HomeMy WebLinkAbout20020821 - Agenda Item - Rezoning Request DIY OF
f,,,e
HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND
City of Sebastian, Florida
Subject: First reading and public hearing Agenda No. 2Z, P-9
for Ordinance 0-02-14; conceptual
development plan and rezoning request Department Origin: Growth Management
from Agricultural(A-1)to Planned Unit Tracy E. Hass/
Development Residential(PUD-R) for a
proposed 72-acre planned unit development Date Submitted: August 21, 2002
situated at the intersection of CR 510 and CR
512,and known as Sebastian River Landings. For Agenda of: August 28, 2002
•
rove I or S- I
/ (,
Exhibits: 0 ! -14,Conceptual Plan, Staff Report,P&Z recommendation.
EXPENDITURE AMOUNT BUDGETED: APPROPRIATION
REQUIRED:None None REQUIRED: None
SUMMARY
The proposed Sebastian River Landings PUD is currently unincorporated, undeveloped citrus groves immediately
west of the St. Sebastian River along CR. 512. Forte Macaulay Development Inc. has submitted an annexation
request for the property, along with the requisite and accompanying conceptual development plan. Additionally, the
property is currently zoned Agricultural (A-1) with a Low Density Residential (L-1), 3 units per acre, land use
designation and the applicant wishes to re-zone the property to Planned Unit Development Residential(PUD-R),with
a comprehensive land use designation of Low Density Residential (LDR). The conceptual plan outlines a total of 9
blocks containing 209 total single-family lots on 72.45 acres, or a density of approximately 2.9 units/acre.
In addition to the single-family homes, a small commercial node of approximately 5 acres in size, including a 1-acre
stormwater management tract, is proposed along the CR 510 frontage. The commercial tract is consistent with
existing commercial development immediately north within unincorporated Indian River County along the CR 510
and CR 512 intersection. In accordance with section 54-2-5.11 of the LDC, the PUD(R) development may contain
125 square feet of commercial land area per dwelling unit (125 x 209 = 26,125 SF, or .60 acres). Seeing as the
proposed commercial land area exceeds the maximum permissible within a PUD,the applicant has agreed to remove
the commercial node from the PUD. Accordingly a separate land use change is being requested for designating the
commercial area as Commercial Limited (CL), thus allowing neighborhood commercial uses as intended by the
developer.
The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the proposed conceptual development plan and accompanying
rezoning request at their regular meeting on July 18, 2002. Additionally, the Planning and Zoning Commission held
the required public hearing and forwarded a recommendation for approval of said request.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Hold a first reading and public hearing of Ordinance No. 0-02-14.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 18, 2002
"I'll make a motion that we approve the site plan for mixed-use development for Capt.
Butchers including the Jackson Street as first phase with all sidewalks included as
presented, with the conditions 1 thru 4 on the staff report."
Roll call: Mr. Mahoney - no Mr. Smith - yes
Ms. Monier -no Mr. Rauth - no
Ms. Reichert - yes Mr. Svatik - no
Churn. Barrett - yes
The vote was 3—4. Motion denied.
Chmn. Barrett called for a break at 9:49 p.m. The meeting resumed at 9:57 p.m. All
members were present.
D. Public Hearing—Recommendation to City Council—Comprehensive Plan
Amendment—Land Use Map Change—Sebastian River Landings PUD—72.5
Acres—L-1 to LDR—SE corner of CR510/CR512
E. Public Hearing— Recommendation to City Council—PUB Conceptual
Development Plan/Rezoning -Sebastian River Landings—A-1 to PUD-R—
Planned Unit Development—Residential
Chmn. Barrett opened the public hearing at 9:58 p.m.
The applicants, Timothy Jelus & Hugh Evans, 1688 W. Hibiscus Blvd., Melbourne, and Randy
Mosby & Bruce Moya, project engineers, were present and sworn in.
Mr. Jelus explained that the project's property was an abandoned citrus grove, was for sale, and
was going to be developed by his company. He felt the City of Sebastian would like to have
control over the design standards and construction, which was why they were requesting to be
annexed into the City.
Mr. Smith questioned if it was legal to review the land use and zoning applications before the
subject property was officially annexed in. Mr. Stringer stated yes.
Mr. Jelus gave a review of the proposed subdivision including density, street layout, needed
permits, community house, pool, and a CR 510 commercial node. Mr. Hass stated because of the
size of the proposed commercial node and what was allowed in a PUD development, staff
recommended separating the commercial node from the PUD and giving it a separate land use
and zoning. He also explained the developers were applying to St. Johns for on-site stormwater
treatment system, which the water would then be released in to the St. Sebastian river.
Mr. Blessing had concerns regarding the entrance off of CR512 being so close to a busy
intersection. Mr. Jelus responded that they would be working intensely with the County on
definitive design plans especially since the County had plans to widen CR512 in that area. He
reiterated the Commission was just reviewing conceptual plans.
7
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 18, 2002
Mr. Mahoney had questions regarding Urban Service Areas. Mr. Svatik asked the applicant why
he wanted to annex into Sebastian. Mr. Jelus responded that they felt Sebastian would benefit
from the proposed development more than Indian River County. Pete Connelly, 457 Lighthouse
Avenue, land acquisition person for Forte Macaulay Developers (applicant), stated staff had
indicated to him the City wished to pursue annexation of adjoining properties.
Mrs. Reichert had questions regarding stormwater run-off into the river, concerns about a
possible cattle dipping facility that used arsenic, rumored to have been on the subject property,
and traffic congestion with three schools in the area. She also questioned if the property was
considered contiguous with the property to the east {within the city limits} because of the ROW
along the river. Mr. Stringer stated yes.
Betsy Field-Connelly, 149 Kildare Drive, would like to see Sebastian stay small town, and
questioned if adequate services were given to existing residents now.
Irene Thompson, 1 531 Spinnaker Lane, stated she was against the annexation because it would
lead to additional larger annexations.
Ann Putman, Sebastian resident, remembered a land study done on the subjectproperty which
found e-coli in the river from the defunct dairy farm and an empty arsenic tank from dipping the
cows. She had questions on construction setbacks from the river.
Sal Neglia, 461 Georgia Boulevard, asked about recycling irrigation water, if a gated community,
and Police and Fire services.
Heather Bryant, Sharkrnart, fully supported the annexation.
Walt Stieglitz, 9871 Riverview Dr. Micco, Marine Resources Council & Pelican Island
Preservation Society & Friends of St. Sebastian River representative, spoke on protecting water
conditions of the river and Indian River Lagoon, and stormwater run-off ramifications of the
proposed project.
Shirley Kilkelly, 950 Franciscan Avenue, also had concerns about a possible arsenic
contamination, and asked that a condition of approval be added to require a Florida certified test
for chemicals.
Mr. Pete Connelly stated that an environmental audit had been done on the property and that the
closest cattle dip-pit was two miles away. Bruce Moya, project engineer, responded to
stormwater concerns.
Chinn. Barrett closed the public hearing at 10:49 p.m.
Mr. Stringer reviewed the process for land use change and rezoning and reiterated that the
Commission was not making a decision or recommendation on the annexation request.
MOTION by Svatik/Rauth
8
•
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 18, 2002
"I make a motion to approve the land use change from L-1(county)to LDR as stated in
the amendment application in accordance with items 1 and 2 of the staff report"
Roll call: Mr. Svatik -yes Mr. Mahoney - yes
Chmn. Barrett -yes Mr. Rauth -yes
Mr. Smith -yes Ms. Reichert - no
Ms. Monier - yes
The vote was 6— 1. Motion carried.
MOTION by Monier/Smith
"I'll make the motion that we rezone the Sebastian River Landings PUD from A-1,
agricultural, to a PUD-R."
Roll call: Mr. Mahoney -yes Mr. Smith - yes
Ms. Monier - yes Mr. Svatik - yes
Ms. Reichert - no Mr. Rauth - yes
Chmn. Barrett -yes
The vote was 6— 1. Motion carried.
CHAIRMAN MATTERS:
Chmn. Barrett asked if a workshop had been scheduled for telecommunication towers.
MEMBERS MATTERS:
Mr. Rauth explained why he thought Sebastian Landings wanted to annex into the City.
Ms. Monier stated she would not be attending the August 1st and 15th meetings. She would be out-
of-state.
Mr. Svatik asked about legal liabilities regarding arsenic fields.
DIRECTOR MATTERS: None
ATTORNEY MA 1"l'ERS:
Mr. Stringer stated that from discussion with City Council the earliest workshop could be
scheduled in September.
Chmn. Barrett adjourned the meeting at 11:10 P.M. (7/25/02 DB)
9
QIY OF
SEBAS" '
WI
HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND
Growth Management Department
Conceptual Development Plan
Planned Unit Development
Approval Application Staff Report
1. Project Name: Sebastian River Landings PUD
2. Requested Action: Conceptual Development Plan Approval.
3. Project Location
a. Address: Corner of CR 510 & CR 512
b. Legal: See development plan
c. Indian River County Parcel Number: 23-31-38-00000-5000-00005.0
23-31-38-00000-5000-00005.1
23-31-38-00000-5000-00005.2
4. Project Owner: Mr. Jim Jelus
1688 W. Hibiscus Blvd.
Melbourne, Florida 322901
(321) 953-3300 fax: 321- 984-2890
5. Project Agent: Randy L. Mosby, P.E.
2455 14th Avenue
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
772-569-0035 fax: 772-778-3617
6. Project Engineer: Same as Agent
7. Project Surveyor: William Mott Land Surveying, Inc.
1275 S. Patrick Drive, Suite H
Satellite Beach, Florida 32937
321-773-4323 fax: 321-777-4795
8. Project Description
a. Narrative of proposed action: The proposed Sebastian River Landings PUD is
currently unincorporated, undeveloped citrus groves immediately west of the St.
Sebastian River along CR. 512. Forte Macaulay Development Inc. has submitted
an annexation request for the property, along with the requisite and accompanying
conceptual development plan. Additionally, the property is currently zoned
1
Agricultural (A-1) with a Low Density Residential (L-1), 3 units per acre, land use
designation and the applicant wishes to re-zone the property to Planned Unit
Development Residential (PUD-R), with a comprehensive land use designation of
Low Density Residential (LDR). The conceptual plan outlines a total of 9 blocks
containing 209 total single-family lots on 72.45 acres, or a density of approximately
2.9 units/acre.
In addition to the single-family homes, a small commercial node of approximately 5
acres in size, including a 1-acre stormwater management tract, is proposed along
the CR 510 frontage. The commercial tract is consistent with existing commercial
development immediately north within unincorporated Indian River County along
the CR 510 and CR 512 intersection. In accordance with section 54-2-5.11 of the
LDC, the PUD(R) development may contain 125 square feet of commercial land
area per dwelling unit (125 x 209 = 26,125 SF, or .60 acres). Seeing as the
proposed commercial land area exceeds the maximum permissible within a PUD,
the applicant has agreed to remove the commercial node from the PUD.
Accordingly a separate land use change is being requested for designating the
commercial area as Commercial Limited (CL), thus allowing neighborhood
commercial uses as intended by the developer.
b. Current Zoning: A-1 (County Agricultural)
c. Adjacent Properties
Zoning Current Land Use Future Land Use
North: CL/A-I Vacant C/I (County)
East: RS-10 Single Family/Vacant LD
South: A-1 Vacant L-1 (County)
West: CL Vacant C/I (County)
d. Site Characterigtics
(1) Total Acreage: 72.45 acres
(2) Current Land Use(s): Citrus Goves
(3) Soil: Electra, Riviera, Wabasso
(4) Vegetation: Citrus Trees
(5) Flood Hazard: Zone A, AE, X
(6) Water Service: Indian River County Utilities
(7) Sanitary Sewer Service: Indian River County Utilities
(8) Parks: North County Park— 1/4 mile
(9) Police/Fire: Sebastian Police 4 miles
County Fire — 2 miles
2
9. Conceptual Development Plan criteria
a. Evidence of unified control of the proposed planned development and the
associated agreements required. yes
b. Ownership Requirements. provided
c. Compliance with comprehensive plan.
(1) Future Land Use: Consistent
(2) Traffic Circulation: Consistent
(3) Housing: Consistent
(4) Public Facilities: Consistent
(5) Coastal Management: Consistent
(6) Conservation: Consistent
(7) Recreation and Open Space: Consistent
d. Compliance with applicable ordinances. Consistent
e_-- Land use compatibility. The adjacent properties to the south and east are
designated for low density residential, while the properties immediately north and
west are designated for commercial use. The proposed PUD has incorporated a
commercial node along CR 510, with low density residential for the remainder of
the property, so as to be consistent and compatible with the surrounding land use
designations.
There will be a negligible impact caused by the proposed land use change due to
the similarity of the existing uses in the area.
f. Adequate public facilities. Provided — public utilities (water, wastewater) will be
incorporated in the development of the proposed PUD and on-site stormwater
tracts are also incorporated in the proposal.
g. Natural environment. The proposed PUD will be required to contain 2 acres of
park space or open recreation areas to satisfy the minimum standards as
established by the comprehensive plan. The preliminary development plan will be
required to demonstrate proper compliance with this regulation.
h. Economic effects. provided — The property is currently not within the corporate
limits of the City of Sebastian. Annexation will provide an additional 72 +1- acres of
land area and a maximum of 209 residential units, which in turn creates an
expanded tax base for the City of Sebastian.
3
•
Orderly Development: The proposed land use change is consistent with the
comprehensive plan and the proposed land use change provides for orderly
development given the location of the site adjacent to residential/commercial
property and availability of sufficient public facilities and access.
j. Public interest. The City of Sebastian Comprehensive Plan outlines the necessity
to incorporate and/or annex enclave parcels within incorporated cities. Although
the property in question is not an enclave, it is adjacent to the urban service area,
and would most likely be better served by municipal services. The current use of
the property is for agricultural purposes. The City does not permit agricultural use
and the proposed change to a single-family and commercial development is
consistent with the future goals and objectives of the City of Sebastian. Therefore,
staff finds that the proposed annexation/land use change is not in conflict with
public interest.
k. Other matters. The requested land use change and accompanying rezoning will
provide consistency with the future land use map of the comprehensive plan.
Annexation of the parcels will demonstrate compliance with goals and objectives
as outlined in the comprehensive plan for annexation of properties lying
immediately adjacent to the urban service area.
The proposed land use change will create a slightly greater impact on water, _
wastewater, drainage and solid waste facilities
10. Contents of Conceptual Development Plan:
a. Vicinity map: provided
b. Property boundaries: provided
c. existing conditions: provided
d. Development plan. provided
(1) land use: provided (L-1, County)
(2) Circulation: provided - the conceptual roadway design plan has been
incorporated within the plan. The plan incorporates two "primary" access
points; one of which will be a direct access to CR 512 to the north, the
other a direct access to CR-510 to the west.
(3) Conceptual drainage plan: provided
(4) Densities: provided
(5) Nonresidential square footage: approximately 26,000 SF
4
•
e. Written material:
(1) Planning objectives: provided — The intent of the project owner is to
create a Planned Unit Development containing single-family and
commercial development. The designation of a property as a PUD is
intended to promote creation of a self-sustaining development containing
both residential and neighborhood commercial uses. The proposed PUD is
aiming to accomplish that objective.
The proposed Sebastian River Landings PUD demonstrates compliance
with proper planning practices for incorporating a housing mix needed
within the City. Additionally, the proposed is consistent with future planning
objectives for the City concerning annexation of parcels of land immediately
adjacent to the urban service area.
(2) Development schedule: not provided - a development schedule shall
be incorporated within the preliminary development plan.
(3) Environmental impact statement: The existing site has historically been
used as a grove. There is a 4 +/- acre Sebastian River Backwater area,
and two ditches traverse the center of the property. No wetland bodies
have been identified on the property, and several lakes are proposed for
utilization as stormwater retention. These lakes will be interconnected and
protect against direct discharge of surface runoff by utilizing natural
drainage concepts. These stormwater managerial practices will have a
beneficial impact on the --water resources in the area, including the
opportunity for recharge.
Landscape buffers will be established to provide both noise and sight
buffers. Whenever possible, existing trees within the project will be
maintained.
(4) Public facilities impact statement: The Sebastian River Landings PUD
will connect to both public water and sanitary sewer facilities with service
provided by Indian River County.
(a) Quantity of wastewater generated; Wastewater generated will
be at 250 G.P.D. per unit (209) 52,250 G.P.D.
1. Description of proposed recreational facilities; Recreation
areas will be required as an essential element of the preliminary
development plan.
(c) Quantity of potable water required; Potable water will be 250
G.P.D. per unit (209) 52,250 G.P.D.
(d) Estimated number of school age children expected within the
development;Maximum 2 children per household = 418 children
—this figure is based on historical averages.
5
•
(e) Estimated property tax and/or sales tax revenue generated by
the project by phase; and provided
$2,500 per unit x 209 units = $522,500.00
(f) Any other positive or negative public facility impact. In
addition, the statement shall also include all public facilities
impact information that may be submitted as part of the
Development of Regional Impact (DRI) review process, as
applicable. Sebastian River Landings will connect to both
public water and sanitary sewer facilities with service provided by
Indian River County.
11. Open space and landscaped areas: The proposed PUD will be required to contain 2
acres of park space or open recreation areas to satisfy the minimum standards as
established by the comprehensive plan. The preliminary development plan shall
demonstrate proper compliance with this regulation.
12. City Engineer's review: The City Engineering Department has not raised any objections
to the conceptual development plan. The Engineering Department will perform a more
detailed analysis and review during the construction phase.
13. Other Matters: The requested land use change and accompanying rezoning will
__ provide consistency with the future land use map of the comprehensive plan.
Annexation of the parcels will demonstrate compliance with goals and objectives as
outlined in the comprehensive plan for annexation of properties immediately adjacent to
the urban service area.
The proposed conceptual development plan will create a slightly greater impact on
water, wastewater, drainage and solid waste facilities.
14. Planning and Zoning Commission Review: The Planning and Zoning Commission --
reviewed the proposed land use amendment at their regular meeting on July 18, 2002.
Additionally, the Planning and Zoning Commission held the required public hearing and
forwarded a recommendation for approval of said request
15. Analysis: The proposed Sebastian River Landings PUD is currently unincorporated,
undeveloped citrus groves immediately west of the St. Sebastian River along CR. 512.
Forte Macaulay Development Inc. has submitted an annexation request for the property,
along with the requisite and accompanying conceptual development plan. Additionally, the
property is currently zoned Agricultural (A-1) with a Low Density Residential (L-1), 3 units
per acre, land use designation and the applicant wishes to re-zone the property to Planned
Unit Development Residential (PUD-R), with a comprehensive land use designation of
Low Density Residential (LDR). The conceptual plan outlines a total of 9 blocks containing
209 total single-family lots on 72.45 acres, or a density of approximately 2.9 units/acre.
In addition to the single-family homes, a small commercial node of approximately 5 acres
in size, including a 1-acre stormwater management tract, is proposed along the CR 510
frontage. The commercial tract is consistent with existing commercial development
immediately north within unincorporated Indian River County along the CR 510 and CR
512 intersection. In accordance with section 54-2-5.11 of the LDC, the PUD(R)
6
development may contain 125 square feet of commercial land area per dwelling unit (125
x 209 = 26,125 SF, or .60 acres). Seeing as the proposed commercial land area exceeds
the maximum permissible within a PUD, the applicant has agreed to remove the
commercial node from the PUD. Accordingly a separate land use change is being
requested for designating the commercial area as Commercial Limited (CL), thus allowing
neighborhood commercial uses as intended by the developer.
16. Conclusion: The proposed PUD is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Land
Development Code and Code of Ordinances.
17. Recommendation: Staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend
approval of the Sebastian River Landings Conceptual Development Plan with the following
conditions:
1. The proposed PUD will be required to contain 2 acres of park space or open
recreation areas to satisfy the minimum standards as established by the
comprehensive plan. The preliminary development plan shall demonstrate proper
compliance with this regulation.
2. The land use change shall be conditioned upon receipt of annexation approval by
the City Council.
2-k /0-a_
PREPIED BY DAT
7