Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-20-2011 PZ MinutesThe pledge of allegiance was said by all. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Mr. Roth Mr. Dodd Mr. Simmons Mr. Srinivasan ALSO PRESENT: ANNOUNCEMENTS: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: OLD BUSINESS: NONE NEW BUSINESS: CITY OF SEBASTIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 20, 2011 Chairman Paul called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M. EXCUSED: Mr. Hepler Mr. Cardinale Mr. Paul Mr. Durr (a) Mr. Reyes (a) Rebecca Grohall, Growth Management Director Jan King, Growth Management Manager Robert Ginsburg, City Attorney Dorri Bosworth, Zoning Technician /Secretary Mr. Paul noted for the record that Mr. Hepler has an excused absence, and that Mr. Reyes will be voting in his place. MOTION by Dodd /Simmons to approve the January 6, 2011 Regular Meeting minutes as submitted. Motion was approved unanimously by roll call. Ms. Bosworth noted the page headers had been revised with the correct date. A. DISCUSSION REVIEW OF ARTICLE V, ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CONSIDERATION OF PERMITTED CONDITIONAL USES FOR EACH DISTRICT Ms. Grohall stated that staff was seeking the input of the Commission regarding the permitted and conditional uses allowed in each of the zoning classifications and also wanted to facilitate a discussion about uses not specifically identified in the code, such as crematories and kennels. The Commission discussed different approaches of attack and where they wanted to get started from. Mr. Dodd stated he had marked the Sebastian zoning chart (from Section x co C Cp Ct. 4 I a cz I w u) a) .1 m o c C a e a CON 0_0- in PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 20, 2011 54 -2 -5, given to Commissioners in their agenda packets) with his suggestions, and gave a copy to staff. Mr. Dodd suggested adding two new zoning districts. One was Commercial Waterfront, a district without a residential component. He felt the residential pockets along Indian River Drive might prohibit what he saw as the goals for that area. He thought with the low property prices right now that if you wanted to build a large waterfront house you could actually buy commercial land cheap and convert to a residential use, which is what happened next to the Yacht Club. He went over the uses he suggested for the new district, which did not include any residential or heavy commercial, but uses to try to building the core of the tourist area that he felt the city was trying to establish. Mr. Dodd's second new zoning district was a suggested "512 A" for the Triangle, which also removed residential uses and included cultural and civic facilities, educational clubs, ancillary uses, etc. He could see residential uses as an accessory use to a business, such as the watchman's apartment above the office for the 512 Storage business, but felt a home occupational use as a conditional use by the apartment should be considered. Mr. Dodd reiterated that the CW district should only be along Indian River Drive, that he felt the residences along Old Dixie and N. Central, and areas were fine. Ms. Grohall explained that the intent of creating the existing "mixed use" districts was to develop commercial on a lower floor with a residential use on a 2 -story. Mr. Dodd stated he hears discussion from council meetings regarding "walk traffic people walking around the shops on Indian River Drive. Mr. Dodd questioned if there was one shop then eight houses, one shop then eight houses, are people going to walk around to the shops? He felt this was the opportunity (reviewing the code) to clean up the zoning (eliminating residential uses) if this was when the city wanted to correct this and facilitate their vision for the riverfront. A decision should be made. Mr. Roth had staff verify where the Triangle Overlay District was located, and where its regulations were in the code book. Mr. Reyes inquired if the Commission would be looking at the conditional use criteria, and asked if the proposed algae bio- energy facility was an odd use for staff to consider. Ms. Grohall stated it was, but that the project could be considered a marine related use, which is allowed in the CWR district. Mr. Cardinale stated he would like to see the Commission review areas of the city specifically and state what uses they would like to see instead of jumping around. Mr. Durr agreed and would like to start with the waterfront using Mr. Dodd's chart/worksheet. Mr. Reyes agreed with Mr. Dodd, and felt there were three areas where residential might want to be removed. Mr. Paul was concerned with property rights of the residential owners. Mr. Dodd agreed with something Mr. Minner had stated at a previous meeting that unlike Melbourne, who had a defined downtown, Sebastian had to work on creating one. He felt as planners their recommendation should at least be forwarded to City Council for them to make a final decision. Mr. Dodd went over his marked up chart, explaining some of his suggested clean -up of changing conditional uses to permitted uses and visa versa. He updated some of the 2 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 20, 2011 uses allowed in zoning districts based on what was built in recent times, i.e. allowing equestrian facilities in the Conservation District as a conditional use because a corral had already been built on Main Street. Mr. Dodd went over his recommendations for proposed district "512 A the gateway area to the riverfront, eliminating child care services, nursing homes, and churches, aiming with more tourist -type uses such as clubs, bars, restaurants, and small commercial (under 5,000 sf). Mr. Durr asked staff if it was easier to modify a current zoning district than to create a new one and re- outline the district areas. Ms. Grohall stated it was easier to modify than create. Mr. Durr suggested modifying CWR. Mr. Dodd thought there were areas where CWR was a still a good fit (with the residential). Ms. Grohall asked for verification if it was only single family uses suggested to be removed or would a mixed -use development be OK? Mr. Dodd did not think residents in the riverfront would garner enough financial support to the existing businesses as compared to bringing in more visitors /tourist dollars. He stated he tends to visit Mulligan's in Vero because he can walk around the oceanfront shopping district compared to what is in the area of the Sebastian Mulligan's. He is not anti residential, just wanted to facilitate commercial growth within some of the pockets along the riverfront, understanding this is a long -term plan. Currently, he stated, all RM -8 uses are allowed along Indian River Drive and US #1 houses, duplexes, multi family, foster care homes in the main commercial district Sebastian has. Mr. Roth stated he totally agreed with Mr. Dodd, but was not against a row of shops with condos /apts on the second floor. He felt other businesses potentially would want to relocate to the riverfront if the right planning could generate additional (customer) traffic. He also agreed with the campaign to slow down traffic on US #1. Mr. Paul suggested reviewing line by line using the zoning chart given to them in their packets starting with CWR. RESIDENTIAL USES: The first line item was single family dwellings. Mr. Durr concurred with Mr. Roth with allowing a mixed use building. Mr. Paul inquired about making them conditional uses. Mr. Dodd clarified that the area along N. Central was mainly residential but still zoned CWR. Rebecca explained that if the use was removed the residences could remain but they would become a non conforming use. They would be allowed to rebuild if an act of God occurred, but could not expand. If unused for a certain amount of time, the use would lose its grandfather rights. Mr. Dodd questioned if changing the zoning district boundaries would help. Ms. Grohall felt tweaking the uses within the category was the most direct route. Rezoning was a lengthier process. Mr. Dodd suggested removing single family, duplex, and multiple family dwellings as permitted and adding "All uses permitted in RM -8" as conditional to accommodate a mixed use building. Mr. Ginsburg advised the Commission on the court's view of conditional uses. Mr. Roth felt leaving multi family as permitted would allow for mixed use buildings, and wanted to see Foster care /group homes removed. A discussion was held on "accessory residential uses" vs. "residential uses accessory to permitted uses A suggestion was made to create a term such as "mixed use building" making it a PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 20, 2011 conditional use requiring the residential unit to be in the upper level. Staff stated it will research for a proper term. In the first section of the chart, it was agreed to recommend removal of single family, duplex, and multi family dwellings, accessory uses to permitted uses, foster care, but to keep accessory residential uses and home occupations. COMMUNITY FACILITIES: Mr. Durr felt child care would be good for a mixed use area. Mr. Ginsburg explained to the Commission that the State Legislature had rules regarding day care that preempted some of the local zoning laws. It was decided to remove them since other good child care facilities were available. Cultural or civic facilities change to a permitted use. There was a discussion on educational institutions marine related and the intensity of the use, so it was considered to remove the term "institution Remove nursing homes. There was a discussion regarding an approved "chapel" and the definition of churches in relation to the alcohol ordinances. Remove churches. Remove clubs lodges, and administrative services. Leave utilities as conditional. Staff explained that public parks recreation are usually rezoned to Public Service after they are established (remain as conditional Protective and emergency services to remain conditional. COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES: Ms. Grohall explained that a definition for "accessory uses to conditional uses" would be similar to what the crematory was to the funeral home, and that an applicant would have to prove that the accessory use is not the principal use. Remain as a conditional use. Keep adult entertainment as not permitted. Ms. Bosworth stated, though, that an "adult arcade" is listed in the definition of adult entertainment, and staff has had quite a few inquiries of opening an arcade in the commercial districts. Currently, they are only allowed in the Industrial District. There was a discussion whether to allow the arcades in the riverfront area. Mr. Roth felt that the arcades should be re- categorized. However, there was no change recommended. Keep bait tackle shops. Add bar lounges as permitted. Movable (food) vendors were discussed, currently not allowed. The Commissioners felt it was a use they would like to see in the riverfront. Staff stated they would look into the Code of Ordinances and LDC to see what would need to be addressed. Keep bed breakfast as conditional, and boat sales rentals as permitted. There was a discussion regarding business /professional offices and whether they should remain in CWR. Mr. Dodd stated he thought the uses in CWR should be creating the area along Indian River Drive and CR more along US #1 where he felt the banks and professional offices should be located. Mr. Roth felt an office in a strip building would work. Staff felt it was a good conversion use for some of the small residences along the riverfront. It was decided to keep but change to conditional. No drive thrus. From the chart, the following uses: Commercial amusement, enclosed through Commercial retail 20,000 SF should remain the same. There was a discussion on Farmer's markets, and it was decided to leave it as is since most would be done on a temporary basis as a special event. From Fish markets packing facilities to Marine fuel sales remain the same. The Commission would like to see Marine power sales service added as a conditional use, and staff will verify that definition (vs. boat sales service). Marine specialty retail to remain the same. Remove medical services. The rest of the chart should remain the same except that Trade skilled services and Wholesale trades services should be marine related (conditional use vs. additional use added to chart?). 4 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 20, 2011 The next district to be reviewed would be Commercial Riverfront (CR) district CHAIRMAN MATTERS: The road projects were updated, with Barber Street project being near completion. Mr. Paul asked about some of the driveways being totally replaced on some properties while others were just portions. MEMBERS MATTERS: None DIRECTOR MATTERS: Ms. Grohall invited all to visit the Sebastian Fine Art Music Festival this weekend down on the riverfront, and to also visit our neighbors to the west for the Fellsmere Frog Leg Festival. ATTORNEY MATTERS: None Chairman Paul adjourned the meeting at 9:34 p.m. (1/25/11 db) 5