Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12.01.94FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR November 23, 1994 • TO: Planning and Zoning Commission SUBJECT: Regularly Scheduled Meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission, 7:04 P.M., Thursday, December 1, 1994, in the City Commission Chambers, City Hall, Sanford, Florida ►6TO WI171_ l . Hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a PD, Planned Development Rezone for Pamala Oaks Ph 2 and to consider the Pamala Oaks Master Plan for property located at 741 - 841 Upsala Road in an AG, Agricultural Zoning District. Owner: Esther M. Locke 1 Contract Buyer: A. David Feinberg Representative: A. David Feinberg 2. Hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a Conditional Use for property located at 2602 S. Orlando Drive, in a GC -2, General Commercial Zoning, District, for the purpose of automobile and truck rental (U -Haul rentals). Owner: Harold Hall Representative: Dan R. Hall Hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a Dimensional Variance for property located at 1401 W. Seminole Blvd., in a RMOI, Multiple Family Residential-Office- Institutional Zoning District for the Purpose of an increase in sign requirements: (1) 32 square feet required, 120 square feet proposed - a variance of 88 square feet; (2) 32 square feet required, 72 square feet proposed - a variance of 40 square feet. Owner: Central Florida Regional Hospital Representative: Stephen D. Cantwell 4. Hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a Dimensional Variance for property located at 1200 French Avenue in a GC -2, General Commercial Zoning District, for the purpose of a reduction in the front yard setback: 25 feet required, 4 feet proposed - a variance of 21 feet. Owner: Hellekson Real Estate Company, Inc. Representative: Gerald Gross 5. Consider the Site/Engineering Plan for New Tribes Mission, Phase 2; a residential use, for property located at 1701 Celery Avenue in a PD, Planned Development Zoning District. Owner: New Tribes Mission Representative: Daniel Taube (Tabled: 1113194) 6. Any other business from floor or Commission Members. 7. Reports from Staff. 8. Approval of Minutes. ADVICE TO THE PUBLIC. If a person decides to appeal a decision made with respect to any smatter considered at the above meeting or hearing, he may need a verbatim record of the proceedings including the testimony and evidence, which record is not provided by the City of Sanford (FS 286.0105) Persons with disabilities needing assistance to participate in any of these proceedings should contact the personnel office ADA Coordinator at 330 -5626, 48 hrs in advance of the meeting. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING CCM EI.SSION MEETING CE DECKER 1 1994 7:00 P.M. CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Ben Dyal Joe Dennison Cynthia Holt -- Miller Ross Robert Lynn Stogner Helen Stairs Leon Brooks MffiMBERS ABSENT Mike Davis James valerino OTHERS PRESENT: Jay Marder, Director of Planning and Development Bettie Sonnenberg, Land Development Coordinator Russ Gibson, Land Development Coordinator The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. The first item on the Agenda was to hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a PD, Planned. Development Rezone for Pamala Oaks Ph 2 and to consider the Pamala Oaks Master Plan for property located at 741 - 841 Upsala Road in an AG, Agricultural Zoning District. Owner: Esther M. Locke / Contract Buyer: A. David Feinberg; representative: A. David Feinberg. Dennis Benbow, 1005 Edgewater Dr., was present representing Mr. Feinberg. He stated that they would be adding Phase 2 to Phase 1 of Pamala oaks. The master plan would have to be amended. He stated that Phase 2 would be identical to Phase 1. Mrs. Stairs asked if the density would be the same. Mr. Benbow stated that it would be the exact same density, same land size, and the same number of lots. Kevin Freer, 1550 Freer Lane, stated that his property is east of and adjacent to both Phase 1 and Phase 2'. Mr. Freer stated that the Phase 1 grade level has been achieved. The road and cul -de- sac, the retention pond and storm drains are in place. He stated that he is concerned with the drainage. At the beginning of the construction, the developers brought in a tremendous amount of dirt. when Mr. Freer looks out of his back door he sees a wall of dirt 6 feet tall. He stated that the first phase effects his back yard and that this proposed phase will effect his sideyard. Mr. Freer stated that if it is built exactly the same as Phase 1, he will be looking at 660 feet of dirt. Mr_ Freer stated that the drainage is not adequate. The storm drain could not handle the amount of water from the recent rains. Water from Phase 1 drained onto his property. The slope created by the developer comes down at an angle down to his property line. The same problem, if it is allowed to continue, will effect the natural drainage of the water across his property. Mr. Dennison asked Mr. Freer if he had experienced a problem during the last rain. Mr. Freer stated +eyes ". He stated that the retention pond did not fill up. The storm drain was not adequate and water created a large hole from the edge of the cul -de- sac to his property. At this point, Mr. Freer entered into the record pictures of problems created by inadequate drainage. Mr. Freer stated that he was concerned with the value of his property because of the mound of dirt. He stated that his property is lower because the developer put in this pile of dirt. Mr. Freer stated that another concern is the 6 -fact tall fence that is to be placed at the rear of the property, supposedly a wood fence. Mr. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 1, 1994 Ddr_ 1 7) Freer stated that if the fence is to be located at the bottom along the property line, a person could take a board and walk to the top of the fence because of the mound of dirt. Homes being built at that elevation may as well be built in a tree looking down on his home. Mr. Benbow stated that due to the rain, several places where the bank was washed away will have to be filled and resodded. He stated that concerns about the water runoff are because the site wasn't finished before the rain came. Mr. Dennison asked if this is the finished elevation for the wall of dirt. Mr. Benbow stated that the elevations are set. Mr. Dennison asked if there is a plan to put in a drainage pipe at the east of this property. Mr. Benbow stated that the Mater goes north and west and into the retention pond and not onto Mr. Freer' s property. The land to the east falls off considerably. There is a 30' easement between the properties. The only reason the water flowed to the east is because the area needed to be sodded and finished. Mr. Dyal stated that what really would be needed is a 12' fence instead of a 6' fence. Mr. Marder stated that the applicant would have to come back and ask to have the fence requirement changed. Mr. Robert asked why the subdivision is so much higher than Mr. Freer's land. Mr. Benbow stated that the drainage falls from the end of the road, back to the retention pond at the back of the property, then it outfalls into the smith Canal. The ground of Phase 2 is substantially higher in elevation than Phase 1. Mr. Freer stated that the easement that goes north and south, is a 15' easement, not a 30' easement. Mr. Marder stated that the plat states that it is a 15' right -of -way which is on the adjacent landowner' s property. The applicant is providing for a 25' drainage easement adjacent to the 15' right -of -way. Mr. Dennison stated that structures planned for Phase 1 were not in place and not completed when all the rain came. If this had been completed, the drainage would have worked properly. Mr. Robert moved to approve based on information in the Muster Plan for Pamala Oaks, Mr. Brooks seconded. Mr. Dyal opposed. All others in favor. Motion carried. The next item was to hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a Conditional Use for property located at 2602 S. Orlando Drive, in a GC -2, Genera. Commercial Zoning District, for the purpose of automobile and truck rental (U --Haul rentals) . Owner: Harold Hall; representative: Dan R. Hall. Dan Hall, 312 W. 1st St., stated that this will be a U -Haul Trailer rental business. Mr. Marder stated that at the time the site was observed for his recommendations, there were more units on the property than were there today. He stated that he had tried to compare the location of the units with the plans because it did not appear that the storage areas, as proposed on the plans, would accommodate the number of units at the site at that particular time. The plan showed the storage area on the southerly portion of the site, with the drive -thru and parking spaces for customers on the northside . Most of the units for rental were located in spots that would be used for customers. He stated that this could potentially be a problem. Mr. harder stated that he does not know where all the units for rentals would be located on the site with adequate parking. Mr. Dyal :roved for approval as presented. Seconded by Mr. Robert. Mrs. Stairs asked when would this gentleman bring back a site plan. Mr. Dyal stated that the site plan was not on the agenda, just consideration of the conditional use. Mr. Dennison stated that at the time when he brings in a site plan he has heard the concerns. All in favor of the motion. Motion carried. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 1, 1994 PAGE 3 The next item was to hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a Dimensional Variance for property located at 1401 W. Seminole Blvd., in a RMOI, Multiple Family Residential -- office- Institutional zoning District for the Purpose of an increase in sign requirements: (1) 32 square feet required, 120 square feet proposed - a variance of 88 square feet; (2) 32 square feet required, 72 square feet proposed - a variance of 40 square feet. owner: Central Florida Regional Hospital; representative: Stephen D. Cantwell. Steve Cantwell, 1401 W. Seminole Blvd., stated that the Hospital would like to install larger signs. The main entrance sign is 13 gears old and they would like to make it more current and more visible. At the same, they would like to address the SR 46 sign. Mr. Cantwell stated that the existing signs are horizontal and that they would like to go with a vertical sign. Mr. Dyal stated that the church on SR 46 wanted a larger sign and asked what makes this situation different. Mr. Marder stated that this is a hospital which requires a greater visibility for emergencies. Most public /semi public uses are not for - profit type of uses such as churches and schools. whereas, the hospital is a commercial for—profit business even though it falls into the category of public /semi public. Mr. Robert moved for approval. Seconded by Mrs. Holt- Miller. Mr. Dural opposed. All others in favor. Motion carried. The next item was to hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a Dimensional Variance for property located at 1200 French Avenue in a GC-2,, General Commercial Zoning District, for the purpose of a reduction in the front yard setback.:. 25 feet required, 4. feet proposed - a variance of 21 feet. Owner: Hellekson Real Estate Company, Inc.; representative: Gerald Gross. Mr. Dyal moved to table due to lack of representation. Mrs. Bolt - Miller seconded. All in favor. Motion carried. The next item was the consideration of the Site /Engineering Plan for New Tribes Mission, Phase 2; a residential use, for property located at 1701 celery Avenue in a PD, Planned Development Zoning District. Owner: New Tribes Mission; representative: Daniel Taube. (Tabled: 11/3/94). . Mr. Dyal made a motion to remove from the table. Mrs. Holt-Miller seconded. All in favor. loot ion carried. Dan Taube, 160 Bolivia Ct . , Sanford, stated that the proposed site/ engineering plan is for the second part of the property. He stated that a PD on the west 40 acres has been developed leaving 30 acres on the east. This site /engineering plan is for the 30 acres on the east side of property and is to be residential. Mr. Robert.asked if this includes Phase 2 and Phase 3. Mr. Taube stated "yes, it includes all three phases on the 30 acres. Mr. Marder stated that the plan is basically for houses and duplexes. Mrs. Sonnenberg stated that no improvements have been submitted for multi - family. Mr. Taube stated that they would have preferred to install yield signs instead of stop signs because of the amount of traffic,, but that they had no problem with going to stop signs. He stated that he was not sure about dedicating 20' of right -of -way along Celery Avenue. Mr. Marder explained that this is what was done for Phase 1 of the project. Mr. Taube stated that he did not have any problems with the 20' right -of -way. Mrs. Holt- biller moved for approval including staff's recommendations. Seconded by Mr. Dyal. All in favor. Lotion carried. MINUTES P AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING of DECEMBER 1, 1994 PAGE 4 On the Addendum to the Agenda was the consideration of the request for the use of chain link within the required yard setback for a single family residence for 833 Valencia St. in a SR -1 single Family Residential Dwelling District. owner /representative: Robert Fossitt. Eugen Dyar, 1906 Patrick Place, was present for representation. He stated that he would like to erect a fence at Mr. Fossitt's home because Mr. Fossitt has been burglarized several times. Mr. Dyar stated that there is a fence around the front yard at a home down the street from Mr. Fossitt. He stated that he would to install a 4' fence. Mr. Dyal stated that there is 7 - 1/2' on each side of this house and asked if he would fence from the front corners of his house and around the rear. Mr. Dyar did not think the owner would be recept to putting the fence from the front corners of the house to the back. Mr. Dyal stated that fencing the front yard does not do the owner any good. Mr. Robert asked if the plan include a drive gate. Mr. Dyar stated that it would have an 18' roll gate. Mrs. Sonnenberg stated that this is the new section of San Lanta. The only fence on Valencia St. is where E. Valencia Ct. and Valencia St. intersects and is a rear yard fence. The older section has houses with fences. Mr. Hobert roved to approve. Mr. Dyal seconded for purposes of discussion. Mr. Dyal stated that he is concerned about fencing the front yard, It would be acceptable with Mr. Dyal if the applicant would fence from the front corner and to the back part of the house.. Mr. Robert in favor of the motion. Mr. Brooks abstained. All others opposed to the motion. Motion failed to carry. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:30 P . M _ tv ao Dennison, Chairman FORM 8B MEMOP'NNDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY, MUNICIPAL AND OTHER LOCAL E JBLIC OFFICERS LA. NAME —FIRST NAME— .MiUlliE NAME N OF BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION. UTHOFIlTY. OR COMMITTEE QO � � THE BOARD, C U CIL. COMMISSION, AL;'fHQRITY. UR COMMITTEE ON ' MAILING ADDRESS � WHi ' I SERVL A UNIT OF: COUNTY O'1'HE1t LOCAL AGENCY CITY DATE ON I � H� r H 4 )L s� �-UKaE� t� COUNTY 4 NAME L. F LITI ' L UBDI I I N: f MY POSITIO] Is. ELECTIVE I� F WHO MST FILE FORA This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an a or elected board, �# it ommission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members f advisory and non - advisory bodies who are presented with a voting conflict of interest undcr S ection 112.3141, Florida Statutes. The requirements of this law a re mandatory; although the use of this particular form is not required by lave, you are encouraged to use it in making the disclosure required by law. � Your re under the lave when faced with a measure in which you have a conflict . of interest will vary greatly depending on whether Y ou hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason,, please pa close attention to the instructions on this form before completing the reverse side and filing . the form. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112,3443 FLORIDA STATUTES ELECTED OFFICERS: A person holding .elect county, municipal, o other local public off M UST ABSTAIN f rom voting on a meas which inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingl y voting on a measure which inures to the special gain of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he is retained. In either case, you should disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; and WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing wind filing this form with the person responsible for recording the minutes o the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. APPOINTED OFFICERS: A person holding appointive c only, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his special private. gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the special gain o a principal ot her than a government a g en cy) by whom he is retained. A person holding an appointive local office otherwise may participate in a matter in which he has a conflict of interest, but must disclose the nature of the conflict before making an y attempt to influence the decision b y oral or written communication, whether made by the officer or at his direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR T THE MEETING T WHIC THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: : • You should complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person r esponsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. * A cop of t + he form should be provided immediately to the other member of the agency, * The form should be read pu blicl y at t he meeting prior to consideration of the matter in which v u have a conflict of interest. ,lk i • ti 4 IF YOU MA E r OMkftE PT TO I FLUE CE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT-.THE MEETI : • You should disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the treasure before participating. Y • should complete the fo and file it within 1 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for You p recording the minutes of the meet in, who shout incorporate the form its: the minutes. DI OL f E OF . CAL OFFICER'S INTEREST 1 9 Is , hereby disclose that on • a) A measure 'carne or will come before my agency which (check one) inured to my special private gain; or inured to the special gain of whom l am retained. (b ) The measure before my agency and the nature of my interest in the measure is as follows: Date Filed Signature NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317 (1985), A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIREL DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND M-A Y BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLO SIN : IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN i SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY hl T TO EXCEED S5,000. From the Director of Planning and Developnen November 23, 1994 TO: City of Sanford Planning and Zoning Commission SUBJECT: Recommendations for Meeting of December 1, 1994 A. DAVID FEINBERG - Request to rezone from SR -1 AA, Single Family Residential to PD, Planned Development for property located on the east side of Upsala Road y2 mile north of CR 46A. Site is Zoned AG, Agricultural, encompasses 5 acres and appears to include an existing single family dwelling. 2. The site was recently annexed into the City. Therefore, the City's Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan will not apply until the Plan is amended. Based on the Joint Planning Agreement with Seminole County, the City of Sanford Land Development Regulations may be applied to the property since the proposed development reflects an equivalent land use designation in the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan. The Seminole County Comprehensive Plan's Future Land Use Map designation is Low Density Residential designation for the property. Low Density Residential permits up to seven dwelling units per acre in the County PUD, Planned Unit Development Zone. 3. The Pamala Oaks Master Plan proposes a total of 56 dwelling units on lots with a minimum of 4,000 square feet. The gross density proposed is 5.69 dwelling units per acre. This request is for a second phase for a total of 28 additional lots. 4. Existing land uses in the immediate vicinity of site include a church and various single family dwellings located on tracts that appear to be larger than one acre per dwelling unit. Such uses are Zoned AG, Agriculture (city) and A- 1, Agricultural (county). In addition, the first phase of Pamala Oaks is under development. 6. Facilities and services such as road capacity, central water and central sewer are adequate and available to accommodate the impact of 28 additional dwelling units. Drainage will need to comply with the City's established level of service. 7. Recommend that the request to rezone to PD, Planned Development be approved based on the information contained on the Pamala Oaks Master Plan, consistency of the proposed development with the Comprehensive Plan and similarity with adjacent first phase of the project which is approved and under development. HAROLD HALL - Request for conditional use approval to permit automobile and truck rental for property Zoned GC -2, General Commercial located at 2606 South Orlando Drive. 1. Site is Zoned GC -2, General Commercial, includes an existing building and encompasses 13,659 square feet. The site fronts U.S. Highway 17 & 92 (South Orlando Drive) and Hiawatha Avenue. 2. Several automobile oriented uses are already located in the general vicinity of site including trailer sales, used automobile sales and tire sales and installation. Other uses adjacent to site include offices, a single family residence and a hotel. 3. A Proposed Site Plan for Harold A. Hall dated November 14, 1994 submitted with the conditional use application reflects proposed display areas, parking, circulation and existing improvements on the property. The proposed layout does not appear to provide adequate display areas for the existing truck and trailer rental units observed on the site. 4. Recommend approval of the request to establish automobile and truck rental based on similar automotive oriented uses already established in the immediate vicinity of site. This recommendation does not constitute a recommendation to approve the proposed site plan submitted with the conditional use application. CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL HOSPITAL - Request a dimensional variance to permit two signs to be larger than that allowed for property Zoned RMOI, Multiple Family Residential, Office and Institutional located at 1401 West Seminole Boulevard. 1. Site is Zoned RMOI, Multiple Family Residential, Office and Institutional and includes a 250 bed hospital with street frontage on West Seminole Boulevard (U.S. Highway 17 & 92), First Street (State Road 46) and Mangoustine Avenue. 2. Hospitals are classified as public and semi - public uses in the context of the City's sign regulations contained in Schedule K of the LDR. Such uses include churches, schools, libraries, and cultural facilities. As such, signage permitted for public and semi - public uses includes up to 32 square feet per street frontage. A community shopping center with a similar floor area of 240,000 square feet would be allowed up to 300 square feet of signage. 3. The applicant desires to replace existing signs at two entrances. The existing sign at Seminole Boulevard is approximately 80 square feet; its proposed replacement would be 120 square feet. The existing sign at First Street is 32 Planning Recommendations, November 23, 1994, Page 2 square feet; its proposed replacement would be 72 square feet. 4. Recommend approval of the requested signage based on the unique nature of the use, a large -scale regional, for - profit hospital and the associated need for higher visibility than other public and semi - public uses due to emergency services provided at the site. GERALD GROSS - Request for a dimensional variance to permit the expansion of a nonconforming structure into the front yard building setback for property Zoned GC- 2, General Commercial located at 1200 French Avenue. 1. Site is Zoned GC -2, General Commercial and includes an entertainment facility known as "The Barn." The site includes approximately two acres. An existing wood frame building is located on the site. 2. As reflected on a proposed plan submitted with the application, the applicant desires to add additional building area to the existing structure adjacent to Twelfth Street. The existing building setback from Twelfth Street is four (4) feet. The required building setback for Twelfth Street is twenty five (25) feet which reflects the City's requirement that corner lots reflect front yard building setbacks for both street frontages. The proposed plan shows that several site improvements along Twelfth Street are located in the right -of -way. Such improvements require a right -of -way use permit approved by the City Commission. 3. Twelfth Street is a local street with a very low traffic volume. The City does not have nor does it foresee any expansion to Twelfth Street in terms of capacity or other improvements. 4. Recommend approval of the dimensional variance of the building setback from twenty five feet to four feet along Twelfth Street based on the major portion of the existing building that already established with a four foot setback from the right -of -way. Planning Recommendations, November 23, 1994, Page 3