
Accessory Dwelling Units Regulation Update Planning Commission Hearing October 29, 2014.
November 11, 2008 BCC PUBLIC HEARING ON BZA #SE , September 4, 2008 APPLICANT/APPELLANT: Christian Haitian Church, Inc.
1 Docket Z (Jantz) A Request to Rezone 9 Parcels from SR-43 to RU-4. Board of Supervisors, January 8, 2013.
Department of Sustainable Development and Construction Proposed Amendments to Cell Tower Regulations - Notification Requirements and Form District Standards.
1 Presented to the Fort Worth League of Neighborhood Associations By the City of Fort Worth, Planning and Development Department August 24, 2009 CONSERVATION.
The Three Levels of Development Planning 1 Small Area Plan Zone / CDD DSP / DSUP.
“ Grand Landings North” Comprehensive Plan Amendment & Rezoning City Council Public Hearing March 3, 2015.
Board of County Commissioners PUBLIC HEARING June 22, 2010.
Community Development Department Special Exception Vehicle Rental and Leasing St. Joe Plaza.
BACK YARD HENS IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS ORDINANCE BCC ADOPTION PUBLIC HEARING JULY 2, 2013 BACK YARD HENS IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS ORDINANCE BCC ADOPTION.
Somerset Village Playground KEENE’S POINTE CAMDEN TOT LOT Lake Burden Playground Bedford Village Playground Community Activity Area Proposed Camden Village.
Single Family Districts Working with staff, we ultimately settled on two districts.
Overview of Residential Reconstruction in Needham Lee Newman Town of Needham Director of Planning and Community Development.
4650 Alhambra Circle Building Site Separation. Request: The applicant is requesting consideration of a building site separation in accordance with Section.
ITEM 6.B ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT AT CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING AUGUST 25, 2009.
1 Villa Laguna MXD3 Site Plan Review. 2 Request: The applicant is requesting site plan review of a proposed mixed-use project pursuant to the recently.
VILLA AMADOR VICINITY MAP. CASE SPECIFICS Subject properties encompass ± acres –Entails 10 parcels of land –Located south of Amador Avenue, west.
Update on Special Event Facilities Butte County Code Section
Zoning Ordinance Update Study
8/23/2016 Luis N. Serna, AICP David, Healey, FAICP
Proposed Zoning Ordinance
GRAND HAVEN DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT – ESSENTIALLY BUILT OUT AGREEMENT City Council Workshop May 27, 2014.
Code Amendments to SMC 19A Planning Commission Meeting
Consideration of Action Re: Commercial Cannabis Businesses
Code Amendments to SMC 19A Planning Commission Meeting
City Council Meeting April 29, 2019
Board of County Commissioners
ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION 6666 MOUNTAIN ROAD APPLICANTS: BRIAN & EMILIE WETHERELL CITY FILE: AM February 26, 2019.
12 D. Variance Request – 211 Jennifer Lane
Presentation transcript:

Dockets R-11-06;07;09 Zoning Regulation Amendments Proposed Amendments to the Cochise County Zoning Regulations regarding Lot Development Administrative Modifications, Neighborhood Rehabilitation and Enterprise Redevelopment Areas, and Legal Nonconformances Board of Supervisors February 14, 2012

Purpose of Proposed Amendments Permit additional flexibility in how some of our site development standards are applied Reduce procedural delays More consideration of unique and unusual development situations, and encourage originality, flexibility and innovation in site planning and design Benefits Applicants by reducing time and money to obtain permits Important to remain cognizant of potential community impacts

Background R (Lot Development Administrative Modifications) The purpose of Administrative Lot Modifications is to permit flexibility in how some of our site development standards are applied Currently, the following site development standards may be eligible for a reduction of up to 20 percent:   Minimum setbacks   Maximum site coverage   Maximum building/structure height   Minimum required parking spaces [For example, the minimum setback for permitted uses in RU-4 is 20-ft.; the process currently allows up to a 4-ft. administrative setback modification]

Furthermore, the process allows the minimum area of a particular site to be reduced as follows:   Any lots that are in a Zoning District with a minimum site area of one acre or smaller (e.g., Residential), the minimum site area may be reduced up to 5 percent   Any lots that are in a Zoning District with a minimum site area of more than one acre (e.g., Rural), the site area may be reduced up to 2 percent Background R (Lot Development Administrative Modifications)

Proposed Amendments The proposed substantive text amendments to Section 1715 are in boldface: Purpose A. A.To allow flexibility in how some site development standards are applied to individual lots, but not to larger developments such as subdivisions B. B.To provide flexibility in site development and building code standards that may be appropriate to facilitate improvements in Neighborhood Rehabilitation (NR) and Enterprise Redevelopment (ER) areas

Proposed Amendments Eligible Lot Development Standards A. The following site development standards may be eligible for a reduction of up to percent: minimum setbacks, maximum site coverage, maximum building/structure height and minimum required parking spaces B. The minimum site area may be reduced as follows: 1. For any lots that are in a zoning district with a minimum site area of one acre or smaller, the minimum site area may be reduced up to 5 10 percent. 2. For any lots that are in a zoning district with a minimum site area of more than one acre, the site area may be reduced up to 2 4 percent. ___ __

For example…   Up to a 5-ft. administrative modification for those zoning districts that require 20-ft. minimum setbacks (minimum of 15-ft. would be allowed or 25% reduction)   Would allow a R-36 property (minimum lot size 36,000 sq.-ft.) to be reduced in site area up to 3,600 sq.-ft. (10% reduction)   Would allow a RU-4 property (minimum lot size 4 acres) to be reduced in site area up to.16-acre (minimum of 3.84 acres would be allowed or 4% reduction)

Questions?

Background R (Neighborhood Rehabilitation & Enterprise Redevelopment)   Areas designated as Neighborhood Rehabilitation (NR) and Enterprise Redevelopment (ER) are comprised of a high number of deteriorating and incompatible uses   These areas generally have insufficient infrastructure   Residents have expressed interest in making improvements to the area.   In order to facilitate improvements, some flexibility in site development and building code standards exists.   Currently, however, specifics are lacking; the proposed amendments would codify the specific site development standards eligible for administrative modification, and the extent to which they may be modified

N NR ER City of Sierra Vista City of Sierra Vista Fry Townsite

Proposed Amendments Staff is proposing to apply the proposed requirements set forth for R (Lot Development Administrative Modifications) to the NR and ER Areas

Proposed Amendments The proposed text amendments to Article 4 are in boldface: Designating Areas as Neighborhood Rehabilitation (NR) E. Some flexibility in site development and building code standards may be appropriate to facilitate improvements (see Article 17 – Lot Development Administrative Modifications)

Proposed Amendments Designating Areas as Enterprise Redevelopment (ER) E. Some flexibility in site development and building code standards may be appropriate to facilitate improvements (see Article 17 – Lot Development Administrative Modifications)

Questions?

Background R (Legal Nonconformances) Per Section 2003 of the Zoning Regulations, a legal nonconformance is: Any use of land, lot or parcel, building or structure which lawfully existing either prior to January 1, 1975, or which was rendered nonconforming with respect to site development standards as a result of amendments to the Zoning Regulations Legal nonconformances are otherwise commonly known as “grandfathered” uses

Proposed Amendment Continuing Existing Uses A. Any use of land, lot or parcel, building or structure, lawfully existing either prior to January 1, 1975, or rendered nonconforming as a result of subsequent amendments to these regulations, may be continued even though such use does not now conform with these Regulations. It is often difficult for owners and the County to find and produce evidence of use prior to January 1, Accordingly, for purposes of determining use under this subsection, the use prior to January 1, 1975 may be inferred from the best available historical evidence, [but in all events any such evidence must demonstrate or suggest the use at least ten (10) years prior to the date of the determination of nonconforming use]

Currently, per Section 2003: In the event a nonconforming use of land, building or structure is changed to a permitted use, or is discontinued for a period of 12 consecutive months, any future use is required to comply with all requirements of the Zoning Regulations Background R (Legal Nonconformances)

Proposed Amendment Discontinuance of Nonconforming Uses A. In the event that a nonconforming use of land, building or structure is changed to a permitted use, or is discontinued for a period of consecutive months as a result of conduct within the control of or attributable to the property owner, any future use thereof shall be in conformity with these Regulations ___

Questions?

Recommendation Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve R-11-06, R and R as proposed