Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ 07-25-1989 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD SPECIAL SESSION HELD ON TUESDAY, JULY 25, 1989 Chairman Swickerath called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. PRESENT: Chairman Swickerath; Vice Chairman Linebarier; Board members Switzer, Sims, Bond, Shiver, and Alternate Carroll; Director of Planning Behrens; Senior Planner Harper; and Deputy Clerk Resnik. ABSENT: Board member Weeks and Alternate Breeze. Chairman Swickerath explained that Alternate Board member Carroll was filling in for Board member Weeks and would therefore have full voting - member status for the meeting. Chairman Swickerath said that the purpose of the meeting was to hold public hearings on the annexation, rezoning, and comprehensive plan amendment petitions. Chairman Swickerath explained that he would open each public hearing in the order they were presented on the agenda. Staff would give a brief overview of the petition, the petitioner would get a chance to speak, then the Chairman would ask for public comments. When all public comments had been heard, he would then close the public hearing and open the discussion amongst the Board before asking for a motion. REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION - (Annexation, Rezoning, and Comprehensive Plan) Jerome Feinstein, G &F Land Co. (Case No. 1- 1ACR- 89:G &F) Chairman Swickerath opened the public hearing and asked staff to give a brief overview of the petition. Senior Planner Harper explained that the petitioner was requesting to annex the 0.035 acre parcel and to rezone the property from its current Orange County classification of "RCE -2, Rural Estate" to "R -1 -AA, Large Lot Single Family District ". Senior Planner Harper pointed out the location of the parcel on the map, near Silver Star Road, 850 feet south of the "S- curve ". Staff recommended acceptance of the petition. Chairman Swickerath asked if there was anyone at the meeting representing the petitioner. There being no one present to speak for the petitioner, Chairman Swickerath asked for citizen comments. There being no public comments, Chairman Swickerath closed the public hearing. Board member Linebarier moved to recommend approval of the annexation and rezoning for Case No. 1- 1ACR- 89:G &F, Board member Shiver seconded, and approval was unanimous. tow Page 2 r Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 Grover H. Voss (Case No. 1- 2CR- 89:VOSS) Chairman Swickerath opened the public hearing and asked Senior Planner Harper to give a brief overview of the petition. Senior Planner Harper explained that the petitioner was requesting rezoning that would entail a comprehensive plan amendment for the 20 acre parcel located on the north side of Silver Star Road between Johio Shores Road and Lake Johio Road, just west of the "S- curve". Senior Planner Harper said the parcel was currently zoned "Unclassified- Ocoee" and the petitioner was requesting "C -2, Community Commercial District ". He explained that the four corners of Clark Road would be commercial in the future, thus the property would be consistent with other property in the area. Senior Planner Harper also said that within the foreseeable future, several thousand homes would be built within a two -mile radius of the subject parcel and the businesses would be necessary to service these households. Staff recommended approval of the petition. Chairman Swickerath asked if the petitioner or a representative wished to speak. C. Roger Freeman, 151 W. Silver Star Road, Ocoee, explained he represented the petitioner, Grover Voss. Mr. Freeman *or said the reason they were asking for C -2 rather than C -1 was to allow for one larger store and to provide for a quality development. Chairman Swickerath then asked for public comments. R.P. Mohnacky, 1820 Prairie Lake Boulevard, commented that the curve on Silver Star Road by this property was already dangerous and asked if the City had discussed with the state the possibility of straightening out the road when the multi - laning of Silver Star Road was done. Director of Planning Behrens said he met with the Florida Department of Transportation (DOT) to discuss Silver Star Road in relation to this property as well as property to the south that was going to be professional offices. Director Behrens said his main concern was the access points from these projects onto Silver Star Road. He said the City and DOT would study this area to come up with a solution that would provide safe access to Silver Star Road. Director Behrens said he would propose that the two projects align their access points onto Silver Star Road. Chairman Swickerath asked which piece of property was zoned P -S and Director Behrens said it was the Feinstein property (Silver Bend). Mr. Mohnacky asked if straightening the roadway was ever considered. Director Behrens said it was not part of the DOT's five -year plan at this point. Page 3 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 There being no further public comments, Chairman Swickerath closed the public hearing. Board member Shiver asked Mr. Freeman to define "quality" development. Mr. Freeman stated that the project would not contain a 7 -11 or a laundry but would have nicer shops with one good anchorage such as a Winn Dixie or an Albertsons. Board member Shiver asked if it would be similar in nature to the Maguire and S.R. 50 shopping center and Mr. Freeman said it would be a little more upgraded. Mr. Freeman said the developer planned on using all 20 acres with the possibility of acquiring 10 more acres to the west. He said that they would need the classification of C -2 in order to provide a quality shopping center of this nature. Mr. Freeman said with C -1 they could have a strip shopping center but that was probably not what the City wanted. Board member Shiver asked what size the project would be and Mr. Freeman said probably 35,000 square feet. He said C -2 allowed for about three times more square footage than C -1. Vice Chairman Linebarier asked about the additional land and Mr. Freeman said they had the option of purchasing the 10 acres to the west. Vice Chairman Linebarier asked what the maximum square 'fir footage was under C -1 and Director of Planning Behrens said 14,000 square feet of gross floor area. Board member Carroll said there was C -2 right next to it and across the street from the subject property and felt it was consistent. Vice Chairman Linebarier said his primary concern was to keep the City's commercial development from becoming strip shopping centers with two or three little shops and multiple cuts onto different roads. He said not only does it look bad, it is also a traffic hazard. Board member Sims asked what a "U" zoning represented and Senior Planner Harper said it was "Unclassified" meaning it had been annexed but not rezoned. Board member Sims agreed with Mr. Freeman that there would be plenty of demand for a commercial project of a C -2 nature and that having an anchor would ensure its success. Senior Planner Harper said there would be approximately 2,000 homes within a one mile radius of this property within the next five years and staff felt this made the project very feasible. Board member Shiver moved to recommend approval of the rezoning and comprehensive plan amendment, Board member Carroll seconded, and upon a roll call vote, Chairman Swickerath, Vice Chairman Linebarier, and Board members Carroll, Shiver, Sims, and Bond voted in favor of the motion and Board member Switzer voted against. Chairman Swickerath indicated that the motion had passed by a vote of 6 -1. Page 4 vilor Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 Grover H. Voss (Case No. 1- 3ACR- 89:VOSS) Chairman Swickerath opened the public hearing and asked Senior Planner Harper to give a brief overview of the petition. Senior Planner Harper said the petitioner was looking to annex the property and was also asking for a change in zoning from Orange County's "R -3, Multi- Family" to "C -2, Community Commercial District ". Senior Planner Harper explained that the subject property contained 28 acres and was located between Old Winter Garden Road and S.R. 50, approximately 1,800 feet east of Blackwood Avenue. He said although the property had limited highway frontage, staff's major concern was that S.R. 50 was already at capacity; he explained that the traffic loadings on S.R. 50 are already at "D" to "F" levels. Staff recommended approval of the petition with the stipulations that it be regarded as one parcel even though it was petitioned as two and that there be adequate buffering provided for the residential neighborhood adjoining the subject parcel. Senior Planner Harper also indicated that the City Attorney was reviewing the petition to ensure that the annexation met the statutory requirements. He said the staff's recommendation further included that the rezoning be granted with the following '`+ provisions: 1. That a "Master Traffic and Utility Study" be conducted at the petitioner's expense and with cost sharing by the Zom Corporation (Case No. 1- 10ACRCT- 89:ZOM) to determine what off -site and on -site impacts will result from the combined development. 2. That generous buffering and landscaping treatments be employed on a unified basis to help protect adjacent residential properties from the intrusive aspects of permitted "C -2" uses. C. Roger Freeman, 151 W. Silver Star Road, Ocoee, representing the developer, said realistically the proposed hospital would require support services and that C -2 would give the developer the opportunity to provide those services (doctors' offices, etc.). Mr. Freeman said the developer would cooperate on any studies that would be required and that a Developer's Agreement would address these items specifically. Chairman Swickerath asked whether the ultimate user would be West Orange Hospital or not. Mr. Freeman said not to his knowledge. •r° John Smogor, Orange County Planning Department, said the County had done a West State Road 50 study in conjunction with the E -W Page 5 %kr Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 Expressway Extension and Clark Road. He said the County had no objection to the hospital site and the County recognized the need for "spinoffs" but did not feel that the C -2 zoning was appropriate. Planner Smogor said that the City's Professional Service (P -S) zoning would allow for clinics or doctors' offices on the northern piece of this site and possibly some affordable housing on the southeastern section of the parcel. He said using multi - family on the southern portion of the property would act as a buffer or transition and would be considered by the County to be reasonable use of the property. Planner Smogor also wanted to point out to the Board that the hospital site would have to be annexed in order to make this property a contiguous parcel to other property in the City. R. P. Mohnacky, 1820 Prairie Lake Blvd., asked for clarification on the buffer. He asked whether a buffer would mean that buildings could not be constructed within the buffer zone or whether this would also include parking lots, etc.. Chairman Swickerath said that this discussion was premature at this point since the Board was only concerned with annexation and rezoning and general use of the property and the specific use would be considered later. He `1r► said this would be discussed in the future if the property was annexed and rezoned at such time as the developer submitted plans. Mr. Freeman wanted to restate that the developer really needed C- 2 to have the opportunity to do bigger and better things. He said the C -2 would give options that the C -1 would not allow and that this was very important to the landowner. Board member Carroll stated that he had a conflict of interest as he is also a West Orange Hospital Board of Trustee member and therefore would refrain from any discussion or vote. Vice Chairman Linebarier pointed out that the subject property was currently designated as residential and conservational on the land use map and said he was concerned with the conservation areas as he wanted to protect the wetlands and the greenery. Vice Chairman Linebarier said he did not believe that C -2 would be an appropriate use of the area and that it would not allow for protection of the conservation areas. He said the highest use he would consider would be professional services. He asked Mr. Freeman if the petitioner would want to annex if the zoning was to go professional services and Mr. Freeman said no. Board member Sims also questioned why the property would not be zoned for professional offices rather than C -2 if it indeed was to r be developed to support the hospital. Page 6 4kry Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 Vice Chairman Linebarier moved to recommend denial of the petition and Board member Sims seconded. Chairman Swickerath said he would like to see the property annexed but to deny the commercial zoning. Vice Chairman Linebarier and Board member Sims withdrew their motion and second respectively. Chairman Swickerath moved to recommend approval of the annexation request and Board member Bond seconded. Upon a roll call vote, Chairman Swickerath and Board members Sims, Bond, Weeks, Carroll, and Shiver all voted in favor of the motion and Vice Chairman Linebarier voted against. Chairman Swickerath then moved to recommend to rezone the subject property to Professional Services and Board member Sims seconded. Upon a roll call vote, Chairman Swickerath and Board members Sims, Bond, Weeks, Carroll, and Shiver all voted in favor of the motion and Vice Chairman Linebarier voted against. Vice Chairman Linebarier said for the record that his "no" votes were not to disagree with the Board but rather because the petitioner did not want to annex without the C -2 zoning. Grover H. Voss (Case No. 1- 4ACR- 89:VOSS) Chairman Swickerath opened the public hearing and asked Senior Planner Harper to give a brief overview of the petition. Senior Planner Harper explained that the petitioner was requesting to Now annex and rezone the property located on the south side of S.R. 50, approximately 3,300 feet east of Blackwood Avenue, and between Lake Lotta and the proposed S.R. 50 and East -West Expressway interchange. Senior Planner Harper pointed out the location of the subject property on the map for the Board. Senior Planner Harper said the petitioner had broken down the property into three different parcels: 1. Parcel 2 - 6.9 +/- acres on both the east and west sides of Citrus Oaks Avenue from Orange County "A -1" to "C -2 ". 2. Parcel 3 - 9.7 +/- acres bordered on the east by Citrus Oaks Avenue from Orange County "R -2" to "R -3, Multi - family Dwelling District ". 3. Parcel 4 - 4.5 +/- acres which front S.R. 50 from Orange County "R -2" to "C -2 ". Senior Planner Harper explained that Parcel 2 on the west side of Citrus Oaks Avenue did not have immediate S.R. 50 frontage as it had sold a 35 foot right -of -way to the Expressway Authority. He said because of a sinkhole, wetlands, and steep slopes, the land would be difficult to develop commercially. The land in Parcel 2 east of Citrus Oaks Avenue coupled with the land in Parcel 4 provides more than 1,200 feet of S.R. 50 frontage but the average Page 7 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 depth is less than 200 feet which would not be functional as a "Community Commercial District ", plus the eastern two- thirds of Parcel 4 have a steep slope away from S.R. 50 which would pose serious highway ingress- egress hazards. Parcel 4 would really only have two to three acres for the actual site and would not have a good access point. The parcel would not be wide enough for an ingress- egress onto S.R. 50. Although Senior Planner Harper did not recommend the commercial zoning, staff recommended annexation of the property since it would probably be right in line with the future entrance to the City from the east. Senior Planner Harper said Parcel 3 would be a good location for the R -3 as it is a high quality, well drained site. Staff recommended annexation of all parcels with the further recommendation that the C -2 requests for Parcels 2 and 4 be denied and the request for R -3 in Parcel 3 be approved. Senior Planner Harper said staff would recommend C -1 for Parcel 4 with the balance of Parcel 2 to be rezoned no higher than R -2. Board member Switzer asked how the property was contiguous to the City and Senior Planner Harper said the City Attorney was studying the boundaries to determine whether or not the petition met the requirements. Mr. Freeman explained that the petitioner was requesting C -2 zoning on Parcels 2 and 4 because of the Highway 50 frontage. He said there would most likely be office buildings on both sides of Citrus Oaks Avenue. Mr. Freeman said the owner might be able to build a suitable office building under C -1 zoning but was asking for the option of C -2. Chairman Swickerath said he had already opened the public hearing and was now going to take public comments. Ed Simmons, 9308 Comead Street, Winter Garden, said he was a long- time resident of Citrus Oaks and he was concerned about Parcel 3 becoming R -3 multi - family since the increase in traffic on Citrus Oaks Avenue would be substantial. He urged that the parcel be zoned R -2 at the most. Mr. Simmons was also concerned about the wetlands in the area where the petitioner desires commercial zoning. He said once commercial zoning is approved, the City would lose control of the property and the landowner could develop whatever the zoning allowed, including a 7 -11. Mr. Simmons said the traffic was heavy enough and was also concerned about the appearance of the entrance to his subdivision. He was concerned his standard of living would decline. Page 8 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 Director of Planning Behrens said for clarification that the County designation of R -2 was roughly equivalent to the City's R -3 zoning. The County's R -2 allows 15 units per acre maximum and the City's R -3 allows 16 units per acre maximum. Director Behrens said the City's R -2 zoning allows eight (8) units per acre maximum. Director Behrens explained that these figures would be under ideal circumstances and that the property specifics would dictate just how many units the developer could have. Senior Planner Harper said the Citrus Oaks units averaged about 8- 10 units per acre. He said as far as the one entrance and the traffic congestion, a second access was being developed that would extend Citrus Oaks Avenue to Old Winter Garden Road. Chairman Swickerath called on Patty Blaser, 9385 Lake Lotta Circle, Winter Garden, to speak next but Ms. Blaser asked to speak last after the others had gone. Kenneth Smith, 9427 Lake Lotta Circle, Winter Garden, a resident of Citrus Oaks, explained that he was representing 67 residents who `or• had signed a petition. Mr. Smith read the petition in full (see Attachment A). He also listed several businesses that would be allowed under the City's C -2 zoning classification. Mr. Smith said the Citrus Oaks residents are concerned that their property values will go down and that traffic will be an even bigger problem. He said the Citrus Oaks homeowners' association owns Citrus Oaks Avenue and has to maintain it. The homeowners believe the added traffic will add substantially to the maintenance expense. Mr. Smith also said the West Highway Fifty Study had stipulated the property fronting S.R. 50 as a wetlands conservation area and that this land should be left vacant. Orange County Planner Smogor said the County had no objection to the annexation but was objecting to the commercial designation of the land. He said the County's Conservation Element addressed this property and there were restoration plans for the area. Planner Smogor added that because of the characteristics of the land itself, the west side of Citrus Oaks Avenue was unusable as far as the County was concerned. The County also strongly objected to the commercial zoning on the east side of Citrus Oaks Avenue. He commented that the County saw a commercial designation as detrimental to the existing residences and that the County did not want to see strip shopping centers developed along West Highway 50. He also indicated that Citrus Oaks Avenue was designated as a residential street but that if commercial was developed, it would 4461, have to use this street as its access because the state Department of Transportation would not allow additional cuts onto S.R. 50 that Page 9 ',. Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 close to the existing cut by Citrus Oaks Avenue. Studies have already shown that S.R. 50 at this location is at a Level "F" capacity. Planner Smogor said the County might consider recommending the R -3 for Parcel 3. Board member Switzer asked Planner Smogor for his recommendation for Parcels 2 and 4. Planner Smogor said the County recommended an R -3 designation, indicating that although the zoning would allow for 16 units per acre, the environmental conditions would probably only allow at the most 8 -10 units per acre. Patty Blazer, 9385 Lake Lotta Circle, Winter Garden, said she now wished to speak. She explained to the Board that she was a widow and that her objections to this petition were based strictly on financial concerns. Ms. Blazer said with the East -West Expressway extension and now this landowner's actions, she felt threatened because all of her savings was tied up in her home and she felt these events would decrease the value of her property. Ms. Blazer also stated that the homeowners of Citrus Oaks currently pay a maintenance fee for upkeep of Citrus Oaks Avenue and she felt if the petitioner was allowed to develop his property as he had requested, that the maintenance of the road should be shared by all who will use it. Chairman Swickerath asked Ms. Blazer whether the Citrus Oaks residents would be interested in transferring ownership of the street to the City but Ms. Blazer said she could not speak on behalf of the residents. Grover Voss, 416 W. Colonial Drive, Orlando, owner of the subject property, said he has owned the land in trust since 1971 and that he originally annexed the land into the City of Ocoee 15 or 16 years ago. He said the land was subsequently deannexed as the result of a court action concerning the land being contiguous to other land in the City. Mr. Voss concluded that in a sense, he was trying to get back what he already had long ago. Mr. Voss said Mason Homes had an interest in the R -3 property and that the company wanted to develop about 95 -100 condominiums. He said the company had a good reputation and that the condominiums would be upscale. Mr. Voss said the company could not develop its plans for the property under an R -2 zone. Mr. Voss said there had been two conservation studies performed on Parcels 2 and 4. He said Parcel 4 did not contain fill, in fact it was a hill and that part of the land had been taken away. Mr. Voss said he donated the land to the Citrus Oaks development for Page 10 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 the Citrus Oaks Avenue and that part of the stipulation in donating the land was that he would be able to utilize the road. Now, Mr. Voss said, the Citrus Oaks homeowners were saying he could not use the road. Mr. Voss said the commercial tracts would be at least 400 feet from any of the Citrus Oaks homes and that there was a natural buffer in between. Mr. Voss said he had two banks that were interested in building on the sites as well as a miniature golf course company. Mr. Voss also said there was the possibility that doctors' offices could be located there since the hospital was going to be close by. Mr. Voss said it was not a location for housing. Vice Chairman Linebarier asked if the zoning was not approved, if the petitioner would still want his property annexed into the City. Mr. Voss said he would still annex Parcels 2 and 4 but not Parcel 3 since the County R -2 designation would allow him to develop the site with more options. R.P. Mohnacky, 1820 Prairie Lake Blvd., Ocoee, said the zoning should be compatible with the neighboring property and that it appeared the petitioner was basically asking for the same classification in the City that he would have in the County. Mr. Mohnacky said he felt better knowing it would be condominiums rather than barrack -type apartment buildings. There being no further public comments, Chairman Swickerath closed the public hearing. Board member Carroll clarified that he would not obstain from this vote, but would obstain from all discussions and votes pertaining to the hospital site and the site adjoining the hospital site. Board member Shiver said he was very protective of the wetlands since they are few and far between. He also said that he felt that one International Drive was enough and he did not want to see West Highway 50 turn into a strip shopping area. Board member Shiver said he was opposed to anything other than professional services on the parcels fronting S.R. 50, providing that construction not infringe on the wetlands. Board member Bond moved to recommend annexation of all three parcels, Vice Chairman Linebarier seconded, and approval was unanimous. ,,. Director of Planning Behrens asked the Board to consider the rezonings of the parcels separately. Page 11 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 Vice Chairman Linebarier moved to recommend denial of the commercial zoning request for Parcels 2 and 4 and moved to recommend a P -S designation at the highest level for Parcels 2 and 4. Vice Chairman Linebarier further moved to approve the R -3 zoning request for Parcel 3. Chairman Swickerath seconded the motion and Board member Switzer asked for clarification on the height restrictions for P -S zones. Director of Planning Behrens said the maximum height in a professional services district is 35 feet. Chairman Swickerath called for the vote on the motion and the motion carried unanimously. RECESS: 9:20 p.m. CALL TO ORDER: 9:35 p.m. Eldon Ward (Case No. 1- 5ACR- 89:WARD) Chairman Swickerath opened the public hearing and asked Senior Planner Harper to give a brief overview of the project. Senior Planner Harper explained that the petitioner was looking to annex a 2.68 acre parcel of property located on the north side of A.D. Mims Road, immediately west of the Forest Oaks subdivision. Senior Planner Harper said the petitioner was requesting a rezoning from Orange County's designation of "Agricultural" to "R -1 -A, Small Lot Single Family Dwelling District ". Senior Planner Harper pointed out the location of the property on the map and said since it is consistent with the adjacent City property to the east (Forest Oaks) and because it is high and dry, staff recommended approval of the petitioner's request. Dennis Solomon, 408 S. Highland Avenue, Winter Garden, representing the petitioner, said he was at the meeting to answer any questions. Vice Chairman Linebarier asked how many homes were planned for the property. Mr. Solomon explained that it was an infill lot and because of its configuration, seven or eight homes would be the maximum the property could handle. Board member Sims said because of the width of the property, a road could not go through the middle and still leave room on either side for homes. Mr. Solomon said the road would have to go on one side of the property and homes would only be on one side of the street. Board member Sims asked which side of the property the road would go on and Mr. Solomon said that determination had not been finalized yet but the street would probably go on the west side of the property, closer to the estate home. Page 12 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 Board member Shiver asked who owned the parcel to the North and Mr. Solomon said that Mr. Ward also owned that parcel. He said that property had access on Prairie Lake Boulevard but that if it was developed, it would not be a part of this subject development fronting A.D. Mims. This property would be developed with a cul- de -sac at the north end. Board member Shiver asked who owned the property to the west of the subject property and Mr. Solomon said Mr. Charles Meeks. Board member Shiver said he would obstain from further conversation and voting since Mr. Meeks was a close personal friend of his. John Castle, 1402 Prairie Lake Boulevard, Ocoee, said he had no objection to the annexation of the property but that he would object to the rezoning since it would allow the property owner to develop homes that would back up to his back yard fence. He also objected to the development of several homes on the property because of the additional traffic hazards it would create. Mr. Castle also felt it would decrease the value of his home. He said he did not believe there was sufficient room for several homes and iftr a roadway. Charlie Crews, 1404 Prairie Lake Boulevard, Ocoee, said he would have a similar problem with homes backing up to his back yard. He said he was concerned financially as well. Mr. Crews said thought also needed to be given to the access onto A.D. Mims Road. He said it was hard enough to get out of Forest Oaks but that it would be dangerous to have another entrance that close to the Prairie Lake Boulevard /A.D. Mims intersection. Jane Johnson, 1402 Prairie Lake Boulevard, Ocoee, said she was concerned financially and was also concerned with the traffic congestion since both Forest Oaks and this property would only have one entrance each out of their subdivisions and both are onto A.D. Mims Road and not very far apart from one another. R.P. Mohnacky, 1820 Prairie Lake Blvd., said the sign on the property caught his eye immediately because he is also a Forest Oaks resident. He asked how the property could possibly be developed since it was so narrow. Chairman Swickerath said any proposed development would have to go through the development review process and meet all zoning and building requirements. There being no further public comments, Chairman Swickerath closed the public hearing. Vice Chairman Linebarier asked what the zoning was on the property immediately to the west. Senior Planner Harper said the property was in the County and was zoned A -1 but that Page 13 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 because the City property located on the east (Forest Oaks) is zoned R -1 -A, the zoning request is consistent and appropriate with other neighboring property. Board member Sims said the homes would most likely be at least as expensive as the Forest Oaks homes because developing a road with homes on only one side is an expensive endeavor. Mr. Solomon said the homes would probably be in the $90,000 range which is at least as expensive as Forest Oaks. He said the lots would probably be a quarter acre (85 feet X 116 feet minimum). Board member Carroll said he could not vote against it because it was consistent with other zoning in the area. He said he would have to reserve comments on the actual development until he could see specific plans. Mr. Solomon restated, that the road would most likely be constructed on the west side of the property since they would try to keep the greatest distance between the entrance of Prairie Lake Boulevard and the entrance to this subdivision. He said there would be a substantial buffer between the road and Mr. Meeks' property. Board member Bond said she had no problem with the zoning request since the homes would be similar in size and price to the Forest Oaks homes. She added that the plans review process would be followed and would provide an opportunity for more in depth study of the area. Board member Sims indicated that with the cost of on -site drainage and the cost of the roadway, the homes would have to be expensive to make the project feasible and there would probably be no more than seven homes maximum. Vice Chairman Linebarier said the only person who really should be voicing any opposition to the petition is Mr. Meeks and he is not even at the meeting. Board member Carroll moved to approve the annexation of the property and rezoning to R -1 -A, Board member Bond seconded, and approval was unanimous with the exception of Board member Shiver who obstained from voting. Lynn Wright, Esq. (Case No. 1- 6A- 89:KENJEN) Chairman Swickerath opened the public hearing and asked Senior Planner Harper to give a brief overview of the petition. Senior Planner Harper explained that the petitioner was requesting the annexation of 28.5 acres located on Ocoee - Clarcona Road, three- Page 14 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 hundred feet west of Hobson Road, and on the eastern side of the northern terminus of the proposed Clark Road. Senior Planner Harper pointed out the location of the property on the map and commented that the land was of a very high quality that was basically old orange groves. He said water and sewer would be available to the area soon and staff recommended approval of the annexation. Lynn Wright of Asma & Wright, 886 S. Dillard Street, Winter Garden, was at the meeting to represent her client and said she would answer any questions. Vice Chairman Linebarier asked what the County zoning was on the property and Ms. Wright said agricultural. R.P. Mohnacky asked what rezoning the petitioner was requesting. Ms. Wright said her client was not requesting a rezoning at this time but was waiting on Clark Road and other studies in the area. Orange County Planner Smogor said the subject property was outside the Joint Planning Area (JPA) and for this reason the County wanted the City to delay annexation until the County and the City could `► come to terms with a possible expansion of the JPA. Planner Smogor said there was also pressure on the County from the residents of Clarcona who wanted protection from the growth that was hitting the area. Planner Smogor asked for denial of the petition until the County and City could come to some agreement through negotiations to modify the JPA. Chairman Swickerath asked staff whether they had run this by the City Attorney. Director of Planning Behrens said they had not. Chairman Swickerath asked how the Board could put off voting until the City and County could discuss the JPA and Senior Planner Harper said the motion could be to deny without prejudice. Chairman Swickerath asked if the motion could be to recommend approval of the annexation subject to amending the JPA to include this property. Ms. Wright requested for the Board to either approve the petition outright or approve the request with stipulations. Director Behrens asked that the Board table the petition to give staff a chance to work with the County. Chairman Swickerath asked how tabling the petition would affect the timetable. Senior Planner Harper said the process would continue regardless of the Board's recommendation because the Board only acts in an advisory capacity. Chairman Swickerath asked Ms. Wright if she would approve of tabling the petition in order to give time to discuss the JPA and r Ms. Wright said she would. Page 15 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 Board member Sims moved to table the petition. Planner Smogor said realistically the JPA discussions could be lengthy and that an amendment to the JPA agreement may not take place for six months or more with all the necessary public hearings that will need to take place both at the City Commission and the County Commission levels after the two staffs have discussed an amendment. Ms. Wright said she had no idea it would be that lengthy when she agreed to table the petition. Board member Sims recommended a continuance with a time certain and Ms. Wright suggested 45 days. Board member Bond stressed that this would be impossible since it would take about that long to fulfill the public notification and hearing process. Senior Planner Harper agreed that it was realistically a six month process at best. Board member Carroll seconded the motion to table for purposes of discussion. Ms. Wright requested that the Board vote to deny the petition without prejudice as discussed. Board member Sims withdrew his motion and Board member Carroll withdrew his second. Board member Sims moved to recommend denial of the annexation without prejudice indicating that at such time as the JPA agreement is modified, the petitioner can enter the process at the next review window. Board member Switzer seconded the motion and Chairman Swickerath stated for discussion that if the City Commission votes to annex the property regardless of this recommendation, then the petition will continue in the process and the Planning and Zoning Board will not be the decision maker. The motion carried unanimously. Donald Wingate for LaKenDon, Inc. (Case No. 1- 7CR- 89:LAKENDON) Chairman Swickerath opened the public hearing and asked Senior Planner Harper to give a brief overview of the petition. Senior Planner Harper said the petitioner was requesting rezoning of a one acre parcel located on the northeast corner of Silver Star Road and Bluford Avenue from "R -1 -AA, Large Lot Single Family District" to "C -2, Community Commercial District ". Senior Planner Harper pointed out the location of the property on the map and commented that the property was presently occupied by a dilapitated single - family residence. Staff recommended that the C -2 zoning request be granted, subject to the twenty foot yard buffering requirements specified in Chapter IV, Section 9.4(c), page 62, in the City's Land Regulations "Gold Book ", as well as other residential neighborhood safeguards provided by the Zoning Code. Senior Planner Harper explained that by buffering he was referring to a '`1rr Page 16 * Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 "true buffer" and not a parking lot. Director of Planning Behrens added that when making the staff recommendation, the future land use map was studied and it showed light commercial at this corner of the intersection. Don Wingate, 110 Mericam Court, Killarney, Florida, said the reason he was requesting C -2 was that both Silver Star Road and Bluford Avenue are arterial roadways and the intersection is commercial in nature. He said the plans for the property included a gasoline and convenience store. Mr. Wingate said the opinions expressed earlier in the meeting referring to 7 -11s and other such establishments were well founded but that the proposed tenant, Redi- Market, would not build a box -like building but would have a different building elevation such as a gable roof to fit better into the area. Mr. Wingate said they also planned to work around the larger trees rather than destroy them. He said there would be a buffer in addition to setbacks so that there would be 40 feet buffering other property and that nothing, including parking lots, would be built in this area. Mr. Wingate also said they were willing to work with the neighboring property owners and to build a wall or other Itior structure if that was the request of adjoining property owners. Board member Bond asked whether this property had come up for rezoning in the past and after discussion it was determined that different owners had tried to get commercial zoning in the past but it was the first attempt for Mr. Wingate. George Vandergrift, 325 Bluford Avenue, Ocoee, said he had lived at his current address for 59 years and was at the first Planning and Zoning Board meeting and had attended meetings in the past when this property was up for rezoning. Mr. Vandergrift said a big shopping center was about to be built on the southwest corner of Silver Star Road and Bluford Avenue and he did not see the need for a convenience store this close by. He was also concerned with people loitering on the property and the traffic problems that may result. Thelma Mae Heatherly, 13 East Silver Star Road, Ocoee, said she was opposed to the commercial zoning because of the traffic problems it would create. She said the traffic was already a problem. Ms. Heatherly said she owned three, fifty -foot lots and wanted to know if a commercial property would limit her family from building homes in the future. Chairman Swickerath said as long as her property met the requirements for building a home, it did not matter what the property across the street was zoned. Page 17 *,„ Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 Larry Carver, Route 2, Box 9918, Clermont, Florida, said he was Ms. Heatherly's son and stood to inherit his mother's property in the future. He said he grew up in Ocoee and planned on moving back to the City but that it would ruin his plans if the convenience store was built. Mr. Carver said there were plenty of places to shop both south and west of this area and with the new shopping plaza being built, the convenience store was not necessary. Don Wingate commented that a convenience store is attracted to the traffic and not the other way around. He said studies have indicated that people will not drive a great distance to go to a convenience store so it will be of service to the neighborhood or people who regularly drive through the neighborhood. He said it will not create a substantial amount of additional traffic. Ruby Vandergrift, 325 Bluford Avenue, Ocoee, said the traffic is already at the point that she can not conveniently turn in and out of her driveway and that she sometimes waits 5 -10 minutes to get out of her driveway or takes another route to avoid the intersection. She said there have been numerous accidents at the %by intersection including accidents involving police vehicles. There being no further public comments, Chairman Swickerath closed the public hearing. Board member Sims declared a conflict of interest and said he would refrain from voting. Board member Bond said she had strong feelings about this petition because it brought up the issue of where to put commercial. She said she would like to see commercial on Silver Star Road stay to the west of Bluford Avenue and keep the eastern portion residential. Board member Bond said a commercial designation may pave the way for additional commercial along this path. For the record Board member Bond stated that she lived on Lakeshore Drive right at the corner of Silver Star Road and that she thought traffic was enough of a problem already without adding to it further. Board member Shiver said although he did not live in the vicinity and it would not directly impact his family, he did feel the need to address the issue as if it was in his neighborhood. He said he has a problem with mixing commercial with residential and especially with Food Lion being built, he did not see the need for a convenience store on the other corner. Board member Shiver said he would not have voted for the commercial to allow Food Lion in either if he had had a vote. Page 18 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 Board member Carroll said he would vote against the commercial zoning of that corner no matter what was proposed to be built. He did not want to see anything of a commercial nature in that location. Vice Chairman Linebarier said he wanted to speak on behalf of convenience stores. He said the Cumberland Farms on Silver Star Road, not far from his home, was not the big bad ogre he thought it would be. Vice Chairman Linebarier said he voiced opposition to the store when it was in the planning process but now felt differently about it. He said the Board should not be so hard on food markets. Board members Carroll and Bond took exception to Vice Chairman Linebarier's comment. They stated that they were not necessarily against convenience stores, they were just opposed to commercial in this location, no matter what use the property ultimately had. Vice Chairman Linebarier said he would have to vote to deny the petition regardless of how he felt about convenience stores because he was opposed to mixing residential with commercial. Board member Switzer moved to deny the petition to rezone the property to C -2, Board member Bond seconded, and approval was unanimous with the exception of Board member Sims who did not vote because of a conflict of interest. FHB Development Corp. (Case No. 1- 8A- 89:FHB DEV) Chairman Swickerath opened the public hearing and asked Senior Planner Harper to give a brief overview of the petition. Senior Planner Harper explained that the petitioner was seeking to annex the 6.7 acre parcel located on the west side of Johio Shores Road, 600 feet north of Silver Star Road. He pointed out the location of the property on the map and stated that it fronted Lake Johio. Staff recommended that the petitioner's request be granted. Bob Hoffman, 6333 Sleepy Hollow Drive, Orlando, representing the petitioner, said he was available for any questions. Vice Chairman Linebarier asked Mr. Hoffman if he was aware that the subject parcel was designated as residential on the City's future land use map and Mr. Hoffman said he was. Mr. Hoffman said the reason the petition did not also request a rezoning was that they were mistaken about the procedures. He said he thought that if the County zoning was the same that was desired once annexed in the City, then they did not have to petition for rezoning. Mr. Hoffman said he had since spoken with City staff and it was agreed that Page 19 * Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 they would petition for rezoning at the next phase. Mr. Hoffman said for the Board's information, that they would seek R -1 -A zoning and that it is currently zoned R -1 -A in the County. Board member Shiver asked Mr. Hoffman what access they would use to a future subdivision and Mr. Hoffman stated that the access would be from Johio Shores Road and not the dirt road on the southern border of the property. There being no public comments, Chairman Swickerath closed the public hearing. Board member Shiver moved to approve the petitioner's request for annexation, Vice Chairman Linebarier seconded, and approval was unanimous. Patricia Wishon (Case No. 1- 9CR- 89:WISHON) Chairman Swickerath opened the public hearing and asked Senior Planner Harper to give a brief overview of the petition. Senior Planner Harper said the petitioner was requesting a rezoning from R -1 to R -2 for the 1.2 acre parcel located at the northwest corner of Oakland and Cumberland Avenues. Senior Planner Harper said the petitioner was looking to develop a child care center and staff %Do felt that would be an appropriate use for the property. The property was on a good corner with ample street frontage and had a fenced in yard. He said the business was talking about doing improvements to the site. Senior Planner Harper said there would be an increase in traffic generated by the business, but that it would not be substantial and that the location of the property itself would greatly assist in traffic management. Staff recommended that the R -2 rezoning request be granted. Patricia Wishon, 12952 Reaves Road, Winter Garden, said Ocoee needed a day care center. She said there was only one day care center listed in the phone book for Ocoee and only one other church she knew of that cared for children. Board member Carroll asked if there was R -3 property across the street from there and Senior Planner Harper said there was a lot and one half of R -3 and then it went to I -2. He said staff felt that the R -2 with improvements to the site would actually upgrade the neighborhood. Board member Shiver said he still had a problem with mixing commercial with residential, especially after the earlier discussion they had. Board member Carroll said this petitioner was requesting R -2 which was a residential zoning and that if the petitioner had not elaborated on what she planned for the site, we would not have been thinking commercial. Page 20 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 Ruth Minor, 614 Gallego Avenue, Ocoee, representing the seller of the property, said the owner is a long -time resident. Ms. Minor said she did not think this would hurt the neighborhood since it would only be open during daytime hours. Ray Meeks, 102 N. Cumberland Avenue, Ocoee, and Bea Meeks, 124 N. Bluford Avenue, Ocoee, said they live across from the subject property and they objected to the rezoning. Mr. and Mrs. Meeks said there were duplexes nearby that were zoned R -1 but that nothing near the subject property was zoned R -2. Mrs. Meeks handed in several statements from nearby property owners who opposed the rezoning as well. She said there was already a day care center a block away which still had several openings for children. Mrs. Meeks said the day care owner said they currently had 55 children enrolled but had capacity for 96 or even up to 105. Mr. and Mrs. Meeks said that the noise from the children during the day could be heard from their property and that the roads are insufficient to handle the additional traffic that would result from a day care center. Mrs. Meeks said if the business took in 100 children there would be at least 75 cars in an out during the morning and evening. She also said she wanted to point out that some of the oldest homes in the City were located in that area. Chairman Swickerath said for the record that there were eight (8) notes from property owners and that although all of them opposed the day care center, there were none that specifically addressed opposition to the rezoning. Katharine Pettus, 1243 Russell Drive, Ocoee, said she felt that another day care center was needed in the City and that this subject location would be a good place. There being no further public comments, Chairman Swickerath closed the public hearing. Board member Carroll mentioned that there was a note from Ruth Aycock among the notes handed to the Chairman that was opposing the day care center although Board member Carroll remembered that she too had received a rezoning to R -2 and wanted to develop a day care center. Board member Shiver restated that he did not like to see commercial mixed with residential but the petitioner was not really asking for commercial since in this case the residential zoning classification allowed a day care center. Vice Chairman Linebarier agreed and said he would have to vote to *ow approve the R -2 zoning since the day care center was not really the issue. Page 21 ,, Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 Board member Sims commented that this was a residential street that would handle the bulk of the traffic going in and out of the center and the additional traffic could be figured by multiplying the number of children the center would care for times four, since each car would create two trips in the morning (in and out) and two more trips in the evening (in and out). He said the Board also had to consider what this would do to traffic going through this part of town in the peak traffic hours of before and after working hours. Board member Bond said she was glad that this was called to her attention since she had not really focused on it as such. Board member Bond said if the petitioner simply asked for R -2 and did not state that her intention was a day care center, she probably would have voted to approve the rezoning, but now she would have to consider the possibility of 400 additional trips added to the area. Board member Carroll moved to recommend approval of the rezoning of the property to R -2 and Vice Chairman Linebarier seconded. Board member Shiver reminded everyone that the Board was voting on the rezoning only, and not the specific use of the property. Upon `b' a roll call vote, the motion carried with Vice Chairman Linebarier and Board members Shiver, Carroll, and Bond voting in favor and Chairman Swickerath and Board members Sims and Switzer voting against. Dave Outlaw, ZOM West 50, Ltd. (Case No. 1- 10ACRCT- 89:ZOM) Chairman Swickerath opened the public hearing and asked Senior Planner Harper to give an overview of the petition. Director of Planning Behrens said he would present this case. Director Behrens read the staff report's Issue and Background and Discussion sections. He pointed out that there were three specific requests being made: 1. Annexation of the subject parcel 2. Rezoning of the subject parcel 3. Creating and enacting a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to Chapter III, Section 4, "Building Height" Director Behrens said the wording proposed in the staff report had been changed and that the "Governmental buildings and tax supported facilities" part had been deleted. He said he had the new verbage and handed the copy to the Board to review. Director Behrens also Page 22 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 wanted to point out that there was a typographical error in the staff report and that the "20 foot height" referred to in this paragraph should have read "200 foot height ". Board member Switzer asked if there would be a traffic light on S.R. 50 at the entrance to the hospital. Director Behrens said the traffic light would probably go near or about Blackwood Avenue. Board member Shiver asked why the wording "governmental buildings and tax supported facilities" was dropped and asked who had suggested the wording. Director of Planning Behrens said the hospital representatives had suggested the new wording and that they could explain the reasoning for the change. Richard Irwin, Chief Executive Officer, West Orange Hospital, 555 N. Dillard Street, Winter Garden, explained the reasoning behind the wording change. Mr. Irwin said the government and tax supported facilities part was deleted because a government such as the City of Ocoee or a tax supported hospital such as West Orange Hospital, can not build a building for the purpose of renting it out. He said the hospital was moving because the outpatient %or services aspect of patient care was becoming increasingly more important and that this would mean having doctors' offices to service outpatients. He said the hospital wanted to build three tower buildings, and that the facilities housing physician offices would have to be owned by a private developer. Mr. Irwin said current City zoning will not allow building these types of facilities. He said the hospital buildings will probably be about 87 feet with additional height needed for television and other antenae. Mr. Irwin said if the hospital can not get approval to allow private building of such a complex, then the hospital will have to choose another location. Board member Shiver asked if all these buildings and the entire facility would fit on the proposed location. Mr. Irwin said it would and that the three -tower complex would be located in the middle of the property. He said one tower would be for inpatients, one tower would house ancillary services, and the third would be doctors' offices. Board member Shiver asked if expansion capabilities were built into the current plan for this proposed property. Mr. Irwin explained that preliminary plans called for 141 beds with 12 beds in the intensive care unit, 14 pediatric unit beds, a 22 -bed progressive Now care unit that would be a step -down unit from the intensive care unit, and two, forty -two medical - surgical beds. He said there Page 23 wi,, Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 would be five operating rooms and major emergency room suites for outpatient needs. Mr. Irwin stressed the focus or emphasis will be on outpatient services because that is the way the industry is heading. Board member Switzer questioned the size of the property and wondered if it would be large enough for future expansion. Mr. Irwin said it would be large enough for at least the next 10 -15 years, if not longer. He said the current location of the hospital is only seven - tenths (7/10) of an acre and twenty overall with the other supporting buildings. Board member Sims asked what hospital the Board could equate the new facility to and Mr. Irwin suggested the Sand Lake facility. Board member Sims said the hospital's suggested new language for the zoning ordinance amendment sounded equivalent to privatization. Mr. Irwin said the Board of Trustees would not entertain selling the hospital to a for - profit corporation but that a non - profit community hospital is not out of the question. Mr. Irwin said the medical industry is a business now moreso than a utility. Board member Sims asked why a special exception could not be granted ° fir rather than changing the language of the ordinance so that it would not open up the process and create problems in the future. Chairman Swickerath agreed that it should be an issue for the Board of Adjustment in order to have it treated as a single issue rather than opening up the process for everyone by amending the ordinance. Senior Planner Harper said that the process is typically done by text amendment, although limited, and case law has shown this to be the best way to go about it. Senior Planner Harper said a variance can not only be given to one petitioner in an issue such as this. It would have to be available to others as well. He also indicated that a variance can not be granted for a hardship that is brought on by the petitioner himself. Director of Planning Behrens suggested making a motion to recommend granting the requests spelled out in the petition, subject to the City Attorney figuring out the best way to resolve the issue. Board member Sims moved to recommend approval of the annexation and rezoning to C -2 with the recommendation to the City Commission to investigate the methods of allowing the hospital to have structures and appurtences up to 200 feet in height without changing the ordinance in such a way that would allow every petitioner or developer to build structures and appurtences of this height. Board member Shiver seconded the motion. 41rr Page 24 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting July 25, 1989 Chairman Swickerath said he wanted the hospital to get what it needed in such a way as not to prejudice other developers, but also not to allow just anyone to build up to these heights. James Slater, 2269 Lee Road, Winter Park, representing the applicant, Zom West 50, Ltd., said he had tried to formulate the language in such a way as to provide a medical complex, which includes a hospital, to build under the 200 foot height restrictions. There was some discussion about whether to amend the motion but Board member Sims said he did not think it was necessary since his motion expressed the general desire. Board member Shiver said he thought the new language helped and that it would give the City Commission a better foundation on which to build. Board member Sims agreed to amend his motion to include "for medical complexes that include hospitals" as a suggested way to amend the ordinance. The motion had already been seconded by Board member Shiver and he agreed to keep his second for the amended motion. The motion was approved unanimously with the exception of Board member Carroll who did not vote because of a conflict of %ftir There being no further business to discuss and no further comments from the Board members, Board member Bond moved to adjourn, Board member Sims seconded, and approval was unanimous. ADJOURNMENT: 12:35 a.m. 1 • LA A A fil I • IRMAN ' I " RATH ATTEST: I I ■ .i'PUTY CLERK RESNIK 'firy