Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989 - Waterfront District StudyRiverfront DistrS; 1989 12/13/89 City Council Agenda Transmittal - "Waterfront District Study" 12/13/89 City Council Minutes Pg 7 - "Waterfront District Study" - Motion to move forward with study Q o� City of Sebastian POST OFFICE BOX 780127 0 SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32978 TELEPHONE (407) 589-5330 FAX 407-5895570 SUBJECT: Waterfront District Study Approved For Submittal By: City Manager EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: AMOUNT BUDGETED: 0 Agenda No. ??ZZ/ Dept. Origin: Community Development (P.J.) Date Submitted 12/06/89 For Agenda Of 12/13/89 Exhibits: Memorandum dated October 25, 1989 Memorandum dated November 30, 1989 SUMMARY STATEMENT APPROPRIATION REQUIRED: The City's Comprehensive Plan, through a series of Policy Statements, addresses the need to prepare for the future development in the Central Commercial Core Area (Main Street, U.S. 1, and Indian River Drive) and the Waterfront Corridor (Indian River Drive). A Draft Work Program has been developed reflecting at a minimum the level of study that should be performed. Upon review of the draft, the Planning and Zoning Commission passed a motion endorsing the Draft Work Program and requesting the City Council to direct staff to move forward with the implementation of the study as expeditiously as possible. RECOMMENDED ACTION Concurrence with the Planning and Zoning Commission's motion to direct staff to move forward with the Waterfront District Study. 8R.z21 QCf B ^ Qop City of Sebastian POST OFFICE BOX 780127 o SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32978 TELEPHONE (407) 589-5330 FAX 407-589-5570 M E M O R A N D is N DATE: November 30, 1989 TO: Richard B. Votapka, Mavor and Sebastian City Council �L THROUGH: Robert S. MCClayryy 414 FROM: Peter W. Jone�aJ RE: Sebastian Waterfront District The City of Sebastian has and will continue to feel the effects of growth and development in our community. The advent of County sewer along U.S. 1 and Indian River Drive will easily double the pace of development in our most visible and sensitive corridors. The City's Comprehensive Plan, through a series of Policy Statements, addresses the need to prepare for the future development in the Central Commercial Core Area (Main Street, U.S. 1, and Indian River Drive) and the Waterfront Corridor (Indian River Drive). A Draft Work Program was developed (memo dated October 35, 1989) reflecting at a minimum the level of study that should be performed in order for the City to realize the future development of its unique waterfront resource as an environmentally sound, cohesive, functional and aesthetic whole. Upon review and discussion with the Director of Community Development, City Engineer and the Planning and Zoning Commission, at their November 2, 1989 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission passed a motion endorsing the Draft Work Program and asked that City Council direct staff to move forward with the implementation of the study as ^ expeditiously as possible H.zzi .% TO: Richard B. Votapka, Mayor and Page 2 Sebastian City Council The study will be performed through the City Planner with assistance from the City's Planning Consultant, Les Solin, in the Development Program Phase and in the development of the 'Zoning Overlay District. As stated earlier, the Draft Work Program outlines in fairly detailed fashion the various phases and tasks to be performed. The current budget establishes funds for this study. PWJ: jk a City of Sebastian POST OFFICE BOX 780127 o SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32978 TELEPHONE (407) 589.5330 FAX 407-589-5570 M E M O R A N D U M DATE: October 25, 1989 TO: Stanley Erulikowski, Chairman and Planning and Zoning Members FROM: Peter W. Jons City Planner RE: Sebastian Waterfront District Draft Work Program /y The attached Draft Work Program is for your review and comment. This Draft reflects, at a minimum, the level of study that should be performed in order for the City to realize the future development of this unique resource as an environmentally sound, cohesive, functional and aesthetic whole. The Draft reflects a process approach for analysis, program, master plan and development framework (zoning, design guidelines, etc.). To be determined, aside from the discussion of the tasks themselves, is the breakdown of who will perform specific tasks, a clear sound process of public input and review and a clear consensus on the study, goals and objectives. (See Policy 1-1.2.4 of the City CLUP Goals, Objectives and Policies.) I would ask that the Commission review this Draft and, either through discussion or special workshop finalize this Work Program with recommendation that Council move forward with the Study. Should there be any issues here of concern, please do not hesitate to call. ^ PWJ:jk CC: Bruce Cooper David Fisher ��.221 ON SEBASTIAN WATERFRONT DISTRICT Draft Work Program 1.0 PROJECT DEFINITION & SITE ANALYSIS 1.1 Formalize project (study) objectives, development goals, work program and services to be performed. 1.2 Establish study area, prepare scaled project base maps, aerials, etc. 1.3 Establish communication and task responsibilities of City, Consultants, Public Agencies, businesses, land owners, merchants and all other interested organizations and individuals that will be involved in both the development and approval process of this project. Clearly, the future development of the City's waterfront is a collective process, one that requires the interest, input, review and approval of the City as a whole. 1.4 Develop and formalize a Project Schedule. 1.5 Gather, organize and review existing applicable data for the study area from sources including but not limited to: City, County, FDOT, DNR, Army C of E, Marine Resources Council. 1.6 Analyze context of the property regarding development and design implications. The analvsis would include but not be limited to: area growth affecting development, available services, accessibility (auto, pedestrian, transit, watercraft), environmental setting, adjacent area land ose and development, related development projects. 1.7 Develop study analysis derived from both man-made and natural constraints and opportunities. Data sources for this analysis would include, but not be limited to: related City (and County) land development and zoning regulations, property ownership/vacant land assessment, property easements (utility, etc.), existing vehicular accessibility and traffic volumes, topography, flood/drainage areas, vegetation, wetlands, estuarine setting, unique physical features, historical features. 1.8 Prepare synthesis map(s) of the site analysis. 1.9 Review. 2.0 DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 2.1 Determine market feasibility of various types of development in terms of land use types, densities and building type quantities based upon anticipated market demands. 2.2 Test and evaluate the development program against the physical capacities of the site. 2.3 Test and evaluate traffic volume and circulatory implications to the site and adjoining roadway network. 2.4 Determine general infrastructure requirements of the selected development program. 2.5 Refine and prepare development program. 2.6 Review. 3.0 WORKING REPORT Prepare a Working Report illustrating and describing the results of work accomplished in Sections 1.0 and 2.0. This Report would document the Site Analysis and the Development Program summarizing the conclusions and recommendations from the efforts up to this time. The presentation quality of this Report would not be oriented toward use as a promotional tool but more of a working summary; (.a formalization of the Site Analysis and the Development Program so that all participants are in agreement that it is the "Basis for Design.") 4.0 DESIGN 4.1 Prepare Land Use Plans. 4.1.1 Using the Working Paper as the "basis for design" and any adjustments authorized by the City to the program, prepare no fewer n than three alternative Land Use plans. These plans will identify specific land uses, vehicular and pedestrian circulation, open space systems, preliminary landscape concepts, development phasing and approximate size of land use areas. 5.0 DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK AND DESIGN GUIDELINES 5.1 Using the Master Plan as its basis, establish a Development Framework for the Waterfront District. The Framework will define the City's intentions for development of the District and creates the policy basis for Design Guidelines and subsequent design controls. /^ The Framework creates the basis for a cohesive, functional and economically productive environment by defining basic Framework Elements including land 4.1.2 Review 4.1.3 Select and refine a final Land Use plan. All of the elements of the Land Use plan will be refined, including (but not limited to) parcelization, vehicular access and circulation, roadway widths, pedestrian circulation, easement requirements, environmental preservation zones, and a suggested phasing strategy. 4.2 Review. 4.3 Prepare an Illustrative Master Plan for approval. ^ The Plan will include, but not be limited to the delineation of the following: building configuration and massing, parking (surface and/or structured), pedestrian/non-vehicular circulation systems, recreation and open space systems, general landscape concept, infrastructure systems, environmental/estuarine zones, and all related statistics for the Plan. 4.4 Review. 4.5 Refine and finalize the Master Plan. This Plan will provide the basis for a Sebastian Waterfront District zoning, development framework and design guidelines. 5.0 DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK AND DESIGN GUIDELINES 5.1 Using the Master Plan as its basis, establish a Development Framework for the Waterfront District. The Framework will define the City's intentions for development of the District and creates the policy basis for Design Guidelines and subsequent design controls. /^ The Framework creates the basis for a cohesive, functional and economically productive environment by defining basic Framework Elements including land r use and zoning, circulation and transportation, landscape and hardscape, and development subareas. This clear definition of the physical structure and overall land use concept of the District will have will have anumber of benefits including: • Exciting developers and public at large as to the possibilities of the District. • Assuring that all development will meet the same high standard. • Defining the essential public improvements needed to stimulate and complement private development. • Assure the maintenance of the very uniqueness of the city's Waterfront. 5.2 Review. 5.3 Using the Master Plan and Development Framework as a basis, develop design guidelines for the Waterfront District. The purpose of these Guidelines will be to encourage, through private and public investment, the development of the District as a cohesive, functional and aesthetic whole. The Guidelines will contain standards addressing the major components of the physical development of the District. The Guidelines do provide a coherent statement of the City's intentions and an overall approach to achieving quality environments. The Guidelines contain specific requirements which provide a baseline for excellent design. The Guidelines are not and cannot be all-inclusive. Mere adherence to them will not in itself guarantee or be sufficient to produce an excellent building and a quality environment. No set of guidelines can cover all circumstances. Rather, it is the use and interpretation of these standards by the City and qualified creative design professionals, fully supported by committed developers and owners, which produces the intended results. 5.4 Review. n 6.0 ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT 6.1 Using the Master Plan Guidelines and accompanying Framework Plan develop the documentation required for an overlay to the City Land Development Code for the Waterfront District. The Overlay Zoning would "dovetail" with existing related codes. Elements should include, but not be limited to: use and development intensity of land, parking and loading requirements, pedestrian access, performance standards for air, noise and water quality, landscaping, screening and permitted and special uses, lot size, coverage and yard requirements. 6.2 Establish the process by which the development review and approval takes place within the existing Land Development Code framework. Inclusive in this process would be the coordination with any architectural review process. 6.3 Review. 7.0 FINAL PLAN REPORT 8.0 MARKET BROCHURE (In conjunction with chamber Commerce and City) Wk /1 n Regular City Council Meeting Minutes December 13, 1989 Page 7 Mayor Votapka opened the public hearing at 7:36 p.m. The Director of Community Development explained the purpose of the ordinance was primarily to adopt January and July as CLUP amendment transmittal dates. Mayor Votapka closed the public hearing at 7:38 p.m. MOTION by McCollum/Oberbeck I move we adopt Ordinance No. 0-89-23 as read by the City Attorney. ROLL CALL: Mayor Votapka - aye Vice Mayor McCarthy - aye Councilman McCollum - aye Councilman Oberbeck - aye MOTION CARRIED 4-0. 9. PUBLIC INPUT A. Non -Agenda Items None. B. Agenda Items J.W. Thompson and Stanley Krulikowski said they would speak during agenda items. Alfred Vilardi, 445 Georgia Blvd., addressed item 89.228 regarding new personnel positions and reclassifications. 10. PRESENTATIONS None. 11. COMMITTEE REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS A. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 89.221 1. Waterfront District Study (City Manager Recommendation dated 12/6/89, Memos from City Planner dated 11/30/89 & 10/25/89) The City Planner explained the purpose of the proposed waterfront study. He said the approximate cost of the study would be S20,000, $10,000 of which is currently in the Department of Community 7 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes r� December 13, 1989 Page 8 Development budget and part which would be funded by Department of Community Affairs grants. Stanley Krulikowski, Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman, urged Council approval for the study. Vice Mayor McCarthy requested the study be referred to as the "Riverfront District Study". MOTION by Oberbeck/McCollum I move we direct staff to move forward with the Riverfront District Study. ROLL CALL: Vice Mayor McCarthy - aye Councilman McCollum - aye Councilman Oberbeck - aye Mayor Votapka - aye MOTION CARRIED 4-0. 89.222 2. Prepare Resolution to Create Architectural Review Board (City Manager Recommendation ^ dated 12/6/89, Memo from City Planner dated 11/30/89 Memo from Interim City Engineer dated 11)7/89) This item was deferred by motion to the January 3, 1990 special meeting at the beginning of this meeting. 12. OLD BUSINESS 89.223 A. Reject All Bids and Re -Bid - Toilet Facility - Riverview Park (City Manager Recommendation dated 12/6/89, Memo from Interim City Engineer dated 12/5/89) The City Manager explained that specifications for the facility have been upgraded, therefore, the project should be rebid. He also stated that the proposed budget amendment on tonight's agenda contains funds for this upgraded facility. Discussion took place on formally establishing a policy on design engineers not bidding on the project as a contractor. G7