Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03212002 PZ CITY OF SEBASTIAN · (~OAF~D)( MINUTES O.F REGU~ MEETING MARCH 21, 2002 ~~~~2u~ ~o ~, . Chairman Barrett called the meeting te order at 7:00 PM. The Pledge of Allegiance was said. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Ms. Vesia Mr. Mahoney Ms. Carbano Ms. Reichert(a) VC Smith and Mr. Svatik, Jr. EXCUSED ABSENCE: ALSO PRESENT: ANNOUNCEMENTS: Chmn. Barrett Mr. Rauth Ms. Monier(a) Tracy Hass, Director, Growth Management Rich Stringer, City Attorney Ann Brack, Recording Secretary Chmn. Barrett announced that Ms. Reichert(a) and Ms. Monier(a) will be voting in place of VC Smith and Mr. Svatik, Jr. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: (3/07/02) MOTION by CarbanoNesia I make a motion we approve the minutes of the meeting of March 7"', 2002. A voice vote was taken. 7 - 0, motion carried. OLD. BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: A. Accessory Structure Review - Section 54-2-7.5 - Crystal Mist Avenue - 28' X 30' detached garage - GRB Construction Inc. Tim Gaff of GRB Construction, Inc. was present and gave a brief presentation. Tracy Hass gave staff presentation noting that a unity of title and an application for a driveway have been submitted. Staff recommended approval. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 21, 2002 MOTION by Carbano/Reichert(a) I make a motion we approve the accessory structure at 621 Crystal Mist Avenue as is. Roll call: Ms. Vesia - yes Ms. Reichert(a) - yes Chmn. Barrett - yes Mr. Mahoney - yes Ms. Carbano - yes Ms. Monier(a) - yes Mr. Rauth - yes The vote was 7 - 0. Motion carried. B. Quasi-Judicial Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - Davis Street Commercial Center - US Highway #1 - Nell Hockenhull Randy Mosby of Mosby and Associates, Inc. was present, and along with Tracy Hass, was sworn in at 7:09 PM. Mr. Mosby gave presentation noting that a variance will be needed for the rear setback, and they plan to apply for it because of the residential zoning or use to the rear. He noted that the setback requirement could be met by rotating the proposed building about three (3) degrees, but the applicant does not wish to do that. He explained the planned water source, and noted that the applicant has agreed to construct the parapet wall on the roofline. At the end of his presentation, he provided a photograph depicting the proposed building.. Chmn. Barrett called attention to the appearance of corrugated metal on the drawing of the rear wall, and Tracy noted that the drawing will be modified and the applicant has agreed to stucco this wall. This issue is included in the conditions in the staff report. Tracy gave staff presentation covering the setback and buffering issues next to residential uses. He responded to Mr. Mahoney's issue of internal circulation, and called attention to the four conditions in the staff report, plus the fifth condition that a variance on the rear setback be applied for to City Council. There was no ex parte communication reported by Commission members. Chmn. Barrett opened and closed the public hearing at 7:24 PM, as there were no proponents or opponents. Atty. Stringer suggested proposing an alternative to the variance with the option to turn the building to meet the setback. Commissioners agreed and amended condition #5 to read: The applicant shall apply to City Council for a variance to the setback at the rear of the building or, upon denial, the building will be rotated a minimal amount required to meet code as per drawing on file. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 21, 2002 Atty. Stringer then commented that this area is redeveloping, and uses that are residential at present but may not. be residential in the future. Ms. Monier(a) commented that this building does not seem to fit in with the vision and master plan that the City has for an "Old Florida Fishing Village" style and theme. She would like to see some adjustments made to follow that theme, even though she is aware that the present code does not require it. The rear access and entry doors were discussed; Randy indicated that this access is a service entry only, with Iow-use, and the doors would only be open when there is a delivery. He suggested signage to restrict the use of this access. Chmn. Barrett suggested adding a sixth condition to include signage indicating a "service road only" and restricted as no public access, Atty. Stringer noted that a variance would still need to be obtained, Section 10.3-10.6 of the Code was consulted and read aloud. Randy and the applicant discussed this issue and Randy felt that he could rework the drainage plan to accommodate the four (4)feet needed at the setback. Mr. Mahoney agreed that the proposed building seems very sterile and unappealing., Ms. Reichert(a) suggested that the owner consider adding cupolas or some other type of decorative relief to the top of the building. Ms. Vesia suggested relocating the handiCap parking spaces closer to the center of the building. Randy-agreed to ask the owner to look at this issue. Tracy noted that when two (2) handicap spaces are separated, another loading/unloading space must be added and they could lose another parking space in this process. Mr. Rauth agreed with the above aesthetic comments. Ms. Carbano commented that she would like to make sure that enough trees will be in the completed plan to make the site look good. Chron. Barrett suggested placing a one-way, do not enter sign at the north end of the building where the service access from the back comes out. Randy agreed. Tracy indicated that staff recommends approval with the amended conditions as outlined, and clarified condition # 6 as follows: Apply for a variance for the granting of approval for the doors to open on to the access way with less than the four (4) ft. minimum code requirement and signed "no public access" or, modifY the storm water tract so that there is a four (4) ff. clearance. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 21, 2002 MOTION by Reichert(a)/Mahoney I make a motion that we approve .the Davis Street Commercial Center site plan with the six (6) conditions staff recommends. Roll call: Ms. Vesia - yes Chmn. Barrett - yes Mr. Mahoney - yes Mr. Rauth - yes Ms. Carbano - yes Ms. Monier(a) - no Ms. Reichert(a) - yes The vote was 6 - 1, Motion carried. CHAIRMAN MATTERS: Chmn. Barrett expressed disappointment that Mr. Hass and Atty, Stringer were not able to attend the workshop on telecommunication towers because they missed Mr. Svatik's excellent visual and oral presentation. He noted that Emil spent thirty-five (35) personal hours on that presentation. The Chairman expressed the' desire that when the code on this issue is developed, Mr. Svatik should give that presentation to City Council. Several other Commission members commented on this presentation. Chmn. Barrett also inquired if Atty. Stringer received the Commission's list of questions about City jurisdiction on right-of-ways in the City in relation to telecommunication towers, and Atty. Stringer responded that he had not, but he would research these questions. There was a brief discussion about the legal ad for the Davis property, and the changes 'in ownership and site plan. MEMBERS MATTERS: Ms. Monier commented that an architectural review board would be redundant on top of what the P & Z Commission does on a site plan. She asked how this Commission can get some authority on the aesthetic issue and felt the site plan presented tonight went against everything that is being envisioned for the riverfront district; Arty. Stringer responded, noting that examples and samples and exact descriptions are needed, instead of vague references open to interpretation. There was discussion on this issue. It was suggested that Commi.ssion members write down some attributes that they would like to see in the river'front and what their vision of "An Old Florida Fishing Village" would be. There was also some discussion on the issue of the P & Z Commission also being the architectural review source, but making the architectural review an important.part of any site plan. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 21, 2002 Mr. Mahoney questioned' the setbacks on the Ameritrend project along Sebastian Boulevard. Ms. Reichert questioned.the extension of Jackson Street, and encouraged that this be done since the traffic on Indian River Drive has gotten so heavy. Tracy indicated that the property owner has agreed to donate the right-of-way when they are finished with their dredging project and development begins. This will be done by a developer's agreement for construction of the right-of-way, then they will donate it to the City, and may include a reciprocal agreement for parking. DIRECTOR MATTERS: Tracy assured the Commission members that staff is not pleased with the Davis Street Commercial Center which was reviewed tonight. He commented that this was the applicant's fourth design, and staff was unable to generate additional cooperation with the river'front theme. There was discussion on how an Architectural Review Committee would play into a site plan review such as this. Atty. Stringer commented that with the recent growth in the City, the population numbers are starting to trip all kinds of numbers in the statistical and market reviews, and more commercial developers are now willing to build here. There was a query about the landscaping on the Chestnut Car Wash site, andTracy responded that the,landscape requirement has not yet been met. ATTORNEY MAI~'I'ERS: Atty. Stringer apologized for not attending the workshop on telecommunication towers. In response to a question from Mr. Mahoney, he then spoke briefly on plans for a community activity at Riverview Park in Fall of 2002, which generated' questions and discussion about parking in the riverfront area. He also spoke of possible regulations that may be developed pertaining to the public boat ramps in Sebastian, especially with the population growth in .the City and nearby surrounding areas. Chron. Barrett adjourned the meeting at 8:30 PM. (3/27/02 AB)