Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07111985 PZPUBLIC HEARING AND REGULAR MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 11, 1985 MINUTES MEETING CALLED TO ORDER BY CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH AT 7:00 P.M. PRESENT: MR. JEWELL THOMPSON MR. ROBERT FULLERTON MR. WILLIAM MAHONEY MR. STANLEY KRULIKOWSKI MR. JAMES WADSWORTH MRS. EDRA YOUNG CHAIRMAN HAROLD EISENBARTH ALSO PRESENT: MR. RANDALL MOSBY, CONSULTING:E~GINEER; MR. GREGORY GORE, ACTING CITY ATTORNEY; AND MR. HECTOR FRANCO, BUILDING OFFICIAL. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AN APPLICATION TO CHANGE THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN/MAP FROM COR TO CL, LOTS 19, 20, 21, BLOCK 185, UNIT 8, SEBASTIAN HIGHLANDS, AT 7:10 P.M. MR. JOHN HAUCH, REAL ESTATE REPRESENTATIVE, FOR THE CUMBERLAND FARMS COMPANY ADDRESSED THE COMMISSIONREGARDING THE REQUEST. THERE BEING NO OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:14 P.M. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AN APPLICATION TO CHANGE THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN/MAP FROM CL TO IND, BEING A PART OF LOTS 61, 62, 64, AND A PORTION OF WAUREGAN AVENUE, AT 7:15 P.M. MR. NOEL WHEATON, MR. HOOSHMAND, AND DR. HOOSHMAND, ADDRESSED THE COMMISSION ON THEIR REQUEST. THERE BEING NO OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:20 P.M. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AN APPLICATION TO RE-ZONE FROM C-1 TO M-l, BEING A PART OF LOTS 61, 62, 64, AND A PORTION OF WAUREGAN AVENUE AT 7:20 P.M. AGAIN, MR. NOEL WHEATON, MR. HOOSHMAND, AND DR. HOOSHMAND, ADDRESSED THE COMMISSION ON THEIR REQUEST. THERE BEING NO OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:25 P.M. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH CALLED THE REC~ULAR COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER AT 7:25 P.M. ALL MEMBERS WERE PRESENT. ~ MINUTES: PAGE 2 PUBLIC HEARING AND REGULAR MEETING JULY 11, 1985 MOTION BY MR. WADSWORTH, SECONDED BY MR. THOMPSON, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE ~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~A~A WHOLE. THE COMMISSION CAN REQUIRE WHATEVER ACCESS THEY WANT, AND REALLY DOES$~HINK THAT THE COMMISSIONS' EONCERN WILL BE A MAJOR PROBLEM, BECAUSE THE COMMISSION CAN DEAL WITH IT AT THE SITE PLAN LEVEL. MR. COLLINS ALSO STATED THAT HIS CLIENT OWNS ALL THE PROPERTY FROM THE PROJEC~ THE COMMISSION IS CONSIDERING AT THIS MEETING, NORTH TO THE SAINT SEBASTIAN CHURCH. MR. COLLINS STATED THAT HE HAD HOPED THAT THE COMMISSION WOULD APPROVE THIS REQUEST AT THIS MEETING WITH SOME RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, EVEN IF THAT RECOM- MENDATION IS THAT IT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO AARECOMMENDATION FROM THE ENGINEER AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE ROAD IS REQUIRED. MOTION BY MR. THOMPSON, RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THE ABANDONMENT OF ALL THE STREETS WITHIN THE WAUREGAN SUBDIVISION BE APPROVED, SUBJECT TO THE OPINION FROM THE PLANNINGAND ZONING COMMISSIONS' CONSULTING ENGINEER, APPROVING THIS ABANDONMENT WITHOUT A STREET ADJACENT TO THE FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILROAD. MR. THOMPSON WITHDREW HIS MOTION. MINUTES: PAGE 3 PUBLIC HEARING AND REGULAR MEETING JULY 11, 19'85 MOTION BY MR. WADSWORTH, SECONDED BY MR. THOMPSON, TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT WE ABANDON THE PAPER STREETS AS REQUESTED BY COLLINS, BROWN, CALDWELL, AND CARTER PER THEIR LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DATED JUNE 3, 1985, SUBJECT TO THE REVIEW OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONS'CONSUL- TING ENGINEER. MR. WADSWORTH AMENDED HIS MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT THE REVIEW OF THE CONSULTING ENGINEER WOULD COMMENT ON WHETHER OR NOT A ROAD ALONG THE FLORIDA EAST COAST RIGHT- OF-WAY IS NECESSARY. MR. THOMPSON AMENDED HIS SECOND. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT NOW THEY ARE WANTING TO CHANGE THE ZONING, INCLUDING THOSE STREETS. THAT IS WHY WE H~JD TO STEP AHA'AD, IT IS INCLUDED IN THEIR LAND NOW. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT THE RESEARCH THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IS WHAT WAS THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF REQUIRING THE CHURCH PROPERTY TO GIVE UP THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IN THE BACK. THE WAY THiS PARTICULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY SETS, WHICH IS OWNED BY. ONE'OWNER, THERE IS PLENTY OF ACCESS ALONG U.S. #1. DURING THE SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS, IF THERE IS A CONCERN ABOUT EMERGING VEHICLES, MANEUVERABILITY, AND PARKING, THAT WOULD COME UP IN THE SITE PLAN OF THE LARGER TRACT. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH STATED THAT WOULD HOLD TRUE IF IT STAYED AS ONE PIECE, BUT IF IT CONTINUES TO BE SOLD OFF IN LITTLE PIECES, THAT ARGUMENT FALLS FLAT. GREGORY GORE, ACTING CiTY ATTORNEY, STATED THAT THE CHURCH WAS NOT REQUIRED TO GIVE UP THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, THE CHURCH ASKED THAT IT BE VACATED. MR. MOSBY ASKED MR. GORE IF THE ROADS THAT ARE THERE PRESENTLY,ARE PRIVATE ROADS. MR. GORE STATED AT FIRST THAT THE ROADS ARE PRIVATE, BUT WAS NOT TOTALLY SURE AND ASKED MR~ COLLINS IF THE ROADS HAD BEEN DEDICATED FOR PUBLIC USE. MR. COLLINS STATED THAT, THAT IS THE CONTROVERSY ON THE OLD SKETCHES THAT WERE RECORDED BEFORE THE 1900'S. THE POSITION THAT MOST OF THE ATTORNEYS IN THE COMMUNITY TAKE IS THAT THERE IS SOME PUBLIC INTEREST, AND THAT IS WHY THE REQUEST FOR THE ABANDONMENT HAS BEEN MADE. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT THE POINT HE WAS TRYING TO MAKE WAS THE REQUEST FOR THE RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT PARALLELS THE RAILROAD TRACKS WAS REQUESTED BY THE CITY, AND THAT WAS WHAT NEEDED TO BE RESEARCHED, TO.FIND OUT IF THE ROAD'NEEDED TO BE EXTENDED. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: MR. THOMPSON MR. FULLERTON MR. MAHONEY MR. KRULIKOWSKI MR. WADSWORTH MRS. YOUNG CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH NAYS: NONE MOTION CARRIED. MINUTES: PAGE 4 PUBLIC HEARING.A~D REGULAR MEETING JULY il, 1985 MOTION BY MR. THOMPSON, SECONDED BY MR. WADSWORTH, TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO CHANGE THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN/MAP FROM CL TO iND, PORTION OF LOT 61, LOTS~62,.64 AND A PORTION OF WAUREGAN AVENUE. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: MR. THOMPSON MR. FULLERTON MR. MAHONEY MR. WADSWORTH MRS. YOUNG NAYS: MR. KRULIKOWSKI CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH MOTION CARRIED. MOTION BY MR. THOMPSON, SECONDED BY MR. MAHONEY, TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL, THE APPROVAL OF RE-ZONING FROM C-1 TO M-l, PORTION OF LOT 61, LOTS 62, 64 AND A PORTION OF WAUREGAN AVENUE. ROLL CALL VOTE:. AYES: MR. THOMPSON MR. FULLERTON MR. MAHONEY MR. WADSWORTH MRS. YOUNG. NAYS: MR. KRULIKOWSKI CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH MOTION CARRIED. MODEL HOME PERMIT - SILVA: MOTION BY MR. WADSWORTH, SECONDED BY MR. MAHONEY, TO TABLE THIS REQUEST UNTIL THE JULY 25, 1985, MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION BY MR. WADSWORTH, TO REQUEST MR. SILVA TO ATTEND THE JULY 25, 1985, MEETING TO DISCUSS HIS APPLICATION. MR. GORE STATED THAT MR~ SILVA IS NOT LEGALLY REQUIRED TO ATTEND. MR. WADSWORTH WITHDREW HIS MOTION BASED ON THE ACTING CITY ATTORNEY'S EXPLANATION. FISCHER SAND MINING PERMIT: DR. HENRY. FISCHER ADDRESSED THE COMMISSION ON HIS REQUEST. DR. FISCHER STATED HE HAS COMPLETED THE REQUIREMENTS LISTED IN MR. MOSBY'S LETTER. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT AS A MATTER OF CLARIFICATION, WHAT DR. FISCHER STATED IS CORRECT. THE COUNTY'S REQUIREMENTS FOR A MINING PERMIT IS THE SAME AS THE CITY'S. ALL THE INFORMATION THAT'WAS NEEDED TO RENEW HIS PERMIT, HAD NOT BEEN SUBMITTED TO US AT THAT TIME. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT THERE WERE TWO LETTERS FROM HIM, ONE WHICHLISTED EIGHT OR NINE ITEMS, WHICH DR. FISCHER REPRODUCED THE SAME INFORMATION HE PROBABLY HADTO PRODUCE TO THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY. THE LAST LETTER, DATED JULY 11, 1985, SATISFIES THE ORGINIAL LETTER, AND AS FAR AS MR. MOSBY IS CONCERNED DR. FISCHER HAS MET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MINING PERMIT. MINUTES: 'PAGE 5 PUBLIC HEARING AND REGULAR MEETING JULY 11, 1985 MOTION BYMR. WADSWORTH, SECONDED BY MR. THOMPSON, TO GRANT THE MINING PERMIT REQUEST AS SUBMITTED BY DR. FISCHER, CONTINGENT ON THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION BEING ADDED TO THE PERMIT BOND. ROLL CALL'VOTE: AYES: MR. THOMPSON MR. FULLERTON MR. MAHONEY MR. KRULIKOWSKI MR. WADSWORTH MRS. YOUNG CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH NAYS: NONE MOTION CARRIED. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH STATED THAT MR. RICHARD FEY HAS REQUESTED THAT HIS REQUEST BE TAKEN OFF THE AGENDA'FOR THIS MEETING. MOTION BY MR. THOMPSON, SECONDED BY MR. WADSWORTH, TO RESCHEDULE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETINGS TO JULY 25, AUGUST 8, AUGUST 22, 1985. MOTION CARRIED. MR. THOMPSON STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE DATE CHANGES ADVERTISED IN THE LOCAL NEWSPAPERS. MOTION BY MR. THOMPSON, SECONDED BY MR. FULLERTON, TO TABLE DISCUSSIONS REGARDING THE ANTENNA ORDINANCE, AND PLANNING AND ZONING REVIEWING ALL STRUCTURES INCLUDING RESIDENTIAL, PRIOR TO PERMITTING, UNTIL THE JULY 25, 1985, MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. THERE WAS ABRIE~DISCUSSION REGARDING THE TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL. CHAIRMAN'S MATTERS: CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH STATED THAT HE WAS IN RECEIPT OF A LETTER FROM MAYOR GALLAGHER, TO THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, REGARDING THE RE-ROUTING OF C.R. 512. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH QUESTIONED IF THE pLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SHOULD POSSIBLY SEND A LETTER IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE MAYOR'S LETTER, AND SEND POSITIVE IDEAS AS TO WHERE THE ROAD SHOULD BE. THERE WAS A LENGTHY DISCUSSION REGARDING THE RE-ROUTING OF C.R. 512. MOTION BY MR. THOMPSON, SECONDED BY MR. FULLERTON, TO PURCHASE ONE CARTON OF TWELVE BANKER FILE BOXES AT $61.00, AND ONE BOX OF TWENTY-FIVE CLIP FOLDERS AT $24.56. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION BY MR. THOMPSON, SECONDED BY MR. KRULIKOWSKI, TO PURCHASE ONE BOX OF MANILA LEGAL SIZE FiLE FOLDERS, NOT TO EXCEED $35.00. MOTION CARRIED. MINUTES: PAGE 6 PUBLIC HEARING ANDREGULAR MEETING JULYll, 1985 MOTION BY MR. THOMPSON, SECONDED BY MR. WADSWORTH, THAT THE QUARTERLY REPORT BE REFERRED TO THE JULY 25, 1985 MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION BY MR. THOMPSON, SECONDED BY MR. WADSWORTH, TO PAY AN INVOICE FROM THE PRESS JOURNAL IN THE AMOUNT OF $26.73. MOTION CARRIED. MEMBER'S MATTERS: MR. THOMPSON STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE COMMISSION TAKE ACTION TO DECIDE WHAT THEY WANT IN THE SITE PLAN ORDINANCE AS RELATED TO MINOR SITE PLANS, BECAUSE I~ WAS INFERRED AT THE COUNCIL MEETING, JULY 10, 1985, THAT THE NEW COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN/MAP IS GOINGTOBE PRESENTED.FOR FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AT THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH STATED THAT THERE WERE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS, AND THAT THE COMMISSION MADE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATIONS.TO THE CITY COUNCIL. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT THE PROVISIONS BETWEEN MINOR AND MAJOR SITE PLANS, THE MODIFICATIONS HAVE TO BE MADE TO THE EXISTING ORDINANCE THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN ADOPTED. MR. MOSBY ALSO STATED THAT IT IS ALREADY iN THE SITE PLAN ORDINANCE, IT IS NOT IN WHAT IS PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, BECAUSE THAT SECTION HAS ALREADY BEEN ADOPTED. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT THE COMMISSION HAS TO MODIFY THE EXISTING ORDINANCE, AND NOT SO MUCH CHANGE THE PROPOSED LANDDEVELOPMENT CODE. THE COMMISSION ALREADY HAS A SITE PLAN ORDINANCE THAT DEFINES THE MINOR/MAJOR, THE COMMISSION HAS TO CHANGE THAT ORDINANCE, NOT CHANGE THE PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. MR. THOMPSON ASKED MR. MOSBY IF THE PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE HA~ A MAJOR AND MINOR SITE PLAN PROVISION IN IT. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT IT DID NOT. MR. MOSBY ALSO STATED THAT, THAT SECTION OUT OF PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE HAS BEEN ADOPTED. THAT SECTION ADDRESSES THE MINOR/MAJORS, THAT IS THE SECTION THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN ADOPTED AND THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO MODIFY, NOT THE PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. MR. MAHONEY ASKED MR. MOSBY WHO HE WAS GOING TO SEND HIS BILL TO FOR THE MEETING HE ATTENDED TODAY REGARDING MR. RICHARD FEY'S INDIAN RIVER BAIT AND TACKLE SHOP. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT HE ONLY HAS A CONTRACT WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. MR. MOSBY ALSO STATED THAT IT WAS A SITE PLAN MATTER, AND IT WOULD HAVE TO BE SOMETHING THE COMMISSION WOULD HAVE TO SPEAK WITH MAYOR GALLAGHER ABOUT.. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH ASKED MR. MOSBY WHO HE IS GOING TO SEND THE BILL TO. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT HE WOULD SEND IT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH STATED THAT THE COMMISSION WOULD DEAL WITH IT, WHEN IT COMES. MR. MAHONEY STATED THAT ON THE SITE PLANS THAT ARE COMMERCIAL, IS THERE ANY WAY THAT THE COMMISSION CAN INSURE THAT THE NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION CODE IS ADHERED TO. MR. MAHONEYSTATED THAT IT IS ACTUALLY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT'S RESPONSIBILITY TO INSPECT THIS, AND MR. MAHONEY WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT IS ACTUALLY DOING THIS. MINUTES: PAGE 7 PUBLIC HEARING AND REGULAR MEETING JULY 11,.'i985 ACTING CITY ATTORNEY GORE STATED THAT WOULD BE THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD, WHICH HE IS THE ATTORNEY FOR. THEY DO HAVE ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS OVER THE FIRE CODE. WHETHER IT IS UP TO THAT STANDARD, MR. GORE IS NOT SURE. IF A BUILDING IS CONSTRUCTED AND FALLS BELOW THE FIRE CODE,' ASIT IS PRESENTLY IN THE CITY, THE VIOLATIONS ARE BROUGHT BEFORE THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD, AND WOULD BE LOOKED UPON AS A VERY SERIOUS OFFENSE. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD HAS THE AUTHORITY TO LEVY FINES UP TO $250.00 PER DAY, IF IT IS NOT COMPLIED WITH. MR. MAHONEY STATED THAT AT A COUNCIL MEETING, MR. STEPHENSON OFFERED TO SELL THE CITY A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED JUST NORTH OF THE YACHT CLUB ON INDIAN RIVER DRIVE. MR. MAHONEY ALSO STATED THAT THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY WAS USED TO COMPUTE DENSITY FOR THE RIVER OAK PROJECT. HE STATED HE DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE LEGALITIES OF IT, BECAUSE TO HIS KNOWLEDGE THE PEOPLE USED THIS PIECE TO ADD ON TO THEIR PROPERTY TO COMPUTE THEIR DENSITY SO THAT THEY COULD GO FROM TRI-PLEXES TO FOUR- PLEXES ON THE MAIN PIECE OF PROPERTY WHEN THEYDID NOT OWN THE PIECE OF PROPERTY ON THE EAST SIDE OF INDIAN RIVER DRIVE. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH STATED THAT HE AGREED WITH MR. MAHONEY. A LARGER DENSITY WAS ALLOWED ON THE WEST SIDE OF INDIAN RIVER DRIVE BASED ON THE PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT WAS ON THE EAST SIDE, AS IF IT WERE ONE PIECE EVEN THOUGH THE ROAD CUT IT. MORE UNITS ARE OVER THERE BECAUSE OF THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY. MR. GORE STATED THAT HE HAS NOT INVESTIGATED IT, BUT THERE ARE OCCASSIONS IN THE LAND USE CODE, IN THE COUNTY, WHERE ONE LOOKS AT GROSS ACREAGE AND IF YOU ARE ALLOWED FOUR UNITS PER ACRE, AND SOME OF THE ACREAGE IS WETLANDS, YOU LOOK AT ONE ACRE AND ALL OF A SUDDEN IT HAS EIGHT UNITS, AND ONE ASKS WHY? THE REASON WHY IS BECAUSE ONE OF THE ACRES IS WETLANDS AND THE COUNTY HAS ALLOWED PEOPLE TO PUT EIGHT ON TO COMPENSATE FOR THE LOSS OF ONE, THAT MAY HAVE BEEN WHAT OCCURRED. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH THEN ASKED IF THAT PROPERTY CAN NOW BE SOLD, AND THINGS PUT ON IT. MR. GORE STATED THAT IF THE FORMULA WAS USED THAT IT WAS AN ALLOWANCE THAT ONLY DOUBT THAT, THAT WOULD FLY. MR. MAHONEY STATED THAT THE COMMISSION WAS LED TO BELIEVE THAT THE RIVER OAK PEOPLE OWNED THAT PROPERTY, WHEN APPARENTLY THEY DID NOT. MR. FULLERTON STATED HE WOULD ACT ON THE COMMISSION'S BEHALF, AND RESEARCH THIS ITEM AND REPORT BACK TO THE COMMISSION WITH HIS FINDINGS. MR. MAHONEY ASKEDMR. GORE IF THE COMMISSION'S PACKETS ARE PRIVY TO PUBLIC INSPEC' TION BEFORE THEY ARE BROUGHT UP AT THE MEETINGS. MR. GORE STATED THAT IT IS PUBLIC INFORMATION. IF A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WANTED COPIES, YOU COULD THEN CHARGE THEM FOR THE COPY. MR. WADSWORTH STATED HE WANTED TO THANK MR. HECTOR FRANCO, BUILDING OFFICIAL, FOR ATTENDING THE MEETING. MINUTES: PAGE 8 PUBLIC HEARING AND REGULAR MEETING JULY11, 1985 ATTORNEY'S MATTERS: MR. GORE STATED THAT HE WOULD JSUT LIKE TO COMMEND THE COMMISSION ON THEIR TIME AND EFFORT THEY GIVE TO THE CITY'S PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. NEW BUSINESS: FATHER AND SON PLAZA - CHAIRMAN'S REVIEW: MR. MOSBY STATED THAT HE BELIEVES THAT THE ITEM SHOULD BE TABLED. THE SITE PLANS THERE WERE SUBMITTED REQUESTING A MINOR CHANGE WERE NOT THE ORIGINAL S~T~.PLANS THAT WERE SUBMITTED FOR THE APPROVAL. MR. MOSBY STATED HE SPOKE WITH MR~ PHILIPSON REGARDING THIS MATTER. MR. PHILIPSON SUBMITTED TWO DRAWINGS, WHICH ARE VERY UNCLEAR AS TO WHAT HE IS TRYINg TO DO. MR. PHILIPSON HAS NOT SHOWN THE OVER ALL PICTURE OF THE MODIFICATION TOA THE MAJOR SITE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT HE RECOMMENDS TO~ THE COMMISSION THEY ~ISAPPROVE THIS REQUEST, AND REQUEST THAT THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN BE MODIFIED AN~E-SUBMITTED. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH STATED HE DID NOT AGREE THAT ONLY THE CHAIRMAN SHOULD REVIEW THIS REQUEST, AND THAT HE WOULD LIKE THE ENTIRE COMMISSION TO REVIEW IT. MOTION BY MR. WADSWORTH, SECONDED BY MR. KRULIKOWSKI, TO DENY THE REQUEST. THERE WAS CONSIDERABLE DISCUSSION REGARDING MA3OR/MINOR SITE PLANS. MR. KRULIKOWSKI WITHDREW HIS SECOND. MR. WADSWORTH AMENDED HIS MOTION TO INCLUDE DUE TO THE IMPROPER PAPERS SUBMITTED. MR. KRULIKOWSKI SECONDED THE AMENDED MOTION. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: MR. THOMPSON MR. FULLERTON MR. MAHONEY MR. KRULIKOWSKI MR. WADSWORTH MRS. YOUNG CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH NAYS: NONE MOTION CARRIED. MOTION BY MR. WADSWORTH, SECONDED BY MR. THOMPSON, TO AD3OURN THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. MEETING AD3OURNED AT 9:40 P.M. A'aa� Cite of Sebastian Jim Gallagher POST OFFICE BOX 127 ❑ SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32958-0127 Deborah C. Krages Mayor TELEPHONE (305) 589-5330 City Clerk PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 11, 1985 CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PUBLIC HEARING RE: CONSIDER AN APPLICATION TO CHANGE THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN/MAP FROM COR TO CL, LOTS 19, 20, 21, BLOCK 185, UNIT B. PUBLIC HEARING RE: CONSIDER AN APPLICATION TO CHANGE THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN/MAP FROM CL TO IND, LOTS 61, 62, 64 AND A PORTION OF WAUREGAN AVENUE. PUBLIC HEARING RE: CONSIDER AN APPLICATION TO RE—ZONE FROM C-1 TO M-1, LOTS 61, 62, 64, AND A PORTION OF WAUREGAN AVENUE. OLD BUSINESS: RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL RE: PUBLIC HEARING — TO CHANGE THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN/MAP FROM COR TO CL, LOTS 19, 20, 21, BLOCK 185, UNIT 8. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL RE: PUBLIC HEARING — TO CHANGE THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN/MAP FROM CL TO IND, LOTS 61, 62, 64, AND A PORTION OF WAUREGAN AVE. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL RE: PUBLIC HEARING — TO RE—ZONE FROM C-1 TO M-1, LOTS 61., 62, 64, AND A PORTION OF WAUREGAN AVE. MODEL HOME PERMIT — SILVA FISCHER SAND MINING PERMIT WAUREGAN SUB—DIVISION — ABANDONMENT OF CERTAIN PAPER STREETS FEY — INDIAN RIVER BAIT AND TACKLE SHOP SCHEDULE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING FOR THURSDAY, JULY 25, 1985. DISCUSSION RE: ANTENNA ORDINANCE r1. DISCUSSION RE: PLANNING AND ZONING REVIEWING ALL STRUCTURES INCLUDING RESIDENTIAL, PRIOR TO PERMITTING. DISCUSSION RE: MEMORANDUM FROM TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL CHAIRMAN'S MATTERS: MEMBER'S MATTERS: ATTORNEY'S MATTERS: NEW BUSINESS: FATHER AND SON PLAZA — CHAIRMAN'S REVIEW ADJOURN /ftkk NOTE: IF ANY PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION WHICH MAY BE MADE AT THIS MEETING, HE/SHE WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS, AND FOR SUCH PURPOSES, HE/SHE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PRO— C!;EDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY IN EVIDENCE ON P. -RICH THE APPEAL IS BASED.