Loading...
08-21-18 CDB MinutesMinutes of the Regular Meeting of the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD August 21, 2018 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order at 6:00p.m. by Vice Chair Paul. Mr. Hansen, Mr. Major and Ms. Simmons were all present. Ms. Lanier, Mr. Elmore and alternate, Mr. Tingen were absent. Also present were Director Shane Corbin, Planner Derek Reeves, Planner Brian Broedell, Board Secretary Valerie Jones and the City Attorney, Brenna Durden representing the firm Lewis, Longman and Walker. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Minutes of the July 17, 2018 Regular Meeting of the Community Development Board. Mr. Hansen motioned to approve the minutes. Ms. Simmons seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. 3. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business. 4. NEW BUSINESS A. Ordinance No. 90-18-235 PUBLIC HEARING AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, COUNTY OF DUVAL, STATE OF FLORIDA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION OF THE LANDS DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A FROM PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) TO RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE-FAMILY (RS-1); PROVIDING FOR FINDS OF FACT; PROVIDING FOR A SAVINGS CLAUSE; REQUIRING RECORDING; AND PROVIDING FORAN EFFECTIVE DATE. Staff Report Vice Chair Paul asked Staff if this was to be withdrawn and Director Corbin said that he did want to formally withdraw. Vice Chair Paul asked Ms. Durden if the Public Hearing would need to be held and Ms. Durden said that it would. Mr. Major asked why it was withdrawn and Director Corbin told him it would be explained in Agenda Item 5 along with details on the new direction that Staff has been given. Ms. Simmons asked if the new direction came from the recent open house. Director Corbin confirmed that there was an open house on the night before which included the City Commission and residents. There was also an open house several weeks before and after reflecting on the input received at these meetings, Staff decided to go back to the drawing board and come up with something that will be a little more palatable. Page 1 of 4 Public Comment 5. REPORTS A. Staff Report Vice Chair Paul opened the floor to public comment. Buddy Barrow of 1868 Sea Oats Drive in unit #9 introduced himself as a neighbor who is concerned about the change in the setbacks. He wanted to reiterate that the proposed changes were drastic and he did not want to see that. Mr. Barrows said there would be an increase in the lot coverage and impervious surface which could have negative results. Cherrie Barrow of 1868 Sea Oats Drive in unit #9 asked why the public wasn't fully informed beforehand. She said that the notice she received didn't say anything about any area that she is in and that she was informed by a neighbor. Sally Maddy of 1915 Creekside Circle said that she doesn't want to be too close to her neighbors and asked the Board and Staff to take this into consideration. Silet Wylie of 1855 Live Oak Lane had a list of questions that she gave to Staff. She went through some of the questions: what is wrong with the existing setbacks, who is prompting the rezoning, why was the original PUD put in place, will this mean that larger houses will permitted on the lots, will a developer be allowed to demolish one home and build two homes in its place, will the impervious lot coverage remain the same, is the City prepared to resolve drainage issues, will the streets be affected and in what way, etc. She is opposed to the rezoning and she felt like the Selva Marina PUD's were being targeted. Brian Kilbey of 1825 Sherry Drive North said he has all of the same concerns as Ms. Wylie. He said he has lived in the community for 20 years and spoke of some of the history. Mr. Kilbey said he is concerned about the roads being changed. He would rather see variances asked for rather than granted to all. Selva PUDs Workshop Director Corbin explained that this is a conversation that has been going on for quite a while and one that he inherited when he came to the City about 7 months ago. He said that Staff brought it to the Board as a discussion item around June to give the Board a heads up and allow for public comment. With no negative responses at that time, Staff began developing ideas for the ordinance change. He said that the original notice went out to the affected area including an additional 300 feet beyond that area which came to approximately 450 properties. Staff then held an Open House on August 7th to get feedback. The RS-1 zoning was selected because it's an existing zoning district, and it was the closest one that fit all of the different PUDs. After the open house the Staff took all of the input and decided to go back to the drawing board and rethink it. Page 2 of4 He said the Selva Marina PUDs were developed by George Bull and they include a variety of setbacks, fence heights and other design standards. They were developed after the concept of PUDs were established for the City in 1972. All PUDs had to go through the Planning Advisory Board in addition to the City Commission. All development with three or more units had to be a PUD. In 1982, the new zoning code eliminated this requirement. When a home was built all of the questions would go to the Special Advisory Planning Board that was established by the developer and they effectively acted as the Community Development Board and made decisions for approval or denial of plans. That would inform the City Staff on whether to issue a building permit. Director Corbin showed a zoning map from 1979 and said that things are no long done in this way. This whole area was called a PUD in anticipation for it to be developed as PUDs. Mr. Bull brought in these individual developments one by one from 1976 to 1982. He said that the most frequent issue is the four foot fence height restriction and showed on the map that there are 75 nonconforming properties. These include fences, setbacks, accessory structures, etc. Due to the frequent need for variances in this area there was discussion on how to make the nonconforming issues conforming and reduce the number of people having to come through and make requests for variances. Another factor that went into using the RS-1 zoning standard is the fact that previous planning directors were applying the RS-1 standard to these neighborhoods without requiring variances. Director Corbin said that in part of the notification process anyone who received a notice was directed to visit the website. At the website there are 3D drawings and site plan drawings that Staff put together and felt that they were as clear as they can be so that people could locate where they live and what was being proposed compared to what is in existence. Staff contact information was also included for questions. Staff heard several concerns at the Open House including setbacks, fences in the front yard and the minimum allowable house size. After the Open House, Staff decided to withdraw the ordinance and it will not go to the City Commission. Staff did take the opportunity at last night's workshop to get direction from the City Commission on what direction they want to go. There was a conclusion that there are 2 possible options: 1} create a brand new zoning district that would resolve many of the concerns or 2} have the neighborhoods reestablish their HOAs and their Special Planning Advisory Boards and have them take this on as the original PUDs were intended. The City would then issue permits based on the Advisory Board's decision. Director Corbin said Staff looked at how many of these PUDs would be uniform if a new zoning district was created with standard setbacks. He pointed to a diagram showing that it would be 8 or 9 of the PUDs that all have the same setbacks. A Page 3 of4 zoning district could be created that has these very specific setbacks that won't change any of these PUDs and for the other PUDs they could specify different setbacks based upon their road frontage. The fence height would be six feet, the front yard fences could be restricted, the issues with accessory structures can be addressed and then be very specific from street to street with what some of the other design standards are. He said that Staff began working on this and presented it to the City Commission for the first time last night and he spoke to Ms. Durden about it today. Board Discussion Mr. Major said that he didn't think that this whole undertaking was about making the process convenient but it was about the limbo status that all of these properties are in. He said that it is very important to him to come up with something that can be used in making decisions. Mr. Hansen added that when putting together the ordinance that it should be taken into consideration that everyone be treated consistently. He said that after, the Ordinance is cleaned up, people may still come and ask for a setback variance. At that point how can you be consistent with the people that have already received a variance before the ordinance was changed? Secondly, he said that we need to respect people's property rights and help them to do what they want to their property while respecting the reasonable expectations of the neighbors. Vice Chair Paul mirrored the sentiments of the Board members who had already spoke. She doesn't want to see the City taken out of the variance process even if a homeowner association is established, but as a Board member she would value the feedback of a homeowner association. 6. PUBLIC COMMENT Carol Schwartz of 1857 Tierra Verde Drive expressed a concern regarding setbacks if any changes are made to the Selva PUDs . 7. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Hansen motioned to adjourn the meeting at 6:43p.m. Ms . Simmons seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Attest Page 4 of 4