Agenda Package - 05-07-07 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

® The Joint Planning Commission considered the issue and unanimously recommended that the boards consider an amendment to allow accessory buildings to be located on separate parcels in the unincorporated areas of Lee County's zoning jurisdiction with the condition that each application be subject to obtaining a special use permit from the Lee County Board of Adjustment. The Lee County Planning Board agreed with the Joint Planning Commission's /reconunendation and recommended unanimously that the Board of Commissioner's consider v an amendment to allow accessory buildings to be located on separate parcels in the unincorporated areas of Lee County's zoning jurisdiction with the condition that each application be subject to obtaining a special use permit. Amendment #2 - The Planning Board and Board of Commissioners conducted a public hearing to consider an amendment to delete Section 6.4 Cluster Subdivisions in its entirety from the UDO. The cluster approach allows a developer to group housing units/lots into a smaller, tighter design with the tradeoff being greater amounts of undeveloped open space areas are retained (the City of Sanford is the only community in Lee County to have had any experience with cluster projects, having had nine approved prior to the UDO and one approved under the UDO). Under the old Sanford zoning ordinance as well as within the UDO, a cluster project was reviewed under the procedures as used for approving a preliminary subdivision plat, ® which is considered a "technical" review. A technical review is much different than a legislative (rezoning) review. Under a technical review, the board (appointed and/or elected) has very limited discretion as to what can be denied. In other words, if an application for a cluster subdivision is submitted and it meets the UDO standards, the board is compelled to approve it. Based on feedback staff has received from the community and from members of the City of Sanford boards, the results have been mixed at best. Some board members have expressed frustration because of the way our approval process works - rezoning first, then cluster application. As an example, a typical scenario is that a developer will petition for rezoning from R-20 to R-12SF or R-14. After the new zoning is approved, a plat is then submitted showing a cluster design in which the majority of the lots are actually 8-10,000 square feet in area, not 12,000 or 14,000 square feet. Once the zoning is approved, neither the planning board nor the elected body has strong footing to deny the cluster design simply based on the reduced lot size because it conforms to the UDO cluster option. Board members have expressed concern that the zoning approval is misleading and not an accurate reflection of what the real intent is in terms of lot size within the development. Additionally, some board members have expressed concern that the value of the additional open space areas in the some of the approved cluster projects do not appear to be adding enough value to the project to warrant the smaller lot design. Based on Sanford's experience, staff suggests that the current cluster approach does provide ® enough control or produce the desired outcomes. Staff further recommends that it be removed from the UDO and, as an alternative, allow such projects to be addressed through the