HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983 01 19 Planning and Zoning Board Regular Minutes
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
January 19, 1983
7:30 P.M.
The Planning and Zoning Board was called to order by Chairman Hatfield. The Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag was led by DeFazio.
ROLL CALL:
CITY OFFICIALS:
John Hatfield-Chairman, present
Cindy Kaehler-Vice Chairman, present
George Kaplan, absent
Richard DeFazio, present
Tim Johnson, absent
Jacqueline Koch, City Planner
110tion was made by Kaehler to approve the minutes of December 29, 1982. Second by DeFazio.
Vote. All aye, motion carried.
CONTINUATION OF CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST OF WALT DITTMER AND NATIONAL HOMES, INC., OWNER,
FOR AMENDMENT TO THE APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAN OF THE WILDWOOD P,U.D. TO REDESIGNATE 30
ACRES WEST OF THE POWER EASEMENT FROM PUD MULTI-FAMILY TO PUD INDUSTRIAL.
Hatfield addressed the audience on the procedure for approaching and speaking to the Board,
in light of the large turn-out for this meeting (56 people).
The City Planner stated that this request is to redesignate 30 acres from garden apartments
and townhouses to PUD industrial. The PUD Ordinance, Section 44.85.8, provides for amend-
ments. This ordinance allows this Board to approve any change that they may find consistent
with the purpose and intent of the ~UD district and with the concept, land use, density and
phasing of the approved preliminary development plan. Ms. Koch went on to state that if
this Board granted approval, this would be subject to a 30 day period for appeal to the
City Commission. If this Board finds the request not to be consistent, the request is auto-
matically forwarded to the City Commission which must call a public hearing on the issue
and consider_it further. The City Planner noted to the Board that there, have been several
changes in the proposal since the last meeting and asked that they be presented to the Board
by the applicant.
L.W. Carroll, attorney for Mr. Dittmer, came forward to request the Board continue the meet-
ing until all five members of the Board could be present, due to the fact that this meet-
ing is a continuance of the December 16, 1982 meeting, at which all were present. Discus-
sion. Tom Green, -attorney for the Wildwood Homeowners Associaton, stated their position
is they would like this matter heard tonight before the Board. The Board decided to proceed
with the meeting.
Mr. Carroll proceeded with the presentation, commenting that the Homeowners had originally
agreed to meet with Mr. Dittmer on January 4, 1983, to discuss some of the conflicts, how-
ever this did not happen. Referring to City Ordinance 44.85.8 which gives this Board the
,
authority to modify the PUD so long as they are consistent with the land use, Mr. Carroll
went on to state that if this is developed residential, the density will be higher in com-
parison to commercial. Mr. Dittmer's plan is for 30% building, 50% parking and 20% open or
landscaped area. There will be 27 lots, with one acre minimum. There will be two dis-
tinctive zone: (1) nearest Rustic Woods, there will be one story developments only, with a
maximum height of 20 feet, for office-warehouse use, with no outside storage of any kind
allowed; (2) near 17-92 there will be a maximum height of 30 feet and a more combined
Office/warehouse/light industrial/ligh manufacturing use. The proposed access road would
run north and south through the property, with two minor cul-de-sacs, for service and
aesthetics as well. This would mean no road near a resiaential area. Mr. Carroll stated
there would be no offensive odor-causing light manufacturing sites.
"- --~--"-'"-'~'-~------""-,.~---~..........-..-........,'
Planning & Zoning Minutes
Page 2
Along the Florida Power buffer of 175 feet, on either side Mr. Dittmer has plans to put
Australian pines or fund a portion of a concrete wall as a buffer. Mr. Carroll handed
out a Proposed Restrictions (attached) for the property. The proposed name for the
project is Winter Springs Commerce Center. Mr. Carroll stated if approved, the next
step would be for the City to approve the preliminary plan, then the individual plans for
building on each lot, prior to obtaining a building permit, would have to be approved.
He stated the tax assessed base on this property when developed could be between 6 3/4
and 10 million dollars.
Mr. Dittmer's reasons for finding this land unsuitable for residential development are
that no natural or legal buffers existing on the 17-92 side, which means abutting com-
mercial development; there is property abutting here that is County, where the City has
no control; no utilities (water/sewer) are presently available if it was to be developed
as residential, whereas light industrial might have septic tanks; and the high density
of multi-family would increase crime, in his opinion.
Mr. Carroll sympathi zed with the homeowners "emotional appeals, tI but reaffirmed the
"quality" points of putting this property to use as commercial: this plan will provide
for lower density, lower traffic, noise, high buffering, cleanness, good design and have a
reputable owner who works and lives in Winter Springs. This leaves the homeowners with
three choices: 1) let Dittmer develop along these lines; 2) let the property set idle;
3) hold out for residential development.
The City Planner stated the concept of the Wildwood PUD originally was for the majority
of the property to be residential with a very small site set aside for commercial; at
that time it was zoned for neighborhood services. The land use and density consistency
requirements are two characteristics which this proposal cannot meet; in the language of
land use and planning, density is an adjective applied to the land dealing with the impact
of some of the various factors which the Board has just reviewed in the revision of the
zoning codes. The elements that are involved in commercial activity is higher density
than any residential activity. On that basis this particular plan does not meet that
particular requirement of the Code. That, however, is not to say that this plan could
not be made to work. The creation of a true buffer or transition between the residential
area and the higher industrial area would be preferable. The retention of warehousing
with truck traffic to the rear of the property on the east would not be consistent with
the City's idea of transitional step upward to higher commercial characteristics. Again,
to be Qonsistent with what we are recommending for the rest of the City the only uses we
find acceptable next to multi-family development would be the moderate land uses of retail
operations and offices for professional operations. This plan does not meet this require-
ment, and in this sense we would not be agreeing with ourselves throughout the City.
Another major prob~em with this type of development, it is not designed for much more
than channeling traffic off an arterial road into a residential neighborhood. To allow
industrial uses would be to allow heavy truck traffic, which is unsuitable for this type
of road. The alternative would be to pave Florida Avenue to the property and require
all the heavy truck traffic to enter from 17-92 with the proposed road ending in a
cul-de-sac. The north end of the proposed road could be utilized only for traffic into
a professional office area, with no trucks entering from Shepard Road. There could be an
emergency inter-connect between two cul-de-sacs that would not be open except if there was
a blockage at either exit or for emergency use. Ms. Koch stated that to make this request
approvable in her mind would still not make it consistent with what is approyed currently.
Ms. Koch stated that the City has a franchise agreement with the water and sewer company,
and it is unlikely that this area would be served by a package plant. Mr. Piland painted
out this is outside the service area of NOWSCO.
Planning & Zoning Minutes
Page 3
Tom Green, attorney for Wildwood/Rustic Woods Homeowners Association, presented the Board
with a signed petition against this proposed development with 103 families' signatures
(out of 130 possible). Green went on to state that the main basis to change the PUD
is consistency. The fact is, however, that these people bought homes here thinking it to
be residential area, and offices and warehouses are not consistent with homes. Although
Mr. Carroll stated that if they put offices and warehouses in less traffic would be created
in comparison to residential, but what is to be considered is what happens everyday when
the employees leave: they go to Shepard Road and you have massive traffic problems. Mr.
Carroll stated crime rate would be less with commercial site; we disagree on the basis
that offices and warehouses would be prime targets for crime. Mr. Green went onto state
that if this is to be light industry, what type of light industry would generate the
figures Mr. Carroll mentioned: 6 3/4 to 10 million in tax revenue. The 4 acres already
classified industrial is enough. This property would indeed be prime for residential devel-
opment especially the property bordering the lake. As to the commercial developments on
17-92, buffers could be installed west of the residences.
The following spoke against the request: Dave Hudick, president of the homeowners assoc-
iation; Harry Misilewich, 731 Lakeview Drive; Ann Silver, 707 Lakeside Drive; Bruce
Bingham; Helen Diehl, Vice President of the association; Doug Condarous, 709 Briarwood
Drive; Al Mendelson; John Hale, 707 Linden Drive; Grace Sullivan.
Troy Piland, 577 Walden Court, spoke for the request.
Mr. Dittmer stated it appears that the homeowners were mislead by National Homes when they
bought their homes. Also if this developed as residential, this is sure to create more
traffic than commercial development, with the high density that apartments have, this
would be anything but desirable. Mr. Dittmer stated that he would be more than happy to
form a review board for the development with some of the homeowners to be on it. This way
they would have an input on what types of businesses would be in the center. Ken Steves,
planner for Mr. Dittmer, stated briefly that with 12 trips per day, per unit (360), and with
the density of 12, this would equal out to approximately 3500 to 4000 trips per day.
Office warehouse would be somewhere below 1000 trips per day. Mr. Carroll stated that
Mr. Dittmer was aware of the possibilities of having to pave Florida Avenue and was willing
to cooperate with this. At this time Mr. Carroll showed the Board several 8 by 10 colored
photographs of garbage and household trash that is currently on the property.
Input from Kaehler in reference to the intent of the PUD, to promote public health, safety
and general welfare; to encourage an environment of stable character, and to allow the
creation of a well-balanced community that provides basic recreational and supportive
services. Currently the Board is in the process of revising the commercial districts in an
attempt to refrain from having intense commercial.acti vi ty adj acent to residential com-
munities. Voting for this, Kaehler stated, would be defeating the purpose of the revision
of the code. What we are proposing currently next to residential property is professional
offices and this request does not meet that requirement. I find this request not to be
consistent and compatible with the residential community. I experienced first hand the
traffic problems on Shepard Road and in this general area, commercial would add more traffic,
especially trucks which would be a disaster.
Ms. Koch stated in relation to the traffic created, the difference between this and com-
mercial would not be significant (just under 2000 trips per day for either multi-family or
industrial park). It is not the amount but the type of traffic, trucks versus passenger
cars that differs.
Hatfield stated that what we are basically looking for here is consistency. We are currently
looking at a 20% change to commerical in a PUD. I don't see how we can find this to be
Planning & Zoning Minutes
Page 4
consistent with the original PUD. I feel that the facilities (water/sewer) would not be
a problem.
Kaehler moved to find Mr. Dittmer's request inconsistent with the Wildwood P.U.D. Second
for discussion by DeFazio. DeFazio stated that what Mr. Dittmer is asking for is not bad,
however,it is not in line with the current changes to the zoning code. Comment from
Hatfield that Mr. Dittmer had showed to the Board an exceptional desire to work with the
homeowners and the Board on this request. Discussion.
Kaehler restated her original motion to find the request of Walt Dittmer and National Homes,
Inc., inconsistent with the preliminary plan of the Wildwood P.U.D. to redesignate 30 acres
west of the power easement from PUD Multi-family to PUD industrial. Second remained by
DeFazio. Vote. All aye, motion carried.
Hatfield explained that this request being denied, will automatically go before the Com-
mission for further consideration at a public hearing. This public hearing will be
advertised and posted for the public.
Meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:20 P.M.