HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-03-2011 LPA MinutesEXCUSED:
ALSO PRESENT:
OLD BUSINESS: None
NEW BUSINESS:
LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY
(PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION)
THURSDAY, MARCH 3, 2011
Immediately following the PZ Commission meeting
Vice Chairman Dodd called the meeting to order at 7:04 P.M.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT:
Mr. Roth
Mr. Durr
Mr. Hepler
Mr. Paul
Mr. Cardinale
Mr. Dodd
Mr. Carter (a)
Mr. Reyes
Rebecca Grohall, Growth Management Director
Jan King, Growth Management Manager
Dorri Bosworth, Zoning Technician
Robert Ginsburg, City Attorney
Wayne Eseltine, Building Director
1
A. PUBLIC HEARING REVIEW AND MAKE RECOMMENDATION TO CITY
COUNCIL REGARDING ORDINANCE 0 -11 -03 WHICH PROPOSES TO
AMEND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING FLOOD
DAMAGE PREVENTION: SECTIONS REFERRING TO SURFACE WATER
MANAGEMENT, FLOOD PROTECTION, AND LANGUAGE AND
DEFINITIONS
Vice Chairman Dodd called the public hearing to order. Ms. King explained that the
ordinance was prepared in conjunction with FEMA audit comments from our participation
in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which identified a few problems with
our current codes. They provided the city with a model ordinance that they requested we
incorporate into our books. The regulatory portion is going to be in the Code of
Ordinances. She proceeded to state that staff found numerous duplications in both code
books. Most of the ordinance action in the Land Development Code will be deletions.
Mr. Eseltine, Building Director, did a background overview, discussed why we have a
flood ordinance, and went over the proposed changes: Insertion of missing definitions
and regulations regarding mobile homes, recreation vehicles, and flood hazard area;
addition of new definitions; a new definition regarding "substantial improvement" which
no longer contains the two year accumulative clause; a new section with standards for
streams; new specific standards that apply to "A" zones without BFE's; and a
modification to coastal high hazard areas "V" zones which now allow non supporting
break away walls in the space below the lowest floor.
He also stated the proposed ordinance was reviewed by the Construction Board, which
made a recommendation for approval.
Mr. Roth asked if the Construction Board had proposed any changes that were
incorporated in the proposal before them. Mr. Eseltine stated no. Mr. Dodd clarified that
the LOMR process would still be available thru the Growth Management Dept.
There was a discussion on the LOMRs, how many are processed yearly, Health Dept.
elevation requirements with regards to finish floor elevations, etc.
Public Input was opened. There were no proponents or opponents who spoke.
Staff concluded by recommending the Local Planning Agency make a recommendation
to City Council of approval of Ordinance 0- 11 -03.
MOTION by Reyes /Hepler to recommend to City Council to approve Ordinance 0 -11 -03
Flood Damage Prevention.
ROLL CALL: Mr. Reyes yes Mr. Dodd yes
Mr. Roth yes Mr. Durr yes
Mr. Hepler yes Mr. Carter yes
The vote was 6 -0. Motion passed unanimously.
B. DISCUSSION REVIEW OF LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ARTICLE V,
ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS, SECTION 54 -2 -5.4 CONSIDERATION OF
PERMITTED CONDITIONAL USES FOR CR (COMMERCIAL RIVERFRONT)
Mr. Dodd explained this was a continuation of reviewing the LDC, specifically the zoning
districts uses, to identify areas that might be recommended to City Council to be
modified. Staff stated the CR area was the commercial corridor that runs along US
Highway #1 from the southern part of the CRA (Country Ham Egg Restaurant) north to
approx. Dr. Shalhoub's site. It is a mixed use district, commercial in nature, while
preserving the character of the riverfront area.
Mr. Dodd questioned if the mixed use vision was the same for this area, such as retail
with a second floor residential use. Ms. Grohall stated yes, but a lot of that type has not
been developed. Mr. Roth requested a clarification of permitted uses vs. conditional
uses, which staff and the city attorney reviewed. Staff suggested discussing the uses
first and then going back to specify conditional use criteria, if necessary.
RESIDENTIAL USES:
The three existing permitted uses were discussed, whether they should remain or be
modified. There was deliberation regarding "all uses permitted in RM -8" and changing it
to a conditional use with suggested criteria that the residential use must be located on a
second floor. What to do with the RM -8 uses was further discussed. Ms. Grohall also
explained that home occupations previously were conditional uses that went before the
Commission, were modified to permitted uses, and now are processed by another
2
department. Mr. Dodd suggested making multiple family dwellings, foster care /group
homes with less than 6 and more than 6 residents conditional uses, keeping accessory
uses to permitted uses and home occupations as permitted and removing RM -8 uses.
There was a discussion regarding the foster care use. It was agreed to recommend Mr.
Dodd's suggestion.
COMMUNITY FACILITIES:
Mr. Dodd opened the discussion regarding churches as a permitted use in the district.
He felt it was an active area for bar lounges, and restaurants with bars, and churches
may restrict that use. He suggested removal of the church use, but wasn't sure if it
would be legal to do so. Mr. Ginsburg stated there are federal cases currently, but if the
use was removed a church could request a zoning change if they wanted to build in the
district. Nursing homes were discussed, with the trend towards smaller scale facilities.
Mr. Dodd felt they did not fit with the riverfront vision. Possible scenarios were explored
and the members reminded themselves that the corridor was large and that it had
different characteristics in it. Discussions followed regarding making churches a
conditional use with regards to size and the members agreed. It was the only change to
this area of the chart.
COMMERCIAL ACTIVITES:
Mr. Durr asked if Commercial amusement, enclosed, could include arcades. Staff stated
because of the age restrictions, they were defined as adult entertainment, and only
allowed in the industrial district. Mr. Dodd suggested making bars and lounges a
permitted use (from conditional). The members agreed. Funeral Homes were
discussed along with crematories. The members decided to recommend that
crematories be listed as a separate use and that they were only allowed in the Industrial
district (if proposed to be a separate structure vs. inside a funeral home building). The
members would like to change parking lots without buildings from permitted to
conditional so there would be some control as to what they would look like. Another
discussion ensued regarding vehicular sales in the district. It had been previously
removed from the riverfront area, and the members decided not to add it back in. The
members did not want trade and skilled services to look like the industrial area on CR
512 and would like to make that a conditional use with the criteria that the trades area be
a part of a retail use. And after further discussion, it was also agreed to make wet/dry
storage of boats a conditional use, and remove wholesale trades and services. Yacht
clubs were removed from the district based on the discussion that the use could fall
under a different category (private club), there was no definition in the LDC, and that
there was a small amount of CR zoning abutting the river.
Vice Chairman Dodd reviewed all the changes discussed for the CR zoning.
Mr. Dodd asked about a schedule for the LDC review that was mentioned at a City
Council meeting. Ms. Grohall stated it was a tentative "moving target" schedule.
CHAIRMAN MATTERS: None
MEMBERS MATTERS: None
3
DIRECTOR MATTERS:
Ms. Grohall stated she had spoken to the parties involved regarding the crematory
activities on a Bingo afternoon. The burning was done in error, and the Elks Club stated
it has not occurred again. They stated the new units at the crematory were performing at
a much better level than the old ones.
ATTORNEY MATTERS:
Mr. Ginsburg clarified with the Commission their premise for removing the Yacht Club
use from the district.
Vice Chairman Dodd adjourned the meeting at 8:49 p.m.
(03/07/11 db)
4