Loading...
10.01.92FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR September 25, 1992 M " � To: Planning and Zoning Co mmission SUBJECT: Regularly S cheduled Meeting of the Planning and Zoning Co m mission , Thursday, October 1. 1992, a t 7:00 P.M. in the city Commission Chambers, C ity Hall, San ford, Florida Fr 1. Hold a Public Hearing to consider a request to Rezone property located at 1308 . 3rd Street from MR-3. Multiple Family Residential to that of RC - 1 . Restricted Commercial. Owner: Bernadette Smith Representative: Denise chandler 2 . Guidelines for small parking areas. 3 . Any other business from the floor or the Commission members. 4 . Reports from staff ADVICE TO THR PUBLIC: If a person decides to appeal a decision made with respect to any matter considered at the above meeting or hearing, he /she may need a verbatim record of the proceedings including the testimony and evidence, which record is not provided by th City of S anford. (FS 286,0105) Persons with disabilities needing assistance to participate in any of these proceedings should contact th P ersonnel office ADA C oordinator at 330 -5626 48 h ours in advance of the meeting, MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 1, 1992 f :00 P.m. CITY CO MISSION CHAMBERS SANFORD CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT Tom Speer Ben Dyal Leon Brooks Cynthia Holt - miller Cathryn Welch Helen Stairs John LeRoy Mike Davis MEMBERS ABSENT: Joe Dennison OTHERS PRESENT: Jay Mard.er, Director of Engineering and Planning Bettie Sonnenberg, Land Development Coordinator Marion Anderson, Recording Secretary The meeting was called to order at 7 :00 P.M. by Nice Chairman Speer. The first item on the Agenda was to hold a Public Hearing to consider a request to Rezone property located at 1308 W. 3rd Street, from MR -3, Multiple Family Residential to that of RC -1 Restricted Commercial. Owner: Bernadette Smith; representative: Denise Chandler. Due to lack of representation and with it being early in the evening, this item was placed second on the agenda. The next item was a discussion of the guidelines for small parking areas. Mr. Marder stated that the City has had an on -going stream of small sites redevelopment changing from residential to an office use. Staff felt that it was inappropriate for the City Commission to be considering these requests for parking on these sites. Planning and Zoning Commission can deal with these requests. Staff felt that it would be appropriate to recommend the Commission do this when revisions to the Land Development Regulations are considered. This concept was reviewed by the Plans Review Committee and the following guidelines were developed for Staff to utilize when referring a plan to the Planning and Zoning Commission for consideration: 1. Non - residential development of 1/2 acre or less. 2. Periodic, non - intensive use. 3. Conversion of an existing building such as residential to office. 4. If a car lot, not over ten cars for display. The standards that Staff would generally recommend on such sites would be: 1. Parking spaces to be defined in some manner, i.e. curb stops, log cut timber, etc. 2. Driveways, aprons, handicapped spaces and aisle associated with the handicap spaces to be paved. Mr. Speer asked what standards do we use in making a decision for a church, automobile, or a duplex parking lot as to whether it would be a solid concrete, asphalt or a permeable surface or mulch. How do we decide to do this? Mr. Marder stated that each situation is unique and economics tend, to dictate the approach. The City tries to work with the applicants and to come up with a workable solution. Mr. Speer noted that he likes what the First Baptist Church, downtown in the Historic District, has done with their MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 1, 1992 Page 2 parking. He stated, that the church has torn down approximately 5 houses on Park Avenue and they are mowing these lots and keeping them green. Since this is only weekend and Wednesday night parking, he would rather see some type of informal parking arrangement rather than cold asphalt or concrete. The atmosphere of a part -time parking lot for church services does not require all the hard rigid rules that you would have for a Winn Dixie Plaza. Mr. Speer noted that under a capital improvement program he would like to see some considerations given to the restoration of Park Avenue. All of the original brick is under the asphalt between 1st Street and 13th Street. He stated that it would probably be just as easy to remove the asphalt to get back to the brick. Mr. Dal moved to remove Item #1 from the table. Seconded by Mr. Davis. All in favor. Motion carried. Mrs. Sonnenberg stated that she had spoken with the applicant and notified her that the item had been tabled. The applicant, Ms. Chandler, wanted to know the particular reasons why this had been tabled and Mrs. Sonnenberg explained that there had been no representation and told Ms. Chandler that it was necessary to have someone here. Mrs. Sonnenberg stated that Ms. Chandler claimed she had not received an agenda for the first meeting in time and Mrs. Sonnenberg told her the date and time of the next meeting which would be October 1, 1992. Mr. Speer wanted the record to reflect that it was his observation, as Vice Chairman of the Board, that there was no one present representing the applicant nor was the applicant present. Also, there was no public present to speak in favor of or in opposition, to the request. Mr. Dyal moved to deny based on inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Seconded by Ms. Holt - Miller. All in favor. Motion carried. Mr. Dyal moved to approve the minutes as circulated. Seconded by Mr. Brooks. All in favor. Motion carried. There being no further business, meeting adjourned at 7:30 P.M. Tom Speer, Vice Chairman WM From the Director of Planning and Development September 25, 1992 TO: Planning and Zoning Co SUBJECT: Guidelines for Small Scale Commercial Paved Parking The Revised Land Development Regulations provide the ability to consider improvements to small scale parking areas pursuant to waiver provisions when such improvements are private, i.e., not dedicated to the public. This provides the ability to refer such considerations to the Planning and Zoning Co One of the advantages of this system is the "one -stop" process for the applicant who will only need to attend the Planning and Zoning Commission and avoid requesting approval from the City Commission. Excerpts of Standards for Consideration of a Waiver are attached. In the specific case of small scale parking areas, the following staff guidelines and standard recommendation have been developed by the Plans Review Committee based upon consistency with previous actions: Guidelines for Consideration and Referral to the Planning and Zoning Commission: 1. Non - residential development of 1/2 acre or less 2. Periodic, non - intensive use 3. Conversion of an existing building such as residential to office 4. If a car lot, not over ten cars for display Standard Plans Review Committee Recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission: 1. Some type of definition of the parking spaces must be provided such as railroad ties, concrete curbstops, et cetera 2. The following areas shall be paved: driveways, aprons, handicapped space and aisle associated with the handicapped space In conclusion, the Pl nl in and Zoning Commission will begin considering requests to waive pavement for small parking areas in the near future. The above guidelines and recommendations are intended to provide a basis for sound and consistent action by the Commission. ON SECTION 7.5 WAIVERS (excerpts) C. Standards for Consideration of a Waiver. Before any modification or waiver may be granted, the following findings shall be determined: 1. That literal interpretation of the provisions of this Ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties located in the immediate area of subject property under the terms of this Ordinance and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant. 2. That granting the waiver requested will not confer upon the applicant any special privileges denied by this Ordinance to other lands, buildings or structures located in the immediate area of the subject property. 3. That, if an alternative or modification of requirements is requested, such waiver request provides for equal or better performance than the stated requirement in this Ordinance. The Administrative Official may require a performance guarantee in the manner set forth in this Ordinance and/or engineering under signature and seal of a licensed Professional Engineer in the State of Florida to insure such performance. 4. That the grant of the waiver will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this Ordinance and that such waiver will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the short -term or long -term public interest or welfare. 5. That the grant of the waiver will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will not adversely impact the established level of service for any facilities or services set forth in said Comprehensive Plan. D. Administrative Official Action and Referral Upon Policy Question. If the request for waiver regards a requirement or provision is that is not determined to be a technical requirement by the Administrative Official, such a request for waiver shall be regarded as a policy question. The Administrative Official shall have the authority to refer requests for waiver regarding a policy question to the Planning and Zoning Commission and/or the City Commission for action. 1. Referral To Planning and Zoning Commission. When the request for waiver does not involve improvements that are dedicated, owned or maintained by a public entity, the Administrative Official shall have the authority to transmit such request for waiver to the Planning and Zoning Co for action in conjunction with the subject plan or application involved in the request for waiver. 2. Referral To City Commission. When the request for waiver involves improvements that are to be dedicated, owned or maintained by a public entity, the Administrative Official shall have the authority to transmit such request for waiver to the City Commission for action in conjunction with the subject plan or application involved in the request for waiver. Action upon a request for 2 waiver involving improvements to be dedicated to the public shall be by action of the City Commission. 3. Action Upon Waiver. In granting such request for waiver, the Planning and Zoning Commission and/or the City Commission must make specific affirmative findings respecting each of the matters specified in Paragraph C, above, and may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards, including requirements in excess of those otherwise required by this Ordinance, which shall become a part of the terms under which a Site Development Permit and Certificate of Completion shall issue. 3