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