PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION (PDC) SUMMARY MINUTES Members Present: Cheryl Phillips, 1 st Vice Chair; William Garvin, 2 nd Vice Chair; Joel Brender; James Brooks; Sondra Moylan; Donny Harrelson, Alternate; and Chuck Dixon, School Board Representative. William J. Grant arrived at 9:06 A.M. Staff Present: Joanna Coutu, Director, Land Development Division (LDD); Joe Hochadel, Planner II (LDD); Susan Wright, Coordinator (LDD); Charlene Wolf, Sr. Secretary (LDD) Also Present: Denise Lyn, County Attorney Absent: David Bramblett, Chair A. CALL TO ORDER Cheryl Phillips, 1 st Vice Chair, called the meeting to order at 9:00 A.M. B. INVOCATION The Invocation was given by William Garvin, 2 nd Vice Chair. C. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by William Garvin, 2 nd Vice Chair. D. ROLL CALL Recording Secretary proceeded with roll call. E. CHAIRMAN TO READ THE APPEAL PROCESS AND MEETING PROCEDURES F. OPEN TO THE PUBLIC None G. APPROVE MINUTES MOTION: Approve minutes of December 6, 2018. VOTE: 6 0, Minutes approved H. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS: None 1 st Mr. Brooks 2 nd Mr. Harrelson
I. EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS: County Attorney Denise Lyn polled the PDC members on whether they had any ex parte communications concerning the applications to be heard. All PDC members said they had no ex parte communications. Mr. Garvin had a site visit. J. APPLICATIONS 1. LAND USE APPLICATION a. V-19-01 Thomas Engineering Group for RaceTrac Petroleum, Inc. (Postponed until end of PDC meeting since applicant was not present) b. CU-19-01 Creighton Construction Management for Peter and Emily Lares REQUEST: This request is for a Conditional Use to allow for a convenience store with gas pumps in the Professional Services/Office District, pursuant to Section 2409, Professional Services/Office District (PSO), as specified in the LDC. LOCATION: Section 12, Township 20 South, Range 17 East; more specifically, Lots 36-38, of Homosassa Springs Gardens, PB 1, PG 58, multiple addresses off of S. Suncoast Blvd., Homosassa, FL. A complete legal description of the property is on file with the Land Development Division. STAFF CONTACT: Joe Hochadel, Planner II; Land Development Division INTRODUCTION: Ms. Wright s overview included an aerial view of the subject property, photos of the subject property and the surrounding area, and the site plan as submitted by the applicant. This request is to allow for a convenience store with gas pumps and a carwash in the Professional Services/Office District. APPLICANT: Will Anderson s presentation included the project goals, current zoning and future land use maps, a photo of the property, the proposed site plan, and the deviations being requested. The goal is to construct a new 3,109 square-foot 7-Eleven with six multi-pump dispensers and a car wash. The construction documents for this project have been submitted for review by Citrus County. A portion of the west boundary of the property is currently zoned PSO on the Land Use Atlas Map, while the entire property is zoned GNC on the Future Land Use Map. A convenience store is an allowable use in the PSO District with a conditional use, so a zoning change is not being requested. Mr. Anderson said that the request for signage inside the landscape buffer area is due to site constraints. The 2
request for site lighting in excess of five foot-candles is proposed in specific areas for safety, and there is minimal light spillage along the perimeter of the property. Mr. Grant noted that he did not have any site visits or conversations with any of the applicants. STAFF: Mr. Hochadel s presentation included an aerial view of the subject property, the land use map, photos of the subject property, and the proposed site plan. This conditional use is being requested to establish a convenience store with gas pumps and a car wash in the Professional Service/Office District (PSO). The PSO strip along US-19 is approximately 50 feet wide. He noted that the applicant has made some modifications to the site plan as part of the permitting process with the understanding that the approval of the conditional use would be required. The applicant s request meets the landscaping, setback, and ISR requirements. Staff has found that the requested deviations can be acceptable as long as the other design standards are adhered to. This application is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Findings of Fact have all been found to be positive findings. Mr. Garvin asked whether the changes made by the applicant in the permitting process would modify the suggested conditions in the staff report. Mr. Hochadel said the condition regarding lighting could be revised, and possibly add something regarding the directional sign, if the PDC so desired. Mr. Brooks asked about the properties to the north and the east of the subject property. Mr. Hochadel said they are currently vacant. Mr. Brender asked about the lighting of the sign which is requested to be located in the landscape buffer. Mr. Anderson said the entrance signs are backlit. PROPONENT: None OPPONENT: None COMMISSION COMMENTS: Ms. Coutu commented that staff has a revised suggested condition based upon the applicant s presentation. Ms. Phillips asked to hear the revised condition. Mr. Hochadel said Condition Two would be revised to say, At the time of permitting, the applicant must demonstrate compliance with development standards per LDC Section 3745, Design Standards for Small Non-Residential Development Projects, including but not limited to 3
landscaping, buffering, façade, and parking, and lighting. Existing vegetation may be used to meet buffer standards. Directional signage and lighting is approved as proposed in the site plan submitted with this application. MOTION: 1 st Mr. Garvin 2 nd Mr. Brooks MOTION: The finds application number CU-19-01 CONSISTENT with the Citrus County Comprehensive Plan and the Citrus County Land Development Code and that Board APPROVES WITH CONDITIONS the application based upon the evidence and testimony presented, and the staff report and conclusions regarding this petition. It has been determined that APPROVING the proposed Conditional Use will not adversely affect the public interest; that there is compliance with special rules governing individual conditional uses of the type involved; that the proposed development, with conditions and safeguards attached, would be generally compatible with adjacent properties and other property in the district; and that the PDC is empowered under the section of the LDC described in the application to grant this Conditional Use. AMENDED CONDITIONS 1. This Conditional Use is to allow for a convenience store with gas pumps and carwash, as proposed on the site plan submitted with this application date-stamped October 24, 2018. 2. At the time of permitting, the applicant must demonstrate compliance with development standards per LDC Section 3745, Design Standards for Small Non-Residential Development Projects, including but not limited to landscaping, buffering, façade, and parking. Existing vegetation may be used to meet buffer standards. Directional signage and lighting is approved as proposed in the site plan submitted with this application. 3. At the time of permitting, the applicant must demonstrate compliance with development standards per LDC Section 3220, Automobile Service Stations, including but not limited to setbacks and access. 4. The site must meet the LDC requirements of Chapter 6 for Stormwater Management and Chapter 7 for Access Management at time of permitting. 5. Cross-access must be provided to the adjacent commercially designated properties to the north and east. 6. A site plan must be submitted to the Land Development Division at the time of permitting indicating compliance with these conditions. VOTE: 7-0, Motion Carried 4
2. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ATLAS AMENDMENT a. CPA/AA-19-03 Jan Yarborough for Dylan Jenkins REQUEST: This request is to amend the Future Land Use Map of the Citrus County Comprehensive Plan from LDR, Low Density Residential District, to GNC, General Commercial District; and to amend the Land Use Atlas Map of the Land Development Code (LDC) from LDR, Low Density Residential District, to GNC, General Commercial District. LOCATION: Section 12, Township 20 South, Range 17 East; more specifically, Lot 2, Block A, of Citrus Park, PB 6, PG 129, which address is known as 6463 W. Homosassa Trail; and Lots 66 and 67, of Green Acres Unit 8, PB 11, PG 40, which addresses are known as 2985 S. Pine Ridge Ave. and 6529 W. Homosassa Trail, Lecanto, Florida. A complete legal description of the property is on file with the Land Development Division. STAFF CONTACT: Joe Hochadel, Planner II; Land Development Division INTRODUCTION: Ms. Wright s overview included an aerial view of the subject properties and photos of the subject properties and the surrounding area. This request is to change 2.62 acres from Low Density Residential to General Commercial. APPLICANT: Jan Yarborough gave a verbal presentation and said the request is to change three lots currently designated as LDR to GNC. The vacant lot between two of the three lots is already GNC. There is no large project planned, but the property may be used as a self-storage for RVs and boats. Mr. Grant asked for more information. Ms. Yarborough said that the applicant wants to have four lots zoned as GNC so metal buildings for self-storage could be constructed. She said there would not be an office or attendant. Mr. Harrelson confirmed that this request is just for zoning and not for the storage. Ms. Yarborough affirmed and said the storage portion is a proposed project after the zoning is changed to GNC. Mr. Grant asked why the applicant did not come with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) since there seemed to be a plan. Ms. Yarborough said the zoning change was one of the suggestions identified in a pre-application meeting. 5
Ms. Phillips asked whether the applicant owned all five of the lots within the block along W. Homosassa Trail between N. Pine Ridge Ave, and S. Bolton Ave. Ms. Yarborough said they just own the four lots. STAFF: Mr. Hochadel s presentation included an aerial view of the subject properties and land use maps. This application is requesting to change 2.62 acres from LDR to GNC. The commercial properties scattered throughout the area are primarily a reflection of existing commercial uses. The site is currently vacant. The applicant has indicated that the use would be for RV and boat storage, but there is no master plan or planned development associated with this application. To develop these lots as one site and used in conjunction, the applicant will need to vacate the easements on Lots 66 and 67. He noted that the GNC District allows for the more intense commercial uses. The increase of GNC may not be compatible with the residential area without a PUD. Staff finds this application to be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Grant asked about Lot 3 that is already zoned as GNC. Ms. Coutu explained that a commercial type of business could have been present when the LDC Atlas was developed in 1990, since the atlas recognized existing commercial uses at that time. Mr. Grant asked whether the applicant was told about the option of making application with a PUD, and Mr. Hochadel said yes. PROPONENT: None OPPONENT: Pamela Janssen expressed concern about more traffic since the intersection at Rosedale and Homosassa Trail can be busy and dangerous. Brenda Buzby said she was opposed because of the uncertainty of what would be developed on this property. REBUTTAL: None MOTION: 1 st Mr. Grant 2 nd Mr. Garvin 6
MOTION: The finds application number CPA/AA-19-03 INCONSISTENT with the Citrus County Comprehensive Plan and Citrus County Land Development Code and that this Board recommends DENIAL of the application to the Board of County Commissioners based upon the evidence and testimony presented, and the staff report and conclusions regarding this petition. Mr. Brooks asked whether a denial of this application would prohibit the applicant from coming back with a PUD within one year. Ms. Lyn said the applicant could come back within one year if the application is substantially different. Mr. Grant commented that he would like to see a PUD as he was concerned about the allowable uses in the GNC District. The traffic and the residential property owners in the area are also factors that need to be taken into consideration. Mr. Harrelson and Ms. Phillips concurred with Mr. Grant. Ms. Moylan asked about a continuance. Ms. Coutu noted this is a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC). If the PDC recommends denial of this application, it goes on to the BCC. If the PDC continues the application, it stops until the applicant returns to the PDC with modifications. Ms. Lyn added that if the PDC recommends denial of the application, the applicant could also request to continue the application before the BCC hearing. Mr. Grant noted that a PUD could financially commit the property owners to acquiring drawings, engineering, and commitment to the use of the land. Mr. Harrelson said he concurred. The PDC discussed the options and determined to vote on the motion. VOTE: 7-0, Motion Carried 3. LAND USE APPLICATION a. V-19-01 Thomas Engineering Group for RaceTrac Petroleum, Inc. Ms. Lyn said this application was noticed and advertised for hearing today and the PDC could proceed without the applicant. REQUEST: This request is for a Variance from the Citrus County Land Development Code (LDC) to allow for the construction of new driveway aprons having less than the required connection spacing from an adjacent driveway connection, pursuant to Section 7150, Access Management for State Highways, as specified in the LDC. 7
LOCATION: Section 13, Township 20 South, Range 17 East; more specifically, Lots 1-10, of Homosassa Acres, PB 3, PG 12, which address is 8198 S. Suncoast Blvd., Homosassa, Florida. A complete legal description of the property is on file with the Land Development Division. STAFF CONTACT: Joe Hochadel, Planner II; Land Development Division INTRODUCTION: Ms. Wright s overview included an aerial view of the subject property, photos of the subject property and the surrounding area, and the site plan as submitted by the applicant. This request is to allow for construction of a driveway connection having less than the required spacing to another driveway connection. APPLICANT: The applicant was not present. STAFF: Mr. Hochadel s presentation included an aerial view of the subject property, a photo of a nearby commercial development, and the conceptual site plan. This variance is being requested for a reduced driveway apron separation of 337 feet and the LDC requires a 660-foot separation. US-19 is controlled by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), and the applicant has not provided information to indicate whether FDOT would allow the second driveway access. The primary access point is proposed at the intersection of US-19 and Cypress Blvd. He noted that cross-access would be required. Findings of Fact Numbers 1-6 and 8 have not been found to be positive findings. Laura Borgesi, County Engineer, said that the County has guidelines to protect residents, stakeholders, and people visiting the area. The second driveway that does not meet the County s spacing requirements puts those traveling US-19 and the patrons of this business at a serious risk of injury due to an accident. Insufficient information has been provided to the Engineering Division and she recommended that the PDC deny the application. Mr. Brender asked about discussions between RaceTrac representatives and Engineering regarding the location of the second driveway. Ms. Borgesi said Engineering had requested more details and noted there are some methodologies that could be utilized to make this safer (i.e. a turn lane). The applicant has not sent anything or tried to set up a meeting. She said she was amenable to sitting down with RaceTrac or any developer in Citrus County to assist with development. Mr. Brender asked about a continuance to allow the applicant time to meet with Engineering. Mr. Grant said he would not vote to approve the request as proposed. He asked about the repercussions of a denial. Ms. Coutu said there would need to be a substantial change to be brought back to the PDC 8
within one year. She noted that staff has encouraged the applicant to talk with Engineering, but without avail. Mr. Grant asked who determines whether a change is considered to be substantial. Ms. Lyn said the Director of the Land Development Division reviews and decides whether or not there is a substantial change. Mr. Garvin said that if the request is denied, the applicant could work with Engineering right away. He felt that a denial would encourage the applicant to take a serious look at the situation and make a significant change. Ms. Lynn said the County is preparing to apply for more Trip grant funding for the next phase of CR-491. One of the conditions to receive the funding is that the County has an Access Management Plan and requires adherence to this Plan. She noted that the PDC is the final authority on this application. If this application is allowed to move forward without complying with the Plan, it could impact the County s ability to receive future funding for transportation improvements around Citrus County. Mr. Dixon agreed that this proposed separation is unsafe. This is a prime example for cross-access since there is vacant commercial land lying to the north and south of the site. Ms. Coutu commented that cross-access to the property on the south could allow the applicant to meet the required 660-foot separation distance. Mr. Harrelson said he was in favor of denying the request. The applicant has had ample time to meet with Engineering and has not shown any interest in making that happen. Mr. Brooks expressed concern about violating conditions that could impact funding and cross-access. Ms. Moylan agreed that the proposal was a picture for disaster. She would not vote in favor for a continuance. PROPONENT: None OPPONENT: None MOTION: 1 st Mr. Garvin 2 nd Mr. Harrelson MOTION: The finds application number V-19-01 INCONSISTENT with the Citrus County Land Development Code and IS NOT in keeping with the intent of the Policies of the Citrus County Comprehensive Plan and that this Board DENIES the application 9
based upon the evidence and testimony presented and the staff report and conclusions regarding this petition. Mr. Grant said he was going to vote in favor of the denial due to the applicant being able to come back with a substantial change and due to the safety concerns. Mr. Brender commented that it will be up to the applicant to carry the discussion further to make changes. He would be voting for denial. VOTE: 7-0, Motion Carried K. ADDITIONAL ITEMS Ms. Coutu gave a brief overview of the number of applications to be heard in upcoming PDC meetings. L. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS None M. ADJOURN The adjourned at 10:11 A.M. Respectfully submitted, Charlene Wolf, Recording Secretary 10