ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES

Transcription

1 ZONING COMMISSION MEETING September 24,2012 MINUTES The Marion County Zoning Commission met on September 24,2012 at 5:30 pm in the Board of County Commissioners Auditorium, 601 SE 25 th Avenue, Ocala, Florida. The following members were present: Vice-Chairman Terry Thompson, Sue Shields-Mangram, Danny Gaekwad, Andy Kesselring, Earl Arnett and Alternate Member Robert Colen. Acting Chair Terry Thompson called the meeting to order at 5:30 pm. Mr. Martsolfread the Proof of Publication and the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting ofnotice, and advised that the meeting was properly advertised. Mr. Arnett gave the invocation which was followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. The secretary called the roll and a quorum was confirmed. All records pertaining to notice to property owners, all correspondence and other related information pertaining to individual Zoning Change and Special Use Permit requests are located in the Zoning Department files for record purposes. Mr. Martsolf explained the items listed on the Consent Agenda. These items received no written opposition within 300 feet and staff recommends approval of the requests. ITEM NUMBER OWNER FROM-TO ACREAGE SU SU SU SU SU Diana Hammond Javier & Paola Gamboa Lewis & Mark Beldock Duane & Abigail Conder Son Shine Ministries Church Special Use Permit in A-I Special Use Permit in R-4 Special Use Pennit in B-2 Special Use Permit in A-I Special Use Permit in B-1 Mr. Martsolf asked if anyone in the audience wished to have any of the Consent Agenda items pulled for discussion. Items SU, SU and SU were pulled for individual consideration Motion was made by Mr. Kesselring, seconded by Mr. Gaekwad to approve the remaining 2 items listed on the Consent Agenda (#121003SU and #121010SU). Motion passed 6 to O Z - Lynn E. Carico, 90 Bahia TraceTrail, Ocala FL, requests a Zoning Change, Article 5 of the Marion County Land Development Code, from R-l (Single Family Dwelling) to A-I (General Agriculture), for any and all uses permitted in an A-I zone, on Parcel Account No Marion County Zoning Commission - September 24, 2012 Page 1

2 Mr. Rison explained staffs recommendation for denial, stating a change to A-I would not be suitable to the character of this urban developed area. Mr. Martsolf announced that 81 property owners were notified, with 20 letters of opposition (25%) within 300 feet. Mr. Carico stated he wants to have chickens on his property. Mr. Carico asked his friend, Valerie Williams, SE 80th Avenue, Summerfield FL, to represent him. She related that Mr. Carico had previously mentioned wanting donkeys but now he doesn't. He purchased an adjoining parcel of property which could accommodate a few animals for his personal use. He may consider building a larger house on the property in the future. He was told he should go for agricultural zoning. Mr. Rison stated that this is an umecorded, older subdivision. This parcel of record could have 1 home on it but has no residence at this time. Staffs normal procedure would be to consider a Special Use Permit in a residential area if someone was living on the property. With Mr. Carico purchasing an adjacent parcel, this could be considered as meeting that requirement. This parcel is within the subdivision. Mr. Kesselring noted that if the property remains R -1 Alternate Approval Conditions could affect covenants, or deed restrictions, which would become a civil matter. County Attorney Guy Minter stated it is not the county's obligation or right to enforce deed restrictions. PUBLIC COMMENT: IN FAVOR: None OPPOSED: Robert Campbell, 170 los W 59th Place, Ocklawaha FL (property adjoins subject parcel), related the following: The subdivision is zoned R -1; there are numerous gopher tortoises and boroughs on the property; a change from R-l to A-I would exempt Mr. Carico from laws governing protection of the tortoises and other animals. Christina Garten, 5900 SE 168th Court, Ocklawaha FL, has been there 32 years; she moved there because it is residential. David Edwards SE 171st Court, Ocklawaha, stated the owner knew what the property was zoned when he bought it; objects to farm animals, which are prohibited by deed restrictions. Sandra Lapp, SE 63rd Lane - Doesn't want the smell; wants it to stay residential- not farm country. Ruth Valkier, SE 63rd Lane, Ocklawaha FL - opposed to zoning change. Jerry Valkier, SE 63 rd Lane, Ocklawaha FL opposed to zoning change. Michael Thomas,5691 SE 171st Court, Ocklawaha The property was zoned residential- for a purpose. Peggy Ann Lewis SE 63rd Lane related the following: lives in the rear ofthis property; is a veteran; came to the area because it was residential; The applicant could have found the right property for the use he wanted. Doesn't want the smell; foreign animals could be invitation for wild animals to come to the area. Lived there for 16 years. This would negatively impact Marion County Zoning Commission - September 24,2012 Page 2

3 ability to sell properties in the area; would lower property values. If the zoning change is approved he could have as many animals as he wants. Mr. Carico added he doesn't own a big farm; only a few chickens. PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED Motion was made by Mrs. Mangram, seconded by Mr. Colen, to agree with staffs findings and recommendation, and recommend denial, based on the following findings offact: L Is not compatible with surrounding area 2. Is not consistent with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan 3. Will adversely affect the public interest Motion passed 6 to O SU Diana Hammond 1749 SE 41st Terrace, Ocala, requests a Special Use Permit, Section 5.3 of the Marion County Land Development Code, for an assisted living facility with a maximum of 6 residents (revised from 7) in an A-I (General Agriculture) zone. Mr. Rison explained staffs revised recommendation for approval of the request based on State's regulations regarding assisted living facilities in the home. (NOTE: Staff subsequently changed its recommendation from Denial to Approval With Conditions, based on the reduction of the number of residents to 6.) Mr. Martsolf announced that 17 property owners were notified with no written opposition within 300 feet. Diana Hammond related the following: The subject parcel is on CR 475, and is 1.3 miles from an emergency services facility; she's owned the property for 30 years and built a residence 22 years ago. Her property was zoned Agricultural and she has a vested interest in the neighborhood. She is the owner and President of Taylor College and has graduated over 2000 medical professionals. Ray Hammond stated their reasons for wanting a group home: He is an Air Force veteran; he has experience in medical field and physical therapist credentials. He's taken care of thousands of residents in assisted living facilities. These elderly residents would have access to a rural setting. They want to allow veterans the opportunity to stay with them in their home. (Mr. Thompson advised that his wife is a part-time staffer and instructor at Taylor College. Mr. Minter stated this would not be a conflict of interest as the property on which the house is located is not owned by Taylor College.) PUBLIC COMMENT: OPPOSED: Marion County Zoning Commission - September 24,2012 Page 3

4 Anna Barbara Roy, 1490 SE 178th Street, Summerfield FL advised: - She purchased the property in 1976; she has just retired and wants to live the rest of her life there. Her concern is that if this is approved, her neighbor will sell her property there and that others will come in and build in the area. She questioned whether or not the Hammonds anticipate expanding the home. She mentioned the owners have big screeching birds, and added that a former renter, law enforcement officer, has used the back yard for shooting firearms, which concerns her because of the children in the area. County Attorney Guy Minter stated: 1) The applicant may have reduced the number of residents to 6 because the State Statute states that if the number of residents is 6 or less, the operation is deemed a non-commercial operation, and the activity is deemed to be residential activity; 2) State Statutes also state that two ALFs within 1000 feet of each other is prohibited; 3) RE: Whether or not the applicant needed to request approval of a Special Use Permit at all - The State Statute exempts activity involving 6 or less residents from this application process. Mr. Martsolf advised that State Statute allows community residential homes, with 6 or less residents, on properties zoned Single Family Dwelling and Multi-Family (residential uses). However; the primary use on this property is agricultural, in which case the Marion County Land Development Code requires that a Special Use Permit be approved to allow an assisted living facility. PUBLIC COMMENT: SUPPORT: NONE OPPOSED: Aubrey Sivis, Highway 475, Summerfield FL, asked if the residents of the ALF would be aged, or young veterans; would they be dangerous; also concerned about traffic situation. Mrs. Hammond: (Applicant) The home is block construction; the structure will remain the same with no additions. The perimeter of the property is fenced and wooded. There will be one resident care aide, experienced in health care and education, to provide care on each (of 2) 12 hour shifts, as well as a nurse who will visit throughout the day. They will not raise the number of residents from 6. She concluded by stating they do not wish to use the property for rental. Mrs. Mangram pointed out that the Special Use Permit, ifapproved, is to expire in 2015, at which time the owners would need to request renewal of the permit. PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED Motion was made by Mrs. Mangram, seconded by Mr. Arnett, to agree with staff's findings and recommendation, and recommend approval of the request with the conditions recommended by staff, based on the following findings of fact: 1. Is compatible with surrounding area 2. Is consistent with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan Marion County Zoning Commission - September 24, 2012 Page 4

5 3. Will not adversely affect the public interest Motion passed 5 to 1, with Mr. Kesselring dissenting SU - Lewis and Mark Beldock, ] 936 NW 46 th Street, Ocala FL, request a Special Use Permit, Section 5.3 of the Marion County Land Development Code, for parking three (3) commercial vehicles greater than 10,000 lbs. each (1 dump truck, 1 bucket truck and 1 backhoe) and retail auto sales with a maximum offive (5) passenger vehicles at one time, in a B-2 (Community Business) zone, on Parcel Account Nos , l and Mr. Rison explained staffs recommendation for approval of the request with conditions. Mr. Martsolf announced that 31 property owners were notified, with no written opposition within 300 feet. Applicant Mark Beldock stated he wants to park three (3) heavy pieces ofequipment on the property, as well as 5 cars at one time for sale, using Old Gainesville Road as access. He said that they may wish to park additional equipment on the property at some point in the future. Mr. Thompson pointed out that one of the conditions recommended by staff limits the number of commercial vehicles to be parked on the property to three (3), and five (5) maximum cars for sale. Mr. Beldock stated he is aware ofthat condition. PUBLIC COMMENT: In Favor: NONE OPPOSED: Diann Pratt, 1846 NW 46th Street, Ocala FL, expressed concerns: the number of vehicles could increase without authorization; and the possibility ofan unauthorized junk yard; future maintenance ofnw 46th Street should the applicant use the road as ingress and egress. She wants the property to remain residential and not commercial. Kimberly Phillips (Porchelli),4505 NW 19 th Avenue, Ocala FL - Expressed concern about attraction of snakes, and said there should be some type of fence or buffer to hide the business from the surrounding residential area. She also questioned whether or not the equipment would be kept in the garage. Mr. Martsolf advised that a condition could be recommended to require the equipment to be placed in a garage or covering; conditions for buffering would be based on the use. Mr. Martsolf stated that if the request is approved the applicant would then be required to submit a development plan. PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED. Marion County Zoning Commission - September 24, 2012 Page 5

6 Mr. Beldock advised that his property is very well maintained; that Kimberly Phillips (Porchelli) doesn't live near the equipment and what she sees from her property is a wooded lot; the equipment is up front for potential customers to see. He added that his property is kept neat, cleaned and mowed, and he will not make it a junk: yard. It is not his wish to create any difficulties. Motion was made by Mr. Kesselring, seconded by Mr. Gaekwad, to agree with staffs findings and recommendation, and recommend approval of the request, based on the following findings of fact: 1. Is compatible with surrounding area 2. Is consistent with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan 3. Will not adversely affect the public interest Motion passed 6 to O SSU Eaton's Beach Restoration Group, LLC (Randy Keuntjes), SE Sunset Harbor Road, Summerfield FL, requests a Special Use Permit, Section 5.3 of the Marion County Land Development Code, for overflow parking in conjunction with a restaurant, in an A-I (General Agriculture) zone, on Parcel No Mr. Rison explained staffs recommendation for denial, based on the limited information provided on the conceptual plan submitted, as well as concerns regarding suitability and consistency with surrounding uses. Mr. Martsolf announced that 24 property owners were notified, with 11 letters ofopposition (46%). Mr. Martsolf noted, for the record, that Attorney Steve Gray had submitted information on behalf of Roch and Janet Schumacher, who reside within 300 feet of the subject property, and who oppose this request. Mr. Martsolf distributed copies of the site plan submitted by the applicant and a Response to Alternate Approval Conditions, which were previously proposed by staff. Applicant, Randy Keuntjes, Owner of Eaton's Beach Restoration Group, advised he has plans for a ISO-seat restaurant at Eaton's Beach with a paved parking lot (drainage plan approved by the County), for which additional parking space will be needed. The purpose of this request is for use of an adjacent parcel (on the southeast comer if the property) for overflow parking (7 paved spaces) for the restaurant. This is primarily to relieve the parking problem experienced in the past by neighboring property owners. He added that he, as the owner, will fully comply with staffs Alternate Approval Conditions. The business will provide 40 new jobs and will generate over $100,000 in taxable revenues from outside Marion County, which is one of the Economic Development Council's (EDC's) goals. Marion County Zoning Commission September 24,2012 Page 6

7 PUBLIC COMMENT: IN FAVOR: Clay Albright, 233 SE 3rd Street, Ocala FL, related the following: There has always been a parking problem at Eaton's Beach, with the roadway being continuously blocked by patrons; Mr. Keuntjes will be putting a considerable amount of money into the project; A point of contention is a. 15-acre parcel, which was the only parcel not subject to the Juliet Dowdy deed restrictions presented; and with Mr. Keuntjes agreeing to the conditions proposed by staff, it will cure a lot of problems. Mr. Albright added that he has no involvement or financial interest in this application whatsoever. OPPOSED: Bryce Ackerman, Attorney with Gray, Ackerman & Haines, PA, 125 NE First Avenue, representing Roch and Janet Schumacher, advised that the subject property is adjacent to the Schumacher's parcel in the Juliet Dowdy unrecorded subdivision. Access to the subject parcel is in this unrecorded subdivision. He made the point that it is the applicant's responsibility to show that this change would: 1) have no adverse affect on the public interest; 2) be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and 3) be compatible with surrounding land use (i.e. the Dowdy subdivision). He went on to state the Dowdy Subdivision restrictive covenants state that property within the subdivision is to be used solely for residential purposes; there are to be no businesses conducted on the property; there should be nothing of annoyance or nuisance to the residents of the subdivision. This purpose would be a nuisance to the subdivision, clearly a commercial purpose, and an illegal expansion ofthe use. Additionally, he noted that Eaton's Beach is a non conforming use under the Comprehensive Plan, but was grandfathered in under Section 120 of the Future Land Use element, which prohibits any expansion unless the area expanded into complies with zoning and land use at the time of the application. The subject parcel is zoned A I - not compliant with a commercial use. The Schumachers agree with staffs recommendations for denial and object to the Alternate Approval Conditions. This application is inconsistent with Comprehensive Plan, which prohibits the Board of County Commissioners from granting the request. Mr. Ackerman added that a portion of access along the easement route is in the Dowdy Subdivision. Mr. Martsolf described, and showed the location on the projected map of, the subject area. With the angle of the proposed parking spaces, the exit would be at the north end of the parking lot, requiring a sharp left-hand tum. William Clapp, SE 134th Avenue (Weirsdale FL), advised that the parking lot is 100 ft. from his house and he is opposed to the request. Roch Schumacher, SE 157th Lane, Weirsdale FL, stated he purchased the property knowing that the parking lot is zoned R-l. His House is 25 ft. from parking lot. They plan to Marion County Zoning Commission - September 24,2012 Page 7

8 exit the parking lot on SE 157th Lane, which is a one-lane road that provides access to his and other residents' properties. He strongly opposes the request. He stated that when Eaton's Beach was open he had a problem with vehicles blocking the roadofmajor concern being in emergency situations. He was told by the applicant he was he'd have to police that area because the restaurant operators wouldn't have the time to do so. He strongly opposes this request. Mr. Gaekwad asked if any law prohibits people from going in and out of the area numerous times. Mr. Minter advised that it would be his opinion that if it's a private road, the owners of that road could block it if they so desired. Mr. Martsolf stated that the easement was dedicated for access - ingress and egress. A discussion ensued concerning ingress and egress from the parking lot. Mr. Thompson suggested the angled parking be reversed, with the ingress being from the north end, on SE 134 th A venue, then exiting back onto 134 th A venue on the south end, with a buffer fence around the north, east and south sides. Mr. Martsolf advised this plan was designed to maximize the parking spaces. In the past vehicles had to back out into the right-of-way. He said Mr. Thompson's suggestion would result in the loss of one parking space. It was Mr. Gaekwad's opinion that six parking spaces would be better than none. Jan Schumacher, SE 157th Lane, Weirsdale FL, stated they purchased the property 18 years ago, have a 45-acre strip of property, and were very aware of the deed restrictions. She said she thought the deed restrictions ran with the land and could never be used as a part of Eaton's Beach, and that there would always be a permanent buffer between the Eaton's Beach business. She showed a photo depicting two rows of parking. This is residential property and she's very opposed to the requested change. A major concern is having autos coming out on a residential lane. David Spencer, SE 134 th Avenue, Weirsdale FL, said he opposes this expansion. He has enjoyed the beach since the 60's and purchased property in the 80's. This restoration, in his opinion, is a commercialization of a residential use. A lift station would be in close proximity to the beach, dumpsters would be next to their homes, and now there will be additional parking. Other concerns are safety, lighting and noise. This change would not be consistent with the surrounding area, nor with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan. Ronnie Spencer, SE 134th Avenue, Weirsdale FL, said he opposes the proposed change. Mr. Keuntjes stated the suggested change in direction of parking mayor may not work. He felt the proposed plan would be less intrusive, but said it could be changed. He added, with regard to the Schumacher's property, that he would consider a buffer of a 6 foot high board-on-board fence to alleviate lighting problems. With regard to the Spencer's concerns, he said that the Spencers can't see the property due to a 6 to 8 foot hedge row that blocks the view. He Marion County Zoning Commission - September 24,2012 Page 8

9 concluded by saying he would consider suggested changes and talk with engineers for a possible solution. Mr. Thompson suggested he meet with area residents to resolve any issues before the Board of County Commissioners on October 16 th CLOSED PUBLIC COMMENT Motion was made by Mr. Kesselring, seconded by Mrs. Mangram, to disagree with staffs findings and recommendation, and recommend approval with the Alternate Approval Conditions, as well as consideration of the angled parking being reversed, with the ingress being from the north end, on SE 134 th Avenue, then exiting back onto 134 th Avenue on the south end, with a buffer fence around the north, east and south sides, based on the following findings of fact: 1. Is compatible with surrounding area 2. Is consistent with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan 3. Will not adversely affect the public interest Motion passed 5 to O SU Duane T. and Abigail Conder, 5595 SE I 40 th Street, Summerfield FL, request a Special Use Permit, Section 5.3 of the Marion County Land Development Code, for a dog kennel for 15 adult dogs (Toy Poodles and Maltese) in an A-I (General Agriculture) zone. Mr. Rison explained staffs recommendation for approval with conditions. Mr. Martsolf announced that 19 property owners were notified with no written opposition within 300 feet. Abigail Conder stated they raise miniature horses and Toy Poodles and Maltese on their 12 acres, and wish to shelter the dogs (approximately 15, excluding her personal pets) in some of the stalls in the barn. No alterations will be made to any structure located on the property. Referring to Condition #3 - no commercial sales ofdogs/puppies shall occur on-site she estimated possibly one person per week would be on-site to pick up a puppy. There is no pet store or kennel. This application is as a result of a Code violation. Mr. Rison explained that for raising puppies for personal use on Agriculture zoned property there is no limitation; however, kennel breeding and sales makes this a commercial use. Mr. Kesselring asked what the difference is between selling dogs and selling chickens (which is pemliued). Mr. Martsolf advised that a kennel is defined in the Code, as there is a potential for barking and other issues involved with a kennel. PUBLIC COMMENT: IN FAVOR: NONE Marion County Zoning Commission - September 24, 2012 Page 9

10 OPPOSED: Hugh Dykes, SE l75th Avenue, Summerfield FL, advised he misunderstood the applicants' intentions and has no problem with the kennel. Richard Dunn, SE l55th Avenue, Summerfield FL, advised his property runs almost entire length (on the east side) of the applicants'. The applicants' bam is ft. from his property and while he has no concern about that, he does have concern about the number of dogs that will be located there, which could create a noise and odor problems. Ingrid Chance, 2 Pine Court Place, Ocala FL, advised although she does not live in the area, she does own two parcels within 300 feet of the subject property. She said she is concerned for her neighbors and is opposed to this request. PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED Mrs. Conder explained that the bam where the dogs will be currently exists on the property, and no changes will be made on the property. When asked, Mrs. Conder indicated that these dogs average 2 to 3 puppies per litter, which will be kept on-site until they are weaned or12 weeks old. After discussion, a motion was made by Mrs. Mangram, seconded by Mr. Kesselring, to agree with staffs findings and recommendation, and recommend approval ofthe request with conditions, deleting Condition #3, which prohibits commercial sale of dogs/puppies on-site, based on the following findings of fact: 1. Is compatible with surrounding area 2. Is consistent with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan 3. Will not adversely affect the public interest Motion passed 6 to O SU - Fernando Alzate, 1800 SE Highway 42, Summerfield FL, requests a Special Use Permit, Section 5.3 of the Marion County Land Development Code, for a 100 ft. guyed tower for broadcasting (off-site) a low-power FM station in an A-I (General Agriculture) zone, on Parcel Account No Mr. Rison explained staffs findings and recommendation for approval with conditions. He added that this request is as a result of a Code violation for the non-permitted tower and a mobile home located on the parcel. Mr. Martsolf announced that 12 property owners were notified, with 6 letters of opposition (50%) within 300 feet. Applicant Juan Nieves, 9645 SE 45th Avenue, Ocala FL, stated he leases this property from Mr. Alzate (owner) who gave permission for the tower to be erected, for which no permit was issued. He said he is a retired engineer and has erected towers in other areas (Puerto Rico, Chicago and Orlando), and that in his experience, the tower owners would obtain proper permits. Marion County Zoning Commission - September 24, 2012 Page 10

11 James Martin (no address provided) stated that when property was leased it was kept as a derelict parcel which the applicant restored to good condition, with the goal being to provide a low powered FM station for any ministry. The mobile home on the property is uninhabitable and is used strictly for storage of the 6'x24' digital transmitter to allow internet capabilities. The group currently has no church home. OPPOSED: Clayton Fell, 1719 SE 150 th Street, Ocala FL, advised the 690 sq. ft. mobile home on the property was a rental unit, which the applicant rented approximately 8 to 10 months ago. Skepticism arose when people would arrive daily in nice cars and would stay for several hours. A 120 ft. tower was erected, after which 20 feet of the tower was removed. This was reported to Code Enforcement and considerable time passed as the owner lived in Columbia. He noted the following concerns noted were: This is an agricultural area; the absentee owner does not live on the property; the renter has no financial interest in the community; the tower was erected with no permit; there is no record of an FCC license for WJRN for 2012; and WJRN radio station forfeiture in March, Area residents are concerned about precedent that this would create, and want to keep this a rural area. There are no other towers in the area and this use is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan or Land Use designation. PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED Mr. Martin rebutted that Mr. Alzate had a station that was sold. They have a petition containing over signatures (300) of people interested in the broadcast. This location was chosen primarily because it was an open agricultural parcel. The low power FM station would not create any dead spaces and should not interfere with internet service. Motion was made by Mr. Colen, seconded by Mr. Arnett, to agree with staffs findings and recommendation, and recommend approval of the request with the conditions recommended by staff. Motion failed on a vote of 2 to 4, with Mr. Gaekwad, Mrs. Mangram, Mr. Kesselring and Mr. Thompson voting NO, and Mr. Colen and Mr. Arnett voting YES. Motion was then made by Mr. Kesselring, seconded by Mr. Gaekwad, to disagree with staffs findings and recommendation, and recommend denial, based on the following findings of fact: 1. Is not compatible with surrounding area 2. Is not consistent with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan 3. Will adversely affect the public interest Motion passed 4 to 2, with Mr. Colen and Mr. Arnett dissenting. Marion County Zoning Commission - September 24,2012 Page 11

12 SU Carmelo and Catherine Stracuzzi, 5499 SE 38 th Street, Ocala FL, request a Special Use Permit, Section 5.3 ofthe Marion County Land Development Code, for storage of concrete forms, a 7,000 lb. curbing machine and five (5) pickup trucks with attached trailers, in an A-I (General Agriculture) zone, on Parcel Account No Mr. Rison explained staffs recommendation for denial. Mr. Martsolf announced that 25 property owners were notified with 5 letters of opposition (20%) received within 300 feet. Consulting Engineer Robert Rogers, 1105 SE 3rd Avenue, Ocala FL, explained that this business employs 15 people, and has been there for 12 years. Concrete forming materials are stored in the storage building. Five (5) trucks will make a total of20 trips per day to and from the business. The applicant is attempting to address any concerns of area residents. There have been no problems with traffic or lights and the applicant has no problem with staff recommended conditions. With regard to noise, the applicant will adjust the loading times so they will be at staggered times in the afternoon and not in the mornings. He stated that the applicant is willing to buffer along the back side of the property to reduce the noise. He explained ingress and egress to the property the map projected overhead. PUBLIC COMMENT: OPPOSED: Lynda Geril, 3734 SE 55th Court, Indian Pines. Ms. Geril showed a group of photos taken from her screen porch, and related the following: She has been in the neighborhood since 1994 and doesn't feel the location is appropriate for this type of business. Equipment is stored in the pole bam which is approximately 20 feet from her home. The business loads each morning and unloads each evening. The men (8-15) would arrive about 3:30 to 5:30 am each morning for many months. She talked with the owner and the noise stopped for awhile, then started up again. This kept repeating for approximately 2 years when she finally went to Code Enforcement regarding the business and learned that it shouldn't be there. They are now bringing trucks behind the back fence, near her home bedroom. Adam Geril, 3734 SE 55 th Court, Ocala FL, stated he agrees with staffs recommended conditions. Connie Hackworth, 3730 SE 66th Avenue, Ocala FL (not on notification list of property owners within 300 feet ofthe subject property), related the following concerns: increased traffic, noise and traffic violations; several blind driveways created by a hill; safety ofchildren at school bus stops, as well as on the narrow roadway; leaching ofoil and fuel into the ground. The business has been run, in violation of the Code. She requests the application be denied. PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED Marion County Zoning Commission - September 24,2012 Page 12

13 Mr. Rogers noted the use of the pole bam is at issue. In an attempt to resolve concerns, rather than shut down a business that employs 15 people, the applicant is willing to place a heavy (25 ft.) vegetative buffer along the existing stockade fence to diminish noise; and to change the work schedule requiring that loading be done in the afternoon. He said he feels the best thing would be to heavily vegetate 25 feet from the property line, and change the work schedule. Mr. Thompson questioned why the applicant was now willing to place a buffer when the neighbor had complained to him for over 2 years. Motion was made by Mr. Kesselring, seconded by Mr. Colen, to agree with staffs findings and recommendation, and recommend denial of the request, based on the following findings offact: 1. Is not compatible with surrounding area 2. Is not consistent with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan 3. Will adversely affect the public interest Motion passed 4 to 1, with Mr. Thompson dissenting SU - Luis and Mindi Licha, NW 8 th Lane, Ocala FL, request a Special Use Permit, Section 5.3 of the Marion County Land Development Code, for parking a commercial vehicle greater than 10,000 lbs. in an A-I (General Agriculture) zone, on Parcel Account No Mr. Rison explained staffs findings and recommendation for denial of the request, primarily due to the location (front yard) proposed for parking the commercial vehicle. Mr. Martsolf announced that 9 property owners were notified, with no written opposition within 300 feet. Applicant Mindy Licha advised that they were not aware they needed a special permit to park the truck on their property. She said her husband comes home once in 28 days, leaving again 6 days later. She said she's spoken with neighbors and no one has expressed any concerns about the truck being there. She asked about the Alternate Approval Conditions. What is the public interest in this situation? Mr. Thompson stated this is not an allowed use in an agricultural zone. Mr. Rison concurred. The continuous parking of the commercial vehicle in an agricultural area is not a permitted activity. This request was as the result of a Code violation initiated by an anonymous phone call to Code Enforcement. Mr. Kesselring asked if the vehicle could be parked in the back yard rather than in the front yard. Mrs. Licha said they have no problem complying with that. Marion County Zoning Commission - September 24, 2012 Page 13

14 Regarding Alternate Approval Condition #5 She asked what the board considers driveway/access points. Mr. Rison advised that would be where her driveway connects to NW 8th Lane. She said that road is not a dedicated road maintained by the County, so how can the county tell her what conditions to maintain on her driveway. Mr. Rison stated this is a private roadway which is not in the best condition and this is a standard approval condition determined to be acceptable so as not to further deteriorate the roadway by the turning movement of the truck. She added that they have a man grade a portion of the road periodically. With regard to buffer requirements - which could be existing vegetation she pointed out this would not be a problem since if they were to park it in the back where there is heave vegetation all around the property. There was no one in the audience to speak for or against this request; the Chair closed public comment. Motion made by Mr. Kesselring, seconded by Mr. Arnett, to disagree with staff's findings and recommendation, and recommend approval with the Alternate Approval Conditions proposed by staff, subject to the applicant changing the site plan to indicate parking of the truck will be in the back yard, and that "visual screen" could be existing material, based on the following findings of fact: 1. Is compatible with surrounding area 2. Is consistent with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan 3. Will not adversely affect the public interest Motion passed 5 to O. MINUTES: Upon a motion by Mr. Kesselring, seconded by Mrs. Mangram, Minutes of the August 27,2012 meeting were unanimously approved. ADJOURNED: The meeting adjourned at 8 :21 pm. Attest: Ja tevens, Administrative Staff Assistant Marion County Zoning Commission - September 24, 2012 Page 14