05.20.93FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT-COORDINATOR
May 20, 1993 r� „
TO: Planning on ing C ommission
SUBJECT: ularly sc hedule L.� d Meeting of Planning and Zoning
Comm is sion , Thur sday, May 20, 1993, at 7:00 ,. in the
City commission Chambers, City Hall, Sanford, Florida.
ADDENDUM TO THE AGENDA
1 . Co nsider the request to place a chain link fence in a
required f ront yard setback for Sunshine Li ,U r s , Inc . , a
pack age liquor s located. at 1610 . 13th St in a GC-2,
General Commercial District.
.
Owner/representative: Jerry F. & J eanne A. Atkinson
ADVICE To THE PUBLIC: i f a pers dec to appeal a dec ision
made with respect to any matter considered at the above meetin
or hearing, he /she may need a verbatim record of the proceedings
including the testimony and evidence, which record is not
provided by the City. FS 286.0105)
Persons with disabilities needing assistance to participate in
any of these proceedings should contact the Personnel Office ADA
Coordin at 330-5626, 48 hour in adv of the meeting.
1EP1:ZO1XJ1 THE LANL7 DETELrOP1ENT
� OORD = W C)TZ
May 13 { 19 c3 3
To: Planning and zoning Commission
SUBJECT: Regularly Scheduled Meeting of the Planning and Zoning
Commission, 7 :00 P.M., Thursday, May 20, 1993, in the
City Comission Chambers, City Hall, Sanford, Florida
AGMWA
1. Hold a Public Hearing to consider an Application to Rezone
property located at 2352 E. State Road 46, from SR -1, Single
Family Dwelling Residential to that of PD, Planned
Development,
Owner: BGM Mining, Inc.
Representative: Ted DeWitt
2. Consider the request for the reduction of the required ten
(10 ) foot landscape buffer on W. First street and a waiver of
the required five (5) foot landscape buffer on Holly Avenue,
Commercial Avenue and Cedar Avenue and approval of the site
plan for a ten ( 10 ) foot cement block wall for 802 W. 1st
Street, a junkyard use located in a GC--2, General Commercial
District.
Owner /representative: Howard Sklar
(Tabled: 5/6/93).
3. Any other business from floor or Commission Members.
4. Reports from Staff.
5. Approval of Minutes.
ADVICE TO THE PUBLIC. If a person decides to appeal a decision
made 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 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING.
a
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEETING OF MAY 20. 1993
7:00 P.M.
CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS
MFMBERS PRESENT
Mike Davis
Ben Dyal
Leon Brooks
Helen Stairs
John LeRoy
Cathryn Welch
Cynthia Holt - Miller
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Tom Speer
Joe Dennison
OTHERS PRESENT
Jay Marder, Director of Planning and Development
Bettie Sonnenberg, Land Development Coordinator
Marion Anderson, Recording Secretary
Acting Chairman, Helen Stairs, called the meeting to order at 7:00
P.m.
The first item on the Agenda was to hold a Public Hearing to
consider an Application to Rezone property located at 2352 E. State
Road 46, from SR -1, Single Family Dwelling Residential to that of
PD, Planned Development. Owner: BGM Mining, Inc.; representative:
Ted DeWitt.
Steve Helle, Peter Kelley, and Kenneth Wright of Shutts and Bowen,
were present for representation and asked that the request to
rezone be tabled.
Mr. Dyal moved to table until June 3, 1993. Mr. Leroy seconded.
All in favor. Motion carried.
There were approximately 35 people in the audience.because of this
request. The Acting Chairman explained that the request would be
heard on June 3, 1993. Although this item was tabled, Ms. Janet
Bell of 134 Drew Avenue, explained that some people had taken off
from work to be present. Also, she explained that 85% of the
people in attendance may not know what tabling meant. Ms. Bell
explained that they have started working in the area and asked that
they postpone digging until the residents know what is going on.
Ms. Bell asked that the commission consider the following
questions: 1) how will it depreciate property values, 2) how will
the property be left when completed; 3) what will be the
construction hours; 4) how will traffic be affected on S.R. 46; 5)
if the children will be protected by more than a fence and lights;
G} how accessible will this place be to the park regarding the
children; 7) if the park is accessible, would it be relocated to
protect the children; and 8) how is this going to benefit the City
of Sanford and the Washington oaks residents?
James Davis of 126 Drew Avenue, stated that this project would
essentially be a hole in the ground. He stated that neighboring
residents are already impacted. He asked if the hole would be
uncovered and on what does the commission base their decision.
Mr. Brooks stated that the commission had not reviewed the plans.
He explained that the commission would listen to the community and
base their recommendation on findings of fact and the comprehensive
land use of the land. Mr. Brooks reiterated that the concerns of
the neighborhood.would not be ignored. He stated that City staff
had recommended denial of this request.
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEETING of MAY 20..'1993
PAGE 2
Ken Wright stated that DeWitt Excavating does not wish to
negatively impact the community,.
Bobby Rushing, 122 Drew Avenue, stated that he would like the
developer to make a full presentation to the area residents before
the next meeting and that he would like to see an environmental
study as to how this would effect the community and the tax base.
It was mutually agreed by Ken Aright and the area residents that
they would meet next Tuesday regarding this matter.
The next item on the Agenda was the consideration of the request
for the reduction of the required ten ( 10 ) foot landscape buffer on
W. First street and a waiver - of the required five (5) foot
landscape buffer on Holly Avenue, Commercial Avenue and Cedar
Avenue and approval of the site plan for a ten (10) foot cement
block wall for 802 W. 1st Street, A junkyard use located in a GC -2,
General Commercial District. owner /representative: Howard Sklar;
(Tabled: 5/6/93).
Howard Sklar, 81 Seminole Blvd., Casselberry, stated that vagrants
are living on private property and that the police have to come out
to remove them.
Mr. Davis stated that he wished the approval include stucco or a
decorative finish on the First Street /Holly Avenue side. Mr. Sklar
stated that he is willing to do anything that the City requires.
Mr. Dyal moved on approval of the site plan for a perimeter block
wall with stucco on the 1st Street Holly Avenue sides and with the
5 buffer on First Street to include landscaping on the front.
Seconded by Mrs. Welch. All in favor.
Motion carried.
on the Addendum to the Agenda was the consideration of the request
to place a chain link fence in a required front yard setback for
Sunshine Liquors, Inc., a package liquor store, located at 1610 W.
13th Street in a GC -2, General Commercial Zoning District.
Owner/representative: Jerry F. & Jeanne A Atkinson.
Jerry Atkinson, 192 Sportsman Drive, Palatka, stated that he is
requesting the fence for security reasons and that he would also
like to block off the dirt drive and the east and west side of the
parking lot. He stated that there is a house at the end of the
east parking lot that police are called to all the time. The
police use the drive all the time and they are in a hurry.
Mr. Dyal Moved to approve a fence around the property without a
fence across the front or south side. Seconded by Mr. LeRoy. All
in favor. motion carried.
Bobby Rushing asked if it was possible to use the Commission
Chambers for the Tuesday meeting with the residents of Washington
Oaks and Ken Aright.. Mr. Marder told him that he would have to
contact the City Clerk.
Mr. Brooks moved to approve the minutes as circulated. Mr. LeRoy
seconded. All in favor. lotion carried.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:00 P.M.
I .t
vwa �Y�
From the Director
of Planning and Development
May 14, 1993
TO: City of Sanford Planning and Zoning Commission
SUBJECT: Recommendations for Meeting of May 20, 1993
DEWITT EXCAVATING, INC. - Request to rezone SR -1, Single Family Residential to
from PD, Planned Development for the purpose of mining for property located south
of North Street .and north of East 24th Street in the western area of the City of
Sanford.
1. Site is Zoned SR -1, Single Family Residential and is vacant at the present time.
Site was originally planned as part of the Washington Oaks subdivision and
has access to several stub streets into the developed portion of that
development.
2. A large drainage ditch runs along the site's easterly property boundary and
appears to be partially located on site. The ditch is part of a system that
eventually drains into Lake Monroe. The applicant initially proposed that the
ditch be rerouted in a manner that would straddle the western edge of the
property adjacent to existing residential development. This method was
reviewed by the Plans Review Committee and found to be unacceptable based
on its negative impact upon adjacent homes and its questionable
feasibility /workability. The applicant then submitted a proposal that showed
the drainage flowing directly into the lake /pond area that would be created by
the borrow pit. That solution was unacceptable to the St. Johns River Water
Management District because the drainage ditch waters are waters of the
state and may not be mixed with the waters from the borrow pit. Also, a
solution to rerouting the City ditch coming from Washington Oaks, Section 2
and connecting into the main drainage ditch had not been resolved at the date
of this writing.
3a. Adjacent land uses include single family dwelling located in the Washington
Oaks subdivision Zoned SR -1, Single Family Residential and the Roseland Park
subdivison Zoned R -1, Single Family Residential located in the unincorporated
area adjacent to the site.
3b. The site is also adjacent to land Zoned A -1, Agriculture in the unincorporated
area which is presently being utilized for mining. The proposed mining use is
basically an extension of the existing mining adjacent to the site.
3c. A small City park is located adjacent to the site.
4. The City's requirements for mining are set forth as follows:
"All mining and resource extraction such as but not limited to
sand and peat excavation shall be conducted according to an
excavation and reclamation plan approved by the Administrative
Official. Because of the high potential for surface and
groundwater contamination associated with mining and
extraction activities, a horizontal impervious layer (possibly
including a portion of the extracted resource) shall, if feasible, be
left undisturbed and unpenetrated beneath all excavated areas.
The amount and location of the impervious layer to remain intact,
if any, will be determined by soil surveys prior to excavation.
The mining operator or owner shall submit to the Administrative
Official said excavation and reclamation plan which shall include
the following information:
A. Quantity of material to be mined or extracted.
B. Scaled plans and drawings that indicate area and
dimensions of proposed mining.
C. Timeframe, dates and phasing of each increment of
mining or extraction activity.
D. Soil survey prepared by a geotechnical engineer
registered in the State of Florida depicting the
feasibility of retaining an impervious layer of
material and amount and location of such
impervious layer.
E. Restoration and reclamation plan including scaled
drawings and plans that indicate restored elevations,
restoration materials, landscape, revegetation,
structures and uses after mining or each phase or
increment thereof has been completed.
F. Setbacks, buffers, fencing, landscaping and other
methods of protecting adjacent land from adverse
impact of proposed mining activities.
G. Hydrologic survey prepared by hydrology engineer
registered in the State of Florida depicting the
ground water conditions and impact of the mining
and excavation activity on same."
Plans submitted by the applicant appear to generally comply with the intent
and purpose of information required above. However the 50 foot buffer or
setback from the property line to the beginning of the slope down to the
Planning Recommendations, May 14, 1993, Page 2
borrow pit is not sufficient to protect adjacent residential land. Any buffer
would need to be a minimum of 100 feet in similarity to the buffer that
appears to be provided on the north side of the previously permitted borrow
pit adjacent to residential development in Roseland Park in the unincorporated
area. Also, it is noted that the proposed borrow pit is proposed to be 50 feet
deep. As such, the pit would unquestionably hold standing water at all times.
5. Comprehensive Plan The Future Land Use Plan Element of the City's
Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Low Density Residential - Single
Family. The Plan includes goals, objectives and policies that prevent
incompatible land uses from intruding upon residential neighborhoods. The
proposed mining activity would be an intrusion into an established single
family area. The Comprehensive Plan permits several zoning districts within
the Low Density Residential - Single Family designation, including PD, Planned
Development. However the basic intent and purpose of the Low Density
Residential - Single Family land use designation must be maintained.
6. Zoning The Zoning Ordinance (Land Development Regulations) provides
flexibility to the applicant by permitting a PD rezone request to include all land
uses categories. This flexibility recognizes that just because the applicant is
permitted to request a particular use, it is not necessarily compatible or
appropriate within a given location or neighborhood. The Future Land Use Plan
Map provides direction regarding the particular uses, densities and /or
intensities that would be appropriate and compatible. The proposed mining use
for the site under consideration does not meet the intent and purpose of the
residential designation set forth in the Comprehensive Plan.
7. Proposed Planned Development Project Plan At the date of this writing the
proposed Planned Development Project Plan is considered to be incomplete
because of the lack of numerous items and information necessary to be
contained in the Master Plan.
8. Recommendation Recommend that the request to rezone from SR -1, Single
Family Residential to PD, Planning Development for the purpose of mining uses
be denied based on the following findings:
a. Mining uses are inconsistent with the Future Land Use Plan designation
of Low Density Residential - Single Family set forth in the
Comprehensive Plan.
b. The proposed mining activity is incompatible with the residential land
uses already established in the immediate area. It would be difficult to
provide sufficient distance for buffers and separation of the borrow
pit /mining activity from existing single family dwellings adjacent to the
site without disrupting the general welfare of the residents in
Washington Oaks and Roseland Park.
C. The information submitted to date does not complete nor does it
Planning Recommendations, May 14, 1993, Page 3
provide an acceptable method to resolve several technical development
problems, especially with regards to routing the main drainage flow
through the property.
Planning Recommendations, May 14, 1993, Page 4