Loading...
09-03-2002 Regular Meeting• • CITY OF CLERMONT MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION September 3, 2002 The meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order Tuesday, September 3, 2002, at 7 p.m. by Vice-Chairman John Atwater. Members present were Dave Lange, Sy Holzman, Maggie Miller, and Ronaldo Camargo. David Pape, Richard Tegen and John Carlson were absent. Also in attendance were Barry Brown, Director of Planning, Robert Guthrie, City Attorney and Jane McAllister, Planning Technician II. Maggie Miller wanted her suggestion added to the minutes, that when the Commission tables a matter the City Council should be informed as to the reason it was tabled. MINUTES of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting held August 6, 2002 were approved as written. REPORTS John Atwater read a letter written by Chairman Richard Tegen and addressed to the City Council and the County Commission, about meetings between the City of Clermont and the County relating to the Joint Planning Agreement. Mr. Tegen requested that all the Planning & Zoning members sign the letter and that it be forwarded to both the City Council and the County Commission. REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICANT: Don M. Casto Organization OWNER: Lucas Clermont Limited Partnership REQUEST: For a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow the construction of a 204-unit apartment complex. Planning Director Barry Brown informed the Commission that the applicant has requested that the matter be postponed until the January 7, 2003 meeting. S Holzman made a motion to ost one this re uest until the Janua 7 2003 meetin . Dave Lange seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor of posfponing the request until January 7, 2003. • CITY OF CLERMONT MINUTES • PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION September 3, 2002 Page-2- 2. REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICANT: NTR Development Inc. OWNER: Rabi & George Nesheiwat REQUEST: For a Conditional Use Permit to construct a shopping center. GENERAL LOCATION: Northwest corner of S.R. 50 and Hancock Road. SIZE OF PARCEL: +/- 7 acres. EXISTING LAND USE: Undeveloped and vacant. FUTURE LAND USE DISTRICT: Undeveloped District - 5 (UD-5); the requested use is an allowable use in UD-5. FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION: Commercial. The requested use is allowed in the Commercial land use classification. EXISTING ZONING: C-2, Commercial District. A shopping center is a conditional use in the C-2 zoning district. Planning Director Barry Brown introduced this request by saying that the applicant is proposing to develop a shopping center that will consist of 5 commercial parcels, an anchor parcel with up to 20,000 square feet of general retail space and four (4) commercial out parcels. The out parcels may include retail, restaurant, pharmacy, and financial institution users. The project is appropriately located at the signaled intersection of a principal arterial, S.R. 50 and a collector roadway, Hancock Road. The north boundary of this project is on the planned alignment for the frontage road between Citrus Tower Blvd. and Hancock Road. The permittee will be required to dedicate 40 ft. of right-of-way along the north property line in order to accommodate the frontage road. The permittee will be required to construct the frontage road along the entire length of the property. Initially the frontage road will only need to be constructed from Hancock Road to the first driveway. At such time as impact fee reimbursement is available the remainder of the frontage road shall be constructed. The project meets the criteria of the land use designations and zoning district and staff recommends approval. • • CITY OF CLERMONT MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION September 3, 2002 Page-3- Mr. Brown wanted to inform the Commission of the variances that have been requested. The first one is to provide a 10 ft. wide landscape buffer rather than the 20 ft. buffer required by code along S.R. 50, the second is to allow the landscape buffer on Hancock Rd. to have 10 feet of slope rather than having the entire buffer flat as required by code. Mr. Brown stated that staff supports these requests. The third variance request is to allow a 5 foot landscape buffer between adjoining properties rather that the 10 feet required by code. Staff does not support this request. Ronaldo Camargo suggested that there is a precedent being set by allowing variances for 10 ft. landscape buffers. Barry Brown said that each site is unique. He explained that the old landscape buffer requirement was 10 feet when Target got their CUP, and that allowing a 10 foot buffer along S.R. 50 for this project would continue that look. He stated further that the goal is to increase landscaping along S.R. 50, but that in this case because of the dedication of the 40 ft. for the frontage road on the north side of the property staff agrees with allowing a 10 ft. landscape buffer on this property. Cecelia Bonafay, attorney for the applicant said that her client has agreed to dedicate the full 40 feet of right-of-way that the City requested. She said that is the reason for asking for the variance for the 10 foot buffer along S.R. 50. Tom Skelton, American Civil Engineering Co, 207 N. Moss Road, Suite 211, Winter Springs, FL 32708, Frank Canon, Spencer Phelps and Terry Lubinsky of Trycon, Inc. 300 International Parkway, Suite 184, Heathrow, FL 32746, were sworn in and offered to answer any questions the Commission might have. Ronaldo Camargo asked if there would be a curb along the driveway near the Walgreens drive thru, which is next to a cross access lane of traffic. Tom Skelton said there was an offset thru lane with a double stop condition in the Walgreens drive thru. An island could be extended to separate the drive thru from the cross access drive. Maggie Miller said that this is not a workable plan. She stated she has problems with the offset driveway, having 3 drive through windows in a row right next to each other, and that access is not going to be easy. She stated the developer appears to be attempting to cram as much as possible in to this site and that she does not like it at all. Sy Holzman said he echos Ms. Millers comments and added that he does not like the placement of a shopping center on this site at all. Mr. Holzman further stated he does • • CITY OF CLERMONT MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION September 3, 2002 Page-4- not want to see so much commercial along State Road 50. He said he does not like the layout of the proposed shopping center and that the internal driving pattern will be a disaster. Ronaldo Camargo said that although he is not opposed to the project he too is concerned with the safety of the internal traffic flow especially when it meets with the external traffic attempting to enter the shopping center. Mr. Camargo stated that he does not have a problem with the variances requested, but stated that the developer may be trying to put too much on this site. Dave Lange agreed with other Commission members that the density was too great on this site. He mentioned that the Commissioner's focus at the last hearing was on the 40 foot right-of-way, and that there was little discussion of anything else because of that concern. Cecelia Bonafay said that the Commission did indeed focus on the 40 foot right-of-way at the last hearing, and that is what the developer heard and that is what the developer addressed. She further stated that the site has C-2 zoning and that the developer had other options that would not have required approval of the City Council. Ms. Bonafay further said the site meets engineering specifications and will work. She said some of the Commissioners concerns are site plan review items. Ronaldo Camargo said that the Commission has to consider how convenient or inconvenient a project is for the consumer. Maggie Miller asked Tom Skelton is he has ever done a shopping center with 3 drive thrus before. Tom Skelton said that he had not, but he added that Walgreens does not want anyone to be inconvenienced. Terry Lubinsky said he has designed more than 50 shopping centers and has seen numerous occasions where the site has 3 front parcels with drive thrus. He said it was not an unusual occurrence. Mr. Lubinsky stated that they, as the developers, have already made over $400,000.00 in accommodations to the City on this site. Frank Canon said that this site plan layout was not unusual. There was further discussion about the uses and layout of the parcels on this site. Barry Brown stated that the planned uses for this location are appropriate, and that the alignment of the driveways and the traffic flow need to be dealt with. • CITY OF CLERMONT MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION September 3, 2002 Page - 5 - John Atwater suggested the matter be tabled. Barry Brown suggested the Commission either approve or deny the request and advise the City Council why they reached their decision. Dave Lange made a motion to approve the request subiect to reevaluation by City Staff. Ronaldo Camargo seconded the motion. During discussion of the motion Ronaldo Camargo asked if it was proper to approve a request subject to reevaluation. City Attorney Robert Guthrie advised that it could be done that way and then they could make a motion to address the matters of concern to the Commission. Maggie Miller stated that she calculated that Taco Bell is 32 parking spaces short. Barry Brown looked at the calculation and determined that Taco Bell did not show the required parking. Ronaldo Camargo withdrew his second of the motion because the parking does not meet code and there was no request for a variance for parking. Dave Lange withdrew his motion. Dave Lange explained that he was withdrawing his motion because he assumed all the figures presented were correct, and it appears that they were not. Ronaldo Camargo stated that the Commission was presented with a design that is not valid. _Sy Holzman made a motion to deny the request. Maggie Miller seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous to denv the request. The Commission wanted the City Council to be aware of the reasons the request was denied. The request was denied because the Commission thinks the layout of the site is not good, the access road and internal driving patterns are not safe, the close proximity of parcels 2 and 3 both with drive through windows, and that the site should have 4 parcels rather than the 5 presented. They pointed out that the design as presented faits to comply with City Code. • • CITY OF CLERMONT MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION September 3, 2002 Page - 6 - There being no further business the meeting was~djourned. ,~ ~ -~ -lam ,'' , ~ J.dhn Atwater, Vice Chairman ATTEST:; ~" ~~~~ ~~~ McAllister;L Planning Technician II