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