Loading...
11-19-1985 Special MeetingCITY OF CLERAIONT MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING November 19, 1985 A special meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman John N. Sargent at 7:31 p.m. on November 19, 1985. Members attending were Don Beal, Adelbert Evans, Nick Jones, Buddy Rogers, John Sargent and Bob Thompson. Debbie Gaines arrived after the meeting had begun. Marie McKinney was excused and James Shepherd did not attend. Also attending were City Manager Wayne Saunders, Councilman Harold Turville and Planning and Zoning Technician Marilyn George. Mr. Sargent explained that the purpose of the meeting was to review Ordinance No. 176-M and make a recommendation to City Council. The ordinance would rezone five parcels in the City to bring them into compliance with the Comprehensive Plan which was revised and adopted in July of this year, as required by Florida statutes. He explained that the State recommends that each governing body set aside two dates each year to hear requests for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. Clermont will hold these hearings in February and August. He further explained that such applications must be received at City Hall by the first Friday in December for hearing in February and by the first Friday in June for consideration in August. Mr. Sargent likened the action to be recommended tonight to • "housecleaning." The first property considered is described as: All of that parcel lying W of a line 993' W of and parallel with the centerline of 12th Street, S of the S ROW line of SR 50, N of the W'ly extension of Broome Street and E of the W'ly boundary of the City of Clermont. This property must be changed from C-2 General Commercial to R-3 Residential/Professional to comply with the Comprehensive Plan (CP). (This legal description describes all of Emerald Lakes, whereas only a small portion of the property in the NE corner is zoned C-2. The majority of Emerald Lakes is currently zoned R-3.) • Because there seemed to be some confusion about the options the Commission has in making recommendations to Counci 1 in this regard, Mr. Saunders explained that State Statutes require that properties not in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan be rezoned to bring them into compliance. He also emphasized that all State requirements were met in advertising the proposed changes. A motion was made by Mr.Evans, seconded by Mr. Thompson and carried unanimously THAT IT BE RECOMMENDED TO CITY COUNCIL THAT THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL (EMERALD LAKES) BE REZONED FROM C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO R-3 RESIDENTIAL/PROFESSIONAL. The second parcel to be considered is described as: Lots 4, 5 and 6; Block 60. This property is to be rezoned from C-1 Light Commercial to R-3 Residential/ Professional. It is part of Lake Dot Condominium property. Mr. Saunders stated that this rezoning brings the property into the zoning classification that describes its actual use. CITY OF CLER~ONT MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING November 19, 1985 A motion was made by Mr. Thompson, seconded by Mr. Evans, and unanimously approved THAT IT BE RECOMMENDED TO CITY COUNCIL TO REZONE THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY (LAKE DOT) FROM C-1 LIGHT • COMMERCIAL TO R-3 RESIDENTIAL/PROFESSIONAL. The third parcel to be considered is described as: Lots 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9; Winona Bay Subdivision. This property is to be rezoned from R-3 Residential/Profes- sional to R-1 Urban Residential. Mr. Saunders explained that this parcel adjoins an area zoned R-1-A Urban Residential, and that there are now two duplexes and two single family homes in the parcel in question. Lot 8 is undeveloped, with single family homes on Lots 7 and 9. In the ERD-1 Land Use District the only zoning choices are R-1 or R-1-A. Both zoning classifications are titled Urban Residential. Mr. Sargent acknowledged Philip Windheim, the owner of Lot 8 and offered him a chance to speak. Mr. Windheim explained that he had purchased Lot 8 in 1980 as an R-3 lot, planning to build a triplex on it for a retirement income property, and that the proposed rezoning would limit him to a single family residence. He stated that Lots 7 and 9 were developed with single family residences after the two existing duplexes were built, indicating that the owners were aware of the possibility that other than a single family home would be built • on Lot 8. He urged the Commission to place this entire parcel in ERD-2, following the former line delineating R-3 from R-1-A, and stated that he would give up his plans for a triplex and build a duplex instead. Mr. Sargent expressed concern for Mr. Windheim's problem and suggested that he make a formal request in time for the February Comprehensive P lan amendment hearings. Mr. Beal said that he felt that notices of proposed Ordinances in the newspaper are not enough, and that all property owners who may be affected by rezonings or redistricting should be notified individually. Mr. Saunders told Mr. Windheim that request forms will be available at City Hall on November 27. • A brief discussion followed, concerning what would be accomplished by tabling the rezoning of this parcel. Mr. Saunders pointed out that the property will still have to be rezoned under EBD-2 to conform with the Comprehensive Plan. A motion was made by Mr. Evans, seconded by Mr. Rogers and approved by a vote of six to one THAT THE REZONING OF THE WINONA BAY AREA BE TABLED UNTIL THE MEETING IN JANUARY. Mr. Sargent voted Nay. The fourth property to be reviewed is described as: Lots 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, and 13; Block 18 from C-2 General Commercial, and Lots 15, 17 and 19; Block 18 from C-1 Light Commercial, all to R-2 Medium Density Residential. Mr. Sargent stated that this parcel is undeveloped land, 2 CITY OF CLERIKONT MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING November 19, 1985 sloping to Crystal Lake. Mr. Saunders explained that the ERD-7 District of the Land Use Map permits single family and multiple family homes with a maximum density of eight (8) dwelling units per acre. This parcel, therefore, may be rezoned R-1-A, R-1 or R-2. He recom- mended R-2, which is the maximum development allowable in ERD-7. Attorney Tom Dougherty, representing Extra Tech Properties, the owner of the adjacent parcel to the north, announced that he objects to the change because it affects his client's property. He believes R-3 would be permissible with eight (8) dwelling units per acre. Mr. Saunders pointed out that Mr. Dougherty had an old zoning book, and that currently R-3 zoning allows twelve units per acre, making it unsuitable for the ERD-7 district. A lengthy dicussion about the reasons for placing this parcel in ERD-7 followed. Mrs. Gaines pointed out that the slope of the land dictated eight (8) units per acre, since the slope is greater than seven (7) percent. The Comprehensive Plan states that intensive development on slopes over seven (7) percent is to be discouraged. She also noted that the best use of the land was considered in establishing Land Use districts. It was determined that if the Commission felt there was reason to change the Land Use district the procedure would be the same as for a citizen request. • Mr. Evans expressed the opinion that C-2 zoning of this parcel is absolutely non-conforming, and that R-2 is much better for the projected use of the land. After further discussion about the requirements for zoning in the ERD-7 Land Use district, and a statement by Mr. Rogers that only portions of the parcel have a 7~ slope, a motion was made by Mr. Evans, seconded by Mrs. Gaines and approved by a vote of f ive ( 5 ) to two ( 2 ) THAT IT BE RECOMMENDED TO CITY COUNCIL TO REZONE LOTS 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, AND 13, BLOCK 18 FROM C-2 TO R-2 AND LOTS 15, 17 AND 19; BLOCK 18 FROM C-1 TO R-2. Mr. Beal and Mr. Rogers voted Nay. The fifth parcel to be reviewed is described as: • All of Block 19 and Lots 3, 4 and 5; Block 20 from R-3 Residential/Professional to R-1 Urban Residential Mr. Saunders explained that ERD-7 allows R-1-A, R-1 and R-2 zoning classifications. He quoted policy statements from the Comprehensive Plan discouraging high density construction in flood prone areas and areas of extreme slope and encouraging low density lakeshore development. (Objective 3: Policies A and B, Page 1-5, Comprehensive Plan.) Tom Dougherty, an attorney representing Extra-Tech Properties, owner of the parcel under discussion, stated that he objects to the recommendaton of the City Manager to rezone this property to R-l. He argued that proper notice was not given to property owners of intention to rezone, in spite of the fact that State Statutes were complied with in the advertising of such intent. He stated that in each area of the City where a density of twelve units per acre is permitted there is no available land. He expressed the opinion that the ERD-7 district covers too large an area, and that properties on the 3 CITY OF CLERINONT MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING November 19, 1985 lakes do not compare with property only 150 feet from Highway 50. He stated that his client's property should have its own identity and be different than ERD-7. He explained that his client stands to lose tens of thousands of dollars because of the rezoning of this parcel. The City Manager asked that what use is permitted according to the Land Use Map be given consideration, rather than past or future proposals. He stated that this parcel can be zoned either R-1 or R-2 and still comply with the ERD-7 designation of the Land Use map, but that the two policies mentioned above be kept in mind. After a brief discussion during which it was pointed out that the City's advertising of these rezonings exceeded the requirement of Florida Statutes, a motion was made by Mr. Rogers and seconded by Mr. Beal THAT IT BE RECOMMENDED TO CITY COUNCIL THAT THIS PARCEL BE REZONED FROM R-3 TO R-2. Mr. Evans urged that the character of surrounding properties be considered, and that most of these are of R-1 or R-1-A character. Mrs. Gaines pointed out that the parcel is across from the ball field, and Mr. Rogers suggested that Crystal Lake also serves as a buffer. Mr. Jones stated that because of the environmentally sensitive nature of the area he feels that it should be a park. Since that is not possible, the highest use of the land should be considered, and that that use would be R-1. After further discussion THE MOTION FAILED TO PASS by a vote of three to four, with Messrs. Evans, Sargent, Thompson and Jones voting nay. A motion was made by Mr. Jones, seconded by Mr. Evans and carried by a vote of four to three THAT IT BE RECOMMENDED TO CITY COUNCIL TO REZONE ALL OF BLOCK 19 AND LOTS 3, 4, AND 5 OF BLOCK 20 TO R-1 URBAN RESIDENTIAL TO CONFORM WITH THE LAND USE MAP. Messrs. Rogers and Beal and Mrs. Gaines voted nay. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9.25 p.m. '~ _1 1~ JOHN N. SARGENT~,~ Chairman Y A ST: --'-1 --- -- -- ----- ----- MARILYN GEORGE ~P & Z Technician 4