Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcocc_boa_agendapkt_20060424 54AC,EA4. , .40 ,-- ' Z.)e)1-4-0_}1+ 4 4 City of Cape Canaveral ,4%240:50, F BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AGENDA 111 POLK AVENUE APRIL 24, 2006 FILE copy 7:30 P.M. Call to Order Roll Call NEW BUSINESS: 1. Motion to Approve the Meeting Minutes of March 13, 2006. 2. Motion Re: Special Exception Request No. 06-02 to Allow Residential Use in the G1 Zoning District, Section 23, Township 24 South, Range 37 East, Lots 4-8, Block 1, Avon by the Sea Subdivision- (Washington Avenue) - Ken Wilson, Designated Agent for L.Joyce Carlton, Petitioner. OPEN DISCUSSION: Pursuant to Section 286.1015, Florida Statutes, the City hereby advises the public that: If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Board of Adjustment with respect to any matter considered at this meeting, that person will need a record of the proceedings, and for such purpose that person may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. This notice does not constitute consent by the City for the introduction or admission into evidence of otherwise allowed by law. Persons with disabilities needing assistance to participate in any of these proceedings should contact the City Clerk's office at 868-1221 (48) hours in advance of the meeting. This meeting may include the attendance of one or more members of the Cape Canaveral City Council and/or Quasi-Judicial Board members who may or may not participate in Board discussions held at this public meeting. 4$a 105 Polk Avenue • Post Office Box 326 • Cape Canaveral, FL 32920-0326 Telephone: (321) 868-1222 • SUNCOM: 982-1222 • FAX: (321) 868-1247 www.myflorida.com/cape • email:ccapecanaveral@cfl.rr.com City of Cape Canaveral Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes March 13, 2006 A Meeting of the City of Cape Canaveral Board of Adjustment was held on March 13, 2006 at the City Hall Annex, 111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida. Earl McMillin, Chairperson, called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. Susan Chapman, Board Secretary called the roll. MEMBERS PRESENT: Earl_McMillin._ Chairperson Constance McKone Vice Chairperson Paula Collins Catherine Barnes MEMBERS ABSENT Robert Laws OTHERS PRESENT: Susan Chapman Board Secretary Todd Peetz City Planner Kate Latorre Assistant City Attorney Bea McNeely Ex-Officio Member Lamar Russell P & Z Vice Chairperson Bennett Boucher City Manager All persons giving testimony were sworn in by Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney. NEW BUSINESS 1. Motion to Approve the Meeting Minutes of February 13, 2006. Motion by Constance McKone, seconded by Earl McMillin, to approve the meeting minutes of February 13, 2006. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. Chairperson McMillin complimented the Board Secretary on the excellent work on the minutes. 2. Special Exception Request No. 05-15 to Allow Residential Use in the C-1 Zoning District (Harbor Heights West Subdivision) - Lot 3, Section 14, Township 24 South, Range 37 East - John Johanson, for Triple J Investments, LLC, Petitioners. Earl McMillin, Chairperson, gave an overview of the previous meeting regarding this request. He explained that this Special Exception Request was postponed by the Board at the last meeting to grant Triple J Investments time to negotiate with the City, if they chose to, about the possibility of the City buying the property. He advised that he performed research since that meeting which revealed that on October 21, 1991, the Board of Adjustment granted Special Exception Request No. 89-9 to construct three single family homes on three individual lots. On January 7, 1992, City Council adopted Resolution 92-01, approving the Final Replat for Harbor Heights West for three individual single family homes. He noted that none of the current Board members were on the Board back then. When Special Exception Request 02-07 came before the Planning & Zoning Board to build three individual homes on the property, the request never came to the Board of Adjustment, because the Building Official believed that the old Special Exception was still valid and in effect. Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes March 13, 2006 Page 2 Chairperson McMillin read a letter, dated July 8, 2002, from the then Building Official, advising the applicant of Special Exception Request 02-07 that they still had a Special Exception in effect. Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney, advised that her office had reviewed the letter from the former Building Official, and they disagree with his opinion. They agree with the Ordinance_thatwas_passed in former SectionAi0-48 (current__— Section 110-32), Expirations, caused that Special Exception to expire. She stated that it is the City Attorney's opinion that Special Exception 89-9 is in fact, expired. City Manager, Bennett Boucher, advised that discussion was held at the last City Council meeting with Triple J Investments. They offered .41 acres for $340,000 and would not budge from the price, which was under the appraised value at build-out of the lot. Councilman Nicholas had made a motion to accept the offer but the motion died for lack of a second. John Johanson, Applicant, advised that Chairperson McMillin's research went deeper than his and he was happy to answer any questions. Chairperson McMillin asked for any experts giving testimony to give the Board their credentials. He cited case law of 1983 where a court felt that a lay person with first hand knowledge of the vicinity of the property in question qualified that person as an expert witness. Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney, advised that if testimony is based on factual information and not solely based on opinions, then you are considered an expert in your neighborhood. She further advised that testimony needs to be supported by facts and competent substantial evidence. Lamar Russell, neighboring resident at 376 Harbor Drive, and Planning & Zoning Board member, gave a short history of the property and advised that when the City established the zoning for that area, they created a corridor along N. Atlantic Avenue to be commercial, and that commercial corridor reached back into the land being discussed. He provided the following opinions: That special exception for residential use in commercial should stop because it debases the existing zoning; the City Council should do something about it and stop it. He asked the Board to decline the request, because he did not believe the City needs more multi-family in that particular area, his nPigbhnrhood needs to finish�o.it with single family. He further commented that if you men leave the property commerci.1110-t the applicant develop a commercial entity and see how successful it is. He di. not believe that commercial would be successful or a worthy venture and that is why he recommends that they let it play out. He advised that the property is commercial and the Board is considering residential by Special Exception. Chairperson McMillin advised that at the previous meeting, Mr. Russell did not believe that the request was compatible with the Comprehensive Plan and they had discussed the definition of compatibility. Mr. Russell agreed. Mr. Russell advised that he did not research the Comprehensive Plan to bring the Board a particular policy, but knows that a policy exists. He advised that the policy is to encourage, to every extent possible, single family dwellings in the City. Chairperson McMillin read Comprehensive Plan Objectives LU-3 and LU-3.2. Mr. Russell verified that those were the Objectives that he was referring to. Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes March 13, 2006 Page 3 Joe Ross, neighboring resident at 227 Coral Drive, testified that special exceptions are not guaranteed. They are governed by procedure. He read City Code Section 110-39 (c) regarding criteria for decisions. He did not believe that the request is compatible and harmonious with adjacent land uses because there are single family residences on both sides of the property, and therefore, the request did not meet the requirement of the code. He read a portion of the Planning & Zoning Board meeting minutes of May 22, 2002 regarding Special Exception Request No. 02-07. He advised that Mr. Nicholas had voiced his opinion that R-2 zoning is not compatible with the Harbor Heights single family subdivision. A lot of discussion had followed regarding limiting the number of units as a condition of the recommended approval. The Planning & Zoning Board had recommended approval of the Special Exception Request No. 02-07 with the condition that the use of the property be limited to one single family residence per lot. The vote had carried unanimously. Judith Lau, neighboring resident at 211 Coral Drive, and licensed attorney to practice in the State of California, spoke on behalf of Richard and Fay Morrish, the people that live in the single family home on Lot 2, that were not able to attend the meeting. They sent a letter detailing their search for a single family lot in Cape Canaveral. Ms. Lau read the letter from Mr. and Mrs. Morrish into the record (entered as Exhibit A). She summarized that they found a single family lot, in a single family neighborhood, and built a single family home. The Board reviewed a City zoning map with an overlay showing existing uses. Ms. Lau spoke of compatibility, referring to Comprehensive Plan, Objective LU- 3.2. She advised that Harbor Heights is a development of low density, one story, single family homes. She claimed that two story homes, close to the beach, were not permitted in that neighborhood until very recently. She explained that if this request is allowed, it would allow a multiple story, three-unit townhouse building in between two single family, one story homes which is not compatible with what is around it. She stated that if the Special Exception is granted, the Ci__t'isaIlowing the character of an existing neighborhood to be changed irreverent' . She further stated that this neighborhood has irrevocabv been intact since the early 19 s; ere has been little construction in the past 10 years; there are only two other lots in the Harbor Heights Subdivision that are still available; most of the houses in Harbor Heights do not have garages, they have carports. This developer is proposing a garage on the first floor and the living area on the 2nd floor. To impose a completely different standard in an area that has been in existence for over 40 years is inconsistent with the policy of the City which is addressed in the Future Land Use Plan Objectives to encourage single family and to require that new development be compatible with adjacent land use. The only structures that are adjacent to this lot are two single family residences; this project changes the look and traffic pattern of the neighborhood, and changes something that does not need to be changed. Discussion followed regarding the letter for Richard and Fay Morrish. Ms. Lau advised that all the sales documentation and advertisements for Lots 1, 2 & 3, Harbor Heights West Subdivision, advertised the properties as single family lots. Discussion followed regarding zoning and existing land use. Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney, advised that a special exception runs with the land. She explained that if Portside Villas, a residential condominium project, in the C-1 zone, was destroyed, they would need to continue the residential use within 18 months or the use would be considered abandoned and the special exception would expire. Discussion continued. Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes March 13, 2006 Page 4 Rick Filkens, neighboring resident at 360 Harbor Drive, and attorney by profession in Florida, testified that he is concerned with the over development in Cape Canaveral; the City has too many people already and did not need any more than it absolutely has to have. This request is an example of how the City by granting a special exception, chips away at the foundation of the Comprehensive Plan; it seems that the Comprehensive Plan is a worthless document if it can be changed by the City without following theestablished procedures laid out by the State for amending the Comprehensive Plan. He voiced his opinion that by changing the zoning classification of this property from commercial to residential, it constitutes a change in the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that he had reviewed the Growth Management Act and could not find the legal authority, by a special exception, to change the zoning of this property. He explained that when a property owner wants to come in to change the land to make a greater profit, than he would otherwise, it goes against the Comprehensive Plan. Constance McKone commented that the Board does not change zoning, and the property is still commercial with a granted residential use. Discussion followed. Ron Abeles, neighboring resident at 393 Harbor Drive, testified that he supports his neighbors. He advised that one property owner wants to change a neighborhood that all the property owners in that neighborhood are against. He explained that he met all the requirements for a special exception for a use on his commercial property, then residential was built adjacent to his commercial entity, and the new residents did not like it. He stated that whoever is there first should take precedence. Joe Ross, neighboring resident at 227 Coral Drive, testified that the intent of the City code section pertaining to the C-1 low density commercial district is to restrict it's application to an area adjacent to major arterial streets; Sea Shell and Coral Drives are certainly not major arterial streets. He agreed with Mr. Russell that commercial does not meet the requirements of the City code for this location. He read the code section that stated lot sizes and other restrictions are intended to reduce conflict with adjacent residential uses. He noted that this project does have an impact on adjacent properties and the neighbors. This project is not harmonious or compatible with the neighborhood. Discussion followed. Arlene Balestrieri, neighboring resident at 204 Coral Drive, testified that the City's Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Element read that the overall goal for the City for future land use is to ensure the proper relationship among residential, industrial, commercial, recreational, and other activities in order to maximize the efficient use of the land, accessibility to the circulation system, and general compatibility among land uses. She noted that for months, the Board has been hearing about the meaning of compatible. She read the definition of compatibility. She advised that 80% of the residents signed the petition, which represents 100% of the people asked. She commented that the Planning &Zoning Board voted unanimously to deny the request. She voiced her opinion that from the beginning, townhouses are not harmonious or in agreement with the current residential single family neighborhood; the previous property owners plans were always to build residential, even though the property is zoned commercial. They are proposing a two story multi-family structure in a predominantly one story, single family, residential neighborhood. Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes March 13, 2006 Page 5 Ms. Balestrieri continued her testimony stating that the owner also plans to sell the units for $400 K, which is not compatible with the average selling price of around $200 K in the neighborhood. The land is only valued at $119 K. The neighbors in this neighborhood help each other; they all chose to live in a single family neighborhood; • they are asking the Board to keep the neighborhood as it is in the best interest of the residents and in keeping with the City's Comprehensive Plan. She noted that there are currently over 45 listed townhouse units in the City that are not selling, which is not near the hundreds of units that are currently under construction. The audience applauded. John Johanson, Applicant, stated his final remarks. He testified that they do not want to negatively impact the neighborhood. They went with the minimum number of units that they could to still make the development profitable; that anything other than a vacant lot is a negative impact. They did their due diligence by looking at the City's criteria and standards and the project is well within the City's requirements; they asked the Building department what the status of the property was and were told that they needed a special exception. He stated that a C-1 use would be compatible, because there is an office building across the street that is not located directly on A1A or a highway. He stated that this request would not negatively impact the neighborhood. Motion by Earl McMillin, seconded by Paula Collins, that the Board accept the unanimous recommendation from the Planning & Zoning Board that Special Exception Request No. 05-15 be denied. Discussion followed. Chairperson McMillin outlined the following reasons why he was against the request: 1. If this property was zoned R-1 (single family), they could not build multi- family. 2. His research back to 1993 revealed that this is the first time the Planning and Zoning Board has ever unanimously recommended denial of a special exception along N. Atlantic Avenue for residential use on commercial property. 3. Harbor Heights has been a single family unique residential community for over 40 years. 4. In 1991 this property was subject to a special exception to construct single family homes on it. 5. Mr. Saurenmann submitted an exhibit at the last meeting advertising the property as a residential single family lot. 6. On both sides of this property there are single family residences. 7. He does not believe that competent substantial evidence is needed in these 4 decisions. He voiced his opinion that if everyone in the City signed the petition it would not mean anything. 8. Over the past few days he has seen new expensive residential homes being constructed along a major thoroughfare in Merritt Island next to commercial buildings, and therefore, if the applicant can't build a single family on this lot he is not persuaded. Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes March 13, 2005 Page 6 9. Triple J were knowledgeable buyers. 10. The Morrish letter had some importance in the decision because if you drive into the Harbor Heights Subdivision, you would think that they are all single family residences. 11. He has voted for residential use in the commercial zoning district along N. Atlantic Avenue for eleven years, but this property is not along N. Atlantic Avenue. John Johanson, Applicant, commented that they are forcing them into a commercial venture. He questioned the Board if commercial is more compatible. He advised that this will be the only commercial lot in this neighborhood. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m. Approved this day of , 2006. Earl McMillin, Chairperson Susan L. Chapman, Secretary Earl McMillin P.O.Box 1086•Cape Canaveral,FL•32920-1086.321-783-8834•emcmillinjd@yahoo.com •Master, Oceans, Unlimited Attorney-At-Law STCW-95 Certified Pennsylvania,Admitted 1969 Port Canaveral Pilot(Retired) Florida,Admitted 1974 y:T_ /- -- or 19 April 2006 `=" t_- Ms. Susan Chapman = Secretary, Board of Adjustment City of Cape Canaveral r tT 105 Polk Avenue Cape Canaveral, Florida Hand Delivery Re: March 13, 2006 Meeting Minutes Dear Ms. Chapman: Today I received the draft Minutes of the March 13th meeting. Inasmuch as I cannot attend the Board of Adjustment meeting scheduled for April 24, 2006, I am writing to you so that my views on the draft can be presented at the April 24th meeting. At Page 6, Numbered Paragraph 7, First Sentencem the draft reads: "He (Earl McMillin) does not believe that competent substantial evidence is needed in these decisions." This is not correct. At the meeting I referred to, inter alia, A.A. Profiles, Inc. v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 850 F.2d 1483 (11th Cir. 1988) and quoted the Court's view that a local government must base its decisions on facts and not participate in "government by applause meter." 04CCUR44,41. � d '48 AtiV J oaf Q I Other cases relevant to this issue to which I believe I referred at the March 13th meeting, but know I looked at before that meeting are: Concetta v. City of Sarasota, 400 So.2d 1051 (2d DCA 1981) in which the Court said, "A popularity poll of the neighborhood" is an improper basis for denial of a special exception. City of Fort Lauderdale v. Multidyne Medical Waste Management, Inc., 567 So.2d 955 (4th DCA 1990) in which the Court held that it is not who produces the most experts that is key. It is whether there is "substantial competent evidence" to support denial of the application. The view I sought to express is that (a) petitions carry no weight in my decisiomaking process, and, (b) even if every citizen of the city had signed a petition opposing the grant of Special Exception Request No. 05-15 it would not affect my decision because I understand from the case law that competent substantial evidence is the be all and end all in quasi-judicial hearings. Any person who doubts that I have held this view since I began serving on the Board and long before Special Exception No. 05-15 should read the letter I wrote to the City Council on behalf of the Board on July 21, 2003, and the letter I wrote to Councilman Hoog on September 13, 2005, in which I said "The Board is a quasi-judicial body. It is limited by the evidence presented to it." Please bring my views to the attention of the Board and to legal counsel for the Board. This is a crucial point in this matter and the record must be clear. • Respectfully, Earl McMillin Chairperson -2- Meeting Type: Board of . Adjustment Meeting Date:_4/24/06 AGENDA Heading Special Exception 06-02 Item. ##2 • No. AGENDA REPORT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: Special Exception request 06-02 to allow Residential use in a Commercial district. DEPT./DIVISION: Building Department Requested Action: Consider the recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Board and to approve or deny the proposed special exception to allow residential use in a commercial district. Summary Explanation&Background: The applicant is Ken Wilson representing the owner of Treasure Key Town homes. They have requested a special exception for residential use in a commercial district. This property is currently vacant on the south side of Washington Avenue. The proposed number of units is eight (8) Town homes. The project is located between Poinsetta (east) and North Atlantic Avenue (west) on the south side of Washington Avenue. Exhibits Attached: #1 Application, #2 Legal description and owner related information, #3 Applicant information regarding the special exception, #4 Notification to Surrounding Property Owners, #5 Staff Report on the Special Exception. City Planner's Office Department: Building Department CITY Page 2 of 11 -)Icitfe City of Cape Canaveral 3coi ' h �v©2. Building Department (Please Print Legibly or Type) I-4d4 DATE FILED I 30(0(.0 FEE PAID t aSO.GCS DEPOSIT 115 15,29 RECV'D BY:5AC ($250.00 Filing Fee is non-refundable) 4 IJ -1 �7 5 , z9 NATURE OF REQUEST Special Exception is for what purpose(Bririef Description) %oo dui-0 -ra,V / £. /40/6S d�i� % �G,� /iz©pin r& w /4,,.r6-T ree. 16rwc4_ Address of request(if applicable) G6 000o/.0000'7° Legal Description: LotL-SiBlockiParcelvo 1,oot ubdv itro'V wetz tr\ Avenue. Section 2Ui Township 3 7 Range 07 3 /_ STATEMENT OF FACT: State of Florida, County of Brevard; I Ii/ %450/k/ , being duly sworn, depose and say that: Imam the property owner. t 1 am the owner(s) designated agent. (notarized authorization required) Owner(s) Name(s): L • VoyC ei4-2Lr0/1/4/ Address: 4.3 0t Zi+vvni r /4vri/ Cocei 5 1`"L 329 ZZ Home Phone 32/-03k-O0LWork Phone..2/-'f2731(7E-Mail Applicant(s) Names(s): ,ii At5°N14 Address: "11/" ?a emu 4' M4•i/.4 / e' 77- :_L-s Com-^,° .. -916:=3 Home Phone321-4/s 3- 'W(WNork Phone3 /266-(a“Ye E-Mail All information, sketches and data contained and made part of this request, are honest and true to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signature of ApplicantNOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF FLORIDA Sworn to and subscribed ore me on this 30 day of ort Lah ,20 O(o. Nitta L. Packard Commission#DD431715 �i• IC . et Cly a.h CX. / Expires: APR. 26, 2006 P.?J}S 4/tLi7 U7_U"T. Bonded Thru Atlantic Bonding Co.,Inc Notary Public,State of Florida - P The completed request form and the $250 filing fee must be filed as follows: Requests for Variances, Rezoning and Special Exceptions (Except Telecommunication Towers),require a minimum of thirty (30) days prior to the next regularly scheduled Planning & Zoning Board Meeting; Request for Telecommunications Towers, require a minimum of sixty (60) days prior to the Planning &Zoning Board meeting. The Board of Adjustment meeting will be set after the request is heard by the Planning &Zoning Board.(A deposit may be required per Section 110-92) http://fcn.state.fl.us/cape/building permit_files/SPECIAL%20EXCEPTION.htm 08/23/2005 ij/41 ci fX01 CITY Page 4 of l t City of Cape Canaveral APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION This application must be legibly completed and returned, with all enclosures referred to therein, to the Building Department, a minimum of Thirty (30) days (sixty (60) days for Telecommunications Towers) prior to the next regularly scheduled meeting in order to be processed for consideration by the Planning & Zoning Board for study and recommendation to the Board of Adjustment. The owner or a owner representative are required to attend the meetings and will be notified by the board secretary of the date and time of the meetings. The Planning & Zoning Board holds regular meetings on the 2nd and 4th Wednesdays of every month at 7:30 p.m. in the City Hall Annex, 111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida. ALL OF THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION MUST BE SUPPLIED PRIOR TO PROCESSING THE APPLICATION. If you have any questions, please contact the Building Department at (321) 868-1297. DATE: //go/04, 1. NAME OF APPLICANT(S) /'S ^l � ADDRESS (if assigned) '/L/O 7"-1�ta L L7 °�►-P Z £" )�a' �C 329's y53. PHONE #32/4153-441k0 FAX #42/- E-MAIL 32-i-244-664 4 2. COMPLETE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: LOT: LI- BLOCK: SUBDIVISION:_AV4iq-Ay--r -SC4- PARCEL: I, 006051.0 /. 00005 0 SIZE OF SUBJECT PROPERTY IN ACRES: r 1 oZ SECTION: 2 9 TOWNSHIP 3 7 RANGE Z3 DESCRIPTION: V4611-7\iT 3. ORDINANCES SECTION UNDER WHICH SPECIAL F.XcEPTJ N IS SOUGHT (EXAMPLE,ARTICLE X,SEC'liON 2) 33 4. COMPLETE THE ATTACHED WORKSHEET IN FULL. (INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS MAY RESULT IN DENTAL OF REQUEST) 5. PRESENT ZONING CLASSIFICATION: (EXAMPL IS C-2, R-1, R-2, M-1 ETC.) 6. PROVIDE THIRTEEN (13) COPIES OF SUE PLAN OR APPROPRIATE DRAWING(S) SHOWING THE FOLLOWING WHERE APPLICABLE: (a) Adequate ingress and egress may be obtained to and from the property, with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and emergency access in case of fire or medical emergency. http://fcn.state.fl.us/cape/building_permit__files/SPECIAL%20EXCEPTION.htm 08/23/2005 CITY Page 5 of11 (b) Adequate off-street parking and loading areas are provided without creating undue noise, glare, odor or detrimental effects upon adjoining properties. (c) Adequate and properly located utilities are available or may be reasonably provided to serve the proposed development (d) Adequate screening and/or buffering will be provided to protect and provide compatibility with adjoining properties. (e) Signs and exterior lighting, if any, will be so designed and arranged so as to promote traffic safety and to eliminate or minimize any undue glare, incompatibility, or disharmony with adjoining properties and will be permitted and in compliance with all adopted codes and ordinances. (f) Refuse and service areas, with particular reference to the issues relating to (a) and (b) above. (g) Required setbacks and other open space. (h) Height. (i) Landscaping. (j) Renewal and/or termination dates relating to a lease, if applicable. (k) That the proposed use will be reasonably compatible with surrounding uses in its function, its hours of operation, the type and amount of traffic generated, structure size and setbacks, its relationship to land values and any other facts that may be used to measure or determine compatibility. PLEASE NOTE: In granting any Special Exception, the Board of Adjustment may prescribe appropriate conditions, stipulations and safeguards to ensure conformity with the foregoing. STATE REASON FOR REQUEST (attach additional sheet if necessary): ti;Vin)6 O CG.tGC,,'��a--1 N t"�9✓v1 L� �i TO i61..E. NlES j ' tL (1-1-1 , 10 4 i+Ares &A)4 eOfi'T'oe- To TH-k: -1:-45, .N v iv.) ix/ W r- s . t F{f K Fst ‘•014A-- 13C A- i z)-n4-1— O F 6 u-tV ics CON.PO4-151 Ni-1 -17> € (- 2- 0 si.,C:T Zowi fv) http://fcn.state.fl.us/cape/building_permit_files/SPECIAL%20EXCEPTION.htm 08/23/2005 CITY Page 6 of 11 THE FOLLOWING ENCLOSURES ARE NEEDED TO COMPLETE THIS APPLICATION: *Paid receipt from Finance Department for$250.00 Application Fee. V *Paid receipt from Finance Department for Deposit,if applicable. (Make checks payable to the"City of Cape Canaveral") / A listing of legal descriptions of all properties within a 500 ft radius of the boundaries of the property contained in the request, together with the names and mailing addresses (including zip codes) of all respective property owners within the above referenced area. Include three (3) complete sets of mailing labels of all property owners within a 500 ft. radius. (This can be obtained from the Tax Assessor's Office.) The list shall be legible and the source of the information submitted stated here: This information was obtained from:6,tAtemcs Dept azictifiNto at.lvv-ry '✓ A property map showing properties within the 500 ft radius, clearly outlining the subject property. '/ The Location map showing adjacent properties uses, zoning, streets, driveways, canals and utilities. Y7. Where Property is not owned by the applicant, a Power of Attorney must be attached giving the Notarized consent of the property owner to the applicant to request the Special Exception. /8. Copy of recorded deed to subject property. 9. Completed worksheet 10. If applicable, elevation drawing(s) or photograph(s) of proposed structure(s) are encouraged. • NOTE: Application fee of$250.00 is non-refundable upon payment to the City. • NOTE: Any balance from required deposit will be returned to the applicant upon written request minus all associated costs. http://fcn.state.fl.us/cape/building permit_files/SPECIAL%20EXCEPTION.htm 08/23/2005 CITY rage u or CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SPECIAL EXCEPTION WORKSHEET The purpose of this worksheet are two-fold: (1) to assist the Planning and Zoning Board and the Board of Adjustment in the evaluation of all criteria relevant to the application; and (2) to educate the applicant as to the criteria which must be addressed and satisfied prior to beginning the special exception consideration process. If the applicant can not satisfactorily address one or more of the following, this should serve as a preliminary indication that the request for special exception may be rejected or that the application may not be acceptable for processing. CRITERIA (Building Official or Designee to Verify) 1) Does the Special Exception create any adverse impact to adjacent property through the creation of noise, light, vibration, traffic, utility requirements, or stormwater runoff that would not have been created had the property been deveed l9pwas a principle ipuse in the applicable zoning district.ND) -(W02,03--ti t L) L eo ) TO e, ( pazew-Tjt%5 . 746 No�rn�sr�WILL 9�T �t A- #161-SC�it-iiL£ ►�ptgc-T ray wti D� /Jatsc L 1 f7i+T J e A#t C- e r . '1O -w' w rE (L kukroFf- i+--- t e I N-7-e.it.E-p Tn ` L,Ly -to ervS.).c Sv • vhpAcr v,.► suc0-0,40O.f� hES 2) Will the Special Exception create any unusual polite, fire or emergency services? NO) F11-e2A. 5(-I --+P 0C div t Nc e- -{t`3 E i t,{ U fA IA-- exYI e a.c,evu 5eLvtceS 0“,E -TD lit-� �,iJl�rn.£S. f 3) Will the Special Exception meet all the requirements of the zoning district in which the request is to be located, such as: lot requirements, building setbacks requirements, lot coverage, height, buffers, off-street parking, signs, storage, landscaping, etc.? AtiL E 7.0141‘46- Piec)u.mtze NiT3 m eroai-rctitd Lvtt,t &. mer A-N-,o e,vsaafo -baa 1+ PQ 0A.A-t- s�w CeS (9-P- Crv ./r.ok•3 AfarD 5 Lk+2 s12S 4) Is there of equate ingress and egress, with particular reference to auto and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and emergency access in case of fire or medical emergency?'�, 'eS Ttie tw tae A- Qui i Ctctess :' 0-k yo Aic,ivt -the Aowopo i-j rvt 5e�v+ce s►OFw t tLS ft�S LL e. dun e �vc'si�tPc �A T 1 0 Zvi►pvc T p N ifs cLot.J 1-Y1 /`t 5) Is there adequate off-street parking and loading areas available without creating undue noise, glare, odor or other detrimental effects Apron adjoining property owners? '/CS 0-)'off- (c o? C teekaici-ext:51115 cue*. f Ste.5'�e ie Yom\ �w2 �-o �tiieT- A+� ph \AA Q t-v Atvo too 1i14�.A-1- C : p1-vu y i 6) Is there adequate and properly located utilities available or may be reasonably provided to serve the proposed development(if applicable)? �S i-T'►t-tT'C S Beep 1- - ©C' R-0£ 3 Aivo ftaz IJ - ' eE,Q,u.L( v ,e 5, AA.)0 w (3z. 5ufPt 0eArA ►'"e' 111-4E Oe EL-Wn..°e 7) Is there adequate screening and/or buffering provided to protect and provide compatibility to adjoining properties? Yi>t A`t0£ 4 wet- )21 VPrL Fev x p-Lc,v c3 i ttt atic R� d f=- � (2 -� ,514,40,,,L,0 /342.00-10E ju c,eA4 iNt v1J , DCA/CLW (Z- v,>1 LA- (tom &PEi1 • co vv � � Su L sTtDnp Gt m n- , 8) Are sign and ebCt rior lighting, if any, designed and arranged so as to promote traffic safety and to eliminate or minimize an undue� glare, incompatibility, ,and disharmony with ad'oinin roperties?�t3t 15 m N-o ism.posa_ 1;1\N c;Q l yrti9 r�. Ca�.SE I 3LL r'S (1 CV- 144A-90 iii P -► S t v(1 W proroi.v 1U' ,pa -71 s http://fcn.state.fl.us/cape/building_permit_files/SPECIAL%20EXCEPTION.htm 08/23/2005 CITY rage y ori i 9) Is there adequate refuse and service areas? *Si A s La tilt y P -(2i toe.,v-c.€ . Di.oi4t(i :- -.'It 6 - Os vsjr3Lf- - R4AEti do/14f u1/40:Je-41L- i4s 4=1-t tv-ru a e, n3lei i�. 7t) i7�a(��t2-0 Q f ..).s E w 0._ GE. )1-ep'3' 0. - of S/d ice' r�. ,-it- ..x,p . 10) Do the set acks, landscaping, and open space meet the requirements of the zoning district? YES i (-t-t, $ 3, -K1 l-z%o3`tyi 246-i A-tufl bpery >fWt 14- A Q-A-vvt -d` // (IS tr)etA- r1/43 R�TE,.r c- o N.' \ ' t-- n ee�oCL e)1 Gee) Z 0)\-)k to 7 te;n fi' i ttE S e av tc,es o-P G aaWE-yo /-}-,Avc &lit ,k) mit.: 0 LO 16 e.vS c.4124._ 11) Is me proposal.er use compatible with surrounding uses in its function, its hours of operation, the type amount of traffic generated, structure size and setbacks, its relationship to land values and any other facts that may be used to measure or determine com atibility? ES) -4 -rowt4 1-R0O1€s w►i i I3 E t/e e-4 f mP, i i 047C4 o OP 1--►1t It-IN Nity - otJ - N 51 2,uc114,2E- (3u i s'ze. fln.),o �,n��w), 114V3 �FoSg�T �tt,‘.. -e+�' i�i-� Ng,\('-1}f�txl-i1oo:3 ,�$rN0 .k) (3E ft- posrn✓E t mipeoy�n. 2.A.'t- �02 'Tit1z.- A{zE_A- 12) Is the Special Exception consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan? \I€S; s i-+s iiabff(-i i5 t-e—\1 5 'ou-OfJD 01Dw)- tA0M,t,S A'r'fl a (r-LE rpt L�j, R�s IDEA)LE -' k'_ -7th 415✓tlec�.S 0.'1 Li_ et -rnO(-t C©vsi' re.,sT 4-4JO Y&KI P-0s '►-,N ;a, int -ScA-R ..rv®r 4) p p€/M-i7�3, TthW+v f- cowloi-ei?-C+rt-t.- eP-ost,_-1 29^, .-n-1-% Loc-A--'t-‘0r`.D- 13) Is the Special Exception consistent with the intent of the zoning district with which the Special Exception is sought? k(S; Ab-A-AA) -1-0-014 IA-eAncs W1( - 13 > -(Lti Lt9 bUl 13"T��1- /}'w 0 Ls©v f-0,2_-v, $h.), --may 5 t.4_, ..c ..,--�'0) r.� pa-010e`A.y j S Ccs-.-vt,Yt.en-z-I 0c-L, 14) Has the petitioner met the minimum requirements for the requested Special Exception and demonstrated entitlement to the Special Exception which will not adversely affect the public interest? '('CS ems ir-- T"k-S Pz5b'ec`"�0vf.t,pPm c'`"r 1 ,- IN '-s A) E, pew e,,Nc -rvks 1'0 1-1-1t-E- su.1,(2.0 �,,v.3► - / P**- tit,0 PQ�e°2T1£s , 'ME Fabia V)t t,t- wo V i N P vJ(W A-y, RA V= ,R-.5 P it k r-F ce;T' "r-tt-e. p.A,o 1._t t_ I iv-Te_E's- 15) Should the Special Exception be granted with any noted limitations, restrictions and/or �conditions? P40, - 1-t-E G( 8 osE o Oev E-1-oen^eI 9p., ti`.x_ t�r�'o ee-� fly" O� 1 1 R Qv�� .hYl,Q,;u \ J E-T�, j-vO Ltt i LA. a0.'�t'Tfi�Y.►'►"' 1.�0✓4."P IA)IT* m�2-r P.-..`- 0 eirE city-£.S 16) Should the Special Exception be specifically granted to the petitioner or run concurrently with the property? VE5 `fly 5QEc.twt. ewevrib O 51+5udt-0 (1E' 'g9-Eo -TOM - e-1--tTt Do EA- 0 N 1t€ F-Ae-i IN e 1- E- s 'U vir p ,L, , ` c7 Yyt 0 ca_z_ C ry N iR ‘ C 1 . j t ru-ci c c -1.4- " - C:�a.(LeA.ri- c 2,0,."'.t . -11-k-- `:> LI--- W►Li + T.4 -' ZiQ 4.14,-not-e_ - A-C- , (i3.:.,..T v...) ►O- 1 n'inzAN T\#\- V4+-4.tut S e aotk.r so t v.%(es'--t S . -1---t )1' U 1 t..t_ • tkv E- j i4-t7Y' tE oil- N.t.6-if-Tt vi c- f C.ec- - tri.5 .1i#t S r v) (DuoesL5 cave.f http://fcn.state.fl.us/cape/building permit_files/SPECIAL%20EXCEPTION.htm 08/23/2005 4^ i k 4pCE 4� .. h1 i, �S► *`' re 'N��l` ` .-: Y Cityof Cape Canaveral '=- WiAi z 3 -- , ♦�.--' February8, 2006 -- 3 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER(S): Special Exception Request #06-02 ., - Notice is hereby given by the City of Cape Canaveral, that Ken Wilson representing L. Joyce Carlton, 440 y Treasure Lagoon Lane, Merritt Island, FL 32953 has requested a Special Exception To Allow ; ' Residential Use in a Commercial Zoning District, pursuant to the Cape Canaveral Code of Ordinances, Zoning Regulations, Section 110-334(C)(10) for the property described as follows: Legal Description: Township 24S, Range 37E, Section 23, Lots 4-8, Block 1 Parcel ID: 24-37-23-CG-00001.0-0004.00 through 0008.00, Avon by the Sea (Washington Ave., Cape Canaveral, FL 32920) In accordance with the City Code of Ordinance No. 18-2002, this letter shall serve as notice that there will be a public hearing before the Cape Canaveral Planning and Zoning Board regarding the property noted above. The meeting will be held on Wednesday, March 8, 2006, at 7:30 P.M. in the City Hall Annex, 111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, FL. The Planning & Zoning Board is advisory in nature and will make a recommendation to the Cape Canaverai Board of Adjustment with respect to the above-named property. The final administrative approval or denial will come before the Board of Adjustment at a subsequently scheduled meeting. Since your property may be located within 500-feet of this property comments can be made in person or may be submitted in writing at the Planning and Zoning Board Meeting or to the City Clerk's Office at 105 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, FL 32920. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Planning and Zoning Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting, that person will need a record of the proceedings,and forsuch purpose that person may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. This notice does not constitute consent by the City for the introduction or admission into evidence of otherwise inadmissible or irrelevant evidence,nor does it authorize challenges or appeals not otherwise allowed by law.Persons with disabilities needing assistance to participate in any of these proceedings should contact the City Clerk's office(868-1221),48 hours in advance of the meeting. Susan Stills, CMC City Clerk , I 510 ; i ,5.01h'114j•21t0r 1T y5.39511.. .. i lit I .1 1 ' 1'�--t <E _ j_-�—._ 254Cr— Z1 71 1 i 11 1.01 :1211yr4n i:_____119 I a 11'12 irADAA _.258 (2 l +I 1 1 i2;12143;910,1, .1 2 .1 I I ....J. 2871 I 1 12 1,12151'1mi 4 i ;' lin!" 105 Polk Avenue • Post Office Box 326 • Cape Canaveral, FL 32920-0326 Telephone: (321) 868-1220 • SUNCOM: 982-1220 • FAX: (321) 868-1248 www.myflorida.com/cape • e-mail: ccapecanaveral@cfl.rr.com View Legal Ad# 711584 Page 1 of 1 Print Window Close Window' AD#711584-4/14,2006 Notice of Public Hearing The Board of Adjustment, City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, will hold a Public Hearing for the purpose of considering a Special Exception at the City Hall Annex, 111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida, on Monday, April 24,2006 at 7:30 P.M. Special Exception Request No. 06-02 to Allow Residential Use in the C-1 Zoning District, Section 23, Township 24 South, Range 37 East, Lots 4-8, Block 1, Avon by the Sea Subdivision - (Washington Avenue) - Ken Wilson, Designated Agent for L. Joyce Carlton, Petitioner. Interested parties are invited to attend this meeting and be heard. If any person decides to appeal any decision made by the Board of Adjustment with respect to any matter considered at this meeting, he/she will need a record of the proceedings, and for such purpose he/she may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made. Susan L.Chapman Secretary to the Board of Adjustment AD#: 711584 Publication: Florida Today First Published: 04-14-2006 4 httr%•I/xxnxnxw+1 tnriav net/legals/disnlay.htm?CMD=DISPLAY&Id=21514 4/14/2006 RADIUS MAP op, IOW 4 ! • gist „,, iii; •4 � i %per *4' Cr 4IIIII = IIIIIIIIII►������, 'vs ion &la O11111• * -,..w. VIII � ST \ CHANDLER AL1 1III .........,.. CAROLINE St } Is E — m man 7 Y .=—_-- at �.0 1 W IE Ale 17 BB 5619 9 11 4 ----- - — \lI, 1 \\ I \ \ `'s q ES 3� • E4 .�f 39 21 ;rfiS ¢. ------ COLUMN*DR MACH u 94 #15.4.06:: ? "''4i ;:6: '29 _-----,---- y;" 11 6 1 VEI X � 61 4E47 465412 —.__--------- 3.1 I I I ADA1_ _ ��---. —__ ill HSI' 7e r574 .72 nn 6566' 65 ee cornmeal al< — 4 Ba ��--- — LONG PODR RD ,^ .,RR RD W 94 96 9E 97 e 6e::e.as eE el 90 79 76::'`71 ,� — mom+ I A ______-- 111 __ tm N 7i__ Y ADISON AV ---,------- - / !_� --�� 110NRD — —"f—T- y j A r91r....„..Al DR r_ ■ n rL- — ___ JACKSON r - - _______r_ - III MAAR.ON DY _ -- _--- ,INVss SI N Vir A GRV.3r S -- —�— 1 IV`JAMxt¢wl _ Brevard County Property Appraiser: Jim Ford • BUFFER DISTANCE 500 FEET APPLICANT NAME(S)/ADDRESS: Based on data from the Property Appraisers Office MAP SCALE IS L•6000(one inch=500 feet) WILSON, KEN LEGEND:266 6668, This map was compiled from recorded documents and does not reflect an actual survey.The Brevard County Board of Commissioners, Notification buffer OWNER NAME(S)/ADDRESS: Property Appraiser,and Geographic Information Services do not assume N parcel lot boundaries L. JOYCE CARLTON, TRUSTEE responsibility for errors or ommissions contained hereon. P.O. BOX 540545,MERRITT ISLAND, FL 32954 Produced by;Brevard County Planning&Zoning Office–GIS,January 27,2006 Numbers on map correspond to mailing list Prc1J102-wiltwa.soo-s.cmr Brevard County Property Appraiser-- Online Real Estate Property Card Page 1 of 2 Waft r.; s fig WARPTAttlitARRMAVOrt ibbf :41 W ION (Home'[Meet JimFord](Appraiser's Jobj[FAQ''General Info](Save Our Homes][Exemptions][Tangible Property] [Contact Usj[Locations][Forms'[Appeals][Propeyt Research.[Map Search](Maps&Data] (Unusable Property]Fax Authorities]Fax Facts][Economic Indicators][What's New][Links][Press Releases]Fax Estimator' General Parcel Information for 24-37-23-CG-00001.0-0004.00 Parcel Id: 24-37-23-CG-00001.0- Map Millage 26G0 Exemption: Use Code: 1000 0004.00 Code: * Site Tax 2433269 Address: Account: *Site address assigned by the Brevard County Address Assignment Office for mailing purposes;may not reflect community location of property. Owner Information Legal Description Owner Name: CARLTON, L JOYCE Plat Book/Page: AVON BY LOT 4 TRUSTEE 0003/0007 THE SEA BLK 1 Second Name: View Plat (requires Adobe Acrobat Reader- Mailing file size may be large) Address: P 0 BOX 540545 City, State, MERRITT ISLAND, FL Zipcode: 32954 Value Summary for 2005 Land Information ** Market Value: $20,630 Acres: 0.14 Agricultural Assessment: $0 Site Code: 0 Assessed Value: $20,630 Land Value: $20,630 *** Homestead Exemption: $0 ***Other Exemptions: $0 Taxable Value: $20,630 This is the value established for ad valorem purposes in accordance with s.193.011(1)and(8),Florida Statutes. This value does not represent anticipated selling price for the property. ***Exemptions as reflected on the Value Summary table are applicable for the year shown and may or may not be applicable if an owner change has occured. Sales Information OR Sale Sale Deed *** Sales *** Sales Book/Page Date Amount Type Screening Screening Vacant/Improved Code Source II II Inl II II I http://www.brevardpropertyappraiser.com/asp/Show_parcel.asp?acct=2433269&gen=T&... 02/01/2006 Brevard County Property Appraiser-- Online Real Estate Property Card Page 2 of 2 15382/0315 1111/20044500,00011WD II PT II II V 4666/1461 7/2002 $100 TD V 1800/0938 10/1977 $3,000 0493/0537 / $18,000 ***Sales Screening Codes and Sources are from analysis by the Property Appraiser's staff.They have no bearing on the prior or potential marketability of the property. Tax information is also available at the Brevard County Tax Collector's web site (Select the back button to return to the Property Appraiser's web site) Data Last Updated:Tuesday,January 31,2006-Printed On:Wednesday,February 01,2006. New Search Help [Home]'Meet JimFordl(Appraiser's Job]JFAQJ[General Info][Save Our Homes'[Exemptions frangible Property] [Contact Us]'Locations]'Forms]'Appeals][Property Research]'Map Search'[Maps&Datal [Unusable Property] ax Authorities]'Tax Facts](Economic Indicators]'What's New] Links [Press Releases]ITax Estimator] Copyright© 1997 Brevard County Property Appraiser.All rights reserved. Disclaimer Applies to Results • • http://www.brevardpropertyappraiser.com/asp/Show parcel.asp?acct=2433269&gen=T&... 02/01/2006 • CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SPECIAL EXCEPTION WORKSHEET The purpose of this worksheet are two-fold: (1) to assist the Planning and Zoning Board and the Board of Adjustment in the evaluation of all criteria relevant to the application; and (2) to educate the applicant as to the criteria which must be addressed and satisfied prior to beginning the special exception consideration process. If the applicant can not satisfactorily address one or more of the following, this should serve as a preliminary indication that the request for special exception may be rejected or that the application may not be acceptable for processing. CRITERIA (Building Official or Designee to Verify) 1) Does the Special Exception create any adverse impact to adjacent property through the creation of noise, light, vibration, traffic, utility requirements, or stormwater runoff that would not have been created had the property been developed as a principle use in the applicable zoning district. The special exception is for eight (8) residential units. The requirements found in the land development code should be able to minimize any impacts created for adjacent property owners. Traffic would generate four to six additional peak hour trips. If developed as a commercial use, more than likely it would generate more peak hour trips. 2) Will the Special Exception create any unusual police, fire or emergency services? There should be no unusual needs or requirements for police, fire or emergency services. 3) Will the Special Exception meet all the requirements of the zoning district in which the request is to be located, such as: lot requirements, building setbacks requirements, lot coverage, height, buffers, off-street parking, signs, storage, landscaping,etc.? The lot should be able to accommodate all of the above requirements. This will be determined during site plan review. 4) Is there adequate ingress and egress,with particular reference to auto and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and emergency access in case of fire or medical emergency? There should be appropriate ingress and egress from this site. The access being proposed will be to Washington Avenue. 5) Is there adequate off-street parking and loading areas available without creating undue noise, glare, odor or other detrimental effects upon adjoining property owners? It would appear that adequate off street parking could be accommodated on site. This will be determined during site plan review. 6) Is there adequate and properly located utilities available or may be reasonably provided to serve the proposed development (if applicable)? There are a full set of utilities available to serve the subject property. 7) Is there adequate screening and/or buffering provided to protect and provide compatibility to adjoining properties? It would appear Landscaping will be required per the landscaping code. A landscape plan was not included with the application. 8) Are signs and exterior lighting, if any, designed and arranged so as to promote traffic safety and to eliminate or minimize any undue glare, incompatibility, and disharmony with adjoining properties? Being a request for residential use the property should be compatible with the surrounding uses. This would be further evaluated as part of the site plan review. 9) Is there adequate refuse and service areas? There is adequate refuse capacity. Refuse service would be curb side pick up service. 10)Do the setbacks, landscaping, and open space meet the requirements of the zoning district? The project appears to be able to meet setbacks and open space requirements. Landscaping will need to be enhanced consistent with the code. 11)Is the proposed use compatible with surrounding uses in its function, its ours of operation, the type amount of traffic generated, structure size and setbacks, its relationship to land values and any other facts that may be used to measure or determine compatibility? The proposed use should be compatible with the surrounding uses, provided limited traffic impact and meet setback requirements. 12)Is the Special Exception consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan? This special exception request is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 13)Is the Special Exception consistent with the intent of the zoning district with which the Special Exception is sought? This special exception request can meet the requirements for this zoning district found in the land development code. 2 14)Has the petitioner met the minimum requirements for the requested Special Exception and demonstrated entitlement to the Special Exception which will not adversely affect the public interest? To be recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board and determined by the Board of Adjustment. 15)Should the Special Exception be granted with any noted limitations, restrictions and/or conditions? To be recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board and determined by the Board of Adjustment. • 3 BUILDING OFFICIAL OR DESIGNEE REVIEW 1. Zoning Amendment 2. Variance Contiguous Zoning 3. X Special Exception North South East West 4. Administrative Appeal C1 C1 R2 Cl CONSIDERATIONS SETBACKS: Yes MEETS CODE CODE VIOLATION (Describe) COVERAGE: Yes MEETS CODE CODE VIOLATION (Describe) LOT SIZE: Yes MEETS CODE CODE VIOLATION (Describe) DENSITY: Yes MEETS CODE CODE VIOLATION (Describe) HEIGHT: Yes MEETS CODE CODE VIOLATION (Describe) ADDITIONAL REFERENCES nolgoe (( i wit >A��F`��,` °.�.. }©fit S£i �. �. ®��' �, ,rF' _. ,� Ff{sr.. v�'�. u,a� Code Sect. Applicability Yes No PARKING 110-491 X LOADING ZONE NA X SETBACKS (A1A Ridgewood/Astronaut) 110-536 X LANDSCAPING 110-566-567 X NON-CONFORMITIES NA STRUCTURES NA LAND USES NA NOTE: The Planning & Zoning Board should also review Section 110-47 (1-11) COMMENTS: No additional comments Date Reviewed by Building Official or Designee: Signature: 4 • City of Cape Canaveral Treasure Key Special Exception Applicant: Applicant Representative, Ken Wilson. Location: Range: 37 Township: 24 Section: 14 Lots 4 thru 8, Block 1 Acreage: .72 +/- of an Acre Allowable Number of Units: 10 residential units Proposed Number of Units: 8 residential units Current Future Land Use: Commercial C-1 Current Zoning: Commercial C-1 Description: The applicant desires to build 8 town home units. The subject parcel is currently vacant located on the southwest corner of Washington Avenue and Poinsetta Avenue. North South East West Zoning Cl Commercial Cl Commercial R2 Residential Cl Commercial Comp Plan Cl Commercial Cl Commercial R2 Residential Cl Commercial Existing Residential Residential, Residential, Residential, Conditions Townhomes Townhomes apartments townhomes Public Services and Facilities in Amendment Area: The Level of Service for parks and recreation is one (2) acres of park land per 1,000 residents. Approximately twenty-four (24) acres of park land exist in Cape Canaveral. This equates to a population of approximately 12,000 residents. The City's population as of April, 2005 was 10,034. This is still adequate park space available. AlA is operating at Level of Service "A" with 373 available peak hour trips between North City Limits and Central Blvd. AlA South of Central Blvd to North Atlantic has a level of Service is "A" with 368 excess trips. This development could generate 4-6 more peak hour trips as added into the Traffic Impact Analysis and capacity is available. The City of Cape Canaveral provides wastewater treatment. The wastewater treatment capacity is 1.8 million gallons per day (MGD). The existing usage is 1.26 MGD with an excess capacity of.54 MGD. This project could generate approximately 2,400 gallons daily. There is adequate wastewater treatment capacity available. The City of Cocoa has a total capacity of 56 MGD and currently provides 48 MGD. Approximately 24.4 MGD of water is being used on an average daily basis, leaving 23.6 MGD available. This project could require approximately 2,800 gallons daily. There is adequate potable water service available with the proposed change. Brevard County provides facilities for solid waste disposal. At this time, the County does not foresee any deficiency with their solid waste facilities. Environmental Description of Amendment Area: The site is vacant Galveston Ga soil type. Galveston Soils are well drained sandy soils that consist of reworked and leveled sandy materials that resemble Galveston sand. There are no known wetlands, Aquifer Recharge or Floodplain areas associated with this parcel. There are also no known endangered species living on the site. Historical and Archaeological Resources in Amendment Area: There are no known historical or archaeological resources on site. Population Projections and Trends: The potential addition of 8 new town home units would equate to at 2.37 persons per household to 18-19 new persons to the City. I I MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Morley, Building Official FROM: Todd Peetz City Planner DATE: February 28, 2006 RE: Special Exception Residential in Commercial Zoning 06-02 I have reviewed the submittal of the special exception review for the above referenced project. My comments are addressed in the special exception worksheet attached to this item. Further review will be conducted during the permitting process for compliance of all local and state codes. The Engineer of Record is responsible for any requirements not identified by the City. If you have any questions,please feel free to contact me at 407-629-8880. MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Morley, CBO Building Official TO: Todd Peetz City Planner FROM: Ed Gardulski Public Works Director DATE: February 2,2006 RE: Special Exception Request No 06-02 Residential in Commercial The Public Works Department has reviewed the special exception request and does not have any comments or concerns with the zoning usage. I I 1 I t �"®`:.--,pit—Lb-t, ';�)1Ct fir' ;'\i�"'.leE��S/.'G'' Q�<�� 1 ll.a,`11 �� ie�p, Dl ��[1._(‘,::::13: �� o����� i ! , D. irj � t��;F 4 �'9\\\/ � l \\ . J 1.1 F j t k fly F� '� 9f (7.....:„.;,,, . '�S"1�� �t,.� �,,��✓s''1�E���" �: �v19��Lr ( f� �E:.�}-s����_ �J �. � 1 ,�f��.���f�11 @ »I E:�� ���a C°o` )�,i'�'`i"„.:r� MEMORANDUM To: Todd Peetz, Legg &Assoc. Building Department From: John J. Cunningham, Asst. Fire Chie' VZ Re: Special Exception 06-02 11111 _ Date: 02-01-2006 We have reviewed the special exception and haven comment at this time U -> J RECEIVE .,-2ii� Station#1 Station#2 190 Jackson Avenue• Cape Canaveral,Florida 32920 8970 Columbia Road • Cape Canaveral, Florida 32920 (321) 783-4777 • Fax: (321) 783-5398 (321) 783-4424 •Fax: (321) 783-4887 www.ccvfd.org ... 0(12- • .,.,, -,..„ . z.4...,:z*.,--tor:•,,,,,,•:, y s te--- ,,',i, 1.-Th / 4,.- r:-,- DISTRIBUTION ' ..._ ,::-75:T -7.'2 , 1.2' • --/' ' --; le,et.:-.1.4.,(/ , it Council • - ....__ i 1 .4.- ,-;,-'-',, ar/s;r4A- ; 1(j- •City Mgr. • 11.iii-PC:.\J Dir Dir. ..:':'','.c.,"•-zi..'=g2.,!::1Z iig oh-. ..7.- ;11e..rice Dir. . 2+2..- iciA/-A11,1- • - CrYvwf• . (.,,,,,,,.)-• ./1.--e--°'-'11-'"azA--- ' , , ( -tf '-`'---- •Az'' -r)i ''''a- 1 Arco-A, .AA-'4-14y. ... ) -}2.4‘.....6'.11 et4 1- - --r61A--- r 0 0 6-6-V - 6-4.-A -I ....--- COL' F q 0 f / • _jj,j( '37-7>° • ... • . I . . : LL Goiclon 8401 1"1 Atlantic Ave. '....? ;:kifil . ileillitannit414' '..r.."*. V. -' . R.LANDO FL 3.8 -doom - . Cape Canaveral,FL 32920-3529 'I. L.r5 MA R. 2006 PM 3 T ,00,,,ton.- - ""6' -"' • USA CA;rAt CAA'k-'..5 C9114/-9'- eyo-r-44-e'L f IzZA4A4-"/ q 3 67'1" , ,e,.., av,.. / 0 5- u Cele CczA,L,a0--vietj" •