Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03.07.74Planning and Zoning Commission March 7, 1974 8:00 P. M. Members Present: Members Absent: Others Present: Arthur Harris, Chairman David Berrien Edward Blacksheare Jeff Davis C. B. Franklin Victor Gischler Robert Karns Rudy Sloan Philip Logan Bill Braceland, Building Official Al Payne, Building Inspector David Farr, City Planner The meeting was called to order by the Chairman. The first item of business was a discussion regarding the re- duction in living area density in MR -2 District. The Building Official explained that Mr. Norman Schiff, Presi- dent of Royal Line Builders, had made application to the Board of Adjustment for a variance pertaining to living area density for one bedroom apartments in MR -2 District, asking for a reduction from the minimum of 700 sq. ft. to approximately 648 sq. ft. for 50 units in a proposed multi- family, rental, garden apartment complex. The Board of Adjustment had continued the hearing on this request in order to get an interpretation from the City Attorney and the opin- ion of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The City Attorney's opinion is that the Board of Adjustment, because of the way it is worded in the ordinance, does have the authority to grant such a variance if they feel it is a hardship and in the public interest. Mr. Karns reported that the Board of Adjustment was concerned that by granting a variance of this magnitude, it would have the effect of amending the zoning ordinance, and they would like an opinion from the Planning and Zoning Commission before coming to a decision. Mr. Schiff was present and addressed the board. He explained Planning and Zoning Commission March 7, 1974 Page 2 ----------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- that the request for varinace is based on two considerations; the first being economics. Research indicates that there is a great need in this area for well planned one bedroom apartments that can be rented in the $145 to $155 per month range. Based on the cost of develop - ment construction, a 650 sq. ft. one bedroom'apartment can be built to rent in that range; a 700 sq. ft. one bedroom apartment would have to rent for $165 to $170, and would not meet the greatest need group in this area. The second consideration is that the minimum sq. ft. requirements for the other planned apartments for the project exceed the City of Sanford guidelines. Mr. Schiff stated that most major lending institutions look for 606 minimum square feet in a one bedroom apartment. He also made a comparison of the minimum require- ments in neighboring communities, showing Sanford's requirements to be greater. After a general discussion, the consensus was that it had been an oversight not to have considered reducing the minimum living area density in MR -2 District when the ordinance had been amended last year to reduce the minimum required living area in single family residences. The Chairman called for a vote, saying those voting aye would be voting in favor, after public hearing, of reducing minimum required living area in MR -2 from 700 sq. ft. to 650 sq. ft. The vote was as follows: one opposed; one abstained, the remainder voting aye. Mr. Karns made a motion to hold a public hearing on March 21, 1974, to consider amending the zoning ordinance to reduce density controls pertaining to minimum required living area in multiple - family residential zoned districts. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sloan and was carried. It was decided to ask the Board of Adjustment to hold off the hearing on the request for variance by Mr. Schiff until the ordinance is changed. Consideration was next given to the request of William Benton for an auto paint and body shop as a conditional use in GC -2 District, at the location of 402 Celery Avenue. After consideration and re- view of the sketch of the site submitted by Mr. Benton, Mr. Franklin made a motion to approve the conditional use for an auto repair and paint shop with the stipulation that the front lot be paved and that cars, both visitors and others, be parked on the paved area only. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sloan and was carried. Consideration was next given to the request of Mr. David Huffman Planning and Zoning Commission March 7, 1974 Page 3 ----------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- for the opinion of the board regarding the rezoning of Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 1, Flora Heights, to GC -2 after the property is annexed, and a plan of the area was reviewed. In light of the small area involved and its location, it was suggested to Mr. Huffman that he request rezoning to RC -1, rather than GC -2, when the four lots are annexed. The Chairman next brought to the attention of the board members two memorandums from the City Manager to the Building Official, regarding action of the City Commission at their meeting of Febru- ary 25, 1974, as follows: "Monday evening Mr. John Mercer took the actions of the Zoning and Planning Commission to the City Commission on an appeal. This pertained to the site plan approval given Thursday evening, Feb. 21, 1974 by the Zoning and Planning Commission. Approval was voted by the Z and P conditioned upon the existing wall being cut back 18' from the property line and the center entrance allowing only entrance traffic. After much discussion, the City Commission voted that they reversed the Zoning and Planning Commission and the site plan was approved as presented. (Wall could continue -to exist and the center entrance could have two way traffic)." "Monday evening the City Commission Voted to instruct the Planning and Zoning Commission not to approve any further site plans with walls or fences in excess of six (6) feet until suitable changes can be made in the ordinance and to give close inspection to all site plans with walls and fences as required set backs." After discussion, a motion was made and seconded to send a memorandum to the City Commission saying that at no time did we approve a wall of any height on this property. At the first meeting we had, we approved only the location of the building on the property. When the plan was brought back for us to approve, it showed only a planter in that area, and the approval we gave at that time was for entrance only. After discussion, it was decided that such a memorandum would not change the situation and the matter was dropped. Mr. Gischler then made a motion to send a memorandum to the City Commission for the purpose of clarification, as follows: Planning and Zoning Commission March 7, 1974 Page 4 In regard to the memorandum of February 26, 1974, it is our under- standing that they do not want us to do again, what we have never done before. The motion was seconded by Mr. Blacksheare and was carried. After consideration, the date of March 21, 1974, was set to hold a public hearing to consider adding fences as a conditional use in all commercial and industrial zones, when approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. On the motion of Mr. Berrien, seconded by Mr. Gischler and carried, the minutes of February 7, and February 21, 1974, were approved. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. z 9& W 2, Arthur H. Ifarris, Chairman