Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07182002MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING JULY 18, 2002 Chairman Barrett called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. The Pledge of Allegiance was said. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Mr. Mahoney Chron. Barrett Mr. Blessing (a) Mr. Rauth Ms. Monier VC Smith Ms. Reichert Mr. Svatik EXCUSED ABSENCE: Mr. Faille (a) ALSO PRESENT: Tracy Hass, Growth Management Director Jan King, Growth Management Manager Rich Stringer, City Attorney Dorri Bosworth, Secretary/Zoning Technician ANNOUNCEMENTS: Chairman Barrett excused Mr. Faille's absence, welcomed Mr. Norman Blessing (alternate member) to his first meeting, and congratulated commissioner Lisanne Monier on her being Sebastian's Women of the Year. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: (6/20/02) A voice vote was taken. 7- 0, minutes approved. OLD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: A. Accessory Structure Reviews - Section 54-2-7.5: 1. 1751 Mainsail Street- G. Barth - 20' X 12' shed The homeowner, Gary Barth, was present and stated the color of the shed would be similar to the house - off white with a tan or dark brown trim. Chron. Barrett verified there was a permit for the auxiliary driveway. Staff gave their presentation and recommended approval. PLANNiNG AND ZONiNG COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 18, 2002 Ms. Monier clarified with the owner that the secondary driveway was not for the use of the shed. Mr. Mahoney noticed that the $50 accessory structure review fee had not been collected. MOTION by Monier/Reichert "I'11 make a motion we approve the 20' X 12' shed at 1751 Mainsail Street." Roll call: Chmn. Barrett - yes Mr. Mahoney - yes Mr. Smith - yes Mr. Svatik - yes Mr. Rauth - yes Ms. Monier - yes Ms. Reichert ~ yes The vote was 7 - 0. Motion carried. 2. 773 Ellingsen Avenue - K. Thompson - 36' X 28' detached garage The homeowner, Ken Thompson, was present and answered questions from the staff report stating the color would match the house and that the exterior wall height was 8 feet. He also had received a permit for the secondary driveway. The garage was going to be used to store a second vehicle, utility trailer, and work tools. Chmn. Barrett questioned the sign-off signatures required to have the concrete sidewalk cross the property line between the lots. Mr. Thompson stated he could use stepping-stones if it created a problem. Staff explained concrete was fine and went over the process of getting the sign-offs. Mr. Svatik questioned the number of electrical outlets in the garage. Ms. Reichert verified the garage was not being used for a business. MOTION by Reichert/Smith "I'll make the motion that we approve a 35.6' X 28' garage for Ken and Debbi Thompson at 773 Ellingsen Avenue." Roll call: Mr. Mahoney - yes Mr. Smith - yes Ms. Monier - yes Mr. Svatik - yes Ms. Reichert - yes Mr. Rauth - yes Chmn. Barrett - yes The vote was 7 - 0. Motion carried. B. Quasi-Judicial Public Hearing - Request for Waiver of Section 54-4- 21.A.5(c)(8), Riverfront Overlay District - Sebastian Retail Shoppes Chmn. Barrett opened the public hearing at 7:13 p.m. The representatives and Mr. Hass were sworn in. Mike Fisher, 1915 Airport Boulevard, Melbourne, Florida with P.A.V.C.O. Construction was present representing the applicant along with Mr. Larry Maxwell, project architect. He explained PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 18, 2002 how much they had worked with staff and visited other projects to meet design criteria required for the project. He discussed the memo to the Board from Mr. Hass and iterated that the parapet wall was a mistake and there were no intentions to skirt any of the codes. The problem with correcting the mistake now is that the foundation was not designed for it and the flow of water off the roof was not properly designed for the addition of a parapet wall. Mr. Smith questioned if the developer received copies of the 5 conditions of site plan approval and why the rear parapet wall was not incorporated into the building plans. Mr. Maxwell stated that staff had directed him to review the new Publix project on U.S. #1 and they had incorporated that style into the Retail Shoppes. Publix did not have a full rear parapet wall, and also the roadway behind the Retail Shoppes was private. They thought they had met the design criteria. Chmn. Barrett asked if there were any ex-page communications by the commissioners. None. Staffreviewed the history of the project after the Commission approved the site plan in December and the possibilities of where the mistake was made. Mr. Hass stated alternative designs for correction could be decorative fencing or a shutter system, or additional landscaping. Ms. Monier felt the codes should have been reviewed a bit more by the developer keeping the project closer to the "small town integrity" that Sebastian was trying to retain. She didn't want to see a precedent started of allowing developers not having to correct their mistakes, and thought the wall should be fixed. Mr. Rauth asked the architect if any of the corrective options - fencing, shutters, or landscaping - could not be done. Mr. Maxwell felt the landscaping was the most reasonable solution. Ms. Reichert stated her preference would be lattice or decorative shielding that could be removed during a hurricane. Landscaping would take too long to grow and develop into enough of a visual semen. Mr. Fisher stated the fencing could be similar to what Ruby Tuesdays used. Mr. Svatik questioned what engineering analysis had been done to support that a parapet wall could not be added at this time. Mr. Maxwell stated the water flow and roof drainage would be most affected and explained how difficult it would be to do a roof addition and not affect the water flow. Mr. Svatik and Chmn. Barrett gave suggestions and discussed adding scuppers in a continuous pattern along with lateral piping to the downspouts as a solution. Also discussed was a stucco, not concrete, false parapet wall with support dowels & epoxy into a metal frame. Staff stated a waiver had to be given before an alternative solution could be allowed. Mr. Hass recommended granting the waiver for the parapet wall and going with the decorative screening like Ruby Tuesdays. Mr. Stringer was sworn in. He stated a letter from the developer had said the rear wall could not structurally support a parapet wall, and that was why the Commission was being presented with options. Chmn. Barrett felt structural solutions had not been looked into thoroughly. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 18, 2002 Sal Neglia, 461 Georgia Blvd, was sworn in. He stated Mr. Fisher had told City Council they would build the parapet wall. Also, he felt the conditional C/O should not have been issued and the city engineer should have stepped in. Betsy Field-Connelly, 149 Kildare Drive, stated the Commission should stand their ground and make the developer follow the codes. Chmn. Barrett closed the public hearing at 8:00 p.m. Mr. Rauth had the City Attorney explain the waiver process. Mr. Mahoney questioned why the developer was not asking for a variance. Mr. Stringer stated they could not meet the criteria to have the variance granted. Chmn. Barrett suggested the developers look further into ways of adding the parapet wall and return before the Commission with definitive plans. MOTION by Smith/Svatik "I make a motion that we table this item on Sebastian Retail Shoppes, rear parapet wall, table it for two weeks." Amendment to MOTION by Svatik/Rauth "Table it for two weeks with the stipulation that it is understood the waiver is denied." Mr. Stringer explained that a "blanket" waiver is denied, which is like a partial denial. A blanket waiver's denied; it's tabled for two weeks to consider an application that involves modifications. Roll call on amendment: Mr. Svatik - yes Mr. Mahoney - yes Mr. Smith - yes Mr. Rauth - yes Ms. Monier - yes Ms. Reichert - yes Chmn. Barrett - yes The vote was 7 - 0. Amendment carried. Roll call: Mr. Svatik - yes Mr. Mahoney - yes Mr. Smith - yes Mr. Rauth - yes Ms. Monier - yes Ms. Reichert - yes Chnm. Barrett - yes The vote was 7 - 0. Motion carried. Chmn. Barrett called for a break at 8:12 p.m. The meeting resumed at 8:23 p.m. All members were pmsent. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 18, 2002 C. Quasi-Judicial Public Hearings - Site Plan Review/Conditional Use Permit - Capt. Butchers FIoodtide Marina & Seafood - 1732 Indian River Drive - Addition of Retail & Residential Development Chmn. Barrett opened the public heating at 8:24 p.m. Mr. John King, representative for the applicant, and Randy Mosby, project engineer, were present and sworn in. Staff previously had been given oath. There were no ex-parte communication disclosures by the members. Mr. King reviewed how the project was designed in keeping with the Riverfi:ont District Charrette Report, the extension of Jackson Street, and the proposed development. The project would be done in phases, and would be hooking up to County water & sewer. Staff iterated the City was very open to extending Jackson Street and that the construction agreement would be reviewed by City Council. The resort units of the project required conditional use approval. Mr. Hass explained that in order for the City to have its street, and for the developer to have adequate parking for his project, the design included parking within the new street public ROW. The spaces would be available for public use but would also be calculated towards the parking requirements for the project. The applicant would also be constructing a connecting sidewalk to U.S. #1, and lighting to match the poles on Indian River Drive. The proposed perimeter fencing would be modified to a berm with landscaping. Staff recommended approval with the 4 conditions listed in the staff report. Mrs. Reichert didn't like the amount of compact car spaces proposed for the site but was happy with the extension of Jackson Street. She was concerned with pedestrian safety and traffic control. Mr. King said they would work with the city on installing signs, brick paver crossings, whatever was needed for making the site pedestrian safe. Mr. Rauth questioned the modification to the fencing. Mr. Hass responded that the berm and landscaping would meet the requirement of a 90% opaque buffer. Mr. King stated there were a few large oak trees on the property lines they would rather not disturb, and that most of the surrounding propeiXies had commercial uses also - canvas shop and boat storage to the north, and a woodworking shop to the south. Mr. Ranth wanted to see some landscaping in the center of Jackson Street to break the expanse of pavement. Staff stated there was no room for landscaping in order to fit in the required parking. A variance could be given on the number of parking spaces in order to achieve more landscaping. Ms. Monier questioned if the existing dockage and water would be opened to the public. Mr. King stated it would be available for Capt. Butcher customers and the commercial fishing operations. Ms. Monier felt the project was too commercial and did not meet the riverfront vision. She did not like the proposed elevations. Mr. Svatik and Mr. King discussed what benefits each party would receive from the developer's agreement for the construction of Jackson Street. Mr. Svatik felt the developer would be getting much more than the City. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 18, 2002 Mr. Mahoney had concerns that Jackson Street would function as a collector street but was designed as a parking lot. He questioned speed, signalization, traffic calming measures, and the lack ora sidewalk on the south side of the new street. He felt the design of the whole site was not plausible or workable. Mr. King stated that the site plan could be submitted with out Jackson Street, and they could just build a parking lot for the use of Capt. Butchers. They had worked with City staff to accommodate the citizens and customers and benefit many instead of few. Mr. Mahoney also discussed density and lot coverage with staff. Mr. Blessing was concerned that an addition of a restaurant would increase traffic. Mr. King stated that a restaurant was not planned for at this time. Mr. Blessing felt that with all the resort units tenants would be coming and going for meals creating too much traffic activity. Mr. Rauth asked if the total 167 parking spaces would be open to the public. Staff stated the spaces in the Jackson Street ROW would be open. Mr. Mahoney questioned the City's liability with parking in the street. Mrs. Reichert felt the street extension would connect the U.S. #1 businesses with the Indian River Drive commercial area completing a good vehicle/pedestrian Sebastian circle. Betsy Field-Connelly, 149 Kildare Drive, questioned if the public using the parking would make it difficult for patrons of the resort to find parking, what benefit and why would the public want to park at this location, and was there a need for more resort units. Sal Neglia, 461 Georgia Boulevard, had questions regarding the sidewalk, parking on Jackson Street, if the infrastructure was being built first, and pedestrian safety. Thomas Connelly, 149 Kildare Drive, felt that the site would work, but because it was illegal to park on his street, he didn't want any parking on the applicant's street either. Jeff Hickman, 134th Street, asked about handicap parking, viewing the plans, keeping green space, and adjusting the building heights. Marcia Hall, 7711 Roseland Road, asked about the percentage of native plants being used, to use the Tree Advisory Board and Florida Native Plant Society as a resource for landscape plans, and commented on the compact car spaces. The public hearing was closed at 9:35 p.m. Mr. Rauth asked about provisions for boat trailer parking and if the applicant would consider building a public access area to the river. Mr. King stated there was no plan at this time for a trailer parking area and Mr. Mosby stated it would be difficult to get proper permits through all the agencies for an access ramp. Mr. Rauth stated an observation deck or public fishing pier could account more for citizens wanting to use the public parking spaces than just to park to take a walk. MOTION by Reichert/Smith PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 18, 2002 "I'll make a motion that we approve the site plan for mixed-use development for Capt. Butchers including the Jackson Street as first phase with all sidewalks included as presented, with the conditions 1 thru 4 on the staff report." Roll call: Mr. Mahoney - no Mr. Smith - yes Ms. Monier - no Mr. Rauth - no Ms. Reichert - yes Mr. Svatik - no Chmn. Barrett - yes The vote was 3- 4. Motion denied. Chmn. Barrett called for a break at 9:49 p.m. The meeting resumed at 9:57 p.m. All members were present. D. Public Hearing - Recommendation to City Council - Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Land Use Map Change - Sebastian River Landings PUD - 72.5 Acres - L-1 to LDR- SE corner of CR510/CRS12 Public Hearing - Recommendation to City Council - PUD Conceptual Development Plan/Rezoning - Sebastian River Landings - A-1 to PUD-R- Planned Unit Development - Residential Chmn. Barrett opened the public hearing at 9:58 p.m. The applicants, Timothy Jelus & Hugh Evans, 1688 W. Hibiscus Blvd., Melbourne, and Randy Mosby & Bruce Moya, project engineers, were present and sworn in. Mr. Jelus explained that the project's property was an abandoned citrus grove, was for sale, and was going to be developed by his company. He felt the City of Sebastian would like to have control over the design standards and construction, which was why they were requesting to be annexed into the City. Mr. Smith questioned if it was legal to review the land use and zoning applications before the subject property was officially annexed in. Mr. Stringer stated yes. Mr. Jelus gave a review of the proposed subdivision including density, street layout, needed permits, community house, pool, and a CR 510 commercial node. Mr. Hass stated because of the size of the proposed commercial node and what was allowed in a PUD development, staff recommended separating the commercial node from the PUD and giving it a separate land use and zoning. He also explained the developers were applying to St. Johns for on-site stormwater treatment system, which the water would then be released in to the St. Sebastian river. Mr. Blessing had concerns regarding the entrance off of CR512 being so close to a busy intersection. Mr. Jelus responded that they would be working intensely with the County on definitive design plans especially since the County had plans to widen CR512 in that area. He reiterated the Commission was just reviewing conceptual plans. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 18, 2002 Mr. Mahoney had questions regarding Urban Service Areas. Mr. Svatik asked the applicant why he wanted to annex into Sebastian. Mr. Jelus responded that they felt Sebastian would benefit from the proposed development more than Indian River County. Pete Connelly, 457 Lighthouse Avenue, land acquisition person for Forte Macaulay Developers (applicant), stated staff had indicated to him the City wished to pursue annexation of adjoining properties. Mrs. Reichert had questions regarding stormwater run-off into the river, concerns about a possible cattle dipping facility that used arsenic, rumored to have been on the subject property, and traffic congestion with three schools in the area. She also questioned if the property was considered contiguous with the property to the east {within the city limits} because of the ROW along the river. Mr. Stringer stated yes. Betsy Field-Connelly, 149 Kildare Drive, would like to see Sebastian stay small town, and questioned if adequate services were given to existing residents now. Irene Thompson, 1531 Spinnaker Lane, stated she was against the annexation because it would lead to additional larger annexations. Ann Putman, Sebastian resident, remembered a land study done on the subject property which found e-coli in the river from the defunct dairy farm and an empty arsenic tank from dipping the cows. She had questions on construction setbacks from the river. Sal Neglia, 461 Georgia Boulevard, asked about recycling irrigation water, if a gated community, and Police and Fire services. Heather Bryant, Sharkmart, fully supported the annexation. Walt Stieglitz, 9871 Riverview Dr. Micco, Marine Resources Council & Pelican Island Preservation Society & Friends of St. Sebastian River representative, spoke on protecting water conditions of the river and Indian River Lagoon, and stormwater mn-off ramifications of the proposed project. Shirley Kilkelly, 950 Franciscan Avenue, also had concerns about a possible arsenic contamination, and asked that a condition of approval be added to require a Florida certified test for chemicals. Mr. Pete Connelly stated that an environmental audit had been done on the property and that the closest cattle dip-pit was two miles away. Bruce Moya, project engineer, responded to stormwater concerns. Chmn. Barrett closed the public hearing at 10:49 p.m. Mr. Stringer reviewed the process for land use change and rezoning and reiterated that the Commission was not making a decision or recommendation on the annexation request. MOTION by SvatikfRauth PLANNiNG AND ZONiNG COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 18, 2002 "l make a motion to approve the land use change from L-l(county) to LDR as stated in the amendment application in accordance with items 1 and 2 of the staff report" Roll call: Mr. Svatik - yes Mr. Mahoney - yes Chmn. Barrett - yes Mr. Rauth - yes Mr. Smith - yes Ms. Reichert - no Ms. Monier - yes The vote was 6- 1. Motion carried. MOTION by Monier/Smith "I'll make the motion that we rezone the Sebastian River Landings PUD from A-1, agricultural, to a PUD-R?' Roll call: Mr. Mahoney - yes Mr. Smith - yes Ms. Monier - yes Mr. Svatik - yes Ms. Reichert - no Mr. Rauth - yes Chmn. Barrett - yes The vote was 6- 1. Motion carried. CHAIRMAN MATTERS: Chmn. Barrett asked if a workshop had been scheduled for telecommunication towers. MEMBERS MATTERS: Mr. Rauth explained why he thought Sebastian Landings wanted to annex into the City. Ms. Monier stated she would not be attending the August 1st and 15th meetings. She would be out- of-state. Mr. Svatik asked about legal liabilities regarding arsenic fields. DIRECTOR MATTERS: None ATTORNEY MATTERS: Mr. Stringer stated that from discussion with City Council the earliest workshop could be scheduled in September. Chron. Barrett adjourned the meeting at 11:10 P.M. (7/25/02DB) 9 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 18, 2002 "I make a motion to approve the land use change from L-l(county) to LDR as stated in the amendment application in accordance with items 1 and 2 of the staff report" Roll call: Mr. Svatik - yes Mr. Mahoney - yes Chmn. Barrett - yes Mr. Rauth - yes Mr. Smith - yes Ms. Reichert - no Ms. Monier - yes The vote was 6- 1. Motion carried. MOTION by Monier/Smith "I'11 make the motion that we rezone the Sebastian River Landings PUD from A-l, agricultural, to a PUD-R." Roll call: Mr. Mahoney - yes Mr. Smith - yes Ms. Monier - yes Mr. Svatik - yes Ms. Reichert - no Mr. Rauth - yes Chron. Barrett - yes The vote was 6- 1. Motion carried. CHAIRMAN MATTERS: Chmn, Barrett asked if a workshop with the City Council had been scheduled for telecommunication towers, MEMBERS MATTERS: Mr. Rauth explained why he thought Sebastian Landings wanted to annex into the City. Ms. Monier stated she would not be attending the August 1st and 15t~ meetings. She would be out- of-state. Mr. Svatik asked about legal liabilities regarding arsenic fields. DIRECTOR MATTERS: None ATTORNEY MATTERS: Mr. Stcinger stated that from discussion with City Council the earliest workshop could be scheduled in September. Chmn. Barrett adjourned the meeting at 11:10 P.M. (7/25/02 DB) 9