Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 01-16-2007 WorkshopCITY COUNCIL JOINT WORKSHOP rw MEETING WITH THE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD CITY HALL ANNEX 111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida TUESDAY January 16, 2007 5:00 PM MINUTES CALL TO ORDER The Chair called the meeting to order at 5 p.m. ROLL CALL: Council Members Present: Mayor Pro Tem Council Member Council Member Mayor Council Member Bob Hoog Leo Nicholas Buzz Petsos Rocky Randels Shannon Roberts Planning & Zoning Board Members Present: Chairperson Bea McNeely Vice Chairperson Lamar Russell Dr. John Fredrickson Donald Dunn Harry Pearson Others Present: City Manager Bennett Boucher City Attorney Anthony Garganese Asst. City Clerk Virginia Haas Building Official Todd Morley City Planner Todd Peetz DISCUSSION 1. City Code Review: Article VI Site Plans 110- 223(f) through 110 -389. ARTICLE VI. SITE PLANS" Mayor Randels began code review at section 110 -223. Mayor Randels asked the Planning & Zoning Board to advise the Council when they note any changes needed. City of Cape Canaveral, Florida Code Review Workshop January 16, 2007 Page 2 of 4 Mr. Peetz verified that five copies of the site plan is the correct number for review. Mr. Peetz responded to Mayor Randels that submitting the site plans 30 days prior to the meeting is sufficient amount of time. Mr. Peetz submitted that on item number 4 the City Engineer coordinates with Department of Environmental Protection and the extra copy is sent to Public Works for review. It was suggested that number 4 be changed to Public Works and delete the Department of Environmental Protection. Ms. Roberts inquired about sufficient time to notify adjacent property owners. Mr. Morley replied that type of courtesy notice is used for variances and special exceptions. Mr. Morley explained that site plan review initiates at four or more units, for example the new hotel going up. No notices are required because it is a permitted use. Ms. Roberts explained that the citizens were not notified about the Cape Caribe project. Mr. Morley asked what would be gained from noticing the public. The City cannot deny the request because it is a conforming use. Ms. McNeely stated that the board would not accept any requests if approvals are not filed and complete; however there are times when the developer likes to rush things through. Mr. Peetz explained that after the initial review process the applicant should resubmit 5 corrected copies and the process starts over again at item (a). Once corrections are completed, the applicant should then submit 11 copies of the site plan instead of 7. Ms. Roberts asked if code references mean calendar days or business days. Mr. Morley suggested submitting plans to the building department 7 days prior to the meeting rather than 5 days. Mr. Russell confirmed that the site plan checklist works well however the special exception checklist was revised. Discussion began on section 110 -223 (h). Mr. Russell explained that this language was added approximately three years ago over a disagreement with a site plan review taking too much time. Dr. John stated that a similar instance occurred when City Council asked the City Attorney to create a short term rental ordinance because they felt the Planning & Zoning Board was taking too much time reviewing the issue. Mr. Russell stated that the board works until they find a solution and provides Council all facts. Ms. Roberts inputted that possibly a consultation with the Planning & Zoning Board could be added prior to City Council considering an application. Mr. Petsos asked if any other cities have this language in place. Attorney Garganese replied yes, however this language is not exercised frequently but used as a safeguard. Attorney Garganese stated that "reasonable time" as used in the code would be determined on a case by case basis. There was some discussion regarding vested rights and a project located on Anchor way. Attorney Garganese stated an issue for review. Section 110 -224 has no abandonment clause which created problems such as the Sand in the Shoes issue. There is no language in the current code for automatic expiration of applications if the project is City of Cape Canaveral, Florida Code Review Workshop January 16, 2007 Page 3 of 4 abandoned. Mr. Morley noted that pulling a permit does not mean the contractor will build. Mr. Petsos stated that the City Council relies on what is written and recommended a meeting with the Planning & Zoning Board as to why they have not made a determination. There was discussion about the sunshine law and City Council speaking to the Planning & Zoning Board members. Mr. Morley mentioned the expiration of building applications which could be tied to abandonment. He explained that the Florida Building Code allows six months to complete an application. Mr. Russell suggested adding the abandonment code to section 110 -224 Expiration. Attorney Garganese explained that section 110 -223.5 was repealed in its entirety by Ordinance 03 -2005. The entire procedure was changed and the City Council now makes final site plan procedures which are covered in 110- 223(h). Attorney Garganese continued that the code is also lacking in criteria for decisions made regarding site plans. For example all site plans have to be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and all levels of service should be reviewed. Mr. Morley replied that this criterion is briefly covered in 110 - 223(8). Ms. Roberts requested that the code be clearer about criteria considered. Mr. Peetz inputted that the vast majority of the checklist is covered in the previous section. Attorney Garganese suggested renaming the current section called "Review Procedures" to "Requirements of Site Plans ". Attorney Garganese requested a meeting with the City Manager, Building Official and City Planner to rework section 110 -223 and 110 -224. Mr. Morley stated these sections should be reviewed along with Chapter 86, Concurrency Management. 110 -224. Expiration. Mr. Morley recommended defining the term "abandonment" in order to set expiration dates for site plans. Mayor Randels questioned what code would suffice to rid unfinished buildings. Mr. Morley replied that this section concerns site plans. Mr. Morley reiterated that at this time a site plan has no expiration. Mayor Randels suggested should no structure inspection or "significant contribution" occur within 6 months, the application expires. Mr. Morley explained that an active building permit for a structure will sustain the life of a site plan. Attorney Garganese stated site plans for phased projects could be monitored by creating a development agreement. Mayor Randels noted that the next Code Review Workshop will begin at Section 110- 224. Expiration. City of Cape Canaveral, Florida Code Review Workshop January 16, 2007 Page 4 of 4 ADJOURNMENT Due to a subsequent City Council Regular Meeting, the Chair adjourned the meeting at 6:45 P.M. Virginia Haas, Assistant City Clerk