Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993 05 05 Planning and Zoning Board Regular Minutes e e.. Planning and Zoning ,Board Minutes Wednesday, May 05, 1993 BOARD BeERS: David Hopkins, Olaiman, Present Crace Anne Clavin, Vice Chaiman, Present Dav id McLeod, Present Tan Brown, Present John Ferring, Present CITY OFFICIALS: Cceg Kern, Planner Donald LeBlanc,' L.D.C. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. The APProval of Minutes of APril 07. 1993 Brown rmved to approve the minutes of Apr i I 07, 1993; seconded by Ferring. Vote: McLeod-absent, Clavin-abstain(not present at that meeting), Hopkins-aye, Brown-aye, and Ferring-aye. Motion carried. Year 1 y APProval of ZoninR MaP LeBlanc explained that in accordance with Section 20.102(C) of the Ci ty Code, the Zoning Map is to be reviewed by Planning & Zoning Board in May and the City Carmissioner in June. There have been two amendnents in the last twelve rmnths, one being the Sprague annexation (Ordinance 530) and the other being the School Board annexation (Ordinance 543). Hopkins asked what type of Land Use these properties are being annexed in at. LeBlanc answered that the Sprague property is classi f ied as industrial and the School Board property as commercial. Hopkins also asked the irq:>act of the l....ms(Land Developnent Regulations) on these properties and LeBlanc answered that in the Workshop Mr. Kern wi 11 explain that the Land Use Classifications proposed to be amended will match the existing zoning classification. Clavin rmved that the Zoning Map as presented by Mr. LeBlanc with two annexations be reccmnended by the Planning & Zoning Board to the City Carmission for approval; seconded by Ferring. Vote: Ferring-aye, Brown-aye, Hopkins-aye, Clavin-aye, McLeod-absent. Motion carried. LeBlanc stated that for the Board's information the Site Plans for Rite Aid and Walgreens have been approved by staff. The Site Plan for 419 Recycling is still being reviewed by staff. Planning & Zoning Workshop Hopkins closed the Planning & Zoning Board and opened the Workshop on COmprehensive Plan Amendments. ~ e Planning & Zoning Board Minutes Wednesday t May 5 t 1993 Page 2 Kern reiterated the dates as outlined is his memo to the Board regarding workshops and public hearings. He did point out that the Planning & Zoning Board Public Hearing tentatively scheduled for June 2nd, 1993 is not a requirement by the State but he felt this public hearing would be appropriate for public input at the Planning & Zoning Board level. In addi tion he stated that the adoption date listed in the memo of Novermer 22nd lIBY be obtainable sooner. Kern continued by explaining the Index Table and how he would classify the components of the packages for the Board's review this evening as follows: Classifications Document Policy Changes Comprehensive Plan Amendments Modifications to the Policies Annexa t ions 1 ) Shasteen annexation 2) Sprague annexation 3) Bergstresser & Voska annexation 4) Pettit annexation 10) High School annexation Adninistrative Internal 5) Allen Keen/Spring Land (by the City) 6) Richard Parker 7) Schrimsher 9) Various parcels in Town Center 11) Joyce 12) Bear Creek Estates 13) Winter Springs Unit 3 Adninistrative External 8) FL Country Clubs (not by the City) 14) Parcels ISt61,80,1~ 15) Parcel 51 Kern explained that the internal admUnistrative type amendments were considered inconsistencies or errors in prior classifications in the Camp Plan after these proposals were review by staff. He continued to explain that the external administrative type amendments are the result of outside requests i.e., developer or land owners making requests of the City to amended the Camp Plan for their property. Hopkins wanted the record to reflect that McLeod did arrived at 7:45 P.M. Clavin questioned the content of item 8) FL Country Clubs to Kern and he responded that this item(a settlement agreement) is in litigation and will be brought before the City COmnUssion on Monday, May 10th. Clavin questioned whether the review of this item by the Board at this time was appropriate. Kern explained his intent in having this item on the listing and that it could be removed at any tUne before the adoption, but removing it fran the list would cause this project to have to wait until next year for Comp Plan Amendments. Discussion ....,'i'f.~,.:"'p.>>,-'~' ::.w-,.----;--:~----- e e Planning & Zoning Board Minutes Wednesday, May .5, 1993 Page 3 ensued among the Board members, consensus was arrived at that this item would be tabled to the next workshop meeting with further infonnation provided fran the COmmission meeting and other sources at tha t time. Carprehensive Plan lmencinents - Modifications to the Policies Policy TCE(Traffic Circulation Element) F.~. Hopkins asked for an explanation of a collector road. Kern explained that roads have 3 functional classifications for level of service- local, collector, and arterial. Local roads serve individual lots or parcels; collectors roads collect trips fran the local roads and route them to other collector roads or arterial roads; and arterial roads are designed for higher speed & volumes that move traffic through an area, and are not intended to provide property access. Kern explained the changes to this policy and. the theory/background to this change. Discussion ensued regarding traffic circulation elements as they relate to collector roads in the City's future development, nBinly the "Loop" in the Ranchlands area. Glavin asked if the definitions of local, collector, and arterial roads are located somewhere else in the Camp Plan and Kern stated that they are found in Volume 1 (Data & Analysis) of the Camp Plan. In conclusion. the Board accepted the amendment as presented. Policy TCE(Traffic Circulation Element) 0.1. Kern explained the changes to this policy and the theory/background to this change. In conclusion. the Board accepted the amendment as presented. Policy FUJE(Future Land Use Element) 4.A.3. Kern explained the changes to this policy and the theory/background to this change. Discussion ensued regarding the City's jurisdiction over CSX and FOOT on this property. In conclusion, Glavin suggested and the Board directed Kern to research the background of this item further to provide them with more infonnation of it's original intent. In addition Ferring suggested that the issue of abandonment of the railroad should be researched to obtain written comments fran CSX and the Board agreed. Questions were raised by McLeod & Cammissioner Langellotti, fran the audience, on how it was addressed with the Partnership 434(Eagle Ridge) & Super Park which are adjacent to this property. Brown also suggested checking with the City of Oviedo on the abandonment issue in regards to a portion of Mitchell Hammock Road which crosses the railroad, the Duda by-pass to Red Bug Road. This item was tabled to the next workshop meeting. e e Planning & Zoning Board Minutes Wednesday, May 5, 1993 Page 4 Policy FUUE(Future Land Use Element) B.9. This item was tabled to the next workshop meetinR for the same reasons as the above item. Policy FUUE(Future Land Use Element) 3.A.I through 3.A.7. Kern explained the changes to this policy and the theory/background to this change. Hopkins questioned the deletion of minimum density au per acre and asked for further explanation. Discussion ensued and in conclusion McLeod explained the interpretation as follows: Rustic Residential has assigned maximum density of 1.0 au per acre, the next step is Lower Density Residential which has an assigned maximum density of 3.5 au per acre. By definition if the au per acre is under 1.1 it is rustic residential thus setting a minimum for lower density residential of 1.1. In conclusion. the Board accepted the amendment as presented. NBI Policy TCE(Traffic Circulation Element) C.8. Kern explained the changes to this policy and the theory/background to this change. In conclusion. the Board accepted the amendment as presented. Policy FWE(Future Land Use Element) 3.C.1. Kern explained the changes to this policy and the theory/background to this change. McLeod pointed out that the first statement should read Impervious Surface Ratio and Fioor-Area-Ratios Maximum Height: 1n conclusion. the Board accepted the amendment with the noted chanRes. I) Shasteen annexation Kern explained that even though this property was annexed into the City it was not given a Land Use Classification. At this time it is the staff's recommendation to classify this property as Lower Density Res idential. The Board ~reed with the staff's recannendation on this land use classification. 2) Sprague annexation Kern explained that even though this property was annexed into the City it was not given a Land Use Classification. At this time it is the staff's recannendation to classify this property as Industrial. Hopkins asked about the adjacent property to the south, how it is classified. Kern stated that the property is classified as Industrial. The Board ~reed with the staff's recannendation on this land use classification. - -;;C:'i;,5.'~:'~:"~f,,> 'U-':'-~~'i;f~~~N'--'--" " . ~.. Planning & Zoning Board Minutes Wednesday, May 5, 1993 Page 5 3) Bergstresser & Voska annexation Kern noted that the existing land use classification as stated on the index table is incorrect and should read Industrial. He asked to table this item to the next workshop meetinR so that further research could be compiled. 4) Pettit annexation The Board members discussed what is located on the property at present and that the change for land use classification would be to Commercial. Kern asked to table this item to the next workshop meetin<< so that further research could be compiled. 5) Allen Keen/Spring Land Kern stated that this property was originally coded as Mixed Use, the amendment is to change it to Commercial, and the existing zoning is C- 1. Development plans were submitted to the city in February 1992 for a Commercial use. Kern explained that this area was classified as Mixed Use by the fonmer planner with the intent of a Town Center for the City. Glavin asked for the definition of Mixed Use. Kern explained that it allows anything fram residential to commercial to industr ial, wi th a nmdnun of 5()c;\ non residential, mininun of 2()c;\ open space, and 5~ space for easements, roadways, etc. Mixed Use was designed for larger acreage. Discussion ensued regarding whether the variance granted on Apr 11 2, 1992 for wet bottam ponds and for an extension for the site plan approval to be valid for 6 months after the FOOT realigns Wagner's curve was still in force. LeAnn Crove, broker for Donald W. Intosh & Associates, in the audience, stated that the FOOT realign of Wagner's curve has not occurred, just the City's realignment of Wagner's curve. Kern stated that there is sane ambiguity regarding this issue of the City's realignment versus FOOT's realignment and if questioned by the developer there would have to be determination nade. However, the Board had no problem wi th the proposed classification of Cannercial because Mixed Use would be hard to adhere to with this property. In conclusion. the Board accepted the amendment as presented. 6) Richard Parker Kern stated that this property was originally coded as Mixed Use, the amendment is to change it to Commercial, and the existing zoning is C- 1 and RU on the back side. Kern stated his conversations with Mr. Parker regarding this property and their discussions regarding the land use classification. Glavin questioned if the city should be changing the land use for this property without a fornal application showing an intent. Kern explained that he told Mr. Parker that he was submitting the change as administrative changes due to the abandonment of the Town Center concept which was used to make the classification e e " Planning & Zoning Board Minutes Wednesday, May 5, 1993 Page 6 of Mixed Use and Mr. Palmer was in caq>lete agreement. Kern further explained that in meetings with staff regarding the Town center issue, they all agreed that the concept was wrong to be appl ied to such SI1Bll(under 25 acres) areas. The staff suggested changing the Land Use classification to match the Zoning classifications. Kern asked if an application fran the property owner could be prepared and included as part of this proposal. The Board agreed with Kern's request and tabled this item to the next workshop meetinA:. 7) Schr imsher Caq>ani es Kern explained that this property was originally coded as Rustic Res idential , the amendnent is to change it to Cannercial. Kern wrote to Schrimsher Properties, and they responded that "Our plans for this property have not changed and rErlBin consistent with uses pennitted in a C-l Neighborhood Cannercial District. Your letter is the first I've ever heard of any portion of our property being designated for residential purposes. We believe such a designation would be inappropriate and incaq>atible with the commercial uses planned for our property." The Board aR:reed with the staff's recannendation on this land use classification. 8) FL Country Clubs The Board previously agreed to tabled this item to the next workshop meeting. 9) Various parcels in Town Center The Board previously agreed to meetinR since it falls under Parker property. tabled this item to the next workshop the sane concept as item 6) Richard The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 P.M. Respectfully submUtted, ~~ 6 May 1993 - -- Planning and Zoning ,Board Minutes Wednesday, May 05, 1993 BOARD f.BB:RS: David Hopkins, Chainman, Present Crace Anne Clavin, Vice Chainman, Present David McLeod, Present Tan Brown, Present John Ferring, Present CITY OFFICIALS: Greg Kern, Planner Donald LeBlanc,' L.D.C. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. The APProval of Minutes of ADr i I 07. 1993 Brown rmved to approve the minutes of April 07, 1993; seconded by Fer-ring. Vote: McLeod-absent, Clavin-abstain(not present at that meeting), Hopkins-aye, Brown-aye, and Ferring-aye. Motion carried. Year I y APProval of ZoninA: MaD LeBlanc explained that in accordance with Section 20.102(C) of the City Code, the Zoning Map is to be reviewed by Planning & Zoning Board in May and the City Carmissioner in June. There have been two amendnents in the last twelve rmnths, one being the Sprague annexation (Ordinance 530) and the other being the School Board annexation (Ordinance 543). Hopkins asked what type of Land Use these properties are being annexed in at. LeBlanc answered that the Sprague property is classi f ied as industrial and the School Board property as cannercial. Hopkins also asked the impact of the UDRs(Land Development Regulations) on these properties and LeBlanc answered that in the Workshop Mr. Kern wi 11 explain that the Land Use Classifications proposed to be amended will match the existing zoning classification. Clavin rmved that the Zoning Map as presented by Mr. LeBlanc with two annexations be recarmended by the Planning & Zoning Board to the Ci ty Carmission for approval; seconded by Ferring. Vote: Ferring-aye, Brown-aye, Hopkins-aye, Clavin-aye, McLeod-absent. Motion carried. LeBlanc stated that for the Board's infonnation the Site Plans for Rite Aid and Walgreens have been approved by staff. The Site Plan for 419 Recycling is still being reviewed by staff. Planning & Zoning Workshop Hopkins closed the Planning & Zoning Board and opened the Workshop on COmprehensive Plan Amendments. r" ""'" Planning & Zoning Board Minutes Wednesday, May .5, 1993 Page 2 Kern reiterated the dates as outlined is his memo to the Board regarding workshops and public hearings. He did point out that the Planning & Zoning Board Public Hearing tentatively scheduled for June 2nd, 1993 is not a requirement by the State but he felt this public hearing would be appropriate for public input at the Planning & Zoning Board level. In addition he stated that the adoption date listed in the memo of Novermer 22nd may be obtainable sooner. Kern continued by explaining the Index Table and how he would classify the components of the packages for the Board's review this evening as follows: Classifications Document Policy Olanges Carl>rehensi ve Plan Pmendnents Modifications to the Policies Annexa t ions 1 ) Shasteen annexation 2) Sprague annexation 3) Bergstresser & Voska annexation 4) Pettit annexation 10) High School annexation Adninistrative Internal .5) Allen Keen/Spring Land (by the City) 6) Richard Parker 7) Schr imsher 9) Various parcels in Town Center 11) Joyce 12) Bear Creek Estates 13) Winter Springs Unit 3 Adninistrative External 8) FL Country Clubs (not by the City) 14) Parcels 1.5,61,80,14C 1.5) Parcel 51 Kern explained that the internal administrative type amendments were considered inconsistencies or errors in prior classifications in the Carl> Plan after these proposals were review by staff. He continued to explain that the external administrative type amendments are the result of outside requests i.e., developer or land owners making requests of the City to amended the Carl> Plan for their property. Hopkins wanted the record to reflect that McLeod did arrived at 7:4.5 P.M. Clavin questioned the content of item 8) FL Country Clubs to Kern and he responded that this item(a settlement agreement) is in litigation and will be brought before the City COmmission on Monday, May 10th. Clavin questioned whether the review of this item by the Board at this time was appropriate. Kern explained his intent in having this item on the listing and that it could be rerooved at any time before the adoption, but removing it fran the list would cause this project to have to wai t until next year for Carl> Plan hnendments. Discussion - -", Planning & Zoning Board Minutes Wednesday, May 5, 1993 Page 3 ensued among the Board members, consensus was arrived at that this item would be tabled to the next workshop meeting with further infonnation provided fran the Commission meeting and other sources at that time. Carprehensi ve Plan .amendnents - Modii ications to the Policies Policy lCE(Traffic Circulation Element) F.~. Hopkins asked for an explanation of a collector road. Kern explained that roads have 3 functional classifications for level of service- local, collector, and arterial. Local roads serve individual lots or parcels; collectors roads collect trips fran the local roads and route them to other collector roads or arterial roads; and arterial roads are designed for higher speed & volumes that move traffic through an area, and are not intended to provide property access. Kern explained the changes to this policy and. the theory/background to this change. Discussion ensued regarding traffic circulation elements as they relate to collector roads in the City's future development, mainly the "Loop" in the Ranchlands area. Clavin asked if the definitions of local, collector, and arterial roads are located somewhere else in the Camp Plan and Kern stated that they are found in Volume 1 (Data & Analysis) of the Camp Plan. In conclusion. the Board accepted the amendnent as presented. Policy lCE(Traffic Circulation Element) 0.1. Kern explained the changes to this policy and the theory/background to this change. In conclusion. the Board accepted the amendment as presented. Policy FUJE.(Future Land Use Element) 4.A.3. Kern explained the changes to this policy and the theory/background to this change. Discussion ensued regarding the City's jurisdiction over CSX and FOOT on this property. In conclusion, Clavin suggested and the Board directed Kern to research the background of this item further to provide them with more infonnation of it's original intent. In addition Ferring suggested that the issue of abandonment of the railroad should be researched to obtain written comments fran CSX and the Board agreed. Questions were raised by McLeod & Cammissioner Langellotti, fran the audience, on how it was addressed with the Partnership 434(Eagle Ridge) & Super Park which are adjacent to this property. Brown also suggested checking with the City of Oviedo on the abandonment issue in regards to a portion of Mitchell Hammock Road which crosses the railroad, the Duda by-pass to Red Bug Road. This item was tabled to the next workshop meeting. "" .~ Planning & Zoning Board Minutes Wednesday, May 5, 1993 Page 4 Policy FUUE(Future Land Use Element) 8.9. This item was tabled to the next workshop meetinR for the same reasons as the above item. Policy FWE(Future Land Use Element) 3.A.I through 3.A. 7. Kern explained the changes to this policy and the theory/background to this change. Hopkins questioned the deletion of minimum density DU per acre and asked for further explanation. Discussion ensued and in conclusion Mcleod explained the interpretation as follows: Rustic Residential has assigned maximum density of 1.0 DU per acre, the next step is Lower Density Residential which has an assigned maximum density of 3.5 DU per acre. By definition if the DU per acre is under 1.1 it is rustic residential thus setting a minimum for lower density residential of 1.1. In conclusion. the Board accepted the ~t as presented. N8I Policy TCE(Traffic Circulation Element) C.8. Kern explained the changes to this policy and the theory/background to this change. In conclusion. the Board accepted the amendment as presented. Policy FUUE(Future Land Use Element) 3.C.I. Kern explained the changes to this policy and the theory/background to this change. Mcleod pointed out that the first statement should read Irq:>ervious Surface Ratio and Fioor-Af'ea-Ratios Maxirrun Height: In. conclusion, the Board accepted the amendment with the noted chanRes. I) Shasteen annexation Kern explained that even though this property was annexed into the City it was not given a land Use Classification. At this tUne it is the staff's recammendation to classify this property as Lower Density Residential. The Board aRreed with the staff's recannendation on this land use classification. 2) Sprague annexation Kern explained that even though this property was annexed into the City it was not given a land Use Classification. At this tUne it is the staff's recannendation to classify this property as Industrial. Hopkins asked about the adjacent property to the south, how it is classified, Kern stated that the property is classified as Industrial. The Board aRreed with the staff's recannendation on this land use classification. , . r ........,.. Planning & Zoning Board Minutes Wednesday, May .5, 1993 Page.5 3) Bergstresser & Voska annexation Kern noted that the existing land use classification as stated on the index table is incorrect and should read Industrial. He asked to table this item to the next workshop meetinR so that further research could be compiled. 4) Pettit annexation The Board members discussed what is located on the property at present and that the change for land use classification would be to Commercial. Kern asked to table this item to the next workshop meeting so that further research could be compiled. .5) Allen Keen/Spring Land Kern stated that this property was originally coded as Mixed Use, the amendment is to change it to Commercial, and the existing zoning is C- 1. Development plans were submdtted to the city in February 1992 for a Commercial use. Kern explained that this area was classified as Mixed Use by the former planner with the intent of a Town Center for the City. Clavin asked for the definition of Mixed Use. Kern explained that it allows anything fran residential to commercial to industr ial, wi th a maxinun of .5()c;\ non residential, mininun of 2()c;\ open space, and .5~ space for easements, roadways, etc. Mixed Use was designed for larger acreage. Discussion ensued regarding whether the variance granted on April 2, 1992 for wet bot tan ponds and for an extension for the site plan approval to be valid for 6 months after the FOOT realigns Wagner's curve was still in force. LeAnn Crove, broker for Donald W. Intosh & Associates, in the audience, stated that the FOOT realign of Wagner's curve has not occurred, just the City's realignment of Wagner's curve. Kern stated that there is same ambiguity regarding this issue of the City's realignment versus FOOT's realignment and if questioned by the developer there would have to be determination IIBde. However, the Board had no problem with the proposed classification of Commercial because Mixed Use would be hard to adhere to with this property. In conclusion. the Board accepted the amendment as presented. 6) Richard Parker Kern stated that this property was originally coded as Mixed Use, the amendment is to change it to Commercial, and the existing zoning is C- 1 and RU on the back side. Kern stated his conversations with Mr. Parker regarding this property and their discussions regarding the land use classification. Clavin questioned if the city should be changing the land use for this property without a fOrIlBl application showing an intent. Kern explained that he told Mr. Parker that he was submitting the change as administrative changes due to the abandonment of the Town Center concept which was used to make the classification """" ~ Planning & Zoning Board Minutes Wednesday t May 5 t 1993 Page 6 of Mixed Use and Mr. Palmer was in ca11>lete agreement. Kern further explained that in meetings with staff regarding the Town Center issue, they all agreed that the concept was wrong to be applied to such sma.ll(under 25 acres) areas. The staff suggested changing the Land Use classification to match the Zoning classifications. Kern asked if an application fram the property owner could be prepared and included as part of this proposal. The Board agreed with Kern's request and tabled this item to the next workshop meetinR. 7) Schrimsher Car1>anies Kern explained that this property was originally coded as Rustic Res ident ial t the amendnent is to change it to Carmercial. Kern wrote to Schrimsher Properties, and they responded that "Our plans for this property have not changed and remain consistent with uses pe~tted in a C-l Neighborhood Commercial District. Your letter is the first I've ever heard of any portion of our property being designated for residential purposes. We believe such a designation would be inappropriate and inCaJ1>atible with the commercial uses planned for our property." The Board CUtreed with the staff's recommendation on this land use classification. 8) FL Country Clubs The Board previously agreed to tabled this item to the next workshop meetinR . 9) Various parcels in Town Center The Board previously agreed to meetinR since it falls under Parker property. tabled this item to the next workshop the same concept as item 6) Richard The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 P.M. Respectfully submUtted, ~~ 6 May 1993