Loading...
2010-09-21_CDBminutes v Minutes of the September 21, 2010 regular meeting of the Community Development Board „ji _ ,,, r A s r MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD Tuesday, September 21, 2010 The regular meeting of the Community Development Board was convened at 6:02 pm on Tuesday, September 21, 2010 in the City Hall Commission Chambers, located at 800 Seminole Road in Atlantic Beach. In attendance were Community Development Director Sonya Doerr, Principal Planner Erika Hall and Community Development Board members Blaine Adams, Lynn Drysdale, Kirk Hansen, Chris Lambertson, Harley Parkes and Joshua Putterman. Ellen Glasser was absent. 1. CALL TO ORDER. Chairman Chris Lambertson called the meeting to order at 6:02 pm. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 17, 2010 MEETING MOTION: Kirk Hansen moved that the Board approve the minutes of the August 17, 2010 meeting, as written. Joshua Putterman offered a second, and the motion carried unanimously. 3. RECOGNITION OF VISITORS. There were no visitors. 4. OLD BUSINESS. There was no old business for consideration. 5. NEW BUSINESS. a. UBE- 2010 -05. Request from Lawton Hall for a Use -by- Exception to allow for the production of custom crafted surfboards in an existing warehouse space located at 36 West 6 Street, within the Commercial General District. Ms. Doerr gave the Board an overview of the history and description of the subject property noting that Atlantic Beach is well known for the production of high quality custom surfboards. She noted that in years past, there had been issues with a couple of these shops who did not properly dispose of residual products, but that a combination of better technologies and responsible shapers have eliminated this problem She stated that it had been at least six years or more since there had been any reported problems with board shapers. Ms. Doerr also noted that there are no adjacent or nearby residential uses, and that this space is within and fully surrounded by well - maintained warehouse buildings occupied by a variety of trades and small businesses, most notably C & C Fisheries. She also noted that it is not likely that this area would ever be appropriate for retail and service uses, because of the access constraints, lack of parking and other limitations for such uses. This area provides an employment base for the neighborhoods to the west, and it should be a goal of the City to support these small businesses. Page 1 of 5 Minutes of the September 21, 2010 regular meeting of the Community Development Board Applicant Lawton Hall (3870 Grande Boulevard, Jacksonville Beach) described the processes he would undertake at the location. In general, he would be custom - cutting surfboards to approximately 90% completion for others who would then refine the boards to completion at their locations. Mr. Lambertson opened the hearing to public comment and with there being none, closed that portion and returned the item to the Board for discussion. Mr. Adams and Mr. Hansen inquired as to disposal methods of any waste by- products. Mr. Hall said that the actual cutter is self - contained with a vacuum device to catch dust, fiberglass, etc. Mr. Parkes commented that he believed the same type of mechanism was employed by the cabinet- making shops. Mr. Hall confirmed and went on to explain that any excess epoxy or resin drops into and is collected in a large container underneath his work surface into a material similar to "cat litter" where it forms into clumps and can then be recycled or disposed of. He said there are no materials or by- products that require any special disposal other than standard commercial waste disposal, and that the tools make very little noise and disperse nothing from the building. MOTION: Kirk Hansen made a motion that the Board recommend approval to the City Commission of a Use -by- Exception to permit the production of custom surfboards within an existing warehouse space located within the Commercial General Zoning District at 36 West 6th Street, finding that approval of this request is in compliance with the requirements of Sections 24 -63 and 24 -112 of the Zoning, Subdivision and Land Development Regulations, and finding that this request is neither contrary to the public interest nor detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the general public, and that the proposed use is compatible with adjacent properties and other properties within the surrounding area. Harley Parkes seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. (Item 5. c was heard prior to Item 5. b) c. ZVAR- 2010 -02. Request from Southcoast Capital Corporation for a reduction in the required number of parking spaces to that existing to allow a 60 -seat restaurant to replace a previously existing, now vacant retail space with no increase in floor area at 299 Atlantic Boulevard within the Central Business District. Ms. Doerr provided a summary of the request noting that the CBD regulations specifically acknowledge that parking is a constraint in Town Center and that most buildings were "built prior to the current requirements for area, setbacks, parking and other site related elements, and this character should be retained." Applicant Southcoast Capital Corporation (SCC) was represented by Lindley Tolbert (465 Beach Avenue). Ms. Tolbert described the properties within and adjacent to Town Center owned and /or leased by SCC. She explained that if parking associated with these properties were enumerated according to the current uses and Land Development Regulations, there would be an excess of some 20 parking spaces that are under the control of SCC. However, a portion of those parking spaces are on the Neptune Beach side, rather than Atlantic Beach, where this particular property is located, but that they are in very easy walking distance of this location. Chairman Lambertson disclosed that while he has no direct involvement with this property at this time or this application, he does have other business involvement with Southcoast Capital Page 2 of 5 Minutes of the September 21, 2010 regular meeting of the Community Development Board Corporation, and therefore would recuse himself from consideration of this application. He then turned the meeting over to Vice Chairman Ms. Drysdale. Ms. Doerr commented that it had been her long -held position that new development on vacant sites or complete redevelopment of a property should provide the parking as required by current code, but that when no expansion in floor area is involved, and the proposed uses are those that expressed in the CBD regulations as desired uses, that strict application of parking requirements would have a long term negative effect on Town Center likely resulting in empty storefronts. Ms. Drysdale opened the hearing to public comment and with there being none, closed that portion and returned the item to the Board for further discussion. With no Further discussion, Mr. Adams made a motion to approve ZVAR- 2010 -02, a request for Variance from Section 24 -161 to reduce the required parking to that existing in order to allow a 60- seat restaurant to occupy an existing space within the Town Center area of the Central Business District at 399 Atlantic Boulevard, finding that this request supports Policy A.1.11.1(c) of the Comprehensive Plan, and finding that it is consistent with the Section 24 -114, Central Business District regulations, as well as finding that this request is consistent with Section 24- 64(d)(4) of the Land Development Regulations establishing grounds for approval of a Variance due to the onerous effect of regulations enacted after platting or after development of the property or after construction of improvements upon the property. Mr. Parkes seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. (Ms. Drysdale returned the gavel and control of the meeting to Mr. Lambertson). b. PUD Modification, Johnston Island. Request from Charles 0. Chupp for a modification to the Johnston Island PUD, as approved in 2005, to provide for an alternative development scenario that would eliminate all future residential development of the site, and also eliminate the private club and 250 -seat dining facility, in exchange for a maximum 125 -seat public restaurant to be located on the one -half acre commercial portion of the site. Ms. Doerr gave a brief history of the Johnston Island PUD and explained what is currently approved for development. Representing the property owner, Charles 0. Chupp, Chad Grimm (4206 Harbor Island Drive) provided the Board with details of the alternative development scenario proposed as part of this requested modification. Mr. Parkes asked how the number of 125 seats for the public restaurant was reached, to which Mr. Grimm explained that three variables contributed to that calculation, those being the potential kitchen -to- seating floor area ratio, the required parking, and the amount of effluent estimated to be generated and accommodated by a drainfield. Mr. Putterman noted that the previous PUD approval had included a 250 -seat private club, and asked how that was approved but the new calculation allowed only 125 seats. Mr. Grimm explained that the original PUD included provisions for running utilities out to the site. However, installation and maintenance would be expensive for both the applicant and the City. After meeting with the City Engineer and Public Utilities, an alternative plan was developed. Mr. Parkes noted that alcoholic beverage licenses for full service restaurants typically require a minimum of 150 seats. Ms. Doerr replied that a "special restaurant license" series (SRX) which Page 3 of 5 Minutes of the September 21, 2010 regular meeting of the Community Development Board does not have the 150 seat requirement, but does require a minimum of fifty -one percent (51 %) food sales would be used. She noted this to be one of the recommended conditions of the alternative plan, as listed in Exhibit B of the staff report to prevent the location from ever becoming "just a bar." Ms. Drysdale noted transient boat slips on the conceptual diagram and asked about the terms of usage. Mr. Grimm explained that the transient slips were for short term for use by patrons of the restaurant, whereas the marina slips were to be sold or leased for long -term use. Mr. Lambertson opened the hearing for public comment and with there being none, closed that portion and returned the item to the Board for further discussion. Mr. Adams expressed his long -held dislike of the PUD as now approved. He said he felt a smaller public restaurant is much more suitable to the island than residential units, and that a public restaurant on the water would more greatly benefit the citizens of Atlantic Beach and surrounding areas. However, he was concerned that this modification would result in an either -or situation in which the owner could still develop the residential -based scenario. Mr. Grimm confirmed that while a restaurant site is much more marketable and highly likely to be developed, the owner fought long and hard to obtain those residential development rights, and he desires to hold on to them in the case that market conditions change before a restaurant can be developed on the site. Mr. Grimm addressed the concern that both uses could still be developed in the future, noting that this was not possible under the proposed modification, and that the property owner has realized that the site is not large enough for both uses in any case, and that the combination of the two uses would not be compatible or marketable for either a restaurant or residential lots. Mr. Parkes asked for clarification that this action would not result in two different PUDs, and Ms. Doerr confirmed that there would still only be one approved PUD. However, there would be two completely different development scenarios, one being the original as already approved, and the second being the alternative plan presented tonight and consisting of only a 125 -seat public restaurant and marina with harbor master facilities and the docks. Ms. Doerr read Exhibit B as included in the agenda package, a list of conditions that are recommended to be made part of the ordinance adopting the PUD modification. General discussion about the modification followed with a consensus that any plan that offered an opportunity to eliminate residential use from the site was positive, and that this would be a good location for the type of restaurant proposed. Mr. Grimm and Ms. Doerr both commented related to opinions regarding the practicality and desirability of the site for residential use given the view the west, the location under the bridge, etc. Mr. Grimm commented regarding market conditions in 2004 -2005 when any residential waterfront property was thought to be "golden." Both concurred that the likelihood of a restaurant is much more probable than residential, and Mr. Grimm commented that having this modification in place would facilitate efforts to market the island as a restaurant site, and that the owner has recently had interest from several restaurant developers. MOTION: Blaine Adams moved that the Board recommend approval to the City Commission of the requested modification to the Johnston Island PUD, finding that this request for a PUD modification has been fully considered following a public hearing before the Community Development Board with legal notice duly published as required by law; finding that the requested PUD modification is consistent with the 2010 -2020 Comprehensive Plan in that the Alternative Plan eliminates residential development in the Coastal High Page 4 of 5 Minutes of the September 21, 2010 regular meeting of the Community Development Board Hazard Area; finding that the requested PUD modification does not adversely affect the orderly development of the City; and, finding that the requested PUD modification is consistent with the Land Development Regulations, specifically Division 6, establishing standards for the modification to previously approved Planned Development Units, to allow for an alternative development plan as set forth within Exhibit B to proposed Ordinance Number 52- 10 -04. Kirk Hansen seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. 6. OTHER BUSINESS NOT REQUIRING ACTION. a. Use -by- Exception Approval Procedures As discussed at previous meetings, Mr. Lambertson said the he believes the current process for consideration of a Use -by- Exception is onerous and burdensome, in both time and resources for all parties involved. The applicant is required to apply and appear before two bodies; staff is required to prepare reports and presentations for and appear before two bodies, and two bodies are required to review materials and hear essentially the same presentations. He asked Ms. Doerr to seek direction from the City Commission as to whether or not this is the best expenditure of valuable time and resources, and to consider a revision to Chapter 24 such that Use -by- Exceptions would be required to come to either the Community Development Board or the City Commission for action, but not both bodies. The Community Development Board felt that the City Commission should make the decision regarding which body should hear Use -by- Exception, and expressed no preference for either. It was noted that final decisions on similar special use applications are made by the Planning Commission at the City of Jacksonville. All Board members concurred. Ms. Doerr confirmed that she would confer this request to the City Commission. 7. ADJOURNMENT. Mr. Lambertson adjourned the meeting at 7:32pm. Chris Lambertson, Chairman Attest kA, ( - ,(( Ptavolev' Page 5 of 5