Loading...
1-20-15 - Minutes Iv.) MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD January 20, 2015 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL. The meeting was called to order at 6:02 pm. Chair Brea Paul verified that all board members are present, with the exception of Mr. Parkes, Mr. Hansen and Mrs. Simmons. Also present was Building and Zoning Director, Jeremy Hubsch; Zoning Technician, Derek Reeves, and representing the firm Kopelousos, Bradley & Garrison, P.A. was Mrs. Darcy Galnor. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. A. Minutes of November 18, 2014 Mr. Elmore motioned to approve the minutes of November 18th. Mrs. Lanier seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. B. Minutes of December 16, 2014 Mrs. Lanier motioned to approve the minutes of December 16th. Mr. Elmore seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. 3. OLD BUSINESS. None. 4. NEW BUSINESS. B. 15-ZVAR-1000 (Public Hearing) Request for a variance as permitted by Section 24-64 for relief from the roof design requirements of Section 24-171(c)(1) based on the plans submitted to the Community Development Board on 20 January 2015 at RE# 169398-0410 (aka 2321 Mayport Road). Page 1 of 4 Staff Report Mr. Reeves introduced the item and stated that the property is in the Commercial General zoning district and is roughly 270 feet by 300 feet. There is an existing gas station that will be torn down to be replaced with a 9,973 square foot retail store occupied by Dollar Tree. The design features a parapet on the front and sides with a tower feature over the front doors for signage. Awnings are located above the front windows and along faux windows along the side of the building. A variance is needed because code requires a roof design that prohibits the appearance of a flat roof. Staff believes the parapets are still a flat roof as presented. The applicants believe that the parapet feature meets the intent of the code as it does hide the flat roof behind. Examples were presented including the Dunkin Doughnuts on Atlantic Boulevard that was approved by staff based on its design. Additionally, One Ocean was shown as an example of a large structure with a sloped roof element. The initial plans did have the awnings. Those were added after staff denial and discussion referencing the Panera Bread on Atlantic Boulevard. That project was denied by staff and came to the Community Development Board as a variance from the same code provision. The board ultimately denied the variance and directed staff to approve the plans because the plans met the code as they interpreted it. It was stated that this is also an option on this variance. The applicants have identified the unusual conditions compared to neighboring properties because this building could be built in any other city without a variance. Mrs. Paul clarified that the code provision is part of the commercial corridor standards. Mr. Reeves confirmed. Applicant Comment Mark Aldred of Clark, Greer, Latham and Associates, 3901 Spring Hill Avenue, Mobile, Alabama 36608 representing Dollar Tree stated that the plan did not initially have the awnings and they were added to provide a slopped element. Additionally, the signing has been worked to provide offsets and break up the walls. Overall this project would be an improvement to the Mayport corridor. Mrs. Lanier asked how the code is interpreted relative to the street side. Mr. Hubsch stated that is has been interpreted to mean any side visible from the street. Page 2 of 4 Mr. Elmore stated that he still thinks it's a flat roof, especially along the north and south sides. He continued by stating that the parapet is still a flat line along the sides and the addition of a change in the parapet along the sides similar to the front would be acceptable. Mr. Stratton asked if a feature like that at One Ocean should be required. Mr. Elmore stated he didn't think so and that if they can change the flat line of the parapet that it would create the relief desired. Mrs. Lanier asked how much the architect could deviate from the Dollar Tree "model". Mr. Aldred stated that there is no defined amount of deviation allowed but that Dollar Tree does have a consistent look that they want to stay with. Mr. Aldred asked if he could present an image from his phone that may meet the side elevation relief that has been discussed. The image was from a Fort Myers project that did feature varied heights of the parapet along the side walls. Mr. Elmore stated that the image would work in his opinion. Public Comment Chris Jorgensen of 92 West 3rd Street, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 stated that he was glad to see this property being redeveloped and that the design was perfectly acceptable. With no additional speakers, public comment was closed by Mrs. Paul. Board Discussion Mr. Stratton asked if the variance was needed if the side walls are changed to resemble those shown in the image. Mrs. Paul stated that this seems very similar to the Panera Bread project and that the variance should be denied while directing staff to approve the plans. Mr. Elmore stated that the staff approval just needs a condition to reflect the change in side wall design. Motion Mrs. Lanier motioned to refer the project to staff for approval finding that a variance is not needed with the condition that the side walls be redesigned to resemble the image shown by Mr. Aldred which would feature raised parapets at the center points of the walls. Mr. Stratton seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Page 3 of 4 5. REPORTS. A. Tree Protection Code Revisions Discussion (Part 2) Motion Mrs. Paul motioned to defer the discussion until the next meeting in fairness to the members of the board that are absent. Mr. Elmore seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Elmore asked for an update to the variance that was previously approved at 398 11th Street. Mr Hubsch stated that the board had granted a variance with the condition that the 47 inch Oak tree be nominated as a Heritage Tree and that for reasons that are unknown to staff, the owner decided to remove the tree rather than designate it a Heritage Tree. By doing so, the variance is nullified and all future development of the property will have to meet zoning code. They did get a Tree Removal Permit and had to do mitigation which included plantings and payment into the Tree Fund. As the tree was being removed, an underground kerosene tank was found that had been leaking and now clean up is needed. 6. ADJOURNMENT. Mrs. Paul motioned to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Elmore seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 pm. Q Brea Paul, Chair ttest Page 4 of 4