Public Hearings 14.
Regular Board of Supervisors Meeting
Community Development
- Meeting Date:
- 09/27/2011
- Title:
- Non-conforming site development standards and rezonings
- Submitted By:
- Mike Turisk, Community Development
- Department:
- Community Development
- Division:
- Planning
Presentation:
PowerPoint
Recommendation:
Approve
Document Signatures:
BOS Signature Required
# of ORIGINALS
Submitted for Signature:
Submitted for Signature:
1
NAME
of PRESENTER:
of PRESENTER:
Michael Turisk
TITLE
of PRESENTER:
of PRESENTER:
Interim Planning Director
Docket Number (If applicable):
Mandated Function?:
Not Mandated
Source of Mandate
or Basis for Support?:
or Basis for Support?:
Streamline rezoning process
Agenda Item Text:
Adopt Zoning Ordinance 11-12 to approve Docket R-11-05, codifying the Board of Supervisors’ authority to determine when existing uses or structures would be rendered non-conforming as a result of a rezoning action due to different site development standards.
Background:
There are occasions when particular rezoning actions render certain site development standards non-conforming (e.g., minimum setbacks; maximum site coverage). Our zoning regulations do not directly address the effects of non-conformances that result from rezonings. Applying the site development standards for the new zoning district has been default practice, which has occasionally resulted in the need for Variances.
For example, in the R-18 zoning districts (Residential; minimum lot size 18,000 sq.-ft.), the minimum setback from all property lines is 10-feet. If a R-18 property has an existing structure sited 10-feet from the property line and is rezoned to RU-4 (Rural; minimum lot size four acres), the structure is rendered non-conforming with respect to minimum setback distance in RU-4 (which is 20-feet) by virtue of the rezoning action. Under these circumstances, the Board could consider determining that the site development standard for R-18 property applies, thus allowing the existing setback, and thus allowing the non-conforming structure to remain with no need for a variance. New structures, however, would be required to adhere to the site development standards of the “new” zoning district; in other words, a new home or accessory structure would require adherence to the minimum 20-feet minimum setback, per Article 6.
Another approach would require compliance with the site development standards of the “old” zoning district. This would have the obvious effect of allowing a different array of uses as intended by the rezoning, but would restrict the Applicant/Owner by requiring them to honor the site development standards of the “old” zoning district.
The Board’s authority to determine which site development standard applies represents a much more efficient approach for staff and saves time and money for the Applicant by absolving them of the need to request Variances from the Boards of Adjustment, which in the past was the course of action required to legitimize non-conforming site development standards that resulted from rezoning actions.
II. The proposed text amendment to Section 2208 is boldfaced below:
2208.03B.2 – Compliance with Applicable Site Development Standards
All sites within the proposed district must be capable of reasonable development for typical uses within the proposed district, through compliance with all applicable site development standards. This criterion applies to formation of all zoning districts in all plan areas. When a rezoning would render existing uses or structures non-conforming as result of different site development standards, at the time of the rezoning the Board of Supervisors may determine which site development standards apply.
III. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
On September 14, 2011, the Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously (7 – 0) recommended that the Board approve the text amendment as proposed.
IV. Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the proposed zoning regulation text amendment which would codify the authority of the Board to determine site development standards that are rendered non-conforming as a result of r
For example, in the R-18 zoning districts (Residential; minimum lot size 18,000 sq.-ft.), the minimum setback from all property lines is 10-feet. If a R-18 property has an existing structure sited 10-feet from the property line and is rezoned to RU-4 (Rural; minimum lot size four acres), the structure is rendered non-conforming with respect to minimum setback distance in RU-4 (which is 20-feet) by virtue of the rezoning action. Under these circumstances, the Board could consider determining that the site development standard for R-18 property applies, thus allowing the existing setback, and thus allowing the non-conforming structure to remain with no need for a variance. New structures, however, would be required to adhere to the site development standards of the “new” zoning district; in other words, a new home or accessory structure would require adherence to the minimum 20-feet minimum setback, per Article 6.
Another approach would require compliance with the site development standards of the “old” zoning district. This would have the obvious effect of allowing a different array of uses as intended by the rezoning, but would restrict the Applicant/Owner by requiring them to honor the site development standards of the “old” zoning district.
The Board’s authority to determine which site development standard applies represents a much more efficient approach for staff and saves time and money for the Applicant by absolving them of the need to request Variances from the Boards of Adjustment, which in the past was the course of action required to legitimize non-conforming site development standards that resulted from rezoning actions.
II. The proposed text amendment to Section 2208 is boldfaced below:
2208.03B.2 – Compliance with Applicable Site Development Standards
All sites within the proposed district must be capable of reasonable development for typical uses within the proposed district, through compliance with all applicable site development standards. This criterion applies to formation of all zoning districts in all plan areas. When a rezoning would render existing uses or structures non-conforming as result of different site development standards, at the time of the rezoning the Board of Supervisors may determine which site development standards apply.
III. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
On September 14, 2011, the Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously (7 – 0) recommended that the Board approve the text amendment as proposed.
IV. Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the proposed zoning regulation text amendment which would codify the authority of the Board to determine site development standards that are rendered non-conforming as a result of r
Department's Next Steps (if approved):
If the Board of Supervisors approves Docket R-11-05, the County will have language codified in the Zoning Regulations speaking to the Board of Supervisors' authority to determine site development standards that are rendered non-conforming as a result of rezoning action.
Impact of NOT Approving/Alternatives:
The County would not provide a more streamlined process for those existing uses or structures rendered non-conforming as a result of a rezoning action due to different site development standards. Applying the site development standards for the new zoning district has been default practice, which has occasionally resulted in the need for the Applicant to apply for Variances to their respective Board of Adjustment.
To BOS Staff: Document Disposition/Follow-Up:
If approved, the Zoning Ordinance is to be signed by the Chairman of the Board and the Clerk of the Board. The Chief Civil Deputy will sign the document the week of September 18 and forward it to the Board of Supervisors for the required signatures prior to the September 27 Board meeting.