Old Spanish Village

1
Old Spanish Village

• CLUP Map Amendment, Zoning Code Text Amendment,
  Change in Zoning, PAD Mixed Use Site Plan Review
  and Conditional Use Request

2
Overview of presentation

• Requested applications
• As-of-right vs. proposed project
• Basis for recommendation
• Alternative recommendation (mitigation
  conditions)
• Findings of fact

3
Requested applications

• The request is for one development proposal which
• includes six separate applications (pgs. 1-2)
• Amend CLUP map to designate property for
  commercial use to allow for proposed commercial
  mixed-use development.
• Amend Zoning Code text to expand existing MXD1
  boundary one block south to Malaga Avenue.
• Amend Zoning Map to designate property with
  commercial zoning to be consistent with proposed
  commercial land use designation.

4
Requested applications (cont.)

• PAD mixed-use site plan review for a proposed
  project consisting of multi-family and townhouse
  residential units and commercial retail and
  office uses.
• Proposed street and alley vacations and
  dedications required to allow proposed
  reconfiguration of on-site circulation.
• Special location site plan review for the award
  of Mediterranean design bonuses.

5
1. CLUP map amendments
6
2. Zoning Code text amendment

• Sec. 3-5(b), Mixed-Use District 1
• 1. Location eligibility. All properties zoned
  for C-Use and located within the following
  described geographic area shall be eligible to
  use the standards set forth herein for Mixed-use
  District No. 1.
• a. The area bounded by Southwest Eighth Street
  to the north, Palermo Malaga Avenue to the south,
  Douglas Road to the east and LeJeune road to the
  west. (3326)

7
3. Change in zoning
8
4. PAD mixed-use site plan review

• (Attachment E, pg. 10)

9
5. Street and alley vacations and dedications

• (Attachment E, pg. 16)

10
6. Special location site plan review
11
As-of-right vs. proposed projectpgs. 10-12
12
3-d Model
13
Basis of recommendation

• Staff recommends denial of the 6 applications.
• While the applications meet many City objectives,
  Staff cannot support due to inconsistencies,
  incompatibilities, and insufficiencies.
• Recommendation of denial based on professional
  planning practices and principles, and
  applications ability to meet CLUP Goals,
  Objectives and Policies (GOPs), 2002 Charrette
  Report, Zoning Code, and Staffs findings of fact.

14
Basis of recommendation (cont.)

• Inconsistent CLUP GOPs (pg. 3)
• 8 inconsistent objectives/policies (pgs. 19-20).
• Incompatible uses, buffering, infrastructure,
  traffic, parking, landscaping
• Remaining SF home not a part of application and
  results in inconsistency/incompatibility between
  proposed land uses.
• Incompatible zoning w/ existing SF residence (pg.
  3)
• Remaining SF home not a part of application and
  results in inconsistency/incompatibility between
  proposed zoning designations
• Incompatible with fundamental planning principle
  of transitioning between uses.
• Would result in spot zoning of SF home.
• Staff met with applicant and SF homeowner to
  address the issue, but no resolution was
  achieved.

15
Remaining SF home
16
Remaining SF home