Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01131997 RIVERRIVERFRONT COMMITTEE MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 13, 1997 Vice Chairman Smith extended a welcome to new faces in the public attendees and noted item #6 on the agenda which is PUBLIC COMM ENT. NEW BUSINESS: Review the results of the workshop: Vice Chairman Smith gave a brief description of the activity at the Saturday workshop with four members of the American institute of Architects. He noted how much the Riverfront Committee has already accomplished as realized when Mr. Massarelli summed it up on paper for the AIA members. He commented that this Committee has a good framework developed for the riverfront, and now it is time to get specific. After the workshop, the Committee members commented on how productive it had been. He also noted that after the meeting, the AIA members commented that they look forward to working with us, and they had a better understanding of what the Committee is looking for. He suggested that it would be wise to continue to work with the same four AIA members, as it would take a lot of time and explanation if new AIA members got involved. Mr. Massarelli agreed that the workshop was extremely productive. He explained that there were five (5) members from the Riverfront Committee present, and four (4) members from a local chapter of the American Institute of Architects. During the course of the day, as many as six (6) or eight (8) members of the public were present, some in the morning and some in the afternoon, and they offered their thoughts. He proceeded to explain how the time was spent, and noted information offered by the AIA members. He also gave Committee members copies of the SR 60 Corridor Plan that the AIA members provided, and urged Committee members to look through it. He described the "bubble" areas that were discussed, and how each area would be treated, keeping in mind what is already built in each area. He also described architecture, materials, setbacks, etc., and they were discussed He noted that if all members are in agreement with the "bubble" area concept, he has some suggestions where to draw some lines indicating the "bubble" areas. Then he suggested that in two (2) weeks, we could go through and describe those different areas, and determine the different needs for the different areas. He noted that everything east of Indian River Drive would be a completely separate area or zone. Mr. Thompson asked how each "bubble" area would be "policed". Mr. Massarelli responded that it would be covered in the Land Development Code and achieved by site plan review. New construction plans would be designed around the requirements for the "bubble" area where they are to be located. Minor or major site plan modification would be done the same way. Present structures would be "grandfathered" in, but when modifications are to be done, they would have to meet the new requirements. Mr. Thompson noted that based on that explanation, he is in favor of it. 2 . r � /01 I10*N .RIVERFRONT COMMITTEE MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 13, 1997 There was discussion on generalities versus specifics, and Mr. Thompson indicated that there must be specifics or it will unenforceable. He also noted that it must be written down to make it the law Ms. Coram inquired about higher density in commercial, and open space requirement Mr. Massarelli noted that residential would be set by the zoning code. He commented that the visual impact of each area would be slightly different, with parking at the rear of some property instead of in front, varying the open space requirement, and allowing less open space in the "downtown" area, and in residential areas maintain large open space and maintain the current nature of each area. Vice Chairman Smith at this point commented on the give and take of information with the AIA members on Saturday in reference to open space. He noted that one suggestion was to vary setbacks, front to rear and side to side. Ms. Coram mentioned the zoning for the riverfront area and it was discussed, along with maximizing what is already there. Mr. Moore questioned the east west involvement of the riverfront concept, and it was noted that the sub areas need to overlap, and Main Street and U.S. 1 would play an important part in this scenario. Mr. Wild noted the historical importance of some of the old properties around the City and the need to be flexible in the requirements in the sub areas. Mr. Tut Connelly of 149 Kildare Drive commented on the use of the term "bubble" areas. The words circles, regions and areas were considered, and Mr. Massarelli explained that he didn't want to use the word "zone" because it was not zoning that was being considered, and it could be misleading. Ms. Westfall of the Historical Society suggested consideration be given to placing parking areas near the Railroad tracks, which was a topic discussed at the workshop meeting. She noted that this concept would keep the riverfront open for people, and other uses. Ms. Ruth Sullivan spoke of being concerned about eliminating zoning. Vice Chairman Smith explained to Ms. Sullivan that the intent of the "bubble" areas was not a zoning proposal, but a new proposal that was added to the Mixed Use zoning for the entire riverfront to provide more explicit information for new building and remodeling, and to create and maintain a certain "character" for the area. The Committee members attempted to make this clear to her. She spoke of the attempt to place a bar near some residential property on U.S. 1. Mr. Wild mentioned the area that Ms. Sullivan referenced, and noted that the residential property is in COR zoning, and the property where the bar was to go is in CG. Mr. Massarelli suggested that if the public is concerned about the potential conflict between bars and residential structures, he would urge that the Conditional Use section of the Code be RIVERFRONT COMMITTEE MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 13, 1997 strengthened, and put in a separation. He noted that there is currently a 450 foot separation from Churches and Schools, and residential structure could be added, and that would be a way to separate undesirable uses. There was more discussion on zoning in the riverfront area and U.S. 1. Ms. Corum mentioned a previous discussion on establishing a residential zoning district in the riverfront area, but there was a possible problem with devaluing people's property. She noted that that was why the Riverfront Mixed Use zoning classification was proposed, and then "design criteria" could be worked out. She commented that the "bubble" areas would be the design criteria. There was discussion on character, vision, and uses. Mr. Massarelli suggested that by developing criteria for individual land uses which would create conflict, would allow for selecting where they would go and would protect residents. Mr. Moore suggested another workshop, including public input. A At this point, Mr. Massarelli displayed a map of the riverfront area, and explained the "bubble" areas and what some of the characteristics of each might be. He noted that he had driven around the entire area, noted what the present uses were, and suggested a flexible overlapping of the proposed "bubble" areas, keeping in mind that the area east of Indian River Drive is different. e"1 Ms. Virgene Scherer asked for more explanation on the zoning classification of Riverfront Mixed Use and how it would affect residential construction. Mr. Massarelli explained the zoning for this area, permitted uses and conditional uses, criteria to be met to determine location within the area, and some uses that would have to be located on U.S. 1. He noted that the architectural design and character should not be the same for the entire area because the entire area is not the same. The idea is to keep the present character that is found in each area with specific design criteria for each "bubble" area. Herman Encke of Indian River Drive, and spokesperson for the Indian River Traffic Watch group, spoke of wanting an additional sign to indicate speeding fines within the City limits, north of Fellsmere Road, on Indian River Drive. He noted that there is already one on the southern part of Indian River Drive for traffic coming off of U.S. 1 going north. He stated there is a need for another one for traffic coming off of Fellsmere Road and heading north on Indian River Drive. He supplied Committee members with a copy of the current sign he is proposing and a copy is attached to these minutes. Vice Chairman Smith requested Mr. Massarelli to provide a copy of the requested sign to the City Manager, to the appropriate staff, and to the Council members. He noted that the plan that this Committee is working on for the riverfront is long range in scope. Mr. Massarelli suggested putting this request on the agenda for the next meeting for recommendation to City Council. /41 4 eol'1 RIVERFRONT COMMITTEE MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 13, 1997 Mr. Bennett suggested proposing access from the west side of U.S. 1 to the east side of U.S. 1 in a safe manner for pedestrians. There was discussion about visual concepts and ideas for design criteria for the "bubble" areas and a workshop session on design criteria. At this point, Mr. Massarelli noted that he would not attend the next meeting and suggested that the Committee discuss parking and the City's role in parking. He agreed to raise a series of questions on the subject for the Committee to discuss. MOTION by Corum/Moore I move to extend the meeting for Mr. Tut Connelly's comments. A voice vote was taken. 7 - 0 motion carried. Mr. Tut Connelly asked if Mr. Tom Collins had resigned from this committee. Vice Chairman Smith responded that his understanding is that Mr. Collins is out of the Country and has been excused from this meeting tonight. Mr. Connelly noted that it was irritating to him that, after Mr. Collins is absent from a meeting, the next meeting is usually spent informing Mr. Collins what took place in the meetings he missed. He suggested the Committee might consider replacing him. CHAIRMAN MATTERS: Vice Chairman Smith reminded the Committee members that the next meeting is on January 27, and the two meetings after that are on the second and fourth Mondays in February, 1997. MEMBER MATTERS: None STAFF MATTERS: None The meeting was adjourned at 9:03 P.M. 5 SPEEDING FINES LIN City of Sebastian 1225 MAIN STREET o SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32958 TELEPHONE (407) 589-5330 o FAX (407) 589-5570 SEBA►.STIAN RIVERFRONT COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MEETING HELD APPROVED AT MEETING HEL THOMAS H. COLLINS, CHAIRMAN AWN M. CORAPI, SE RETARY �oe. J"74�v 4�— E. ANN BRACR, RECORDING SECRETARY RCMAS.WP City of Sebastian 1225 MAIN STREET 0 SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32958 TELEPHONE (407) 589-5330 0 FAX (407) 589-5570 AGENDA RIVERFRONT COMMITTEE MONDAY, JANUARY 13, 1997 7:00 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER. 2. ROLL CALL. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: /401) Meeting of January 6, 1997 Workshop meeting of January 11, 1997 4. ANNOUNCEMENTS. 5. NEW BUSINESS: 1. Review the results of the workshop 2. Parking in the Riverfront 6. PUBLIC COMMENT. 7. CTFA RMAN MATTERS. 8. MEMBER MATTERS. 9. STAFF MATTERS. 10. ADJOURNMENT. NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING: • Monday January 27, 1997 @ 7:00 • 1.1 i► 't. City of Sebastian 1225 MAIN STREET a SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32958 TELEPHONE (407) 589-5330 0 FAX (407) 589-5570 PUBLIC MEETING The Riverfront Committee of the City of Sebastian, Indian River County, Florida, will hold their regular meeting on Monday, January 13, 1997 at 7:00, in the City Council Chambers. 1401� -d �' 4- 64q��- - Dawn M. Corapi, Secretary Riverfront Committee 2E1W NOTE: IF ANY PERSONS DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE ON THE ABOVE MATTERS, HE/SHE MAY NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS, AND FOR SUCH PURPOSES, HE/SHE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY IN EVIDENCE ON WHICH THE APPEAL IS BASED. NOTE: IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA), ANYONE WHO NEEDS A SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION FOR THIS MEETING SHOULD CONTACT THE CITY'S ADA COORDINATOR AT 589-5330 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING.