Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03152012LPA Minutes� LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY (PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION) THURSDAY, MARCH 15, 2012 Chairman Dodd called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL: PRESENT EXCUSED Mr. Dodd Mrs. Kautenburg (a) Mr. Carter Mr. Roth Mr. Reyes Mr. Qizilbash Mr. Durr Mr. Paul Mr. Dyer (a) ALSO PRESENT: Joe Griffin, Community Development Director Jan King, Senior Planner Robert Ginsburg, City Attorney Dorri Bosworth, Planner/Secretary ANNOUNCEMENTS: N � � �C� C ,� �o � •� � � � LL. � � � O, � �U � � � m � � ,t2 '� � o c � 4 a a.� �i} N Q Q (n Chmn. Dodd welcomed Mr. Larry Paul back to the Commission, and welcomed Ms. Louise Kautenburg, a newly appointed alternate member, who would be voting in place of Mr. Roth. Mr. Dyer, who could not attend, was also welcomed as a newly appointed alternate member to the Commission, too. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MOTION by Paul/Carter to approve the regular minutes from Thursday, February 16, 2012. Motion was approved unanimously by voice vote. OLD BUSINESS: NEW BUSINESS: None A. DISCUSSION — REVIEW OF LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE — ARTICLE VI, CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA — CONSIDERATION OF CRITERIA BEING ESTABLISHED FOR NEW CONDITIONAL USES CREATED THRU CURRENT REVIEW OF ARTICLE V, ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS Chmn. Dodd stated the Commission would be considering new conditional use regulations for modified permitted uses they were proposing to change. Staff had inserted into Article VI, for discussion, suggested regulations which were received from the Commissioners before packets had been compiled. Suggested regulations received by Mr. Roth closer to the meeting date were placed at the Commissioner's seats. Staff noted that the suggestions received had actually changed some of the previously agreed upon uses, and requested the Commission to clarify what they wanted to � � E � recommend. Also placed at the Commissioner's seats was the district matrix, and staff explained that the uses highlighted in yellow were the uses that needed clarification, and those highlighted in pink were the new conditional uses that needed criteria to be established. Chmn. Dodd suggested the clarifications for the uses could be made when the new criteria were discussed. The new conditional use criteria were listed in Article VI alphabetically by use. The first use discussed was Business & Professional Offices, excludinq drive-throuqh facilities, in the CWR zoning district, proposed to be changed from permitted to conditional. The new criteria proposed mirrored the conditional use criteria item #5 currently required for Business & Professional Offices, including drive- through facilities, allowed in other commercial zoning districts. Staff questioned the requirement for a wall/barrier if usual office hours were considered. After discussion, the Commissioners concurred on the proposed criteria. Churches were discussed noting that there was existing criteria, but that they were being changed from permitted to conditional in two new zoning districts - CR and CWR. Mr. Durr felt they would not be a good fit in the CWR district since they might affect future restaurant and entertainment developments. Ms. Kautenburg agreed. There was discussion regarding the approved site plan which proposes a future chapel on the Sembler property, and also the minimum size lot a new church would require. The city attorney opined that a chapel was not the same as a church. It was the consensus of the Commission to remove churches entirely from the CWR district. Item (15A) was the addition of Duplexes as conditional uses in CR and CWR zoning districts. Chmn. Dodd reviewed the four new proposed criteria which addressed the requirement of a commercial use on site, size [no more than 50%], detached or attached, parking and landscaping. Mr. Qizilbash stated because these were primarily commercial districts, he would like to see the percentage number be less. There was discussion regarding the possible sizes of housing units, including single-family, duplexes, and multi-family on the second floor of a large two-story commercial building. Mr. Durr suggested only allowing attached units. Mr. Dodd reviewed that some of the lots in the riverfront area are deep and could accommodate a commercial building upfront with a residential structure in the back. Ms. Kautenburg felt that if only attached structures on the second floor were allowed, those deep lots would be losing some of their property rights by restricting the development on the lots. Mr. Griffin stated he also like the attached angle, directing future mixed-use development to buildings with commercial use on the first floor and residential above, but didn't feel that we could legally dictate that. Discussion ensued regarding restricting attached only in the CR district, but allowing both [attached and detached] in CWR, and if the residential structure was up front, with a commercial building in the rear, would that disrupt the development vision the commissioners were trying to achieve. Staff pointed out that single-family and duplexes required carports or garages, so that attached, second-story units may still need a detached garage building on the site. Mr. Dodd polled the Commissioners to see if they wanted to allow both detached and attached structures, or only require attached. A majority of the members, four, stated they would like to see both allowed. The Commissioners agreed on the proposed percentage number of 50%. 2 Different scenarios of mixed use development were discussed using the 50% requirement such as a proposed commercial building with a second-story duplex, but also a single-family dwelling behind the commercial building. Staff stated the amounts could be looked at cumulatively. Foster care/qroup homes with =/< 6 residents was proposed to be changed to a conditional use in the CWR zoning. Ms. Bosworth stated there were State statutes that prohibited local ordinances from preventing group homes in residential areas, and therefore she was not sure if the use should be changed to conditional. Mr. Dodd explained that the new criteria proposed were the same as for foster care/group homes with more than 6 residents. Mr. Ginsburg stated it was correct that the State preempted local regulations but he felt the city could set standards for the use, and have them in place if there were any future changes in the State regulations. The Commissioners agreed to leave as proposed. Mr. Dodd reviewed the three new conditions proposed for Marine power sales and service in the CWR district, one of which they must be ancillary to permitted marine facilities along with sales activity only allowed at permitted docks. Mr. Griffin proposed a scenario where a businessman may want to buy a large vacant property, such as the one next to Indian River RV on N. Central Ave, and sell boats that are on dry land, similar to Treasure Coast Marine and others in the Grant area, that are not full-service marinas. Condition #3 (item viii) was discussed as possibly being contradictory. Mr. Dodd stated since boat sales are allowed in CR, he thought the Commission wanted to limit some of the activities in the CWR district, but agreed that staff's scenario should be addressed. Mr. Dodd stated his intent was to limit the service and repair activity to marinas only, and not necessarily boat sales. Staff felt the use should also be included in the Industrial areas, and requested it be added to the IN & AI districts. There was discussion on some of the uses that may overlap such as wet/dry storage of boats. Staff reminded the Commission that marinas are already allowed to service boats based on the LDC definition of marina, and suggested removing "and service" from the use title. Mr. Griffin noted the "marina" use was not in the matrix and the Commissioners agreed it should be added, and requested staff to review and clean up any of the marina-related use titles and massage the suggested conditional use criteria. Mr. Dodd stated they should extend the discussion for duplexes to address Multi-family dwellinqs. After asking staff where CL zoning was located, the Commission decided to change the use from conditional to permitted, leaving it conditional in CR and CWR. Mr. Dodd stated the suggested criteria required the same regulations for minimum living area and access as RM-8, but then also added similar criteria as the duplexes. Staff asked the city attorney if development rights would be infringed on in a case where the proposed 50% requirement affected maximum allowed density that could be built. Mr. Ginsburg stated it could for existing developed land with regards to grandfathered rights, but not likely for vacant, undeveloped property. The Commission and staff discussed density issues, and how and when RM-8 uses were introduced into the commercial districts. Mr. Dodd noted a joint workshop with City Council should be had to discuss these issues and that he would put together a presentation reviewing what the Commission has done and has been trying to accomplish. He felt the Comp Plan directives gave ample justification for the Commission's proposed LDC changes. Mr. Griffin agreed it was time to have a joint workshop with Council before there was any more spinning of the wheels. 3 Proposed times and dates for the workshop were discussed. Mr. Dodd thought there should be a lot more public input and suggested having a series of workshops with the Chamber, Working Waterfront Committee, etc. The proposed conditional use criteria for Sinqle-family dwellinqs in CR and CWR districts was discussed with the size allowed percentage different for each district, less in the CR district (20% of total developed SF) than CWR (50%). Recently reviewed mixed- use site plans, Clams R Us and Muscle Car Memorabilia Shop, were compared with the new suggestions, and did [the new criteria] force larger buildings along Indian River Drive to accommodate those still wanting a residential use. Mr. Dodd noted the suggestions did not address attached or detached residential structures. Landscaping requirements and parking was discussed with staff. Mr. Dodd reviewed that Trade and skilled services was proposed to be changed from permitted to conditional in CR, and removed from CWR. One of the proposed conditions, that it be an accessory use to permitted commercial uses, was discussed using the existing custom cabinetry business and carpet & tile shop on US #1. After further review and discussion, the Commission agreed to keep the use permitted in the CR district. Mr. Paul stated that Pawn shops had been added as a conditional use in C-512, but not changed in Article VI. Mr. Dodd stated since there were existing conditions, the zoning district could be added. Staff noted that as written, pawn shops wishing to locate on Sebastian Boulevard could not meet the condition of the structure being 50 feet from any residential lot since the Sebastian Highlands are adjacent to the rear of any property zoned C-512. The Commission agreed to take out pawn shops in the C-512 district as it was to begin with. The Commission and staff discussed how they stood with regards to the changes and what may come out of the workshop, and how they thought City Council would stand on some of the issues. Mr. Ginsburg stated he was surprised there was not more public input at these meetings than there has been. Mr. Griffin noted the public may be watching at home on Channel 25 than actually attending the meetings. CHAIRMAN MATTERS: None MEMBERS MATTERS: None DIRECTOR MATTERS: None ATTORNEY MATTERS: None Chairman Dodd adjourned the meeting at 9:15 p.m. (db) 4