Item 8A
AGENDA ITEM #8A
MAY 24, 2004
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
CITY COMMISSION MEETING
STAFF REPORT
~.
AGENDA ITEM: Rescheduled public hearing to consider a request for aUse-by-
~„ Exception per Section 24-161 (i) to reduce the required number of parking spaces from 22
to 17, and to reduce the width of spaces from ten to nine feet related to the proposed
development of a new two-story commercial building containing professional office use and
~, also a height waiver per Section 24-156 to allow a proposed building height of 32-feet,
exceeding the 25-foot height limit within the Central Business District for property located
at the southwest corner of Ahern Street and East Coast Drive.
SUBMITTED BY: Sonya Doerr, AICP ,~.~
Community Development Director
DATE: May 14, 2004
BACKGROUND: This request was deferred from the October 13, 2003 meeting. (As
requested at that meeting, individual notices have been mailed to adjacent and nearby property
owners.) Since that earlier meeting, the application has been amended as follows.
~•
1) The original request anticipated a mix of office and retail use. The use is now limited
to 8872 square feet of professional office use.
~,. 2) The original request sought to reduce the required number of off-street parking spaces
from 28 to 13 spaces. The currently proposed development requires 22 spaces, and a
5-space reduction to provide 17 spaces is requested.
~. 3) The parking regulations require parking spaces to be 10-feet in width, and the
application requests that spaces be permitted to be 9-feet in width.
4) Building height in the Central Business District is limited to 25-feet. The application
requests a waiver to allow atwo-story building 32-feet in height. The original
application requested a building height of 35-feet.
It is the applicant's position, as expressed within the attached letter, that because the use is now
limited to office only, the needed parking for this project will not compete with peak demand
times related to restaurant, bar and beach use within the Town Center area. Staff recognizes that
e® the peak times for parking shortages are typically during weekends and evenings; however, staff
has some concern that restricting the property to office use only may present future enforcement
issues, since retail and restaurant uses are by-right Permitted Uses within the Central Business
District. Parking waivers previously granted to adjacent projects have not been enforceable, and
specific conditions of several parking waivers have not been met. Staff is also mindful that the
Commission supported the findings of the Town Center Parking Committee recommending that
no future parking waivers be granted. If the Commission takes action to approve this request,
staff suggests a condition restricting the future use of this property to Professional Office only,
unless additional parking as required for any alternative use is provided.
.~
May 24, 2004 regular meeting
AGENDA ITEM #8A
MAY 24, 2004
BUDGET: No budget issues involved in this request.
RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Board considered this application,
'"" as originally submitted at their August 19, 2003 meeting, and approved a motion by a 4:1
vote to recommend approval to the City Commission of the Use-by-Exception, subject to
the following conditions:
1. That a shared parking agreement, as required by Section 24-161 (e) (2), exist
with the Shoppes of North Shore or other property within 400 feet of the
subject site, and that this be a mandatory requirement; and
2. That the on-site parking spaces shall be designated to serve the first floor
retail uses.
Since the amended application involves lesser requested waivers, staff has not returned the
application to the Community Development Board; however, the suggested conditions are no
longer appropriate in that the City has been advised of private lease restrictions that preclude
shared parking agreements, and the retail use has been eliminated from the project. The request
for a height waiver was not considered by the Community Development Boazd; however, that
Board has expressed a consensus that the 25-foot height limit be maintained within the Central
Business District.
Staff supports the recommendations of the Town Center Parking Committee related to future
~,. pazking waivers, but in the case that the Commission takes action to approve the 5-space parking
space reduction, the following condition is recommended.
~. • Permitted Uses use of this property shall be limited to Professional Office only,
unless additional parking as required for any alternative use is provided prior to
issuance of an Occupational License for said use.
Staff has no objection to the requested height waiver to permit 32-feet, provided that the building
is limited to a two-story design, and further, that elements of the building exceeding 25-feet in
height be limited to architectural design elements and not heated and cooled interior space, (This
is the first request to exceed the 25-foot height limit in the Central Business District. The
Commission should take into consideration the precedent that approval of this request may
represent.)
ATTACHMENTS: Applicant's letter dated May 04, 2004, revised site plan, supporting
materials and minutes of the August 19, 2003 Community Development Board meeting.
~•
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
•.
2
Map Output
JAXGIS Property Information
.~ ,~ ti{ ~
{ 4
iS 5~ ~~
1 ° ~ ~
--'-- ~~~
~~~ ~ ~I
f~
r
~' ~
~.
~I ~, - _ ____.~~-
~.
C~-
~1~
AGENDA ITEM #8A
MAY 24, 2004
~-rs ~,
s11
~~`~ '~
i. ti ~~ ~ yti ~~ i
~Qpyria ht ~Ca20R2 ~ iiy of Jacksanv~k, FI 3141
~~l
~~~~~~
~~
~~
`11
1
E # ame ddress Value c~ ook nel egal Descriptions Flon°e LandUse oning ENT
2
169728 0000 U R PROPERTIES INC EAST COAST DR
04600
.36
001
62 1 5-069 21-2S-29E
TLANTIC BEACH Not in
Flood
2233 LOTS 1,3,5 BLK 1 one
~ttn•//mgrc7 nn: r~e+/~I7i:DQTTII/71..~.,.111.rA-_/a__/L--- _--- -.-
AGENDA ITEM #8A
MAY 24, 2004
+~ MICHAEL DiT1VLAP ARCHITECTS, P.A.
,
s x
j
7
y F
"' ++. ~.•:_
~ j~1~SE31~
~%II:I.E
~~RIDA 32202
,
ri.
(~, •i~ ryj~~~.,~~•+'r-11~,n`..~, 5. ~ 'MY~4+R~-.{y2.u[Y "` .."i ~~G
I~ y4 n~ try :. ^,'h4 .y„ W..^ i ~ "1 .
i
F
~~ s
J ~ PS n ~''YE.i
4 May 2004 v ~,, ~ ~~ _ ~ ~. _
'~
i ~ ~
~`
~
,f
>
-Sh-, r _
Y
~
~
~
~
~• Jul '4a Yw
Ms. Sonya Doerr ~ ~' }, ~~ ; ~ ~, ~ s 3t
.
: ~,
City of Atlantic Beach
800 Seminole Road ~ ~ ~
;~ , {
~, <
... ., ,
~U
`
' µ,.r~,,h -
Atlantic Beach
FL 32233 ~~ "'~ ~ ~''
,
Re: 42 East Coast Drive Variance /Council Submittal
Dear Sonya,
Please place the project on the Commission Agenda for the May 24, 2004 regular
meeting. Attached is a revised concept site plan dated 5-04-2004. The project has been
modified as follows:
1. The use of the building will be professional offices only, for a total of 8872 gsf.
2. Parking has increased on site from 13 to 17 spaces. The spaces indicated on the
~"' attached site plan are 9' x 20', from 10' x 20' required. At one space per 400 gsf, 22
parking spaces are required by code.
3. The original variance application indicated a structure 35' in height. We now require a
height waiver because of the recent code change to 25' maximum. The revised height will
be 1'
~2 rn i~~, v `~
~~o~'
Continued.. .
ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING
FLORIDA REGISTRATION #AR-9200
www.michaeldunlap.com
AGENDA ITEM #3A
MAY 24, 2004
*~ 4. The original concept of the project, which is a colonnade building with a sideyard
greenspace, is essentially intact. Another positive aspect is that the proposed 17 parking
~„ spaces are daytime use, which adds 17 more "shared" spaces during the peak after-hours
to the Towncenter area. Given the chazacteristies of the project we look forward to
unanimous council support for the requested variances.
Please call if we may clarify any of the information.
Sincerely,
~1,
~~
Michael Dunlap
cc: Mr. Chris Hionides
Mayor John Meserve
~+.
0t8L6ilY IY~11V2119193a1 VOMOId
'
'
'
'
' y
N
L~I
a9fiYmG VOI2101
9llNNOV)qYf
1
~
1 Y41iIDld
hC~V
3G 711NV
l1V 3~laitl 1BY0~ 19V8 [~ ~
'v-d 61~311
H~~
dV"1Nfid
3VH~IW ~I~1N~~ ~Ib`l~c~/~~I~~O n
'
~
,
~Q
~ o
W t~
Q ~
A
d
W ~
4
3
~~~ ~~
~ ~~~ ~~
~~ ~
---------------------------------------- ~ ~-------- ~ d
a ~
~ d a ~
3/~IZJd 1S70~ 18V'~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ ~
Q ~,,
7114R1~Q18 -------~------ ~-~--------
i - ,~ .0L ; ~ i m~
, ~ \
v0-,Efi \~
*---
I I --------- ~ - - \ i i ~~ ,-~
i ( Q
I I
i ~ r--------- ~' ----------- ----- ~~ ~ ~\\ ~
I ~ i ~ \Q\ ~ 11-~
I ,,, I---------- \`~ ~
i ~ i ~, ~ ~
----- -
~ ~ I--------- ~ \ \ ~ a
I I -- ~\' O
I ~ > --- -~--- - ~ ~ ~ ~~
I ~----~--~--- r ,~ ~ \\
4 U U V ~ \I
i J-I~
i i ~
I I ---~ ~ ----~-~- - ~ \ .\1
----- ~
~ ~ ~ ~~~
I r--------- ~
~ ~
I ~
I ~--------- \ \i
i i ----------- ----- ~
i i--------- ~ ~ ~!
Q
1=
~I r~
~~~1
AGENDA ITEM #8A
MAY 24, 2004
~•
~- '. x~l
'tom -s
~, APPLICATION FOR AUSE-BY-EXCEPT-I _...____.
City of Atlantic Beach 800 Seminole Road • Atlantic Beach, Florida'3Z233=5445
Pho~ne~:x(904) Z47-5800 FAX (904) 247-5805 - htip:/Jwww/ci.atlantic-beach.fl.us
G~~%Ml~a OS D 0~••~
Date 8-1-03 ~ ~ ile Piro. ~?3i~ Z40 3 -~7j Receipt
1. A licaat's Name Michael Dunlap Architect
PP
` 2. Applicant's Address •118 W Adams St. Ste 200 Jacksonville, FL 32202
±~ 3. Property Location East Coast Drive C Ahern St. Atlantic Beach. FL 32266
1
1
9. Utility Provider
JEA
10. Statement of facts and special reasons for the requested Use-by-Exception, which demonstrates compliance with
Section 24-63 of the City of Atlantic Beach Code of Ordinances, Zoning and Subdivision Regulations. Attach as
Exhibit A. (The attached guide may be used if desired. Please address each item, as appropriate to this request.)
~.
11. Provide all of the following information..(All information must be provided before an application is scheduled for any
public hearing.)
a. Site Plan showing the location of all structures, temporary and permanent, including setbacks, banding height,
number of stories and square footage, impervious snzface area, and e~dsting and/or proposed driveways.
Identify any existing structures and uses.
b. Proof of ownership (deed or certificate by lawyer or abstract company or title company that verifies record
owner as above). If the applicant is not the owner, a letter of authorization from the owner(s) for applicant to
represent the owner for aI1 purposes related to this application must be provided.
c. Survey and legal description of property sought to be rezoned. (Attach as Exhibit B.)
d. Required number of copies. (Two (2) copies of ail documents that are not larger than Il z 17 inches in size. If
plans or photographs, or color attachments are submitted, please provide eight (8) copies of these.).
e. Application Fee 0250.00)
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ALL INFORMATION PROVIDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IS CORRECT:
Signature of owner(s) or authorized person if owner's authorization form is attached:
Printed or typed name{s): Michael Dunlap
Signature(s):
ADDRESS AND CONTACT INFORMATION OF PERSON TO RECEIVE ALL CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING TffiS
APPLICATION Name- Michael Dunlap
„~ Mailing Address: 118 W. Adams" St. Ste. 200 Jacksonville, FL 32202
4. Property Appraiser's Real Estate Number jhQ7?.Rn(1OCl Block No. I Lot No. 1 _ 3. cot.
5. Current Zoning Classification ~~ 6. Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use designation
7. Requested Use-by-Exception Waiver of pazitinQ requirements. S~GLGI.~ ~-~ucj ;
~ ~P~~lnll~ ~FG~ R~G?1oN Ta `i~ X2o`
8. Size of Parcel 100' x 150'
Phone• 904) 358-1002 FAX: 904) 358-3708 email: architect@aljtei.net
;A
AGENDA ITEM #8A
MAY 24, 2004
E~;H~IT A
The review of an application for aUse-by-Eacception shall consider the following items. Please
address each of the following as applicable to your specific application.
~, 1. ingress and egress to property and proposed Structures thezeon with particular reference to vehiculaz and
pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control and access in case of fire or catastrophe.
See attached concept site plan.
2 Parlang and Loading Spaces, where required, with particular attention to the items in (1) above.
See attached concept site plan.
3. The potential .for any adverse impacts to adjoining properties and properties generally in the azea resulting
from excessive noise, glare and lighting, odor, traffic and similaz characteristics of the Use-by-Exception
being requested.
The project is entirely compatible with the towncenter neighborhood
4. Refuse, trash collection and service areas,.with particulaz reference to items (1.) and (2) above;
Shared with adjacent retail center.
5. Utilities, with reference to locations, availability and compatibility;
See attached concept site plan.
6. If adjacent uses are different types of uses, describe type of screening and buffering that will be provided
between.your use and the adjacent use. 4Pp attar3iPr1 rnn~Pnt cite nlan
~ 7. Signs, if any, and proposed exterior lighting, with reference to glare, traffic safety, economic effects and
compatibility and harmony with properties in the District; (See Signs and Advertising, Chapter 17.)
See attached concept site plan.
8. Required Yards and other Open Space. Show building setbacks and areas of open space on site plan.
S ~""
9. General compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the surrounding Zoning District as
well as consistency with applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan.
See architect's statement
_ ~, ` Other information you may wish to provide: See arShi ec 'c c atement
s*
AGENDA ITEM #8A
ATAY 24, 2004
11 August 2003
Retail/ Office Building, 42 Eastcoast Drive
Architect's Statement
The proposed two-story project is located on a corner lot in the historic CBD of Atlantic
Beach. It is flanked by commercial-mixed use properties on the south and east as well as
the Northshore Center on the west. The north property, across Ahern Street, is a single-
family residence, well buffered by dense vegetation.
The project is an extension of the existing Northshore Center and creates 9525 gsf of
retail and office area and shazes many of the existing resources, such as parking,
retention, and trash collection. The existing parking lot to the west, under the same
ownership, can be considered shared parking for the.office use on the second floor, since
there are many available spaces for daytime use.
The overall character of.the Towncenter is defined by colonnade building types
~.
constructed on their respective property lines. Ragtime, Sundog, and Sunny Carribee are
architectural examples of one and two story structures that define the character of
Towncenter. Our project is meant to be another example of these ideas, which under the
present code requires a parking waiver. One of the positive aspects of the project is the
creation of a pocket park, which occupies 32% of the site, in lieu of 5720 gsf of
additional asphalt required by the code. This is consistent with the spirit of the
neighborhood which carefully balances the built and natural habitats.
I am confident that the Boazd and Council will support this project ,which will be a
welcome addition to the authentic mixed-use towncenter established many years ago.
This is a collaboration. I believe that compatible azchiteeture and a pazk is a fair trade for
a few less pazking spaces.
Sincerely,
Michael Dunlap
•
.~
AGENDA ITED~1 #8A
MAY 24, 2004
MAP SHOWING BOUNDARY SURVtY ()1=
L~7T5 1, ~ ANO 9, BLCCK 1, A7LAMTIC BEAC}•{, AS r~ECO~DED IN PiJ17 80CX 5, PACE &9,
OF 'ME CL'RRa17 PU6lIC RECORDS OF OLJVAL CDL'NTY, FLDf~lIIA.
C: RTSFIED TO;
O.IJ.R. PR~PERT1arS, IiVC.
TH. G~RDON BrVvK
GLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL T1TLE 1NSl;RANCt= CO1vEPANY
PaTcRSO!v, BOND AND LATBHA'J`J, P. A.
AHERN~ STREET
+D.~' Ft1GHT ~ wAY;
5ST 1/." ~C'liat
,•ru+.ca 'era ~a c7m'
t~0.07 (DEED?
M 890'13' E 15t7.D0' (MF:.A551JF
oaao-
l a ~
._a, ui I
11 I
Q,'dE 5'~DT2 Y
P ~ ~ 2t.5 ~ ~ swtn FRAME
a ~ ~.- -3'
t '
$ cs ~ Two sraRY oeRaae
a.. ~ ~
O m iz~l :e.S I
m 4~.
I.DT 7 a'
c:LQG~C 1 ~
Q
~ Q
Z l0T 5
BI.DCSC 1
~r ~/~,• nC~w
0.C STAMRD '1111}1C1i LO b702'
S 89'00'13" M
LOT 8
3L.OCK 1
~uwo x
ssa'
~ PO5TED 1 ~ 42
~ I
~ ~~
2i3~ ~ I _ 2S.T
• '~a.C 7L1'
I
i
1
i
I N
I
I
LOT 3 S LDT 1
BLOCK 1 s eLOCx 1
1
1
i I
i 80.OQ _ t SaCC ~!~
i.sar x-~: TO iE7AR 150.t}0' (CAL.C'JLJITED'
(~ i50.C0' (DEED)
LOT ~ ~ CDT 2
BL~7CK 1 E LDC1c t
LEGF:NC: ~ --
F ~ RAOsL'S - X- ~ iTIdC~ ~~
1_ ~ l,'.i:GTM ~ CONCRf,Tt 1
h1QT'S:
f. E~ARI.NGS +1P.: 9ASEL CM THE ~~~ SEARING Qrr S OT'CffOD' E A101-C T4E
:.><S7'~~RL7 BOUNDARY LINE CF 51~9.1EG7 ?.Wt.~.
2. *31' ~inPyC P~rnNC CNIY T.~E GAPTiCNED unDS uE 1NTHNY FLGaD =C.v£ x ~S ~IDWk cn rHE
yr.TIONA: FID:~ Ir15URAN~ MA? OA1'ED .~1PAll 17, 198&, CD-tuUN:TY NUMBER 1Z007S,.PANF~ D~_~..
S. TFILS SIRVEY RErZEC78 ALL E.IS"kc e'NTi lr 71CHTS Oi '.W.Y ,CS P=.R RECJRDEO FIAT dtJOR T11L.E CC•111i111TiatVT
x eu~
. Q
.- ~
~~
.., ~ v
< Li.l
~ o
~' o Q i.
i7 g
m ~ f--'
~ ~ u
°' Q
O
W U c
~ ri
S ~' v
U
':' Q Q
~ •~ H ~
4EVIS1ON5
OASE ~ OESCRIPTIOPi
AGENDA ITEM #8A
A~IAY 24, 2004
~. Minutes of August 19, 2003 Regular Meeting of Community Development Board
Page 5 -~
~„ b. UBE-2003-03, and ZVAR-2003-15, Michael Dunlap on behalf of Chris Hionides.
Amended request for aUse-bv-Exception per Section 24-161 (il to reduce the required
number of parking spaces from 28 to 13, and also for a Variance to reduce the required side
~„ _yard setback on a corner lot from 15-feet to 11-feet related to the proposed development of
a new commercial building containing retail and professional office uses to be located at the
southwest corner of Ahern Street and East Coast Drive.
~. Mr. Michael Dunlap introduced himself as the project architect representing Mr. Chris Hionides
who was the owner of this parcel as well as North Shore Center to the west. He stated that they
were requesting consideration on two issues: (1) a variance to reduce the corner lot dimension or
setback dimension from 15 feet to 11 feet, and (2) the Use-by-Exception to reduce parking from
the 28 spaces required by the Code to 13 spaces provided on site.
s. Mr. Dunlap advised that Mr. Chris Hionides owned this lot as well as North Shore so they could
be considered in some ways to be an extension of North Shore Center but not connected. He
stated that this project was a separate building on a separate lot. He stated that this project was a
blend of the setback requirements, height restrictions, parking issues, the built habitat and natural
habitats. He advised that they were creating a colonnade building with covered walkways on the
ground floor and second floor, a retail base, stairs at each end, elevator lifts with roughly 4,500
""" square feet per floor, for a total of 9,500 square feet--retail below and professional offices
upstairs.
"" Mr. Dunlap addressed the parking issue as follows: If they were, in fact, an extension of North
Shore, then they had 91 parking spaces in North Shore and they had 13 parking spaces [in the
new project].. (Mr. Dunlap displayed a rendering of the project.) The office and retail in North
'~"' Shore and the cafe add up to 21,000 square feet of space, and the new project was 9,500 square
feet, for a rough average of 30,000 square feet of office retail including Sticky Fingers. They are
providing, between North Shore and this project, 104 parking spaces. He stated that Sticky
'~' Fingers required quite a bit more pazking than that of office-retail but he did not think that there
was such a severe parking problem that there was substantial evidence to deny a project like this.
He further stated that they felt that the office space was taken care of during the day by shared
~" spaces and they did not need to provide 12 parking spaces for the second floor because it could
be shazed by on-street parking in the neighborhood within two blocks. Mr. Dunlap stated that
they were providing 13 of the 16 spaces for retail of the ground floor.
Mr. Dunlap advised that they could move the building back and double the parking but they
would like to give the community a pocket park by using 32% of the site for green space. He
stated that they could fill the lots with asphalt but he thought that had been done too much; or
they could in-build them with a balance of built habitat and natural habitat.
~,,,, Mr. Dunlap informed the board that in the audience was Mr. Ned Jones, who developed 16,000
squaze feet of mixed-use space in Neptune Beach, and provided 12 parking spaces. He stated
that that project had been a success in Neptune Beach and it was only two blocks away. He
~„ further stated that this project was a very close-by precedent, not located in Atlantic Beach but
located in Town Center, and it added an economic vitality that had been missing for years.
,~„ Mr. Dick Hilliard spoke in opposition to the project. He stated that he did not see any water
retention areas and they want to back out onto Ahern Street, which was already a bad
intersection.
~*
~,. Minutes of August 19, ?003 Regular Meeting of Community Development Board
Page 6 ~•
AGENDA ITE1~~I #8A
1VIAY 24, 2004
~,,, Mr. Jenkins requested that the board resolve the issue of whether or not they could include the
North Shore parking area as countable or as a whole in the aggregate.
~„ Mr. Wolfson said that historically speaking, when Sticky Fingers came before the board that
there was a restaurant in place that did not succeed, that they wanted to put in their restaurant,
and that there was a need for additional parking. He said that the owner of Sticky Fingers at the
.. time said that he had made arrangements, if needed, for valet parking across the street, which the
board felt would be cumbersome. In addition, Mr. Wolfson said that Al's Pizza had two
variances, one when he remodeled, and one when he expanded the restaurant. He advised that
this entire quadrant has very minimized parking.
Ms. Doerr advised that Section 24-161(e)(2) provided a provision for shared parking under
+~* certain conditions. She said that a parking study or analysis on the entire area that is under single
ownership or unified control is typically required when there was shared parking by mixed uses.
In response to a question from Mr. Jenkins, Ms. Doerr stated that her staff report indicated that
she did not object to the parking waiver subject to certain conditions: 1) that the 13 on-site
parking spaces adjacent to the new building be designated for use only by the retail part of the
®~' project, which would be 3 less than the 16 required by Code for the retail space, and 2) that the
property owner designate private parking for office use within the lot he owns that was adjacent
to this property. She said that this would have resulted in only a 3-space deficit for the whole
~"' project. However, she informed the board that Mr. Dunlap had since informed her that there was
a restriction in the tenant leases that prohibited the designation of parking for specific businesses.
'~" Mr. Dunlap stated that he would welcome a parking study if the city would fund it. He further
stated that he believed there was a perceived parking problem at Town Center but that it was a
weekend and nighttime issue, not a daytime issue.
~.
Discussion was held with regard to the Use-by-Exception granted to Sticky Fingers. Mr.
Wolfson advised that the board alleviated the amount of parking spaces required and that the
~" records should be on file.
Mr. Frohwein advised that he liked the proposed mixed use of the building as opposed to solely
retail. He thought that it would add attractiveness to Town Center.
Mr. Frohwein asked Mr. Dunlap how they were going to handle retention. Mr. Dunlap
responded that they were exempt from the St. John's Water Management and, in light of that, the
city was willing to waive their retention requirements. Mr. Wolfson asked Mr. Dunlap about any
~ concessions he may have from the city. Mr. Dunlap responded that his engineer. spoke with Bob
Kosoy, who indicated that they would be exempt from City standards if they were exempt from
St. John's Water Management. Ms. Doerr advised that the city had separate drainage and
~, stormwater requirements from the St. John's Water Management District. She further advised
that this project would be subject to a paving and drainage review as part of the permitting
process.
Ms. Drysdale stated that she liked that this project was sensitive to maintaining the green space
and the mixed use. She asked Mr. Dunlap if the green space in the rear of the property was
AGENDA ITEM #8A
MAY 24, 2004
Minutes ofAugust 19, 2003 Regular Meeting of Community Development Board
Page 7 -.
~. adjacent to the parking lot at North Shore. Mr. Dunlap responded that there was 32 feet of
shared property line.
„~• Mr. Wolfson asked Mr. Dunlap if there was any consideration to reduce the number of offices
and retail spaces so that they could reduce the number of parking spaces needed. Mr. Dunlap
responded that it was difficult, at this point in time, to determine how many businesses would be
located in each bay.
Mr. Wolfson stated that the retail mix was going to be problematical because if they have a
bakery that was going to serve food or coffee and have seating, then they would have a greater
demand for pazking than if they had drive up, walk-in minimum usage retail. Mr. Dunlap
responded that the code defines retail to allow coffee shops, and there was a real distinction
"" between a restaurant license and a coffee shop license.
Mr. Wolfson asked Mr. Dunlap how many feet were between the building line and the lot line,
""" north to south. Mr. Dunlap responded 32 feet. Mr. Wolfson advised that he was asking this
question because that was possible additional parking. Mr. Dunlap stated that they discussed this
in early design sessions but thought there was already too much traffic on East Coast. He further
~ stated that Al's Pizza service and driveway were part of the congestion problem and they did not
want to compound the problem.
Discussion was held with regard to shared parking and what would happen if the two
developments were separated at a later date. Ms. Doerr advised that the city could require a
shared parking agreement.
Mr. Frohwein asked Ms. Doerr if she saw any benefit to limiting the types of retail uses. that
could occur here, specifically meaning restaurants which seem to demand a lot of parking
requirements and would that be reasonable, fair and equitable to do so. Ms. Doerr responded
that over time, it would be very difficult for the city to monitor. She stated that restaurants are
allowable commercial uses at this time and the property owner would need to offer that
limitation.
~,,, Mr. Wolfson discussed limiting offensive lighting and noise such as music that would bother
residents. Ms. Doerr responded that the code addressed lighting and this project would be
subject to landscaping requirements. Mr. Frohwein stated that he did not want to disallow music
~„ and felt that, in this particulaz scenario, the buffer would be the building itself. Mr. Wolfson
stated that he would prefer music on the south side and not on the north side. Mr. Dunlap agreed.
Mr. Wolfson also stated that he would not have a problem with open seating on a patio.
~•
Mr. Wolfson asked Mr. Dunlap what the. hazdship was for the variance. Mr. Dunlap stated that he
would have to say that there was no hardship in this case but would like the boazd to consider the
character and compatibility to the neighborhood. He further stated that they had a compatible
project that was mixed use and that was going to add vitality.
Chair Wolfson moved to deny the request for the variance. Mr. Burkhart seconded the
motion.
e.•
AGENDA ITEM #8A
MAY 24, 2004
~ Minutes ofAugust 19, 2003 Regular Meeting of Community Development Board
Page 8 -~
~. Mr. Wolfson stated that he did not see a hardship and he did not see why the building could not
be reduced by four feet.
~.• Mr. Frohwein referred to a publication given to them by Ms. Doerr, which discussed the
uniqueness to allow buildings to be built closer to streets. He stated that without reading this
publication, he thought it would be difficult to understand what he believed Mr. Dunlap was
proposing. He further stated that in this case he thought this was a unique piece of property in a
unique section of town and that he could vote in favor of allowing the variance.
~* Mr. Wolfson asked Mr. Frohwein what difference it would make if the building were reduced by
four feet. Mr. Wolfson said it would not change the ambiance of the building, the attractiveness
or the purpose. Mr. Wolfson said that the property could be developed to the architect's desire
'~" and still be in compliance with the setbacks. Mr. Frohwein responded that he was seeing an
attempt to maintain a lot of green space by pressing the building to the north and, therefore, it
would not bother him to have it project to the east.
Mr. Wolfson asked the applicant if the same scenario existed to the west side of the building. Mr.
Dunlap responded that he believed that the west side was 5 feet 11 inches and would remain the
'"' same. He said that by reducing the structure by four feet, they would lose 160 square feet on
each floor, totaling 320 square feet. In addition, he said there was the issue of the azchitectural
effort which if he felt he could have met the 15-foot setback, he would have done so. He said that
there was a sense of proportion to the building and there was an aesthetic to the building that he
felt worked on an 18-foot bay that lined up with the parking and lined up some characteristics
that he was after. Mr. Dunlap suggested looking around the neighborhood; there are a lot of
buildings built up to the property line, such as Ragtime, Sun Dog and Al's Pizza. He told the
board members that if they wanted to see buildings that met the setbacks to go visit K-Mart.
The vote was called and Mr. Burkhart, Mr. Jenkins and Mr. Wolfson voted for the motion,
Ms. Drysdale and Mr. Frohwein voted against the motion. The motion passed and the
~,,, variance request was denied.
A motion was made by Mr. Frohwein and seconded by Mr. Wolfson to recommend
~„ approval to the City Commission of the Use-by-Exception.
Mr. Jenkins stated that he thought the applicant had failed to convince the board that this project
~„ would not cause aparking/congestion problem. He further stated that he did not think that it was
the city's .responsibility to prepare a parking study--the applicant was requesting the variance and
it would be his responsibility to demonstrate that this project would not cause further congestion
to what was already a congested area. Mr. Jenkins also expressed concern about drainage.
In response to a question from Mr. Frohwein, Ms. Doerr advised that the code required that
~. stormwater be handled on site. Mr. Frohwein asked if any exceptions could be made. Ms. Doerr
responded that the Public Works Director had the discretion to waive on-site storage
requirements in some situations, but that would be done during the review process. She further
~ stated that the Public Works Director would not waive city requirements solely because the St.
John's Water Management District exempted the project. Mr. Frohwein asked if the board could
attach to the motion a recommendation that stormwater be handled on site. Ms. Doerr responded
~.
AGENDA ITEM #8A
MAY 24, 2004
~,,, Minutes o~'August 19, 2003 Regular Meeting of Community Development Board
Page 9
that the code specifically gave authority to the Public Works Director and she did not believe it
was within the board's authority.
~, Mr. Dunlap advised that they would not receive a building permit until they handle the
stormwater issue. He stated that they are either exempt, which he thought they were, or they
could handle it with water elements on site, with the neighbor who is the same owner, with
~„ French drains under the parking, or they could use grass-crete to park on.
Mr. Frohwein expressed concern with regard to a possible waiver. Ms. Doerr responded that she
,,,, did not want to give the impression that Mr. Kosoy was waiving stormwater requirements. She
stated that the code gave him some discretion as to how to address stormwater requirements for
on-site storage.
Mr. Dunlap added that they would take the necessary steps to ensure that the pocket park did not
become a lake.
Mr. Frohwein moved to modify the motion to include that a shared parking agreement exist
with North Shore and that this be a mandatory requirement. Mr. Wolfson seconded the
amendment.
Mr. Jenkins asked if this could be enforced. Ms. Doerr responded that if the parking was
required to satisfy requirements, the board could require a shared parking agreement. She stated,
however, that she was not sure if it had been determined that this could be done. Mr. Jenkins
stated that he did not feel that the city would be in a position to enforce or monitor this condition.
Mr. Wolfson stated that he believed that a caveat to this effect could be placed on a Use-by-
Exception. He did say, however, that he did not know about enforcement. Mr. Wolfson further
stated that this was a single owner, single landlord, so he thought that the proposal as presented
ties the whole development together. He stated that the City Attorney might have to address this
issue. Ms. Doerr advised that Section 24-161(e)(2) addressed shared parking within 400 feet of
contiguous parcels. She stated that a demonstration of off-peak requirements for different uses
had to be shown. Ms. Doerr explained that the board could make the condition as part of the
recommendation to the City Commission and that the applicant would have several weeks to
determine if they could provide a shared pazking agreement.
Discussion was held with regard to why this was aUse-by-Exception instead of a variance. Ms.
"""" Doerr advised that the code stated that pazking waivers require aUse-by-Exception rather than a
Zoning Variance.
Ms. Doerr requested that it be clarified that the shared parking agreement be between properties
within 400 contiguous feet as set forth in Section 24-161.
Mr. Frohwein amended the motion to include that the on-site parking spaces shall be
designated to serve the first floor retail uses.
Mr. Wolfson said that this was a very dangerous intersection. Ideally, he said that he would like
to see the property developed as a parking lot.
AGENDA ITEM #8A
MAY 24, 2004
,R. Minutes of August 19, 2003 Regular Meeting of Community Development Board
Page 10
Mr. Dunlap responded that if they built a parking lot, 50 cars could be parked there and Sticky
Fingers could fill it up on the weekends and there is a lovely new parking lot in the
neighborhood. Mr. Dunlap stated that here was a chance to have a lovely new place in the
neighborhood. He asked if the board wanted more asphalt in the community. He said that he did
not think so and he did not think Neptune Beach did either, which was why they agreed to
16,000 square feet. Mr. Dunlap said they felt that there was substantial shared parking on street
and in the neighborhoods to support those businesses.
Discussion was held with regard to the interior parking lots in Neptune Beach. Mr. Dunlap said
that if every building was knocked down in Town Center and made into parking, on the
weekends it would not be enough parking--it would never be enough parking, because the City
of Jacksonville is to the west and everyone has the right to park one block from the beach.
Mr. Wolfson said that he remembered a discussion with Sticky Fingers where they cautioned the
owner about the lack of parking and it was determined that the "supply and demand" would take
~ care of the problem. Mr. Wolfson said he was not so concerned because this was a daytime use
and a mixed use.
The vote was called on the following motion:
To recommend approval to the City Commission of the Use-by-Exception with the
~" following conditions:
1. That a shared parking agreement, in accordance with the terms of Section
24-161 (e) (2) exist with the Shoppes of North Shore, or other property
""'"" within 400 feet of the subject site, and that this be a mandatory
requirement; and
2. That the on-site parking spaces shall be designated to serve the first floor
retail uses.
Mr. Burkhart, Ms. Drysdale, Mr. Frohwein and Mr. Wolfson voted in favor of the motion,
Mr. Jenkins voted against the motion. The motion to recommend approval passed.
6. Other Business.
a._ Discussion and consideration of proposed revisions to Chanter 24.
Ms. Doerr explained that she made the revisions as outlined by Mr. Jacobson. Mr. Jenkins
explained why the board made revisions to the definition of hardship. Further discussion was
held and the board directed staff to schedule another workshop.
Ms. Drysdale left the meeting at 9:05 p.m.
7. Adiournment
'~ There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m.
AGENDA ITEM #8A
MAY 24, 2004
City of Atlantic Beach 800 Seminole Road • Atlantic Beach, Florida 32233-5445
Phone: (904) 247-5800 FAX (904) 247-5805 •http://www.coab.us
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATION
~"' TO: Property owners adjacent to or within near proximity of the lands described within this notice.
FROM: City of Atlantic Beach Community Development Department
SUBJECT: Rescheduled public hearing date to consider a request for aUse-by-Exception and a request
for a waiver to increase the maximum height permitted within the Central Business District. (File Number
UBE 2003-03-01)
NOTICE is hereby given of a rescheduled public hearing to be held by the City Commission of the City of
~„ Atlantic Beach, Florida to consider an application described as follows. The meeting will take place on
Monday, May 24, 2004, beginning as at 7:15 pm, and will be held in the Commission Chambers at the
Atlantic Beach City Hall, 800 Seminole Road, Atlantic Beach, Florida. Interested parties may attend the
a. meeting indicated in this notice and state your opinions.
Application: Request for aUse-by-Exception per Section 24-161 (i) to reduce the
required number of parking spaces from 22 to 17, and to reduce the width of spaces
from ten to nine feet related to the proposed development of a new two-story
commercial building containing professional office use and also a height waiver per
Section 24-156 to allow a proposed building height of 32-feet, exceeding the 25-foot
height limit within the Central Business District.
Property Legal Description: Lots, 1, 3 and 5 of Block 1, Atlantic Beach Subdivision
Physical Location: Southwest corner of Ahern Street and East Coast Drive. (See attached location map.)
Please be advised, you may attend the meetings indicated in this notice and state your opinions, or if you
wish, you may reply by mail to: City of Atlantic Beach Community Development Department, 800
~" Seminole Road, Atlantic Beach, Florida 32233. This matter is subject to court imposed quasi-judicial•
procedures. Communication between interested persons and members of the Community Development
Board or the City Commission should be limited to those in public hearings or through written
communication. If you have any questions about this request, please call (904) 247-5826.
Notice to persons needing special accommodations and to all hearing impaired persons: In accordance with
the Americans with Disabilities Act, persons needing special accommodation to participate in this
proceeding should contact the City of Atlantic Beach (904) 247-5800, 800 Seminole Road, Atlantic Beach,
Florida 32233 not later than 5 days prior to the date of this meeting.
mailed May 13, 2004
'~ Map Output
JAXGIS Property Information
~.
3~ tiI 3~ ti 3~ ti~ ~~
351
III III ~- yL-T ~^L~~-
I
I ti ~ ~ ti
~ ~( I 33, I 3~ I
347 I 333 ~I ~
3~5 I
~ I ~, ~.-
,Q
~.~ ~
AGENDA ITEM #3A
MAY 24, 2004
2T8 'i zz~
~1
~ ~-~
~~ ~~ ti
y, ~,', ~, zap ~~~, ~~ ~~. ~
Cop~rrie M ~) 282 C ilyr o~F ,I.aiasnYil{q, FI ~ ~ ~
~-
i i
i~ ~
~~-__
~r
y
~'~ ~~~
~--
2{7> 233
ti a .
~ dkkess T «~ '~ egd DescripaFons use r
2 s~ zS-zsE t ~,
X728 U R PROPERTIES IN T COAST D ~ ~ ~ TLANTIC BEACH d
OTS 1,3,5 BLK 1
~
Duval County Properly Appraiser's location map
~.
http://maps2.coj .net/WEBSITF/DuvalMAps/toolbaz.rip
5/12/2004