12-05-1989 Regular Meeting• •
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 5, 1989
The regular scheduled meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission
was called to order by Chairman John Sargent on December 5, 1989,
at 7:30 p.m. Members present were Marilyn George, Cecil Smart,
Adelbert Evans, Don Smith and Bonnie Kranz. Members excused were
Curt Dicamillo, James Brown, and Robert Mitchell. Also attending
were James McAllister Planning Director and Jane Warren Planning
Technician.
MINUTES of the meeting held November 7, 1989 were approved as
presented.
NEW BUSINESS
REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
OWNER: Ultra Precision, Robert Grafton
APPLICANT: Open Door Baptist Church
LOCATION: 1705 Grand Highway
ZONING: M-1 Light Industrial District
REQUEST: To allow the temporary operation of a church (3 months).
Mr. McAllister advised the Commission that the applicant is
requesting a Conditional Use Permit for three (3) months to operate
a church in the M-1 Light Industrial District. The property is
located at 1705 Grand Highway, in the building previously occupied
by Ultra Precision.
The applicant received a Conditional Use Permit on September 26,
1989 to operate a church at 1295 West Highway 50, previously
occupied by Subscriber Systems. According to the applicant, the
church has decided against moving to that location and is
negotiating to purchase property on US Highway 27, north of
Minneola, and plans to construct a new facility.
The new facility will not be constructed for four months and the
lease on the current church location expires November 30, 1989.
Mr. McAllister recommended approval of this request subject to the
following condition:
1. This Conditional Use Permit is for a period not to exceed
three ( 3 ) months from the date the Conditional Use Permit
is granted.
Mrs. George expressed concern regarding the time restriction of
three (3) months, asked if three (3) months would be ample time to
construct a church.
Mr. Smith concurring with Mrs. George suggested the time
restriction should be extended to six (6) months.
Pastor Stewart of Open Door Baptist Church was present and
explained that the church would be a modular structure and felt
three months would be sufficient.
1
•
•
After a brief discussion a motion was made by Cecil Smart to
recommend to the City Council approval of this request as presented
by staff, seconded by Adlebert Evans and approved by unanimous
vote.
REQUEST FOR CHANGE OF ZONING/
REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
APPLICANT: Helen B. Wilkins
P.O. Drawer 320459
Cocoa Beach, Fla. 32932-0459
Brenda Norquist
52 Sunnyside Drive
Clermont, Fla. 34711
OWNER: Same
Location: Southwest corner of Osceola St. & West Ave.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: City Block 94, Lots 1 and 2 and Beginning at
the INT of S R/W lines of Osceola Street and W R/W
lines of West Avenue run N 60', W 258' to lake SE'LY
along lake 67' to S R/W line of Osceola St. E to
POB.
ZONING: Present: R-3 Residential Professional District
Proposed: C-2 General Commercial District
APPROXIMATE ACREAGE: 1.06 Acres
RECOMMENDATION:
Mr. McAllister pointed out the property in question is in the
NED-6 Future Land Use District which states as follows:
The NED (Non-Established District) is a contiguous area of
primarily existing development that has demonstrated a
tendency over time toward change in the existing character due
to factors that may include zoning, proximity to major
thoroughfares, structural depreciation, speculation and types
of ownership. Criteria established for this district would
allow an orderly and desired change in the existing land use
through controlled new development and/or renovation of
existing development.
The NED District allows for light commercial uses only.
Mr. Mcallister recommended that the above referenced parcel be
rezoned to C-1 Light Commercial.
Mr. McAllister informed the Commission that staff was also
recommending rezoning of lots 4,5, and 6 Block 94, and a small City
owned strip of property located west of lots 1 and 2 and east of
West Lake. This would complete the zoning pattern initiated by the
applicants and further compliment the downtown business area.
Mr. Jim Ellrodt was present and expressed concern regarding the
impact of additional traffic on the existing roads and asked who
would be responsible if additional development occurred in this
area.
2
•
Mr. McAllister advised Mr. Ellrodt that if the applicant wished to
develope some type of commercial endeavor it would be the
responsibility of the developer to construct the additional
streets.
Mr. Ken Norquist was present and stated the change in zoning would
allow the property owners, especially businessmen in the area, to
upgrade and expand their business as a conforming enterprise.
Mr. Norquist informed those present that it was his hope that the
requested change in zoning would be a positive step in commercially
developing the downtown district.
Mr. Smith urged staff to be exact in the legal description of the
property is insure that all property being considered for rezone
be properly itemized in an ordinance, should this request be
approved.
After a brief discussion a motion was made by Cecil Smart to
recommend to the City Council approval of this request with an
emphasis that the entire legal description be included to properly
describe the exact property proposed, seconded by Bonnie Kranz and
approved by unanimous vote.
REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
OWNER: Dennis Cannon
APPLICANT: R. D. W.Inc.
LOCATION: 1200 Bowman Street
PROPERTY: Sunnyside Terrace, Lots 1 and 2
ZONING: R-3 Residential/Professional District
REQUEST: To construct a 3000 s. ft. one-story office building
Mr. McAllister pointed out the property in question is located
across from Sunnyside Plaza, and is zoned R-3 and is bordered by
C-1 zoning and an existing office building to the north, a vacant
lot zoned R-3 to the south, and a shopping center zoned C-2 to the
east.
The site is under the same ownership as the site and existing
office building to the north. Both projects will be connected
internally by two driveways one being from the east, the other from
the west. The existing office building to the north was granted
a Conditional Use Permit in 1984 with no specific restrictions.
Mr. Mcallister pointed out that the existing building is deficient
in one parking space. The parking area to the west of the existing
building was approved for five (5) parking spaces, however only
four (4) were constructed. By connecting the two access points to
the east, the applicant will also lose two (2) parking spaces on
the existing building. A total of three (3) extra spaces will be
required on the new site for a combined total of 39 parking spaces
for both sites being required.
Mr. McAllister also pointed out that the site plan as presented
indicates a ground sign on Bowman Street. This will not be allowed
as the applicant has already constructed the allowable amount of
ground signs for that property.
3
•
Mr. Bob Thompson was present and wished to clarify that R.D. W.
Inc is the current owners.
Mr. Thompson stated he felt the parking situation could be easily
addressed.
Mr. Thompson did ask if the existing sign were to be removed could
a new sign be erected more centrally located. Mr. Thompson also
asked if the project were separately owned could there be two (2)
signs.
Mr. McAllister informed Mr. Thompson that the existing sign could
be taken down and a new sign could be erected but the size of the
sign would be restricted by the lineal frontage on Bowman Street;
secondly there could be two signs if the project were not under
joint ownership.
Mr. Smith suggested now was the time to require sidewalks on Bowman
Street.
Mr. McAllister pointed out this issued would be addressed during
a Site Review meeting but also suggested that a condition could be
added to any recommendation of approval to the City Council.
Mrs. George suggested that the sidewalk construction is needed by
addressed by the City Engineer and the Public Works Department.
Mr. Smart stated he did not feel the sidewalks were needed at this
time.
After a brief discussion a motion was made by Mr. Smith to
recommend to the City Council approval of this request with an
additional condition which would require the applicant, if
determined needed by the City, to construct sidewalks from Highway
50 south to the applicants's property line, seconded by Mr. Smart
and approved by unanimous vote.
REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
OWNER: George and Charlotte Mayfield
APPLICANT: J. Mark Sutherland
PROPERTY: Block 88, Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 17
LOCATION: Southwest corner of Chestnut St. and 8th. Street
ZONING: R-2-Medium Density Residential
REQUEST: To construct 7 townhomes and a variance to
allow the following:
1. A 8' high privacy wall where a maximum height of
6' is allowed.
Mr. McAllister informed the Commission that the applicant is
requesting a Conditional Use Permit to construct seven (7)
townhomes on a parcel of land totalling just over one (1) acre.
The property is zoned R-2 Medium Density with R-2 zoning on both
the east and west sides. Single family homes are located both east
and west of the property.
4
• •
Mr. McAllister pointed out that the area in question has been
taking on a more multi-family appearance within the past few years.
There currently exists an apartment building approximately 200 feet
east of the property and a townhouse development located east of
the property on Seventh and Chestnut Street.
Mr. McAllister also pointed out the applicant is requesting a
variance to allow for an 8' high masonry wall where a maximum
height of 6 feet is allowed. Staff has no objections to an eight
(8) foot masonry wall.
Mr. McAllister pointed out the site plan indicates the masonry wall
as extending well past the ordinary high water mark indicated on
the plan as a dotted line. The wall will not be permitted forward
of the ordinary high water mark.
Mr. Don Smith stated he felt an eight (8) foot high wall would set
a precedent in the area which would be undesirable and suggested
a six (6) foot high fence would be sufficient.
Mr. Smart also stated he was opposed to the eight (8) foot high
fence.
Mr. Mark Sutherland was present and informed the Commission that
the site plan submitted was conceptual and he also had concerns
regarding the wall. Mr. Sutherland assured the Commission that it
was his intention to construct a wall that would be aesthetically
pleasing to both the interior and exterior of the project.
After a brief discussion a motion was made by Don Smith to
recommend to the City Council approval of this request along with
the opinion of the Commission that an eight (8) foot high fence
would be undesirable, seconded by Adelbert Evans and approved by
a 5-0 vote. Member Bonnie Kranz claimed a conflict of interest,
and abstained from voting.
REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
OWNER: Horton Trust
APPLICANT: Same
PROPERTY: Sec 29-22-26 Portions of Tracts 3, 4, 5A, 5B, 8B, 9A, 9B
and 14.
LOCATION: Vacant property north and east north east of Quincy's
restaurant.
ZONING: C-2 General Commercial Business District
REQUEST: To excavate property to facilitate further development.
Mr. McAllister informed the Commission that the applicant is
requesting a Conditional Use Permit to place 500,000 cubic yards
of fill material on an approximately 19 acre site located
immediately north and east of Quincy's Restaurant.(Mr. McAllister
estimated 500,000 cubic yards of fill would be approximately 25,000
truck loads of fill). The applicant states that the purpose of the
proposed fill project is for site preparation in anticipation of
constructing a shopping center. The site was the subject of a
Conditional Use Permit granted by Resolution No. 574 which granted
the applicant permission to excavate a portion of this same
property, more specifically the area between this property and the
sand mine located furthest to the east.
5
•
•
The area to be filled is presently zoned C-2 and is primarily
vacant except for several citrus and oak trees. The site is
characterized by excessive slopes from Highway 50 northward to
Jack's Lake. Elevations on the site range from 160 feet to
approximately 85 feet.
Although the applicant has claimed that the purpose of the fill
operation is to prepare the site for future development, staff is
of the opinion that the site should be treated as if no development
will occur since no development plans have been submitted for
approval, thereby requiring permanent drainage facilities and
reforestation measures.
Mr. McAllister presented the following concerns and comments to the
Commission:
A. With regards to the Operation Plan as outlined in the
attached manual submitted by the applicant, staff recommends the
following amendments to this section of the plan:
1. The plan as submitted does not address off-site
stormwater. The applicant will be required to
incorporate into the stormwater calculations, all
offsite drainage entering the property.
2. The overflow mechanism as outlined on the plan are
inadequate. They should be designed so that the
overflow water will not cause erosion. The plan
indicates overflow onto slopes of over 6.3 percent.
This is unacceptable.
3. The existing driveway located on Grand Highway was
never built correctly. The applicant will be
required to construct a concrete apron from the
street to the property line. This will keep all
stormwater from Grand Highway from entering the
property and provide adequate ingress and egress for
service vehicles.
4. The applicant will be required to construct swales
or other acceptable erosion protection along the
existing driveway which runs between Jacks Lake
north and south, in such a way as to prevent erosion
on the road. This has been a problem in the past
and will continue to be a problem and worsen as this
road is to be used for ingress and egress by dump
trucks and heavy equipment. This work will be
completed and inspected prior to any fill activity.
5. The City Engineer has requested information
regarding the soil type to be placed on the property
This information will be required before a
development permit is issued.
6. Density test will be conducted at a maximum of 2
foot intervals in order to prove compaction
requirements. Fill shall be compacted to 95~ of
modified proctor.
7. The applicant shall submit a detailed erosion
control plan for the entire site during the site
plan review process.
6
•
•
8. Both temporary and permanent grassing including
fertilizer shall be done in accordance with an
approved plan designed by the U. S. Department of
Agriculture Soil Conservation Service stationed in
Tavares.
9. A dust abatement plan will be submitted to staff
detailing measures to be taken in eliminating the
migration of dust particles from the site. The plan
must specifically outline those measures recommended
by F.D.E.R.
10. Noise levels shall not exceed those recommended by
F.D.E.R. Vibratory compaction shall be limited to
the hours of 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Monday thur
Saturday only. Heavy equipment will be allowed to
operate on the site between the hours of 7:00 A.M.
and 7:00 P.M. Monday thur Saturday. Machinery
engines will not be started earlier than 7:00 A.M.
and 9:00 A.M. respectively. Vibrations must be
limited to avoid any damages to neighboring
properties.
11. A 6'high chain link temporary construction fence
will be required along Grand Highway from Quincy's
property line to existing driveway.
12. Ingress & egress for trucks and other heavy
machinery shall be from existing clay road. Dump
trucks shall not utilize Highway 50 or Grand Highway
for ingress or egress.
13. A DOT permit will be required for fill activity
along Highway 50 right of way.
B. With regards to the stormwater management plan, staff
recommends the following amendments and/or clarifications
to the plan:
1. Permeability test must be submitted as part of the
site plan review process.
2. Verification of the run-off curve and other
assumption & calculations must be provided.
3. A St. John's River Water Management District permit
will be required.
C. With regards to the reclamation of the site, staff
recommends the following amendments and/or clarifications
to the application plan.
1. Reclamation of the site will be phased in accordance
with a fill phasing plan. The project will be
phased in such a way that the applicant will not be
permitted to construct Phase II until Phase I has
been completed, reclaimed, inspected and approved
by city staff. A phasing schedule must be submitted
and approved by city staff prior to any development
approvals. Development permits will be issued on
a phase by phase basis in accordance with an
approved phasing plan.
7
• •
The silt barrier shall be placed at the floodplain
elevation prior to any activity on site. The
easterly retention area will then be constructed
and approved prior to any fill activity for
Phase I.
2. Stockpiles of topsoil and/or fill material must be
located in an area of the site approved by City
staff, which shall be at a minimum of 100' from
Grand Highway right of way. All stockpiled topsoil
and/or fill causing an erosion problem will be
covered, mulched or any similar technique used to
avoid erosion, migration of dust particles, etc..
No debris, refuse, or other construction related
articles shall be stored or left on site at any
time.
3. All WRA slopes, inside and outside, will be sodded.
The east WRA outside slope will be sodded to the 100
year floodplain elevation. The westerly WRA outside
slope will be sodded to an elevation equal to the
depth of the WRA. Westerly slopes shall be sodded
from the bottom of the WRA to an elevation equal to
the top of the berm.
4. All reforestation operations shall be completed
within thirty (30) days of the expiration date of
the Conditional Use Permit. The reforestation plan
will consist of 20 trees per acre, evenly disbursed
aver the site. Trees shall meet City of Clermont
Tree Ordinance specifications.
5. All revegetation and reclamation operation other
than reforestation shall be completed for each phase
before any development permit is issued for the next
phase of fill operation.
6. According to the Zoning Code, all Conditional Use
Permits abutting a residential use shall provide a
landscape buffer between the two uses. In this
case, along Grand Highway which shall include one
approved tree per 50' of frontage and a landscape
buffer with irrigation.
7. A reclamation bond amounting to 110$ of actual
reclamation costs by phase, including reforestation,
shall be submitted to the City. Upon completion of
each phase, the bond will be rolled over to the next
succeeding phase of fill operation and adjusted for
cost difference.
8. At the end of six (6) months after the completion
of each phase, at least 80~ of the reclaimed areas
shall have established ground cover, by the end of
one year of completion of each phase, ground cover
shall be established on 100 percent of the reclaimed
area. Should erosion problems occur after final
revegetation by phase, the applicant will take
whatever steps are necessary to correct the problem.
9. All inspection costs will be borne by the applicant.
This shall include final inspection and ongoing
random inspections for compliance with Conditional
Use Permits conditions.
8
• •
This project shall be completed within one (1) year of the date of
issuance for this Conditional Use Permit. If the project is not
completed by this time, the applicant will cease fill activity all
have thirty (30) days to completely reclaim the site according to
the reclamation plan.
Mr. McAllister pointed out the applicant is seeking two (2) year
time frame, rather than the normal one (1) year normally granted
a Conditional Use Permit.
All plans and specification are to be prepared by a Florida
Certified Engineer who will be retained as supervising engineer
through completion. The engineer shall certify each phase as
completed according to approved plans prior to commencement next
phase. Engineer will certify final reclamation and reforestation.
Staff recommends approval of this request subject to the conditions
as outlines under Section A, B, and C of this report and subject
to the applicants operation/reclamation plan as amended and
clarified by staff.
Mr. McAllister informed the Commission that he had received several
telephone calls from several adjacent property owners who were
opposed to the project.
Mr. A. J. Knight, Mr. Harry Camp, Mr. Albert Ritchie and Mr.
Richard Bowman, adjacent property owners, were unable to attend
this meeting, both informed staff of their opposition to the
project.
Mr. Bob Wade was present and advised the Commission that the
property in question is currently under contract and also suggest
the possible commercial development of a shopping center in the
near future.
Referring to Mr. McAllister's comments, Mr. Wade stated the
following:
A (11). A 6" high berm rather than a 6' high chain line
fence would more desirable, the reason being
appearances and dust abatement.
Mr. Wade stated he felt one (1) year would not be a practical time
frame and suggest eighteen (18) months, with six (6) months
increments on 2 to 3 Phases.
Mr. Wade also stated the movement of the equipment would not be
contained on the property and emphasized the need for access from
with Highway 50.
Mr. Cecil Smart stated he did not feel the need for reforestation
if there were plans for commercial development in the near future
and suggested any reforestation would be a hinderance to future
commercial development.
Mr. Smart also stated the existing interior road constructed by the
applicant is narrow and would not be suitable as a two-way street
and suggested some type of consideration be given the applicant for
access from Highway 50.
Mrs . George asked in the plans for a shopping center were submitted
for final review would a new Conditional Use Permit be required.
Mr. McAllister informed the Commission that a shopping center of
9
• •
that size would require a Conditional Use Permit, but pointed out
the provisions in the operation plan of this project that would
allow for certain conditions to be waived and new conditions to be
implemented regarding the needs of a shopping center.
Mr. Dan Smith suggested the land would not be any more developable
after the proposed fill operation than it is presently and
expressed desire to address the site when a site plan is formally
submitted to the City for commercial development.
Mr. John Sargent asked if the heavily mined property to the east
is the location from which the fill will be obtained.
Mr. Wade advised the Commission this was correct.
Mr. Evans stated it would be wise to assume there are no plans
far commercial development at this time, considering the numbers
of proposals that have been presented and have not materialized.
Mr. Smart stated he felt the time frame of two (2} years would be
needed to move that amount of fill.
Mrs. Kranz also stated she did not feel one (1) year was sufficient
time to complete the project and suggested eighteen (18) months.
Mr. McAllister pointed out that the City Engineer felt one (i) year
would be sufficient for completion of this project.
Mr. Sargent expressed concern regarding safety with trucks
existing from Grand Highway on to Highway 50 and then east on
Highway 50.
Mr. McAllister stated Mr. Saunders had advised him that the
original concept of the interior road was to be construct to
contain as much on site traffic as possible. Mr. McAllister also
informed the Commission the interior road was originally designed
for two-way traffic for mining operation.
Mr. McCoy, engineer for the project, stated the interior road would
not be well suited for loaded trucks during stormy weather, stating
the wear and tear caused by the weight of such vehicles, would
limit the use of the road as well as the number of loads per day.
After a brief discussion a motion was made by Don Smith to
recommend to the City Council denial of this request, seconded by
Adelbert Evans.
DISCUSSION OF MOTION
Don Smith reason for recommending denial:
1. Project appears to serve no real purposed other than giving
the owner a jump on filling for construction that may or may not
occur.
2. Truck traffic would be very difficult to control.
3. Project does not appear to be workable with a future
commercial construction plan.
4. Personally does not necessarily feel this location lends
itself to a large shopping center development.
Mr. Evans expressed concern about the stormwater run off from
asphalted parking areas.
10
• •
Mr. Smart stated he felt the fill project would be an improvement
to the land and set the stage for commercial development.
Voting on the motion
Members Smith, Evans and Sargent voting aye.
Members George, Kranz and DiCamillo voting nay.
A second motion was made by Cecil Smart approval of the project
with the following modification to staff's recommendations:
1. This Conditional Use Permit shall expire eighteen
(18) months from the date granted by City Council.
2. The project should have access from Highway 50, east
of Quincy's Restaurant.
Seconded by Bonnie Kranz.
Voting on the motion.
Members Smart, Kranz and George voting aye
Members Sargent, Smith, Evans voting nay.
Because of the tie vote Parliamentary procedures requires a
recommendation of denial be forwarded to the City Council regarding
this request.
Mr. McAllister referring to a previous meeting which addressed Day
Care facilities in the R-3-A District as a Conditional Use
requested a recommendation to the City Council for such a change
to Ordinance No. 245-C.
After a brief discussion it was the consensus of the Planning &
Zoning Commission to recommended to the City Council that Day Care
facilities be added as a Conditional Use Permit in the R-3-A
District.
John N. Sargent, Chairman
ATTEST
Jane Warren
Planning Technician
11