Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 10-22-2008PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 22, 2008 A Regular Meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board was held on October 22, 2008, at the City Hall Annex, 111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida. Chairperson Bea McNeely called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The Secretary called the roll. MEMBERS PRESENT Bea McNeely Lamar Russell John Fredrickson Donald Dunn Harry Pearson John Johanson Ronald Friedman OTHERS PRESENT Chairperson Vice Chairperson 1 st Alternate 2nd Alternate Kate Latorre Assistant City Attorney Susan Chapman Board Secretary Barry Brown Planning & Development Director NEW BUSINESS 1. Approval of Meeting Minutes: September 24 2008. Chairperson McNeely announced that the draft meeting minutes were revised. The Board members reviewed the revision. Motion by Harry Pearson, seconded by Bea McNeely, to approve the meeting minutes of September 24, 2008, with the noted change. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. 2. Recommendation to Board of Adjustment Re: Special Exception Request No. 08-08 to Construct a Single Family Residence in the C-1 Zoning District, Section 14, Township 24 South., ..Range 37 East,. Lot A.02, oak Lane - Bernard M. Lennon, Petitioner. Barry Brown, Planning & Development Director, advised that this request was a Special Exception to allow for a single family residence in the C-1 zoning district; the property was located on oak Lane; the parcel was just under one acre; and currently vacant; property to the north was multi -family, west and south vacant, and to the east was a single family residence; the surrounding area was predominately residential; the request for residential use is with keeping in nature with the surrounding area. He advised that the only concern staff had was the Oak Street right-of-way. Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2008 Page 2 He explained that the right-of-way was currently unimproved. Evidentially, over the years they have been dumping asphalt millings to build the roadway up. In the short-term, the existing roadway should be acceptable for Mr. Lennon's request. He noted that in the near future there may be another request for a single family across the street from Mr. Lennon's property. He advised that at some point, oak Lane would need to be constructed to City standards; according to Public Works there was currently a 50 ft. wide right of way; if Mr. Haynes approaches the City again to construct a townhome development that will been a good time to bring the road up to City standards; on the south side of oak Lane, there were several single family lots that at one time were replatted into townhome lots, but the project did not proceed and the preliminary plat expired; if the property owner decides to develop the property into townhome lots, that may also be the time that the City would decide to require oak Lane to be brought up to City standards; Mr. Lennon was happy to use the roadway as it existed; water and sewer were available; and therefore, staff recommended approval of the Special Exception request. Dr. John Fredrickson questioned that at the recent workshops with City Council, at least two of the City Council members, and two or three members of the Planning & Zoning Board, swore off accepting special exceptions. He questioned why the City was still accepting applications. Barry Brown responded that an ordinance was passed that ended Special Exceptions, for residential use, in the C-1 zoning district, only on the properties along Al A. He advised that Mr. Lennon's property was not affected by that ordinance. Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney, verified that Mr. Lennon's request was valid. Ron Friedman referred to page #G of the Board packet. He noted that what was referenced as oak Lane, did not extend all the way to N. Atlantic Avenue. There was another parcel (Part of Parcel B and part of Parcel A.07) that would have normally been the right of way or the road. He questioned if oak Lane was an official City road? And if Parcel B and A.07 were owned by two other people, then Mr. Lennon's lot was a landlocked piece of property, without legal access to the road. He questioned if the City wanted to have that traveled way upgraded to a City street, who would pay for it? Barry Brown responded that he spoke with Public Works and was informed that there was a 50 ft. right of way but, it did appear that it did not extend all the way to N. Atlantic Avenue. He would research the City records to verify if the City has some type of agreement across those properties. He advised that Circle K and LaCantina Restaurant may have been required to dedicate right of way, at some point, that may not be reflected on the parcel maps. Ron Friedman pointed out that even though tax maps are informative; they were not legal in terms of property lines. He recommended that if the Board recommends approving the Special Exception request that the approval be contingent upon the City Attorney confirming that there was an existing legal right of way owned by the City to the property. Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2008 Page 3 Motion by Harry Pearson, seconded by Donald Dunn, to recommend approval of Special Exception Request No. 08-00, contingent upon verification that there was an existing legal right of way that was owned by the City to the property. The Board held discussion regarding the motion. Donald Dunn thought that the motion was to only add the condition, not for recommendation of the Special Exception. Barry Brown advised that he checked with Public Works and verified that oak Lane was a City right of way, but he could not confirm that the right of way extended to N. Atlantic Avenue. Discussion continued. For clarification, Assistant City Attorney, Kate Latorre, repeated the motion. Harry Pearson verified that the motion, as stated, was correct. Chairperson McNeely asked for a second to the motion. There being none the motion died. Discussion continued. Kate Latorre researched the County's web site to see if she could verify the right of way, but was unsuccessful in doing so. Harry Pearson agreed to withdraw his motion. Donald Dunn withdrew his second to the motion. Chairperson McNeely announced that the motion was withdrawn. Donald Dunn questioned if there was any special stormwater runoff, which he believed there was, because the road was not paved. Barry Brown responded that at the time Mr. Lennon submitted his site plan he would need to deal with the drainage, however there was right of way for stormwater to flow in too. John Johanson advised that Mr. Lennon was responsible for his stormwater retention. Donald Dunn voiced his opinion that, because there were no curbs or sidewalks, and the street was not paved, it was not safe. Barry Brown responded that at some point when there was more development along that road, that could be a concern, but right now there were no pedestrian issues. He explained that there were no residences west of Mr. Lennon's proposed residence. Donald Dunn stated that he still had a problem with it. John Johanson pointed out that Harbor Heights only had one sidewalk and that was a developed subdivision. The Board members reviewed the Special Exception application checklist. Mr. Lennon verified that he had answered the questions on the application checklist. Discussion was held regarding storm water runoff; traffic flow and control; compatibility of surrounding uses; verification that Oak Lane was a public road; verification of availability for water and sewer; refuse service disposal; surrounding zoning; and uses. Bernard Lennon, Petitioner, testified that approximately eight years ago, his title company held up his title, because they had the same concern, as the Board, regarding the right of way. His title company had contacted the city attorney, at that time. After the city attorney researched the issue, he verified that the City owned the right of way. He noted that the entrance of oak Lane had a city street sign; and for a distance of approximately 100 feet, the entrance to oak Lane appeared to be built to city standards. He advised that he purchased the property in 1999. Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2008 Page 4 Donald Dunn questioned at what point the road would be paved. Barry Brown responded that probably at the time a property owner requested replatting a property into townhouse lots, or perhaps a condominium development. He advised that the City did not have a specific code that stated when a road was required to be brought up to city specifications. He added that the City did not have any funds available to pave the road. Motion by Donald Dunn, seconded by Dr. John Fredrickson, to recommend approval of Special Exception Request No. 08-06, contingent upon the condition that the city verify access to N. Atlantic Avenue. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. 3. Recommendation to City council Re: Section 110-171(a)L21.- Changing the Requirements for a Restaurant to^ Serve_ liguor from a Minimum Seating of _200._ to 150 Persons - Brigitte Krause, owner of _Izzy-'s Bistro, Applicant. Barry Brown, Planning & Development Director, advised that this was a request to amend the City code for the amount of seating that's required for a restaurant to have a liquor license. This would change the minimum amount of seats to 150 seats. He explained that the city code currently read that the required separation be 2,000 feet between establishments that were licensed by the State for on -premise consumption of alcoholic beverages, with the exception of restaurants seating 200 or more persons. The Florida Statutes only require a restaurant to have only 150 seats in order to serve liquor. He noted that this was a request to bring the City code in line with the Florida Statute on the minimum number of seats required. He explained in comparing the Florida Statutes with the City code, the Florida Statute addressed the number of liquor licenses that could be handed -out in a county, and the City code addressed a distance requirement. Kate Latorre, Assistant city Attorney, explained that Florida Statute, 551.20, regulated the number of licenses that the State will issue for serving alcoholic beverages, and it was based on the county population. one of the exceptions that the Florida Statute provided was an establishment with a minimum of 2,500 sq. ft. and could serve 150 people at the same time. She explained that the city code was a distance requirement that limited two establishments within 2,000 feet of each other from receiving an alcoholic beverage license. The City code exception from that requirement was if a restaurant could seat 200 persons. She advised that the applicant's request was to reduce the number of required seats to 150 seats, in order to be exempt from the 2,000 feet distance requirement. Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2008 Page 5 Lamar Russell gave a brief history of when the original City code was written. He explained that the original code was written back in the Apollo times, when there was a bar or nightclub at almost every corner, from the Port to the split at Patrick Air Force Base. After that time, the City changed the code to impose a distance requirement between like establishments that sold alcoholic beverages, in an effort to cleanup the town. Later, the code was updated to add an exception from the distance requirement, which was for restaurants that had a minimum of 200 seats, (which seemed reasonable at the time, because of average restaurant sizes). He voiced his opinion that he did not have a problem with reducing that number to 150 seats. Discussion followed regarding restaurants with indoor and outdoor seating. John Johanson advised that if they were trying to upgrade the City right now, the City could bring in some nice restaurants, and a liquor license may help do that. And, changing the code may help with mixed-use as well. He stated that the way that the economy is right now, these restaurants need all the help they can get. He voiced his opinion that changing the code was a good idea for existing restaurants and for the City's future restaurants. Barry Brown noted that lzzy's Bistro was only licensed by the State for 75 persons, and if they were going to increase their seating, then that would bring in the parking issue. So if the code is changed, it does not necessarily make it work for Izzy's. However, there may be other restaurants throughout the city where the code change could apply. Chairperson McNeely questioned if establishments outside the City boundaries had anything to do with the 2,000 feet requirement? Kate Latorre answered that the measurements includes any establishment within 2,000 feet, whether inside or outside the city boundaries. Harry Pearson referred to page 22 of the Board packet, which stated that the Florida statute was amended. He asked when and what was amended? He advised that no such amendment had taken place; in June of 2006, was when Section 110-171 (a)(2) was established into an ordinance. He did not believe that the State law had changed since that time. Discussion was held regarding minimum service area. Lamar Russell advised that the code did not address a minimum service area. Donald Dunn commented that maybe they should consider establishing one. Lamar Russell gave a history on that. He explained that if a restaurant had seating for 200 people that would pretty well define space for a service area, so the City left that open to the creativity of the restaurants. Discussion continued. Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes October 2, 2008 Page 5 Dr. John Fredrickson voiced his opinion that he did not have a problem with reducing the required number of seats, but he did not know how the code change would help Izzy's Restaurant. He advised that Izzy's currently had 75 seats, and there was no way they could increase the seating another 75 seats with the room they had or have enough parking to accommodate another 75 seats. Ron Friedman noted that non -chain restaurants have one of the highest failure rates in the Country; and selling alcoholic beverages is a good part of any profit that they may have, by lowering the seating requirement from 200 to 150 seats, regardless of what Izzy's may have, may be enough to attract another independent restaurant that would only want to have 150 seats. He voiced his opinion that the reduction of 100 or 150 seats could be good to attract non -chain, non -fast food restaurants into the city. Discussion followed. Kate Latorre explained that the Board would be making a recommendation to the City Council. Motion by Dr. John Fredrickson, seconded by Lamar Russell to recommend to City Council that the request to change Section 110-171 (a)(2) be granted to reduce the minimum number of required seats from Zoo to 150 for a restaurant to serve liquor to be exempt from the 2,000 ft. distance requirement. Discussion followed. Brigitte Krause, applicant, stated her name and address for the record. Donald Dunn questioned why she brought this request if it did not apply to her. She responded that, because it was not fair with the business relationship in the City compared to cocoa Beach, where she has owned Gregory's Steak and Seafood Grille for 15 years and has had no problem with serving liquor at all, because most people usually just have an after dinner drink, or a glass of wine or martini. She explained that most of the time, patrons don't want to dine at a place that they only have a choice of beer and wine to drink with dinner. Gary Kirkland, helping Ms. Krause with this matter, advised that the 75 seats that Izzy's had now was only a carry-over from the previous restaurant which was called Mangroves. Since it was taken over, the inside of the restaurant was remodeled. He advised that the booths and the stage that were taken a lot of space were removed. They understood that this was only an ordinance change and that a Special Exception was still required, they would apply for the Special Exception and business license for 150 seats, if the code is changed. They also understood that there would be permits required and additional sewer impact fees. Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2008 Page 7 Mr. Kirkland advised that they already tried to make application for a Special Exception, but were told that they were within 2,000 feet of Charlotte's Web. They currently had a 2COP license, which was for beer and wine consumption, and wanted to upgrade that to a 4COP license under the State Statute. He noted that the State required 51 % of sales to be for food consumption for a restaurant with a 4COP license, so the restaurant could never be turned into a bar. Currently, the restaurant sales were 80% from food and 20% from beer and wine. The restaurant was approximately 2,900 sq. feet, which exceeded the State requirement of 2,500 sq. feet. Mr. Kirkland stated that he was not able to locate the date that the Florida Statute was revised, however the request was based on the current Florida Statute. Harry Pearson advised that his research revealed that the Statute was revised in the year 2000. He noted that the City changed the ordinance about two years ago, but could not recall what was changed, however 200 seats was the number that was voted on. He suggested if they were going to look at changing the code, they should look at the entire Section 110-171, instead of just picking -out one little place and changing it. John Johanson questioned what other part of the code he wanted to change? Harry Pearson voiced his opinion that paragraph (a)(2) was not the only paragraph in Section 110-171, and that the entire section should be reviewed. Kate Latorre advised that in 2006, the code Section was thoroughly evaluated and was rewritten after several workshops and discussions. Chairperson McNeely commented that there was nothing glaring in the code section that needed to be changed. Dr. John Fredrickson commented that it was not the applicant's responsibility to know what the City had done two years ago. Irrespectively, the request to reduce the minimum number of seating from 200 to 150 was consistent with the State. Harry Pearson responded that the 150 seats that the State required did not apply to the City. He explained that they were not going to bring the code into compliance with the State law by changing the seating to 150. Kate Latorre agreed that there were some similarities, but they addressed different issues and were unrelated. She stated that the City was not bound to 150 seats. Bea McNeely and John Johanson agreed that 150 seats sounded reasonable. Motion passed by a (4) to (1) majority in favor of the motion, with members voting as follows: Donald Dunn, for; John Fredrickson, for; Bea McNeely, for; Harry Pearson, opposed; and Lamar Russell, for. Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2008 Page 8 OPEN DISCUSSION Dr. John Fredrickson commended the Planning & Development Director for the format of the Project Status Report he provided to the Board, which was readable and easy to understand. Barry Brown gave an overview of the report, which gave the status of current submitted applications for: rezonings, special exceptions, comprehensive plan amendments, site plans, etc. He advised that at the next meeting, he would have a list that showed different projects that staff was working on, such as code amendments. He stated that every couple of months he would provide a status update. Brief discussion followed regarding various projects. Barry Brown, Planning & Development Director, gave the Board members an overview of his job duties. He also reported that he had received a phone call from the Department of Community Affairs (DCA), who informed him that in reviewing the Public School Facilities Element, the only comment they had was the maps that the city submitted for proposed school facilities were outdated. The reviewer informed him that if the City provided the most recent map that was approved in Brevard County's submittal, by the end of the week, then DCA would not review the City's element. He advised that the map was e-mailed to DCA this morning. He noted that the City could not move forward with adopting any other elements until the Public Schools Facilities Element was adopted. Discussion followed. John Johanson advised that he spoke to the Board approximately five months ago about the accessory use definition in regards to the Porter project, and it had never been further defined and should be. Barry Brown responded that it was on his high priority list after the Capital Improvements Element; however he would provide some framework to use for Board to discuss. John Johanson commented that if the City prohibited drive -up doors and windows, it would prevent more fast-food restaurants from coming into the City, in hopes to generate nicer restaurants. He asked if the Board members had driven around the city and identified any areas they did or didn't like as discussed at the previous meeting. He commented that no one addresses the special exception areas that people complain about; they don't step-up and talk about trying to change the code to fix the problems. The Planning & Zoning Board should do the homework for the city Council, but that has not happened or initiated. It had always been direction from the City Council. Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2008 Page 9 Barry Brown announced that the City Council scheduled the next sign ordinance workshop on Thursday, November 6th a@ 5:30 p.m., after certifying the election results. There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.