Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-03-2024 PZ MinutesCITY OF SEBASTIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY MINUTES OCTOBER 3, 2024 Call to Order -- Chairperson Kautenburg called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. Pledge of Allegiance -- was recited by all. III. Roll Call Present: Ms. Matthews Mr. Reno (Alternate) �y Ms. Kautenburg Ms. Battles '�D � Mr. Carter Ms. Kinchen t Ms. Lorusso Ms. Geesey E•— d W -CO Absent E Mr. Roberts (Alternate) -- Excused) k Also Present: t9 3 Andrew Mai, Attorney (Zoom) •r— a Dom Bosworth, Community Development Manager 9 Michelle Faulkner, Community Development Ejj N <4 Nicholas Ladyman, AV Technician Janet Graham, Technical Writer IV. Announcements and Agenda Modifications Ms. Kautenburg announced that Mr. Roberts, alternate member, has been excused from tonight's meeting, and the City Attorney Jennifer Cockcroft, was unable to attend tonight's meeting. Andrew Mai, attorney, is joining us tonight via Zoom and is available for questions and guidance should he be needed. There were no objections by Commissioners. Ms. Kautenburg asked if any of the Commissioners have an objection to moving New Business Items A and B to Item No. VII on the agenda. All Commissioners indicated they had no objection. V. ADDroval of Minutes -- Regular meeting of August 1, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY PAGE 2 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 3, 2024 All having indicated that they had read the Minutes of the regular meeting of August 1, 2024, Ms. Kautenburg called for a motion. A motion approving the Minutes of August 1, 2024 as presented was made by Ms. Battles, seconded by Ms. Matthews, and approved unanimously via voice vote. VI. Local Planninq Agency (LPA) Public Hearinqs -- None VII. New Business: A. Accessory Structure Review -- LDC Section 54-2-7.5 -- 197 Delmar Street- 506 SF Detached Garage -- Scott & Donna Huff Ms. Bosworth stated that this item is an accessory structure review for 197 Delmar Street, a 506-square-foot detached garage, for Scott and Donna Huff. Mr. Chris Pinson, 481 Avocado Avenue, Sebastian, introduced himself as representing Mr. Huff. Mr. Huff' could not be here tonight, as he had to go out of town. Mr. Pinson stated that Mr. Huff is proposing an accessory structure on a second lot that he owns, which is tied together through title with his existing house. The garage is a metal building, and it actually exceeds the 500 square footage dimensions by 6 feet due to the contract that he made with the metal building company. Reducing it to meet the 500 square footage dimensions would reduce the square footage by 120 square feet. The construction company did not offer anything in between. The owner has met all efforts to at least meet some of the criteria if the building was to exceed 500 square feet with color swatches that Mr. Pinson has here tonight. The colors that Mr. Huff has chosen match the trim of the house. This lot is located in a very heavily wooded area. He does not have any plans to clear it, and it sits as far back on the property as it possibly can. So Mr. Pinson is here to ask if the 6 feet would be excused as far as the accessory structure is concerned. The other challenge that Mr. Huff has is that it is a red brick house. Brick facades on metal buildings are difficult to do. Mr. Pinson said the slab has already been poured for the accessory building. He asked for any questions or concerns the Commissioners have. There being no Commissioners' questions, Ms. Kautenburg called on staff for their report. Ms. Bosworth stated that, as Mr. Pinson said, only because of 5 square feet is this item before the Commission. She stated that 750 square feet is the threshold that says you have to match the house exactly. If it is over that size, Mr. Huff would have to put bricks PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY PAGE 3 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 3, 2024 somehow on this building. However, it is in the 501-750 feet that says it has to be very similar to the house. Staff is fine with the size, and it meets all the setbacks. Staff wanted to get it as close as possible to some of the paint colors being similar to the house. The homeowner is requesting to paint it sandstone, which is more of a beige. That would be up to the Commissioners. They also have an alternative color that is kind of red. Brick is a hard color to match. Mr. Pinson did say that there is a lot of vegetation on the lot, and you are probably not going to see a lot of it from the road. Staff is all right with the Commissioners deciding which color scheme to go with. She asked that Mr. Pinson state how high this garage will be so that it is on the record. Mr. Pinson stated that the total height of the garage is 13 feet. The house elevation is 3 feet higher than the actual garage, so it is going to be well under the threshold of the height of the house. Ms. Bosworth stated that on Page 3 of the Staff Report the recommended conditions for approval are as follows: 1. Submittal of an Auxiliary Driveway Permit application 2. Submittal of a Land Clearing/Tree Removal Permit application 3. Submittal of a Tax Combine Form to the Property Appraiser's Office to create one tax parcel (Unity of Title has already been recorded.) Ms. Matthews asked how much of this lot Mr. Huff is going to clear. Mr. Pinson stated that Mr. Huff is only leaving access for the driveway and the building, and there will be a driveway to the building. Ms. Geesey referred on Page 2, Item 3c, she was confused. Ms. Bosworth explained that item. Ms. Kinchen asked if the owners are going to use the red color. Mr. Pinson said that the owner is proposing to use the sandstone color. Ms. Battles suggested adding a condition that the accessory structure is not taller than the house. Ms. Bosworth stated staff can verify based on the information that is available that the house is 14 feet, and Mr. Pinson has stated for the record that the accessory structure is 13 feet. Staff is comfortable stating that it will meet that condition. There being no further comments/questions, Ms. Kautenburg called for a motion. A motion approving the accessory structure review (LDC) Section 54-2-7.5 for 197 Delmar Street for the addition of a garage with the conditions recommended on Page 3 of the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY PAGE 4 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 3, 2024 Staff Report as well as the sandstone color being permitted was made by Ms. Kinchen and seconded by Ms. Geesey Roll Call Ms. Lorusso -- Yes Ms. Geesey -- Yes Ms. Battles - Yes Ms. Matthews -- Yes Vote was 7 to 0 in favor. Motion carries. Ms. Kinchen — Yes Mr. Carter -- Yes Ms. Kautenburg -- Yes B. Accessory Structure Review -- LDC Section 54-2-7.5 -- 474 Periwinkle Drive -- 748 SF Detached Garage David & Penny Robinson Ms. Bosworth stated this is an accessory structure review request for 474 Periwinkle Drive. This is for a 748-square-foot detached garage. David and Penny Robinson are the homeowners. Ms. Kautenburg called on the homeowners to present their request. David and Penny Robinson identified themselves, and Ms. Robinson said they are requesting approval for an accessory building. It is a metal building. They know that they have to match the color to the house. They have an engineer drawing on how to attach stucco to this metal building, and to make sure that the colors match the home as it is. She stated that they want to use the building to store a boat, a kayak, and some lawn items. There is access on the side of the house from the current driveway. She said they use that area now to get tree limbs, etc. discarded. Ms. Kautenburg called on staff for their report. Ms. Bosworth stated this request is for an accessory structure measuring 748 square feet. This is not a double lot; this is a large single lot on Periwinkle. According to the survey, they will meet all setbacks. She stated that according to staff's review, they meet all the requirements, and the only two additional considerations that staff has are that when the roof is painted, they bring in the specific color so that staff can verify that it will be close to the house. Also, based on one of the pictures that staff has, as you drive past their property you can see that it is very narrow between a palm tree and a meter box and the air conditioner. Staff was not privy as to what size boat or trailer they have to get something back here, and staff was concerned that they might encroach onto the neighbor's property to get back there, Mr. Robinson said that the area is narrow at the very beginning, and it gets wider, at an angle, going back through there. Ms. Bosworth PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY PAGE 5 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 3, 2024 stated that staff recommends approval of the request, with sandstone being the color to match the house. Ms. Kautenburg called for questions/comments from the Commissioners. Ms. Matthews asked if the homeowners are currently driving back there now. Mr. Robinson stated they are, and there are no issues now. He stated that they are not on the neighbors' property when they drive through the area. Ms. Kautenburg asked if there is an easement that will be used. The homeowners stated there is not an easement. Ms. Kautenburg asked if the ground is stable enough for the vehicles. Mr. Robinson said yes. Ms. Bosworth said that staff recommends approval with the condition that they bring staff in the proposed paint color for the roof in order to get it as close as possible to the paint color that is on the house. There being no further questions/comments, Ms. Kautenburg called for a motion. A motion approving the accessory structure for David and Penny Robinson at 474 Periwinkle Street with the condition that they bring into staff paint colors to be approved for the roof was made by Ms. Lorusso and seconded by Mr. Carter. Roll Call Ms. Battles -- Yes Ms. Lorusso -- Yes Ms. Geesey -- Yes Ms. Kinchen -- Yes Vote was 7 to 0 in favor. Motion carries. Mr. Carter -- Yes Ms. Matthews -- Yes Ms. Kautenburg -- Yes Vill. Plannina and Zonina (P&Z) Commission Quasi -Judicial Hearinas A. Quasi -Judicial Public Hearing -- Site Plan Major Modification + Conditional Use Permit -- Dunkin' Donuts 900 U.S. Highway #1 -- 4,810 SF Multi -Unit Commercial Building with Associated Site Improvements - Restaurant with Drive - Through Facility + 2 Retail Units -- RMU (Riverfront Mixed Use) Land Use, CR (Commercial Riverfront) Zoning District PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY PAGE 6 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 3, 2024 Ms. Kautenburg stated that Ms. Battles, because the company she works with has done work on this project, will step down and excuse herself. Because we have one of our alternate members here, Mr. Terry Reno, he will be stepping up to vote in her place. Ms. Bosworth explained that, on some of the City's projects, especially when the City did not have a City Engineer, some of the City's site plans are reviewed with Consulting Engineers. Ms. Battles' firm was the original Consulting Engineer on that project. So, there is the financial element that state statute requires her to step down since her company has benefitted financially from that involvement. Ms. Kautenburg opened the hearing. Ms. Bosworth read the item into the record as set forth above. Ms. Kautenburg asked if any of the Commissioners have ex parte communications or conflicts that they need to disclose other than Ms. Battles. All Commissioners stated they do not. Ms. Bosworth stated that staff and the Project Engineer and the applicant do not have to fill out the speaker cards on the table in the rear. Attorney Mai swore in (via Zoom) all who from the audience would be speaking on this matter. Ms. Kautenburg called on the applicant to make their presentation. Angelina Vitter, PE, MBV Engineering, Inc., identified herself as representing the applicant and owner of the project. She stated that the owner/applicant are in agreement with the conditions that have been placed. She called for comments/questions. Ms. Bosworth stated that staff has given the Commissioners copies and plans for the proposed project. The Staff Report basically mimics all the requirements that come from the City's Land Development Code that the site had to meet. She reviewed some of the items and then stated the conditions of approval. She described where the property is and what the proposed project would entail. She went through the Staff Report, including the additional considerations listed on Page 6 and the recommendations listed on Page 8. She stated that per Page 3 of the Staff Report, this project does meet the required setbacks. She also noted that on Page 3 of the Staff Report there is a scrivener's error where it lists side setbacks. Where it says west, it should say east. She added that, even though the site setback is 10 feet, one of the conditional use criteria is that a building has to be 30 feet from any residential adjacent property. They did meet that requirement. With regards to the Conditional Use Permit, on Page 6 the criteria are met except for No. A (2) that says that the curb cuts for the driveways —one on Cleveland Street and one on US 1—shall be limited to a maximum width of 50 feet and shall be located no closer than 35 feet removed from the property line. The US1 driveway meets that requirement; the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY PAGE 7 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 3, 2024 one on Cleveland is actually 30.6 feet. If they were to move that to meet the requirement, they would have to redesign Cleveland Street where there is some stamped parking. There is also a decorative streetlight and a palm tree. All of three of those items would have to be moved around. She stated that if the commissioners are okay with them being 4.4 feet from the required dimensions, that should be a part of the motion if they would like to waive that condition that that driveway can remain as it is presently. Ms. Kautenburg called for questions/comments from the Commissioners. Mr. Carter -- Regarding the drive -up windows, he asked about the traffic flow there. Mr. Danny Figueiredo described how that will be handled, and Ms. Bosworth described how that traffic flow was arrived at. Mr. Carter said that he wishes the design of the building would adhere to more of the fishing village theme that is mandated for certain areas in the City. Ms. Bosworth described what the construction and amenities will be. She stated that this does meet the Code for what is in the Riverfront Overlay District requirements Ms. Geesey -- She is impressed with the presentation and the plans. She thinks that it will be a good addition to the neighborhood. Her main concern is the rear opaque buffer. She said she would defer to the townhouse tenants and what they want. Ms. Vitter said they are comfortable with the fencing in either location. Ms. Kinchen -- She asked how long this project will take. There was no discussion. Ms. Lorusso -- Her question is in regards to the two retail units. She asked what type of retail can go in and how it would affect the parking figures. Ms. Bosworth said it can be any type of retail. By using the retail for the parking calculations, they have calculated the most intense uses on the site and will have adequate parking. Ms. Matthews -- She asked for an explanation of the drive -through lane as she is confused about that. Ms. Vitter explained that item in detail. Ms. Kautenburg -- She does not have as much issue with the speaker systems as she does with the big trucks with the diesel engines that sit there and roar while they are waiting on their orders. Ms. Kautenburg opened the floor to anyone who wished to speak in favor of this request. There being none, Ms. Kautenburg opened the floor to anyone who is opposed to the request. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY PAGE 8 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 3, 2024 Joe Whitaker -- He is the President of River Oaks Townhomes which are to the east of this property. He asked where precisely the drive-in windows are and where do they border the property. Ms. Vitter placed the drawing on the screen which showed the entire property. Mr. Whitaker stated the only concern the residents of the townhomes have is the noises of ordering the items and the repeating back of what the order is -- whether that is going to be facing the townhomes. Ms. Vitter said there will be a buffer installed on that side of the property. Mr. Whitaker said the residents are opposed to being able to hear the speakers with orders being repeated to the customers. Ms. Kautenburg asked Mr. Whitaker if the association would prefer looking at a fence or looking at shrubbery. Mr. Whitaker said a fence. Robert Cox, River Oaks Townhomes -- He has owned that property since 2018. He appreciates small businesses bringing their businesses to the community. His concern is the amount of noise involved with this business. He stated that he does not think any of the residents in the townhomes are opposed to building and progress, but they want to make sure that their rights as homeowners are considered so they can maintain some sort of quaint fishing village flavor. Mr. Figueiredo replied that they will do their best to comply and not be a nuisance to the neighborhood behind us them. The Dunkin' Donuts has been there for 25 years already. He is aware that it will be a big change. They are going to demolish the old building and put something in that is within the code to the fishermen's style landscape that they have. They will do everything they can to comply and be good neighbors. Mr. Carter spoke as to the fencing and an additional sound barrier. Ms. Bosworth pointed out on the site plan that there will be a lot of foundation planting. They are planting a lot of additional trees, so there will be some buffering. She suggested that staff could require some additional landscaping in the area where the sod is being proposed that would act as a noise buffer also. There is room; she did verify that. It could be a condition of approval, or if you want to talk about an 8-foot fence, that could be a consideration also that would help with the noise. She also suggested, the closer we get some landscaping to the actual sound and where it may be coming from, that it may be a better buffer than the fence. Ms. Bosworth stated that staff does feel that this proposed project meets all the requirements, and staff is recommending approval with the 4 recommended conditions of approval on page 8, along with a number 5, which would state "Additional landscaping shall be planted as a noise buffer that runs along the easternmost drive aisles." That could be made as an additional condition unless a higher fence is desired. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY PAGE 9 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 3, 2024 Ms. Kautenburg asked the Commissioners for additional questions/comments. Mr. Reno stated that he thinks the additional landscaping would be better than a taller fence. All of the other Commissioners were in agreement with Mr. Reno. There being nothing further on this item, Ms. Kautenburg closed the hearing and called for a motion. A motion approving the site plan major modification and conditional use permit for Dunkin' Donuts, 900 U.S. Highway #1, 4810 square feet, multi -unit commercial building with associated site improvements, restaurant with drive -through facility + 2 retail units, RMU (Riverfront Mixed Use) land use, CR (Commercial Riverfront Zoning District. In addition, he included the 5 conditions that staff recommends, which would include the 4 listed plus the additional landscaping in the buffered zone, as well as the conditional use permit application to be approved with the waiver which would allow the existing Cleveland Street driveway to remain at 30.6 feet from the property line instead of the required 35 feet was made by Mr. Carter and seconded by Ms. Kinchen. Roll Call Ms. Kinchen -- Yes Ms. Kautenburg -- Yes Ms. Matthews -- Yes Vote was 7-0 in favor. Motion carries. Ms. Geesey -- Yes Ms. Lorusso -- Yes Mr. Carter -- Yes Mr. Reno (a) -- Yes Ms. Kautenburg thanked the applicant for having put so much work into the plans already. She added it was a breeze reading through these plans as is shown by the limited number of questions left over. IX. Unfinished Business -- None X. Adiournment There being no further business, Ms. Kautenburg adjourned the meeting at 6:59 p.m. jg fEBASTIAN CITY OF SEBASTIAN SPEAKER CARD AND AFFIDAVIT (Please Print- * Asterisk Denotes Required) *NAME: a P—(./ � i I-C-. I,/- -e ,- *STREET ADDRESS: 7 3%_ L le il�_' IC_NU') A *CITY 4% IV *STATE �L : *zip 3a ps3 CONTACT PHONE: CITY RESIDENT: ES NO CITY BUSINESS OWNER: YES / NO CITY PR PERTY OWNER: YES / NO AGENDA ITEM NO: 7 ORGANIZATION REPRESENTING: �Qr �c�kS ww,J�j�c SUBJECT: ax„ AFFIDAVIT: am aware of the rules of this proceeding and I swear or affirm, under penalty of perjury, that all statements an info�rwm tion that I provide in this matter will be truthful. *Signature:+�J� Proceeding Speaker Rules: - Complete card prior to introduction to item - Hand the completed card to City Clerk/Secretary - Speaker will have 5 minutes to address the subject - Additional time may be extended if speaking for an organization or applicant - Speakers will be called upon by the Mayor or Chair 4 Jon SEBASTIAN CITY OF SEBASTIAN SPEAKER CARD AND AFFIDAVIT », ». (Please Print- * Asterisk Denotes Required) *NAME: *STREET ADDRESS: % 3z /-t- _ (¢ *CITY *STATE !C5�L- *ZIP L-2 958 CONTACT PHONE: '77-2- 766 -67,2g CITY RESIDENT:/ NO CITY BUSINESS OWNER: YES /&& CITY PROPERTY OWNER: �O / NO AGENDA ITEM NO: % �A- ) ORGANIZATION REPRESENTING: Sc 1 d j,,r SUBJECT: �, �t /`'1't��.v . �- �%un. kr:1 �o e ✓ �5 a� AFFIDAVIT: I am aware of the rules of this proceeding and I swear or affirm, under penalty of perjury, that all statements and information that I provide in this matter will be truthful. *Signature: Proceeding Speaker Rules: - Complete card prior to introduction to item - Hand the completed card to City Clerk/Secretary - Speaker will have 5 minutes to address the subject - Additional time may be extended if speaking for an organization or applicant - Speakers will be called upon by the Mayor or Chair