Loading...
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