Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 01-22-2008 WorkshopCITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING WITH THE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD CITY HALL ANNEX 111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida TUESDAY January 22, 2008 5:30 PM MINUTES CALL TO ORDER The Chair called the Meeting to order at 5:30 P.M. ROLL CALL: Council Members Present: Mayor Pro Tern Council Member Mayor Council Member Bob Hoog Leo Nicholas Rocky Randels Shannon Roberts Council Member Absent Council Member Buzz Petsos Planning and Zoning Board Members Present Chairperson Vice Chairperson Bea McNeely R. Lamar Russell Donald Dunn Dr. John Fredrickson Harry Pearson Ronald Friedman Planning and Zoning Board Member Absent: Others Present: John Johanson City Manager City Attorney City Clerk Building Official Bennett Boucher Kate Latorre Susan Stills Todd Morley City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Code Review Workshop Meeting w/ Planning and Zoning Board January 22, 2008 Page 2 of 6 DISCUSSION 1. City Code Review: Article VII, Division 5, C -1 Low Density Commercial District, Code Section 110 -331 through Division 8., C -2 Commercial/ Manufacturing District, Code Section110 -389, Parking and Loading. Lamar Russell, Planning and Zoning Board Vice Chairperson, requested to address statement in the September 18, 2007 Workshop Meeting Minutes related to Code Section 110 -276 which read, "Mr. Boucher explained how although the Court dismissed the ruling on zoning by referendum, the subsequent City Council noted on the matter. Mr. Russell clarified that the density contention was challenged by Cevesco, Inc. The lower court did not uphold the referendum. As a fact, the Florida Supreme refused to hear the case after it had been dismissed by the Court of Appeals. In the interim, an election occurred, and the City Council established low density at 15 units per acre by a 3 -2 vote. Mr. Russell concluded that the U.S. Supreme Court, through an Ohio case, ruled that people can zone by referendum. Therefore the U.S. Supreme Court upheld zoning by referendum although the decision was not recognized at that time by the State of Florida. Since that time another vote was made on height and the citizens established a height limitation of 45 -feet by referendum, or what Mr. Russell called a "straw" vote. He concluded that these were two facts explained for clarification in the Minutes. Mr. Russell replied to Mayor Randels that with enough signatures on an initiative, the electorate could get a zoning referendum on the ballot under the U.S. Supreme Court ruling. However, it had no bearing on what was done in Cape Canaveral. The Florida Circuit Court ruled that it could not be done and the Florida Court of Appeals upheld it. The Florida Supreme Court refused to hear the matter. Therefore, the Florida Courts did not settle the City's density matter, the Council did. Attorney Latorre stated that the Florida Supreme Court made zoning by referendum legal also for Florida in 1983. After the Cape Canaveral case was overturned and rendered invalid, the Florida Supreme Court has since recognized it. This is something the City could pursue and it would become a zoning Ordinance before the electorate. Attorney Latorre affirmed for Mr. Nicholas that the 1983 decision did not legitimatize the previous referendum. In order to have that become effective, a new procedure would be required. Mr. Russell stated his intent to clarify that the Council could change matters as needed regardless of previous Court cases. Mr. Russell referred to the height limitation saying that 45 -feet were established by a straw vote and the Council honored it. However, a Council could change that if they desired. Mr. Friedman, Planning and Zoning Board Member, referred to the paragraph at the top of Page 3 in the September 18 Workshop Minutes and requested a change to his statement on height from "27- feet" to "47- feet." City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Code Review Workshop Meeting w/ Planning and Zoning Board January 22, 2008 Page 3 of 6 Mayor Randels opened Discussion with Code Section 110 -331, Intent C -1 Low Density Commercial District. Mayor Randels called on Todd Peetz, City Planner to lead the discussion. Ms. Roberts questioned the second sentence which referred to motorists but did not include pedestrians. Discussion followed on the difference between residential and visiting pedestrians and motorists. Section 110 -331, Intent was changed as follows: "the types of uses permitted are intended to serve the consumer needs , as well as the commercial needs of residents and visitors Attorney Latorre clarified that the last sentence formerly relating to fire districts was repealed with the Liquefied Petroleum Gas ordinance. Mr. Peetz proceeded to Code Section 110 -332, Principal Uses and Structures Mr. Russell pointed out that the Business and Cultural Development Board planned to review this list in order to amend it. Mr. Boucher brought up new service needs, such as Adult Day Care and Assistant Living Facilities. Attorney Latorre reminded of a provision which charges the Building Official with interpretation questions. Attorney Latorre also cautioned on defining Uses too restrictively which might exclude Uses of which exclusion was not intended. Ms. Roberts referred to Item No. (4) relating to hotel "rental units" for clarification that they were different from apartment dwellings. Mr. Morley brought up that his discussion with Cape Caribe addressed assigned keys or the number of rental units. Discussion concluded that No. (4) pertained only to hotels and motels. Ms. Roberts referred to Item No. (5), Eating Establishments and asked if that referred to outside as well as inside eating. Mr. Peetz stated that the establishment would need to meet the setback requirements. Mr. Peetz brought up hot dog carts; however, discussion concluded that mobile vending prohibition was established in another Code section. Discussion followed on what would be included or excluded in order to clearly define the list. Ms. Roberts stated that the Council should formally ask the Business and Cultural Development Board to update Code Section 110 -332. Mayor Pro Tern Hoog questioned outside displays on page 16, Section 110 -334, Special Exceptions Permissible by Board of Adjustment in which outside displays were allowed within requirements. Mr. Morley requested more clearly defined language for Item No. (4) to define separately leased units. Mr. Russell replied that how the units were rented was a business issue. Mr. Peetz explained that this discussion came about due to discussion with Cape Caribe which allows rental of one -third of a suite. Mr. Peetz explained that the new building on the west side of the road was debated as either one unit or three due to the number of keys. Mr. Morley recommended the following language "Hotels and motels with a minimum cauability of 150 seoarate leasing units" to clarify the ability to separately lease the units. Discussion ascertained that there City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Code Review Workshop Meeting w/ Planning and Zoning Board January 22, 2008 Page 4 of 6 appeared to be no violation of the City Code since a Certificate of Occupancy was obtained.\ Ms. Roberts asked for a clarification on No. (6) and if there was any further discussion on the potential of a mortuary. Discussion followed on funeral service providers. Ms. Roberts mentioned, for the record, Mr. Boucher's suggestion of Adult Day Care Services and if that should be included on the list. Mr. Morley recommended clarifying the type of schools under Item No. (6) and No. (14) and if there were a need to include private schools in No. (6). Mayor Randels clarified the language change in Section 110 -332 as follows: removing the word schools from No. (6) and changing No. (14) to read private and public schools. Discussion followed on adding Adult Day Care to Item No. (11). Mr. Morley informed that a residential Living Facility would allow for a limited number of patients. Attorney Latorre clarified that the State statutes preempts the City's regulations and the legislature states that they were a valid residential use. However, the number over the threshold, presumably eight persons, would fall under State regulations. Discussion concluded to include the word "Adult" in Item No. (11). Harry Pearson, Planning and Zoning Board Member, expressed that schools were regulated by the Public School District. Mr. Morley brought out that the correct terminology was Adult Assisted Living Facilities differed from Adult Day Care. Attorney MW Latorre explained that Assistant Living Facilities was a specifically defined term in State statutes with up to one dozen categories of Adult type care facilities each regulated differently. Attorney Latorre recommended a general term such as Adult Care Facilities. Ms. Roberts brought out rehabilitation services. Discussion brought out that any services the Council specifically did not desire in the list should be removed. Mr. Peetz proceeded to Code Section 110 -333, Accessory Uses and Structures There were no changes made to this code section. Mr. Peetz proceeded to Code Section 110 -334, Special Exceptions Permissible by Board of Adjustment Mr. Morley stated that Article VII also addresses setbacks. Mr. Boucher clarified that Paragraph (b) would allow a provision, adjusting setbacks, that should come under the Variance process, not the Special Exception process. After some discussion, Council and the Board agreed to strike Code Section 110 -334, paragraph (b), of Special Exceptions Permissible by Board of Adjustment Mr. Russell explained how Special Exceptions allowed for a public hearing and input from the residents adjacent to proposed commercial property. Ms. Roberts asked if there were any other distance guidelines. Discussion followed on a proliferation of surf shops and the need for their regulation. Mr. Nicholas stated that adult arcades should also be addressed. Discussion came about out related a full -bar liquor license which was denied to a Cape Canaveral business due to its radius to a similarly licensed business across the street in the unincorporated area. Mayor Randels composed a City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Code Review Workshop Meeting w/ Planning and Zoning Board January 22, 2008 Page 5 of 6 list to include: surf shops, pawn shops, check cashing, day labor halls, tattoo shops, psychic readers, and adult arcades for further discussion on the Discussion Parking Board. Mr. Boucher brought out including night clubs. Mr. Russell stated that night clubs were regulated by the requirement to serve food to 200 people. Discussion followed on regulating liquor licenses. Mr. Nicholas informed that the State had several classes of liquor license and there was a minimum seating requirement. Mayor Randels stated that beer and wine required 25 seats. Mr. Nicholas stated that the City could control distance and hours of operation. He stated that Law Enforcement was not strictly enforced at the time when the Rich's Restaurant property served as a Rave Club. Mr. Morley stated that Code Section 110- 171(2) states, "The establishment, if licensed by the State Division of alcoholic beverages and tobacco to permit on- premises consumption of beverages, shall not be located with 2,000 feet of another licensed establishment. Discussion continued on some of the items mentioned on the Discussion Parking Board. Dr. John Fredrickson, Planning and Zoning Board Member, asked if there were any businesses in the survey that the residents did not desire to see in the City. Ms. Roberts read from the Business survey that adult entertainment, porn shops, tattoo parlors, and more hotels and condominiums were listed as something that they did not want to increase. Ms. Roberts asked about regulating outside eating. Mr. Morley stated that the number of seats was counted by the State as part of the licensed number of tables you are allowed to serve. Number of seats would affect parking and sewer impact fees, however, at this point the City had no regulations to prohibit it. Mr. Morley clarified that cooking outside was regulated by the State. Mr. Peetz proceeded to Section 110 -334 (c), Items No. (1), (2), and (3) related to veterinary hospitals, clinics, radio and television studios, broadcasting towers and antennas and automotive service stations. Mr. Friedman brought up discussion on Paragraph (h) and specific language to address vehicles parked outside of the facility. Council and the Board decided not to amend Paragraph (h). Ms. Roberts brought up Code Section (g)(6). Brief discussion occurred on banning the sale of cigarettes and Council and the Board agreed to exclude this prohibition. Mr. Peetz read through the remaining Items through Item (q). Ms. Roberts asked where the City would address safety concerns relating to pavements in disrepair. Mr. Boucher replied that these concerns should be sent to his office. Mayor Pro Tern Hoog referred to Item (q) and requested input. Mr. Peetz stated that a service station actually performs repairs on -site. Discussion followed on the site of any subsequent service stations. City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Code Review Workshop Meeting w/ Planning and Zoning Board January 22, 2008 Page 6 of 6 Before adjourning, Mr. Boucher informed that Mr. Petsos had contacted him stating his reason for missing the meeting. Mr. Boucher distributed the Agenda Packet for the Ctron"rc'IdEtikdinance Workshop on Thursday, January 24 ADJQONMENT: There be ft� ither buiiiness, the meeting adjourned at 8:00 P.M. usa Stills, ITY CLERK