Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP & Z Board Packet November 8, 2006 City of Cape Canaveral PLANNING & ZONING BOARD REGULAR MEETING CITY HALL ANNEX 111 POLK AVENUE NOVEMBER 8, 2006 7:30 P.M. Call to Order Roll Call NEW BUSINESS 1. Approval of Meeting Minutes: October 11, 2006 F) ^ ..............._, __I _& 1\ ........_+:.......-.. 1\ II:....... ....__. r"'\.....+......L........... I")r:: "Af"\~ L. t-\jJjJl UVal UI IVIt::t::lIIl!:j IVIII IUlt::~. V \,;lU ut:: I L'-l, LUUO 3. Review and Recommendation to City Council Re: Hertz Local Edition Vehicle Rental Facility Site Plan - Section 15, Township 24 South, Range 37 East, Part of Parcel 25.0 (Property is Located Just North of Residence Inn and South of Country Inn) - William H. Stephenson, Project Engineer. 4. Discussion Re: Oak Park Condominiums Ingress and Egress - Todd Peetz, City Planner. 5. Discussion Re: Special Exception Reviews - Todd Peetz, City Planner. 6. Discussion and Motion Re: Cancel Meeting on November 22nd and Establish Next Meeting Date (Possibly November 29th). OPEN DISCUSSION ADJOURN Pursuant to Section 286.1015, F.S., Ule City hereby advises Ule public that: If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Planning and Zoning Board with respect to any matter rendered 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 inadmissible or irrelevant evidence, nor does it authorize challenges or appeals not otherwise allowed by law. This meeting may include the attendance of one or more members of the Cape Canaveral City Council, Board of Adjustment, Code Enforcement and/or Community Appearance Board who mayor may not participate in Board discussions held at this public meeting. 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. 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@Cflrr.com PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 11, 2006 A Regular Meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board was held on October 11, 2006, at the City Hall Annex, 111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida. Chairperson Bea McNeely called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The Secretary called the roll. MEMBERS PRESENT Bea McNeely Chairperson John Fredrickson Donald Dunn I I _ ~~. . n _ _ ~_ _ ~ naIl y ,tal ~UII John Johanson 1 st Alternate MEMBERS ABSENT Lamar Russell Vice Chairperson OTHERS PRESENT Duree Alexander Acting Secretary Todd Peetz City Planner Kate Latorre Assistant City Attorney Robert Hoog Mayor Pro T em NEW BUSINESS: 1. Approval of Meetinq Minutes: September 27, 2006. Motion by Harry Pearson, seconded by Donald Dunn, to approve the meeting minutes of September 27, 2006. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. 2. Review and Recommendation to City Council Re: Proposed Model Ordinance for Proportional Fair-Share Mitiqation of Development Impact on Transportation Corridors - Todd Peetz, City Planner. Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2006 Page 2 Todd Peetz, City Planner provided an overview of the Proposed Model Ordinance. He stated that there is a statutory deadline of December 1, 2006 to enter into this inter-local agreement by ordinance that addresses fair-share mitigation impacts on transportation corridors. He explained that the local government shall include methodologies that will be applied to calculate proportionate fair share mitigation. A developer may choose to satisfy all transportation concurrency requirements by contributing or paying proportionate fair-share mitigation if transportation facilities or facility segrnents identified as mitigation for traffic impacts are specifically identified for funding within the next five year schedule of capital improvements. He continued by stating that proportionate fair-share shall be applied as a credit against impact fees to the extent that all or a portion of the proportionate fair-share mitigation is used to address the same capital infrastructure improvements contemplated by the local government's impact fee ordinance. Discussion followed regarding which streets would be impacted by this Ordinance. Todd Peetz, City Planner, explained that there is a section in the proposed ordinance that references intergovernmental coordination, which advises each local government to work with other affected agencies to establish a procedure for coordinating mitigation to impacted facilities that are maintained by another agency, outlining inter-jurisdictional review criteria and decision time-fames. Bea McNealy, Chairperson, questioned how is the fair-share determined. Todd Peetz, City Planner, explained that the formula to determine fair-share is the cumulative number of trips expected to impact roadways during peak hours, divided by the change in the peak hour maximum service volume of roadways, multiplied by the construction cost. The City shall determine improvement costs based upon the actual cost of the improvement as obtained from the Capital Improvement Program. If that information is not available improvement cost shall be determined by other methods, such as other projects which are similar, or utilize the most recent issue of FOOT transportation costs. Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2006 Page 3 Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney, stated that this will be put in City Ordinance form. She advised that she would review the Brevard County's Ordinance to insure that the City's Ordinance was compatible. She recommended that the Board review this Ordinance again in a City Ordinance format before recommending it to the City Council. Motion by Donald Dunn, seconded by Harry Pearson, to bring back the Model Ordinance for Proportionate Fair-Share Mitigation of Development Impacts on Transportation Corridors in City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance format for review 1..-.,+1.-_ nl,......__:__ __-' 7__:__ n__....-I __...:_...J._ ...___~_~__~-.I_J.:__ .1._ "':.L. r-..______!I \1_.1._ uy lilt:: ,1c::U 11111 l\:j clllU LUIIIII\:j DUclIU, fJllUI lU 1t::\.;UIfIlIIt::IIUclllUlllU \.JllY \.JUUlIGII. VUle on the motion carried by majority, with a four to one vote, with members voting as follows: Donald Dunn, for; John Fredrickson, for; John Johanson, for; Bea McNeely, for; and Harry Pearson, against. OPEN DISCUSSION Discussion was held regarding short term rentals and the missing history from the Board packet at the previous meeting. The members expressed concerns that there may have been a better way to write the ordinance, and include police and code enforcement requirements. Ruth Anders, representative of Solana Lakes, addressed the Board regarding liquefied petroleum, requesting that the Planning and Zoning Board revoke the special exception for liquefied petroleum. She expressed concerns regarding the Board not acting on the petition signed by the residents. Bea McNeely, Chairperson, responded that the Board was waiting on additional information from staff, and upon receiving all pertinent information the Board would act accordingly in the best interest of the citizens. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Bea McNeely, Chairperson Duree Alexander, Acting Secretary PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 2006 A Regular Meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board was held on October 25, 2006, at the City Hall Annex, 111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida. Chairperson Bea McNeely called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The Secretary called the roll. MEMBERS PRESENT Bea McNeely Chairperson Lamar Russell Vice Chairperson John Fredrickson Donald Dunn Harry Pearson John Johanson 1 st Alternate OTHERS PRESENT Rocky Randels Mayor Robert Hoog Mayor Pro Tem Todd Morley Building Official Kate Latorre Assistant City Attorney Todd Peetz City Planner Susan Chapman Secretary NEW BUSINESS: 1. Discussion Re: Staff Report on Existinq Liquefied Petroleum Within the City. Todd Peetz, City Planner explained that this agenda item was a result of the Board for staff to evaluate and inventory all existing liquefied petroleum throughout the City. He gave a brief overview of the report and attachments. Vice Chairperson, Lamar Russell pointed out that page three of the report did not have a reference for the C-2 Zoning District. Todd Morley, Building Official reported his findings of the research and gave an overview of the report. He identified each zoning district where the use of liquefied petroleum is allowed. He advised that there currently are no established fire district(s) in the City. He advised that every storage facility in the M-1 zone requires a granted special exception regardless of how many gallons are being stored. He further advised that storage in excess of 3,000 gallons is required to be underground. He explained that as per the City Code, Chapter 38, Fire Prevention and Protection, Sections 38-4 and 38-5, the fire department is required to permit the storage. He reported that there were no tanks larger than 120 Ibs in any mobile home district; he did not inventory any of the residential districts; and the report referenced a tank's declared capacity as imprinted on the storage tank, whether it was gallons or pounds. The Board members thanked staff for the report. "'if . r; 2. .J.-~ Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes October 25, 2006 Page 2 Discussion followed regarding: establishing a fire district(s); protection; buffering; setbacks; and establishing an allowable minimum and maximum size. Following discussion, Chairperson McNeely requested that the Fire Chief be present at the next meeting to answer the Board's questions and concerns. Discussion was held regarding liquefied petroleum products within the residential zoning districts; regulating them as an accessory use in compliance with the fire code; types of fuels for portable generators; establishing a fire district for storage in access of 3,000 gallons. Todd Morley read the definition of a fire district from City Code Section 110-1. Following discussion, the Board agreed to have the Fire Chief speak to the Board at the next meeting, and the Board will then establish a threshold for each zoning district; and for staff to review other Cities codes to see how other jurisdictions handle the storage issue. Ruth Anders, spokesperson for the Solana Lakes Committee for a Safer and More Beautiful Cape Canaveral, advised that the committee has asked the City all along for a repeal of the special exception which allows for storage of liquefied petroleum in the M-1 zoning district. She pointed out that propane and other highly flammable petroleum products are next door to high density residential and the two uses do not mix. She understood that less than 2,000 gallons is considered an accessory use. However, the concern is that the properties with a granted special exception have no threshold. 2. Review and Recommendation to City Council Re: Proposed Ordinance for Proportionate Fair-Share Mitiqation of Development Impacts on Transportation Corridors. Todd Peetz, City Planner, explained that the ordinance will require property owners who impact transportation corridors that are failing and are in the State's Capital Improvement Plan to pay their fair share of the impact to the road. He further explained that this process is already required for developments of regional impact and now is being extended to non-regional impact projects. He advised that it is not anticipated that this new requirement will directly impact proposed developments in the City at this time because the level of service standards is not in a level !!F!! condition. Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney, gave an overview of the draft, answered various questions from the Board members, documented the recommended amended changes, and advised the Board that the City is required to implement the Ordinance by December 1, 2006. Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes October 25, 2006 Page 3 Motion by Lamar Russell, seconded by Bea McNeely to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance as amended. Discussion followed regarding defining acronyms. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. 3. Discussion Re: Creatinq a Checklist or Matrix for Special Exception Reviews. The Board members reviewed and discussed the proposed matrix that was created by the City Planner, Todd Peetz. Mr. Peetz explained that the intent of the matrix was to make special exception decisions more consistent based upon established standards. Following discussion, the Board concluded that the matrix idea should not be carried forward. In an effort to assist the Board, the Board Secretary offered to provide the Board with a copy of the special exception forms that the Board used years ago to make recommendations to the Board of Adjustment. This item will be further discussed at the next meeting. OPEN DISCUSSION: Discussion was held regarding trucks traveling on N. Atlantic Avenue after 10 p.m. The Board questioned who the enforcement authority was. The Board Secretary offered to contact the Public Works department and report back to the Board at the next meeting. Discussion was held regarding right in and right out access at the Oak Park project. John Fredrickson advised that he has seen property owners turning left to exit and enter the property. Todd Peetz, City Planner, responded that he believed when the improvements are made to N. Atlantic Avenue there would be a concrete median that will prevent the left turns. Discussion followed. The Board Secretary advised that staff would review the approved site plan and report back to the Board at the next meeting. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:57 p.m. Bea McNeely, Chairperson Susan Chapman, Secretary Meeting Type: Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Date: 1l/8/06 AGENDA Heading Site Plan Item #3 No. AGENDA REPORT PLANNING & ZONING BOARD THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: Hertz Rental Car - Site Plan DEPT./DNISION: Building Department Requested Actiou: Review and recommend to City Council the proposed site plan for Hertz Rental Car. Summary Explanation & Background: This request is to build a Hertz Rental Car facility at the north out parcel associated with the Residence Inn. Project includes 1,840 square feet of office and car wash space. There is parking for approximately 40 rental vehicles with 20 spaces for customers. The site has a special exception for vehicle rentals, which was extended for 12 months by the Board of Adjustment on October 23, 2006. Exhibits Attached: #1 Application, #2 Applicant information, #3 Staff Report, #4 Site Plan City Planner's Office Department: Building Department T-kn1 'I/: 3 APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REYlEW FEE: DATE: ?l!IY!u(, PROJECT NA.vIE: Ii e --~ ; I L " L '= T\ +- ' 'I . ')~ I L._ OCf-i )J i 10 tJ /7'- " '"'I. ( , / iil LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 24 - 3/-1<0- - dO - 0 oj I '?? ' 0 - 0000,00 " jq n "''/ /J.fmaM) ", .-<=;...,.,.~-~---"_---- -~ PItI2-T 6-\' CCNT wr 4~ S'\J I 4 of St I(if As Ue:;c IfJ=81044 P :I"Io,L2630 11/ u-: /J 1)/, ""5' I ( LAG (1 Pc:. k,'{j;" A~" r b] vn i f /'JK., O"V~"ER(S) l\"A.vIE: _1-. Y) "'::1 '-.--\.:...1, ' J i 1"- i l-r c..-U ~ OW:\"ER(S) ADDRESS: Lfq03 gANAJJA f.2.lverc D/< tJ ~CoA Bet1 FI =S2CJ3/ PHO~"E 1'.i"L"NffiER: 3, ~} - ('is L/ - 61 q 7 NALvIE OF AR~-IE::"fGTh"EER: LN~. lrJIUIArh'5+€pl/)~SoJ,j . 3, 2/-l~ 3'2. - <;] 1f52 /'" // ..-. '/' 36/~ 8/8Z PHOl'i"E l'H_~mER: CrC:1/ 5C/- I , ' ,/\ j /Y'1 h /) ! "" \-/.1 APPLICA. '<T'5 SIG~AnH.F: \ '/ , Y!~~2-e~ (' ?~ II O\V:YER OR ~ J. IT t I NIp., t:r iI", ,," \./ PHOI'l"E ~L~mER: 32/-lo'~i-:'1JOj~ -fh: '1.0 "'j(,np - ~ n:C)V -1f', I, w, _ -, _ _"' FL.' 1/95 -- CD City of Cape Canaveral October 25, 2006 filE COpy Messer Construction Corp. Mr. James Messer POBox 425 Sharpes, FL 32959 RE: Special Exception No, 05-10 - Time Extension to Allow a Vehicle Rental Facility in the C-1 Zoning District, Section 15, Township 24 South, Range 37 East, Part of Parcel 25.0 - (Property is Located Just North of Residence Inn and South of Country Inn) - Messer Construction Corp., James Messer, President. Dear Mr. Messer: The Board of Adjustment of the City of Cape Canaveral has heard information and testimony pertaining to your request at the meeting held on the 23rd day of October, 2006. Based on the information provided the Board of Adjustment has granted your request for a one time, twelve month extension for the above project permissible as per Section 110-48 of the Cape Canaveral Code of Ordinances. Please note that should there be a violation to any part of this approval the special exception is subject to revocation according to the City Code. Sincerely, ~g.//?h~ Constance B. McKone Chairperson SLC 105 Polk Avenue · Post Office Box 326 · Cape Canaveral, FL 32920-0326 Telephone: (321) 868-1222 · SUNCOM: 982-1222 · FAX: (321) 868-1247 G:J www.myflorida.com/cape · email: ccapecanaveral@cfI.rr.com tmara or AdjUstment Meeting Minutes October 27, 2005 Page 2 3. Special Exception Request No. 05-09 to Allow a Restaurant to Serve Beer & Wine at (7802 N. Atlantic Avenue - La Fiesta Restaurant), Section 23, Township 24 South, Ranqe 37 East, Lots 9, 10 & 11 , Block 25, Avon by the Sea Subdivision - Alice Fusillo, Petitioner. Alice Fusillo, Petitioner, testified that the restaurant opened on September 1, 2005; this was a family restaurant; and she was requesting a special exception to serve beer and wine to her patrons to enhance her business. Paula Collins, stated that the previous restaurant had a beer and wine license, which set precedent for the location. Todd Peetz, City Planner, advised that the previous special exception had expired. He verified that the request meets all applicable City requirements. Motion by Paula Collins, seconded by Connie McKone, to grant Special Exception Request No. 05-09. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. 4. Speciai Exception Request No. 05-10 to Allow a Vehicle Rental Facility in the C-1 Zoninq District, (Property is Located Just North of Residence Inn and South of Country Inn), Section 15, Township 24 South, Ranqe 37 East, Part of Parcel 25.0 - William Stephenson, Petitioner. William Stephenson, Petitioner, testified that this request was for a vehicle rental facility; the property would share access with the Residence Inn and the parcel immediately to the South; the property was slightly over one acre; and the use would be an asset to the community. Todd Peetz, City Planner, verified that all applicable City codes have been met with this request Motion by Connie McKone, seconded by Paula Collins to grant Special Exception Request No. 05-10. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. 5. Election of Chairperson and Vice Chairperson. Robert Laws announced that he would not accept any nomination for Chairperson. Paula Collins nominated Connie McKone for Chairperson. Connie McKone accepted the nomination. Vote on the nomination carried unanimously. Robert Laws nominated Paula Collins for Vice Chairperson. Paula Collins accepted the nomination. Vote on the nomination carried unanimously. There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 6:57 p.m. Approved this /'7'~day of --;re1roA. ,2005. ~. ~AG$.7?J(!~ ~C~Lt~~AS>_ Constance B. McKone, Chairperson Susan L. Chapman, Boar~ Secretary @ Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes September 28, 2005 Page 3 5. Motion to Recommend: Special Exception Request No. 05-10 to Allow a Vehicle Rental Facilitv in the C-1 Zoninq District, (Propertv is Located Just North of Residence Inn and South of Country Inn), Sec. 15. Twp. 24S. Rqe. 37E. Part of Parcel 25.0 - William Stephenson, Petitioner. Todd Peetz, City Planner, advised that the property was located on an out-parcel from the Residence Inn, and gave an overview of the request. He testified that the project would have shared access with Residence inn; and reviewed the required criteria for this type of special exception. Kevin Looney, employee of the Petitioner, testified that the car rental facility may have a car wash, and if so, it would be located within the 600 square foot prep area as shown on the submitted conceptual plan. Victor Watson, employee of the Petitioner, testified that the use is compatible with the surrounding areas, and designed to meet all code requirements. He noted that the property will be owned and leased long-term. Motion by Lamar Russell, seconded by Donald Dunn to recommend approval of Special Exception Request No. 05-10 to the Board of Adjustment. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. OPEN DISCUSSION Todd Peetz, City Planner, gave an update on the City Council meeting's discussion regarding short-term rentals. He advised that City Council is not taking any action until the County makes its final decision. He noted that 36 properties are licensed for rentals in the City. Bennett Boucher, City Manager, advised that he was having a difficult time with the State trying to identify vacation rentals. He noted that less than 10 are identified throughout the County. Todd Peetz, City Planner, advised that City Council passed the 1st reading of a moratorium ordinance. He advised that the moratorium would delay new applications. He explained that the proposed moratorium would be for 90 days, with a 60 day extension if needed. He advised that over 300 parcels have granted special exceptions for residential use in the commercial zoning district, and identified some of them from a City zoning map. Bennett Boucher, City Manager, added that City Council was looking at preserving commercial areas on A1A, and properties along A1A would be the only properties affected. - There being no further business for the Board to consider the meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m. /2 ' ^ / A'~ 7 .. ),'1 "f ---------------~-------------- , " \'VP:d. [J Cr{! UM A/\ ~~~ ( Bea McNeely, Chairpersorr- ~-- L\ \') ,---" ------ ---------, } , "---.~ ~iV\ . .~ rv flN\AD._ Susan L. Cllapman~ecretary City of Cape Canaveral Applicant: William H. Stephenson Location: Range: 37 Township: 24 Section: 15 Acreage: .92 +/- Acres / Hotel Acreage 6.20 +/- acres Proposed Use: Vehicle Rental Facility Current Future Land Use: Commercial C-l Current Zoning: Commercial C-l Description: The applicant desires to build a vehicle rental facility, on one of two out parcels for the Residence Inn. The vehicle rental facility will be on the north out parcel between the Country Inn and Suites and the Residence Inn located on the west side of AlA at the City's north end. North South East West Zoning Cl Commercial C 1 Commercial C 1 Commercial Cl Commercial Comp Plan Conservation C 1 Commercial Cl Commercial CI Commercial Existing Existing Race Trac Vacant and All - -~ Conditions service station Office Buildings Residence Inn Country Inn & Suites 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 approximately 10,000. This is still adequate park space available. AlA is operating at Level of Service "A" with 481 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 373 excess trips. This development could generate 105 more peak hour nips 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. 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. 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 Canaveral Complex Ca soil type. Canaveral Complex is level to gently sloping type of soil. 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: Not applicable. C9 Memorandum To: Todd Morley, Building Official From: Todd Peetz, City Planner Date: October19,2006 Re: Hertz Rental Car Site Plan Review I have reviewed the site plan for Hertz Rental Car and have no further comments at this time. If you have any questions, or need further information please feel free to contact me at 407-629-8880. (ff; CV page 1 01 1 T odd Peetz From: John Cunningham Ocunningham@ccvfd.org] Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 1:48 PM To: Todd Peetz Subject: Re:Hertz Rental Car 2nd (Site Plan) Todd, We have reviewed the site plan and have no comment. 11/1/2006 @ MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Morley, Building Official TO: Todd Peetz City Planner FROM: Ed Gardulski Public Works Director DATE: October 16, 2006 RE: Hertz Site Plan Review The Public Works Department has reviewed the above stated project and do not have any further comments or concerns. All previous comments and concerns have been satisfactorily addressed. (Ci! \..Y STOHLER PAGE 02 11/0112005 04:49 321-783-7055 November 1. 2006 Mr. Todd. Peetz SSA Miller-Legg & Associates 631 South Orlando Avenue Suite 200 Winter Park, FL 32789 RE: Site Plan - Hertz - Review #3 , SSA Job No. 05-0025, Task 032-1004 Dear Mr. Peetz: SSA has reviewed the above-referenced project and based on our review, SSA recommends said plan for City approval. Please note that this site must comply with the conditions of the St. Johns River Water Management District permit for the Residence Inn. Specifically Condition 25 which states "Prior to initiating construction on each of the. two out-parcels, drainage plans must be submitted to the District for staff review and approval to demonstrate compliance with the permitted design. The maximum allowable impervious for each of the out parcels is 70%." This review does not relieve the applicant from other local. state, and federal agencies having jurisdiction over the project site. Should you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Stottler Stagg & Associates ArChileOn9ineers, Planners, Inc. a{ ~ t',.eb~(~ ~ +=o~ John A. Pekar, PE Sr. Vice President - City Engineer City Engineer's Review Fee for Review #3 - $380.00 NOTICE OF ADDITIONAL FEES As this project is being reviewed under the original City contract, Engineering Fees for all reviews after 2nd review will be billed at $95.00 per hour. STOTIlER STAGG & ASSOCIAlES ARCHITECfS ENGINEERS PlANNERS, INC. @ S6S0 North Atlantlc Avenue P. O. Box 1630 Cape Canaveral, Florida 32920 Tel 321-783-1320 Fax 321-783-7055 U:\Jo'n Soltor~.\CIV\L\Prnj'c!S\CAPE\l-h.ltz Roview 3.do. Lie. #AACOOO329 .fiEBOOOO762 ifLBOOO6700 Meeting Type: Planning & Zoning Meeting Date: 11/08/08 AGENDA Heading Discussion Item #4 No. AGENDA REPORT PLANNING & ZONING BOARD THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: Right in and Right out - Oak Park Condominiums DEPT./DNISION: Building Department I Requested Action: I Discussion with direction/recommendation to staff or City Council on enforcement of right in and right out Oak Park Condominiums. Summary Explanation & Background: The Oak Park Condominiums were approved in 2005 with the condition of a right in right out for access. This was because of the close proximity of a driveway from the Villages of Seaport. Also in 2005 a proposed interesction improvement is programmed for improvement in this same vicintiy. The Oak Park Condominiums are now being occupied and the intersection improvements have not been (started) completed and the nevI residents are ingnoring the right in right out requirement. This has created concern by area residents and mentioned in open discussion at the 10/25/06 Planning and Zoning Board meeting. Exhibits Attached: 1) Minutes from previous meetings and a photograph of the completed entrance. Planning Official's Office Department .~ ]]em )Q</-l 1'1 f Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes August 25,2004 Page 3 Mr. David Langstrom, President of two Villages of Seaport Home Owners Associations and resident of 432 Beach Park Lane, verified that to the best of his knowledge, no representative from this project has contacted the Villages. He explained that Villages would need 100% of the ownerships votes to grant shared access, which would be impossible. Dude Braselton, Vice President of Oak Park, Inc., provided the rear elevation drawings requested by the Board at the last meeting. He explained that the buildings would be Key West style; the architect drawings, colors, and landscaping were unanimously approved by the Community Appearance Board. The Board members reviewed the rear elevation drawing and landscape plan. Mr. Braselton verified that where possible, the existing vegetation would be preserved. Mr. Braselton submitted the City's site plan overview (Exhibit A) and copy of the Brevard County Roadway Permit (Exhibit B). Mr. Bras_elton advised that the drivewa will be painted with double-lines indicatin ri 'ht-ill/ri ht-ou( ..?nly. Mr. Braselton testifie t at e cou not gIve names and times of who he spoke with at Towne Realty, but he did speak with Tom Downs, developer of Villages of -~-_____~eaport~nnd_Crai~Smith.-representativ-e-for-Coastal-I<'u€ls.--l"h~y-w€f~ll()t",il1t~l'~~t~1ldI!"..,. __ ___ ~___.. M_~_ -...,-,.._..... ------------- .----....".. neg6tiatirigsharedaccess.m " ,',' ""'mm.. Mr. Nicholas commented that the access was a dangerous safety concern and needed to be addressed. Todd Peetz, City Planner outlined the suggestions from the transportation report, dated June 2, 2004, from Luke Transportation Engineering Consultants. Bennett Boucher, City Manager commented that the developer had since June 2, 2004 to contact adjacent property owners to negotiate access. He added that Luke Transportation suggested the right turn only off N. Atlantic A venue as a last resort. Dude Braselton responded that he followed every recommendation from Luke Transportation. Mr. Boucher reiterated that he spoke with Towne Realty and they are interested in negotiating. Steven Lasey, Attorney for Oak Park, Inc. commented that the discussions were fruitless. He advised that Coastal Fuels has flat-out refused to work with the developer. Mr. Lasey cited various case law and advised that the City would fall into a taking of the property by denial of access. He noted that the County has approved and issued the permit for roadway access and therefore, the Board could not deny the site plan based on traffic conditions on N. Atlantic Avenue. Mr. Braselton reiterated that all his contact with adjacent property owners has been verbal. Chairperson McNeely announced that the applicant has the right to appeal to the City Council if they do not agree with the Planning & Zoning Board's approval. Craig Stevenson, future resident of this project spoke in favor of the site plan. Bill Hartnett, Board member of Shorewood Association advised that residents of Shorewood and Solana Lakes are concerned. Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes August 25, 2004 Page 4 City Attorney Garganese gave the Board direction as to voting options. He noted that there is case law where the property owner is not entitled to the easiest way of access. City Attorney Garganese asked Attorney Lasey if his client would be willing negotiate with adjacent owners for access and bring the request back to the Board in two weeks. Dude Braselton responded no because he has attempted to contact the adjacent property owners. Motion by Mr. Nicholas, seconded by Ms. McNeely to table this item for two weeks to give the developer time to negotiate with the property owners of Shorewood Drive. Mr. Braselton requested that the Board make a motion to approve the site plan. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. There being no further business for the Board to consider the meeting was adiourned at 9:07 p.m. ~~ /;;]U J} Z~.. ) luL~ ' Bea McNeely, Chairperson (J Susan L. hapma, oard Secretary (j) t"LAI\lI\lIl\l\..:J 6\ LUI\lIl\l\..:J IjUAKU MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 22, 2004 A Regular Meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board was held on September 22, 2004 at the City Hall Annex, 111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida. Board Chairperson Bea McNeely called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The Secretary called the roll. MEMBERS PRESENT Bea McNeely Chairperson Leo Nicholas Vice Chairperson Lamar Russell Walter Schoenfeld Donald Dunn 2nd Alternate MEMBERS ABSENT Alice Filteau 1 st Alternate OTHERS PRESENT Susan Chapman Board Secretary Todd Peetz City Planner Anthony Garganese City Attorney Robert Hoog Mayorpr07Tem All persons giving testimony were sworn in by City Attorney Garganese. Chairperson McNeely introduced the new Board members. NEW BUSINESS: 1. Approval of Meetinq Minutes: Auqust 25, 2004 Motion by Mr. Nicholas, seconded by Mr. Fredrickson to approve the meeting minutes of August 25, 2004. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. OLD BUSINESS: 1. Review and Motion Re: Oak Park Condominiums Site Plan, Township 24. Ranqe 37. Section 14, Tracts A & B - Steven Morqan, Applicant. Mr. Peetz, City Planner, advised that on the Board voiced concerns and questions regarding setbacks, access, and traffic flow. He noted that nothing has been received from the applicant since the last meeting. I ~/1r. Braselton, developer, advised that this vvas the 3rd time before the Board and I I requested a motion for approval. He submitted an affidavit that he contacted and spoke \ with representatives from Towne Realty and Coastal Fuels regarding Shorewood Drive roadway access (Exhibit A). \ i I ~) Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes September 22, 2004 Page 2 Attorney McLennan, representing the developer, advised the Board that it is beyond the capacity of his client to perform the request of the Board. He commented that the Board is not authorized under the City's ordinances to require additional access. Mr. Nicholas responded that traffic flow is a concern of this Board in an effort to protect the safety of the citizens, including children, throughout the community. Mr. Russell responded that the Board is allowed to make any reasonable inquiry to protect health, safety and '~.." . ......yyE?JtgIE?,.~...Mc,...~Cq8.E?IJQXL.H~.?pgng~~LJbqLJb.E?c~QndjJjQIJ8..~QfJbE?.E2Qgg:L9JE?~..jnE?ql1jJ<:lQJ~.." .' ..'~ .. because there is a list of multiple parties into the negations and the request is increasingly difficult. City Attorney Garganese responded that the Board can impose reasonable conditions, this project begs another ingress/egress point but the developer does not have approval which creates a dilemma. He read a portion of the city code regarding the site plan process relating to safe ingress and egress. Discussion was held reQarding installing an emergency break-through gate up to the pavement of Shorewood Drive; future developments on N. Atlantic Avenue; and traffic flow. Mr. Braselton responded that he has a retaining wall and would need to build a bridge to construct any kind of emergency access. Mr. Gardulski, Director of Public Works Director, advised that the city can request a 20 ft. right of way easement for traffic improvements. Mr. Braselton advised that he could not accommodate that request RE?g91d~E?bi?..<:iE?YE?IQRmE?nt....w9?.._9.ttbE?.m<:l)5:iml1m.jQL\I\f<:ltE2LrE2JE2otiQDLE2QuimmE2nts; ..and. - ~ --"-- .. -...... - ,.. ~_._'-'-~ could not remove units from the project because the cost would be prohibited. Mr. Roviaro, Director of Transportation Planning for Luke Transportation, advised that he has witnessed how close the accesses are at Villages, Shorewood, and this proposed development; the distances do not meet D.G.T. minimum distance requirements; N. \ Atlantic Avenue is not a residential roadway and Luke Transportation has recommended N. Atlantic Avenue as a last recommendation for access, and only with a right turn only. Mr. Braselton responded that Villages North road is for emergency only access, not a permanent access, and is only being used ternporarily. Mr. Russell commented that in order to make the area safe, north-in and north-out must be on both sides of N. Atlantic Avenue. Mr. Gardulski, Director of Public Works showed the Board a map, designed by Allen Engineering showing the road improvements on N. Atlantic Avenue of what is designed and what is currently under construction which was entered into the record (Exhibit B). The Board members reviewed the proposed landscape and sidewalk plan. Mr. Braselton advised that a vegetative buffer will be installed within the 15 ft. rear setback. Discussion followed. Motion by Mr. Russell, seconded by Chairperson McNeely to approve the Site Plan of Oak Park Condominiums \Nith the condition that the access be right-in/right-out only. Motion carried by a (3) to (2) majority with members voting as follows: Mr. Fredrickson, against; Ms. McNeely, for; Mr. Nicholas, against; Mr. Russell, for; Mr. Schoenfeld, for. ----- - @ @ Page 1 of 1 http://www.brevardpropertyappraiser.com/scripts/esrimap.dll?name=Brevard1&id=200611...11/1/2006 Meeting Type: Planning & Zoning Meeting Date: 11/08/06 AGENDA Heading Discussion Item #5 No. AGENDA REPORT PLANNING & ZONING BOARD THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: Discussion - Special Exception Reviews. DEPT./DIVISION: Building Department I Requested Action: I Discussion regarding creating a new methodology for special exception reviews. Discuss the process and determine key variables based on what is in the Code and recommend possible additions to code to remove most of the subjectivity with issues of compatibility Summary Explanation & Background: During the review of several past special exceptions, there were times when review questions become debatable, especially with compatibility. At the September 27th meeting, Board member Lamar Russell submitted to the Planning and Zoning Board his "thoughts on compatibility and surrounding uses". The primary emphasis of the report was establishing criteria for measuring compatibility. The City Planner has provided a DRAFT matrix to use to work from for the discussion. If values are assigned to measure compatibility they need to be meaningful and not arhitnnv ---~ --- - --------,./. During the P &2 meeting on 10/25/06, the City Planner presented a draft matrix evaluation sheet. After some discussion, it was decided that the matrix might not be legally acceptable if scoring was found to be subjective. The discussion continued, the answer could be more specific in the questions being asked. The discussion ended with the direction to discuss further. Exhibits Attached: 1) Report from P&Z Board member Lamar Russell, 2) Special exception questions for discussion currently, 3) Special exception forms from the past I Planning Official's Office I Department I I I Aq e,1dC( ~ terll * 5 Thoughts on Compatibility with Surrounding Uses L What are the minimum requirements for a Special Exception? The Minimum Requirements for a Special Exception should be reviewed 'by P&Z ----------------------------ul.e.mbexs__hefQrc__caclLme.eting.-which-will-cQlls-ider-a--Sp@Gial-E-lfeepfial1;___________________________________ The Minimum Requirements should be read in full or summarized at the beginning of a Special Exception agenda item. II. What are the planned Future Land Uses? What uses are aI10wed by current zoning regulations? Should they be documented into the Hearing Record? What are the Comprellensive Plan goals, objectives and policies with respect to this matter? Should they be documented in the Hearing Record? III. Criteria for Ivleasuring Compatibility The fuHowing absolute measures of compatibility \vil1 provide the Board of Adjustments with a set of documented findings that will aid that board to render a decision that will withstand chal1enge. A. Differences in Land Use Functions Are there extreme differences in adjacent functions, i.e. Manufacturing vs Residential vs Commercial? Do extreme functional differences (Le., resorts vs fuel storage or industrial storage vs residential) mandate maximum buffer distance? B. Hannony Between Adjoining Properties Appearance Are there serious differences in structural appearances? Industrial or Commercial communities might think their uses are attractive; adjoining Residential residents might disagree. Size Are there seriolls or extreme structural size difYerences? Buffering/Screening Is screening a useful mitigation? What types of screening might be practical? Setbacks Does relocating structures or orientations aIlow \:vider buffering bet\veen zoning functions? Noise Does noise from one use annoy tIle adjoining use? (J) Glare Is there spill-over light or glare onto an adjoining use? Odor ----....-----------------------..Isthere...a-docUl11entedhistory-of-e-roorreleases-;-H-owwere-dTey-detectea-oy----------------.----- documented? Hours of Operation Do differences in hours of operation cause milloyance? Traffic Are there differences in types of traffic generated? Differences in types and sizes of vehicles? Is loading and unloading involved? Do these activities impact adjoining uses? r., Relationship to Land Values L-. Are property values impacted? What does the City's Mission Statement say in regard to propeliy values? D. Risk Factors Does potential energy storage pose risk to surrounding area? If so, what is the radius of safety? Is the Fire Department') hazard analysis complete and adequate? 'N'hat recommendations are made by the Fire Department? \\111at are the hazards that may contribute to fire, detonation or toxic release? \Vllat type and capacity of materials are allowed? What is the present on-site fire fighting capability? E. Enviroll..rnental Conditions Is there a documented history of environmental violations? How were they detected or documented? Are there any recent investigations regarding environmental violations? Are there any current on-going remedial or cleanup activities required by any state environmental agency? Have mitigation funds been allocated? F. Other Considerations Who was there first? How long have any present buffer areas existed? Does the Special Exception seriously reduce buffer area that produces beauty or increases safety? GiJ mY'! 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. 2) Will the Special Exception create any unusual 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.? 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 fi.-re or medical emergency? 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? 6) Is there adequate and properly located utilities available or may be reasonably provided to serve the proposed development (if applicable)? 7) Is there adequate screening and/or buffering provided to protect and provide compatibility to adjoining properties? 8) Are signs and exterior lighting, if anYI designed and arranged so as to promote traffic safety and to eliminate or minimize any undue glare, incompatibility, and disharmony with adjoining properties? (J) ~,) 7 9) Is there adequate refuse and service areas? 10) Do the setbacks, landscaping/ and open space met the requirements of the zoning district? 11) Is the proposed 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 compatibility? 12) Is the Special Exception 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? 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? 15) Should the Special Exception be granted with any noted limitations/ restrictions and/ or conditions? . . \, 16) Should the Special Exception be specifically granted to the petitioner or run concurrently with the property? 8 @ BUILDING OFFICIAL OR DESIGNEE REVIEW 1. _ Zoning Amendment 2. - Variance Contiguous Zoning 3. _ Special Exception North South East West 4. _ Administrative Appeal - - -- CONSIDERATIONS SETBACKS: - MEETS CODE _ CODE VIOLATION (Describe) COVERAGE: - MEETS CODE _ CODE VIOLATION (Describe) LOT SIZE: - MEETS CODE _ CODE VIOLATION (Describe) DENSITY: - MEETS CODE _ CODE VIOLATION (Describe) HEIGHT: - MEETS CODE _ CODE VIOLATION (Describe) ADDITIONAL REFERENCES I SUBJECT CODE SECT. APPLICABLE I Code Sect. Applicability Yes No PARKING -- LOADING ZONE -- SETBACKS (AlA Ridgewoodj Astronaut) -- LANDSCAPING -- NON-CONFOR1v1JTIES . " -- STRUCTURES -- LAND USES -- NOTE: The Planning & Zoning Board should also review Section 110-47 (1-11) COMMENTS: Date Reviewed by Building Official or Designee: Signature: ~ 5 9 IU;COMr.lr.NDlI.'PIONS OF PLI\NNING I\ND 7.0NING flOl\lW H1~QUg~)'r NO. c-\i::;::'" - C' I --- J 1. A Public nearing was held on Oft. q; 111z. at 1 { 30 I'fil . (elate) (time) 2. Action taken: V Recommend approval. Recommend disapproval. Request postponed. Request tabled until at . (date) (time) Request returned to applicant for additional information. Request withdrawn by applicant. 3. The factual basis upon which the Planning & Zoning [loard decision was rendered is as follows (reference 6"5.25 for variances; 645.21 i\ nc1 6"5.23 for Special gxceptions; and 6"5.19 for I\dministrative Review): ~,,/ (P3Z 5"1 13 - 7fLCM>4~J.!'P. -;(:tM~fU; "'f ~~ adf'd ~k ;ii' .' ':f '4 ~1 "aft .uJ ~r v _- i tMfl-fUU4u:ta-.11 ~t1AI\ e:.i~G it.. .dz;,.a. r- tIA.1JtL - ---~ t-'~O .err~+' ~ ~. , .. , Date Dzc, '1, 11CJ L- If cTf, 'I20-dLlP Q I Chairman, Planning & Zoning Doard AC'l'If?N BY ZONING BOARD OF - --JUS'l'MEN'r REQU,\S'l' NO. en:: - 01 1. A Public nearing was held on / 4' (q 3 at I: 30 f VY1 . , date) (time) 2. Action taken: V Request approved. Request denied. Request postponed. Request tabled until at . (date) (time) Request returned to Planning and Zoning Board. Request returned to applicant for additional information. Request withdrawn by applicant. 3. The factual basis upon which the Zoning Board of Adjustment decision was rendered is as follows (reference 645.25 for Variances; 645.21 and 645.23 for Special Exception; and 645.19 for Administrative Review). In granting any Special Exception or Variance, the Zoning l30ard of Adjust- ment may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with Zoning Ordinance. Violation of: such conditions and safeguards, when made a part of the terms under which Special Exception or Variance is granted, shall be deemed to be a violation of this Ordinance and punish- able as provided therein. Artrove d w; Ii. 2 con J~ ~~J : t. I...(' /t..e Frye De! f. d, S C-c I'\, +,." UeJ [..{ se of i8t.( ~ frofMt-(j ~ SfyvLvtu r-e I +t..e 5-h--qc~y-e. -::sJ"li3-lI he GvoufrM LAA-to cOYY'fll'~c.e DY (-eW1oved_ 7h. <e Y1 0 i1 - C 0 V1.~~ V" m ,,' n d u.. ::) e ,5+,a-tA.. vt 0 + IJ e. e. ')( p ~ de d \..-\....~<< LU a 0- _ ,~(\ .. )>.. . ,,),>~,.. . \jY ~~. & r.....,~ 'c:l)~ O~ ~ '6~e\ . . , Date //~'/Cj3 ~~ I ~ G) Chairman, Zoning Doard ~f: Adjustment Rev. lJ-lJ9 Meeting Type: Planning & Zoning Meeting Date: 11/08/06 AGENDA Heading Discussion Item # ~ No. AGENDA REPORT PLANNING & ZONING BOARD THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: Consider Meeting Cancellation of November 22nd and Consider Setting a Meeting on November 29th DEPT.lDIVISION: Building Department I D ~.n.....o.Cl+..o.rI A r-..:n....... I """'':lu.''''Io::::JI(,'''~ .LlL."'.......,.... Consider cancelling the Novmeber 22nd and setting a meeting on November 29th. Summary Explanation & Background: Normally the P&Z meeting is cancelled due to the proximity of the Thanksgiving holiday_ When the P&Z anticipates and active agenda they schedule a special meeting for the last Wednesday in November. This the schedulling of a special meeting is totally the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Board. Exhibits Attached: I __ 0 _ uo 0 _ ___ I I Planning Otlicial's Otlice Department