Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-02-2013 BOA Minutes1. Mayor McPartlan called the Board of Adjustment Meeting to order at 6 pm. 2. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 3. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Bob McPartlan Vice -Mayor Jim Hill Council Member Jerome Adams Council Member Andrea Coy Council Member Richard Gillmor City Staff Present: City Attorney, Robert Ginsburg City Manager, AI Minner City Clerk, Sally Maio Community Development Director, Joseph Griffin Planner, Jan King 4. ANNOUNCEMENTS: None 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Meeting of November 20, 2013 MOTION by Mr. Adams and SECOND by Ms. Coy to approve the November 20, 2013 Minutes. Roll Call: Ayes: McPartlan, Hill, Adams, Coy, Gillmor Nays: None Passed: 5 -0 6. OLD BUSINESS: A. QUASI- JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING (deferred from November 20, 2013): SEBASTIAN INLET MARINA & TRADING CO. In Regards To Property Located At 1615 Indian River Drive To Be Developed As A 16 -Unit Motel, Is Requesting The Following Variances: 1. Reduction of the side yard setback along the north property line from 5 feet to 2.5 feet. 2. Reduction of the front yard setback along Indian River Drive from 10 feet to 5 feet. 3. Reduction of the perimeter landscape strip along the north property line from 10 feet to 2.5 feet. 4. Elimination of the hedge requirement along the north property line. 5. Reduction of the drive aisle width from 25 feet to 21 feet. 6. Reduction of the parking stall length of the standard and handicapped spaces from 20 feet to 19 feet. Mayor McPartlan opened the public hearing at 6:01 pm. This hearing was opened on November 20, 2013 and deferred to December 3, 2013 by motion of City Council. Board of Adjustment Meeting December 2, 2013 Page Two The City Attorney read the variance title as set out in the title A. 1 -6 above and said this is a quasi - judicial hearing. Mayor McPartlan called for disclosure of any ex -parte communications by Council. Ms. Coy said she had received a call from Mr. Collins who wanted to discuss the issue and get together to discuss the issue. She said they did not get together and did not discuss the issue over the phone. Mr. Adams said he similarly received a call from Mr. Collin but did not speak to him either in person or on the phone. Mr. Gillmor, Mr. Hill and Mayor McPartlan said they met and spoke with Mr. Collins on the property. The City Attorney, in light of disclosed ex -parte communications, asked those who met with Mr. Collins on the property, if they could judge this application on the merits, and base their decisions strictly on the materials in the file and upon evidence and testimony before them tonight. Mr. Gillmor, Mr. Hill and Mayor McPartlan all responded in the affirmative. The City Clerk swore in all those who intended to offer testimony during the hearing. The Community Development Director said Planner, Jan King would present staff analysis Ms. King said there are six variances to consider, that the staff report provided history of the project which includes previous variances on this property, but only one of substance in 2000 when the original hotel was approved for a landscape variances that dealt with the number of palms and hardwoods required. She said staff has outlined the criteria required for variances on pages 4 -6 of the staff report, that staff held several meetings with Mr. Collins to discuss his points and then outlined those bullet points in the report. She asked that Council have Mr. Collins conduct his presentation for the requested variance. Tom Collins, applicant, said this project goes back to 2006 when they first envisioned a three story building with 24 units, that parking is not an issue because there is sufficient parking. He said they have revisited the project in the last year and have consulted with City staff and with neighbors, Oyster Bay and Oyster Pointe Association, who like the idea of a two story building. He said in regard to the setbacks, which are normally put in place to keep distance between buildings, the west setback was left at ten feet because they are abutting Oyster Pointe, the north setback abuts a 50 foot FDOT right -of -way and if by moving the building slightly to the north by reducing that setback from 5 to 2.5 feet will allow them to put in two rows of parking in and in consulting with staff, if we make the stalls slightly smaller it will provide more parking and the more parking the better, the building would be 52.5 feet away from any other building, and there are no objections from those neighbors. In regard to the east setback along Indian River Drive, he cited no need for curb and gutter which would have reduced the setback to zero, and asked that the setback be reduced from ten to five feet. He said that setback is next to the road so no one is being affected, and is where the City is putting in parking so it works out well. As to the issue of trying to get as much parking as they can, providing 14 to 20 spots allows someone staying there to park there. He said they did not want to encroach upon their own thoroughfare and push this building to the south, and by doing 2 Board of Adjustment Meeting December 2, 2013 Page Three that they keep the main thoroughfare, and parking will strictly be for in and out and it will not be a thoroughfare. He said they can get parking on both sides, even though they are not required to provide it, which is part of the difference on the size of spaces. He said they could have complied with 10 X 19 spaces but they have had nine foot spaces all over their property and have not had any issues with them. He said their neighbors do not want through traffic. Mr. Collins said the other variance is for landscaping, citing the hedge requirement on the north side, and from a practical standpoint the hedge would be below the elevation of the building, and he was requesting instead to put in high bushes to make it more attractive, which the neighbor likes better, and will give more privacy between units. He said they will put in the normal hedge along the roads and other normal requirements. He said in summary they have worked closely with their neighbors, noting there are letters of no objection from them in the file, said they have to go through all requirements of Planning and Zoning which is where the more extensive landscaping review will come in as well as drainage, hoped this would be an economic boon, and was open to questions. Council asks questions of the applicant and staff Ms. Coy clarified the complete site plan will come back to Planning and Zoning, and Mr. Collins said that is correct, and Ms. Coy asked that is when drainage will be addressed. Mr. Collins said those plans have been submitted to staff and are being reviewed. Ms. Coy said she had several members of the public call with her with concerns about drainage. Mr. Collins said that will be addressed by P &Z. Mavor opens the floor for anvone in favor of the reauest - None. Mavor opens the floor for anvone ormosina the reauest Ruth Sullivan, 1215 IR Drive, Sebastian, said these are six requests to lower Sebastian's building requirements, to replace three units with a 16 unit hotel on only 1/3 acre of land. She said she has seen open space on the Riverfront reduced, understands the petitioner wants to profit but it should not be at the expense of wildlife and our river, said experts cite contaminated runoff from rooftops, paved parking lots, and leaching into the aquifer, said we are looking at the continued death of the Indian River, stating this proposal is destructive overdevelopment and adding to the pollution of our river. She said anyone wanting to protect the lagoon cannot approve any part of this proposal. Sal Neglia said we don't need another hotel, the riverfront is getting so crowded that Sebastian is not a fishing village anymore, that as to these six requests, Council needs to watch out for the people of Sebastian and keep an eye out for them, that this is not for the people and it is crowded as it is. Bill Simmons, Drawdy Way, Sebastian, member of Planning & Zoning Commission for seven years, said in working with the codes and overlay district, that the codes were enacted for a reason, and he had a general opposition to the number of exceptions that are being sought, noted it has been said there is already sufficient existing parking, and the codes don't address different setbacks based on what is abutting. He said he did not know how Council was going to vote, whether item by item or all at once, so he debated on whether to address each one or just generally speaking and thanked them for listening. Board of Adjustment Meeting December 2, 2013 Page Four Joann White, Sebastian, asked how many employees work at Captain Hiram's and where do they park when they do work, and said her other concern is that she had been through the parking lot in the last week or two and there seem to be employees parking there, and asked, if the hotel is there, is the access to the hotel only on Indian River Drive. She said she asks this because she visited there and tried to leave the parking lot and because of the City angled parking, could not see out and had to get into the road to actually see. She said she sees this as a bottleneck, that she loves Captain Hiram's and supports it, but it has become a really congested area and people are always looking for parking spots. Applicant provided opportunity to respond to issues raised bV staff or public Mr. Collins said the property is zoned to allow 16 units, which staff can confirm, said Mrs. Sullivan went on about drainage and open space, which he said were certainly valid concerns but are addressed before P & Z and State law requires runoff has to be retained on -site and they support that. He said as to employee parking, they are the only property along Indian River Drive that has adequate parking with 45 additional spots than what they are required to have, and have designated parking area for employees. He said the in and out issue is not going to change, that they have the right to put in the driveway, though it is a good point about cars backing out there, because they do have some issues now with the City angled parking and have put up signs for pedestrians to look both ways when crossing the crosswalk. He said they can't regulate whether people park in that lot who are not staying there, or if the general public parks in his lots. He said parking is always an issue, staff thought it was a good idea to ask for these variances and end up with 20 spaces rather than 11. Mr. Gillmor said Ms. White made a good point, it is a very congested area, and asked Mr. Collins where people check in. Mr. Collins said they check in at the main office off of the highway, and Mr. Gillmor suggested he could make the entrance to the new building right off his own parking area rather than have a separate entrance from Indian River Drive. Mr. Collins said they did look at that but would lose six parking spaces by doing so, did not want to create backing in and out of the thoroughfare, engineers didn't like the idea and he did not like the idea and would lose quite a few parking lots. Mr. Gillmor said if he closed that other entrance he would get more parking spaces there. Mr. Collins said again the engineers and he did not like the idea, and did not want to affect their existing thoroughfare. Mr. Collins said they vary from 150 to 200 employees, with 35 -40 at peak, and at any given time there are 20 to 25 cars parked, and that there is designated parking though it is hard to enforce. The Community Development Director said Mr. Collins explained his position better than any of us could, that Jan King did a great job explaining criteria and staff did great job in sitting down with Mr. Collins explaining the variance criteria and that is why we are here tonight for Council consideration. Mayor McPartlan asked if they were zoned for 16 units on that property, and the Community Development Director said they were because they have the square footage, so it would fit. He said the variance issue has to do with something else. Mr. Gillmor asked the Community Development Director whether they have permission to build because that building is part of the total acreage they have and is it normal to put 16 units on 1/3 acre. M Board of Adjustment Meeting December 2, 2013 Page Five Jan King said Mr. Collins mentioned density, but it is not a density number that we are looking at here but rather intensity, which is square footage of impervious surface on the property, and if he can provide parking, our standards dictate one parking space per unit, but as long as his square footage or the footprint of the building can fit on the property and he can still provide the mandatory open space that is required, he can put in as many units as he would like to. Ms. Coy asked for clarification that he is not exceeding the square footage, and Ms. King said she was sure he was not and that is something that will be addressed at site plan. Ms. Coy asked Mr. Griffin if this initiative can be considered an economic development improvement, in looking at variances, is it economically enhancing that property in our riverfront. The Director Community Development said he believed it was. He said it is a judgment call, said was it a trade -off between what was brought up here tonight or pure economic development, it is a combination, but if it were up to him he really believed it would be an economic development initiative with more jobs and more exposure. Ms. Coy said parking is premium down there and by granting variances we are giving him more parking, there are no objections from immediate neighbors, which would have been of great concern, noting Mr. Collins said neighbors to the west had a concern so they are not infringing on that setback to the west. She said it would be difficult to say no to this because we are trying to economically develop the area. Mr. Adams said in looking at the variances, it seems like this is mostly to encourage economic development and having the letter from neighbor being in agreement it did not seem like it was adversely impacting and would have no problem with this. Mr. Gillmor asked the City Attorney if we have a requirement for the City to notify property owners and the City Attorney answered yes. Mr. Gillmor asked to whom, and Ms. King said to all property owners within a 300 foot radius to the site, and they were sent out for the first hearing and again for this deferred hearing. Mr. Gillmor asked if they were sent out to each timeshare owner and Ms. King said no, that the letters go to the management company of Oyster Pointe, noting each unit is owned by 52 owners and there are over 200 units, and the code provides that the letter goes to the management of the association. Mr. Gillmor said he had several issues, the property is less than 1/3 acre, had three units on it before the hurricanes, and are now squeezing in 16 units, with parking spots, we are going from 50% semi permeable drainage to only 14% semi permeable ground, and it requires six variances for it to be built. He said he asked Ms. King today could this be developed in a way that would mirror the unit across the street that he owns that is 14 units, and not require variances and she said it was possible. He said what we are looking at is too much, and if just designed properly for a 14 unit hotel, without changing laneage or size of parking spots, we wouldn't be here. He said he spoke with our engineer, Frank Watanabe this morning, and he had done some stormwater calculations on a Y4 acre lot, and he was surprised that a16 unit hotel could go on that site. He said three inches of rain on 12,000 square feet would generate 4000 cubic feet of stormwater or 30,000 gallons, going into the lagoon. He showed a picture showing a pipe going into a pit on FDOT property (see two photos provided by Mr. Gillmor to Council members and staff attached). He said the pipe comes from the Captain Hiram's resort and when the retention area is full it goes there. He said this project as developed will add more problems than we can shake a stick at, with another entrance off of Indian River Drive there are three entrances to this resort, and with on street parking that the City put in, is very problematic. Board of Adjustment Meeting December 2, 2013 Page Six He said there is a way to fix this but the developer said he would lose six spots, and said he can't support this the way it is, wants to see economic development, but not at the expense of the lagoon. He said this is putting that building almost right to the street, 25 feet is pretty high and is a pretty good sized building on Indian River Drive, and the character of the street will be changed by this building. He said he can support it on a smaller scale, but to have six variances, said we have seen things that come to us, citing Paradise Marina which wanted one variance and we denied it, and here we have six. Mr. Hill said we should take every variance request based on the merits of that request. He asked staff can they put a building on here with a parking lot and the Community Development Director answered correct. Mr. Hill said at site plan the drainage issues will be dealt with as will impervious surface issues for the entire property, and those issues are not being dealt with here. He said the north 50 setback he had no problem with, the east is a five foot reduction, said the building will be thirty feet from the road so he had no issues with that. He said this property provides high quality, was comfortable with the fact that Oyster Pointe supports it and they have to go to P & Z for other issues. He said that the other entrance has been in place for years and has zero to do with the variances we are looking at tonight. He said the only concern he would have is safety. He asked if any of these variances raise any public safety concerns to staff. The Community Development Director said he was not concerned about size of stalls, but maybe the reduction of the drive aisle from 25 feet to 21 feet with two -way traffic might be an issue but as far as safety, that would not be a concern. Mr. Hill said they are the ones who need to provide convenience to their customers. The Community Development Director said the drive aisle and making that turn with traffic coming from the north, though that could happen in other places as well, and maybe Mr. Collins can cure that with appropriate signage. Mr. Hill said any variances we are discussing tonight don't fix that problem. Mayor McPartlan said he was in agreement with the majority that this is an economic development plan and drainage and other concerns will go before Planning and Zoning, there are no safety issues with the variances being requested. Mayor McPartlan called for a motion. MOTION by Mr. Hill and SECOND by Ms. Coy for approval of all six variance requests. Roll Call: Ayes: Hill, Adams, Coy, McPartlan Nays: Gillmor Passed: 4 -1 7. NEW BUSINESS: None 8. CHAIRMAN'S MATTERS: None 9. MEMBERS' MATTERS Ms. Coy reminded everyone about the Saturday, December 7th Salvation Army bell ringing day at Walmart where all money taken in stays here in Sebastian and goes to the North County Hunger Relief Coalition. Mayor McPartlan announced the Christmas parade on Saturday, December 7th at 6 pm and the Chamber Light Up Night Friday night. 0 Board of Adjustment Meeting December 2, 2013 Page Seven 10. STAFF MATTERS: None 11. Being no further business, Mayor McPartlan adjourned the Board of Adjustment Meeting at 6:54 p.m. Approved at the February 26, 2018oard of Adjustment Meeting. Bob McPartlan, Mayor Attes� Sally A. Maio, M , City Clerk 7 +. ". .;,•,1�e!'6,,►." .r r..o. •7 i, �. 4 '9 l,�h 3!.'' 5r°X 3. r ti y' t . i Mh N", $ a E_ yI !'x' � . *'.7' 409 i Y. ,,,.;.1.,....,#• ti °x�Y $ •ii r Sept•',` t Y r. 4 (1,1_ Iv rtr f.,,•►!s �+. c Is ~I• i . "a v r' .. ✓� £ • 1 +r ' ' & a ,,„F /✓ ,„ r k i ¢ a T . . • •11 .4 ♦�. $e � r t Y. M # � 4 6 ', -p # 1' • , '+ ' iq 1 a F 5 VI ,wf.�e � { * � t 0r ar 1 tAM l;p S � « 'Y Ia � i * aF* c k a - 9' �°z s4 Ai' + � r a y..pe Y , �• • i'�\ a t , , m a, w a q, r # i k � t #. ,r £ '< ma+p w 1I + i df3. ' I h / .d r 7� ` �I'.; x* a s� t r A 4 di � a °d . k . m A ' c b ,t� i.'4 a f � a Y*� ;• t w s ' } d y ;*�' p i a r ...ms 1»< 4 s$ I J * js 1 4 d a ...+A< - ' r 9 z:„ p d � 44 i '. •‘' ryy. # r i r f r-, ,,rt - P A r c ' ai t :,-S144:44"-i# %#* ' ` ‘,..J.,1„, "+m. a,. d1,P,{ M ' - . \$ � A+ f t r}, v": yy. . ',x �w :d . _Ag -,bl r S = r a .. ' t {. 7 y 'r• r. i. y 4 ,• i t � :„.,..4, r "q.ud �t g +". , \� -4 a`4 < 9.F ,.. p "1,,t.. N S ,V ' a « p . + :.p •5 p• l' a , � � €r+ •1 1f ,r• p ,' � t' d'' 4. a' ,t . er# gg S' l .;. a p-{ t ? ? F"11:,;',,'�. ',,k' • #p, •„, : At � 1 . l :_� p . 'l r'44-: r ,- .• it ; �' "y b� j 4 44 • !+ •e t f � �k `� R° 4,..,-4 fi � i I�e `a� ' ,,,:r.).. v *L h < # r ..• • :,,:: y ' i - -: . .4147.441.0,7,„ , .a � 1—* ".� � fr ' � 'g � ♦ r .. i a 4q^ ° d Aa ` n w• ►- ia,,o In ,`§. 3a h 1S t 3� " . ` e a #d °y d-,►; s ' p, �^ 4 4- l' w r tR _ d° �4 + ' eIj 15� 1 rr P _ r - fi p . ,i -4 w *VI'. yj r R. e sa r . , r 1 &;1 ' � 9 4'1a"° h , d♦ < 4 3." • ; , 9 y, n ! � yp .4%t • ° ^ . r i d l + ^ C y p �' ° i'' .- 4 . -r„ p try�;, I ' �' 4 b W 3 Y '4 t4f'4'i-/t •e . -�y 4.'4'. 4 I . ► ., i• 1 'f4.,to� e6 ! . /,f t A fl ' " #x� t yTM t” r a gi., 'dA : *°,1►t" e ' P A '. r 'I/41,r „ en s - �+, , 4 t: r' a 0 ,► K 1 +° .o . ,d `. z Y ..",•'",, ;XS6i� �,w ” „6„,,4:, F «a - so ° Y .# ` f yf, + ,.a ' . w ' �k_ i1p f S # 4 ' t ' k t ° N iP *,s q• + r ♦ lit i ._1 e '4,14) $ .' Rdt r s+ p e► & ,—4 4,,,,-" t4 �' 1 x a ► + x Po �� 1a 7a sp 'V a `� ”� '',"4-4,1•••‘,:-" l a Ag�' ;qr ► c , , ,. ,t '`8' , �r e I t 4, ra p „ �lip A s. ' , .'. o• ,t t � 1,, ea r . t s , v .. . t4 . A 4;` el ; , 4< S Ii /4}r►; � i•• s ' d 4a i5 ya• ' e1` '± ha'�4, 9 ?*`44 ur• E I, A -,�. a. s t •'' �� J t s {< iti s: �� s •�'.. a . - 9 " a • •:�i + • .ys •d t p .�A� Wi'i� �- b • , . :e" _t " c a 1 a . -7,";;.p,� ra s`l yy ,r ;�F°,. .� + 1 E '+ `t i.�� ' �1��j `' :: 4 y` .4� � +k�o- � � e Y: p 4�'� i �� i ' I � $4 4", ,4. m; w . e*� �p S q" y �f.4.' + . 2 w,S, ',4t � ', # I 3i" ,8+►. x ;" ^ 41,-' - -4" .11,14°.• '. „rx . 'lb.' }i:. 4 t p rtY r �t � G .. *, '' y . a 44 P,r ..d s h 6 8 fi•• , e ,i >Q Y`n ? , p ar. ► a X t�i ; .,7 a. ?