Loading...
CDB 11-18-14 v � ri ' Jrlr js ti r tf t1 �>i1 )'r• MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD November 18, 2014 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL. The meeting was called to order at 6:04 pm. Chair Brea Paul verified that all board members are present, with the exception of Patrick Stratton. Also present was Building and Zoning Director, Jeremy Hubsch; Zoning Technician, Derek Reeves, and representing the firm Kopelousos, Bradley & Garrison, P.A. was Mr. Sam Garrison. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. A. Minutes of October 21, 2014 Mr. Elmore asked that the person making the motions be revised. Mrs. Paul asked that the individual board member names be listed in votes when there is not a unanimous decision. Mr. Hanson motioned to approve the minutes with the proposed corrections. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Simmons. The motion carried unanimously. Mrs. Simmons asked the chair about verifying the corrections that were to be made to the September minutes. Mr. Hubsch stated that the staffer Jenny Walker has been out and that the September minutes will be on the December agenda. 3. OLD BUSINESS. None. 4. NEW BUSINESS. Mrs. Paul motioned to take item B out of order due to the large number of public speakers in attendance for this item. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hanson. The motion carried unanimously. B. ZVAR-14-00100042 (Public Hearing) Request for a variance as permitted by Section 24-64 for a reduction in side yard setback from 10 feet as required by Section 24-17 "Lot, Corner" to 5 feet at Atlantic Beach Subdivision Block 13, Lot 47 (aka 398 11th Street). Staff Report Mr. Reeves introduced the item and gave a background on the property. The property was previously part of 1075 Seminole Road but the previous home was demolished and the property was divided into 3 platted lots. There is an existing 47 inch diameter at breast height live oak tree located in the center of the lot and the desire to preserve the tree is the reason for the requested variance. The applicant is proposing to build a single family home around the oak tree at least 15 feet from the base of the tree. The variance is requesting to reduce the required side yard setback for corner lots from 10 feet to 5 feet to increase the buildable area. The proposed plan decreases the side yard setbacks normally required of corner lots in RS-1 from 17.5 feet to 15 feet. The proposed plan is also to build a primarily single story structure due to the overhanging branches. The edge of pavement of Seminole Road is about 37 feet from the western property line and the sidewalk is about 4 feet from the western property line. A comparison was made to the fence code relative to the allowable height along wider right-of-ways and the resulting sight triangles. A brief description of the surrounding properties' setbacks along Seminole Road was given. There are plans for an 8 foot wide sidewalk to be built along the western property line as part of the Safe Routes to School program. The applicant has identified topographic issues and reasonable use both related to the oak tree as grounds for approval. Mrs. Simmons asked for clarification on the location of the oak tree and a site plan. Mrs. Paul asked if the tree has any special designation by code. Mr. Hubsch clarified that it is a protected tree and would have to be mitigated for if removed, but nothing beyond any other tree. Mrs. Simmons discussed the likelihood of the oak tree to survive as result of damage to the roots beyond the area to be protected. Applicant Comment Lindley Tolbert, the applicant, of 465 Beach Avenue, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 spoke to the concerns of the board. Mrs. Tolbert described the reasoning and logic of the proposed plan and the limited site plan at this time. The goal is to preserve the oak tree and designing around it as much as possible while still getting a functioning house. There are no guarantees on the outcome and success of the tree because that is not possible. Future owners of the property can do what they will and that cannot be avoided. It was reiterated about the fact that the oak tree could be removed and that surrounding conditions won't be significantly impacted by a 5 foot variance. Public Comment Teresa Flores of 233 Belvedere Street, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 spoke to the need to protect the tree and to deny the variance if the oak tree is not protected. Rich Reichler of 2025 Beach Avenue, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 spoke to possible conditions of approval such as running it with the life or removal of the tree. Jeff Montanye of 334 11th Street, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 spoke in opposition to the variance in order to preserve the tree. Bob Liggero of 389 12th Street, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 spoke to the applicant's knowledge of rules and that the oak tree does not pose a hardship.This variance should be denied. Edward VanVoorhis of 388 11th Street, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 spoke to safety concerns related to visibility at the corner and believes the variance should be denied to prevent further blockage of sight lines. Dick Hiliard of 338 11th Street, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 spoke to the character of the neighborhood with its lot sizes and the inability of the oak tree to survive with a house on the root system. Based on that and all of the other things discussed the variance should be denied. Karen Ostergren of 374 11th Street, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 spoke to the inability to mitigate for such an old and large oak tree and that the 3 lots do not fit with the neighborhood. Susan Mariani of 360 12th Street, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 spoke to concerns of increasing traffic and drainage issues in the area and that the tree be preserved. Mr. Hubsch addressed concerns as to why and how the property was split into 3 buildable lots because they were platted as 3 lots but have been acting as 1 lot for some time. Gay Weber of 364 11th Street, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 spoke to protecting the oak tree and concerns that any development around it would negatively affect the oak tree. There are also concerns about the character of the neighborhood and density. Marisa Carbone of 391 8th Street, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 spoke in support of the variance because the applicant is trying to save the tree and the variance is the best way since the tree is not a heritage tree. Public comment was closed by Mrs. Paul. Board Discussion The board declared several ex parte communications from several members of the community. Mr. Parkes recognized the strong public support to protect the oak tree. Mr. Elmore discussed the reasonableness of the variance and that the three lots could be developed regardless based on current codes and the result of the variance would be minimal on surrounding conditions. Mr. Elmore continued that he believed the tree could survive based on the proposed plan. Mr. Hansen agreed with Mr. Elmore but did express concerns about sight lines though still supports the variance. Mrs. Lanier spoke to her own and the public's love of character of the neighborhood. Mrs. Simmons spoke to the public concerns and the general loss of tree canopy in the city. Mrs. Simmons continued with concerns that the oak tree cannot survive this development and is therefore against the variance. Mrs. Paul asked Mr. Hubsch about the mitigation required if the tree were removed at the time of construction. Mr. Hubsch stated the oak tree could be removed if mitigated at one inch for every two inches removed resulting 23.5 inches of mitigation. If the property owner nominated the oak tree as a heritage tree then mitigation would be at a rate of two inches for every one inch removed resulting in 94 inches of mitigation. Mr. Parkes discussed his experience with designing and developing homes around existing trees and believes it can be done in a way to preserve the oak tree. Mrs. Simmons asked the board for possible conditions of approval of a variance. Mr. Hubsch commented that a possible condition could be to have the owner nominate the oak tree as a heritage tree. Discussion ensued about the details of the condition. Simply nominating the oak tree as a heritage tree was seen as more reasonable condition then requiring approved designation from the City Commission. Motion Mr. Hansen made the motion to approve the variance as presented with the condition that prior to approval; the property owner must nominate the oak tree as a heritage tree. Mr. Parkes seconded the motion. All board members voted for approval with the exception of Mr. Elmore that voted against. The motion carried 4 to 1. A. ZVAR-14-00100047 (Public Hearing) Request for a variance as permitted by Section 24-64 for a reduction in front yard setbacks from 20 feet as required by Section 24-160(e)(1) to 16 feet in the front yard along Beach Avenue and 18 feet in the front yard along Ocean Boulevard at Atlantic Beach Subdivision Block 28, Lot 5 (aka 290 Beach Avenue). Staff Report Mr. Reeves introduced the item and gave a background on the property. This property is a through lot between Beach Avenue and Ocean Boulevard with an existing single story home along Beach Avenue and a two story garage apartment along Ocean Boulevard. The proposed plan is to demolish the existing structures and build a two story single family home 16 feet from the Beach Avenue property line and an attached garage with living space above 18 feet from the Ocean Boulevard property line. The setbacks requested are less than the required 20 foot front yard setback. The lot is comparable in size to most lots in Old Atlantic Beach. The board was reminded that nearby nonconforming structures cannot be used as grounds for approval and that it is largely detached structures that form the character of the area. It was clarified that the code change regarding through lots that was recommended by the board and that is currently in front of the City Commission for approval would not effect this variance application. The approval of that code change would result in a defined front and rear yard for through lots that does not exist today. With both front and rear yard setbacks being 20 feet, the only effect on this variance would be a request from both front and rear yard setbacks instead of just two front yard setbacks. The applicant has identified the substandard lot size compared to the minimum required in RS-2 as restricting the use of the property. Mr. Hansen asked for clarification on the single structure designation since the site plan looks like two structures. Applicant Comment Andy Pitler, the applicant, of 277 Beach Avenue spoke to the discussions of the board in past meetings and the public comments tonight that there is a desire to preserve the character of the community and that this plan is consistent with the character. The 6500 square foot lot that is smaller than the required 7500 square feet for new lots in combination with 20 foot setbacks limits the developable area. Goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan call for the encouragement of high quality development and redevelopment and a preservation of the residential character. This proposed plan was designed to account for safety, aesthetics, the goals and policies of the city and the expressed concern of the board related to this area and has the support of neighbors. Mrs. Paul stated that 6 letters of support were included in the packet. Mr. Parkes stated that he is currently doing work for one of the authors of one of the letters. Public Comment Rich Reichler of 2025 Beach Avenue, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 requested the board base its decision of legal findings of fact and that if approved then a condition be added that required the building to largely resemble the plans presented. Public comment was closed by Mrs. Paul. Board Discussion Mr. Elmore stated that he and rest of the board, as confirmed by them, received a package from the applicant with a letter and additional material. Mr. Elmore pointed to the continued interest in through lots that need to be addressed at a larger level. Mr. Hansen agreed. Mr. Parkes addressed the positive aspects of the proposed plan including safety and sight lines. Mrs. Simmons brought the discussion to the findings for approval and what the applicant stated in their application. Discussion focused on the onerous effect of regulations after platting. Mrs. Lanier discussed the positive aspects of the proposed plan. Motion Mrs. Lanier made the motion to approve the variance as presented. Mr. Elmore seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. C. ZVAR-14-00100046 (Public Hearing) Request for a variance as permitted by Section 24-64 for a reduction in rear yard setback from 20 feet as required by Section 24-106(e)(2) to 8 feet at Atlantic Beach Subdivision Block 52, Lots 1 and 2 (aka 1303 Beach Avenue). Staff Report Mr. Reeves introduced the item and gave a background on the property. There is an existing home located one foot from the Beach Avenue property line. The proposed plan is to remodel the interior and exterior of the existing structure while adding a new floor to the top. There is a significant change in elevation on the property so from east side the proposed structure would appear as a two story house while the west looks like a three story house. A variance is required because the rear yard setback along the western property line is required to be 20 feet where the top floor addition starts 8 feet from the western property line. There are issues with tearing down the house and rebuilding related to the DEP and the Coastal Construction Control Line. The proposed plan avoids some of those issues but does add building mass closer to Beach Avenue then what is allowed by code. While some of the existing mass facing Beach Avenue is going to be reduced, an entire new floor will be added just 8 feet back. An interpretation issue was presented to the board related to defining the proposed structure as a two story or a three story structure. City code does not address this issue and only has a definition of a basement in the Flood Hazard Areas Chapter. Staff requested a determination from the board if the variance is approved. After some discussion, the board decided to delay further discussion until after the variance was approved or denied. Applicant Comment Richard Skinner of 2245 St Johns Avenue, Jacksonville, Florida; the architect on the project representing the property owners, Dr. Fred Lambrou and Patricia Andrews, spoke first. Additional drawings and letters of support from neighbors were presented to the board. It was pointed out that house was built prior to zoning setbacks and that the owners do love the interior of the house and want to preserve the interior. The reasoning for the 8 foot setback request is because that is the only way to accommodate a staircase and elevator that go from the garage to the top floor due to the fact that the garage level is only under a portion of the overall house. If the discussion about third floor determination does occur then the applicants are prepared to present evidence to support a two story designation. The board asked questions about possible design changes that would reduce the needed variance but were told that this plan is already the best that could be done. Patricia Andrews of 1863 River Road, Jacksonville, FL 32207, the owner of the property, spoke to their love of the historic 1937 home. Pictures were shown of the interior of the home. The modifications are necessary to make the house livable. Public Comment Rich Reichler of 2025 Beach Avenue, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 requested the board base its decision of legal findings of fact while understanding what onerous effect of regulation means and that if approved then a condition be added that required the building to largely resemble the plans presented and that if any additions to the east are made in the future then the whole house should be made conforming. Sarah Anthony of 1373 Beach Avenue, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 spoke in favor of the variance. Patricia Andrews, the property owner, clarified that the yard would be preserved. Public comment was closed by Mrs. Paul. Board Discussion Mrs. Paul stated Mr. Skinner gave her five letters in support of the variance. Mr. Parkes expressed concerns about large buildable area east of the house and how that might be developed in the future. Mrs. Lanier spoke in favor the living in place design elements of the proposed plan. Mrs. Paul addressed the findings of approval identified by the applicants. Mr. Elmore agreed with applicants' statement that house was built prior to zoning codes and the Coastal Construction Control Line which present onerous conditions on the property. He continued by identifying the unique character of Beach Avenue that this house contributes to. Mr. Parkes pointed to the uniqueness of the property favoring the variance but again expressed concerns about the buildable area to the east of the house. Mr. Parkes addressed the applicants to see if they would find a condition limiting construction in the buildable area to the east of the house acceptable. Mrs. Paul stated that the applicants were indicating that such a condition would be acceptable. Discussion ensued as to how to word the condition. Motion Mr. Parkes motioned to approve the variance with the condition that no development and/or expansion of the existing structure, occur more than 10 feet eastward of the proposed plans presented to the Community Development Board on 18 November 2014, and that if such development and/or expansion occur then the variance becomes void and the existing structure must be made to meet all zoning codes at that time. Mrs. Lanier seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Discussion ensued about the need to make a determination on the third floor issue. It was decided that the issue of third floor determination would be moved to the December meeting so that the discussion could be put on the agenda and staff could prepare full packages for the members of the board to review. D. UBEX-14-00100045 (Public Hearing) Request for use-by-exception as permitted by Section 24- 112(c)(6), to allow welding, metal fabrication and sheet metal works at 325 Mealy Drive. Staff Report Mr. Hubsch introduced the item and the surrounding conditions. Maps were displayed of the property that showed the site and its location within the Light Industrial and Warehousing zoning district relative to nearby residential. Photos of the existing 0.3 acre site with its metal building and paved parking to remain were shown. The applicants do not intend to make any alterations to the property at this time. The applicants are requesting to operate a welding, metal fabrication and sheet metal shop where they will make repairs to roll off dumpsters and other industrial equipment. This is specifically listed as a use-by-exception within the Light Industrial and Warehousing zoning district. This is a use- by-exception so that it can be ensured that neighboring properties, especially residential, will not be negatively impacted by the business. City codes require all work to be done inside and that outdoor storage is restricted to side and rear yards of the property. Mrs. Paul asked for clarification on what is the front yard on this corner lot. Mr. Hubsch stated the side along Mealy Drive is the front yard. The items to consider for use-by-exceptions were presented. Staff felt a possible condition necessary would be to limit hours of operation due to noise. Mr. Parkes asked for clarification on where the closet residential property is to this site. Mr. Hubsch stated that is roughly 125 feet to the north separated by another property. Applicant Comment Feriz Delkic, the property owner spoke to the history of his business in ceramics and the connection to this property and the proposed business. The business at this location is owned and operated by Zanin Basic and will use some of his ceramic technology in the metal products repaired. Mr. Elmore questioned the nature of the business relative to the application. After a brief discussion it was clarified that this site would only be repairing metal items for customers. Public Comment After no public comment, Mrs. Paul closed public comment. Board Discussion Mrs. Lanier spoke to the limited impact on residential properties due to its location in the center of the Light Industrial and Warehousing zoning district. Mr. Parkes agreed and that welding is consistent with the area and light industrial use. Mrs. Simmons spoke to the concern that noise and disruptions outside of the property related to deliveries of large metal products. Mrs. Paul and Mrs. Lanier pointed to size of the lot and the available area to accommodate deliveries and that code requires such activities to occur on site. Mrs. Lanier spoke to the high skill, high wage nature of the work to be performed and the positive impact that can have. Mrs. Simmons brought up the need for hours restrictions to ensure surrounding properties are not negatively affected and discussion ensued. Motion Mrs. Lanier motioned to recommend approval of the use-by-exception as presented to the City Commission with the condition that the hours of operation be limited to 7 am to 6 pm, Monday through Saturday. Mr. Parkes seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. E. UBEX-14-00100044 (Public Hearing) Request for use-by-exception as permitted by Section 24- 111(c)(10), to allow the sale of used automobiles at 15 Simmons Street. Staff Report Mr. Hubsch presented the item. The property was shown and it was explained that it is part of a larger parcel that would be split if the use-by- exception were approved. The property is zoned commercial general but currently has a single family home built on it. The home would be used as an office while a parking lot would be built along Mayport Road. Some trees would likely have to be removed to accommodate the parking lot. They expect to have 20 cars for sale at any given time. This property is in close proximity to the Dutton Island Road access point for the Atlantic Beach Country Club. A use-by-exception is required by the code for the sale of new and used automobiles in the Commercial General zoning district. The Commercial General zoning is intended to feature uses that are compatible with and serve the City of Atlantic Beach and its neighborhoods. The city's Commercial General zoning district is not as intense as some other jurisdictions. For example, the city does not allow region serving "big box" stores. The comprehensive plan discourages a proliferation of automotive related uses while encouraging retail that serves the surrounding neighborhood. There are several other used car dealerships in the area including those across the city limits in the City of Jacksonville. Discussion ensued about the existing used car dealerships. The comprehensive plan also has portions calling for the elimination of blighting influences while preserving the residential character of the city. The considerations for approval of use-by-exceptions were given and it was pointed out that it is the expressed intent of use-by-exceptions is to limit a proliferation of a single use in one part of the city. Applicant Comment Ryan Hawkins; of 13020 Biggin Church Road South, Jacksonville, Florida 32224, stated he is requesting to open a used car dealership at this site after purchasing the property. The existing building and the trees behind it are to be preserved. The application contains several contracts and documents to show how the property would be converted. The intent is to have no more than 20 mid priced cars that would be good for the community. Mr. Elmore asked if the applicant owned any other used car dealerships. The applicant said he did not own any others but has worked at a couple throughout Jacksonville. Mr. Elmore asked how this site was chosen. The applicant responded that despite perceptions, this area has relatively few used car dealerships compared to areas such as Beach Boulevard and that this area provided a good safe neighborhood for his cars. Public Comment After no public comment, Mrs. Paul closed public comment. Board Discussion Mr. Hansen asked how the board can recognize a proliferation of used car dealerships in the area while also approving this application. Mr. Elmore stated that this is not a use that the city wants to encourage and that this use goes against the comprehensive plan while also going against redevelopment plans for the area. Mrs. Paul drew attention to the comprehensive plan pointed out that city recently had a moratorium on used car dealerships. Mr. Parkes stated that he disagrees with some portions of the comprehensive plan and this is a major corridor to one of the largest industrial sites in northeast Florida, but does recognize a used car dealership is direct conflict with the comprehensive plan. Mrs. Lanier stated that she wants to encourage the applicant to be a great businessman but also sees the proliferation of used car dealerships. Motion Mr. Hansen motioned to recommend denial of the use-by-exception as presented to the City Commission. Mr. Elmore seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. 5. REPORTS. A. Sign Code Update Staff Report Mr. Hubsch presented that the current sign amortization is set for January 1, 2015 and that staff is seeking to extend the time period to June 1, 2015. This would allow staff time to plan a course of action and notify property owners with nonconforming signs. The City of Neptune Beach is going through similar issues and is pushing their deadline back as well and matching them would provide consistency along Atlantic Boulevard. Motion Harley Parkes motioned that the Community Development Board recommend to the City Commission that, by ordinance, the City Commission extend the deadline for nonconforming signs to be made conforming to June 1, 2015 and that no further extensions be granted. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hansen. The motion carried unanimously. B. Tree Protection Code Revisions Discussion This discussion was rescheduled for the next Community Development Board meeting on December 16th, 2014 due to time. 6. ADJOURNMENT. Mrs. Simmons motioned to adjourn the meeting. Mrs. Lanier seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:39 pm. iiejhZ241/4.-1411a Brea Paul, Chair "44A„...," iv"-/L— --- Attest