Loading...
CDB MTG JUNE 17, 2014MINA FS OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE <;vIMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD June 17, 2014 1. CALL TO ORDER. - C ') pm Chair Brea Paul veritk: d that all board members are present with the exception of Patrick Stratton. The meetir was called to order at 6:OOpm. Also present was Redevelopment and Zoning Coordin - -or, Jeremy Hubsch, Zoning Technician, Derek Reeves, Recording Secretary Jenny Waft r, and representing the firm Kopelousos, Bradley & Garrison, P.A. was Mr. John Kopelo . , os. 2. ADOPTION OF MEETING MINUTES - April 15, 2014. Brea Paul called for a motion to approve the minutes of the April 15, 2014 regular meeting. Mr. Hansen made a motion to approve the minutes. Mr. Elmore seconded the motion and it carried by a vote of 5 -0. 3. OLD BUSINESS. 4. NEW BUSINESS. Staff Report me. A. UBF °'- 14- 00100018(PUBLIC HEARING) 512 `txewart St. Regr st for use -by- exception as permitted by Section 24 -112 (C) (5), to a110 he permanent storage of automobiles. Jeremy Hubsch, Redevelopment and Zoning Coordinator stated this UBEX -14- 00100018 is a request for a Use -by- Exception to allow the permanent storage of automobiles in a Light Industrial and Warehousing (LIW) Zoning District. The applicant is Student Transportation of America, prospective ,ants of the property. This company provides contracted school is and transportation services for Duval County Schools. The pplicants will be using the site to park buses when they are not in -e, as well as the bus drivers' personal vehicles. They are Irrently located in Jacksonville Beach. 'ie applicants are required to obtain a Use -By- Exception per Page 1 of 12 Section 24 -112 (c)(5), which requires one for, "establishments for heavy automotive repair, towing service or the permanent storage automobiles, motorcycles, trucks, and tractors, machinery and ,uipment, farm equipment and similar uses." i he site is composed of two lots (512 Stewart and 1589 Main St.) under the same ownership. The property at 512 Stewart Street is the proposed vehicle access point, location for the break room facility and the dumpster for the site. The property at 1589 Main Street will have dedicated employee parking for personal vehicles and bus parking for up to 60 buses. ,oth properties have other existing uses that differ from that of the proposed use. It is possible to legally split each property according to city code, so that the existing uses have their own lot separate from the proposed use. The vehicle access point on Stewart Street is located within 30 feet of the intersection Stewart Street and May Street. This is the only way to access Mary Street which is a dead end street that currently has 20 dwelling units in duplex and /or townhouse properties. Stewart Street between Mealy Lane and Main Street has another 8 dwelling units in duplex and /or townhouse properties. Additionally there are newer residential neighborhoods on the east side of main Street that may be impacted by the project. Staff has concerns about the traffic and visual impacts this project will bring to this residential neighborhood. Traffic impacts will be largely staggered throughout the day. Most employees will arrive in their personal vehicles between roughly 5 and 7 AM. They would then leave in their bus almost immediately with roughly half taking a route along Dutton Island Road to Mayport Road and the other half taking a route along Main Street to Levy Road to Mayport Road. Beyond those affected in the previous paragraph, both routes are comprised of a mix of rejdential, commercial and industrial uses. About two thirds of the buses would return mid day, coming in around 9 to 10 AM and leaving around 1:30 to 2:30 PM most days. Almost all buses would then return for the day between 5 and 7 PM and employees would leave in their personal vehicles. A few buses that transport athletic teams and similar events would return later in the night depending on when they are done. At a maximum capacity of 60 buses approved on this site, weekday traffic counts would conservatively be around 120 employee vehicle trips and 200 bus trips. Page 2 of 12 Applicant Comment Prior to this item going to the City Commission, the city's engineers urn the Public Works Department will review it for impacts to local roads, possible environmental runoff issues, stabilized parking, and any other relevant impacts. Below are relevant policies in the Comprehensive Plan that relate this proposed use. Policy A.1.5.6 Commercial and light industrial development shall be located and designed so as to minimize adverse effects on residential areas, traffic facilities, and the aesthetic character of the City. Goal A.1 The City shall manage growth and redevelopment in a manner, which results in a pattern of land uses that: 1) encourages, creates and maintains a healthy and aesthetically pleasing built environment, 2) avoids blighting influences, 4) maintains the City's distinct residential community character. Policy A.1.1.3 The City shall protect potable water well fields and surface waters from the adverse impacts of development and shall prohibit the establishment of incompatible land uses adjacent to potable water wells. Such incompatible land uses shall include all industrial and manufacturing uses, but shall also include uses which have the potential to contaminate surface water or groundwater resources. Jeremy discussed three suggested actions to recommend approval and three suggested actions to recommend denial. Staff suggests tb.it a condition of screening be required in areas where the bus parking is visible from Main and Stewart Streets, that no bus -: rivers can sleep overnight in their cars, buses, or structures on rice and that consideration be given to negative impacts that could result to residential neighbors relating to noise and lighting. aniel Middleton, Student Transportation of America's epresentative stated that there will be no maintenance done on the site at all. He says the primary function of the property will be the storage of the buses. Sylvia Simmons asked where does the maintenance take place and he replied at their 340 Lee Rd facility. Mr. Elmore asked why they want to abandon their current Page 3 of 12 Public Comment Board Discussion acksonville Beach location. Mr. Middleton replied that Lrategically Atlantic Beach affords them a little more opportunity n leave time to get out to their pick up locations and would be more cost effective for them. Mr. Elmore asked what is their geographical range that they would cover. Mr. Middleton's general manager, Chris, stated they go all the way down Mayport and service all the way to JTB, not crossing the intracoastal. Mr. Charles Mann of 165 Arlington Road spoke and stated he owns 7 duplexes in the immediate area of this proposed bus storage ara. He says the area has been cleaned up, new homes have been milt and he feels that if you intensify the industrial at this point ' ben you will be retarding the growth and development. This would be an awful burden on this residential area. This would not ire minimizing the adverse effects on this residential area that is improving. This will also increase traffic and affect the water table. he recommends if you do approve this to put some further restrictions on it such as indirect lighting no higher than 4ft, no honking of horns, no outside speakers, rodent control on a monthly basis, onsite security and a police officer onsite to direct traffic. He states that this is not bus storage but should be considered a terminal. He proposes that the applicant has not presented competent substantial evidence to meet the allowable reasons to receive a Use by Exception per the Comprehensive Plan, Policy 8.1.5.6. hilly Elmore states that his big concern is the amount of traffic that pis UBEX will generate and he feels this is an incompatible use for „Jr comp plan. He is going to vote to deny this. He is also .)ncerned about the amount of paving that would need to be done to store the buses and states there would have to be onsite ;tormwater retention which would therefore limit the use of the ,and for their intentions. _inda Lanier agrees with Mr. Elmore and states that this will hurt the quality of life for the residents that live around the site. She is worried about the traffic on the narrow streets and the safety of all the children living in the area. She votes to oppose this. Harley Parkes agrees with Kelly and Linda. He believes that the --pact this will have on the neighborhood will be overwhelming �d that this type of business does not fit in the category of Light dustrial. He feels this is a transportation mode and is worried Page 4 of 12 bout the amount of traffic this will generate. Sylvia Simmons states that she is worried about the traffic and the exhaust caused by the buses and does not feel this is a good location for this use. Brea Paul states that she is not only concerned about the traffic s business will generate but she doesn't believe that the streets the area were built to withstand all of those buses on them on a ally basis. rk discussed that at the last meeting there was a request for a 'xi cab company that the board put a cap of 25 vehicles on their approval, this UBEX is requesting 60 school buses at one time and he agrees that this would overwhelm the neighborhood. He is also concerned about the early morning noise caused by starting the school buses. He also believes it doesn't fit the zoning classification. Motion Harley Parkes makes a motion to recommend denial of UBEX -14- 00100018. Kirk Hansen seconded it. All were in favor and the motion carried. Staff Report UBEX -14- 00100019 (PUBLIC HEARING) 175 Atlantic Blvd. Request for use -by- exception as permitted by !ction 24 -111 (c) (5), to allow limited wholesale operations in ,e Commercial General (CG) Zoning District. remy states that this is a request for a use -by- exception to allow mited wholesale operations in the Commercial General District. The property owners demolished the building that used to be a mattress store. The applicants are proposing to open a nursery business. The applicant is Atlantic Beach Urban farms. They will be using a tower system called hydroponics to grow produce inside a greenhouse for retail sale. This is where the plants will grow inward in the towers and is more efficient than a standard type greenhouse. It is the intent of the applicant to sell their produce in an on -site retail storefront while also conducting limited wholesale Aerations. They are actually allowed to do a nursery by right but e required to obtain a Use -By- Exception per Section 24 -111 in)(5), which says one is needed by, "Limited wholesale operations, 'ot involving industrial products or processes or the manufacturing Page 5 of 12 Applicant Comment of products of any kind." The site was previously a carpet business located on three ,t- .parate, partially wooded lots. All existing structures have been demolished and the site is being cleaned in preparation for new construction. The main structure will be a 7,000 square foot greenhouse where the produce growing aspect of the business will take place. There will also be a small retail and office building, storage and maintenance building, and a packing and distribution building. All structures meet height and setback requirements. The site will have two access points. One will be located along the ccess road to west bound Atlantic Boulevard at the front of the droperty and the second will be located on West 15t Street at the rear of the property. The applicant is expecting no more that two 24 foot refrigerated trucks a week for the wholesale use. Jeremy discussed the suggested actions to recommend approval and denial and states that staff does not have any proposed LL nditions if the board recommends approval. Sylvia asked if they are already allowed to do the greenhouse and the retail without this Use -by- Exception and Jeremy states yes, the ! BEX is for the wholesaling. Kelly Elmore states he will be recusing himself from the vote as he is a consultant on the project. Susan King, a partner with Atlantic Beach Urban Farms project states that they will producing a few limited produce items, particularly lettuces, herbs, and basil and sell to a single source, probably Cisco. This is a very low impact project, low water use, v energy use and even low labor use. The retail will be on a very .call scale also. Ir. Hansen asked if they intended to eventually grow the nolesale business to sell to more than one company. Susan states lat they are hoping to in the future but for this Use -by- Exception hey will be only distributing to one company. If they do expand or icrease production, then they will just fill the trucks. The capacity already in place to absorb growth. Page 6 of 12 Public Comment Board Discussion Motion iichael Hoffman of 176 Camelia St. spoke stating he lives a few :1;-)uses away from the site. He wished the City would have bought • property and turned it into a buffer but he supports the proposed idea and the fact that they will have a retention pond. ;-le also hopes that they will leave as many trees on site as possible. !le hopes they install some attractive fencing along W. 1St Street. He would not like to see a 2nd greenhouse on the property. Hr.; ley states he likes the project and cannot see any reason not to approve it. Susan states that there is going to be a fence and palm trees along Main Street. Sylvia Simmons states that the streets are very small around the site and she is wondering how the truck traffic will go to the site. She is concerned that the Atlantic Blvd. entrance access will be dangerous and block traffic. Kelly Elmore states that the greenhouse(s) will be placed along !atlantic Blvd. to allow a buffer for the residents along 1St. St. He thinks it is a great project and although he can't vote on it he believes this is a great Use -by- Exception. Linda Lanier says it is an exciting project and she likes the idea and says it will be friendly to the neighborhood. She is comfortable with the 2 trucks a week. She is in support of Atlantic Beach Urban Firms. Mr. Elmore said that the ingress /egress on Atlantic Blvd. has a code issue with ADA and will be rebuilt, but the location is already approved with the DOT right of way guidelines. He said this will be a very quiet site with only 3 employees a day. Kirk Hansen makes a motion to approve and Harley seconded. All approved, motion carried. Page 7 of 12 Staff Report C.ZVAR -14- 00100020 152 3rd St.(PUBLIC HEARING)Request for zoning variance as permitted by Section 24 -64 for a reduction of setbacks as required by Section 24- 106(e). Jeremy states this is a request for variance from the provisions of Section 24- 106(e), to allow a reduction of required setbacks in the RS -2 zoning district on double frontage lots located on Beach Ave id Ocean Blvd. Specifically, the applicant seeks to construct a detached garage 10' from Ocean Blvd, which is 10' less than the minimum 20'. At the November 19, 2013 Community Development Board, former Building and Zoning Director Michael Griffin presented a recommendation that the city change a current policy regarding through Tots between Beach Avenue and Ocean Boulevard. At that time, the city had a requirement that all through lots with double frontage between these two roads would be required to consider Ocean Boulevard as the front yard for setback purposes. This meant that no detached garages could face Ocean Boulevard, as ey can only be built in rear yards. Mr. Griffin recommended that tr . requirement be removed. The recommendation was presented the same way to the City Commission, however, when the actual ordinance revision was written, it did not allow property owners to consider Beach Avenue as their front yard and Ocean Boulevard as their rear yard. It simply removed Section 24 -84 (c) from the code. This code change now requires that double frontage Tots between Beach and Ocean must consider both street frontages as the front yard for setback purposes, which means no detached garages can be built within 20' of either Beach or Ocean. Jeremy states that the other option would be for the applicants to apply for a zoning variance for a "garage apartment" that is larger than 600 square feet in lot area, provided it meets the zoning setbacks of 20' and also has a 20' gap between the main structure. ' Ir. Hubsch said that he believes the intention of Mike Griffin was make it so you could declare either Beach Ave or Ocean Blvd as )ur front yard, and be allowed to build a 10' detached garage on Page 8 of 12 Applicant Comment Public Comment ither side. Jeremy discussed the six distinct grounds for the approval of a variance and the required actions for the board. Board members spoke about their interpretations of what the code change meant. Mr. Elmore states that he has no problem with Mowing a 10' right of way on Ocean Blvd because the right of way ;ere is so much bigger that on Beach Ave. Sylvia asks the )plicant why they want the detached garage and the applicant Ilison states that the reason they want the detached garage there -.cause the most beautiful part of the house is the west room and they blocked it with the garage then it defeats the purpose of 'reserving the home. lark Major of Starr Sanford Design introduced himself on behalf of the applicant Katherine Allison Hall Hillis. He stated that they could meet our zoning requirements but that would require them tearing down a historic structure structure. This project is driven by maintaining the historical structure and making the most reasonable use of the property for the applicants. They are also trying to take advantage of the depth of the lot since the width of the lot is so small. A couple other things driving this project is the p:)sitioning of the front porch on the Beach Ave side, so that would become the activity side and it would also catch the prevailing breezes from the beach which would help to climate control the house naturally and also the energy efficiency of this house. There is a beautiful retaining wall on the Ocean Blvd and 3rd St side with flowering jasmine which we are also trying to preserve. We could also write this variance a different way by reducing the front yard setback to 15'. They discussed saving parts of the retaining wall Iso. Mr. Rich Reichler of 2025 Beach Ave spoke first. He agrees with Mr. Elmore that there is a very large right of way for Ocean Blvd. Rich says his entire issue with this project is the fact that there is a sidewalk and that the sidewalk would be approximately 10' from the garage doors. He thinks that the owners were somewhat victimized with this new rule because he doesn't believe the sidents realized they now have a restriction on the Beach Ave 5 1e of the property. He would be supportive of providing some 'pe of benefit for the applicant, like 5 or 10' of Beach Ave which Page 9 of 12 Board Discussion they were allowed to do within a few weeks ago to build the garage. He would also have been fine with it if the sidewalk wasn't on that side of the street. There is no way for anyone to back out of their driveway with only 10 ft to the sidewalk and be able to see walkers, runners, or strollers, without running them over. The other issue is with only 10' to the sidewalk there is nowhere for anyone to park except on top of the sidewalk. Andy Pitler of 277 Beach Ave spoke next. He is in full support for allowing this variance. He believes that there needs to be a formal discussion and that there were unintended consequences from the setback decision made back in April. This decision negatively impacts all the residents that have through lots from Beach Ave to Ocean Blvd. He states that there are several garages on Beach Ave and Ocean Blvd that are only 10' from the property line. He feels that the risks are minimal for allowing the 10' setback. Next speaker is Bernard Kane of 333 Ocean Blvd. He wants to commend the couple for refurbishing the house. He has lived in olis house for 53 yrs. He states that his other neighbors got a aproval for a garage and ended up having a rental garage apt and that he has had to deal with tenants for year. He also says that the retaining wall is actually on city property and that it is ugly and should come down. ,1r. Hansen has a different view than Harley did. He said Harleys -,ew was that you could allow Beach Ave or Ocean Blvd as the ont yard. Kirk states that is not his view, he believes that the ,ront yard has a 20' setback and the rear yard has a 10' setback. Not as 24.84.A states as other through Tots. He states if you use Beach Ave as the front yard with the 20' setback and Ocean Blvd as the rear yard with the 10' setback then the applicants don't even need a variance. He thought that's what was approved and that's 'hat the City Commission approved. We need to clean up that de and find out what it is intended to be. Harley states he would ,Iay this off until Jeremy gets with the commission to figure out hat their intent was. He also says his other problem with this is lat in his entire time on the board, they have not approved a ,tback variance for a garage. We should not approve this variance ith the lack of understanding on what the Commission intended. Ir. Elmore states that this was precipitated by the redevelopment f a through lot that the owner requested a change of address . om an Ocean Blvd address to a Beach Ave address based on the eal estate values being slightly higher on Beach Ave, then that Page 10 of 12 w iuld make the most sense based on the cities best interest. Mr. Elmore would like to applaud the owners for keeping this existing structure and renovating it and feels they should be more flexible s ;ice the existing structure in the setbacks already. Kelly recommends that the wall that was put in should be removed because it is in the city right of way and should have never been approved to begin with unless it was for a special topographic situation which it isn't. Mark Major states that the issue they have with deferring this is that it could possibly delay their construction schedule by 90 or 120 days. Linda Lanier states that we should be encouraging this type of construction since they are preserving the original property. Mr. Parkes states that the entire garage is a new construction on a non conforming location on the property. He says there are conforming locations that this garage could be built on. emy asked the board if the quicker solution would be for him to L>) to the Commission and get a consensus from them that their ntent is to change the code then Harley states he would vote to L ?ant the variance. Brea made a motion to defer this to the next meeting pending a Motion conversation with the City Commission on the specific wording of tills code. If the City Commission agrees that they meant to pass either or on the front yard, meaning 20' front yard and 10' rear ‘'ard setbacks with the option of using Beach Ave or Ocean Blvd as the front yard, then the variance will come back to the board next month and the board will approve it. Sylvia seconded the motion and it carries. Staff Report D. PLAT '4- 00100021 Atlantic Beach Country Club Spa. Request for approval of plat map for Atlantic Beach gauntry Club Unit 1. [he Atlantic Beach Country Club Special Planned Area was approved by the city i 2013. Construction has already commenced on the new clubhouse portion of the development. The developers are now seeking to begin construction on he residential component of the project. They are now seeking to Plat Unit 1 lf the project, which includes 17 homes at the southeastern portion of the development. The Plat Map submitted to the city matches the approved Special Planned Area Master Development Plan Map and SPA Text. City staff in the Public Works, Utilities, and Building and Zoning Departments have reviewed the proposed plat and have no outstanding issues. Our code requirement states that new plats go before the Community Development Board for Page 11 of 12 Board Discussion Motion recommendation the the City Commission for final approval. Kelly Elmore pointed out that the 20' x 20' easement for A.T. & T. has been moved across the treet. Kelly Elmore pointed out that the 20' X 20' easement for A.T. &T. has been moved across the street. Kirk Hansen stated last time they approved something for Selva Marina, he was on the board, but he is no longer on the board and the LLC is dissolved. Mr. Elmore recuses himself. Linda Lanier made the motion for approval. Harley Parkes seconded, motion carried. 5. REPORTS. 1,2remy introduced our new Zoning Technician. 6. ADJOURNMENT - 7:55 PM Brea Paul, Chair OrdiAl Page 12 of 12