HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOA Minutes 6-25-2015BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MEETING MINUTES
June 25,2015
A Meeting of the Board of Adjustment was held on June 25, 2015, at the Cape Canaveral Public
Library, 201 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida. The meeting was called to order at 5:59 p.m.
by Chairperson Arvo Eilau. The Secretary called the roll.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Arvo Eilau Chairperson
Douglas Raymond Vice Chairperson
Desmond Wassell
George Sweetman
Joe Elliott
MEMBERS ABSENT
Linda Brown
OTHERS PRESENT
Kimberly Kopp Assistant City Attorney
David Dickey Community Development Director
Patsy Huffman Board Secretary
NEW BUSINESS:
1. Approval of Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — February 26.2015.
Motion by Mr. Wassell, seconded by Mr. Raymond to waive the reading and approve the Meeting
Minutes of February 26, 2015, as presented. Vote on the motion carried unanimously.
2. Quasi -Judicial and/or Public Hearing: Consideration of Request to Approve
Special Exception No. 15-02 to authorize a storage warehouse/office in the C-2
Zoning District, per City Code of Ordinances, Section 110-383, Special
Exceptions permissible by the Board of Adjustment — O. Wave, Inc. — Owner -
(280 W. Central Blvd.).
Mr. Dickey presented Staff s report/photos showing the project site. The building will be used
to store consumer goods for the owner's souvenir stores located in the general area.
The one-half acre site is zoned C-2 and includes a 10,400 square foot building. The parcel is
accessed from W. Central Boulevard and Commerce Street.
Sec. 110-39 (c) of the City Code establishes certain criteria that most be evaluated when a
recommendation to the Board of Adjustment is being considered. The proposal does meet the
minimum standard. Staff pointed out the four (4) parking spaces off of Central and eight (8)
spaces near the loading areas. The majority of the stormwater run-off goes into the retention
Board of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
June 25, 2015
area located on the North end of the property. Surrounding zone is C2 and Ml. The general use
of properties in this area is warehousing to the North and West.
The Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval by a vote of 5 to 1 at its May, 27, 2015
meeting.
Staff read from the Special Exception Worksheet and Staff Analysis Report regarding Land Use
and Zoning as follows: subject property is situated in an area of the City that has historically been
characterized by industrial warehousing uses; was used as a warehouse until 2012, when United
Space Alliance vacated the building; proposed use is a continuation of the development pattern in
the area and is compatible with adjacent uses and will be conducted entirely inside the building;
minimum requirements can be met on the property and are compatible and harmonious with the
surrounding properties; no adverse effect to the traffic volume since there will only be five (5)
employees during working hours which represents a reduction in the total number of vehicular
trips; proposed use will be conducted entirely indoors between 9:00 am and 5:00 pm.; all service
areas including loading areas are appropriately located and oriented towards the adjacent roads;
parking and traffic circulation are designed to have minimum impact to other properties in the
surrounding area; adequate screening, buffers, landscaping, open space, off-street parking, and
other similar site improvements to mitigate any adverse impacts of the Special Exception as
required by the City Code to be erected/constructed as part of the City's approval process. Staff
explained that this building was previously built per City Code and is just a reuse of the property
as previously approved.
The Board wanted further clarification of the loading/anloading and what type of vehicles will be
using that area to avoid blocking of the sidewalks, which Staff addressed.
Staff continued with the Report as follows: proposed access, internal circulation, and design
enhancements will be adequate to accommodate the proposed scale and intensity of the Special
Exception requested; signs and exterior lighting designed and located to promote traffic safety and
to minimize any undue glare or incompatibility with adjoining properties; proposed signage will
be subject to review for consistency with City sign ordinance requirements during the permitting
process; adequate off-street parking meets all requirements.
Mr. Eilau opened the meeting to the public.
The Board suggested that a hedge/buffer be considered. It was also stressed that the proper use of
parking and loading/unloading areas with relationship to vehicles blocking sidewalks be enforced.
Discussion ensued with relationship to hedges and Laura Young, Attorney, filling in for Kimberly
Rezanka, Counsel for O Wave, Inc., stated that there is no additional room for landscaping, could
potentially block pedestrian walkway and the view of vehicles coming and going from the
property. Staff felt that the landscaping currently in place met the minimum Code requirement.
Staff suggested that the Board make a recommendation for a buffer that could be presented to the
Board of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
June 25, 2015
applicant. Attorney Young wished to reiterate that it may not be appropriate to make this a
requirement when the applicant has met the current City Code requirements, but felt her client
would be happy to discuss any recommendations that the Board may suggest. Clarification by the
applicant that smaller trucks would deliver on the West side and larger trucks would deliver on the
East side was addressed. Attorney Young stressed that if the requirement is not in the City Code,
it should not be a recommendation since the Code could change. Assistant City Attorney Kopp
clarified that the Board does have the discretion to add conditions to the Special Exception that
they deem appropriate to the property, but if it is already in the Code; it is not necessary. Attorney
Young concurred.
Mr. Eilau closed this portion of the meeting to the public.
Assistant City Attorney Kopp needed clarification from the Board as to its motion.
Mr. Eilau reopened the meeting to the public.
Discussion ensued regarding clarification of the motion specifically conditions for the buffer and
loading/unloading areas and whether the applicant is already meeting current City Code
requirements, can the Board put any additional conditions on the Special Exception.
Motion by Mr. Wassell, seconded by Mr. Sweetman, to approve SE -1502 to authorize a storage
warehouse/office in the C-2 Zoning District, per City Code of Ordinances, Section 110-383 with
the understanding that Staff will work with the applicant to discuss further buffering options. The
motion passed unanimously.
3. OuasiJudicial and/or Public Hearing: Consideration of Request to Approve a
Change of Use to authorize a 5 -unit townhouse in the R-2 Zoning District, per City
Code of Ordinances, Section 110-195(e) — Antonio Romano — Owner - (350
Monroe Avenue).
Mr. Dickey presented Staff s report/photos regarding a Change of Use for 350 Monroe Avenue.
This project is a single story structure built in the 1960's and is currently vacant. The property is
zoned R-2 and includes the demolition of the existing structure(s) and the construction of five (5)
townhouses. Sec 110-195(e) allows a property owner to request a change in use from one non-
conforming use to another non -conforming use, subject to certain conditions.
Sec. 110-195(e)(5) establishes factors that must be considered when a Change of Use is being
sought. These include:
a) Uses less space;
b) Has fewer employees;
c) Requires less parking;
d) Creates less traffic;
Board of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
June 25, 2015
e) Has fewer deliveries;
f) Creates less noise;
g) Creates a better benefit to the surrounding area than the previous use;
h) Is more acceptable with the existing and future use or make up of the area;
i) Is more normally found in a similar neighborhood; or
j) Creates less of an impact than the present non -conforming use.
The property is zoned R-2 and consists of approximately 12,700 square feet. According to the
Brevard County Property Appraiser, initial construction of the structure was in 1963. It currently
contains ten (10) rental units.
The owner, who bought the property in 2011, desires to demolish the existing structure and replace
it with five (5) townhouses. However, as the structure is nonconforming, the new construction
will have to be consistent with the R-2 zoning standards; which would allow 4 units. Due to the
size of the lot, 4.7 units would be allowed; there are currently ten (10) which is non -conforming.
The owner would like to build five (5) units, which is above the four (4); but you cannot build 4.7
units because you have to round to the lesser number. The project would create a lesser non-
conforming use.
The Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval by a vote of 4 to 2 at its May 27, 2015
meeting.
Discussion ensued with Staff and Board Members explaining how the units would be situated on
the property and the number of parking spaces for each unit. The type of materials used for the
driveway and sidewalks and the size of the driveways was explained. Setbacks must be met.
The Change of Use Worksheet and Staff Analysis Report was explained as follows: the parcel the
current structure is on will be utilized for the proposed townhouse construction; square footage of
the building will increase from 2,980 to 4,868; the number of units will decrease from 10 to 5;
parking requirements will be reduced by five (5) spaces from a required 20 spaces (ten units of
apartments) to 15 spaces (five townhouse units): as the number of units is being reduced by 50
percent, the corresponding traffic will also be reduced by approximately 50 percent; according to
the ITE Manual, 8" Edition, apartments generate 6.65 daily trips per dwelling unit while
townhouse units generate 5.81 trips on a daily basis; the corresponding noise associated within 50
percent less units would be anticipated to be less; the current structure is in a serious state of
disrepair and needs to be demolished; construction of five new townhouses represents an
investment of approximately one-half million dollars into the neighborhood, which is a
conservative estimate; units will be purchased as opposed to rented; there are ongoing Code
Enforcement violations on this piece of property; proposed project would be a positive impact to
the neighborhood; this would help property values for surrounding properties; impacts to the
neighborhood as well as the City and other service providers will be reduced due to the reduction
of units and the type of ownership.
Staff recommends approval for Change of Use for this property. Part of this recommendation is
based on the fact that this property has been vacant since the current owner purchased it and the
Sherriff s Department had been very active at the location of this property. Staff feels what is being
Board of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
June 25, 2015
proposed is very positive for the tax base of the City; adds a nice housing choice opportunity and
adds .3 units above what is permitted currently by right. There are other non -conforming properties
in the neighborhood.
Mr. Eilau opened the meeting to the public.
Rick Marchand. Contractor for the applicant, explained that he is available to answer any questions
the Board may have.
Discussion ensued regarding number of units and concerns about whether the properties will be
owned or rented; property is being built to sell to individuals with the understanding that the
owners will occupy the property; concern over a Live Oak that bordered the property was
addressed; Staff mentioned the process the applicant would have to go through for a tree removal
permit if that became an issue; Assistant City Attorney Kopp pointed out that the City Arborist
would make a determination; proposal would be a vast improvement to the neighborhood; letters
went out to surrounding property owners, with no replies in opposition; Board Members stressed
not having cars park on the sidewalks or adjoining properties needed to be enforced.
Assistant City Attorney Kopp pointed out that the reason for the Special Exception is due to the
request for five (5) units vs four (4) units; multi -use is permitted in the zone. City Code does allow
this use if the criteria are met and for Board Members to base their recommendation if the criteria
we met.
Discussion ensued whether City Code addresses landscaping requirements between adjoining
parking areas and the current landscaping being depicted. Mr. Marchand explained that shrubbery
can be added but this would not ensure that owners cannot cross over those boundaries.
Mr. Eilau closed the meeting to the public
Motion by Mr. Eilau to approve the Change of Use with the understanding that six (6) trees would
be required to separate driveways and each side of the end units.
Assistant City Attorney Kopp and Staff felt that the Board could not make this a requirement and
for Staff to work with the applicant to address this issue.
Motion by Mr. Eilau, seconded by Mr. Wassell to approve the Change of Use with the
understanding that Staff will work with the applicant to discuss further landscaping buffering
options between driveways. The motion passed unanimously.
REPORTS AND OPEN DISCUSSION:
Staff provided brief update of current City projects.
Board of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
June 25, 2015
ADJOURNMENT:
Motion by MT. Raymond, seconded by Mr. Wassell to adjourn the meeting at 6:24 p.m.
this day of P-, J 2 01,& , 201j[
Arvq,Nrau, Chairperson
C. .,_.-
Patsy Huffman, Board SecreW