07-13-1983 Special/Public Hearing
.
~ ~
CITY OF EDGEWATER
PLANNING COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARING
July 13, 1983
Minutes
Chairman Bennington called the Public Hearing for the FEC Edgewater
Industrial Park to order at 7:11 P.M., in the ,Community Center.
ROLL CALL
Members present: Messrs. Chenoweth, Opal and Bennington. Also pre-
sent: Josel Alvarez, City Attorney, Scott Spooner from Briley, Wild
& Associates, Mayor David Ledbetter, Councilman Asting, Councilwoman
Gigi Bennington, Councilman Wargo, Parker Mynchenberg of Upham -
engineers for FEC, Kathy Vaughn of the News Journal, and secretary,
Susan Mista. There were also present various persons from the commun-
ity.
Parker Mynchenberg, an engineer with the Upham firm, representing
FEC, presented a map, outlining the proposed industrial park. He
informed the audience that there is approximately 240 acres with
access off of Park Avenue. They plan on phasing the project and he
indicated on the map that part involved in the first phase. There
are two lift stations to take care of the sanitary aspects of the
project and they will be pumping down to the treatment plant on Mango
Tree. There is an existing ditch section that will be relocated to
the perimeter of the property. He indicated on the map the retention
areas for Phase I and Phase II. Service will be provided with rail
spurs. The water will be supplied via the main along Park Avenue.
There is now an 8" main and Terry Wadsworth of the Utilities Department
has advised that there are plans for a larger main in the future. The
water distribution through this subdivision will be provided by a 10"
main.
Councilman Neil Asting asked how many phases they anticipated. Mr.
Mynchenberg stat ro they have proposed two phases. They would like
to come in and after preliminary plat approval, either bond or put
the improvements in for the first phase and they can begin marketing
the lots. If the market is strong and everything goes well, they may
go and do the entire second phase, or come back with a split up in
Phase II. The reasons for phasing it is that the lift station location
has to be built so the roadway has been brought to a point (indicating
on the map), putting in a temporary turn-around for access to fire
and garbage vehicles.
Councilman Neil Asting asked if the buildings will be put up at this
time. Mr. Mychenberg advised that the lots will be sold, said lots
averaging in size from 1.8 acres to 2 acres. There will be some non-
rail served lots with no spur connected to them ranging from .5 to .6
acre.
Mr. Opal questioned the black line on the map as to what it signified.
Mr. Mynchenberg advised that it is 241 of pavement, it being the main
roadway and it is named Elmer Hall Parkway.
Councilman Neil Asting questioned Mr. Mynchenberg as to whether or not
there will be access to 10th Street, to which he replied that it is not
shown at this time. He stated that in the future FEC would like to
have another point of access. He showed on the map an 81 piece of
land that can be dedicated for a roadway if it becomes necessary. He
showed a 501 right of way on the map, if sometime in the future Flagler
Avenue becomes developed, there is a mode to connect and have another
means of ingress and egress.
o
o
Mr. Opal asked how many total lots are included in Phase I, to which
Mr. Mynchenberg replied, 17.
There being no further questions from the audience, Mr. Chenoweth
moved to close the Public Hearing, seconded by Mr. Opal. Motion
CARRIED 3-0.
At this time the Planning Commission continued with the Special Hear-
ing concerning this matter.
Chairman Bennington read the comments given by the department head
supervisors. He asked Mr. Mynchenberg if they were seeking a sidewalk
variance. Mr. Mynchenberg advised that they were not providing them.
It was his understanding that a variance was received on the project
when it was submitted more than a year ago. Chairman Bennington stated
that they were granted this variance, however, he assumed the variance
would expire at the same time the preliminary plat application expired.
Mr. Mynchenberg advised that the reason he did not make an application
for the variance this time was because the planner at that time, Debbie
Winks, told him she was of the opinion that it was not necessary. He
said if it is required, he will apply for same again.
A discussion then ensued regarding recreational requirements. Con-
cerning the requirement of 50% common open space, Mr. Mynchenberg
stated that in this project everything is either being dedicated to
the City or will be sold off to a third party when they come in and
buy lots. There will be no common area like you find in a condominium.
He stated that when someone comes ih to put up a building, they will
have to ~o to the Planning Commission for approval and at that time
it can be determined whether or not they meet all the requirements of
the Code. He advised that there are no common open areas in the entire
project. City Attorney, Jose. Alvarez, advised that the open space
may include open parking areas.
Chairman Bennington asked Scott Spooner of Briley, Wild if the retention
area is adequate, to which Mr. Spooner stated that the retention areas
shown will take care of the entire project. Each individual project
that comes in for site plan approval will not need individual retention
area requirements.
Chairman Bennington advised that most of the requirements in the PID
Ordinance will not apply until the individual businesses come in for
site plan approval. Mr. Alvarez suggested that the potential buyers
be informed that they will be required to comply with the city.s
codes. Mr. Mynchenberg agreed and said there would be no problem with
that.
Chairman Bennington stated that under the Subdivision Ordinance it
states that the final plat is recorded subject to posting bond of
110% of the cost of improvements, under the PID Ordinance it requires
a performance bond of 120%. He said he did not see how they can be
held to the PID Ordinance requirements when they are not developing
the entire project. Mr. Mynchenberg said they will probably want to
bond the entire project and if they don1t go through with the improve-
ments, the bond could be pulled and a contractor hired to put the
improvements in. The other way would be prior to filing the final
plat, put the improvements in the ground in Phase I, prior to selling
any lots, have the improvements inspected by the City Engineer and
then file the final plat and record it, wherein a bond would not be
required. These are the options open to FEC.
Chairman Bennington then read the letter from the City Engineer,
Bill Cross of Briley, Wild, advising that the retention areas are
adequate. The letter also states that Mosquito Control is wanting
a 201 easement. Mr. Mynchenberg said there would be no problem with
-2- Planning Commission
Special Meeting & Public Hearing
July 13, 1983
o
Q
that. He said in the retention areas themselves will be deep bodies
of water which will support a firm minnow and fish population which
will take care of the mosquito larvae. Chairman Bennington asked if
these areas would be fenced. Mr. Mynchenberg stated there were no
plans for fencing them. He said if that is a requirement he would
prefer to do hedging or something along that line. Chairman Bennington
said the recommendation from Engineering was to make the areas inaccess-
ible to children and hedges would not be adequate. Scott Spooner of
Briley, Wild suggested some form of a chain link fence, 4 or 61. Mr.
Mynchenberg said that putting up a chain link .fence would create an
eyesore, in his opinion. Mr. Spooner stated this could be worked out
wit h Mr. My n c hen be r g .
Mr. Spooner advised that the retention areas will not be dedicated to
the City. Councilwoman Gigi Bennington questioned who will maintain
t he r e t en t i on are a s aft era 11 the lot s are sol d . Mr. My n c hen be r gad vis e d
that a landowners association will have to be formed to take care of
these matters.
Councilman Neil Asting questioned if the drainage system will be swales
or ditches, rather than tiles beneath the ground. Mr. Mynchenberg
referred to the map and explained the drainage system to the audience.
Chairman Bennington stated that the roads being put in are 241 paved,
with 1~" of asphalt, 8" base and 8" sub-base. The right-of-ways are
80', including the swales on both sides. All of the right-of-way,
including the swales, will be dedicated to the City. Mr. Mynchenberg
said that it is a 12" sub-base, not 8".
Chairman Bennington asked when they plan on starting and when they
plan on finishing Phase I. Mr. Mynchenberg said as soon as the approvals
are received and other details are taken care of, probably six months
they will start the improvements. They are leaning toward bonding right
now and trying to sell some lots. He anticipates 6 to 8 months. If
they bond first, they can begin selling the lots in 3 to 5 months.
Councilman Neil Asting asked whether or not FEC has a real estate
organization they are dealing with in selling these lots. Mr. Mynchenberg
said they do have a real estate firm in St. Augustine and they will be
actively pursuing the selling of this project in the future.
Mr. Mynchenberg said there is not landscaping proposed, other than
sodding the swale systems, as shown. When someone submits a site plan
application, this matter can be addressed at that time.
City Attorney, Josel Alvarez, said that the requirements of the sub-
division ordinance are called into play because this is a subdivision
of land, however, the subdivision ordinance that is in the books deals
with residences, not industry. Therefore, you have to look at the
requi~ements for residences, but since this is not residential you
have to determine which of the requirements you feel are in the interest
of the City and which are not. That is the discretion the Board has
to use. For example, the case of the sidewalks which are required in
a residential subdivision. This is not a residential subdivision and
if you do not want pedestrian traffic in there, it was his opinion that
the Board could at this time waive that requirement because it does not
apply to an industrial subdivision.
Mr. Opal asked if the developer will put the sewer and water in. Mr.
Mynchenberg advised that they would put all the water mains in and
drainage pipes.
Mr. Opal asked a question regarding curbs arid gutters. Mr. Mynchenberg
stated there will be a 241 paved area and 8' stabilized shoulders on
each side and the swales begin after that. Chairman Bennington read
from the Code Book concerning this matter. He read that unless it
is determined that for water retention you don't want curbs or gutters
-3- Planning Commission
Specrial Meeting & Public Hearing
July 13, 1983
~
,
c
I
Q
then you go to the other system and it has been standard policy that
they don't want the curbs.
Chairman Bennington asked Mr. Mynchenberg if the cul-de-sac was
temporary, to which Mr. Mynchenberg replied, yes, with 80' of pavement.
Mr. Chenoweth made a motion that the preliminary plat approval complies
with the Comprehensive Plan and should be approved, waiving the need
for a sidewalk variance. Mr. Opal seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED
3-0.
There being no further discussion concerning this matter, Mr. Opal
made a motion that the meeting be adjourned, seconded by Mr. Chenoweth.
Motion CARRIED 3-0. Meeting was adjourned at 8:30 P.M.
Minutes submitted by:
Susan Mista
-4- Planning Commission
Special Meeting & Public Hearing
July 13, 1983
..
~
Date 9uY I.~ /'13"1
~
o
-