HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-06-2022 PZ Agenda,m,,
HOME OF PEIJCAN ISLAND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
1225 MAIN STREET a SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32958
TELEPHONE (772) 589-5518
www.cityofsebasfan.org
AGENDA
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 6, 2022 — 6:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1225 MAIN STREET, SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA
ALL AGENDA ITEMS MAY BE INSPECTED IN THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
1225 MAIN STREET, SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA OR ON THE CITY WEBSITE
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. ROLL CALL
4. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND AGENDA MODIFICATIONS
Modifications and additions require unanimous vote of members. Deletions do not apply.
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular meeting of September 15, 2022
6. PLANNING AND ZONING (P&Z) COMMISSION OUASI-JUDICIAL HEARINGS
• Chairman opens hearing, attorney reads ordinance or resolution or title
• Commissioners disclose ex parte communication
• Chairman or attorney swears in all who intend to provide testimony
• Applicant or applicant's agent makes presentation
• Staff presents findings and analysis
• Commissioners asks questions of the applicant and staff
• Chairman opens the floor for anyone in favor and anyone opposing the request (anyone
presenting factual information shall be sworn but anyone merely advocating approval or denial
need not be sworn in)
• Applicant provided opportunity to respond to issues raised by staff or public
• Staffprovided opportunity to summarize request
• Commission deliberation and questions
• Chairman calls for a motion
• Commission Action
A. Quasi -Judicial Public Hearing — Site Plan Modification — Taco Mobile Restaurant — Small
Building Addition, Additional Parking, and Outside Seating Areas — 825 Sebastian Boulevard -
Lots 1, 2, 3 & 4, Block 188, Sebastian Highlands Unit 6 — C-512 (Commercial CR 512) Zoning
District
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None
8. NEW BUSINESS: None
9. ADJOURN
No stenographic record by a certified court reporter will be made of the foregoing meeting. Any person who decides to appeal
any decision made by the Council with respect to any matter considered at this meeting will need to ensure that a verbatim record
of the proceeding is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be heard.
(F.S.286.0105)
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, anyone who needs a special accommodation for this
meeting should contact the City's ADA Coordinator at 772-388-8226 at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting.
All government meetings in City Council Chambers will be broadcast live on COS -TV Comcast Channel 25 and ATT UVerse
Channel 99 and streamed via the city website — vvwiv.cirs-olsebaslian.or4 unless otherwise noticed and rebroadcast at a later
date — see COS -TV Channel 25 for broadcast schedule
ZOOM INFORMATION
Please check the city's Meeting Calendar found on its website www.citvofsebastian.ort for Zoom information to
join this meeting virtually.
2
CITY OF SEBASTIAN
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 15, 2022
I. Call to Order -- Vice Chair Kautenburg called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
II. Pledge of Alle(Jance was recited by all.
111. Roll Call
Present:
Mr. Lucier
Mr.Christino(a)
Mr. Simmons
Ms. Battles
Ms. Kautenburg
Ms. Kinchen
Mr. Carter
Ms. Jordan (a)
Not Present:
Mr. Alvarez -- Excused
Also Present
Ms. Lisa Frazier, Director AICP
Mr. Manny Anon, Jr., City Attorney
Mr. Paul Carlisle, City Manager
Ms. Dorri Bosworth, Community Development Manager
Ms. Barbara Brooke -Reese, MIS Manager
Ms. Janet Graham, Recording Secretary
IV. Announcements and Agenda Modifications
i
I: .M..
!-
E
a. E
�0
Cd
0 CD
cr
10-
> a
C:
q 2
< CE <tz
Ms. Kautenburg stated that Mr. Alvarez is excused from tonight's meeting, and Ms.
Jordan will be voting in his place.
V. Approval of Minutes -- Regular Meeting of Se0ember 1. 2022
Ms. Kautenburg asked if everyone had had a chance to review the Minutes from
September 1,2022. All indicated they had. Ms. Kautenburg called for a motion. A motion
approving the Minutes from September 1,2022 as presented was made by Ms. Kinchen,
seconded by Mr. Carter, and approved unanimously via voice vote.
VI. Local PI anninci Aaencv (LPA) Public Hearings
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING PAGE 2
AGENCY MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 15, 2022
Ms. Kautenburg outlined the rules for this meeting. She then opened the Local
Planning Agency public hearing. Mr. Anon read the item into the record.
A. Public Hearing -- Recommendation to City Council -- Small
Scale Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Amendment --
Man Caves @Sebastian, Applicant (Proposed Annexation) -- An
amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map for
property containing 4.56 acres located south and east of Spirit of
Sebastian PUD, west of Old Dixie Highway and FEC right-of-way, and
north of multiple family residential development. Existing county land
use designation is L-2 (low -density residential) and the requested
Sebastian land use is CG (General Commercial)
Ms. Kautenburg called on the applicant to make its presentation.
Mr. Herb Green of Cadjazz Engineering, Kissimmee, Florida, stated he is here to
request a small-scale comprehensive plan amendment to allow the applicant to rezone
from the current L-2, which is a County designation, to the CG designation for the
desired use of creating man caves and a self -storage facility on the site as set forth
above. He explained that everything that is going to be generated as far as level of
service is some equipment with minimal impact to the City of Sebastian in terms of the
total levels of service available. He is requesting approval of this item and asked for
questions/comments.
Ms. Kautenburg asked for presentation from City staff. Lisa Frazier identified
herself and described the request for a 4.56-acre parcel that has been requested to
be annexed into the City. Concurrently, the applicant would like to change the land
use, and later on this evening the Commissioners will also be considering the
rezoning of this property. Currently, it lies within the County as L-2 (low -density
residential). They are asking that it be changed to CG (general commercial). She
described the adjacent properties and their land use designations. Staff feels that
this is a compatible change in use due to the change that has occurred along Old
Dixie Highway. Old Dixie has always been more of an industrial area. Regarding
adequate public facilities, water and sewer have been brought down Old Dixie
Highway, and the applicant is well aware that they will have to connect, and there is
a letter in the agenda packet to that effect. Included also in the packet is a
conceptual plan of these storage units. Under the zoning they are requesting, this
is a conditional use, and they will have to meet certain additional criteria in order to
put storage units on this site. She called for questions/comments after public input.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING PAGE 3
AGENCY MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 15, 2022
Ms. Kautenburg opened the floor to public input, and she called on anyone who
wished to speak in opposition to this proposal. There was no one either in chambers or
on Zoom. She then called for anyone who wished to speak in favor of this proposal.
Robert Votaw, Sebastian, Florida. He stated that he is representing the adjacent Spirit
of Sebastian project. He stated his group is absolutely in favor of this proposed project.
He stated that they would like to see some buffer restrictions a little larger than the 10
feet that has been proposed and possibly doing a chain -link fence instead of a white
vinyl fence for security. Otherwise, they are very much in favor of the project.
There being no one else to speak in favor of the project, either in chambers or on Zoom,
Ms. Kautenburg called for staffs summary.
Ms. Frazier stated that she believes that the Commissioners have all of the information
that is required, and she will answer any questions.
Ms. Kautenburg closed public comment at this point. She called on the Commissioners
for any questions or comments.
Mr. Christino asked how many storage units will be located on the property. His concern
is that the southern section of Old Dixie Highway is unimproved, and there will also be a
lot more train traffic there, and he asked if there is a safety concern. Ms. Frazier said
that staff does not feel that there will be a large amount of traffic. However, staff has
anticipated that the road right-of-way will probably need to be widened . That is part of
the site development or annexation that will be considered requiring a portion of the
right- of -way to be deeded.
Ms. Battles asked whether water and wastewater are available. Ms. Frazier said yes.
Ms. Kautenburg asked if this Commission is to address the zoning change as well as
the annexation. Ms. Frazier stated this Commission does not address any type of
annexation. Annexation is through the Florida statutes, and this Commission is only
considering future land use. Later on this evening the Commission members will be
addressing the zoning. There being no further discussion, Ms. Kautenburg called for a
motion. On staff's recommendation and the fact that this meets the City's land
development changes from County L-2 to City CG, a motion recommending approval to
City Council was made by Ms. Kinchen and seconded by Mr. Simmons.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING
AGENCY MINUTES OF MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 15, 2022
Roll Call
Ms. Battles -- Yes
Mr. Lucier -- Yes
Ms. Jordan --Yes
Ms. Simmons — Yes
Vote was 7-0 in favor. Motion passes.
Mr. Carter -- Yes
Ms. Kinchen -- Yes
Ms. Kautenburg --Yes
PAGE 4
B. Public Hearing — Recommendation to City Council -- Large Scale
Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Amendment — Graves
Brothers Company, Applicant (Proposed Annexation) -- an
amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map for
Property consisting of 1913.593 acres, more or less, located south of
County Road 510, west of lands adjacent to 741h Avenue, north of 59th
Street, and east of 90th Avenue. Current County future land use is AG-
1 (agricultural, 1 unit per 5 acres). The requested City land use is MU
(mixed -use).
Mr. Anon read the item into the record. Ms. Kautenburg asked for input from the
applicant. Ms. Frazier said Mr. Joseph Schulke, with Schulke, Bittle & Stoddard is here
to answer questions.
Ms. Frazier made a Power Point presentation (SEE ATTACHED). She went through the
Power Point and explained the slides which showed several maps, talked about the
boundaries, and discussed that the property would remain A-1 (agricultural) zoning at
this time. She then called questions/comments .
Ms. Kautenburg called on anyone in Chambers or on Zoom who wishes to speak in
opposition to this project.
George Glenn, Jr., Sebastian, FI. Mr. Glenn identified himself as an attorney in
Indian River, and he is also on the Board of the Pelican Island Audubon Society, a legal
advisor to the Clean Water Coalition, and he works with some other environmental
groups. His group proposed some time ago that the City of Sebastian engage with a
consultant to come up with a new plan that is site specific that would bring groups
together -- concerned citizens, organizations, local governments, etc. -- and it would
then make a proposal based on those inputs. It was rejected. He stated that Martin
County did it, and Alachua County is doing it currently for 4,000 acres. He stated that,
in reading the staff report, it seems to rely heavily on the notion that it is likely going to
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING PAGE 5
AGENCY MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 15, 2022
come in through a PUD, and he discussed what is involved with a PUD. He also
addressed the agriculture land use category that is in the City's comp plan, which reads
in part that, "The City shall also utilize the agriculture land use designation for future
annexations of existing agricultural land." "It is supposed to receive an agriculture land
use designation until such time that urban growth is contiguous, and agricultural
activities are no longer economically viable." He stated that those are two findings that
the City needs to make. He mentioned some of the other concerns his group has such
as the open spaces, etc. He asked if anyone knows how many units will be contained in
this project. He also called for a traffic impact study to be done. He made several
suggestions as to what should be included in the project. He said his group wants
Sebastian to grow, but the growth should be done correctly.
Richard Baker identified himself as President of the Pelican Island Audubon Society.
He spoke on the needs of the environment. He suggested that his group is neither for
nor against the project; they just want it done correctly. He reviewed several actions that
should be taken regarding the environment when developments are planned and
constructed.
Tim Glover, President of the Friends of St. Sebastian River. He reviewed that his group
was a party to a letter that was sent to Sebastian City Council a few months ago. They
recommended to City Council that they engage a consultant for planning and
development for this project. He is asking that the Commission would also consider that
as a recommendation to City Council.
Diana Bolton, Sebastian. She reviewed that she has lived in Sebastian many
years. She has been in partnership with developers. She stated that she is in favor
of development if it is done correctly. She is also involved with several conservation
groups. She called attention to some of the maps that were included in the Power
Point presentation and had questions regarding what those maps show. She
reviewed numbers that show what the number of residents would be when the
development is completed, and she is against that many new residents. Some of
her other concerns are the headwaters of St. Sebastian River and wildlife
corridors,which are not mentioned at all.
Dr.Graham Cox (on Zoom), Sebastian. He wanted to underline some of the things that
were said by prior speakers. He stated this is a very big, complex issue that needs some
real expertise to steer it through to fruition. He thinks that this project should not be
rushed. He also recommended having an annexation agreement developed. There is a
plan needed, and having mixed use in general terms is not a plan. No one knows how
many people will be living in this area, and the County needs to know that.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING PAGE 6
AGENCY MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 15, 2022
Ms. Kautenburg called on anyone in chambers or on Zoom who wishes to speak in
favor of this development.
Joseph Schulke of Schulke, Bittle & Stoddard. He stated that he prepared the
application. He stated that the annexation is not being considered tonight. He is not
asking for any services tonight. He stated that they will be doing an annexation
agreement and working that out with City staff and City Council. That is the appropriate
time when any limitations or what the City needs should be addressed. It is a little
premature to be talking about some of those things right now. He spoke about water and
sewer and how that will be addressed when the time comes. He is a resident of
Sebastian, and he thinks this project is a great idea. There being no one else from the
public who wished to speak, Ms. Kautenburg called for staff summary.
Ms. Frazier thanked all of the public who gave their input for the project. She assured
the Commission that staff and consultants are taking their time to think about this, and
there are many meetings being held in regard to this project. She also said staff is
considering putting in an annexation agreement -items that will benefit the City, and that
will be brought forward. She added that the Commission may put forth their own
recommendations tonight. She called for questions/comments from the Commission
members. There being no further questions/comments to the staff from the
Commissioners, Ms. Kautenburg closed Public Input and called for deliberations from
the Commissioners.
Mr. Christino spoke regarding the 43 acres that were originally put aside to protect the
south slough. He feels that is an ecologically sensitive area. He would like to have that
put back in when proceeding with the plans for this project. Mr. Carlisle, City Manager,
stated that all those things will be discussed. He stated that buffers, wetlands, etc. are
all addressed as part of the ordinance, whether it is in an annexation or not -it is in the
enacting ordinance. Ms. Frazier added that everyone needs to understand mixed use.
When you have someone stating that there are going to be 10,000 residential units that
is not mixed use. Staff and consultants are going to make sure that in any agreement it
will be pertaining to a mixed -use, town -center type of development.
Mr. Christino stated that there seems to be some confusion over control of storm
water in the area of the Sebastian River Improvement District. He asked if it will
continue to operate, or will the City of Sebastian be responsible for maintaining
canals and swales in that area. Mr. Carlisle said that Vero Beach has an underlying
water management district within it. Those water management districts are
established by the State -either by sections 198 or 298. Those do not go away.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING PAGE 7
AGENCY MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 15, 2022
When we get into roadways, infrastructure and swales, that is if it is a private
community, they would manage it; if it were a public community, the City would
manage it. The major infrastructure, canals, drains, and conveyances currently
today would be managed by the Sebastian River Improvement District. That is why
the stormwater fee, currently, for this land is only the administrative portion,
because the City is not providing any services.
Mr. Christino asked, when this is done on land that is controlled by the Sebastian
River Improvement District, will the City of Sebastian be paying for those
improvements down the road. Mr. Carlisle said no one knows what the drainage
plan is going to look like, and we do not know how each individual pod will be
developed. That will be addressed during the zoning process and the development
process.
Ms. Battles addressed the magnitude of the increase in density, and she asked if
there was a comparison done to quantify the amount of utility demand increase, and
has that been communicated with County utility staff, and what communications
have happened between the applicant and County staff. Ms. Frazier stated that it
shows on Attachment A that there is enough capacity for any type of development
that might be present. The concern by the County is that when a development order
is put in, that is when the capacity license comes into play, and you set it aside for
that wastewater, etc. Their concern is what is the density going to be at this
property and what is the usage. That is not in play at this point because there is no
development design. They have enough capacity today, and it is not allocated to
any particular development. No one else has claimed this usage. Ms. Battles asked
if anyone has compared what the maximum would be given the densities that are
approved. Ms. Frazier stated there is no definite number. Some of these concerns
will not be addressed until later.
Ms. Battles addressed the land -use changes of the property and the mixed use
and asked if there have been any community outreach meetings. Ms. Frazier
stated that there have been two workshops, and multiple public hearings were
held before the land use and annexation. Ms. Battles asked what is generating
the reason behind not having the applicant come forward with a conceptual plan
at this point. Ms. Frazier said it was done prior, and it was not successful. So
the applicant has not presented us with a plan. When the applicant wants to
move forward with the rezoning or development plan that is when we get the
master plan. The examples being given of the County's master plan -they
already have the land use in place. The master plans and development
entitlements are happening at the zoning and development -plan stage, which is
what the City requires also.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING PAGE 8
AGENCY MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 15, 2022
She suggested that before we can do a master plan that is always market
driven.
Mr. Carlisle stated that when you get to a point where you start putting land
uses and zoning in an annexation agreement, you could run afoul with contract
zoning, which is completely forbidden in the State of Florida. So you have to be
careful where you cross that line between regulation and contract zoning. There
are ways that we have to word this annexation agreement and the land use. A
lot of those are covered in our ordinance.
Ms. Battles inquired as to what safeguards are there in place if the City moves
forward with the land -use change. She asked Mr. Carlisle to elaborate on that. Mr.
Carlisle explained that this is an enacting ordinance. It is for mixed use. This is
something that we can use. It has all of those layouts that Ms. Frazier explained.
Ms. Battles asked if the impact to the school district has been looked at. Ms. Frazier
stated that would come during zoning. Mr. Carlisle added that with any
development the school board is autonomous, and they determine when a school is
needed.
Ms. Kinchen emphasized that the only thing that is being discussed this evening is
agricultural to mixed use being recommended to City Council. She added that there
were some concerns that she heard from some of the audience that some items
are not being looked at. Part of those concerns related to water, etc. She would
like to know what other concerns there are. Mr. Carlisle explained some of the
history of the water on this property. St. John's River Water Management District
would not concede that, once they flooded it they would not guarantee that they
would not then call it a wetland. So they did not want to go forward with the project
and then be penalized for cleaning up the water and then have the land designated
as a wetland.
Mr. Simmons said that it seems that only affordable housing will be allowed in
the 12- units -per -acre. He asked if that is the only use. Ms. Frazier explained
that it will be 10 units per acre is what is being permitted in the multi -family
areas. However, with incentives that can go up to 12. She further explained that
typically for attainable housing the unit size seems to be denser, and the unit
area itself needs to be smaller. She emphasized that it can be used for more
than attainable housing.
Mr. Simmons asked regarding the other acreage that had been annexed for Graves
Brothers a couple of years ago, would they go through the same process if they
changed that to mixed use. Ms. Frazier said that property is general commercial as
the land use.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING PAGE 9
AGENCY MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 15, 2022
Ms. Battles asked if staff plans to have more community outreach meetings as you
work through this process and is there community involvement in that process. Ms.
Frazier suggested that there has already been community input through the
workshops and the public meetings that pretty much the annexation agreement will
be between theCouncil and the landowner. Mr. Carlisle stated that it would be a
Council decision if they wanted to add more workshops.
Ms. Kautenburg assured the public that this is not the first time these matters have been
processed. The new comp plan is something that took more than a year to do. She
stated that this comes very close to everything that the comp plan calls for. She also
assured the public that each chunk of the land that gets developed comes before
Planning and Zoning and the City staff, and every part of the development must go
through the water run-off, buffers, permission from St. John's, making sure that it meets
all of the ordinances. Each one of those meetings is also open to the public. She always
wishes that there were more people who were coming to those meetings and asking
their questions and having them answered directly as opposed to hearsay. There being
no further discussion, Ms. Kautenburg called for a motion.
A motion recommending to City Council approval of the land use change from County
A- 1 to City MU based on the fact that it meets the requirements of the City of Sebastian
Comprehensive Plan 2040 was made by Ms. Kinchen, seconded by Ms. Battles with the
condition that the applicant come forward with a conceptual plan. Ms. Frazier presented
conditions that the Commission put on the last Grave's Brothers future land -use
amendment, and recommended that the conditions be added to the Commission's
recommendation for approval.
Ms. Kinchen did not agree to the addition of the conceptual plan being added to the
motion. Discussion was held regarding the previous conditions, and Ms. Battles
withdrew her addition.
The following wording is to be added to the motion:
• Rezoning of the property shall be done through a Planned Unit
Development process as described in Article XX of the Land Development
Code.
• Housing types shall be mixed to meet various income levels and lifestyle
choices.
• Future dedication of ROW for an interconnected, extended and improvement
of the grid road system, along with a well -planned transportation system of
roads and streets throughout the development, in coordination with Indian
River County, to specifically include 81 st Street, 77th Street, and 73rd
Street, as well as 74th Avenue.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING PAGE 10
AGENCY MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 15, 2022
• Provision for a mixed -use "Town Center" area.
• Future dedication and donation of institutional lands necessary for
governmental services such as post offices, public safety, schools, etc. that
may be needed for increases in necessary services.
• Strategic assembly of commerce and industrial development at major
intersections.
• Future dedication of conservation lands to include any wetlands of significant
importance, and the provision of greenway trails and public access to those
areas.
• Dedication of City park and recreational lands above what will be required
in the individual residential subdivision developments.
• Increased buffers adjacent to low density areas outside of the PUD area.
• As a condition of future developments, sufficient land area shall be allocated
for infrastructure required to support the development and mandate hook-up
to central potable water and wastewater systems for all new developments
prior to receiving development orders. Therefore, the proposed development
must provide sewer and water service as a condition of
development. These services may be provided by the County however no
septic systems would be allowed in accordance with City policy and land
development codes.
Roll Call
Ms. Jordan -- Yes Ms. Kinchen --Yes
Mr. Lucier -- Yes Mr. Carter -- Yes
Ms. Battles -- Yes Ms. Kautenburg -- Yes
Mr. Simmons -- Yes
Vote was 7-0 in favor . Motion passes.
A. P&Z Quasi -Judicial Hearing -- Recommendation to City Council --
Land Development Code Rezoning Amendment for a specific
site - Man Caves @Sebastian, Applicant (Proposed Annexation)
-- An amendment to the Zoning Map for property containing 4.56 acres
located south and east of Spirit of Sebastian PUD, west of Old Dixie
Highway and FEC right-of-way, and north of multiple family residential
development, the existing County zoning is RM-6 (multiple -family
residential district, 6 units/acre), and the requested Sebastian zoning is
CG (Commercial General)
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING PAGE 11
AGENCY MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 15, 2022
Mr. Anon read the article into the record. Ms. Kautenburg asked if any member of the
Commission has had communication with the applicant. All stated they had not. Those
who were going to testify in this matter were sworn in. Ms. Kautenburg called on the
applicant to make his presentation.
Mr. Herb Green of Cadjazz Engineering, Kissimmee, Florida, identified himself. He is
requesting a positive recommendation for a rezoning from the current zoning to CG
upon the voluntary annexation that the applicant has requested. He gave a brief
summary of the genesis of the project. The most efficient size in terms of acreage for the
project is four acres. This property is surrounded by CG to the north. His group has
corresponded with Indian River County and understands the requirements for the right-
of-way . Applicant has consented to the right-of-way improvement that is required along
the frontage of the project. He called for questions/comments. Ms. Kautenburg called on
staff for their findings and analysis.
Ms. Frazier reviewed that this is a request for a rezoning from County RM-6 to CG.
She described the size and location of the project. The zoning is appropriate for that
use (mini storage), but it is a conditional use under that zoning. So they will have to
meet specific criteria for approval when they come in with a site plan development.
They have provided a conceptual design, but that is not what is being approved. It
is only the zoning at this juncture. The design will have to come in again. Staff feels
that there is a change in conditions occurring along that corridor, so this is an
appropriate change and appropriate use should this property be successful in being
annexed into the City. Ms. Frazier suggested that certain conditions be placed on this
zoning recommendation should the Commission choose to move forward -that we honor
the Spirit of Sebastian and the mobile home park to the south and make sure that the
appropriate buffering and security fencing measures be taken in the site plan process,
as well as the right-of-way dedication for the improvement of Old Dixie Highway be
included also in the site plan approval process. Ms. Kautenburg called on the
Commissioners for questions/comments.
Mr. Carter asked how big the individual units are going to be. Mr. Green stated the
typical size of this type of unit varies. It could range from 15 feet wide by 30-40 feet deep
up to 25 to 55. It is going to be a mix of self -storage component and also the
mancave component. The mancaves are typically used for and have been
successful in attracting work/storage spaces for carpenters, plumbers, etc. who can
put their supplies, etc. in these units as well as having a small office space so that
they can go inside and work also. Some people use them as garages and places to
store hobby items, etc. The units will be air conditioned as well.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING PAGE 12
AGENCY MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 15, 2022
Mr. Christino asked if these units are going to be sold. Mr. Green stated that has
not yet been decided. In other projects like this people actually own the units. It
depends on what the local codes are. He agreed with Ms. Frazier that the current
conceptual plan is just to show what may be the layout. Mr. Christino is also
concerned about large vehicles being used in that area and how that will affect the
roads. Mr. Green reviewed that every street is designed for tractor -trailers, so
anything less than 80,000 pounds on an axle is simple as far as the roadway is
concerned.
Ms. Battles asked regarding the units being air conditioned. She asked if each man
cave will have separate utilities. Mr. Green said that will depend, but now there is
water and sewer available. The applicant will discuss that with staff in terms of
defining the site plan. Ms. Frazier emphasized that this is not living space. Mr.
Green stated that the applicant will adhere to the criteria that are stated in the
zoning and the land development code.
There being no one present in chambers or on Zoom who wished to speak in favor
of or against this project, and nothing further from staff or the Commission
members, Ms. Kautenburg called for a motion.
A motion recommending approval of the rezoning request was made by Ms. Battles
and seconded by Ms. Kinchen, who stated that the motion should include the Spirit
of Sebastian's request for additional buffering and the right-of-way request for
widening of Old Dixie Highway for future use, and use of additional fencing as
security measures.
Roll Call
Ms. Battles -- Yes
Mr. Lucier -- Yes
Ms. Jordan -- Yes
Ms. Kinchen -- Yes
Vote was 7-0 in favor. Motion passes.
Mr. Carter -- Yes
Mr. Simmons -- Yes
Ms. Kautenburg -- Yes
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING PAGE 13
AGENCY MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 15, 2022
VIII. Unfinished Business: -- None
IX. New Business -- None
X. Adjourn
There being no further business, Vice Chair Kautenburg adjourned the meeting at
8:07
p.m.
M
jg
Date:
array
SE ksTIAN
FL
HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND
Community Development Department
Site Plan Modification
Staff Report
1. Project Name: Taco Mobile Restaurant — Site Modification
2. Requested Action: Modification of an existing restaurant site to formally add
additional parking areas on three adjacent parcels located
to the east (Lots 2, 3 & 4), including a small kitchen
expansion and outside seating areas, along with the
requisite landscaping and stormwater management
system.
3. Project Location
a. Address: 825 Sebastian Boulevard
b. Legal: Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, Block 188, Sebastian Highlands Unit 6,
according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 5,
Pages 93 through 97 inclusive, of the Public Records of
Indian River County
C. Indian River County Parcel Numbers: 31-38-13-00001-1880-00001.0
31-38-13-00001-1880-00002.0
31-38-13-00001-1880-00003.0
31-38-13-00001-1880-00004.0
4. Project Owners: Javier & Melina Zamarripa
100 S. Orange Street
Fellsmere, FL 32948
(772) 360-8408
5. Project Engineer: Todd N. Smith, PE, Inc.
1717 Indian River Boulevard, Suite 302
Vero Beach, FL 32960
(772) 559-3699 tnspe@bellsouth.net
6. Project Surveyor: William B. Zentz, PLS
684 Old Dixie Highway
Vero Beach, FL 32962
(772) 567-7552
7. Project Description
a. Narrative of proposed action: A previous site plan modification for
additional parking and a small kitchen expansion was approved in
December 2019 by the PZ Commission for the Taco Mobile Restaurant
located at 825 Sebastian Boulevard. Landclearing occurred but the
modifications were never constructed. The restaurant owners have since
acquired an additional adjacent lot, and wish to add it into their expansion
project. The three adjacent lots to the east are proposed to be joined with
the existing restaurant parcel, cleared, and stabilized with asphalt millings
for a much needed additional parking area, along with requisite
stormwater and landscaping. A 141 SF kitchen expansion, wooden
walkways, 1000 SF of two separate outside seating areas, and
installation of a new lift station are also proposed. New landscaping and
building elevations for lots 2, 3, & 4 will be in accordance with the 512
Overlay District requirements. Landscaping for lot 1 will be brought into
compliance with the original 1996 approved landscape plan.
b. Current Zoning, Future Land Use and Overlay District:
(1) Zoning: C-512 (C-512 Commercial District)
(2) Future Land Use: C-512 (Commercial CR-512 Corridor)
(3) Performance Overlay District: CR 512
C. Adjacent Properties
Zoning
Current Land Future Land Use
Use
North: RS-10
C512/residential LDR
East: C-512
vacant C-512
South: RS-10
residential LDR
West: C-512
commercial C-512
d. Site Characteristics
(1) Total Acreage:
.2 + .15 + .15 + .15 acres =.65 acres
(2) Current Land Use(s):
Restaurant and vacant
(3) Soil:
EauGallie fine sand
(4) Vegetation:
forested uplands —pines, oaks, palms
(5) Flood Hazard:
Zone X
(6) Water Service:
IRC Utilities Water Main
(7) Sanitary Sewer Service:
IRC Utilities Lift Station
2
(8) Parks: Barber Street Sports Complex: % mile
(9) Police/Fire: Indian River Fire — %2 mile
Sebastian Police — 2 miles
8. Comprehensive Plan Consistency
a. Future Land Use: consistent
b. Traffic Circulation: consistent
C. Housing: n/a
d. Public Facilities: n/a
e. Coastal Management: n/a
f. Conservation: consistent
g. Recreation and Open Space: consistent
9. Contents of Site Plan:
a. lot configuration: provided
b. finished ground floor elevation: 24.33 (existing bldg)
C. contours and designating number of dwelling units: n/a
d. square footage of site: 8,666 SF + (3 X 6,400 SF) = 27,866 SF
e. building coverage: 797 SF (existing) + 141 SF (kitchen exp.) + 210 SF
(cooler) + 480 SF (covered outside seating area) = 1,628 SF = 5.8 % (35%
max)
f. square footage of impervious areas and open area:
Total impervious area 16,028 SF = 57.5% (80% maximum)
Open space 11,838 SF = 42.5% (20% minimum)
g. setbacks: None required for additional parking spaces
Building: Required Proposed
Front (north) 74' 79.78'
Front (west) 10' 34.63'
Side 10, 104'
Rear 10, 38.48'
h. scaled drawings of the sides, front and rear of the building or
structure: provided
3
i. generalized floor plan indicating uses and square footage of each
proposed use within each building or structure: provided
j. Building exterior construction materials and color: To match existing
building including color
k. building height: 16 feet (35 ft maximum)
I. location and character of all outside facilities for waste disposal,
storage areas, or display: provided
M. location and dimensions of all curb cuts and driveways: provided
n. number of spaces with their location and dimensions: provided
Required parking: grandfathered from 1996 approved plan = 7 spaces
Existing parking = 7 standard spaces + 1 H/C = 8 spaces
Required parking for modifications:
1000 SF outside seating areas X 1.5 spaces/100 SF = 15 spaces
(kitchen expansion and cooler: none required)
Total Required: 22 spaces
Proposed parking = 29 standard spaces
2 H/C spaces
2 compact spaces
2 motorcycle spaces (counts as 1 regular)
34 spaces
o. details of off-street parking and loading areas (including
requirements of Article XV): provided
P. all off-street vehicular surfaces available for maneuvering: provided
q. surface materials: provided — concrete & asphalt millings
r. number of employees: Uknown
S. type of vehicles owned by the establishment: none
t. If there is a combined off-street parking facility, required
agreements: n/a
U. Location of all pedestrian walks, malls, yards and open spaces:
Provided.
V. location, size, character, and height or orientation of all signs:
Location provided, existing
4
W. location and character of landscaped areas and recreation areas:
provided
X. location, design and character of all public, semi-public, or private
utilities: New lift station location shown
Y. location, height and general character of perimeter or ornamental
walls, fences, landscaping: Provided. A split rail fence will be installed
partially around the southeastern stormwater area to prevent overflow
parking within the area. The plans indicate the location of only 260 LF of
fencing. Since the Landscape Plan shows plantings along the eastern
and southern perimeter of the stormwater pond, staff recommends the
fencing should be extended to run completely along the northern and
western perimeter.
Z. surface water drainage facilities plan certified by an engineer or
architect registered in the State of Florida: Provided
aa. location of existing easements and right-of-way: Provided. Two 6-
foot, side, public utility & drainage easements (PU&DE), established per
the subdivision plat, will be required to be abandoned. The eastern
easement on Lot 1, and easements on Lots 2 & 3 have been previously
abandoned by City Council.
bb. Land survey with complete legal description prepared and certified
by a registered surveyor: Provided
CC. Verified statement showing each and every individual person having
a legal and/or equitable ownership interest in the subject property:
Provided
10. Site location and character of use: Provided
11. Access, internal circulation, off-street parking and other traffic impacts:
a. internal circulation system design and access/egress
considerations: Provided.
b. separation of vehicular and pedestrian areas: Provided
12. Open space and landscape (including the requirements of Article XIV):
a. Calculations of required type, dimensions and square footage of
landscape materials and of required landscape areas, including: total
site area, parking area, other vehicular use area, percentage of non -
vehicular open space, perimeter and interior landscape strips, and
required number of trees: Provided
b. Location of required landscape areas and dimensions: Provided
5
C. Location, name, height and size of all existing plant material to be
retained: Provided. Also, a note has been added to the Landscape Plan
that establishes "If any trees noted to received tree credits are removed
during landclearing or construction, tree replacements must occur based
on the number of tree credits received with replacements planted at a
minimum 12 feet in height at planting and with a minimum 6-foot canopy
spread."
d. Location, size, height and description of all landscape material
including name, quantity, quality, spacing, and specified size and
specification of all plant materials: Provided
e. Height, width, type, material and location of all barriers of nonliving
material: None proposed
f. Location, dimensions and area of landscaping for freestanding signs:
Existing
g. Show all landscaping, buildings, or other improvements on adjacent
property within five (5) feet of the common property line: Provided
h. C-512 Overlay District special landscape requirements: Provided —
berm with canopy & understory trees along CR-512 shown
13. Required screening of abutting residential and nonresidential uses:
An existing wooden fence is located behind the building on Lot 1 facing the
adjacent residential area south. However, an opaque buffer will need to be
added to the adjacent 3 lots now included with the restaurant site in order to be
in compliance with the buffering requirement. The applicants can extend the
existing wood fence east along the alleyway to the property line, or increase the
height of the proposed southern hedge shown on the Landscape Plan to 5 or 6
feet.
14. Flood prone land and wetland preservation: N/A
15. Surface water management: Provided
16. Available potable water: Yes
17. Wastewater service: New lift station
18. Soil erosion, sedimentation control and estuary protection: Provided
19. CR-512 Overlay District Requirements:
Proposed parking area lighting is shown on the plan. However, the Overlay
regulations require the lighting to be of a decorative type. No lighting details
were provided. Before installation, details on the lighting fixtures and poles
should be provided to staff for approval.
1.1
20. Additional considerations: A) Stormwater calculations have been received
with the application and reviewed. Because the property is less than 10 acres,
with less than 2 acres of impervious area being added, a formal modification to
the existing SJRWMD permit is not required. An exemption certification form will
need to be submitted to St. John's by the project engineer when the construction
begins. Also, as requested by the city's Stormwater Dept., a small conveyance
swale will be added along the south side of the alley pavement to help with
drainage in that area, with details and elevations provided by city staff at time of
construction.
B) Most of the properties along Sebastian Boulevard in the C-512 zoning district
have been platted as 40-foot wide lots, as is the width of the subject parcels. The
county determined that it will not issue individual driveway permits for each lot,
and has developed a Master Curb Cut plan for CR 512, which is incorporated
into Article V of the LDC. Parking areas are required to be in front of buildings
and interconnect with adjacent properties. To facilitate the interconnections,
owners must grant an access easement through their parcels. The dedication of
this easement is required for this project over all four lots, and staff has required
the access easement be constructed of concrete in lieu of the millings proposed
for the parking areas. The applicant has provided staff with the necessary
easement document.
21. Staff Conclusion: The site plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan,
Land Development Code, and CR512 Overlay District.
22. Recommendation: Hold the public hearing regarding the proposed
modifications for the Taco Mobile Restaurant. Staff recommends approval of the
site plan modification dated September 21, 2022 subject to the following
conditions:
The project engineer shall submit a copy of the SJRWMD stormwater
permit or the 10/2 Exemption Certification form before issuance of the
Landclearing permit, and the contractor must contact the City Engineer
to receive details regarding the alley swale before construction along
that roadway begins
2. Receipt of a current Gopher Tortoise survey/inspection will be needed
before the Landclearing permit can be issued
3. Approval by City Council for the abandonment of the two interior 6-foot side
yard utility easements on Lots 3 & 4 before a Certificate of Completion can
be issued for the project
4. The proposed split -rail fence shall be extended to include the entire
northern and western perimeters of the retention area
5. The required rear opaque buffer shall be installed on Lots 2, 3, & 4 by
either extending the existing wooden fence on Lot 1, or increasing the
height of the proposed rear hedge materials to 5-6 feet.
7
6. The proposed light poles and fixtures must be of a decorative type, and be
approved by staff before they are installed.
►L-� al(
o �2
PREPARED DAT
.11
v
01YOF
HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
1225 MAIN STREET is SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32958
TELEPHONE (772) 589-5518 ■ www.citvofsebasfian.orq
❑ PUD — Conceptual Development Plan
❑ PUD — Preliminary Development Plan Aso acres or <)
❑ PUD — Preliminary Development Plan (> than so acres)
❑ PUD — Site Plan
❑ PUD — Final Plat
❑ SITE PLAN (Administrative Approval)
❑ SITE PLAN (New Development)
❑ SUBDIVISION — Division of Single Lot (Residential)
❑ SUBDIVISION — Preliminary Plat Aso acres or <)
❑ SUBDIVISION - Preliminary Plat (> than50 acres)
❑ SUBDIVISION — Construction Plans
❑ SUBDIVISION —Final Plat
SITE PLAN (Major Modification)
❑ SITE PLAN (Minor Modification)
Project Name: '� � Total Site Area: 2% 06(o sf AcrOC [. 1
_ � e l
Parcel ID 7 11-- $$-12, —OGZ74� 1--1 JM?�4 r 0010 I .Cb Devv 2 .d
Address of Site: 02
5
FL. 32.15$
Proposed Use: � .T Land Use: CeM RL4 A-0_0 A -L Zoning:
Applicant Name: ` 1 My l e� 7—A
Address: S2S _X_k K S'Tl xA+ 'F,%-Vt7 , S7 L n A N 1 � L 75 21'; $
Telephone: �.�.T2� 040%, Email: J SYL&mc= 4 wat�
Applicant (If not owner, written authorization (notarized) from owner is required)
Owner:
Address:
Telephone: Email:
Date Received: ,C.1 b 1(i�.�'� �- Fee Paid: $7W-L)O
Received by: —It) D K
FORM A
LSrveyor:
Address: O ! rI � f �r 7-11(a
Telephone: (-� 1S)—soq „ I CA 7, Email: b t l i2 - W bZd awl G�S�f rte �
[Engineer: N.
Address: i 7 1 tjV[ VwL &L-\A? 43%j 11-F . -
Te: l 2lephone-y S�a � q Email: !L'S 12e tqFALL S tA . hl,aC-
Pre - Application Meeting Date:
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT:
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT
I hereby certify that I have read and examined this application and know the same to be true and correct. All
provisions of laws and ordinances governing this type of work will be complied with, whether specified herein or
not. The granting of approval does not presume to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of any other state
oral law regulating construction or the per7ignature
of construction.
r n
Print name Date
Notary:
STATE OF:
COUNTY: 112c-
I hereby certify that on _-r 4l_ 9D-0 as v , 20 personally appeared
,-�V 1 -e+ 7ak^41.rn p CL who is V personally known to me or has produced
identification. Type of identification produced:
[SEAL]
MICNEf LE L FAULKNER Notary Public
�commission8HH126W7 My Commission Expires:
Expires Jury 20,20
B,,&dii TWyF*i0'-- ce600-25.70t9
FORM A