Loading...
10.01.985 Cii� of Sanford Planning an Zoning Commiss Re ul rly Scheduled Meet 7 :00 P.M. Thursday, October 1, 1998 City Commission Chambers, City Hail, Samford, Florida AGENDA 1. Hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a Planned Development Rezone for Seminole Properties DRI, property located at 1500 Towne Center Boulevard, amending a portion of the approved Seminole Towne Center Mall PD Master Plan. Tax Parcel Number: 2 -1 - o -LIB -1 600-0000 Property Owner: Seminole Towne Center LP o Simon Property Group LP Representative: James G. Willard - Shutts & Bowen 2. Hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a Conditional Use for property located at 2109 S. French Avenue in a RC -1, Restricted Commercial Zoning District for the purpose of a roof sign. Tax Parcel Number: -1 -30- 534 - 0100 -0200 Pro perty Owner: Susan Few Representative: Luanne Null, Will Page Wireless 3. Hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a Conditional Use for property located at 24451 W. Airport Boulevard in a MI-2, Medium Industriai Zoning District for the purpose of establishing an outdoor manufacturing facility - a reef truss plant. Tax Parcel Number: 2 - 19 -3o- o -OBO1 Property O wner: D.O. Smith Development Corp. Representative: Anne A. Walla 4 . Hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a Conditional Use for property located at 1127 Sanford Avenue in a GC-2, General Commercial ial Zoning District for the purpose of an automobile dealer sales establishment. Tax Parcel Number: 30-19-31-522-0000-0370-0 Property Owner /representative: William DeAlba 5 . Hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a Dimensional Variance for property located at 1120 Florida street in a MR - Multiple Famil Dwelling R sidential Zoning District to allow an increase in the maximum um heig t of fencing within the front yard; 4 feet allowed; 6 feet proposed, a variance request of 2 feet: Tax Parcel Number: 01- 2- 3- 504 -2700 -0090 Property Owner: Joseph Ross Representative: Janet Il errit 6 -A Hold a Public Hearing to c onsider a request for a Conditional Use for Lan's Roadhouse, proposed restaurant located at 4649 W. 1 Street in a PD, Planned Development Zoning District for the purpose of - alcoholic beverage sales for consumption on premises, AB-COP. Tax Parcel Number: 29 Property O wner: Landry's Seafood -Fla, Inc. Representative: Troy Casto - Interpin Practice Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda - October 1, 1998 Page 1 of 6 .B Hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a Dimensional Variance for Logan "s Roadhouse restaurant proposed at 4649 W. 1'# Street in a PD, Planned Development onin District for the purpose of the reduction in parking space size requirements: 10' x 2" required c 18' proposed a variance of 1' x 21 . Tax Parcel Number: 29-19-30-503-0000-001A Property Owner: Landry's Seafood -Fla, Inc. Representative: Troy Casto - Interplan Practice 6.0 Consider the Site Plan for L gan's Roadhouse, a proposed restaurant located at West 1 st Street on Lot 1 A, Gateway Plaza Shopping Center PD. Tax Parcel Number: 29-19-30-503-0000-001 Property Owner: Landry's Seafood -Fla, Inc. Representative: Troy Casto - Interplan Practice 7 Consider the Site Plan for Calgary Temple of Praise, a proposed church located at 2020 McCracken Road. Tax Panel Number., 2 1g -3o- AE- 0 -00 0 Property Owner: Calvary Apostolic Church Representative: Jerry W ills - Burke, Bales and hill 8 Consider the Site Plan for Twin Laces Apartments (aka Plantation Lakes Apts located at 1215 Rinehart Road in the Twin Laces Apartments Planned Development Tax Panel Number: 32 -19-30-300-0110-0000 Property Owner: Ira W. Southward Trust o Altman Development Corp. Representative :llilljarn E. Burkett, P.E. - Burkett Engineering g. Consider the Site Plan for Seminole Ford a pro osed automobile dealership located at 1000 and 1001 Rinehart Road in the gouthridge Planned Development. Tax Parcel Number: 32 -19-30-300-007A-0000 Property Owner: First Team Ford, LTD Representative: ,John D. Fros her - Common wealth Engineering 10. Consider the Final Plat for sterling Woods, a 124 lot single family residential subdivision located at 1250 W. Lake Mary Boulevard. 11. Consider the Final Plat for Mayfair Club, Phase !I, a 44 lot single family residential subdivision located at 4000 Country Club Road. 12. Any other business frorn floor or Cornrnission M rnbers. 13. Reports from Staff. 14. Minutes. ADVICE To THE PUBLIC. It a person decides to appeal a decision rude with respect to any matter 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 f the meeting. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 1, 1998 7:00 P.M. CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS CITY HALL, SANFORD, FLORIDA MEMBERS PRESENT: Kevin Hipes Ross Robert Andrew Kutz Jinx Valerino Otto Garrett Mac McClanahan Bobby VonHerbulis Timothy Hudson MEMBERS ABSENT: Michael Skat OTHERS PRESENT: Jay Marder, Director of Engineering and Planning Marion Anderson, Recording Secretary 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 Planned Development Rezone for Seminole Properties DRI, property located at 1500 Towne Center Boulevard, amending a portion of the approved Seminole Towne Center Mall PD Master Plan. Jim Willard of Shutts and Bowen, 20 N. Orange Ave., Ste. 1 000, Orlando, stated that his firm had reviewed Staff s recommendations and that they don't have any problems with them. MT. Kutz asked if this would incorporate the automotive activity. Mr. Willard stated "yes ". He noted that the primary intent is to create a land use matrix, with mixed and matched uses. He noted that the land hasn't been looked at or examined from a planning aspect. There has been a lot of interest but there are no pending sales or contracts. Mr. Willard stated that they would be looking at the flexibility of office uses and throwing in auto uses. Mr. Robert asked if the right- of-way for the Greeneway had been purchased. Mr. Willard stated "no ", that there is no final highway approval of the interchange of I -4 an 46. It has not taken place. Mr. Willard stated that they have traded a lot of engineering reports, but that there has not been any taking, and it probably won't be for months. He stated that he does not believe that the change to PD will change the highest and best use. Mr. Willard stated that they have no problem with providing flexibility as to the cleaning facilities not facing Rinehart Road. He noted that to every extent possible, the bays will be buffered through opaque landscaping. The facilities will face a road no matter which moray you put it. The Greeneway will be raised, and it will be considered the back of site. Mr. Willard stated that he is more concerned with buffering Rinehart and Towne Center. It is almost impossible to shield the view from the Greeneway. He stated that he does not have a problem with the final site design buffering everything possible. Mr. Kutz moved on approval based on Staff s recommendations. Mr. Robert seconded the motion. All in favor. Motion carried. The next item on the Agenda was to hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a Conditional Use for property located at 2109 S. French Avenue in a RC -1, Restricted Commercial Zoning District for the purpose of a roof sign. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 1, 1995 PACIF ?. Luanne Null, Will Page Wireless, 2109 French Ave., was present. She stated that they had installed the sign before obtaining a permit. She stated that the sign is attractive and will show off Sanford better. This sign is not garish, the other signs are. She requested that the Commission reconsider Staff s recommendations to deny. Mr. VonHerbulis asked who installed the sign. Ms. Null stated that The Real Sign Company installed the sign. She stated that there was some confusion as to who was to pull the permit. She asked if the other signs were changed, would this help to get this sign approved. Mr. Kutz stated that according to the contract Mr. Sam Durrance would be responsible to pull the permit and asked who was Sam Durrance. Ms. Null stated that he is the president of Will Page. Mr. Marder explained that this is a conditional use for a non - conforming structure. It is not a lawful structure. It is out of ordinance. He stated that this is an ordinance that we provide to approve this. In a way it is a dimensional variance. No signs are allowed. The conditional use is for a roof sign. They are allowed to have a roof sign by a conditional use if granted. Mr. Kutz asked if there are any other problems with the sign other than the fact that it is on the roof, and they don't have a permit. Mr. Marder stated that there are other problems as enumerated in the recommendations (attached). Those are the other findings based on our sign code and the intent and purpose of our sign regulations. The other tenants presumably have lawfully existing signs. Mr. McClanahan stated that there is a notation on the form that designated the person liable or responsible to get sign permit. At what timeframe was that placed on that form? Has this been added to it later on or was this put on that form when you entered into contact with sign company? Was it spelled out on there that you needed to be responsible for getting the permit? Ms. Null stated that he had added that after he found out. Mr. McClanahan stated that he hope that she hadn't paid him any money and if she did he hopes she has a good lawyer to get it back. If he didn't have it on the form and he is a sign company in business, then they certainly are aware that there was a permit required before they could put the sign up there. But if they put it on before and spelled it out in clear English that you needed a permit and you went ahead and let them do it without a permit, then you have a problem. Mr. McClanahan asked if this company was licensed in the City of Sanford, if they have an occupational license. Mr. Marder stated that he did not know the answer to that, that he presumes that they are licensed. Mr. McClanahan stated that his concern is what timeframe and that timeframe that went on there would tell who is responsible and who went ahead and did it without following the procedures. Mr. Robert asked if the applicant was suggesting that if the City made the owner remove all the other signs then she could keep hers. Ms. Null stated that her question was that if they conformed their signs so that none of them went over the 50 square feet, would her sign be allowed. Mr. Robert stated that 50 square feet is the aggregate total, its not per sign. Ms. Null stated that the sign on the right for the check cashing extends way out and is not in anyway shape or form attractive. She feels that they are trying to bring to Sanford a classy business and a good company. They are providing a service for the people of Sanford and a lot of City employees. Mr. Kutz asked if an applicant can acquire a sign permit. Mr. Marder stated that they have to be a contractor, and that they have to have a sealed engineering drawing for every sign. The sign must be able to sustain 150 mile per hour winds, and comply with electrical requirements if the sign is to be lighted.. Mr. Kutz asked if in any instance can Will Page get a permit themselves? Mr. VonHerbulis stated that according the Florida State Statutes, the only one that can pull a permit is the actual building owner for his own use if he rented or utilized the building. He couldn't pull it for a tenant and a tenant cannot pull it for their own. Mr. Kutz asked if the applicant doesn't get the conditional use would the sign have to come down and what period of time would they havc to take it down. Mr. Marder stated "yes ", it would have to come down and they would be given a reasonable time based on code enforcement. Immediately is what would probably be told to them. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 1, 1998 PAGE 3 Mr. Hipes stated that the sign contractor should never have installed the sign without seeing a permit. He stated that she would probably have best luck working with the owner in getting him to conform the entire signage of the building in line with City codes. It is the property owner that should allot the square footage for his tenants. Mr. Marder stated that the freestanding sign, detached sign, appears to be over the square footage allowed. He stated that the City has a fairly liberal code in terms of placing signs on walls and probably that should be tightened up significantly. It allows for quite a bit of signage to be placed on walls and the buildings themselves. Mr. Hipes stated that this may be the opportunity for the City to work with the owner of the building to get the whole building aligned with the code. Mr. Marder stated that he is pretty sure that this came about by Code Enforcement. He stated that he is assuming that the other signs are lawfully existing signs. They appear to be relatively old. The old signs don't go along with the way our ordinance intends signage to be; but this is basically the way its developed over many, many years. It is exactly what we want to discourage. Mr. Garrett stated that on the bottom of the contract it states that at the time of final work payment should be made in full and asked what was the final work. Ms. Null stated that it was just putting it on the roof. It was put on top of the roof because it's a flat roof and this was the only place that it could go. Mr. Kutz asked if the applicant got a citation for an illegal sign. Ms. Null stated that someone came in to see them and said that they had gotten a call from someone else in the area and they were checking at that time.. Jerry Davis, one of the owners of that store, stated that at the time of the initial inspection they realized that they weren't in compliance and started at that time to try and work things out. It seems that everytime they got calls, they were getting different information even from the guys that came in to inspect. She stated that they would like to have a great business in Sanford. They are a franchise. They are one of forty stores in Florida. Gail Farr, 406 Colonial Way, Sanford, spoke in favor of the request. She stated that the sign is very attractive. It is the best sign on the block. Ms. Farr stated that she hopes the Commission lets them keep the sign. Mr. Hipes moved to deny as per Staff s recommendations. Seconded by Mr. McClanahan. No discussion.. All in favor. Motion carried. Next on the Agenda was to hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a Conditional use for property located at 2445 W. Airport Boulevard in a I -2, Medium Industrial Zoning District, for the purpose of establishing an outdoor manufacturing facility - a roof truss plant. Greg Adams, 1807 7 St., Winter Haven, was present for representation. Mr. VonHerbulis stated that the entrance is going to be off of Albright Road. There have been complaints presently on Albright Road regarding the drainage. When it rains, the driveway as proposed, will be under 12 inches of water. It is not that the property is low, the drainage is clogged up. Mr. VonHerbulis stated that he has spoken with Jerry Herman, and has made written requests for the adjacent property regarding the drainage. He stated that this would have to addressed prior to construction. Mr. Adams stated that the intended access off of Airport Blvd. is for employees and customers. Trucks will come through Albright Road. There will be some noise, but not to the extreme. The building will be situated on the rear of the property so that it will be approximately 300 feet from the nearest resident. In addition, they would like to have a 6 -foot block wall on Airport Blvd. with 10' of planting buffer. Mr. Adams stated that there would not be any night deliveries. Some studies have been completed with decimal meters, and the noise on Airport Blvd., is substantially higher than from this operation. Mr. VonHerbulis moved to approve per Staff's recommendations. Seconded by Mr. Hipes. All in favor. Motion carried. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 1, 1998 PAGE 4 The next item on the Agenda was to hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a Conditional Use for property located at 1127 Sanford Avenue in a GC -2, General; Commercial Zoning District for the purpose of an automobile dealer sales establishment. William Dealba, 2411 Holly Avenue, Sanford, was present and submitted pictures of the site into the record. He requested permission to have at least 15 cars on the lot and stated that there is enough space. Mr. Marder stated that in the City's file, there was a plan submitted at some point in time that shows 6 cars being displayed at this site. He stated that he would like to see a plan with all landscaping, buffering and with the 15 cars being displayed. Mr. McClanahan suggested that in the absence of proper information, that this item be tabled until the applicant can work with Staff to find out how many cars the lot will accommodate within the present ordinance. Mr. VonHerbulis asked how many cars is this lot allowed to have. Mr. Marder stated that there doesn't appear that there was specific approval to do this, and that he doesn't know if this was approved. He has given the benefit of the doubt, up to 6 cars. Mr. Marder noted that this request came about by way of Code Enforcement. The applicant was cited for putting cars in the right -of -way. They were cited for what they are doing and the way they are doing it. Carlos Dealba, 1127 Sanford Avenue, stated that the site plan was from 1379 when the property was a gas station. They bought the property in 1992 and was not aware of the previous site plan. Mr. Dealba stated that they were cited for not being in accordance with the previous site plan. Their demand for vehicles has grown and they cannot survive with only 6 vehicles. Mr. Kutz moved to approve the Conditional Use subject to the development and approval of a site plan that conforms with all of Sanford's requirements. Seconded by Mr. VonHerbulis. After a brief discussion Mir. Kutz amended his motion to give the applicant 90 days to prepare his site plan. The amendment was seconded by Mr. VonHerbulis. All in favor of the motion and the amendment. Motion carried. The next item on the Agenda was to hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a Dimensional Variance for property located at 1120 Florida Street in a R -3, Multiple Family Dwelling Residential Zoning District to allow an increase in the maximum height of fencing within the front yard; 4 feet allowed, 6 feet proposed, a variance request of 2 feet. Janet Merritt, Manager of Pineaire Apartments, 1120 Florida Avenue, stated that there have been problems over the years of people cutting through their property. They purchased the property around the first of the year, and have completed a tremendous amount of rehabilitation. She stated that they need the 6 -foot fence because of the foot traffic cutting through the property, along with high drug usage in the area. She stated that they are working with Com Air to lease to its students and that the fencing is important to them. The fence will be installed by a licensed contractor. It will be a 6' galvanized wrought iron fence on the north and south sides. Mr. McClanahan stated that given the history of the area, that he is in favor of granting the variance because of the uniqueness and problems that exist there. Mr. VonHerbulis noted that he has concerns with the pointed top of a fence this close to the High School. Mr. Robert asked if there would be a problem from the standpoint of traffic with a 6'. Mr. Marder stated that there would not be a visibility problem. Mr. Marder stated that a set of criteria is provided to all applicants. There are hoops that they have to jump through. The applicants have to show no negligence on their part, and that there are special conditions unique to this property for dimensional variance approval. He stated that the Commission's decisions are based on findings of fact, not on audience participation. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 1, 1998 P A CIF ii Mr. Kutz moved on approval for a wrought iron fence.. Seconded by Mr. VonHerbulis. All in favor. Motion carried. The next item on the Agenda was to hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a Conditional Use for Logan's Roadhouse, a proposed restaurant located at 4649 W. 1 St Street in a PD, Planned Development Zoning District for the purpose of alcoholic beverage sales for consumption on premises, AB -COP. Bemmie Eustace, Interplan Practice, 933 Lee Road, Orlando, was present and represented this request. She stated that they are requesting a full liquor license and that they concur with Staff s recommendations. Mr. Robert moved on approval per Staff s recommendations. Seconded by Mr. VonHerbulis. All in favor. Motion carried. Next on the Agenda was to hold a Public Hearing to consider a request for a Dimensional Variance for Logan's Roadhouse restaurant proposed at 4649 W. 1 St Street in a PD, Planned Development Zoning District for the purpose of the reduction in parking space size requirements: 1 YxX required, 9'x 18' proposed, a variance of 1'x2'. Bemmie Eustace represented this request also. She stated that they concur with Staff recommendations. Logan's has used this standard in other locations and has found that no problems have occurred. r. VonHerbulis stated that he has a problem with the variance. He stated that he has no problem with 50% of spaces being reduced to compact size but not 90 %. He noted that several areas on site plans shows 16'. Ms. Eustace stated that on the plan where it shows 16', there is a 2' overhang which adds up to 18'. Mr. VonHerbulis stated that he is use to seeing 18' with a 2' overhang. Mr. Robert moved on approval per Staff s recommendations. Seconded by Mr. McClanahan. Mr. VonHerbulis and Mr. Kutz in opposition. All others in favor. Motion carried. Next on the .Agenda was the consideration of the Site Plan for Logan's Roadhouse, a proposed restaurant located at 4649 Nest 1 St Street on Lot 1 A, Gateway Plaza Shopping Center PD. Bemmie Eustace represented this request also. She stated that they are required to complete off site improvements and complete rear access. She noted that the stormdrainage would be handled by grading, catch basins, and popoffs with the master system, and possibly skimmers. There will be 332. Ms. Eustace noted that there will have to be a cross access and cross parking easement with Eckerds and noted that they realize that they can't pull building permits until everything is in place. She noted that the plans show 117 parking spaces as opposed to the 132 parking spaces that are required. This will be corrected when final plans are submitted. Mr. Robert moved on approval per Staff s recommendations. Mr. Hipes seconded. In opposition were Mr. Kutz and Mr. VonHerbulis. All others in favor. Motion carried. The next item on the Agenda was a Public Hearing to consider the Site Plan for Calvary Temple of Praise, a proposed church located at 2020 McCracken Road .Terry Mills, 701 W. 3rd Street, Sanford, was present. He stated that there are a few minor errors on the plan in terms of street radii that can be worked out with Staff. This will be a pre - engineered metal building for multi- purposes. The Church is planning to build a sanctuary very soon. The existing fence on the site is being proposed to be removed. The intent is to have the grassed isles and grassed parking stabilized. The Church would like to retain the large concrete slab and use for parking, as much as possible. Additional grading that would work in with the existing slab. The slab must be sloped. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 1, 1998 PAGE G Mr. Robert moved on approval. Seconded by Mr. VonHerbulis. All in favor. Motion carried. The next item on the Agenda was to consider the Site Plan for Twin lakes Apartments (aka Plantation Lakes Apts) located at 1215 Rinehart Road in the Twin Lakes Apartments Planned Development. Bill Burkett, Burkett Engineering, 200 N. Orange Avenue, Orlando, was present representing this request. He stated that they are aware of Staff's comments and are in agreement. No Lake access is included on the Plan. Eric Kenney, 2201 Corporate Blvd., Boca Raton, Fla., was also representing this request. He stated that there will be a mixture of two and three story buildings. The exterior will be stuccoed with stucco detailing. This will be a concrete product that looks like it has a clay roof: Mr. McClanahan moved in favor of the request per Staff's comments. Seconded by Mr. Robert. All in favor. Motion carried. Next on the Agenda was the consideration of the Site Plan for Seminole Ford, a proposed automobile dealership located at 1000 and 1001 Rinehart Road in the Southridge Planned Development. John Froscher, Commonwealth Engineering, represented this request. He stated that they agree with Staffs comments. Plan revisions have been worked out. Display parking is 9'x 18' and customer parking is 10'x20'. The building will be 50,000 square feet. Mr. VonHerbulis moved to approve as noted by Staff's recommendations. Mr. Robert seconded. All in favor. Motion carried. Next on the Agenda was the consideration of the Final Plat for Sterling Woods, a 124 lot single family residential subdivision, located at 1250 W. Lake Mary Boulevard. Mr. Marder noted that this is the same lot layout as the preliminary. Mr. VonHerbulis moved in favor. Seconded by Mr. Hipes. All in favor. Motion carried. Next was the consideration of the Final Plat for Mayfair Club, Phase II, a 44 lot single family residential subdivision located at 4000 Country Club Road. Mr. VonHerbulis moved in favor. Seconded by Mr. McClanahan. All in favor. Motion carried. Mr. Kutz stated that everything is "subject to or based on" on the site plan review sheets provided by Staff. He stated that things should be set, that everything should be approved before it comes to the Board. With a change on Page G, of the Minutes of September 3 Mr. Hipes instead of Mr. Robert in favor of the motion, Mr. McClanahan moved to approve the Minutes of August 20 and September 3' . Seconded by Mr. Garrett. All in favor. Motion carried. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M.