Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeptember 11, 2013 - MinutesPLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 11, 2013 A Meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board was held on Wednesday, September 11, 2013, at the City Public Library, 201 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida. The meeting was called to Order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairperson, Lamar Russell. The Secretary called the roll. MEMBERS PRESENT Lamar Russell Harry Pearson John Fredrickson Ron Friedman Bruce Collins John Price OTHERS PRESENT Chairperson Vice Chairperson Susan Chapman Secretary Kate Latorre Assistant City Attorney Todd Morley Community &Economic Development Director Barry Brown Planning &Zoning Director NEW BUSINESS 1. Approval of Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes - August 28, 2013. Motion by Harry Pearson, seconded by John Fredrickson to approve the Meeting Minutes of August 28, 2013, as written. Discussion followed regarding Section 94-21 of the proposed sign code relating to the allowable height of all signs. Todd Morley explained that 15 ft. was a Scribner's error and the number needed to be changed back to 20 ft. in the draft. Vote on the motion to approve the meeting minutes carried unanimously. 2. Recommendation to City Council Re: Request to Amend the Code of Ordinances to Expand the List of Possible Variances to Include "Lot Dimension" - Mark Smith for Rainier Construction, Inc., Applicant. Planning & Zoning Director, Barry Brown gave his Staff Report. He read the Code definition for "Variance" and noted that the definition did not allow for a variance for the width of a lot. He explained that the applicant owns a 120'X 148' vacant lot on E. Central Blvd. and wants to split the property into two lots and construct two single family residential homes; the property is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, which calls for a minimum lot width of 75 ft.; splitting the lot would create two 60 ft. wide nonconforming lots; however, the lots would meet all other R-1 requirements. He advised that Staff supported the request and noted that additionally, Staff requests the Board to expand the list of possible variances to include Chapter 110, Zoning Regulations, which would allow variances for zoning district regulations including, but not limited to: lot size, dimension, parking and loading, landscaping, fences, etc. He reviewed the results of a survey of other local governments and their variance regulations. He noted that the City of Melbourne also allows variances to zoning regulations and provides for an "Administrative Waiver" process. Discussion followed regarding minimum lot dimensions in all zoning districts. Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes September 11, 2013 Page 2of4 Board Member, Ron Friedman commented that the City should use its own knowledge, intuition, and expertise to regulate what is best for us and not allow other municipalities to influence this City. Chairperson Russell replied that we need to read what other municipalities have so we don't reinvent the wheel. He noted that the City has been the model for many municipalities around the State. Ron Friedman voiced his opinion that dividing a lot that meets Code into two nonconforming lots to construct two units instead of one unit is not considered an undue hardship. He further voiced his opinion that if the City allows for a variance for lot dimensions that it be limited to 5% of the overall lot dimensions. Mr. Collins agreed. The Board discussed measurements of lot dimensions; and reviewed and discussed municipalities' allowable variances as well as the proposed ordinance. Harry Pearson noted that none of the other municipalities allow for lot dimension as an allowable variance. Barry Brown responded that the other municipalities just don't list lot dimension specifically. Chairperson Russell advised that there would be no limit to how narrow a lot could be based on the way the proposed ordinance reads. Jerry Doolittle, Realtor/Broker/Associate with Trafford Realty, supporting Mark Smith, Rainier Construction, Inc., Applicant, read a statement into the record and gave a presentation regarding the lot that Mr. Smith had recently purchased. He advised that Mr. Smith wished to split the lot down the middle and build a conforming house on each lot; however, the two lots would not meet the Code requirement for lot width and the Code does not allow a variance for lot dimension. He showed details of how the lot would be split and noted that the surrounding neighborhood was a melting pot of various size lots, some that do not meet Code. He advised that the applicant was simply trying to construct homes that conform to the neighborhood; that have existed with various lot sizes for a long period of time. He concluded that if granted, the subsequent construction of two new single family homes would conform to the current neighborhood plan. This would be a win-win for the community by maintaining the intent of current low density R-1 zoning. He noted that one larger, more expensive home built on that lot would not be comparable to the rest of the neighborhood. Discussion followed regarding consideration the proposed ordinance. Chairperson, Lamar Russell noted that if the ordinance was approved by Council as proposed the applicant could come back and request a variance for a lot width reduction of 20%. Discussion followed regarding percentage of an allowable lot width reduction variance. Planning & Zoning Director, Barry Brown requested that the Board not impose limits on the percentage of an allowable lot width reduction and explained why. Discussion continued. Motion by Harry Pearson, seconded by John Price to recommend that Council add lot dimension to the list of possible variances. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. Chairperson, Lamar Russell announced a break at 7:11 p.m. He called the meeting back to order at 7:17 p.m. 3. Recommendation to City Council Re: Request to Amend the Code of Ordinances to Allow for the List of Possible Variances to be Expanded to Include "Location of Accessory Structure"; to Revise the Definitions of Landscape, Accessory Structure, Accessory Use, and Side Yard; and Revise Section 110-468, Accessory Structures - Kim Rezanka, Authorized Agent. Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes September 11, 2013 Page 3 of 4 Planning & Zoning Director, Barry Brown gave his Staff Report. He advised that the Board would be considering an applicant's request to amend the Code: 1) to allow for the list of possible variances to be expanded to include the location of accessory structure; 2) to revise the definitions of landscape, accessory use, and side yard; 3) and revise Section 110-468 - Accessory Structures. He explained that the owner of a single family residence at 625 Manatee Bay Drive has constructed a "tiki hut" in the front yard of his property. The code does not allow for accessory structures to be erected in any front yard. The properly has been cited by City Code Enforcement, the case was heard by the Code Enforcement Board who granted an extension to allow the applicant an opportunity to have their request heard by the P & Z Board and the Council. Accordingly, the applicant is requesting amendments to the Code that will allow for location of the "tiki hut" in the front or side yard. The amendments included: new and revised definitions, and location of accessory structure as eligible for variance consideration. He advised that Staff does not support adding "tiki huts" to the definition of landscape; and suggested that for clarification purposes, the City add a list of examples of manmade objects to the Code, i.e. benches, birdbaths, fountains, wishing wells, and other decorative features, etc. He clarified that a "tiki hut" is a structure, by definition, and should not be considered landscape. He advised that there is no need to revise the definition for accessory use or structure and Staff does not support the revised definitions, as proposed by the applicant. He further advised that Staff wanted to add definitions for front, side, and rear yards, but does not support the definition of side yard as proposed by the applicant, because the definition proposed has the side yard running from the front property line to the rear property line, and no other municipality he researched defines a side yard in this manner. Staff also supports expanding the list of possible variances to include location of accessory structures. In addition, Staff requested that the Board consider expanding the list of possible variances to include all zoning district regulations in Chapter 110, Zoning. The Board reviewed and held discussion regarding the applicant's request for amendments to the Code. The Board members also reviewed and discussed a survey, performed by Staff, of other municipalities regarding regulations they allow for variances. Barry Brown noted that the City of Melbourne allows variances to their zoning regulations and provides for an "administrative waiver" process. John Johanson, Resident, 8669 Villanova Drive, advised that the applicant's entire front yard is lushly landscaped and the tiki but is part of that enhanced landscape, which brings monetary value to the neighborhood, and everyone except for one property owner agrees. He noted that the Code Enforcement Board realized there was a problem with the City's definitions. Ron Friedman noted that because the tiki but blends in so well with the landscape that unless you look closely for it you can't see it. The Board held discussion regarding placement and size of a tiki but in a front yard in general. Craig Donceel, Property Owner, advised that there is a neighbor on his street that filed a complaint with City code enforcement that has a personality issue with him. He showed the Board a list of neighbors' signatures in favor of him keeping the tiki hut. He voiced his opinion that it does not fit the City's definition of an accessory structure. Barry Brown read the definition of a structure, which is anything built or constructed. Craig Donceel voiced his opinion that the tiki but was landscaping, and described it as a "Florida Umbrella". Discussion followed. Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes September 11, 2013 Page 4 of 4 Barry Brown advised'that Staff considers a tiki hut to be an accessory structure, not landscape; there is no need to allow an accessory structure in a side yard by defini'tioin, as proposed by the apiplicant; and Staff supports all�owing the "location of accessory structure" as a Variance., The Board directed Staff to come back with a, definition of Accessory Structure, to 'Include defining a tiki hut as well, as definitions, of front, side, and rearyard, as proposed' by Staff. 101IN Planning & Zoning Director, Barry Brown gave a status update of the proposed Casa Canaveral Assisted Living Facility project. Motion by Bruce Collins, seconded by John Price to adjourn the meeting at 81:41 p.m. Approved on this day of )20113. all Lamar Russell, Chairperson Susan L. Chapman, Secretary