Loading...
Minutes / Public Hearing - 04-16-01MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC HEARING HELD BY THE ATLANTIC BEACH CITY COMMISSION HELD IN ATLANTIC BEACH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AT 7:00 P.M. ON MONDAY, APRIL 16,2001. City Commissioners Present: John S. Meserve, Mayor Rick Beaver, Mayor pro rem Mike Bomo Theo Mitchelson Dezmond Waters, City Commissioners Community Development Boazd Members Present: Don Wolfson Mazy Walker Robert Frohwein Staff Present: Don Ford, Building Official Maureen King, City Clerk The meeting, which was held for the purpose of receiving public input on the draft of the proposed new zoning ordinance, was called to order by Mayor Meserve. The Mayor introduced members of the City Commission and Community Development Boazd and outlined the rules for the evening. He encouraged people to submit written comments or questions and assured them that all comments submitted would be addressed. The Mayor also gave an overview of the review process which had taken place .thus far on the proposed ordinance. Don Wolfson, Chairman of the Community Development Boazd, summarized the responsibilities and scope of authority of the Community Development Board. He pointed out that there were several conflicting sections in the zoning code, and other sections were vague and difficult to interpret, which made it difficult for the board to be consistent in dealing with matters which came before the board. He also reported that the engineers who aze designing the core city stormwater improvements had suggested the city reduce the density of this azea and had also suggested that the city establish a 50% impervious. The Mayor then summarized the major changes in the ordinance (1) clarify language and definitions; (2) to maintain the density in the core city area; (3) establish a maximum impervious surface limit of 50%;-and (4) create a Central Business District (CBD) zoning classification. The Mayor then opened the floor for a public heazing and invited comments from the audience. Tom Foppiano, 377 4`h Street, inquired whether existing duplexes would be grandfathered in and whether duplex owners would be assured they could rebuild in the event of a disaster. Mr. Foppiano felt that unless these structures were grandfathered in potential purchasers may not be able to secure mortgages, and thus, property values would be negatively impacted. Page Two Minutes - Apri116, 2001 Public Heazing on Zoning Ordinance Daniel Meyer, 1200 Tulip Street, said he liked the diversity in Atlantic Beach. He owns a large piece of property in Marsh Oaks and felt the proposal to allow only one recreational vehicle to be pazked on any residential lot, was a bad law. He felt that while this may be desirable in one azea, it was unreasonable to apply that standazd to people who owned larger lots. Ron Schiebler, 1040 Tulip Street, said he owned an acre of land in Marsh Oaks and also felt that the limits on recreational vehicles, or the length of a boat should not apply to lazge tracts of property such as his since, he said, he could pazk a motor home and a boat on his property and it would not be seen from the street. He felt the ordinance was too restrictive and said he liked the diversity in Atlantic Beach and did not want to see it treated like a gated community. William Winfree, 680 East Coast Drive, said he was concerned- regarding the impact the proposed rezoning would have on the owners of duplexes. He was concerned that mortgage companies would not lend money if properties could not be rebuilt after a disaster. Betty Eilers, 369 Third Street, felt that duplex owners should not be required to seek vaziances to rebuild in the event their properties were destroyed in a natural disaster. She also inquired whether she could rebuild lazger or better if she so desired. She said she was opposed to any ordinance that would not allow her to rebuild her home. Jack McLaughlin, 375 Third Street, said he owned a duplex and his elderly mother lived in the unit next door. He said this ordinance would create an extreme hazdship for him if he could not rebuild their homes. Bill Paulk, 336 Second Street, inquired whether the ptoposed 50% impervious surface limits would apply to all zoning classifications and. was advised that it would apply to all. He also, felt that ail existing structures should be grandfathered in. Dorothy Kerber, 365 First Street, said she had served on the citizens' .committee which reviewed the ordinance. She felt that a 50-ft. lot was not large enough for the large duplexes. being built today. Also, a 50-ft. lot was not lazge enough to provide adequate parking for these duplexes. Ms. Kerber felt the 50% impervious surface limit would be beneficial to stormwater management. Gerri Sabot, 330 First Street, said she had recently purchased property in Atlantic Beach with the intent to build a second unit. Under the current zoning this would be allowed. However, under the proposed zoning she would be unable to do so and would be denied the income she had planned on receiving from this property. Sherry Burns, 130 East Coast Drive, felt that some of the duplexes which have been built in recent years had improved the azea, and under the proposed ordinance she felt some of these Page Three Minutes -April 16, 2001 Public Hearing on Zoning Ordinance property owners would have trouble selling. their property. She felt the intent of the ordinance was to get rid of duplexes and said this would ruin the investment she had made in her property. She felt the survey which had been mailed to the residents was misleading. Edward Patterson, 670 Plaza, inquired regarding the 25-ft. limit on recreational vehicles which could be pazked in residential areas. He said he could see no need to limit such vehicles to 25-ft. as long as they could be pazked behind the setback line on the owner's property. Keith Maddox, 348 Seventh Street, said he has been parking his 19-ft. boat in his yard since 1988 and had been cited twice recently for improperly pazking his boat in his yazd. He also reported that the city had cut a hole in his driveway and asked when this would be repaired. The Mayor said he would make sure this matter was looked into. Hobart Joost, 336 Seventh Street, said he has a 25-ft. boat and asked for clarification regarding the size of boat trailers which could be parked legally under the new ordinance and was advised that boat trailers could be up to 32-ft. Steve Diebenow, 1301 River Place, representing QOP Radio Station, pointed out the radio station property was zoned Commercial General under the City of Jacksonville. After the area was annexed by Atlantic Beach the zoning was changed to Open Rural and the radio station was . permitted by exception. Mr. Diebenow noted that radio station was not listed as either a permitted use or a use by exception under the new proposed Conservation District zoning and inquired if the radio station could be rebuilt if it was destroyed in a disaster. He suggested a special zoning category be established for the radio station property, similaz to what had been done for the junkyard property. The Mayor suggested he submit his recommendation in writing and follow up with the City Manager. Sylvia Simmons, 211 Beach Avenue, said she was in favor of single family zoning in the core city but felt that the post-disaster situation needed to be addressed. She felt that people needed to be allowed to rebuild their homes and felt that existing structures needed to be grandfathered in. Paul Eakin, 1745 Beach Avenue, representing his neighbor, Craig Sutton, noted that boat was not defined, and also inquired whether the deletion of boat trailer as an accessory use was deliberate or if this was an oversight. He felt this section was misleading. Stephen Kuti, 1132 Linkside Drive, said he supported the 50% impervious surface limit and felt that 50% was a reasonable number and would help with stormwater management. Regarding the pazking of boats he felt that one size did not fit all: He felt that licensed boats should be allowed to be pazked on any residential property. Bob Winters, 540 Sailfish Drive, felt that thinning down the population in the core city would also thin down the economy. He felt that the defuution of recreational vehicle was vague and felt the intention was to include vehicles which were not used for primary transportation, and felt Page Four Minutes -April 16, 2001 Public Heazing on Zoning Ordinance to limit citizens to one such vehicles would result in hardships - he felt that two vehicles would be much more reasonable. Mr. Winters also inquired regarding the 20-ft setback requirement and asked how this figure was determined. Why 20 ft. and not 15 ft. or 5 ft? Was it for safety or aesthetic purposes? Mr. Winters also inquired whether a permit would be required for the installation of satellite antenna. J.P. Marchioli, 414 Sherry Drive, pointed out that the townhouses on Sheiry Drive were a great improvement over the old duplexes which they had replaced. He felt that the 500 ft. sepazation of similar structures needed to be clarified -was the 500 feet to be measured in the same street, or was this a 500 ft. radius? Regazding the parking of boats, he felt that some consideration .. - needed to be given to the size of lots. Charles Rohrman, 306(08 Fourth Street, said he was counting on his duplex for retirement income. Michael Lift, 385 Third Street, owner of a duplex, said he felt the intent of the ordinance was to eliminate duplexes. He inquired why the only azea being considered was First Street through. Fourth Street in the core city. He was opposed to this change because he felt it would render his investment valueless. Gregg Carr, 574 Nautical Boulevazd, said he is a boat owner and used to park his boat in his driveway. He now pazks it on the grass were it is incompliance with city regulations. However, he said that this kills the grass, and from an aesthetic point of view, it looked much better when it was pazked in his driveway. He suggested a 5-ft setback would be more reasonable. Dan Foglton, 333 Fourth Street, said he owned half of a duplex and wanted to protect his home and be assured he could rebuild it if his home should be destroyed . Dave Pesterfield, 307/309 Fourth Street, would like to be assured that he could build on the same footprint and possibly build higher if his home was destroyed. He pointed out that this would have no impact on the impervious surface requirement. Nancy Garcia, Northeast Florida Association of Realtors, (NEFAR) reiterated the concerns of the association which had been submitted in writing and aze attached hereto as Exhibit A. She said the association felt that the ordinance would have a negative impact on property values; felt that Section 24-151 was counter productive and suggested that dog houses and children's play houses should be excluded from this section; felt the 50% impervious surface requirement may have a negative impact on marketability and value of homes and that a lower limit on impervious surface may accomplish the desired result. Ms. Gazcia indicated that NEFAR would continue to review the situation and pledged to assist the city where possible. Page Five Minutes -April 16, 2001 Public Heazing on Zoning Ordinance Pat Pillmore, 995 Camelia Street, did not see boats as being offensive and felt that owners should be allowed to park them in their yazds; approved of the duplex zoning in the core city area and said she would like to see this concept developed further where small businesses could be operated downstairs with living quarters upstairs; felt that stronger enforcement of pazkin~ regulations was needed in business districts. Peggy Cornelius, 278 First Street, liked the diversity of Atlantic Beach and felt that a zoning change in the core city azea would limit the ability of some people to live in Atlantic Beach; indicated she was not in favor of any maximum impervious surface limit. Bob Totter, 275 11`s Street, felt that all azeas of the city did not receive equal representation on the City Commission and encouraged the establishment of electoral districts. Don Phillips, 1566 Park Terrace West, complimented Don Wolfson and all those who had worked on the proposed ordinance. He indicated that the engineers working on the core city drainage project had recommended limiting the amount of impervious surface and felt that establishing such a limit would help the St. Johns River Water Management .District to look favorably on the infrastructure project. Alan Potter, 374 Second Street, felt that if duplexes were destroyed, the insurance coverage may not be adequate to pay off the remaining mortgages. He felt the City Commission did not have authority to prevent property owners from rebuilding what they currently own and felt that all existing duplexes should be grandfathered in, otherwise he felt the city was opening itself up to the possibility of several class action law suits. Since no one else wished to speak, the Mayor declazed the public heazing closed and adjourned the meeting at 9:00 p.m. JOHN S. MESERVE MAYOR ATTEST: MAUREEN KING CITY CLERK