Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989 05 10 Planning and Zoning Board Regular Minutes DK:fl-Ff PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MINUTES MAY 10, 1989 The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. HOARD MEMBERS: David Hopkins, Present Gene Dorman, Chairman, Present John Torcaso, Present David McLeod, Present Michael Saporito, Vice-Chairman, Present CITY OFFICIALS: J. Koch, Dir. Admin./Comp. Planning D. LeBlanc, Land Coordinator Chairman Dorman stated that the purpose of the meeting is a Public Hearing to discuss the possible changes to the land use designations within the entire Tuscawilla PUD or the possible rezoning of the entire PUD. This meeting came about because of a motion made by Commissioner Partyka at the Commission Meeting on February 13. The motion was as follows: For the staff and the P&Z Board to get together for the purpose of specifically reviewing the Tuscawilla PUD zoning, and whether it would be better to make it residential R-lAAA and/or reviewing all land use designations in the PUD or having any other issues associated with the properties that are in the interest of the public, resolved. Since the Commission Meeting of February 13, we had one additional meeting which Commissioner Partyka participated in, in which he clarified to some extent what he really wanted to be done, and what the Commission wanted done as to looking at the Tuscawilla PUD. There are a number of things to be considered. First, we must understand that R-1AAA is a zoning district, C-l is a zoning district, PUD is a zoning district. Tuscawilla including Oak Forest is entirely a PUD, and that is a zoning district. There are no separate zones within the PUD. There are separate designations for different sections of the land as to multi-family, single-family, etc. There have been three or four workshops with the City Staff to get the physical information about Tuscawilla- what is there, what is not there, what should be there or what shouldn't. We announced that we would not be making any recommendations until such time as we had a Public Hearing with the people from Tuscawilla and/or the people from Gulfstream participating and making comments. Zoning districts: First consideration: that the Tuscawilla PUD be broken up, and we become an R-1AAA zoning district. Divide all of Tuscawilla into a zoning district. Mr. Khemlani spoke: He said he would like to wait to make a comment until he hears what the P&Z Board has come up with. Chairman Dorman said they had come up "with nothing except some figures about what exists and what doesn't exist." Tim Johnson, 1109 Gator Lane, spoke. He asked why the homeowners suggested R-1MA. He said that that is the way Gulfstream set it up except for the waivers and favors that the City has given to them: Elimination of certain right-of-ways, allowed to do certain things within the City that wouldn't meet any zoning code. Set backs. The owners of the homes there should expect the community to meet certain zoning requirements. Now R-1AAA would be a good one. Now that's past. We are saying take us ~ut of this PUD. It hasn't protected us. Take the vacant property that is left and apply R-1AAA to it. We are asking that the homeowners be protected by the strongest zoning classification available. I have been advised that R-1AAA is it. The legislative body in the City of Winter Springs has the right to change that PUD. If they have the right to invoke Ordiance 61, then they certainly have the right to kick it out. We have to rezone it. There shouldn't have been a PUD here to begin with. It should have been done right the first time. It should have been done under the subdivision laws of the State of Florida to begin with. Mr. Dorman said that the way it was given to us by the Commission and by the , A' ~ "~J" /.1_, ie " , t! 1989 l,:,:icle~ in the Tuscawilla Homeowner's Newsletter, everyth,lng was to be considered :,:,r R-lMA in Tuscawilla and not just the undeveloped areas. ,Mr. Saporito asked .what about all of those people who call us and write us and say they like the PUD ;tnd want it to continue?" Discussion. Mr. Johnson said that if Tuscawilla had been formed ns a subdivision, the sewer plants, etc. would be owned by the City of Winter Springs. By giving the single owner the right to set up a PUD, we are allowing him to save himself millions and millions of dollars in sidewalks, width of streets, etc.. Mr. Saporito stated that this group has "jumped up and down" about sidewalks, width of roads, etc.. Mr. Johnson said that the PUD did not afford "us" any protection. Discussion. Ethel Beecher, 1207 Winter Springs Boulevard, spoke. She stated that she had thought that the commercial property that is there now, was the extent of it. She said that those who live on Winter Springs Boulevard feel the impact of the growth and traffic and pollution. She said tht she is very much in favor of building an R-1AM. Mr. Khemlani asked that the Board explain what they have been doing in the work- shops. Mr. Dorman explained that we have looked at the City zoning codes in depth. He said that they understood that they were to look at the possibility of rezoning all of 'the Tuscawilla PUD R-1AM. They have looked at other zoning codes also. He said tha t the Tuscawilla PUD also includes Oak Fores t. We have looked at the undeveloped land that is under discussion with the City Commission relative to vested rights. We ,have looked at the undeveloped land at the eastern end of Winter Springs Boulevard. Undeveloped land to the north of the railroad track that goes up from the extension of Tuscora will be finished all the way to 434, and Vista Willa to 434, the kinds of land and what might be built on them - how much is buildable and how much is not, rights-of-way, the Duda property, and whats going to happen with it, the natural buffers that exist between certain developed sections, the need for other buffers to be constructed, possible land use changes. Mr. Moti Khemlani, President of the Tuscawilla Homeowners Association, spoke next. He asked the Board to tell the people what their ideas are. He said that they had made hours of comments for eight months to the Commission. He said that he would get copies of the testimony by the representatives of the Homeowners at the Commission meetings. All of the comments represent one request: No commercial within Tuscawilla, only residential. He asked what the Board is doing about it. Mr. Glenn Chiles, 1602 Wildcat Court, spoke next. He said that the people feel th,lt they are "being shafted". . He said that what he heard from the Commission was that they (the people), are only asking for R-IAM for undeveloped area. He feels that there is a lack of communication, and that the homeowners arc put right in the middle. He said "I have to dispute Mr. Johnson's comment". He said that he called the construction office today. They said that there arc 2500 to 2700 homes in TuScawilla. He estimated that the average taxes that the people pay, arc $1200. The City of Winter Springs and the County get over three million dollars a year in taxes from Tuscawilla. There is a homeowner's investment of over 350 million dollars. He said that they arc pleading with the City to reclassify whatever is necessary, and keep a shopping center out of the center of the residential area. If the Duda goes in, and comes in to Seneca, near 100 feet on dumping into Winter Springs Boulevard, the City will have to foot the bill for extra police, fire, etc., and when you open up Vistawilla, people are going to come from 434 down Vistawilla into Seneca to the Boulevard. They will either come up Seneca or by my house on Northern Way. Mr. Dorman asked Mr. Chiles how he would think they would be able to handle things with one zoning district ...0 1-:~ ,?" <:>'I~ Planning and Zoning Board Minutes May 10, 1989 Page 3 within the middle of a PUD. Mr. Saporito asked if the Board recommended that because the area surrounding the shopping center is residential, taking into consideration that the market conditions in that area probably don't support commercial use of the land, and the Board recommended that it be set up for single or multiple family residences, you would not object to that? Mr. Chiles said no. He said that the value of the property will go down if they have a shopping plaza there. Mr. Saporito asked Mr. Chiles how he would feel about the area where the expressway will cross 434 being commercial, then the develop- er will be able to make up a loss there. Mr. Chiles said he would be against that. Lorraine Seives, 1716 Seneca Boulevard, spoke next. She addressed the area that would continue out from Vistawilla. She pled for nothing but single family dwellings in that area. She said they're concerned about Duda, and about Tuscawilla "going down the tubes". Cheryl Lawler, 1436 Northern Way, spoke next. She reiterated the resident's opposition to a shopping center and expressed her concern about the Board's talking about trade-offs with a developer - that we're avoiding what was requested initially, and that is to keep the community residential. She feels that the growth is going unchecked. Ted. Erion, 1100 Huron Trace, spoke. He objected to a shopping center. Rae Lawrence, 1003 Trune, Greenbriar subdivision, spoke. She said that the people feel "manipulated and manuvered". She said a shopping center would invite crime, drugs, etc. Bob Lawrence, 1003 Trune Trace, spoke next. He also said keep the industrial area out or it will go down the tubes like other places have. Mr. Dorman spoke. He said that prior to this meeting, the general sense of this Board had been to recommend changing the land use designation of that area in the central part of Tuscawilla to a residential area. He said he believed that would be their recommendation. And that there be a buffer, possibly a park between the existing commercial (7-11 etc.), and the residential area. We are thinking that the area at the eastern area of Winter Springs Boulevard where you cross the creek going toward 426 which is undeveloped and is presently called commercial, that we not make a recommendation as to its use until we know more about what Duda is going to do. It has possibilities for certain kinds of commercial and for certain kinds of residential development. We have talked about the large areas to the north of the railroad tracks. The railroad has a 100 foot right-of-way. That is bounded by some high trees which provide a good buffer to the north of the existing homes. Our thought was to provide some commercial are on the south side of 434 - not in the form of commercial strips, but a commercial enclave that would have no egress or exit into Vistawilla or Tuscawilla. The commercial enclave shouldn't be deeper than 750 feet. It could be bounded by some multi-family. and then we would have some single family on the north side of the railroad tracks. Dave McLeod read that R-lAAA does not fit into the first piece of property in Tuscawilla because of side setbacks or width of lines, etc. R-lAAA requires a 20,000 sq. foot lot. Mr. McLeod discussed each Tuscawilla sector: Unit 2 _ housing lots, 19,000 sq. ft. so don't fall into the R-lAAA; does not meet the land size or the requirement for the front yard set back, or the side yard set back. R-lAAA requires a 20 and has a 10. We don't have information on what the rear yard set back is. Sector II doesn't even fall into it. Sector III - primary difference is that it is a 1 acre plus tract. So that even as a 1 acre, because of side set backs etc., we can't get the present requirements to get this ./anning and Zoning 130 J,1Y 10, 1988 Hinutes P<lf,C 4 into <In R-lAAA. Sector IV - 20,000. Sector V - is a 1 acre requirement. It docs meet R-IAM, but the side yard set hacks are only 10 ft.. So we don't meet it. These do meet the R-lAA, though, which is a 10,000 sq. ft. requirement, 35 ft. set backs on the front, a 10 ft. side set back, and a 35 ft. back yard set back. the width on the front of these properties in a R-lAA is 80 ft. The only other thing that we could find is Sector 9-A.. It also falls in the R-lAA. Units 7,8, 9, 9ll, Bear Creek included, 11, llA, liB, 12, 12A, 13, 14A, and all of Oak Forest. The only thing that all of those properties fall into at the present time is an R-1^. That is an 8,000 sq. ft. requirement. near Creek has 31,000 sq. ft. pieces of land. Is it fair to the people that a 31,000 sq. ft. piece of property be put in a R-IA zoning? Some people have covenants in the Homeowner's Associa tion tlw t stops them from being nble to divide n piece of property. Others do not. Do we want them to put this into an R-IA and end up having somebody start splitting their property, and have smaller shomes next to larger homes? We do not want to cheapen the value of your homes. ~. Nr. Dorman said that in toto, if we brOUGht everybody into the R-lAAA zoning code, it would require a totnl of 147 vnriances. If we brought everybody under R-IMA. there would be 97 v.,riances. Thats not the indivldual home. Tho~e :1re the different sections. So we arc not going to recommend to the City Commission that ,Tuscawilln pun be broken up in order to provide a separate zoning district. The R-IMA sets everything in concrete. He read the intent and purpose of the pun zoning district: "To provide for planned residential communities containing a variety of dwelling unit types and arrangements and complimentary and compatible commercial centers". A pun gives variety of dwelling units. It has been said that we do not have the protection as to what goes next door in a PUD that we would have if we were in separate zoning districts. We have more protection in a pun than the people in the other zoning districts. In the zoning there isn't the protection from what goes in next door tllat there is in the pun. In the pun. overflow parking from a commercial area can't park in a residential drea as it can in a zoned area. Also, campers etc. arc permitted in the zoned ~re~s (visible to the street). Disabled motor vehicles can be kept out in your back yard up on braces. None oE those things are allowed within the PUD. Hr. Khemlani spoke. He said that there have been three surveys by the Homeowners of Tuscawilla. The first one W<lS in Nay nnd June; a private survey. It was signed by over 1000 residents of Tuscawilla. They stated they did not want any commerci,-tl.. The second survey wat=; sponsered by the Homeowners Associa tion, and 90Z of returns said they don't want any commercial. As late as tllis year in the Homeowners Newsletter. we puhlished a one page statement - "no grocery store in Tuscawilla". I have also gone on record ;1S saying th<1t it is cruci<ll to Tusc<l- willa to insist on rezoning. That the pun is not a protection :1gainst developers who are most expedient in nttempting to maximize land use even though it is ar,.,inst the wishes of the homeowners. Twenty three chnnges that have been mnde, h<lve not been to the betterment of the homeowners. A statement was made by the developer on July 6, in which the developer proposed to remove the commercial section from the center and put it where you were proposing. The Board rejected it in Jtlly. 1987. lie said that they don't want the pun, because if the pun st<1Ys. then the vested rights issue stays. We are going to continue to be badgered by this developer. The only way to do it is to rezone the PUD into resident!<11; create zonings to protect us. Discussion. Hr. HcGleocl asked Nr. Kheml<1ni wh.,t he ''''<15 galning in chnnging to zoning. Mr. Khemlnni said they would be g.,1ninl; protect:lon from n developer who thinks he has nn option to rezone things any WilY he prefers. Mr. HcLeod suggested "going after" the number one problem - the undeveloped pieces n \. .,Jf ---- :;l ,.." :;:>-d ~ l' '-G ?;. PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MINUTES May 10, 1989 Page 5 of property, then looking at the entire PUD. Mr. Khemlani repeated that he did not see any negatives of rezoning the PUD. In response to Mr. McLeod's question, Mr. Khemlani stated" we felt that when someone says 'no Food Lion in Tuscawilla', that I consider, ~s. saying no commercial in Tuscawilla". Discussion. M~Leod asked to se a copy of the pet~t~on. (SEE ATTACHED) - Ms. Lawler spoke for rezoning because she said they do not want commercial develop- ment anywhere in the community. Mr. Johnson spoke. He said that the PUD is archaic and outdated. He said that the P&Z Board should ask the Commission for more time, and perhaps set up a moratorium. Ms. Katherine Stucker, 1787 Seneca Boulevard, spoke next. She said that she knows there will be extra traffic. M~. Isabelle Laub, 1872 Blue Spruce Court, spoke next. She stated that she has heard from her neighbors, that no matter what we want, the builder will get what he wants because he has the money and the power. There were no further comments from the public. Mr. Hopkins spoke. He said that he did not see how the PUD zoning has not been beneficial to Tuscawilla. lIe mentioned that with the beltway coming through, we are going to be looking at a whole lot of traffic. He said that he felt that if they are not going to be stopping in Winter Springs to spend the money, then they are going to be using it for another freeway through Winter Springs. He said that he felt that commercial land use, if it is set up in the right manner, around the beltway, would be a beneficial source of revenue for our City. He said that unless we find some way to bring in some revenue, the taxes will go up, and will continue to go up. Mr. Torcaso spoke. He said that the PUD was approved because you could build any type of home in that area. It gave the developer and residents the ability to have the home of their choice. He stated that there is nothing in the Code Book that says that we can change the PUD. The City has the power to change anything they want to change. Mr. Saporito spoke. He said that he wouldn't be adverse to making the whole Tuscawilla community a limited access community much like Bear Creek. He spoke of the extra traffic that would be caused by commercial. He said that he does not believe there is enough business to support a development there. He said that he would vote that there be no commercial development. Mr. McLeod spoke. He said that 44.85 (8) and (9) does give the governing bodies of this Board, and the governing bodies of the City Commission the right to "take a look" at the PUD. Mr. Dorman spoke. He stated that at least three of the members of the Board had attended the Commission Meetings since the shopping center controversy came up. He said that the Board has been directed by the City Commission to provide a report as soon as possible. He said he didn't see much sense in delaying any longer. He said he was not happy with making any kind of a recommendation about the eastern edge of Winter Springs Boulevard at this time. He said he would prefer to "table" that issue until we get more information on the Duda property.