Loading...
08-07-1990 Request• • PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 7, 1990 The regular scheduled meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order Tuesday August 8, 1990 at 7:30 by Chairman John Sargent. Members present were James Brown, Don Smith, Bonnie Kranz, Adelbert Evans and Peter Bertronaschi. Members excused were Marilyn George and Carlos Solis. NEW BUSINESS 1. REQUEST REZONE APPLICANT: Jim Modica 300 Main Street Minneola, Fla. 34711 LOCATION: 310 Almond Street REQUEST: Rezone property from R-2 Medium Density Residential to R-3-A Residential/ Professional. Mr. Saunders reminded the Commission that the property was recently approved by the City Council for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and a future land use designation change which allows professional offices in the area. The applicant has advised staff that he plans to convert the structure from a single family residence into a professional office for his use and therefore requests the rezoning. Mr. Modica will be required to apply for a Conditional Use Permit for the professional offices following the final approval of the rezoning by the City Council. The R-3-A designation will allow a professional office as a conditional use The residential density will remain the same as in R-2 Medium Density Residential. The property is abutted on the west by the R-3 Residential/Professional and the south and east by R-2 Medium Density Residential and on the north by C-2 General Commercial, developed as Sunnyside Shopping Center. The R-3-A Residential/Professional designation will be an acceptable transition zoning from the commercial to the R-2 Medium Density Residential, therefore staff recommends approval of this request. Mr. James Modica, the applicant was present and requested the Commission's approval of the requested rezone. Mr. Evans stated he like the proposed retention area. Mr. Don Smith asked why the requested zoning was R-3-A rather than R-3. 1 • • Mr. Saunders pointed out that the R-3-A has the same density restrictions of R-2 and is more desirable considering the abutting uses. After a brief discussion a motion was made by Mr. Evans to recommend to the City Council approval of the request as presented by staff, seconded by Mr. Brown and approved by a unanimous vote. 2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICANT: Clermont Pelican Inc. 677 West Highway 50 Clermont, Fla. 34711 LOCATION: 677 West Highway 50 REQUEST: Operate an ice cream parlor in an existing structure located in the C-1 General Commercial District. Mr. Saunders pointed out that the applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to convert the existing building located on the south portion of the property to an ice cream parlor. The building in the past has been used as an office building. Adequate paved parking is .now provided for the usage. As in the past for Conditional Use Permits on existing structures, improvements are recommended that will bring the site closer into compliance with existing codes, specifically landscape codes. Staff recommended approval of this request subject to the following conditions: 1. A landscape hedge to be placed along the western and eastern boundaries of the property and along the southern boundary where a landscape hedge does not exist. 2. The five (5) foot landscape buffer adjacent to the sidewalk areas on each side of the western entrance from Highway 50 be provided. This will require the removal of a 5' strip of asphalt for this landscape buffer. 3. The perimeter tree requirements shall be met. 4. The existing water retention area to the south should be redefined and the existing disturbed areas in and around the retention area shall be resodded. 5. The sidewalk along 7th Street shall be constructed. In addition to the reconstruction of the sidewalk staff also recommends the elimination of the existing curb cut from 7th Street to the southwest corner of the property. Mr. Saunders advised the Commission the applicant is aware of these conditions and willing to improve the site accordingly. Mr. Smith expressed concern regarding the visual problems because of the hedge on Highway 50. Mr. Saunders pointed out that the Landscape Ordinance does address visual concerns and those guidelines would have to be met. 2 • • Mr. Smith also stated concern regarding traffic cutting through landscaped area. Mr. Saunders pointed curbing along the landscaped area would deter possible cut through traffic. Mr. Smith pointed out this would require additional expense on part of the applicant. After a brief discussion a motion was made by Mr. Smith to recommend to the City Council approval of the request as submitted by staff, excluding the landscape buffer on Highway 50. Motion was seconded by Mr. Evans. DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION Mr. Bertronaschi questioned the removal of the landscape buffer on Highway 50. Mr. Smith stated concerns regarding visual clearance, curbing buffered landscape, beautification, traffic access onto the site and traffic flow around the pumps and canopy. Mr. Saunders pointed out that the canopy which was recently constructed had to meet the 30' setback from the front property line. Mr. Saunders also pointed out the two entrances off of Highway 50 which are approximately 40' cuts each. Mrs. Kranz called the questioned. Mr. Brown, Mr. Smith and Mr. Evans voting Nay. Mr. Sargent, Mr. Bertronaschi and Mrs. Kranz voting Aye. Tie vote, the motion failed. Mr. Smith made a motion that the request be recommended for approval as presented by staff, seconded by Mr. Bertronaschi, approved by a 5-1 vote. Mr. Evans. voting nay. There being no further business the meeting was adjourned. ti John Sargent, hairman ATTEST: Jane Warren, P an inq Technician 3