Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994 11 02 Planning and Zoning Board Regular Minutes city of winter Sorinqs. Florida Planninq and Zoninq Board Minutes of the November 2. 1994 meetinq 1. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 7:10 PM by acting Chairperson Dave Hopkins. 2. Attendance: Mr. Carl Stephens Mr. Gene Lein Mr. David Hopkins Carl Gosline, Community Development Coordinator 3. Consideration of the minutes of the October 5. 1994 meeting Gene Lein moved approval of the October 5, 1994. Carl Stephens seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous. - 4. Consideration of a reQuest to rezone property located at 1170 OranQe Ave from R-U (Rural Urban DwellinQ District) and C-2 (General Commercial and Industrial District) to R-3 (Multiple- Family Dwelling) Don Lebanc presented the staff recommendation for approval of the request. The rezoning is necessary to accommodate an Adul t congregate Living Center (ACLF). The subject parcel is eight acres in size. All of the property surrounding applicant north of the railroad track is outside the city limits. The property is designated Mixed Use on the Comprehensive Plan. The Mixed Use classification was enacted to promote flexibility in project design, particularly in the Town Center area. It allows a maximum of ten units per acre with no more than 75 percent of the gross land area in residential use and no more than 50 percent in non-residential use. A minimum of 20 percent of the parcel is required to remain in open space. Mr. LeBlanc explained there are several zoning classifications which are possible in the Mixed Use land use classification. The possible zoning categories include C-1, C-2, R-3 or PUD. It is the staff's recommendation that the R-3 category is the least intensive available in this land use category. Chairperson Hopkins asked for any public input. Ms. Conner, 1206 Orange Ave, stated she was in favor of the applicant. Attorney Donna McIntosh, Stenstrom, McIntosh, et al of Sanford, said she was representing the applicant and would reserve her comment time to answer any questions that might arise. Greg Bocknick (sp 1), president of the South Lake Jesup Homeowners Association, and an adjacent property owner, asked if were true that if the property were rezoned to R-3 a more dense development than is proposed could occur. Mr. LeBlanc answered that, under the existing land use designation and an R-3 zoning, up to 60 dwelling P&Z Minutes November 2, 1994 meeting page 2 units could be placed on the property. Mr. Bocknick expressed concern that such a development would be totally incompatible with the current development in the area. He also expressed concern that the existing infrastructure would not accommodate a 60 unit development. He was not opposed to the ACLF per se, only the multi-family zoning classification. Mr. Bocknick further asked whether a variance could be granted for the ACLF without changing the zoning. Mr. LeBlanc explained that the RU zoning was a very low density designation, one dwelling unit per acre, and as such could not accommodate an ACLF with 24 clients. Mr. Gosline said that the issue here is to get the zoning consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The P&Z has four possible zoning categories to choose from to make the zoning consistent with the Plan. The choices are: C-1, C-2, R-3 or PUD. He said the RU category is not consistent with the Mixed Use land use designation. He further said the staff's recommendation is to approve R-3 zoning because it is the least intensive zoning classification available which is consistent with the Plan. He also said the P&Z Board could direct the staff to reanalyze the application for another zoning classification, but the land use designation cannot be changed without going through the formal plan amendment process. Ms. McIntosh asked whether the Board had any questions of the applicant. They had several health care consultants in attendance which could speak about variety of matters concerning ACLFs, if necessary. Ms. McIntosh indicated the property had been for sale for more than one year and no buyers had presented themselves. Ms. Joyce, the applicant, did not wish to rent the property. Ms. McIntosh explained the applicant has an opportunity to sell the property for an ACLF. The applicant believes the proposed use is consistent with the use that currently exist in the neighborhood. The ACLF functions as a single family use because the clients do not have cars nor do they travel. The clients are usually housebound and/or bedbound. The purpose for an ACLF is to create a health care environment which is as near a residential character as possible. Ms. McIntosh said she thinks this proposal is an opportunity to secure a low intensive use rather than a more intensive use such as commercial or industrial uses. She also said they believe they have a right to have the property rezoned and that the RU classification is not consistent with the Plan. The status quo is no longer reasonable here due to the development in the surrounding area. We (the applicant) are asking for the least intensive use to support the land use designation. P&Z Minutes November 2, 1994 meeting page 3 Mr. Hopkins questioned whether being adjacent to the high school is an appropriate location for such a facility. He said the Plan was adopted with the intention that land development regulations would be adopted to control the density and intensity of development. Mr. Gosline explained that land development regulations implement the Plan, not vice versa. He further stated that until the regulations are changed, we must use those regulation in the current city Code. Therefore, the P&Z's decision must be based upon the regulations currently in place. Mr. Stephens asked whether RU is consistent with the comprehensive plan mixed use designation. Don explained that the staff is saying that RU is consistent with the Mixed Use designation, but the RU zoning classification will not allow an ACLF. Mr. Stephens stated that as he understands the situation, if the application is denied we would not be denying the use of the land because the RU is consistent with the Plan. Don said he was correct because 75 percent of the property could be used for residential use. Mr. Gosline summarized the staff's position by stating the Board has before them an application to put in an ACLF in an designated on the Comprehensive Plan for Mixed Use development. If the Board approves the use of the property as an ACLF , the property must be zoned consistent with the Future Land Use Plan designation using one of the available zoning categories in the current City Code. The staff is recommending R-3 because it is the least intensive of the available zoning classifications in the current code which would be consistent with the Mixed Use designation. In addition, if the applicant had requested an ACLF with 14 or less clients, the rezoning petition would not have been necessary and the facility would have received its building permit weeks ago. Since the applicant desires to have 24 clients, a multi-family zoning classification is necessary. Ms. McIntosh said the existing building is 4400 sq. ft. It will be renovated to meet state standards and city building code requirements prior to its occupation. The facility will strictly regulated by the Agency For Health Care Administration. Mr Hugh Gary (sp ?), 1268 Orange Ave. stated that if the zoning changes to R-3, a domino effect of other rezoning would occur which would destroy the current quality of life of the residents in the area. He stated that, other than the high school, this is the first step in ruining the area. He also said he and his neighbors feel very powerless to control what is going on in the area. Mr. Hopkins asked about the availability of public services. Don responded by saying the property is served by a septic tank and a well. Orange Ave is a dirt road and Tuskawilla Road is a dirt road north of the railroad track. McDonald's and the School Board will P&Z Minutes November 2, 1994 meeting page 4 be paving Tuskawilla Road south of the railroad track. Mr. Hopkins asked if there would be a problem getting a fire truck to the site. Mr. LeBlanc said no because the City already provides police and fire service to area. Ms. McIntosh introduced Pat Inman from the Health Care Agency responsible for licensing ACLFs. She said her specialty is consulting for ACLFs, particularly in startup situations. She stated she had thirty years health care experience, six years as the owner of a 110 bed ACLF and a member of the state board of directors of the assisted living association. She pointed out that the Agency For Health Care Administration will not hesitate to deny a license to a facility that does not have proper emergency care, or otherwise meet the standards. A licensing review by the state cannot occur unless the local government certifies the site is properly zoned. She also stated that often high schools have volunteer projects which provide service to ACLFs, i.e. they are compatible uses. Mr Sage, 1228 Orange Avenue, said he was ambivalent about the facility. He was concerned the road would not accommodate the visitors to the facility during certain times of the year. Mr. Gosline stated that for the record the staff had coordinated the review of this project with the Seminole County staff. The County staff indicated they had no problem with the facility being located on a dirt road, or being served by septic tank and wells. Apparently, there are similar facilities in the county now. Mr Lein moved the Board accept the staff's recommendation to rezone the subject property from RU and C-2 to R-3. The motion died for the lack of a second. Mr. Hopkins asked if there were any other motions. None were offered. Under the provisions of Section 20-28 (b) of the current City Code, the recommendation will go forward to the city Commission, hopefully on November 28, 1994, without a Board recommendation. The P&Z Board agreed to hold a special meeting on November 16, 1994 to review the minutes. The minutes will be an integral part of the staff report to the City Commission on this matter. The staff report is due to the city Manager by Friday November 18, 1994. P&Z Minutes November 2, 1994 meeting page 5 5. Further consideration/comparison between the Larqo. FL performance code approach and that of a conventional zoninq code approach It was the consensus of the Board to table further consideration of this issue until a special meeting on November 16, 1994. 6. Other Business No other business was brought up for consideration. 7. Adiournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 PM. submitted, shirley Frankhouser November 11, 1994 J~ THE NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD IS WEDNESDAY NOVEMBER 16, 1994 AT 7:00 PM. This document is a summary of the Planning and Zoning Board actions at this meeting. The audiotapes of this meeting are retained in the permanent records of the city.