Loading...
6-18-24 CDB Adopted MinutesMINUTES Community Development Board (CDB) Meeting Tuesday, June 18, 2024 - 6:00 PM City Hall, Commission Chamber 800 Seminole Road, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 Present: Kirk Hansen, Chair Jennifer Lagner, Member Harold Gear, Member Richard Arthur, Member Ellen Golombek, Vice Chair Jeff Haynie, Member Absent: Angela Farford, Member Gregory (Greg) Beliles, Alternate Member Also Present: Amanda Askew, Planning & Community Development Dir. (PCDD) Abrielle Genest, Planner Valerie Jones, Recording Clerk Robert Graham, Acting City Attorney (CA) 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Approve minutes of the May 21, 2024 regular meeting of the Community Development Board. The minutes were approved. 3. OLD BUSINESS Chair Hansen said that last night was a joint meeting with the City Commission and a lot of good idea came out of that. He said the Board didn't get to discuss anything amongst themselves and he would like to do this at the end of this meeting. 4. NEW BUSINESS A. 44 Dewees Avenue ZVAR24-0007 (Tom and Amy Slater) Request for a variance to reduce the minimum 5 -foot setback for mechanical equipment at 44 Dewees Avenue. STAFF REPORT: Planner Genest presented the information as explained in the staff report. She also provided a PowerPoint presentation. Ms. Lagner asked if the contractor explained why the A/C units were moved from the original plan. Planner Genest said it was found during an inspection. Mr. Haynie asked if the lot was sub -standard size. She said it was not. Mr. Arthur asked if both A/C units were over the setback. Planner Genest said the applicant would be able to answer that. Communih Development Board (CDB) June 18, 2024 Page 1 of 7 APPLICANT REPORT: Leonard Mcaneny introduced himself as the contractor. He said the A/C unit closest to the street is 5 feet off of the property line but the one in the back was moved because the plans had it directly under the electrical meter box which doesn't meet Code. Mr. Gear asked who did the original drawing. Mr. Mcaneny said Cathy Duncan was the original architect. Ms. Golombek asked why he didn't go back to the City with the change. Mr. Mcaneny said they went back to the City with other things but not this. Ms. Lagner asked if the unit was encroaching the setback or just the slab. He said the unit was encroaching the setback. Chair Hansen said it looked like if the units would have place where they were originally approved then the electrical box wouldn't have been in the way. Mr. Mcaneny said the original location is where the main feed comes into the house and that's where the panel was. Mr. Arthur asked what was in the front corner toward the street that would keep from moving them there. Mr. Mcaneny said the meter cans were there and you have to be 3 feet from that. Ms. Lagner asked if the panel was installed where it was supposed to be. Mr. Mcaneny said it was. Mr. Haynie asked if there was a way to comply with the approved plan. Mr. Mcaneny said there isn't a place along that wall other than where it is. Mr. Gear asked about moving it back. Mr. Mcaneny said it would still be in the setback. Ms. Slater said they worked hard to keep the esthetic of the home even though the lot has challenges. She said they feel like they met most of the criteria. PUBLIC COMMENT: Elizabeth White of 0 Dewees Avenue said she had sent a letter of opposition but after speaking to the Slater's would like to withdraw it. She said that it looks like it is only the slab that encroaches and wouldn't interfere with her building on her lot. BOARD DISCUSSION: Ms. Lagner asked if the applicant would have gone back to the City with this issue would the City have approved the current location with an administrative variance. Director Askew said it would have probably been close to the 5% allowed so they would have been encouraged to seek a variance. Ms. Lagner asked who owned the fence. Director Askew thought it was owned by the applicant. Ms. Golombek asked how much of the 3.5 feet was the slab. Director Askew said it 3.5 for the unit, not the slab. Mr. Arthur said it looks like no matter where the unit was moved on that side of the house it would encroach on the setback due to the irregular shape of the property. Mr. Gear didn't feel like it met any of the requirements. Ms. Golombek had a hard time with the fact that the builder has worked in the City before but didn't go back to the City and get approval. Mr. Haynie said he wasn't sure that decision for approval #5 would work in this case. Mr. Arthur asked where the A/C unit could go. Mr. Haynie said it isn't the Board's job to figure that out. MOTION. To DENY ZVAR24-0007 due to the request not meeting any of the criteria for approval. Motion: Harold Gear Second. Jeff Haynie Community Development Board (CDB) June 18, 2024 Page 2 of 7 Kirk Hansen For Jennifer Lagner For Harold Gear (Moved By) For Richard Arthur Against Ellen Golombek For Jeff Haynie (Seconded By) For Motion passed S to 1. B. 1173 Sandpiper Lane East ZVAR24-0008 (Better Home Improvement -Carter Lynch) Request for a variance from Section 24-81(d) to allow reconstruction of an existing unpermitted covered porch in the rear yard at 1173 Sandpiper Lane East. STAFF REPORT: Director Askew presented the information as explained in the staff report. She also provided a PowerPoint presentation. Mr. Arthur asked since the porch was unpermitted then the applicant could only rebuild back to the 160 square feet. Director Askew said that was correct. APPLICANT REPORT: Chris Buckner introduced himself as the contractor. He explained that they shrunk the job to only cover the concrete slab since some of it was pavers, but they still need a variance. Mr. Arthur asked if the request was for 240 square feet. Mr. Buckner said it should be for 200 square feet. Ms. Golombek asked if the existing slab is 20 x 10 feet. Mr. Buckner said it was. Debra Lynch introduced herself and her husband Carter as the homeowners. She said they bought the home 5 years ago with the intention of replacing the porch cover so that it wouldn't be visible from the front of the house. Mr. Haynie asked if the roof would be removed from the paver section. Ms. Lynch said that was correct. She said they didn't realize it wasn't permitted. Ms. Golombek asked if the slab could be shrunk to 16 x 10 feet. Mr. Buckner said yes, concrete can be cut. PUBLIC COMMENT: Chair Hansen opened the floor to public comment. There were no public comments. BOARD DISCUSSION: Ms. Lagner said she doesn't see a reason for approval. Mr. Haynie wondered if condition #3 would apply since there isn't a history for the existing porch cover. Ms. Golombek said the slab could be shrunk and then it wouldn't need a variance, only a building permit. She struggled with the fact that the lot had 56% impervious area. Mr. Arthur was surprised this didn't come up on insurance requests in the past due to the dangerous design and materials. He also struggled with the 56% impervious area. Mr. Buckner said they found permits but they didn't find any inspections of completion. MOTION. To DENY ZVAR24-0008 due to the request not meeting any of the criteria for approval. CommunhN Development Board (CDB) June 18, 2024 Page 3 of 7 Motion: Ellen Golombek Second: Jennifer Lagner Kirk Hansen For Jennifer Lagner (Seconded By) For Harold Gear Against Richard Arthur For Ellen Golombek (Moved By) For Jeff Haynie Against Motion passed 4 to 2. C. 1810 Park Street and 0 Edgar Street COMP24-0001 & REZN24-0001 (Ordinance 31-24-18) Request is for a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) amendment to change the future land use map designation of 0 Edgar Street (RE# 172268-0100) & 1810 Park Street (RE# 172268-0000) FROM Residential Low Density (RL) TO Light Industrial (LI). Also, a request for a rezoning of 1810 Park Street (RE# 172268-0000) FROM Residential, General, Two -Family (RG) TO Light Industrial & Warehousing (LIW). STAFF REPORT: Director Askew presented the information as explained in the staff report. She also provided a PowerPoint presentation. Mr. Haynie asked if the LI designation was the lightest use on the FLUM. Director Askew said the City only has this industrial designation and no heavy industrial designation. Mr. Arthur asked if our Future Land Use Map deviates from the County. Director Askew said the County provides zoning categories on the Property Appraiser's website as a service but it doesn't bare any weight over the City's zoning map. Mr. Arthur asked if the current zoning deviates from the FLUM. Director Askew said it does and that the current land use is Residential Low. Mr. Arthur asked when the FLUM changed. Director Askew said it has been like this since 2010. She said it's not uncommon that the land use and zoning districts don't match. Mr. Haynie said that the driveway is zoned residential but it's the only way to get back to the land. Director Askew said there is possible access off of Mealy Street. APPLICANT REPORT: Andrew Hagaman introduced himself as the applicant. He explained that he doesn't have any access to 0 Edgar from the north, south, east or west and no easements with private landowners. Mr. Hagaman said that since it's zoned LIW there's nothing they can do with the site. He said the only access is 1810 Park Street. Mr. Hagaman said that by denying the request it would condemn the site and make it worthless. If approved, it would allow development of a warehouse to the back with fencing and landscaping. Mr. Gear asked when the land was purchased. Mr. Hagaman said about 10 years ago. Mr. Gear asked if he could get a right-of-way from a neighbor. Mr. Hagaman said they have tried. Mr. Haynie asked what the warehouse would be used for. Mr. Hagaman said storage and parking of a few vehicles. Mr. Haynie asked if there would be lighting. Mr. Hagaman said all lighting would be directed toward the interior Community Development Board (CDB) June 18, 2024 Page 4 of 7 of the area that they fence in. Ms. Golombek asked if the property has sat unused. Mr. Hagaman said that was correct due to the lack of access. BOARD DISCUSSION: Ms. Lagner had concerns because of the residences next to the property and how it would affect them. Ms. Golombek was concerned that the property could be sold at some point and the new owner may not be as well intentioned and it could impact the neighborhood. Mr. Haynie said that looking at a policy in the Comp Plan mentioning deficiencies of Commercial or Industrial land. He didn't see this as being the case saying there is quite a bit of industrial use. On the other hand, he thought the property would be wasted if it stays as it is now. Mr. Hagaman said they looked for other places for the warehouse but they were unsuccessful. He said that without approval of this request there is nothing they can do with the property. Mr. Gear was concerned about the effect on the existing homeowners on each side of the property. Mr. Arthur asked about page 62 in the agenda that shows 0 Edgar running all the way north being used for Dirt Works. Director Askew said that north of Edgar is zoned as LIW and the FLUM is residential low. Mr. Arthur was concerned about what this would do to other people asking the same thing in the future. Mr. Haynie asked that given the FLUM designations for that whole strip north of 0 Edgar, why not change it to match the zoning or should the zoning be changed to match the FLUM. Director Askew said traditionally planners would like them to match but it is currently zoned LI and it can be used as LI. It's a larger question as to how do we see this property redeveloped in the future. Do we want to see it rezoned or to see the FLUM changed to LI. MOTION: To recommend to the City Commission denial of COMP24-0001 based on the lack of findings to support it in Policy A.1.31. Motion: Jeff Haynie Second. Jennifer Lagner Kirk Hansen For Jennifer Lagner (Seconded By) For Harold Gear For Richard Arthur For Ellen Golombek For Jeff Haynie (Moved By) For Motion passed 6 to 0. MOTION. To recommend to the City Commission denial of REZN24-0001. Motion: Jeff Haynie Second. Harold Gear Community Development Board (CDB) June 18, 2024 Page 5 of 7 Kirk Hansen For Jennifer Lagner For Harold Gear (Seconded By) For Richard Arthur For Ellen Golombek For Jeff Haynie (Moved By) For Motion passed 6 to 0. 5. PUBLIC COMMENT Mr. Hagaman asked how the Board intended for the owner to use this property. Chair Hansen suggested he get an easement for the property. The Board didn't feel they were in a position to recommend how to use the property. 6. DISCUSSION - CHAPTER 24 Chair Hansen said that he feels like there are issues with the stormwater requirements that don't make logical sense. He said it the area of focus was from Ahern Street to 7th Street and over to East Coast Drive which is a small part of the City. Chair Hansen said he thinks they need to look at dividing the City and have different codes for different parts of the City based on the characteristics of that part of the City. He said that technology has changed, and more than one vendor came in an talked at the joint workshop about the products today and be a lot more pervious than they were 5 years ago. Mr. Arthur said the stormwater treatment requirements, impervious surface, impervious technology and artificial turf are different issues. He thought the City should look at 100% impervious technology and look at Jacksonville Beach, Neptune Beach, Ponte Vedra, Jacksonville and Fernandina to see how they address the language for this technology. Mr. Arthur said artificial turf technology has changed. Director Askew said ESC had concerns about the environmental effects. Mr. Arthur said the City should look to see what other Cities are doing to address the environmental piece. Mr. Arthur said the stormwater treatment requirements need to be revisited. He didn't like the triggers and said it puts an unequal burden on the homeowner who doesn't live in a development that provides stormwater retention. Mr. Arthur said other cities aren't requiring this and it has unintended consequences on homeowners. He explained that the tax trigger causes a homeowner to provide stormwater retention even if they have added zero impervious surface. Mr. Arthur said the 250 square feet trigger only requires stormwater retention for the 250 square feet. He said the third trigger allows a home that is far beyond the 45% and they get an exemption. Mr. Haynie agreed with Mr. Arthur. He questioned whether it would be impractical to have different stormwater codes for different parts of the City. Mr. Haynie said that maybe the on- site requirement should go away or be reduced by extreme projects. Ms. Golombek asked Director Askew if Staff could provide information on the new impervious technology. She said she would get the information that was mentioned at the joint workshop. Ms. Golombek would like information on whether sealing pavers impacts the drainage. She said she is concerned about the unintended consequences if everything is stripped out and what Community Development Board (CDB) June 18, 2024 Page 6 of 7 7. Attest: is left. Ms. Golombek said she wished that the Board and the Commissioner would have had more discussion but due to public comments that didn't happen. Mr. Gear said he agreed with the Board and their comments. He agreed that the 50% evaluation trigger didn't make any sense regarding stormwater retention. Ms. Lagner encouraged the Board to watch the meetings for 2019 to see what went into this Code. She agreed with the Board regarding the triggers and said they don't make any sense. Ms. Lagner said she doesn't understand how if you are at 45% or below and a trigger could still happen. She would like to have more engineering involved. Ms. Lagner said she doesn't understand the grandfathering clause. She explained that where she lives it flooded all the time and then they replaced the crushed pipes, and it no longer floods. Ms. Lagner said to drive by 435 Sailfish and you will see one of the worst unintended consequences leaving a swale so deep that it needs a fence around it. Mr. Arthur asked if the Board is looking to Staff to come back with recommendations or are they looking to divide those 3 topics and workshop them. Chair Hansen said he was looking for direction from the City to see what they want from the Board. He said then they will have Staff create the language and make it palatable. Director Askew said she separated the Comp Plan and Chapter 24 due to timing. She said the Comp Plan is going to Commission at the next meeting. Director Askew said Chapter 24 is on hold. Chair Hansen asked if the Board should recommend changes and have Staff put it together to recommend to the Commission. Director Askew said that as a recommending body part of the Boards charge is to review Chapter 24 and give Staff recommendations to provide to the City Commission. The Board agreed to focus on the items they have discussed regarding stormwater. ADJOURNMENT There being no further discussion, Chair Hansen declared the meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m. a�'^-'— Ainanda Askew KA Hansen, Chair Community Development Board (CDB) June 18, 2024 Page 7 of 7