Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11062014PZ Minutes�C o CITY OF SEBASTIAN C PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION co MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING �'� NOVEMBER 6, 2014 Chairman Dodd called the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting to order at 7:00 P.M lA o O� V 7 The pledge of allegiance was said by all. 'C O O ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Mr. Roth Mr. McManus (a) CD O C- CL Mr. Dodd Mr. Qizilbash (n N -2' R Ms. Kautenburg (a) (arrived @ 7:02 pm) Mr. Carter Mr. Durr Mr. Reyes Mr, Paul Ms. Dale Simchick. IRC School Board Liaison ALSO PRESENT: Frank Watanabe, PE, Community Development Director Bob Ginsburg, City Attorney Jan King, Senior Planner Dorn Bosworth, Planner/Recording Secretary ANNOUNCEMENTS: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MOTION by Paul/Roth to accept the minutes of the October 2, 2014 meeting as submitted. Motion was approved unanimously by voice vote. MOTION by Roth/Paul to accept the minutes of the October 16, 2014 meeting as submitted. Motion was approved unanimously by voice vote. OLD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: A. ACCESSORY STRUCTURE REVIEW — LDC SECTION 54-2-7.5 — 1026 EVERNIA STREET — LOTS 30 & 5, BLOCK 164, UNIT 5 - 30' x 33' (990 SF) DETACHED GARAGE — M/M MILLAR Mr. Doug Millar, the applicant and property owner, was present. Ms. Bosworth reviewed the proposed garage application noting the actual square footage was 999 SF, stated it would be constructed on the lot behind the house, would be of the same material and colors of the residence, was proposing to plant the required amount of shrubbery, and that the applicant had also applied for the auxiliary driveway permit. She stated that staff recommended approval. Mr. Qizilbash asked if a Unity of Title had been recorded. Staff stated they had a copy in their file. Mr. Durr discussed with staff the lineal footage calculation used in determining the shrubbery PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2014 amount, and disagreed with the elimination of the south side wall because of the additional concrete pad. MOTION by Durr/Roth "to approve the accessory structure at 1026 Evernia Street, on Lot 30 & 5, Block 164, Unit 5, with the condition that the added foundation planting at the number of 93 LF should be accounted for." There was discussion if the foundation planting needed to be a condition if it was already required by code. Staffs interpretation of how the lineal footage was calculated was in question. Ms. Kautenburg had a question on the additional pad, and stated she did not think the building was attractive enough for that neighborhood. ROLL CALL: Mr. Durr yes Mr. Qizilbash yes Mr. Paul yes Mr. Reyes yes Mr. Roth yes Mr. Carter yes Mr. Dodd yes The vote was 7-0. Motion carried. B. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING — SITE PLAN, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, & WAIVER — WATERCREST SENIOR LIVING — 89 -BED ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY — 13085 US HIGHWAY #1 — COMMERCIAL RIVERFRONT (CR) ZONING DISTRICT — REQUESTSED WAIVER FROM LDC SECTION 54-4-21.A.7: RIVERFRONT OVERLAY LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS Chairman Dodd asked the Commissioners if they had any ex -parte communication to disclose. Ms. Kautenburg stated she had no ex -parte communications but worked in the real estate office with the listing agent of the property. Mr. Paul stated that the project civil engineer was his neighbor but there had not been any ex -parte communications. The applicants/representatives and staff were sworn in by the City Attorney. Mr. Todd Howder, MBV Engineering, Inc., and the applicant set up display boards highlighting the project's site plan and architectural elevations. He introduced himself, the design team and owners to the Commission: Ms. Joni Williams, Mr. Mark Chilcott, VP of Development, Mr. Randy Buchannan, Landscape Architect, and Mr. Richard Wellman, Architect. He then reviewed the civil plans noting access to the site would be from an existing turn lane on US #1 and from an access through the neighboring Shady Rest Mobile Home Park, which easement document was already executed. The stormwater system consisted of three dry ponds and an exfiltration trench. The adjacent Catholic Church was selling a piece of land to the project, and in return the ALF was extending a water line onto the church's western property for a fire hydrant. Permits from IRC Utilities and both FDOT permits had been received. Ms. King stated that the project had received two variances from the Board of Adjustment regarding the method of calculating parking spaces and the rear setback. She explained that the LDC required .6 parking spaces per bed whereas the industry standard was .5 spaces per bed. Also, the rear setback was reduced from 30 feet to 20 feet since the Shady Rest property had been rezoned to Commercial Riverfront and in the near future would not be continuing any residential uses in exchange for an increased buffer. She noted that the copy of the recorded access agreement requested in proposed Condition #1 in the Staff Report had been received. Mr. Durr had questions for the Landscape Architect regarding the proposed materials for the increased buffer, and asked if landscaping could be planted within the slopes of the retention ponds to fill in gaps. Mr. Howder responded they prefer not within the slopes but top -of -banks was doable. Mr. Qizilbash had questions on the amount of parking spaces and how the building E PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2014 height was measured. Mr. Richard Wellman, Architect, showed where the height was measured from and to, meeting the 35 foot maximum height allowed. Mr. Dodd asked if the secondary access through Shady Rest would be upgraded and repaired since it was not intended for heavy traffic. Mr. Howder stated not at this time. The city engineer, Mr. Frank Watanabe stated he would take a look at the existing condition of that roadway. Mr. Roth asked staff to explain the landscape chart that was included in their packet. Ms. King iterated that the first page was the basic landscape code that had to be met, and if not, a variance from the Board of Adjustment would be needed. The second page was the Riverfront Overlay District requirements that had to be met, and if not, a waiver from the Commission was needed. The applicant was requesting a waiver from the Overlay requirements, and the charts indicated the amount of landscape material that a waiver was needed for. Mr. Durr had additional questions and concerns regarding the proposed size and gallons of the landscaping plants for the increased rear buffer. Mr. Howder stated they would work with the landscaper. Mr. Dodd opened the Public Hearing at 7:31 pm and asked if there was anyone in the public that was opposed or in favor of the application. There was none. Ms. King reviewed the three actions needing motions from the Commission. MOTION by Durr/Paul "to approve the Conditional Use Permit for an assisted living facility for this application." ROLL CALL: Mr. Reyes yes Mr. Dodd yes Mr. Durr yes Mr. Qizilbash yes Mr. Carter yes Mr. Paul yes Mr. Roth yes The vote was 7-0. Motion carried. MOTION by Paul/Roth "to approve the site plan [which will be an enhancement to the city, needed by the community, and be a good project] with the staff recommendations #2 and #3." ROLL CALL: Mr. Reyes yes Mr. Dodd yes Mr. Roth yes Mr. Durr yes Mr. Paul yes Mr. Carter yes Mr. Qizilbash yes The vote was 7-0. Motion carried. Ms. King noted that the applicant was planting additional landscaping on the church's property (11 canopy trees, 9 palm trees, and 208 shrubs) but since that was off-site, those counts were not added into the charts. MOTION by Durr/Carter "to approve the landscape waiver as requested for Section 54-4-21.A.7 of the Riverfront Overlay District." ROLL CALL: Mr. Roth yes Mr. Qizilbash yes Mr. Carter yes Mr. Reyes yes Mr. Dodd yes Mr. Paul yes Mr. Durr yes The vote was 7-0. Motion carried. 3 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2014 C. PUBLIC HEARING — RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL — SPECIAL USE PERMIT — RECREATIONAL VEHICLE RESORT — CHESSER'S GAP PUD — S. FLEMING STREET SOUTH OF SEBASTIAN BOULEVARD — COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD -C) ZONING DISTRICT Chairman Dodd explained that per LDC regulations, after review of the project, the Commission could make a recommendation to the City Council that they approve the application, deny it, or approve it with conditions, and their recommendation was not binding on the Council. He stated to the public in attendance that at the PZ meetings there were no time limits imposed on input but ask all to keep to the topic and speaking brief. Everyone who wished would be able to address the Commission. Mr. Todd Howder, MBV Engineering, Inc., reviewed that the hearing was for the Special Use request only, and not site plan specifics at this time. He then continued with a Power Point presentation [attached] which explained the project, and details including PUD zoning specifics and allowable uses, aerials of the site, review of the approved, but not constructed, townhome project, comparison of traffic trip generation, proposed resort deed restrictions, conceptual resort site plan and details, proposed site photos, pictorial of allowed and prohibited RV's, and photos of other existing, Florida RV resorts. Mr. John King, REMAX Crown Realty, 1603 US #1, spoke about the history of getting the project initiated. He also explained that if the Special Use was granted, any future changes to the project or deed restrictions would necessitate additional approvals by the City. The resort plan would be similar to a condominium or homeowners association in that each lot owner would be charged a maintenance fee. He also stated they had already spoken to the adjacent property owners (Elks and Sebastian Jr. High Charter School) and addressed their concerns. Mr. Watanabe displayed the two pages from the staff report which listed proposed conditions (16) if the Special Use was recommended to be approved on the overhead projector, and read each condition [attached]. Mr. Carter asked what would happen if the business plan for the resort didn't work. Mr. King reiterated that any new plan would have to come back before the City, but the resort would be completed in phases. Mr. Durr questioned if the RV's would be going in and out on a daily basis. Mr. King stated not likely, in that it took time for an RV set-up and most owners might have small electric cars or golf carts. Mr. Durr had additional questions on expected daily traffic trips the use would generate, and Mr. King discussed research information the civil engineer had gathered. He offered that a "Right Turn Only" sign could be placed at the exit to direct RV's to Sebastian Boulevard instead of into the adjacent subdivisions. Mr. Qizilbash stated he was concerned with the quality of the project and maintenance of the site. Mr. King stated there would be a management company onsite responsible for the interior and exterior maintenance, and the resort operated like a condominium. Mr. Rich Stringer, Esq., applicant's attorney, stated that if the project failed, there would not be dilapidated buildings to look at, more of a blank slate, and the City's recourse would be the same as with any other failed development, with regards to nuisance violations. Mr. McManus asked how the value of the lots would be established for taxing purposes and had setback questions. Mr. King responded it would be the same as a fee simple condo and every lot would be taxable. 4 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2014 Mr. Paul corrected information regarding RV's that was displayed in the Power Point presentation. He then questioned if the lot owners could sub -let their property when they were not using it, and had additional questions regarding the proposed wall. Mr. King responded yes, but the renter had to be approved by the management company and pass all other background checks. Mr. Dodd verified with staff that per the LDC, the definition of a recreational vehicle is "a temporary dwelling". Mr. Watanabe concurred. Mr. Dodd summarized that if the Special Use was approved, it would be for a resort composed of temporary dwellings — a temporary dwelling facility. He also stated that the city would not have any means to enforce the by-laws or deed restrictions, and requested the Commission not to ask site plan related questions. Mr. Dodd asked if the townhome site plan was still active, and had a question regarding the stormwater lake. Mr. Watanabe stated it was not, and Mr. Howder stated the existing lake would be relocated. Mr. Reyes had questions regarding the location of the existing RV Resorts in the state, felt capacity of the resort would be seasonal, and opined that an RV Resort at this site wouldn't work as the adjacent commercial sites in the PUD were empty. Ms. Kautenburg opined that the concept of the RV Resort would bring in the highest income stream possible with the least pressure on the services that must be provided. Mr. Roth asked if the proposed restaurant would be open to the public. Mr. King stated yes. Ms. Simchick, IRC School Board Liaison, stated the only concern the school district had for the Sebastian Jr. High Charter School located on Wave Street was the type of traffic and daily trips. She stated that although initial information provided by the civil engineer indicated that daily trips would decrease from the previously approved townhome development, the type of vehicles creating the trips were of truck and bus length. She also stated that she was a councilmember when City Council approved the townhome project, but the approval included a condition of installing a turn lane. She noted that a turn lane was not shown on the conceptual plan and because of the back-up on to Fleming Street already occurring during drop-off and pick-up hours, requested that a turn lane and/or traffic signal be considered when the traffic study was done and site plan submitted. Chmn. Dodd opened Public Input. The following people spoke in regards to the application: John Maylie, 771 Carnation Drive, felt the project did not meet the required Finding of Facts to approve the Special Use and was concerned with security, drainage, traffic from having the resort on two sides of the road, and noise. Jim Sunnycalb, 721 S. Easy Street, Collier Creek Estates, was concerned that Fleming Street would be reconsidered to open up to US Highway #1. Al Manzi, 742 Holden Avenue, Collier Creek Estates, felt the density of the RV resort was not in keeping with the surrounding subdivisions. John Johnston, 747 S. Easy Street, President of the HOA for Collier Creek Estates, did not want this type of use in the area next to a residential subdivision, and stated their main concern as for the safety of the students in the charter school with regards to the renters and potential pedophiles. Patricia Keller, vacant property owner in Collier Creek Estates, was concerned with how the resort would impact the subdivision and property values, noise, and less taxes. 5 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2014 Brad Cronin, 208 Chello Avenue, Collier Creek Estates, did not think the conceptual plan indicated a luxury resort with lots that would sell at the proposed price, and it was not a use that would be used by Sebastian residents like the previously approved assisted living facility. David Brunelle, 762 Holden Avenue, Collier Creek Estates, noted that taxes would be assessed on lots with no buildings, and was concerned about traffic congestion near the school. [Mr. Dodd disclosed that Mr. Brunelle was his brother-in-law.] Joel Stout, 813 George Street, opined that the resort was another name for a trailer park and stated his house would be adjacent to the project. He was worried about property values, and potential pedophiles near the school as his daughter was a student there and walked home. Maureen Mathewson, 108 Harbor Point Drive, stated that Harbor Point Subdivision would be affected by the proposed condition #7a, and requested a landscape buffer between the stormwater tract and their subdivision if the Special Use was approved. She also had concerns with the transient population the use would bring in. Debra Green, 334 Brookedge Terrace, is not opposed to the RV Resort but opposed to the location next to the school, and the safety of the students that ride their bikes or walk. Ann Carr, Melrose Lane, was concerned with the type of renter, and the width of Fleming Street. Frank Lamacchia, 722 S. Easy Street, Collier Creek Estates, new resident of 2 months, felt the location next to a residential area was wrong for a RV resort, worried about pedophiles, maintenance, density, and traffic & noise from the RVers. Bruce Fleming, 720 S. Easy Street, Collier Creek Estates, asked who enforces the deed restrictions. Brad Paschall, 115 Harbor Point Drive, stated he has spoken to staff, the city manager, and other RV resort managers. He discussed comments made by a Port St. Lucie resort manager regarding the resort being split by an arterial roadway which would have visitors crossing the road to the office and amenities, and asked the Commissioners to outweigh the benefits vs. the risks of the project when they made their recommendation. Henry Ghigliotty, 774 S. Easy Street, Collier Creek Estates, stated he closed on his house the day before but would not have if he knew the RV resort project was being considered. Grace Savage, 204 Hunt Court, Collier Creek Estates, 1 month new resident, stated she was unnerved with learning about both All Aboard Florida and the RV resort. She opposed the project for all the reasons already stated, mostly quality of life and traffic. Joe Horstkamp, 782 Holden Avenue, Collier Creek Estates, worried that additional crime would occur not only because of transients but also because the RV's were high end and pricey. Damien Gilliams, 713 Layport Drive, informed the public that the Council made the final decision regarding the Special Use and told them to contact councilmembers and attend the council meeting. He stated the use belonged in other areas of the city and not near the residential areas. Dr. Henry Fischer, property owner of the west portion of the project, clarified some of the misinformation that was stated. He reviewed that the location was in a commercial/industrial area with a curb & gutter street and underground drainage, along with 20 acres of lakes. The initial project planned by the new owner was for a low-income apartment complex to which Mr. King introduced the idea of the RV Resort. Mr. Fischer also reviewed other uses the property could develop as allowed by the commercial and industrial zoning. He thought a gated community, similar to other subdivisions he had developed, would be better suited to the area. N PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2014 Henry Fischer, Jr., 10729 US Highway #1, reviewed the history of the development of the commercial parcel, stated he was an Ryer, had stayed at other RV Resorts, and felt it would be nice to bring something different to Sebastian. He also stated he was offended by the statements that compared pedophiles with RVers. Keith Hodel, 757 George Street, Class A RV owner, stated he bought a lot in a RV Resort south of Orlando, and within seven years it was deteriorated, which is why he moved to Sebastian. Walter Gill, 742 S. Easy Street, Collier Creek Estates, an Ryer, was concerned with Fleming Street going through the middle of the resort, and noted in his experiences staying at many RV resorts that they deteriorated with almost every yearly visit. He did not want a resort near his neighborhood. Chairman Dodd closed the public input at 9:56 p.m. and summarized what the Commission needed to consider. He read the definition of a recreational vehicle from the LDC. He stated he had a problem with approving a special use permit without much information from the LDC to go with, and in using the definition of a recreational vehicle it made it such that the Commission didn't have a lot of control of what they were approving. He stated he was opposed to making a recommendation of approval based on the definition of a recreational vehicle being a temporary dwelling, that the location lends to an opportunity to become transient, the site's proximity to the school and existing residential, and not being consistent with Section 54-2- 6.2.(d)(1) and (d)(2). Mr. Qizilbash stated he also couldn't find any information in the LDC regarding Special Uses. Mr. Dodd read the required Findings of Fact (Section 54-2-6.2) from the code book [also in agenda packets/staff report], and stated he felt the use was not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, but that it was also not inconsistent with the Plan, and that the downsides of the project was greater than the upsides to the City. Mr. Paul stated that he felt for every negative item there could be a positive item found and that there were property rights of the developer to consider. Mr. Dodd stated property rights were a two-way street, and it was the Commission's responsibility to consider the property rights of everybody. MOTION by Dodd/Durr "that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the City Council deny the request for a Special Use Permit to allow a Recreational Vehicle Resort in the Chesser's Gap PUD -C due to the conditions set forth in LDC Section 54-2-6.2(d)(1) and (d)(2)." Mr. Roth stated his denial would be based on the road down the middle of the resort because there would be traffic in all different directions, and that it was not the right plan for that area. Mr. Dodd stated that was a site plan issue, and the use is what needed to be considered. Ms. Kautenburg opined that things change, and no one is comfortable with change. They alternative developments were all doable before the adjacent subdivisions were built. She felt bad that there was name calling, and never met an Ryer who was a pedophile. She stated she wasn't sure if the RV Resort was a right use of the land, nor if it was a wrong thing. ROLL CALL: Mr. Roth yes Mr. Qizilbash yes Mr. Carter yes Mr. Reyes yes The vote was 6-1. Motion carried. Mr. Dodd yes Mr. Durr yes Mr. Paul no A pause was taken to let the Council Chambers empty. 7 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2014 CHAIRMAN MATTERS: Chmn. Dodd reviewed that the last four site plans approved in the Riverfront District were granted waivers for Overlay landscaping. He felt it was time to review the code and asked staff to bring back a proposed modification early in the new year. Ms. King reviewed past activity that the Chamber of Commerce had done with regards to presenting modifications on this issue, which never came to fruition. She said she agreed with Chmn. Dodd in that it was time to review the landscaping code. Ms. Bosworth cited the foundation landscaping regulations as the ones most requested waivers from. Chmn. Dodd suggested having a single landscape code for the city, and felt there may not be enough developable lots remaining in the Riverfront large enough to adequately meet the Overlay landscaping requirements. Chmn. Dodd also discussed not having a place on the Commission's agenda for Public Input, and relayed information from a previous discussion with the City Attorney that it may be illegal not to provide it, and that there has been changes in both case law and at the State level regarding this. He asked the Commission if they would like to add "Public Input" to the agenda. Mr. Ginsburg stated State law was passed last year regarding the issue. It does not allow people to talk to the Commission about random issues, but rather agenda items, even if it is not labeled a public or quasi-judicial hearing. He stated the Commission and Council had been good about letting people speak on all matters, and when asked directly about adding "Public Input" formally to the agenda, he responded that he was comfortable with allowing the Chairman to recognize when people should be given time to offer input. Mr. McManus asked if you could place a time limit and request the input be item specific. Mr. Ginsburg stated yes. MEMBERS MATTERS: Mr. Carter thanked the City for installing the sign lights in front of City Hall. Mr. Roth thanked the City for re -striping Barber Street from US Hwy #1 to the railroad tracks and past. Mr. Paul stated his term had expired and he had decided not to re -apply, that tonight was his last meeting. He thanked the City Council for putting their vote in him all the years he'd been a Commissioner, but specifically wanted to thank staff who he stated had been excellent in the nine years he had served, and also stated that Mr. Ginsburg was the "cake". He told the Commissioners he thoroughly enjoyed his time with them. DIRECTOR MATTERS: Mr. Watanabe informed the Commissioners that an appeal of their decision regarding the Capt. Hiram's site plan had been submitted [and would be considered by the City Council.] ATTORNEY MATTERS: Mr. Ginsburg informed the Commission that he was working on two Ordinances, and because of the timing of upcoming meetings, City Council would hold their 1st readings on 11119, and the PZ Commission would hold their review and make a recommendation on 11120. The Ordinances dealt with temporary uses, and the other was Stay of Appeals. Chairman Dodd adjourned the meeting at 10:30 p.m. (db) The conditional uses include bars/lounges, commercial retail > 20,000 SF, business and professional offices (with drive-through facilities), farmer's market, funeral homes, pawn shops, nursing homes, child care services, utilities (public and private), parks and recreation (public), restaurants (with drive-through facilities), vehicular service and maintenance, veterinary services, wholesale trades and services, commercial amusements (enclosed), mini -storage, schools, golf courses, protective and emergency services, model homes, and accessory uses to conditional uses. The individual platted lot component of the RV Resort is the special use in question. All other components of the resort, including a clubhouse, swimming pool and spa, a tiki bar, showers, laundry, guard house, recreational area with gazebo, tennis courts, canoe launch, storage garages, storage units and a commercial building are permitted or conditional uses. The platted RV lots are somewhat of a hybrid between commercial and residential use. If viewed as a commercial use, it could be similar to a hotel/motel. As defined by code, a hotel/motel is a building with dwelling units for accommodation of transient guests or tenants. Each platted RV lot would provide individual hook-up of electric, water, sewer, and cable for transient owners or guests, with the dwelling unit itself entirely mobile. If viewed as a residential use, there would be no permanent dwelling unit on the lot, but possibly an accessory structure, such as a tiki but or gazebo. Regarding the transient nature of the RV Resort, there is no code restriction in the Land Development Code which limits the time of occupancy for either a hotel/motel or a residence. Staff has reviewed the application to determine suggested conditions of approval, if the special use permit is approved by City Council. These conditions are designed to substantially secure the objectives and intent of the zoning regulations. Following are the suggested conditions of approval: (1) Area: Total area of platted RV lots shall comprise no more than 14.5 acres, representing 25% of the overall Chesser's Gap PUD. (2) Intensity: Within the area of the platted RV lots, there shall be no more than 15 RV lots per acre. (3) Size: Each RV lot shall be a minimum of 1500 SF. (4) Dimensions: Each RV lot shall be a minimum of 30 feet wide by 50 feet deep. (5) Setbacks: Each RV lot shall provide the following minimum setbacks: a. Front yard: 10 feet b. Side yard: 5 feet c. Rear yard: 5 feet (6) Open space: 30% minimum (mixed use). (7) Buffer requirements: 11 a. Landscape buffer strip of 50 feet in depth between area of platted RV lots and perimeter properties bordering the RV resort, unless the bordering property is a stormwater tract. * b. Landscape buffer strip of 50 feet in depth between platted RV lots and major streets. (8) Recreation area requirement: Provide a minimum 10% of gross site area for usable recreational open space or enclosed recreational facilities (excluding RV sites, buffer strips, streets, storage or utilities). (9) Required separation between RV's and other structures: 10 foot minimum. (10) Required separation between permanent buildings: 20 foot minimum. (11) Stabilization of each RV lot: RV pad of shell, marl, paving or other material approved by the City Engineer. (12) Parking requirement for RV lots: 1.5 spaces per RV lot provided in the resort, with a minimum 1 space located on each RV lot. (13) Deed restrictions for the platted RV lots shall describe use limitations, specifically prohibiting occupancy by mobile homes, non -motorized travel trailers, and tents. (14) No removal of RV wheels. (15) No placement of RV on foundation or piers. (16) Uses permitted within RV Resort may include: RV lots, offices, recreational facilities, tiki bar, restrooms with shower facilities, laundry, dump station, retail sales, restaurant, storage garages, storage units, and other similar uses. 8. Required findings of fact (Section 54-2-3.1(a)(3): a. The approval of the application for a special use will not be detrimental to the public safety, health or welfare, or be injurious to other properties or improvements within the immediate vicinity in which the property is located based on criteria established in Article Vl; If the special use is approved, a fully engineered site plan must be submitted for review and approval by both the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. A traffic study will be required based on the mix of uses identified on the plan. Upon review of that study, additional analysis may be requested. If warranted, off-site road and pedestrian improvements shall be required. The site plan review will also include drainage, parking, landscaping, and special buffering requirements. In order to 5