04-05-2005 Regular MeetingCity of Clermont
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
April 5, 2005
The meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order Tuesday,
April 5, 2005, at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman David Pape. Members present were Sy
Holzman, Carolyn Mathieson, Henry Rhee, Roger Pierce, David Outlaw, Elwood
Treadwell, Peter Geigel and Maggie Miller. Also in attendance were Darren Gray,
Assistant City Manager, Curt Henschel, Planner, John Morgeson, City Attorney
and Jane McAllister, Planning and Zoning Clerk.
MINUTES of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting held March 1, 2005
were approved as written.
REPORTS
Assistant City Manager Darren Gray told those present that the City has hired a
new Director of Planning, James Hitt. Mr. Hitt will be starting in that position on
April 11, 2005. It was also announced that Planner Barbara Hollerand who has
been working part.. time for the City in recent months has agreed to return as a full
time employee.
Assistant City Manager Darren Gray reported that the Joint Planning Area Land
Development Regulations are almost finished. He announced that the final
hearing will be on May 3, 2005.
1. REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
OWNER: Family Christian Center of Clermont, Inc.
APPLICANT: E.W. Griffith
REQUEST: To amend Resolution No. 1384 to allow for the construction of a
public park; to allow for the addition of five (5) portable classrooms for an
additional 8,640 square feet of space; to remove the requirement for a sidewalk
to be constructed adjacent to Highway 27; to allow for pervious rather than
impervious drive aisles for grass parking, and to allow for the construction of a
two-story multiuse building of approximately 50,000 square feet.
LOCATION: 2500 S. Highway 27
EXISTING ZONING: R-1-A, Single Family Low Density Residential.
EXISTING LAND USE: Church.
FUTURE LAND USE DISTRICT: Undeveloped District 8 (UD-8).
V
City of Clermont
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
• April 5, 2005
Page - 2 -
FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION: Residential.
Planner Curt Henschel introduced this request by saying that the applicant is
requesting an amendment to the existing church CUP for the expansion of
educational classrooms. The applicant proposed to install 5 modular classrooms
to accommodate the growing educational program at the existing church. The 5
classrooms will serve as temporary structures until the master development plan
is completed.
The applicant is also proposing a public park facility along the south end of the
property. The proposed park will be 3 acres in size and include playground
equipment for the children to play on. Associated with the park will be a stabilized
parking area for those who will be utilizing the park.
Part of the overall master plan for the church development is a 50,000 square
foot multi-use building. This building will be used for classrooms, offices,
banquets, ad contain a gymnasium for sporting events. This building is a
permanent building that will blend in with the overall master site plan.
• Two amendments are also being requested with this conditional use permit. The
first amendment is a request to remove the public sidewalk requirement with the
development of the project. Within the original conditional use permit a sidewalk
was required along Highway 27. This sidewalk has not been installed, and the
applicant has been approached by the Department of Transportation requesting
an additional 5 to 20 feet of right-of--way to be used for the expansion of Highway
27. The applicant is confident that a sidewalk placed in the original proposed
location will be short lived with the widening of Highway 27. When the widening
of Highway 27 is completed the applicant does propose to install the sidewalk bu
only after the widening is complete.
The second amendment is a request to utilize pervious drive aisles within the
grass parking areas. The original conditional use permit allows for grass parking,
but also requires all driveway aisles to be paved or impervious so not to create~a
"dirt" pathway for each grass parking stall. The applicant is proposing to use
other stabilized methods that are not considered to be impervious by city code.
This area of grass parking will also be affected by the widening of Highway 27
and the applicant wished not to pave the parking area twice.
t
Staff recommends approval of the request.
Chairman Pape asked if the applicant was present.
C
2
City of Clermont
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
April 5, 2005
E.W. (Bill) Griffith, 15009 Green Valley Blvd., Clermont, FL said that the park will
be in memory of 12 year old Brittany Black, a church member who was killed in
an automobile accident about one year ago. He said the park will have plastic
playground equipment rather than the treated wood used in many local parks.
Mr. Griffith showed a diagram of the modular classrooms and stated that they will
be in place for no more than 3 or 4 years.
Chairman Pape asked if there was anyone in the public who wished to speak
about this request.
Mary Humberson, 13219 Olesen Court, Clermont, FL lives directly south of the
church property and expressed a concern that children would be cutting through
her yard to get to the playground at the church. She also mentioned that her
property abuts a water retention area and said she thought she was not allowed
to put up a fence.
Bill Griffith of Family Christian Church assured Ms. Humberson that the
playground would be entirely fenced in and that the only entry would be from
church property. He also mentioned that when there was no one at the church
• the playground would be gated and locked.
Chairman Pape asked if the commissioners had any questions for the applicant.
Commissioner Holzman stated that there were two other modular units on the
church property and asked how long they would be there.
Mr. Griffith said those units would be there indefinitely.
Commissioner Rhee asked if Mr. Griffith knew when the widening of Highway 27
was scheduled to take place.
Mr. Griffith said he estimates within 2 to 3 years from the information the
Department of Transportation has give him.
Commissioner Pierce asked if there been any grading estimates done.
Mr. Griffith said there is a preliminary grading estimate and that Earner Barley
and Associates were the engineers for the project.
Commissioner Geigel asked if there was a master plan for the development of
the church property.
City of Clermont
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
• April 5, 2005
Page - 3 -
Chairman Pape explained to Commissioner Geigel that the church presented a
.master plan to the city 2 years ago.
Commissioner Geigel said that the CUP should state that the 5 new modular
classrooms will be gone in four years.
Commissioner Mathieson said that a church has to develop as it can, and that
the growth in this community has been much greater than anticipated. That is
what makes it difficult for the church #o adhere strictly to a master plan.
Commissioner Pierce asked Curt Henschel if there was other grass parking at
churches in the area with pervious parking.
There was some discussion about the request for pervious drive aisles in the
grass parking.
Mr. Griffith stated that they did not wish to pave the drive aisles for the same
reason they do not want to put in the sidewalk until the widening of Highway 27 is
finished. If they pave the drive aisles now they will probably have to be done over
• when 27 is widened since this parking area is next to Highway 27.
Commissioner Miller said that in her opinion pervious parking is preferred as long
as the ground is stabilized.
Commissioner Pierce moved for approval of the request with the added
stipulation that the five new modular units be removed after 4 vears• seconded by
Commissioner Miller. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion.
2. ORDINANCE #320 -SIGNS
Planner Curt Henschel introduced the proposed changes to the sign ordinance.
He passed out a summary of the proposed sign code revisions and asked for
comments and input from the Commission. The summary is attached to and
becomes part of these minutes.
Mr. Henschel also showed examples of various signs that are now allowed and
of the same category of signs that would be allowed under this change in the
code. He explained that non-conforming signs would have to comply to the new
code with a change of occupancy of the premises.
• Mr. Henschel went over all the proposed changes with the Commissioners and
asked for their comments and suggestions.
4
City of Clermont
MINUTES
• PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
April 5, 2005
Page - 5 -
Commissioner David Outlaw asked if there would be some provision for allowing
a longer time period for business owners to repair signs that are broken due to
an act of God or some other event that is not the fault of or under the control of
the business owner.
Assistant City Manager Darren Gray said there was no such provision, but that if
a sign was not repaired within the allotted time period Code Enforcement would
be notified. He said it would be up to the Code Enforcement Officer and Board as
to whether the business owner should be allowed more time to make repairs due
to the circumstances. Historically, the Code Enforcement Board works with
respondents to achieve compliance.
Commissioner Holzman expressed support for Commissioner Outlaw and his
suggestion that there should be some leniency shown when there is damage to a
sign through no fault of the owner, or when the owner is unable to get someone
to make repairs in a timely manner.
Commissioner Outlaw suggested a change in wording of Section 102-23
Changeable copy signs. It reads as follows:
• Changeable copy signs shall be regulated under the following guidelines.
This section shall not include electronic message boards and the like,
which are prohibited under this chapter. Such signs shall be permitted in
the following manner:
Commissioner Outlaw suggested that the last sentence should say "Changeable
copy signs shall be permitted in the following manner".
Commissioner Pierce moved to approve the amendments to the sign ordinance:
seconded by Commissioner Holzman. The vote was unanimous for approval.
DISCUSSION OF NON-AGENDA ITEMS
Commissioner Outlaw expressed concern about the fact that there is not a more
concise set of rules for development within the city limits. He asked if a
committee could be formed to author such a set of planning and zoning rules that
would serve to eliminate many of the requests that come before the. Planning and
Zoning Commission and the City Council.
Commissioner Holzman suggested holding off on such a move for a few months
until the new Planning Director has had an opportunity to acclimate himself.
• Commissioner Outlaw agreed, but suggested that much of the leg work could be
done in the mean time.
City of Clermont
MINUTES
• PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
April 5, 2005
Page - 6 -
Chairman Pape said that most of the growth and development in the city has
been residential. He went on to say. that we need to court commercial growth as
well.
Assistant City Manager Darren Gray suggested a workshop session with the
Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council in reference to the future
growth of the city.
All of the Commissioners said they would look forward to meeting with the City
Council in a workshop to discuss the future plans of the city, and the possibility of
forming a committee to create a more detailed plan for developing within the city
limits.
There being no further business the meeting was adjourned.
•
ATTEST:
G' ~j~ `'
~%
/ ne C. McAllist - tanning Technician II
•
6
:.
Pianning and Zoning
Sign Code Revisions
Summary
• Section 102-2 Ground signs
Defined as: Asian that is anchored near or at ground level which has the vertical
structure supports concealed in an enclosed base The width of such enclosed base
shall be eaual to at least one-half (1/21 the horizontal width of the sign surface
• Section 102-3 Change of Occupancy
Non-conforming signs shall be replaced when a change of occupancy
occurs or a business cha~,ges ownership.
• Section 102-10 Construction and Maintenance Standards:
Signs left in a state of disrepair longer than 90 days are considered
nonconforming.
•
• Section 102-12 Height and Setbacks:
Height to be measured at the location of the sign
Flag Poles = 30 feet max
• Section 102=15 Permitted Signs:
Signs in commercial districts
60 square feet for arterial roads/ max height of 10 feet
48 square feet for collector roads/ max height of 8 feet
32 square feet for local roads/ max height of 6 feet
* additional 1 foot may be added far ornamental display
Setbacks = 5 feet from ROW, except visibility triangle.
10 feet from side or rear properly line
20 feet from residential zoning
100 square feet of landscaping is required azound sign base
•
l i
t
•
wall signs
High Rise; Multi-Unit office = One Wall Sigh
Below roof top
Max. area for signs 30 feet anlower = 1 sf for each
lineal feet of building frontage
Max area for signs 30 feet and higher = 5 sf for each
1,000 square feet of gross floor azea, not to exceed
800 sf.
Multi. -Occupancy commercial Sites - (Shopping Centers)
Centers 75,000 sf and more = 120 sf of sign azea !Max Height of 15 feet
Centers 10,000 to 75,000 = 75 sf of sign area / Max Height of 15 feet
Centers up to 10,000 = 60 sf of sign azea / Max Height of 15 feet
Setbacks = 50 feet from side lot~~ines, or equal distant from side lot.
10 feet from ROw
Multi Tenant Industrial Complex
Max Height of a sign shall be 15 feet
• ,Max Sign area for 50,000 sf or more =120 sf of sign azea
Max Sign azea for less than 50,000 sf = 100 sf of sign area
Max sign height for an individual platted lot = 8 feet
• Office complex and parks -
Max. sign height shall be 15 feet
Max sign area for office parks having more that 25,000 sf or more =120 sf sign area
Max sign azea for office parks having less than 25,000 sf =100 sf of sign area
Individual platted lots have a maximum sign height of 8 feet
• Section 102-23 Changeable Copy Signs:
Houses of worship /Churches - shall follow the same sign code as any other
business.