Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993 05 19 Planning and Zoning Board Regular Minutes - - - - Planning and Zoning Board Minutes Wednesday, May 19, 1993 BQ6JID Me.eERS: David Hopkins, Chairman, Present Crace Anne Clavin, Vice Chairman, Present David McLeod, Absent Tam Brown, Present John Ferring, Present CITY OFFICIALS: Creg Kern, Planner The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. The Approval of Minutes of May 05. 1993 Brown moved to approve the minutes of May 05, 1993; seconded by Clavin. Vote: McLeod-absent, Glavin-aye, Hopkins-aye, Brown-aye, and Ferring-aye. Motion carried. Hopkins closed the regular meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board and opened the second Workshop on Comprehensive Plan Amendments. Planning and Zoning Workshop Comprehensive Plan Amendments - Modifications to the Policies Policy FLUE(Future Land Use Element) 4.A.3. and Policy TCE(Traffic Circulation Element) B.9. Kern discussed documents which relate to previous dealings with CSX and FOOT on the issue of at grade railroad crossings which were provided as hand outs to the Board members. Kern stated that the staff's recommendation is to eliminate FLUE 4.A.3 and modify TCE B.9 because if defers permitting of developments access to which requires crossing the railroad tracks while they remain active. Also FOOT requires application to cross the railroad to became the entrance drive for public access (i.e., into the park, which is an adjacent to this property). Hopkins asked if the elimination and modification of these policies would allow a property owners/developers access to cross the railroad anywhere and everywhere. Kern answered that these crossings of the railroad are not within the City's jurisdiction and would have to addressed with FOOT and CSX. Kern reiterated that the way the policy is stated. the City is mandati~ to the property owner that he can not gain access to State Road 434 across the railroad except at Wagner's curve. The granti~ of access to these facilities is not within the City's jurisdiction. thus the staff feels that this policy is inappropriate. Discussion ensued regarding the traffic issue of where the property owner would have to gain access if the policies where not changed (i.e., in an already congested area of Wagner's curve at the entrance to the park and the proposed high school) or if the policy is changed (i.e., application to FOOT and CSX for crossing onto State Road 434 will always be required). Fonner Mayor, LeAnn Grove stated the Board responsibility is to ensure the health, safety, and well being of the City's citizens and she felt the / - "- '-. -, Planning and Zoning Workshop Minutes Wednesday, May 19, 1993 Page 2 way this policy is written, it does not ensure the safety of the citizens in that area because access would have to made at the entrance to the park at Wagner's curve. Discussion ensued regarding if the owner of this property had carne to the City with application to develop. Clavin stated her opinion that there should not be a deletion or modification to these policies because there is no intent of abandonment of the railroad and there is not an application for development before the Board at this time. In conclusion at the recommendation of the City Planner and aRreement by the Board these changes are to be pulled fran this package of Camp Plan Amendments. Hopkins recommended that if this issue was to be presented to the Board in the future that written staff comments - pros and cons - for these changes would be helpful. Changes to the Future Land Use Map 3) Bergstresser & Voska annexation and 4) Pettit annexation Kern noted at the last meeting that the existing land use classification as stated on the index table was incorrect and should read Industrial and Commercial, respectively. He asked to table this item to the next workshop meeting so that further research could be compiled. Kern stated that according to the research he perfonned, the land use classifications were not passed by ordinance after the annexation, as the code states, so the land use classification is correctly stated as N/A. Therefore, the Land Use Map has been incorrectly coded and should be changed through a Comp Plan Amendment because ordinances were not passed regarding these properties. The only change would be to the Winter Springs Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Spring 1993 Index Table which shows the Land Use for the Bergstresser & Voska annexation as Commercial, it should be Industrial. The Board aRreed with this amendment with the above stated change. 6) Richard Parker Kern reiterated that this issue was tabled as he was requested to obtain fran the property owner, Mr. Parker, a Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application. Kern provided the Board in a mail ing a copy of aforementioned. Kern explained that Mr. Parker is requesting to change this land use classification franMixed Use to Commercial which would match the zoning for this property of 26 areas which is C-l. He further explained the justification for this change as outlined in the document by reading the following statement: "The property has a zoning classification of C-l, neighborhood commercial, as a result of a rezoning ordinance passed by the city (Ord. No. 317 dated 05/13/85). The present land use /",......., ~ - - Planning and Zoning Workshop Minutes Wednesday, May 19, 1993 Page 3 classification of Mixed Use is not entirely consistent with the current zoning and imposes maximum non-residential development limits (50%) max. gross area) as well as minimum open space requirements (20% min. gross area) which restrict the commercial development of the property. The land use classification COmmercial is the proper designation and is consistent with the current zoning district classification." Brown asked for an explanation of Mixed Use fram Kern. Hopkins asked Kern what the implications would be if the City denied the application to change the land use classification for this property to Commercial. Kern answered that the adopted zoning for this property is C-l and our adopted land use map for this property is Mixed Use, Florida Statutes require us to bring the land use and zoning map into consistency. If there is an inconsistency, the future land use map of the most currently adopted Camp Plan dictates the development. Discussion ensued regarding the classification of Mixed Use and Commercial with this property which is adjacent to the Central Winds Park. Kern stated that even if Commercial was requested for this property, the Ci ty could and would request heavy "buffering". Glavin asked what could be in C-l. Kern answered that neighborhood commercial would allow apartments, shopping center, professional offices, etc. Glavin asked what could be in Land Use of Commercial. Kern answered that our land use of commercial equates to the zoning classification of C-l. Discussion ensued regarding the eliminate of zoning with the implementation of the LDRs(Land Use Regulations). Kern pointed out that whether the zoning map is going to be eliminated or not has no bearing on the decision to amended the future land use map to be consistent with the zoning of this property. He added that the change in land use classification to Commercial would bring the property in line with the rezoning fram R4U to C-l, that the property owner requested via Ord. No. 317 on 05/13/85. Clavin stated that she felt that the Board should only be looking at the question of which land use classifications need to be assigned to this property, Mixed Use or Commercial, and not the current zoning. Kern explained that if this application is denied, the applicant can came forward as an grieved party. He can state that our land use classification is inconsistent with the zoning, which he received on 05/13/85, and our adopted Camp Plan arbitrarily, in his view, placed Mixed Use on his property. Hopkins stated that he felt that the Board should be addressing this issue fram the perspective of what is better for the City of Winter Springs for this property, a Commercial or Mixed Use development. Kern stated that if the Mixed Use designation was retained, the developer could continue with his proposed pre-conceptual plan of maybe same apartments, same commercial. Hopkins stated that it is a ...... - - - - Planning and Zoning Workshop Minutes Wednesday, May 19, 1993 Page 4 little more restrictive than Commercial for a land use classification. The Board agreed to deny Mr. Parker's application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment to ch~e the land use classification from Mixed Use to Cammercial. Recess at 8:50 P.M., meeting reconvened at 8:55 P.M. Kern explained to the Board a letter from Donald McIntosh & Associates regarding what was brought to the Board during the last meeting as the 5) Spring Land Annexation. In their discussion a question was raised regarding the Board of Adjustment's variance granted on April 2, 1992 for wet bottom 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. lntosh & Associates, in the audience, stated that the FOOT realignment of Wagner's curve has not occurred, just the City's realignment of Wagner's curve. According to this letter they feel that "the engineering plans received by the City on February 24, 1992 and approved by the Site Plan Review on February 27, 1992 remain valid and active, and in fact will remain in effect until 6 months following the cCX1l>leted construction of the proposed FOOT realignment of SR 434." 8) Florida Country Clubs Kern informed the Board that on May 3rd, 1993, the City COmmission approved the settlement agreement as proposed. Kern explained the documentation provided to the Board regarding the Table 1: Impact Analysis for the effects of guest cottages, condominiums, and both; and Table 2 CCX1l>ares the Single Family Proposal, which was accepted, against the Guest Cottages/Condos Proposal, which could be developed under the 1971 PUD Plan. Kern explained that the reason that this amendment is before the Board is to modify the Future Land Use Map fran Recreational to Lower Density Residential as outlined in the settlement agreement. The Board agreed with the amendment to change the land use classification for the parcels 1 through 8 regarding 69 lots and 61.185 acres according to the recently approved settlement agreement. 9) Town Center Mixed Use Modifications Kern updated the Board with the acreages for each parcel, since that infonnation was not available at the last meeting. As previously discussed these parcels have zoning classifications of C-l, C-2, R-T, and R-3 all with a land use classification of Mixed Use. With regards to the sizes of these parcels, all but one being under 5 acres, it will be very difficult to impose Mixed Use on these parcels for the following reasons: 20% min. open space, and 50% max. non-residential. Clavin explained that she felt that for example the Bill's Landscaping .-. - - - Planning and Zoning Workshop Minutes Wednesday, May 19, 1993 Page 5 which is 4.13 acres could have commercial in Mixed Use but it would provide for more open space than the Commercial land use classification. Kern answered that the adopted zoning for these property vary fran C-l to R-3 and our adopted land use map for this property is Mixed Use, Florida Statutes require us to bring the land use and zoning map into consistency, if there is an inconsistency, the future land use map of the most currently adopted Camp Plan dictates the development. Clavin stated that because Commercial development could be implemented in Mixed Use but no more than 50% non- residential, it only limits the intensity of commercial use of the property. Kern further stated that this incident is equivalent to a overlay which states to the property owner that they can plan a commercial development due to the zoning with a restriction of no more than 50% non-residential gross acreage due to the land use classification. The Board agreed to pull this amendment and retain the current land use classification of Mixed Use. 14) Winter Springs Development Joint Venture (Parcels 15, 61, 14C, and 80 Kern explained what was stated in a letter dated May 14, 1993 from Vision Developers, Inc, and W. Scott Culp, here tonight, as follows: "Upon adoption of your(City of Winter Springs) proposed Plan Amendment Policy FLUE 3.A.l through 3.A.7 dated 04/29/93 we would be able to withdraw the Plan Amendment requests for the parcels identified by your Map Reference Numbers 2-6. Our intent is only to allow the flexibility to provide less intensive residential uses within those parcels and we have no intention of attempting to include other uses not approved by the Settlement Agreement." Mr. Culp stated that if amended FLUE 3.A.l through 3.A.7 are adopted there would be no need to request this amendment to change the land use classification to Mixed Use for parcel 15(3), 15 (2A & B), 61, 14C, and 80. However, for parcel 15 (lC) which is commercial, he is still requesting the change of land use classification fran Commercial to Mixed Use. Clavin questioned changing a residential property to mixed use which would allow carmercial. Culp explained that according to their settlement agreement commercial is not allowed, and it only allows residential. He feels that the designation of Mixed Use would allow for lower intensity residential. Clavin expressed her concern of commercial in a residential area. Culp answered that the reason Mixed Use was selected is that at this time, he, the developer is not certain of the size of the lots, which according to their settlement agreement could be apartments to single family, therefore he could not pick which classification of residential would be appropriate (i.e., urban, moderate, or lower density residential). The Board agreed to pull parcel 15(3), 15 (2A & B), 61, 14C, and 80 fram this amendment .- - -., Planning and Zoning Workshop Minutes Wednesday, May 19, 1993 Page 6 conditionally to the approval of the FLUE 3.A.l through 3.A.7. and agreed to change the land use classification on parcel 15 (IC) to mixed use with the stipulation that it only be developed as residential without commercial. Glavin then questioned if legally the settlement agreement could be amended by the City and the owner. Hopkins stated that he felt that perhaps the usage of Mixed Use (Commercial & Residential) would not be an appropriate land use classification if the purpose is for residential only. Glavin suggested that a new land use classification of Mixed Use-Residential for the currently designated residential parcels and asked Kern to work on this and report back to the Board. In conclusion the Board a~reed to table this amendment on the residential parcels. however. a~reed with chan~in~ the land use classification from Commercial to Mixed Use for parcel 1. 15) Parcel 51 - Tuscawilla PUD Kern read the justification as stated on the application as follows: "change parcel from Urban Density Residential (RJD acre condominium), to Moderate Density Residential acre) Single Family Detached. We wish to develop 75 single family detached patio/vi lla units." 12 units per (6 units per and build + /- Kern asked Ms. LeAnn Grove, in the audience, if the new land use classification they were going to develop, as discussed above, would be better suited to their request. Ms. Grove stated that she did not wish to change the presently requested land use of moderate density residential. The Board ~reed with the ch~e of land use classification from Urban Density Residential to Moderate Density Residential. 10) High School Annexation Kern explained that when this property was annexed, land use classification could be adopted, so at this time, one needs to be assigned. The land use classification requested by staff is COmmercial in case the School Board would decide not to develop this property. A public facility can be built on any land use designation. Glavin asked if any other land use classification would be appropriate for this property and asked about Mixed Use. The Board a~reed that the land use classification would be Mixed Use. 11) Joyce Annexation Kern explained that the requested change in land use classification is fram Public Building to Industrial. The zoning is currently C-2 and there is a truss mill in operation at this location. The change is - - .-, - Planning and Zoning Workshop Minutes Wednesday, May 19, 1993 Page 7 requested as the current 'Public Buildings' classification would only be appropriate after the high school is built. The Board discussed the possibility of Mixed Use as a better land use classification than Industrial, because the mill could be an acceptable use in Mixed Use. The Board did not agreed with changing the land use classification fram Public Building to Industrial but preferred the change to Mixed Use. 12) Bear Creek Estates and 13) Winter Springs Unit 3 Bear Creek Estates was coded Rustic Residential due to the fact that there are only 63 lots on the 74 acre site which yields 1 dwelling unit per acre. Kern explained however that the definition of Rustic Residential pursuant to the COOl> Plan is "for use within country areas where urban infrastructure is lacking by design and choice." Discussion ensued regarding the change to Lower Density Residential (LOR) and if it would then allow the homeowner to build up to 3.5 dwelling units per acre. Kern stated that deed restrictions for 1 dwelling unit per acre would supersede any change made by the land use classification. The main reason for the change in land use classification would be due to the fact that urban infrastructure is already in existence in this area. The Board agreed with the change of Rustic Residential to Lower Density Residential. Winter Springs Unit 3 was coded Rustic Residential with 130 lots on 245 acre site. The Board discussed the need to keep the coding of Rustic Residential because there are country areas where urban infrastructure is lacking by design and choice. The Board did not agree with the change of Rustic Residential to Lower Density Residential. Kern explained that the next meeting on June 2, 1993 will have a Public Hearing on the COOl> Plan Amendments and a Vested Rights Determination with supporting documents, Draft Order and Application. The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ~~ 21 May 1993 \ .