06-19-18 CDB MinutesMinutes of the Regular Meeting of the
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
June 19, 2018
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chair Lanier. Mr. Elmore was
absent from the meeting. Ms. Simmons, Mr. Hansen, Mr. Major and Ms. Paul were
all present. Alternate Mr. Tingen filled in the open seat. Also present were Director
Shane Corbin, Planner Derek Reeves and Planner Brian Broedell. Board Secretary
Valerie Jones was absent. City Attorney, Brenna Durden arrived at 6:20p.m.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Minutes of the May 15, 2018 Regular Meeting of the Community
Development Board.
Mr. Hansen motioned to approve the minutes. Mr. Tingen' seconded the motion.
The motion carried unanimously.
3. OLD BUSINESS
There was no old business.
4. NEW BUSINESS
A. UBEX18-0001 PUBLIC HEARING (Sugar Cane Inc.)
Request for a use-by-exception as permitted by Section 24-175(d)(3), to
allow on-premises consumption of alcoholic beverage in accordance with
Chapter 3 of the code within the Commercial Limited (CL) zoning district
at 1487 Mayport Road, Unit 2.
Staff Report
Planner Reeves introduced the item and explained location of the restaurant as
being in an existing shopping center south of Donner Road. He said there is some
residential property to the east but it is located in a Commercial Limited (CL)
zoning district and has a future commercial land use. The proposal is to add onĀ
premises consumption of liquor to their existing restaurant. They already have
beer and wine as a permitted use. They will have a 150 seat layout which complies
with the States requirement for a restaurant license type. It is an existing
restaurant, signage is up, there is a dumpster in place, and they aren't changing
parking or access. The need for a use-by-exception comes from 2 locations:
Chapter 3 which is alcohol and the recently created overlay district from last
summer also allows restaurants within the CL district to serve liquor with a full
service restaurant. A couple concerns are sales of liquor late in the night, the City
has a 2:00 a.m. cutoff. Businesses need to maintain sufficient lighting for safety
purposes. Consumption needs to occur within the building, this restaurant doesn't
have any outdoor seating. He said that this would be the only restaurant on
Page 1 of6
Applicant Comment
Public Comment
Board Discussion
Motion
B.
Mayport Road south of Fairway Villas selling liquor. The Board will be voting to
recommend approval or denial to the City Commission.
Chair Lanier declared exparte communication with Kelly Erhayel who is one of the
owners of the property. Chair Lanier explained that the nature of conversation
had to do with code violations that existed on the property. Director Corbin
explained that there are existing code violations on site and he is trying to work
with the owner on that. Chair Lanier asked if it bears any influence at all on the
approval of this issue. Director Corbin said that this particular business doesn't
have any violations but there are other business in the center that have issues.
Mr. Major asked if this use-by-exception was consistent with the intent of the
Comprehensive Plan. Planner Reeves said that Comprehensive Plans are open to
interpretation. He said that the Plan calls for neighborhood serving businesses
within the CL district, he couldn't say that alcohol is specifically listed in the Comp
Plan but he thinks it would be consistent. Mr. Major asked if the restaurant was in
compliance with all of the requirements of 24-63. Planner Reeves said yes. Mr.
Major wanted to know if it was consistent with permitted uses in the Commercial
Limited zoning district and Planner Reeves said it was. Mr. Major asked if parking
is an issue and Planner Reeves said there wasn't any parking issues because it is
an existing shopping center that is actually over parked.
Derek Martin of 12654 Gandalf Lane in Jacksonville introduced himself as one of
the owners.Eisa Montgomery of 4325 Marsh Landing Boulevard, #417 in
Jacksonville Beach introduced herself as the other owner. Lynne Porter-Gaitan
introduced herself as the owner of Blue Sky Consultants and she wanted to know
if the Board had any questions. Mr. Tingen had asked what the hours of operation
were. Ms. Porter-Gaitan said that it would be midnight in the summer and winter
would be 11:00 p.m. The restaurant sales are 75% food.
Chair Lanier opened the floor to public comment. There was no public comment.
Ms. Paul said that she is for it and brought up some of the previous businesses
that have been approved. Mr. Tingen said that he has been to the restaurant and
has enjoyed it. Ms. Simmons agreed to approve.
Mr. Hansen motioned to recommend approval of UBEX18-0001. Ms. Paul
seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
ZVAR18-0010 PUBLIC HEARING (John Halverson)
Request for a variance as permitted by Section 24-64, to increase the
allowable fence height from 4 feet as required by Section III(D)(4) of the
Page 2 of6
Staff Report
Applicant Comment
Public Comment
Board Discussion
Motion
C.
Staff Report
Selva Marina Unit 9 PUD to 6 feet at Selva Marina Unit 9 Block 1 Lot 20 (aka
1861 Sea Oats Drive).
Planner Broedell explained that this was a variance request for fence height in a
PUD. The proposed plan is to replace an existing 6 foot wood fence with a new 6
foot wood fence. The need for a variance stems from the PUD's requirement that
the maximum fence height be 4 feet outside of the dwelling zone. The dwelling
zone is defined as the area within the building setbacks which is 30 feet in the
front and rear, 15 feet on the sides. The PUD was approved in 1976. The covenants
and restrictions serve as the governing text for this PUD. It has not always been
enforced or applied resulting in 6 foot fences throughout the PUD. 6 foot fencing
is allowed everywhere else in the City except for the PUDs.
Mr. Hansen asked if this request was materially different from any of the other
recent requests. Planner Broedell said it is very similar.
John Halverson of 1861 Sea Oats Drive introduced himself as the owner. He would
like to replace his existing fence that has been damaged by the hurricanes. He
explained that it is currently 6 foot and he would like to replace it with the same.
Chair Lanier opened the floor to public comment.
Harley Parks of 1838 Seminole Road introduced himself as the back yard neighbor.
He said he has a 6 foot fence and that tall fences make good neighbors.
There was no Board discussion.
Mr. Hansen motioned to approve ZVAR18-0010 based on line item 2 of the
guidelines. Ms. Simmons seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
PLAT17-0005 PUBLIC HEARING (North Florida Engineering Services
Inc.)
Requestfor a plat approval as required by Chapter 24, Article 4 ofthe Code
of Ordinances within the Residential General zoning district at RE#
172095-0000 and 172081-0050 (previously known as 56 Dutton Island
Drive West and 0 Dudley Street).
Director Corbin said that this is 2 lots that are going to be split into 4 lots. The
zoning is Residential General {RG) just outside of the Mayport corridor. The future
land use map has it designated as a Residential Low {RL). The intent is to put 4
single-family homes on these lots that meet width, depth and lot size
requirements.
Page 3 of6
Ms. Lanier asked if the creek was part of the plat and Director Corbin said it was.
She thought that there could be a possibility to have 6 lots. Director Corbin said
that because it is under an acre 6 lots would be over the density limitation.
Mr. Tingen asked if there was any mitigation involved. Director Corbin said that
will come later during the building permit stage. A permit will not be issued until
an approved plan is put in place for the tree's to be mitigated. Director Corbin
explained that there are a couple of things that need to be done before it can be
officially complete. Those have been sent to the applicant and Staff is waiting for
the revisions. An additional plat note is needed stating that stormwater mitigation
will meet the stormwater regulation at the time that they pull the building permit.
A notary block needs to be moved to under the owner's signature. A comment
needs to be added about not being the owner's homestead. The correct mortgage
lender's name needs to be added. A separate notary is needed on the mortgage
lender's block.
Ms. Lanier wanted to know if the Board's motion would need these conditions
attached. Director Corbin confirmed they would.
Applicant Comment
The applicant was not present.
Public Comment
Chair Lanier opened the floor to public comment. There was no public comment.
Board Discussion
Ms. Simmons was pleased to see that area developing in a positive way. Ms. Paul
was happy to see that single-family homes will be built there.
Motion
Ms. Simmons moved to recommend approval of PLAT17-0005 to the City
Commission with the previous listed conditions above. Mr. Hansen seconded the
motion. The motion carried unanimously.
5. REPORTS
A. PUD Changes
Staff Report
Director Corbin said that the City Manager is very interested in getting the PUD
situation resolved. He said that the PUD's are really concentrated in the Selva
Marina area. A majority of them were developed by George Bull at different times.
They are very are similar but each one has its own nuances regarding setbacks,
fence height and lot size. The City had an ordinance established in 1972 that was
put together as a tool to help guide development because there wasn't a Camp
Plan. The PUDs went through an Advisory Committee which is no longer in
existence. Research shows that any development with 3 or more units had to go
through this process. The process ended in 1982. The area of interest is from
Page 4 of6
Saturiba Road between Seminole Road and Selva Marina Drive. Because the City
didn't have a Comp Plan in place to guide development, Mr. Bull went with the
PUD process. Director Corbin showed the Board all of the different PUD's and the
years that they were built. They range from a 6 year period from 1976 to 1982. He
pointed out that there are 75 non-conforming lots: 50 are fences, 38 are structures
that were added onto or built new and 8 are accessory structures that exceed the
maximum accessory structure size. Staff would like to clean things up and
eliminate the need to send these to the Board. Research shows that the RS-1
design standards have been applied to this.
There are a few things that can be done. One is to nothing. Second, a new zoning
district could be developed that would have its own design standards that would
eliminate a lot of these issues. Third, the area could be rezoned to an existing
zoning district. Staff thinks this is the best solution, to zone to an RS-1. Last, there
could be some very large variances done on all these parcels to clean issues ...such
as fence and setbacks. Staff thinks that rezoning to an RS-1 would be the best
solution. The nuances are pretty small, many of the PUD's have a 10 foot setback
which would be dropped to a 7.5 foot setback. It would resolve all of the fence
issues and it would resolve all of the accessory structure issues as well.
Mr. Major asked if this would go through a process that would be voted on by the
City Commission. Director Corbin said that it would be a rezoning of a very large
part of the City, approximately 250-300 parcels at once. He said that it would come
back to this Board first. Mr. Hansen asked if that would mean that the existing
PUD's would be wiped out and be changed to the RS-1 zoning. Chair Lanier asked
if there was anything in the RS-1 zoning that could be an outlier and still require
the need for a variance. Director Corbin said that it would eliminate all but 9 of
the non-conforming uses and he believes they can get creative and add some
language to that which would resolve those issues as well.
Ms. Paul said that she looks forward to solving the fencing issue and thought that
the rezoning would be a good idea for this ongoing problem. Ms. Lanier agreed
that it would save some staff time and space on the agenda. Mr. Tingen asked how
recent the 9 non-conforming uses were and Director Corbin said he wasn't sure
but he could bring that information back to the next meeting.
Ms. Durden clarified that covenants are expired under the Florida Marketable Title
Act and that is true for covenants that are privately enforced, however, for zoning
ordinances that are contained within a covenant, those do not expire. So the City
is in the position of having to enforce it and she thinks rezoning to an existing
zoning district is an excellent option.
B. Code Books I Code Rewrite
Staff Report
Planner Corbin spoke about the binders that he presented to the Board that
contains code of ordinances. He told the Board that Staff would be meeting with
Page 5 of6
the consultants for the code rewrite. He said that dates would be scheduled for
public meetings that would include the Board. He asked the Board to take their
binders and mark them up, put sticky notes and convey their ideas as to changes
they would like to see. Ms. Lanier wanted to know if there will be any postings
online that could be checked out during the process. Director Corbin thought that
there would be a web-site and said he will give the Board information as he can.
Mr. Hansen expressed concern about the Board asking people if their neighbors
like what they want to do. He said that since they are not a legislative body but
only to interpret the grounds for the request. He said it concerns him that an
applicant could ask their neighbor to tell the Board it's okay to do what they are
doing. Ms. Lanier agreed that it is the Board's job to interpret the code.
Mr. Tingen said that you can have issues that crop up between neighbors. He said
that neighbors working with neighbors is a good thing. He added that
communicating with your neighbors can save you from going to small claims court
and attorney fees. Mr. Tingen thought it was a common courtesy. Mr. Hansen said
he understands that but he doesn't think that should shape the Boards opinion.
Ms. Durden said that Mr. Hansen is right, there is a phrase in Florida case law
called the applause meter and quasi-judicial decisions cannot be based upon the
applause meter. She said that it is always good if you have a neighbor that
supports you and will come to meeting. This Board can only pay attention to the
criteria, which is why it is so important when Staff point you to the criteria, those
are the basis for you decision.
Director Corbin told the Board that there will be an appeal of the last fence
variance that was granted. Chair Lanier said that either she or Ms. Paul would be
at that meeting.
6. PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no public comment.
7. ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Hansen motioned to adjourn the meeting at 6:58p.m. Ms. Simmons seconded
the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
Page 6 of6