Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 05-17-2001 St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes REGULAR MEETING May 17, 2001 Room 101, Civic Center at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Hearn; Mr. Aikens; Mr. Merritt; Mr. Lounds; Mr. Grande; Mr. Jones; Mr. McCurdy, Vice Chairman; Mr. Matthes, Chairman. MEMBERS ABSENT: Mr. Trias; Excused. OTHERS PRESENT: Mr. David Kelly, Planning Mgr.; Ms. Cyndi Snay, Planner II; Ms. Heather Young, Asst. Co. Attorney; Sheree Bell, Interim Administrative Secretary. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Matthes called to order the meeting of the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission meeting at 7:05 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL ANNOUNCEMENTS Chairman Matthes gave a brief presentation on what you can expect to transpire tonight. For those of you who have not been here before, we are an agency that makes recommendations to the County Board of Commissioners and that is the capacity that we act in. What we will do tonight is that we will be presented on each petition with a brief summary of the project by staff after which time the petitioner will come up and make his case for the requested petition and change. At any time this Board will stop and ask questions of the petitioners or staff. After that process is completed we will open the public hearing for people who wish to speak for or against the petition. The purpose behind this hearing to is to get the general public input. Please if you have something to say, come forward and say it. After everyone has gotten a chance to speak for or against the petition we will close the public hearing, staff will make a final recommendation to this Board, we will deliberate and we will make a decision on our recommendation, one way or another. The decision that is made is typically read from a scripted set of statements that are given to us. It may sound rehearsed but it really is not. There is one for and one against given to us in the package, so we may make the motion either one or the other so it is very clear in the records. Once again, I want to remind you that we only act as an advisory capacity the Board of County Commissioners and if you are not happy with the outcome of the hearing you always have the opportunity to speak at the public hearing in front of the Board of County Commissioners on the petition in front of us that will be forwarded to them with a recommendation of either denial or approval. No other announcements or comments. P & Z Meeting May 17, 2001Page 1 AGENDA ITEM 1: APRIL 19, 2001 MINUTES Mr. Grande mentioned a couple of corrections to the minutes. On page 9, the line that starts out Mr. Grande stated that the motion that failed should be incorporated into page 11 of the minutes. th Mr. Matthes asked for a motion for approval of the April 19, 2001 minutes. Mr. Grande motioned for acceptance, seconded by Mr. Lounds with changes. Upon a roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously. Mr. Merritt arrived at the meeting. P & Z Meeting May 17, 2001Page 2 AGENDA ITEM 2: PA-01-001 FUTURE LAND USE CHANGE WILLIAM AND DAURA HILSON Staff Planner, Cyndi Snay stated that Agenda item 2 was the Petition of William and Daura Hilson for a change in the future land use designation from Commercial (COM) to Residential Medium (RM) for a 4.79 acre parcel of land located on the west side of Hartman Road, approximately 1/4 mile north of the intersection of Hartman Road and Okeechobee Road, directly north of the Orange Blossom Mall. The proposed petition is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies as set forth in the comprehensive plan and is consistent with the changing growth patterns in this area. This petition is also consistent with the State Comprehensive Plan and the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council Strategic Policy Plan. Staff is recommending that this petition be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. Chairman Matthes Mr. Matthes asked the Board if there were any questions for staff. Hearing none, opened the public hearing. Chairman Matthes then asked if the petitioner was present. Mr. & Mrs. Hilson addressed the Board stating that they had resided in St. Lucie County for approximately 30 years. They previously resided at the property under this petition. Approximately 15 years ago, the County rezoned the subject property from a residential zoning district to the Commercial General Zoning District. This was done about the same time as the Orange Blossom Mall was developed. Mrs. Hilson further stated that they no longer reside at this residence but there are two residential units on the property that they rent out. The amount received from the property in rents do not account for the amount they pay in taxes and upkeep for the property. The property is taxed as a commercial property and therefore does not reflect the actual use of the property. Mrs. Hilson also stated that over the last few years, the property has been marketed for commercial use but no one has shown any interest. There has been interest in the property for additional residential uses. Mr. Lounds asked Mr. Kelly if he could shed some light on when this property was rezoned. Mr. Kelly stated that this was about the time that the County adopted the Comprehensive Plan and the subsequent rezoning to bring the County zoning districts in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. He also stated that the Hilsons were aware of the change at the time. Mr. Matthes asked if there were any other questions for the petitioner from the Board. The Board responded in the negative. Mr. Matthes asked if there was anyone else who wished to address the Board Chairman Matthes closed the Public Hearing. on this item. Hearing none, Mr. Lounds stated that after considering the testimony presented during the Public Hearing, including staff comments, and the standards as set forth in Section 11.06.03, St Lucie County Land Development Code, I hereby move that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners grant approval to the application of William and Daura Hilson for a change in land use from COM (Commercial) to RM (Residential Medium) because the proposed land use is consistent with the surrounding land uses and is a better use for the subject property. Motion seconded by Mr. Grande. Upon a roll call vote the motion passed unanimously and forwarded to the County Commissioners for approval. P & Z Meeting May 17, 2001Page 3 AGENDA ITEM 3: RZ-01-009 William and Daura Hilson Staff Planner, Cyndi Snay stated agenda item 3 is the petition of William and Daura Hilson for a change in zoning from the CG (Commercial General) zoning district to the RM-5 (Residential, Multiple Family 5 du/acre) zoning district for a 4.79 acre parcel of land located on the west side of Hartman Road, approximately 1/4 mile north of the intersection of Hartman Road and Okeechobee Road, directly north of the Orange Blossom Mall. This petition is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and conforms to the standards of review as set forth in the Land Development Code. Staff recommends that this petition be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. Mr. Matthes asked if there were questions of the staff. Mr. Matthes stated since this was a companion item to the Comprehensive Plan amendment, the petitioner was not asked to address the Board and recommended that comments from the prior item be incorporated into the record. Chairman Matthes opened the Public Hearing. None responded. Chairman Matthes closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Grande stated that after considering the testimony presented during the Public Hearing, including staff comments, and the standards as set forth in Section 11.06.03, St Lucie County Land Development Code, I hereby move that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners grant approval to the application of William and Daura Hilson for a change in zoning from CG (Commercial, General) zoning district to the RM-5 (Residential, Multiple-Family surrounding area. Motion seconded by Mr. Aikens. Upon a roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. P & Z Meeting May 17, 2001Page 4 AGENDA ITEM 4: RZ-01-010 Harry Stuart Subdivision Staff Planner, Cyndi Snay stated agenda item 4 is the petition of Harry Stuart Subdivision for a change in zoning from the I (Institutional) Zoning District to the RS-3 (Residential, Single-Family 4 du/acre) Zoning District for a 4.75 acre tract of land located north of Rosewood Drive, approximately 38 feet from the intersection of Rosewood Drive and Sandalwood Drive. This property is an out-parcel located in the Sandalwood E forth in the St. Lucie County Land Development Code and is not in conflict with the goals, objectives, and policies of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, staff recommends this petition be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. Chairman Matthes asked for questions of the staff. Mr. Hearn questioned permitted uses (item g; recreational activities) in the Institutional zoning to be expanded upon. Ms. Snay stated that any types of park feature, school or teaching facility are permitted uses. Mr. Kelly stated that the subject property is tennis courts and a pool at this time. Mr. Jones addressed the error on sta related to a religious facility. Chairman Matthes asked for comments from the petitioner or his representative. The petitioner was not present at this time. Mr. Grande stated he would like to hear public comments. Mr. Kelly suggested that the Commission could continue until later in the evening. Upon inspection of the public that attended to speak to petition, Chairman Matthes asked for a motion to continue later in the meeting. Mr. Lounds moved for continuance, seconded by Mr. McCurdy at 7:18 p.m. Mr. Matthes asked for show of hands; Ayes unanimous. NOTE: Agenda item # 5 Liberty Baptist Church, was heard during this time. The minutes have been adjusted for clarity. The petitioner arrived at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Lounds motioned that Item 4 be opened and continued. Mr. McCurdy seconded the motion. Petitioner Ernest Valasco, of the Velcon Group, stated that he would be happy to address any questions regarding the Harry Stuart Subdivision. Mr. Grande asked Mr. Valasco if they planned on any daycare use in the future and the petitioner stated, none. Chairman Matthes opened the Public Hearing. Ms. Sandra Johnson, 204 Sandalwood Drive, stated that she lived right on the corner across the street, on the south side, of the subject property. Ms. Johnson stated concerns about the entrances to the property Mr. Hearns and Mr. Valasco asked for clarification from Ms. Johnson on what her issues were.Mr. Matthes stated the concern was the two existing driveways from Sandalwood Drive have access over the common area to reach the subject property. Ms. Snay confirmed the two existing driveways and that the petitioner does have to address these as part of the site plan project. Mr. Grande asked for confirmation that the accesses to the land in question would not be active accesses as part of the site plan. Ms. Snay agreed. Ms. Snay explained the accesses in the site plan to Ms. Johnson. Mr. Kelly explained the site plan owner of the property that was in question. Ms. Johnson responded the Sandalwood Drive Property ation. Mr. Grande addressed Mr. Kelly about contacting the Property Owner Association, if he should receive a site plan different from the one on file. Mr. Kelly stated that would not be a problem. Ms. Johnson also wanted to be advised. Ms. Johnson stated that the sign placed on the subject property, referenced the rezoning to RS-4, not RS- 3. Ms. Snay confirmed that the rezoning is for RS-3 which coincides with the surrounding areas. Next petitioner, Ms. Carol Hayes, 201 Rosewood Drive across the street from the subject property, stated her concern about the water supply. She stated that the other homes have well water for the Sandalwood Subdivision, which is not accessible to that parcel. Mr. Laskco explained that the property already has ivate well supply and septic tanks. Ms. Johnson stated that the community well is maxed out. Chairman Matthes closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Aikens asked Ms. Snay if the incorrect posting on the subject property posed any legal problems. Ms. Snay responded, none. Mr. McCurdy asks staff why this area was zoned Institutional in the first place. Mr. Kelly stated that when this subdivision went in, the plan included a tennis club, which was not successful. Mr. Grande questioned if it was a private or public membership for the tennis club. Mr. Kelly stated he would have to research that. Mr. Hearn stated that the Guinness Book of World Records was P & Z Meeting May 17, 2001Page 5 broken on that tennis court, for 101 hours of consecutive playing. Mr. McCurdy stated that after considering the testimony presented during the Public Hearing, including staff comments, and the standards of review as set forth in Section 11.06.03, St Lucie County Land Development Code, I hereby move that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that the St. Lucie County Board or Commissioners grant approval to the application of Harry Stuart Subdivision for a change in zoning from the I (Institutional) Zoning District to the RS-3 (Residential, Single-family 3 du/acre) Zoning District because it will be in tune with the neighborhood. Motion seconded by Mr. Grande. Upon a roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. P & Z Meeting May 17, 2001Page 6 AGENDA ITEM 5: RZ-01-007 Liberty Baptist Church Staff Planner, Cyndi Snay stated the petition of Liberty Baptist Church, Inc., of Fort Pierce is for a change in zoning from the AR-1 (Agricultural, Residential 1 du/acre) Zoning District to the I (Institutional) Zoning District for a 13.88acre parcel of land at the northwest corner of the intersection of Dunn Road and Midway Road. The subject property is across Dunn Road from the existing Liberty Baptist Church parcel to the east. The applicant has indicated they plan to expand their existing facility to possibly add educational services. The requested zoning is consistent with the surrounding character of the area. The staff determined that it does conform to the standards of review as set forth in the St. Lucie Development Code and is not in conflict with the goals, policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends forwarding to the County Board of Commissioners for recommendation of approval. Chairman Matthes asks for questions of the staff and if the petitioner was present. Mr. Wallace Cooley, the pastor of Liberty Baptist Church, stated they are in the process of purchasing this property, subject to approval of zoning. The purchase is for future building for auditorium and classroom space. Mr. Lounds questioned the petitioner about the existing building, if he planned to keep it open. Mr. Cooley responded they will keep it open and the new building would be a continuation of the existing building. Mr. Merritt asked the petitioner if he was aware the adjoining property to the west was zoned commercial, locate there for any kind of on-premises consumption. State law states within 500 feet it is not possible to locate such an establishment. Mr. Lounds asked Mr. Kelly if anyone wanted to expand behind that corner, once the church took ownership, they would not be able to put in alcoholic establishment? The current County rules are 1,600 feet but the State rule is 500 feet. The County has the ability to waive from 1,600 feet to 500 feet. Mr. Lounds questioned the distance between the western portion of the parcel and the existing church. Mr. Kelly stated the parcel itself is 643 feet wide; the CN parcel is just less than 600 feet from the western property line of the subject parcel to the Selvitz Rd. ROW. Mr. Lounds clarified that if an establishment wanted to make changes west of Selvitz Rd., it would not interfere with the State rule of 500 feet. Mr. Kelly stated that is correct, but need to apply for a waiver with the County because of 1,600 feet rule, but State would take precedent. Mr. Grande clarified that the parcel would be a first come, first serve basis. Mr. Merritt addressed the Mobil station rights to the west half of the CN parcel. Mr. Kelly stated they are permitted for sale of packaged alcohol only, not on premises consumption and there is already a church across the street. Chairman Matthes opened the Public Hearing. None responded. Chairman Matthes closed the Public Hearing. Chairman Matthes closed discussion and asked for a motion. Mr. Hearn stated that after considering the testimony presented during the Public Hearing, including staff comments, and the standards of review as set forth in Section 11.06.03, St Lucie County Land Development Code, I hereby move that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that the St. Lucie County Board or Commissioners grant approval to the application of Liberty Baptist Church, Inc. of Ft. Pierce for a change in zoning from the AR-1 (Agricultural, residential 1 du/acre) Zoning District to the I (Institutional) Zoning District because it appears to be an appropriate use of this property, given the surrounding land uses and will fit in nicely. Motion seconded by Mr. Lounds. Upon a roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. P & Z Meeting May 17, 2001Page 7 AGENDA ITEM 6: ORDINANCE NO. 01-06 Property Maintenance Regulations Chairman Matthes stated that since this item was submitted at such a late date, he would just like to open up the Public Hearing on the item. Assistant County Attorney, Heather Young stated that Commissioner Barnes suggested that this ordinance be drafted. Tonight we would like to hear public opinion from those in attendance. She stated that the legal staff would review those comments for any revisions and present the ordinance at the June meeting. Chairman Matthes asked Ms. Young if it was properly noticed. Ms. Young stated that it was properly noticed but omitted from their package. Mr. Matthes asked Ms.Young if we opened public hearing tonight and closed it, does it have to be opened at the next meeting. Ms. Young replied that the public hearing could be held tonight, with a motion to continue until the June 6 meeting and re-open the public hearing at that time and then a recommendation be presented by the Board. Mr. Grande asks if the updated ordinance will be presented before the Board at the June meeting. Ms. Young stated it would include revisions from this public hearing. Mr. Grande stated he would also like Matthes stated he would open and then close the public hearing portion and then decide how much Board discussion needs to take place before a motion to continue the hearing is presented. Ms. Young stated that legal staff would consider all recommendations by the Board before the Co Chairman Matthes stated that any comments tonight be given to the Board in a timely manner in order to review them and see how it affects the original ordinance in the notes they have made to this point. Mr. Hearn asked staff to re-advertise before the next hearing. Ms. Young stated she would refer that matter to the Public Information Officer. Chairman Matthes opened the Pubic Hearing. Mr. Jeff Goodman, landowner, stated he reviewed the ordinance and was concerned with who would enforce this ordinance and what their interpretation of reasonable would be. Mr. Goodman stated that the rights and the ones who are keeping up their Ms. Shirley Burlingham, President of the North Beach Owners Association, thanked the County nd addressed the rental units in North Beach. She stated that Code Enforcement is not able to enforce cosmetic problems. Ms. Burlingham suggested it be Association and they only had one change in Section 1-16.1.11, on page 6 in which they thought a couple said she would check the minutes from the meeting with the County Homeowners Association. Mr. Lounds asked Ms. Burlingham if Code Enforcement was doing all that they could do on North Hutchinson Island problems. Ms. Burlingham stated that this ordinance would help with the cosmetic problems. Mr. Kelly stated that is not the function of Code Enforcement and this would help in that area. Mr. Merrit stated stated that the homes in that area are unsafe and feels Code Enforcement could take care of some of those problems. Mr. Kelly stated they could take care of structural problems. Ms. Dollie Beal stated she lives in Harbour Cove is in favor of this ordinance and appreciates any support tenants are. Mr. Andy Braham, President of Gallion Town Homes, stated that their tenants spend a lot of time keeping their properties nice looking and the others in the area should do the same. Ms. Shelly Dugan stated she represents the Radisson Resort on North Hutchinson and they would appreciate any help with this ordinance for the area. Chairman Matthes closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Matthes asked the Board what kind of discussion did they want to have tonight. Mr. Grande stated he had a few minor changes that he would like to see made to improve the ordinance. On page 6, Section 1- 16.1-8 (6), he would like to see that removal for fences be incorporated. Section 1.16.1-10, Mr. Grande stated that shrubs being replaced that have died, should state replacement to prevent blighting or depreciation of adjoining properties. On page 7, Section 1-16.1-12, Mr. Grande discussed incorporating a sufficient amount of time to allow insurance claims processing. P & Z Meeting May 17, 2001Page 8 Mr. Hearn referred to page 6, Section 1-16.1-9, and stated he would like to see the material that Boards up abandoned buildings to match the color of the building. It makes for a nicer appearance. He offered for discussion that the ordinance should apply only to inside the urban service area. Mr. Lounds asked Ms. Young for clarifications on page 4, Section 1-16.1-6, regarding the inspections. He asked if the inspectors would be allowed to enter any premises and what the procedure would be. Ms. Young responded that a provision is incorporated that unless an emergency, the enforcement officer must obtain permission from the property owner or occupant before entering. Mr. Lounds asks who determines an emergency. Ms. Young replied it would be up to the officer based on his training. Several expressed concerns of the legality of the officer entering premises. Mr. Aikens stated that the restrictions would be less for an officer. Mr. Matthes stated that the whole ordinance it is too vague for the standards of measurement. Mr. Lounds addressed page 7, Section 1-16.1-8 (7), and that it is too vague. Mr. Matthes stated that the should be addressed in this ordinance. Ms. Young agreed. Mr. Matthes stated that the public should be made aware of assistance programs. Mr. Lounds asks if this ordinance applied to residential and rentals, or if commercial property was incorporated. Mr. Kelly said there is no distinction. Mr. Kelly stated that this ordinance is countywide and does not target one area. Mr. Kelly stated that commercial standards for landscaping are more strict, and required during the site plan process. Mr. Matthes stated the ordinance should be consistent. Mr. Merritt stated there are ordinances on the books not currently being enforced - active not reactive and these cosmetic issues are not part of the enforceable code as it currently stands. Mr. Merritt asked Ms. Young about the penalty process and would like to see it incorporated into the ordinance before approval. Mr. Aikens stated the code enforcement inspector would be the judge at the time as to what is a safety or emergency issue and what the compliance would be. Mr. Jones stated that he agreed with most of the comments made. He stated his concerns with those stated that each property would need to be handled on an individual basis and the inspector does need to have some discretion. Mr. Merritt stated addressing the commercial and rental properties, only in the ordinance. Mr. Lounds would like to hear the comments from the various homeowners associations. Mr. Grande advised that this ordinance was presented to the County Home Owners Association and their comments are forthcoming. Mr. Hearn suggested getting the public information officer involved in the process. Mr. Matthes asked for a motion to continue. Mr. McCurdy moved to continue discussion on Ordinance No. 01-06, Property Maintenance Regulations) until the June21, 2001meeting. Motion seconded by Mr. Grande. Mr. Merritt suggested an amendment to the motion of continuance with the condition of re- advertisement. Amendment accepted by Mr. McCurdy. Amendment accepted by Mr. Grande. Upon a roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. No further business. Next scheduled meeting will be June 21, 2001. ADJOURNMENT - Motion to adjourn by Mr. Merritt, seconded by Mr. Lounds. Meeting adjourned at 8:55. . P & Z Meeting May 17, 2001Page 9