HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 10, 2010 P & Z MinutesPLANNING & ZONING BOARD
MEETING MINUTES
MAY 12, 2010
A Regular Meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board was held on May 12, 2010, at the
City Canaveral Public Library, 201 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida. Lamar
Russell, Chairperson, called the meeting to Order at 7:00 p.m. The Secretary called the
roll.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Lamar Russell
Bea McNeely
John Fredrickson
Harry Pearson
Donald Dunn
John Johanson
Ron Friedman
OTHERS PRESENT
Susan Chapman
Kate Latorre
Robert Hoog
Barry Brown
Todd Morley
Jeff Ratliffe
NEW BUSINESS
Chairperson
Vice Chairperson
1 st Alternate
2nd Alternate
Secretary
Assistant City Attorney
Council Member
Planning & Development Director
Building Official
Assistant Public Works Director
Approval of Meeting Minutes: April 14, 2010.
Motion by Bea McNeely, seconded by Harry Pearson, to approve the meeting minutes of
April 14, 2010, with Donald Dunn's inserted sentence, as read by Chairperson Russell.
Vote on the motion carried unanimously.
Chairperson Russell asked the Board members if they would consider changing the
order of the agenda to move agenda item #4 to #2 in order to accommodate the
petitioner, because the other agenda items could have lengthy discussion. Brief
discussion followed.
Motion by Harry Pearson, seconded by Donald Dunn, to move agenda item #4 up to #2.
By unanimous consensus, the orders of the agenda items were changed.
2. Recommendation to Board of Adiustment Re: Special Exception Reauest No
10-01 to Allow a Child Care Facility in the R-2 Zoning District at Palms East
Apartments, 211 Caroline Street, Section 14, Township 24 South, Range 37
East, Parcel 502.0 — Jeffrey W. Wells, Petitioner for Palms East LLC, Property
Owner.
Barry Brown, Planning & Development Director gave his staff report. He advised that
the city code was recently amended to allow child care facilities in the R-2 zoning district
by special exception. Palms East was requesting a special exception to allow a child
care facility.
Planning & Zoning Board
Meeting Minutes
May 12, 2010
Page 2
The Board members reviewed the application packet. The Board reviewed the special
exception criteria worksheet, which included consideration and verification of the
following: land use and zoning, impact to surrounding properties, traffic and parking,
public services, and any miscellaneous impacts. The Board members also verified that
the request met the special exception conditions of the City code pertaining to child care
facilities. Brief discussion was held regarding the submitted drawing of the facility. Barry
Brown verified that it was drawn to scale; however, the drawing was reduced for the
Board packet and the scale was cut off. He advised that he would annotate the scale on
the drawing.
Toni Abeles, Managing Partner for Palms East Apartments, testified that there are over
100 children living at the complex. The reason why they want to start this child care is
so the kids have some supervision, because some have no supervision before and after
school; they will make the care affordable for the residents; they are anticipating that
95% of the children that come into the facility will be from the apartment complex. Since
the property is only one block from the elementary school, they also anticipate some
children for before and after school care. She verified that staffing would depend on the
State requirement, and parking was available all along the facility. Hours of operation
will be from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m.
Motion by Donald Dunn, seconded by Harry Pearson to recommend approval of Special
Exception Request No. 10-01, with the conditions as specified in the City code. Vote on
the motion carried unanimously.
3. Recommendation to City Council Re: Voluntary Annexation of 315 Grant Avenue
— Jack and Elizabeth Mutter, Petitioners:
Chairperson Russell announced that the Board is not making a formal recommendation,
because it has no authority to make recommendation on a voluntary annexation;
however, the Board can give an informal opinion. He advised that they only needed to
recommend the zoning for the property.
Barry Brown, Planning & Development Director, explained that Jack and Elizabeth
Mutter are requesting a voluntary annexation. He described the property, land use, and
zoning designation. He advised that the Mutter's have requested annexation into the
City to lower taxes and assessments, better police service, availability of reuse water,
and a more favorable interpretation of the Florida building and fire codes regarding alarm
systems. He further advised that the City staff review team reviewed the request, and
addressed sanitary sewer, water, roads, stormwater, reclaimed water, and
nonconformities. Staff recommended that while Florida Statutes do not require that
annexations be heard by the Planning & Zoning Board, City code calls for the Planning &
Zoning Board to make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the zoning to be
assigned to the annexed property.
Planning & Zoning Board
Meeting Minutes
May 12, 2010
Page 3
Barry Brown asked for the Board's input in evaluating the request. He commented that it
appeared that the Mutter's would benefit from the annexation and was asking the Board
to consider how the City benefits and any downstream ramifications from the
annexation. He advised that the property did not fully comply with the City code; and the
non -conformities were minor or being adequately addressed by other service providers.
The Board members viewed photographs and aerials of the property, held discussion
and received input from Barry Brown and Jeff Ratliffe, Assistant Public Works Director,
regarding: sanitary sewer, sanitary sewer hook-up, reclaimed water, ownership of the
roads.
Ron Friedman advised that the City code was specific, in that every property in the City
had to hook into the City sewer. He questioned how the City could waive that
requirement. Barry Brown advised that the question was brought up during the staff
review committee meeting. Staff concluded that it would be considered an existing non-
conformity. Other existing non -conformities included: the density is greater than what
our code allow and the property has less parking than what is required by code. Ron
Friedman responded that it is not an existing non -conformity. He advised that City code
has a provision that if a property has a septic tank the owner is responsible for 150 ft. of
sewer connection. Therefore, in this case, the City was only responsible for 40 ft. of a
new sewer line. He commented that anytime the City is considering creating a non-
conforming use that is 50% more than the existing surrounding zoning it is not the right
thing to do. He asked what benefit this property would be to the City. Donald Dunn
commented that the City would not approve someone building a non -conforming use.
Barry Brown explained that staff originally analyzed the annexation from the standpoint
of how it would benefit the Mutter's. A fiscal analysis determined it would benefit them
from a tax and assessment standpoint. Staff had not fully accessed the benefit to the
City.
Jack Mutter, Applicant, advised that it would be a benefit for the City if any properties
south of Grant Avenue were annexed, starting with his property. He noted that other
property owners on Grant Avenue are also interested in annexing into the City. He
commented that more properties in the City would increase the tax base; he didn't
believe there could be a sewer connection on Orange Avenue, because of the elevation,
unless a lift station was installed. He noted that the main reason he was requesting
annexing, was to increase emergency response time. He was aware that if the building
was destroyed more than 50%, only 15 units per acre would be allowed.
Discussion was held regarding a referendum that was held in 2005 regarding annexing
the properties located in Avon by the Sea that are located between Cocoa Beach and
Cape Canaveral. David Hiltoff, 201 Garfield Avenue, advised that the reason the
property owners do not want to annex into either city is because they are happy the way
things are. Discussion continued.
Motion by Harry Pearson, seconded by Bea McNeely, to recommend that if the property
is annexed into the City, that the zoning be R-2. Motion failed by a (3) to (2) vote, with
members voting as follows: Donald Dunn, against; John Fredrickson, against; Bea
McNeely, against; Harry Pearson, for; and Lamar Russell, for. Brief discussion followed.
Planning & Zoning Board
Meeting Minutes
May 12, 2010
Page 4
Motion by Lamar Russell, seconded by Harry Pearson, to recommend to City Council
that if the property is annexed the Board recommends that it be included into the R-2
zoning. Discussion followed. Vote on the motion carried unanimously.
4. Recommendation to City Council Re: Proposed Ordinance Amending Section
110-557, to Allow Commercial Parking Facilities by Special Exception in the C-1
M-1 and C-2 Zoning Districts.
Barry Brown, Planning & Development Director, explained the request and gave his staff
report. The Board members reviewed, discussed, and commented on the proposed
ordinance. Discussion was held regarding buffering and landscaping; future long term
planning of how the City should be redeveloped, functionality and aesthetics; minimum
area should be flexible; proposed hours of operation should be extended; other cities
who allow commercial parking do not have the Port as their neighbor; the City is
supporting the Port more than the citizens; what the visioning workshops revealed, what
do the citizens want; large open undeveloped properties on the northern end of the city;
commercial parking lots being detrimental to the City's future plan; allowing parking
garages in the M-1 zoning district only; no parking lots in any zoning district; proposed
distance between facilities; potential consequences if use is allowed; parking facilities at
the north and south ends of the City; seven factors in the City code that are special
exception criteria giving discretion on a site by site basis to consider if a request is an
appropriate use on the site proposed; compatibility; commercial parking lot in Cocoa
Beach across from Publix; types of security; highest and best property uses; commercial
parking lots being a transitional use; market demand; City being a bikeable and walkable
community; parking overflow at City hotels; providing and removing a service; allowing
commercial parking only in C-1 and C-2; when the visioning process will begin; how
parking fits into the vision; and not considering the ordinance until after the visioning is
finished; allowing no commercial parking lots or garages in C-1 or C-2; allowing parking
garages only in M-1; not allowing parking garages at all; existing vehicle rental facilities;
ensure the City codes are in place as a result of the visioning before enactment of this
ordinance; create the commercial parking ordinance from an architectural approach; ask
the Planning Director to provide visioning information and guidance on how this request
fits into the vision.
Motion by Donald Dunn to table recommendation of the ordinance. Motion failed for lack
of a second.
Discussion followed regarding establishing a date to come back to the ordinance for
recommendation. Barry Brown advised that the City has an application to amend the
code, and at some point the Board needs to move forward and make a recommendation
to the City Council, so that they can make a final determination. Discussion continued.
Motion by Harry Pearson to recommend to City Council that the proposed ordinance be
adopted, as written, in C-1 and C-2. Motion failed for lack of a second. Discussion
followed.
Motion by Donald Dunn to recommend denial of the ordinance to the City Council,
because the Planning & Zoning Board needs more of a match between the visioning
process and this code amendment request. Motion failed for lack of a second.
Discussion followed.
Planning & Zoning Board
Meeting Minutes
May 12, 2010
Page 5
The Board members agreed that since they could not reach a consensus, they would
continue discussion at the next meeting.
OPEN DISCUSSION
No open discussion was held.
Motion by Harry Pearson, seconded by Bea McNeely, to adjourn the meeting at 9:55
p.m.
Lamar Russell, Chairperson
Susan L. Chapman, 8-ecretary
+12010
Date & App oval
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
MEETING MINUTES
MARCH 10, 2010
A Regular Meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board was held on March 10, 2010,
at the City Canaveral Public Library, 201 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida.
Lamar Russell, Chairperson, called the meeting to Order at 7:00 p.m. The
Secretary called the roll.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Lamar Russell
Bea McNeely
John Fredrickson
Harry Pearson
John Johanson
T ..
Donald Dunn
Ronald Friedman
OTHERS PRESENT
Barry Brown
Susan Chapman
Kate Latorre
Robert Hoog
NEW BUSINESS
Chairperson
Vice Chairperson
1 st Alternate
2nd Alternate
Planning & Development Director
Secretary
Assistant City Attorney
Council Member
1. Approval of Meeting Minutes: February 10, 2010.
Motion by Harry Pearson, seconded by Bea McNeely, to approve the meeting
minutes of February 10, 2010, as written. Vote on the motion carried
unanimously.
2. Recommendation to City Council Re: Proposed Ordinance Amending
Section 110-294, Adding Child Care Facilities as a Permissible Use by
Special Exception in the R-2 Zoning District — Kate Latorre Assistant Citv
Attorney.
Barry Brown, Planning & Development Director, advised that following discussion
at the Board's previous meeting, the Board recommended that child care be
added to the R-2 zoning district, as a special exception. At that meeting, .the
Board directed City staff to perform research for criteria to evaluate the
appropriateness of child care at a specific location. Based on the research, Kate
Latorre, Assistant City Attorney, drafted an ordinance that adds child care
facilities as a 6t" item to the list of special exception uses in Section 110-294. Mr.
Brown gave an overview of the proposed ordinance and staff's research.
Planning & Zoning Board
Meeting Minutes
March 10, 2010
Page 2
Mr. Brown advised that a visual survey of properties within the R-2 zoning district
revealed that only five or six locations would possibly qualify for this type of use.
He advised that there has been no demand for a child care facility, other than
recently in one multi -family project, Palms East Apartments. He advised that
based on his R-2 survey and the lack of demand, the city would only deal with
the request at hand, and limit the possibility of a child care in R-2 to that multi-
family project. He pointed out that most importantly, a child care facility needs to
have a safe, on-site, drop off and pick up area, out of the public right-of-way.
Mr. Brown reviewed the proposed special exception conditions, for a day care, in
the R-2 zoning district. Proposed conditions included: one parking space for
every ten children, and one for each employee; visual screen and noise buffer;
safe, adequately lighted, on-site, pick up and drop off area, located outside the
public right of way; and a requirement for a site plan showing certain criteria, as
part of the special exception application.
The Board members reviewed the city code regulations regarding day care
facilities in the C-1 and C-2 zoning districts. Dr. Fredrickson commented about
adding the same criteria for a church wanting a day care facility in the C-1 zoning
district. Chairperson Russell advised that the agenda item was to recommend a
proposed ordinance for a day care facility in the R-2 zoning district, and
requested that the discussion be limited to same. He offered that if the members
wanted to discuss day care facilities in other zoning districts, they could request
that a discussion item be placed on another agenda.
John Johanson commented that he agreed with having separate criteria for day
care facilities. He agreed with Dr. Fredrickson that it would be very easy to
encompass the same criteria for day care facilities in the C-1 and C-2 zoning
districts. He believed the city should do it right, the first time, by adding criteria
for day care facilities in all the zoning districts where day care facilities are
allowed (similar to the city code pertaining to special criteria for townhouses.)
John Johanson advised that two other cities he researched had excellent criteria
for day care facilities. He commented that some of the proposed criteria in the
draft ordinance were too vague. He commented that he was upset that the
Board members did not receive the draft ordinance until the meeting, and
advised that in the past members received agenda item information at least a
week ahead of the meeting. Barry Brown addressed John Johanson's
comments. He explained that staff was working expeditiously to accommodate a
customer. He explained the process and time frame for adoption of an ordinance
once it was recommended to the City Council. He advised that this item was one
of several he was working on and trying to move forward. He commented that
there is a legitimate need for this request and a direction from City Council.
Planning & Zoning Board
Meeting Minutes
March 10, 2010
Page 3
The Board members held discussion regarding: adequate parking; safe drop-off
and pick-up areas; lighting; noise buffering; visual screening; fencing; days and
hours of operation.
Motion by Harry Pearson, seconded by John Johanson, to recommend approval
of the draft ordinance, with incorporation of changes to the criteria, as composed
this evening, to read as follows:
• (A) The child care facility must be located in a multi -family complex and
any such complex shall not be an age -restricted community;
• (B) There shall be an adequate drop-off and pick-up area onsite
located outside of the public right-of-way;
• (C) One (1) parking space per employee, plus one (1) parking space
for every eight (8) children shall be required, with a minimum of five (5)
total spaces;
• (D) Adequate visual screening and noise buffers from adjacent areas
shall be provided;
• (E) Each application for a special exception under the subsection shall
be accompanied by a site plan drawn to scale depicting the child care
building, drop-off and pick-up area, parking, play area and adjacent
buildings;
• (F) Adequate lighting in the pick-up and drop-off area shall be
provided.
Vote on the motion carried unanimously.
OPEN DISCUSSION
No open discussion was held.
Motion by Bea McNeely, seconded by Harry Pearson, to adjourn the meeting at
8:03 p.m.
Lamar Russell; G airperson
Susan L. Chapman, Secretary