Loading...
9-15-15 - Minutes fi C MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD September 15, 2015 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL. The meeting was called to order at 6:04 pm. With the abscense of Chair Mrs. Paul, it was decided by the board that Mr. Hansen would be Vice- chair. Vice-chair Hansen verified that all board members are present, with the exception of Mr. Parkes, Mrs. Simmons and Mrs. Paul. Also present was Building and Zoning Director, Jeremy Hubsch; Planner, Derek Reeves, and representing the firm Kopelousos, Bradley & Garrison, P.A. was Mr. Rich Komando. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. A. Minutes of August 18, 2015 Mrs. Lanier motioned to approve the minutes of the August 18th meeting. Mr. Elmore seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. 3. OLD BUSINESS. None. 4. NEW BUSINESS. A. 15-CGTA-1060 (PUBLIC HEARING) Request for the transmittal of an application to the State of Florida in accordance with Florida Statues 163.3184 and 166.041, for an amendment to the text of the City of Atlantic Beach's Comprehensive Plan for an Interlocal Service Boundary Agreement with the City of Jacksonville for the provision of services within the Atlantic Beach Country Club. Page 1 of 5 Staff Report Mr. Hubsch introduced both items "A" and "B" on the agenda together since they were both related to the annexation of the Atlantic Beach Country Club. It was stated that the process started a couple of years ago when the Atlantic Beach Country Club SPA was approved and the City entered into an interlocal agreement with the City of Jacksonville to provide services to the new club and residences. That was done in anticipation that the club would be annexed by the city. These items are part of state requirements to update the city's comprehensive plan to reflect the annexation of the properties. Item "A" was described as a text amendment to the city's comprehensive plan to recognize the interlocal agreement with the City of Jacksonville. The area to be annexed was shown. Item "B" was described as map amendments to not only show the annexed area as part of the city but also to designate a future land use for the property. Based on approved development densities and surrounding future land use categories, staff has recommended a future land use designation of Residential Low. The action to be taken tonight is to make a recommendation to commission for both items to be sent to the state for review. Mrs. Lanier asked if this was being reviewed by both cities. Mr. Komando stated that it has. Public Comment Mr. Hansen opened the floor to public comment for 15-CGTA-1060. With no speakers, public comment was closed by Mr. Hansen. Board Discussion Mr. Elmore asked about the appropriateness of a residential future land use when much of the property is held in conservation and limited in the number of units allowed. Mr. Komando responded that the SPA zoning limits the number of allowable units preventing any future development beyond that. Mr. Hubsch added that the conservation easement will also put limits on future development. Motion Mr. Stratton made a motion to recommend to the City Commission that the city submit item 15-CGTA-1060 to the state for approval. Mr. Elmore seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Page 2 of 5 B. 15-CGTA-1061 (PUBLIC HEARING) Request for the transmittal of an application to the State of Florida in accordance with Florida Statues 163.3184 and 166.041, for an amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the City of Atlantic Beach for the annexation of the portion of the Atlantic Beach Country Club that is currently located within the City of Jacksonville. Public Comment Mr. Hansen opened the floor to public comment for 15-CGTA-1060. With no speakers, public comment was closed by Mr. Hansen. Motion Mr. Elmore made a motion to recommend to the City Commission that the city submit item 15-CGTA-1061 to the state for approval. Mr. Stratton seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. 5. REPORTS. A. Density Bonus Discussion. Staff Report Mr. Hubsch refreshed the board's memory of a previous discussion about density bonuses and incentive zoning. Some common features provided by or utilized by developers in cities that have incentive zoning are affordable housing, housing for the elderly, transportation access, proximity to job centers, energy efficiency, size limits on units, use of renewable energy, brownfield redevelopment, environmentally sensitive lands, location in a redevelopment area, providing park space, providing landscaping, minimizing impervious surface, and providing a desirable mix of uses. An example was shown of Asheville, North Carolina where they have a point matrix where the developer can do a list of things and get points for each one that add up and link to a corresponding scale for increases in density. Their matrix includes things like infill development, proximity to employment centers, proximity to transit, affordable housing, mix of housing types, renewable energy. This allows the city to get positive development in a form that they want without mandating it. It becomes optional to the developer and they are rewarded with increases in density for the project. This could be beneficial for redevelopment along Mayport Road as well as a way for the city to get the type of development that they want. Page 3 of 5 Mr. Elmore stated that the plan seems to have a lot of grey areas where there could be debate on whether points would be provided. Mr. Hubsch stated that these are just concepts for the board to consider and that staff would get into more detail in the areas that the board was interested in. Mrs. Lanier asked how this would fit into a community redevelopment area like the one proposed for Mayport Road. Mr. Hubsch stated that if done correctly, this could spur early redevelopment in the area that may take longer to see without incentives and that it could potentially be carried over into the City of Jacksonville side of Mayport Road and their own CRA in that area. Public Comment Wyman Duggan, 1301 Riverplace Boulevard, Jacksonville, FL 32207 introduced himself as an attorney representing Tribridge, the developer of BluWater in Jacksonville Beach. He discussed how his client is interested in some property in Atlantic Beach but current codes prohibit the financial viability of the properties. He explained how theoretically, a number of 4 bedroom townhomes could have the same number of residents as twice as many 1 and 2 bedroom apartments and it such development that they believe is doable but only with the increase in the number of units. He added that they envisioned targeting young professionals that have been priced out of the area that may have grown up in the area. Mr. Duggan pointed out that services are already in place from utilities to parks and restaurants so this allows these people to live in the community without putting further development pressure in the core of the city. Mrs. Lanier asked for more information about BluWater. Mr. Steve Broome, the developer of BluWater, stated that they have 172 units that are 100 percent leased with a majority of 1 and 2 bedrooms and some 3 bedrooms and some townhomes. He added that they are seeing some tenants with 6 figure jobs living there and pointed out that there have not been any new multi-family projects in Neptune and Atlantic Beach in years. Mr. Elmore asked if they got any reductions in parking at BluWater. Mr. Broome said that they do 1 space per bedroom, but do not think that they had to do any special parking. Mr. Elmore asked if they had to underground stormwater storage. Mr. Broome said they did some. Mrs. Lanier asked if some of the benefits of increased density are to redevelop underutilized properties while boosting property tax and sales tax revenue. Mr. Broome stated that that is a large part of it. Board Discussion Mr. Elmore stated that with the beaches being so built out and demand increasing, that this is a good opportunity to get ahead and start working Page 4 of 5 with good developers that will build a good product. Mr. Hansen expressed his concern that this has been focused on redevelopment, which he likes, but that there are some undeveloped parcels and that those could be negatively impacted. He added that this could be contradictory when the city just passed a stricter tree removal code and now we are going to encourage more development. Mr. Elmore pointed out that this would only really affect blighted properties because those are the ones cheap enough for it to work financially for developers. High end properties with high end use will remain. Mr. Hubsch stated that staff can continue to research and narrow down a system that works if the board gives consensus. The board all agreed that they would like to see this go further and directed staff to continue. Mr. Hubsch then gave an update on an appeal of the decision of the board from the 88 Ocean Boulevard variance. He also updated the board on the buffer code changes that were discussed at the previous meeting. Mr. Hansen asked if the city was involved in any way in the litigation with the Beaches Dinner. Mr. Komando stated that the city is not part of it. 6. ADJOURNMENT. Mr. Hansen motioned to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 6:53 pm. 22)1511Z,— Brea Paul, Chair Attest Page 5 of 5