Loading...
2006-06-20 (meeting minutes) vMinutes of June 20, 2006, Community Development Board Meeting MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD June 20, 2006 A regular meeting of the Community Development Board was held on Tuesday, June 20, 2006, in the City Hall Commission Chambers. Present were Chairman Sam Jacobson, Steve Jenkins, Craig Burkhart, Dave MacInnes, Carolyn Woods, Chris Lambertson, Lynn Drysdale (arrived at 7:16 p.m.) Community Development Director Sonya Doerr and Recording Secretary Jeanne Shaw. Alan Jensen was present in the audience. 1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance. Chairman Jacobson called meeting to order at 7:06 pm. and asked Mr. MacInnes to lead the pledge to the flag. 2. Approval of Minutes from the regular meeting of May 16, 2006. Mr. MacInnes inquired if Ms. Drysdale was present at the previous meeting. Ms. Doerr responded that she would verify Ms. Drysdale's attendance and would amend the minutes as appropriate. Mr. MacInnes asked that the last paragraph under New Business be corrected to accurately reflect that he refrained from voting because he is President of the Board of Trustees for the Church and was the person who signed the application. Mr. Burkhart made a motion, seconded by Mr. Lambertson to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of May 16, 2006, as amended. The motion carried unanimously. 3. Recognition of Visitors. Chairman Jacobson recognized that Commissioner Borno was in the audience. 4. Old Business. There was no Old Business to discuss. 5. New Business. Mr. Jacobson noted that Variance request (ZVAR-2006-03) had been continued to the July meeting at the request of the Applicant. a. Use-by-Exception-2006-03, Judy Jenness. Request for aUse-by-Exception for the Atlantic Theatre site located at 751 Atlantic Boulevard. The owners of the Atlantic Theatre received a Use-by-Exception on March 28, 2005 to allow Live Entertainment for a comedy club and also to allow on-premise consumption of alcoholic beverages. The request seeks aUse-by- Exception for a new Applicant to allow on-premise consumption of alcoholic beverages and Live Entertainment to include live music (indoors only.) Minutes of June 20, 2006, Community Development Board Meeting Chairman Jacobson explained the procedure for aUse-by-Exception request. The following people addressed the Board in support of the applicant: Gerard Vermey, architect, 65 Shell Street; Judy Jenness, applicant, 1836 Nightfall Drive, Neptune Beach; Tom Fallon, general manager of Atlantic Theatre Comedy Club, 1144 Hamlet Lane East, Neptune Beach; Leslie Targonski, sound engineer, 7818 Lady Smith Lane, Jacksonville. Mr. Vermey reviewed the current status of the Atlantic Theatres and noted that half of the building is currently used for the comedy club and the applicant is interested in using the other half of the building for relocating her business, the Freebird Cafe, from Jacksonville Beach. He noted that the site has ample parking in front and that there is an existing bar within the building. Mr. Vermey supported Ms. Jenness' request for the Use-by-Exception. Ms. Jenness indicated her desire to relocate in order to have a larger venue so that larger, national music acts could be booked. She indicated that her business is capable of addressing the issues of noise, parking, and security and that her sound engineer is here to answer any questions regarding sound issues. Mr. Fallon expressed his support of Ms. Jenness' application and noted that currently much of the space in the facility is unused. He believed that Ms. Jenness' business would be a compatible use with the existing comedy club. He stated that the music shows would not be scheduled seven nights per week and that the shows would begin around 10:00 p.m. Chairman Jacobson asked if the Board had any questions. Mr. Jenkins asked Ms. Jenness to specify the exact hours of operation being requested in her Use by Exception. Ms. Jenness noted that currently her business is open until 2:00 a.m. but that they would like to make their hours of operation begin and end earlier in the new location. Mr. Jenkins asked for further clarification and Ms. Jenness indicated that most of their shows would end around 12:30 or 1:00 a.m., but that the maximum hours of operation being requested would be until 2:00 a.m. Mr. Jenkins asked how she has addressed security issues. Ms. Jenness responded that she has met with the Chief of Police for Atlantic Beach to discuss these issues. She stated that she hires the appropriate amount of security officers for all of the shows and discussed the type of security in more detail. Board Member Lynn Drysdale joined the meeting at 7:16 p.m. Chairman Jacobson inquired into the expected clientele of the business and Ms. Jenness described the variety of people, depending on the type of show. The Chair asked Chief David Thompson, Director of Public Safety, if he would like to provide any information concerning the application. Chief Thompson acknowledged that he had met with Ms. Jenness and her staff and discussed the issues involved with live music and alcohol. He discussed the estimated number of people attending the events and the sound issues that could affect the neighborhood in proximity to the location. He encouraged the business to provide their own private security officers and provided statistics of police calls received from the vicinity of the current Freebird Cafe in Jacksonville Beach. In closing, Chief Thompson believed that most instances at the Freebird Cafe have been handled well by the security provided by the business. 2 Minutes of June 20, 2006, Community Development Board Meeting Ms. Woods questioned the applicant's plans for monitoring and addressing the noise outside of the building. Mr. Targonski, sound engineer for the applicant, responded and provided the details on how the sound will be measured and adjusted appropriately. It was noted by Chief Thompson that the City Code does not have a specific decibel limit for noise and that the issue is a judgment call addressed and based upon complaints and police calls. Discussion ensued regarding means to manage the noise from the establishment. In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Fallon indicated that the business would be building an additional bar in the building. Ms. Jenness answered questions regarding seating capacity by responding that the establishment will be standing/dancing room only. The applicant noted that their shows would not be occurring simultaneously with the comedy club acts and that there is ample parking on the property. Chairman Jacobson inquired as to the specific nature of the business, night club concept or concert hall? Ms. Jenness responded that it is a live music venue with dancing room only. Ms. Drysdale asked if the issue of loading spaces at the rear of the building would create the same problems as occurred in the Jacksonville Beach location. Ms. Jenness indicated that the problems with bus parking and loading issues have been resolved. Ms. Jenness also stated that the business prefers to use only the ground floor level, but may consider utilizing the upstairs area for special customer viewing at certain shows. The Chairman opened the floor to public comments. Steve Foraker, Sixth Street, strongly supported the Freebird Cafe relocating in Atlantic Beach and spoke highly of Ms. Jenness' manner of operating her business. He believed it would be an asset for the community. Carol Schwarz, Tierra Verde Drive, did not support this type of business activity in Atlantic Beach and did not believe it fit in with the City's family character. Judy Truitt, 315 Second Street, spoke in favor of the club moving to Atlantic Beach. R.D. DeCarle, 51 Beach Avenue, spoke in favor of the request and believed the business books quality acts. There being no further public comments, the Chairman closed the public hearing and brought the request back to the Board for discussion. A motion was made by Mr. Burkhart, seconded by Mr. MacInnes, and passed unanimously to recommend approval of the request as presented. b. ZVAR-2006-04, New Friendship Missionary Baptist Church. Request for a Variance to reduce the dimension of parking space sizes from 10-feet by 20-feet to 9-feet by 18-feet in association with expansion of the existing church facilities located at 28 Dudley Street. Minutes of June 20, 2006, Community Development Board Meeting The following individuals addressed the Board in support of the request: Forrest Thomas, Chairman of the Board of Deacons at the New Friendship Baptist Church; Rodney Paige, Deacon at New Friendship Baptist Church; and Jose Rezex, 6821 San Sebastian Avenue, representing the general contractor for the project. Mr. Rezex explained the reasons for requesting the variance. He noted that due to the requirements for stormwater retention, a large portion of the lot will be needed for the retention pond. Thus, in order to meet the number of parking spaces by regulations and as needed for the church services, Mr. Rezex stated they are requesting to reduce the size of the parking spaces. He noted that the church only needs the parking spaces for functions on Sundays and Wednesdays. Mr. Thomas noted that the church property will also be reduced in size by the Department of Transportation taking ten feet on Dutton Island Road for Mayport Road improvements. The Chairman opened the floor to comments from the public. Rae Brady, 1636 Sea Oats Drive, expressed concerns with the stormwater issues and received clarification from Ms. Doerr on the Church's plans for the retention pond and the impervious nature of the parking area. Ms. Woods commented that the 10-foot by 20-foot spaces are generally used for grocery stores and other businesses where there is a need for ample space on the sides of cars for loading and unloading goods. Chairman Jacobson noted the similarity of this application with the request just recently approved for the Community Presbyterian Church. Mr. Lambertson asked for clarification of the exact location of the New Friendship Missionary Church and stated, for the record, that he owns the piece of property on the corner of Dutton Island and Mayport Roads and also owns a piece of property across the street. A motion was made by Mr. Burkhart, seconded by Ms. Drysdale and passed unanimously to approve the variance request as presented. d. Public hearing to discuss and seek and further input related to the ongoing Community Character project and proposed residential Development Standards. It is anticipated that the Community Development Board will make a recommendation to the City Commission related to this matter at this meeting. (The Community Development Board is a recommending body and does not take final action on this matter. Any future adoption of an ordinance to adopt these proposed regulations would occur following advertised public hearings before the City Commission.) Chairman Jacobson asked for a show of hands from the audience of how many people would like to speak on this issue. Given the complexity of the matter ,and the amount of public interest, the Chairman proposed that the public be given the chance to speak and have discourse with the board during the public hearing so that the matter can be fully heard. There were no objections to his proposal and the Chairman opened the floor to public comments. T.J. Streit, 848 Ocean Boulevard, believed that FAR should be anon-factor since the proposed standards would also include a height to wall plate issue and a proposed building coverage. He questioned why all three standards need to be in the current proposal. He stated his opposition to seriously limiting any potential for an owner to build up on his/her property. 4 Minutes of June 20, 2006, Community Development Board Meeting At this time, Chairman Jacobson explained the purpose of this item coming before the Board and reviewed the history of the meetings, workshops, organizations, and committees which have led up to the current draft being discussed this evening. He noted that the Board may not be able to answer questions regarding the specifics of some of the standards but he encouraged and welcomed discussion and suggestions from the public. He also reviewed the proper behavior expected for the meeting and asked that the audience refrain from applauding in support of each speaker. The Chairman responded by explaining that the results from the last two workshops helped to determine that the FAR is still a necessary part of the standards in order to prevent a potential domination of large box structures in the City. He discussed with Mr. Streit the possible impacts of allowing a 6000 square-foot, 3-story structure on a 50-foot lot. David Boyer, introduced himself as a retired architect who was also a member of the citizen input advisory committee selected by the Mayor. He thanked the Board for allowing the amount of public participation and expressed his reasons for supporting the current draft of the proposed standards as a reasonable compromise. He reiterated his belief that the standards should be applied to the entire City, not just to one area. Mr. Jenkins asked for a recalculation and further clarification of the examples used by Mr. Boyer. Mr. Boyer responded and Mr. Jenkins thanked him for the explanation. Joan Carver, 46 Fifteenth Street, commended the Board for their work and supported the reasonable proposal they have provided. She believed the proposed standards will help maintain the quality and property values of Atlantic Beach and she encouraged the Board to continue with the proposal. Bryan Barker, 1225 Selva Marina Circle and 620 Beach Avenue, acknowledged the lengthy process, but supported taking the time needed to work out this issue. He suggested polling the residents of Old Atlantic Beach for their opinion on how the proposed standards would effect them and if they support them. He believed the proposal is still too restrictive and believed the majority of the residents affected would feel the same way. Chairman Jacobson asked for specific examples of what part is too restrictive and why. Mr. Barker replied with examples relating to the lot coverage and FAR standards. Ms. Woods addressed a common misconception regarding the issue of lot coverage. She clarified the difference between the current impervious coverage, which would remain at 50%, and the issue of building lot coverage that is being addressed by the proposed standards. The Chairman pointed out that there was initial opposition to a 35-foot height limitation and now most residents are glad that restriction is in place. Mark Holmes, 275 Beach Avenue, believed the current codes and management in place are sufficient and questioned why the City should change them. He asked to see a drawing of an example of a home under the proposed residential standards that would fit on the standard lot size. He also discussed impervious space ratio and the effects on duplexes. The Chairman informed Mr. Holmes that drawings of example homes have been provided in the Minutes of June 20, 2006, Community Development Board Meeting report from the consultant and that he can acquire a copy of the report from the City. Mr. Burkhart stated that the 50% impervious limit has been part of the Code for some time and is not a part of the proposed changes. Judy Truitt, 315 Second Street, expressed concern with the size of the units being built across the street from her residence. She discussed her concerns with McMansions replacing single-family houses. Ms. Truitt supported the proposed standards and commented on the importance of tree conservation to the City. Discussion ensued regarding duplexes on Second Street. Ms. Doerr provided information on the issue in response to questions from the Board. Jane Wytzka, 352 Second Street, stated she was happy with draft for residential standards and recounted some historical incidents relating to 35-foot high residences and other situations that effected yards in neighboring residences. She discussed McTownhomes, neighbor's opposition to large houses, lack of homesteaders, and the increase in investment homes. The Board discussed the amount of investor owned homes on Fifth and Sixth Streets. Mr. Lambertson commented that some citizen's concerns appear to be more related to two-family dwellings rather than single-family dwellings. Steve Foraker, Sixth Street, commended the Board for their work on this process and discussed the Save Atlantic Beach group's reactions to the proposal and the concern with property rights being over-regulated by proposed standards. He believed that the City of Atlantic Beach has a family-oriented character, good property values, and swell-run government. He commented that this proposal may allow homes bigger than he would like, but he views it as a good compromise and supports this draft. Bill Gulliford, 75 Beach Avenue, introduced himself as a resident of Atlantic Beach for 39 years and a former mayor and commissioner of the City. He stated he joined the Save Atlantic Beach group in order to prevent serious encroachment on property rights. He commended everyone who has been involved in the process. Mr. Gulliford proceeded to discuss with the Board the figures presented by Mr. Boyer and the effect of the proposed standards. He pointed out a discrepancy in the standards, which could encourage people to buy a 50 x 100 foot lot because the standards would allow them to build more on it than on a lot larger than 6000 square feet. Mr. Lambertson questioned whether or not the proposed standards were intended to exempt lots of 6000 square feet or less from the FAR limits. The Board acknowledged Mr. Gulliford's concern with that part of the proposed standards, and Ms. Woods believed it should have been changed from the previous meeting. Chairman Jacobson asked about the Save Atlantic Beach proposal being referenced and stated that no one in City Hall has received this official proposal from the group. Mr. Gulliford responded that everyone in the Core City was distributed a copy of this and he thought tonight would be an appropriate forum to make it widely available. He cautioned the Board to examine their proposed standards more thoroughly before endorsing all of it. He believed that the standards should be applied to the entire City. He expressed the desire to achieve a balance between property rights and reasonableness. He discussed the concept of subjective interpretation as it applies to this issue. Mr. Gulliford stated that the FAR standard is too restrictive. He endorsed the Save Atlantic Beach 6 Minutes of June 20, 2006, Community Development Board Meeting group's recommendation fora 20% reduction of the current code. Chairman Jacobson inquired how the Save Atlantic Beach proposal was created, whose input was included, and if the group voted to accept it? Mr. Gulliford responded by commenting on the process for creating their proposal, including a review by professionals. He believed there is a negative reaction in the community due to the duplexes that have been built. He suggested that they be given the opportunity to readdress the numbers and provide an amended proposal if necessary. Mr. Lambertson asked Mr. Gulliford his thoughts on a referendum. Mr. Gulliford believed that the entire City should have a say in the issue. He handed out copies of the proposal from Save Atlantic Beach. Rae Brady, 1636 Sea Oats Drive, discussed the issue of impervious surface and how the proposed building coverage is related. Mr. Lambertson explained that the City requires residential buildings to retain stormwater runoff and, thus, drainage is not an issue in this proposal. He proceeded to explain the process for those requirements and the Chairman suggested that perhaps the Public Works' Director could best address Ms. Brady's questions. Lindley Tolbert, 334 Sixth Street, discussed the Save Atlantic Beach proposal and indicated that it each of the Board Members should have received a copy of it. She addressed the calculations presented fora 50 x 130 foot lot. She suggested that the City hire two independent architects to present to the City their calculations, given the same hypothetical examples, to determine if their outcomes match and can be agreed upon by the City. She strongly disagreed that this was a minor change to the current code. She pointed out that a FAR is not in the current code. Ms. Tolbert discussed where the board members and commissioners live in relation to the area affected by the proposed standards. She asked how the limits were decided and questioned who would be affected by the proposal. She questioned the exemption of 6000 square foot lots from the FAR requirement and asked how the height to wall plate issue applies to the mansard roof. She requested an explanation for the difference between the standards for a sloping roof versus a flat roof. She disagreed with the use of the term "tweak" to describe the changes to the code. Chairman Jacobson informed everyone that the term "tweak" is not going to be used in legislation, and Ms. Doerr explained why she used that word in her staff report. The Chairman thanked Ms. Tolbert for her comments, her clarification of the roof language, and her suggestions for two experts to run calculations for the City. He asked her for her opinion of what would be considered reasonable. Mr. Lambertson acknowledged Ms. Tolbert's points regarding reasonableness depending on where the house is located. Mr. MacInnes asked if the Save Atlantic Beach's proposal fora 20% reduction of the current code could be worked into the City's proposed standards. The Board continued to discuss the issue of removing the FAR requirement and the proposal from Save Atlantic Beach. They discussed the issues of three-story buildings, tree coverage, light/air, and compromising. Bob Castro, 412 Ocean Boulevard, introduced himself as a resident of Atlantic Beach for 34 years and discussed the history of Atlantic Beach properties, costs, and the residents in the City. At this time, Mr. Lambertson left the meeting. Mr. Castro continued to talk about how the homes and citizens of the City create and define the character of the town. He expressed the importance for 7 Minutes of June 20, 2006, Community Development Board Meeting respect for property rights and strongly urged the City to heed the legal advice given to them. Mr. Castro was strongly opposed to any change to the current regulations in the Code. R.D. DeCarle, 51 Beach Avenue, questioned the Board's purpose and intent for determining Old Atlantic Beach boundaries. He distributed information showing official plats and historical versions of the outline of Old Atlantic Beach. He noted that the information indicates that the limit for that area extends all the way to Sixteenth Street and asked that this information be delivered to the Mayor and Commission. He believed the City has identified the boundaries of Old Atlantic Beach incorrectly. He discussed the purpose and intent of building coverage by buildings and believed it is unfair to one- and two-story buildings. He asked that the City leave the building coverage as it is for one- and two-story homes, and create lot coverage restrictions just for three- story homes. He asked that the Board remove the FAR. He believed the market trend was starting to show a diminishing demand for McMansions. Mr. DeCarle was opposed to the proposed standards or changing the code. Ms. Woods reiterated that the lot coverage issue is not being reduced and discussed the building coverage standard. Mr. Lambertson discussed the difference between the 1913 plat and what is currently on 12~' Street. The Chairman addressed how they defined what they called Old Atlantic beach for this purpose. Mr. Jenkins discussed with Mr. DeCarle what he would consider reasonable fora 50 x 130 foot lot. Carol Mikel, 1771 Sea Oats Drive, identified herself as a founding member of Save Atlantic Beach. She indicated that the group attempted to contact all the board members with their proposal. She presented numbers for they believe are reasonable standards. She did not believe that people could financially afford to build out to the maximum allowed. Mr. Jenkins then questioned their group would want to preserve the right to build a 7400 square foot house if it is not feasible for most people. Ms. Mikell responded that they would like to preserve the choice to do so. She presented documents, which illustrated that, in the past, only four people have spoken in support of the Community Character initiative at the Commission meetings. Sally Clemens, 1638 Park Terrace West, recapped the history and process of defining community character. She reminded everyone that even the final draft is not written in stone. Susie Snead, 261 Beach Avenue, discussed the Winter report and believed it showed an extreme scenario that has created this issue. She addressed the impact on trees and the misunderstandings involved. She reviewed how the Save Atlantic Beach group originated and believed the proposed standards should be applied citywide. Ms. Snead impressed the importance of polling citizens and letting them know they are being heard by their officials. She made suggestions regarding the issues of impervious surface and height limits. She believed the proposed standards are too complicated and asked for a simpler version. Kevin Byrnes, 391 Eighth Street, noted that he has attended all the Commission and CDB meetings regarding the Community Character issue. He spoke in favor of applying the proposal to all areas of the City. He commented that no one is currently building home to the maximum allowable size. Further discussion ensued regarding examples of specific houses in his neighborhood and whether they are considered too large or not. 8 Minutes of June 20, 2006, Community Development Board Meeting There being no further public comments, the Chairman closed the public hearing. The Chairman presented the Board with the options to reconvene in a special meeting as a continuation of this meeting, to have another workshop and then meet again, or to continue on with the meeting tonight. The Board agreed to recess and continue the meeting at a special meeting, to be on Thursday, June 29th, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., in order to allow the Board to discuss the item and make a recommendation to the Commission at that time. The Board recessed the meeting at 11:20 p.m. Signed ,.. Attest 9