April 20, 2016 agenda

Transcription

CITY OF TITUSVILLE
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY
NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING
April 20, 2016
555 S. Washington Avenue Titusville, Florida 32796
Council Chamber at City Hall
6:00 PM
Notice
All persons who anticipate speaking on any Public Hearing item must fill out an Oath Card to be heard on that agenda item
and sign the oath contained thereon. These cards are located on the table near the entrance to the Council Chamber or may
be obtained from the Recording Secretary. This meeting will be conducted in accordance to the procedures adopted in
Resolution #24-1997
Those speaking in favor of a request will be heard first, those opposed will be heard second, and those who wish to make a
public comment on the item will speak third. The applicant may make a brief rebuttal if necessary. A representative from
either side, for or against, may cross-examine a witness.
Anyone who speaks is considered a witness. If you have photographs, sketches, or documents that you desire for the
Commission to consider, they must be submitted into evidence and will be retained by the City. Please submit such exhibits
to the Recording Secretary.
1.
CALL TO ORDER
2.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3.
ROLL CALL
4.
DETERMINATION OF A QUORUM
5.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A.
6.
April 6, 2016 Minutes
Approve Minutes
QUASI-JUDICIAL CONFIRMATION PROCEDURES
The following items are subject to quasi-judicial rules of procedure. Anyone wishing to speak on any of these items must first
sign a Public Hearing Agenda Card and sign the oath contained thereon. Those speaking in favor of a request will be heard
first. If you have photographs, sketches, or documents that you desire for Planning and Zoning to consider, they must be
submitted into evidence and will be retained by the City. Submit these exhibits to the Recording Secretary.
7.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
8.
OLD BUSINESS
9.
NEW BUSINESS
Page 1 of 56
A.
Conditional Use Permit CUP 3-2016
Conduct public hearing of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 32016 to allow a building in excess of 35 feet in height in the
Planned Industrial Development (PID) zoning district.
B.
Chapter 28 Accessory Uses
Accept the draft accessory use table, standards, and format for
the accessory use portion of the proposed draft of Chapter 28.
10.
REPORTS
11.
PETITIONS AND REQUESTS FROM PUBLIC PRESENT
12.
ADJOURNMENT
Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission with respect to any matter
considered at this meeting will need a record of the proceedings, and for such purpose, may need to ensure that a verbatim
record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based.
The City desires to accommodate persons with disabilities. Accordingly, any physically handicapped person, pursuant to
Chapter 286.26 Florida Statutes, should at least 48 hours prior to the meeting, submit a written request to the chairperson of
the meeting that the physically handicapped person desires to attend.
Page 2 of 56
P and Z Regular - April 20, 2016 - 6:00 PM
Category: 5.
Item: A.
City of Titusville
"Gateway to Nature and Space"
REPORT TO COUNCIL
To:
Planning and Zoning Commission Members
From:
Peggy Busacca, Community Development Director
Subject:
April 6, 2016 Minutes
Department/Office:
Recommended Action:
Approve Minutes
Summary Explanation & Background:
Alternatives:
Item Budgeted:
Source/use of funds/Budget Book Page:
Strategic Plan:
Strategic Plan Impact:
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
April 6, 2016 minutes
Page 3 of 56
Upload Date
Type
4/14/2016
Backup Material
Planning and Zoning Commission
Regular Meeting
April 6, 2016
The Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) of the City of Titusville, Florida met in regular session
in the Council Chamber of City Hall, located at 555 South Washington Avenue on Wednesday, April
6, 2016 at 6:00 p.m.
XXX
Chairman Williams called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Present were Vice Chairman Chavier,
Secretary Chambers, Dr. Fayson, Dr. Tibbitts, Member Bobik and School Board Member Hare.
Member Ritchie and Member Baker were absent. Also in attendance were Senior Planner Trevor
Traphagen, Redevelopment Planner Tim Ford, Assistant City Attorney Chelsea Farrell and Recording
Secretary Laurie Dargie.
XXX
Dr. Fayson motioned to approve the minutes from March 16, 2016. Vice Chairman Chavier seconded.
There was a unanimous voice vote.
XXX
Quasi-Judicial Confirmation Procedures
None
XXX
Consent Agenda Items
None
XXX
!ew Business
Ordinance Relating to CUP expiration
Mr. Traphagen gave an overview of this item.
Chairman Williams asked how far back does this retro for Conditional Use Permits (CUPs). Mr.
Traphagen said this will only impact the active CUP’s. Mr. Traphagen said there are currently seven
active CUP’s.
Chairman Williams said he is very uncomfortable with doing this because generally when someone
comes in with a CUP they have some idea of what they are going to do with the land and they have
some engineering. I cannot see it taking more than a year for engineering to at least give you some
documentation that is relevant to the City for the City to say this is what is going to happen. At the
same time I feel it brings a bit more speculation in development. You do not have to spend any money
to say that I have a piece of property and this is what I want to do or I might be interested in buying
this piece of property so I have no interest, I haven’t put a good foot forward to make that happen. I’m
not saying everyone is like that I just believe there needs to be intent with following through before
you come to the City and say this is what we want to do. I don’t think you should put all your pennies
upfront. At the same time we and City Council are making decisions with the assumption that they are
Page 1 of 16
Page 4 of 56
Regular Meeting
April 6, 2016
going to carry through with what they are saying that are going to do. At the same time, it could
inconvenience the neighbor. We have to have some belief that this is going to come to fruition. Four
years with an extension up to two is not good faith in my opinion of what I feel. I say this all the time I
am one person on this Commission but at the same time I’m not opposed to getting a CUP approved
and extending thereafter. If it is six years by all means if they come in at every check mark and say
hey, my CUP is about to expire, I still want to use this, come in and get an approval at that point but
not just blatantly say you have four years to do something. I think it is giving too much for nothing. I
have seen a lot of speculative development happen the last several years. I have seen CUP’s never
happen. The market conditions could be a factor, changing the minds, getting finances established,
they can all be factors and I realize this. I don’t see that if it is not happening why there should be an
issue to say hey you can have an extension. If there is some reason that something has changed
dramatically it gives the City a chance to pause and say this is not appropriate anymore. Generally, I
can’t see this happening but I think it is worth, even if it is a separate extension package. Let us say
you take this package you don’t have to development on it you just have to request an extension and
that is, you notify those within 500 feet, done, let’s see if we can move forward. In my mind this is
what is more appropriate than to give a blanket extension. That is all I have.
Vice Chairman Chavier said he came to the same conclusion. I would rather see the applicant come
back and express their problems that they are having, whether it is market conditions, it doesn’t matter
what reason it might be but I would like to see the applicant come back and give us reason why they
need an extension. They come in and explain it in twenty minutes and we vote to approve and
extension. There has to be some real cause why this has not happened whether it is financial,
engineering, or someone went bankrupt whatever the case might be. The idea of just rolling this over
and going forward is a great door for speculation. This can be used for anyone to slow down the
process in any project. I have to go along with the Chairman and get something better. The idea of the
City Manager can extend this for one year; I’m not too opposed to that. I don’t think that is
unreasonable. I think if someone really has a problem and they really ran into an engineering problem
where there is some delay whatever it happens to be, I can live with that. In terms of just rolling this
over on a regular continuing bases with specific times, I cannot go along with that.
Secretary Chambers said a year ago or two we had something like this where someone came forward
requesting a four year extension and we voted no, we voted it down. I can see, going along with the
Chairman, I can see where something might happen and we give them two but four years whatever it is
we should know exactly what is being done. I can see one or two but definitely not four. We already
voted that down once. I’m almost sure we did. If I go back and look at my paperwork I bet I find it.
Chairman Williams said he wanted to add that he likes the six month, where they don’t use it for six
months as long as they come in they apply. I do like that aspect, six months isn’t a long time there
could be market conditions, there are a lot of snowbirds. I mean it doesn’t, who knows why it happens,
I’ve seen it happen, I’ve seen, there is a car dealership here, used to be Lemoines. I could have sworn I
saw that it wasn’t being used as a car dealership for a while but obviously they were able to comeback.
Basically my point is that I think there is a lot of effort given to CUP’s. Six months is a short about of
time for them to be able to somehow extend it is reasonable. I think it is a good faith effort on the City
to allow for that rather than for them to have to do a fully CUP all over again. That is one aspect that I
did like for an easier extension.
Page 2 of 16
Page 5 of 56
Regular Meeting
April 6, 2016
Vice Chairman Chavier asked if Staff is asking for a recommendation. Chairman Williams said it is a
recommendation. Mr. Traphagen said it is an action item. Vice Chairman Chavier said he thinks we
had the Howard Johnson’s property on US Highway 1 got an extension for a couple of years if he is
not mistaken. Chairman Williams said that was the Developers Agreement.
Mr. Traphagen said he wanted to clarify one thing. Staff is not changing the submittal requirements for
the CUP. The Commission brought up being speculative but the applicant would still be required to do
a conceptual plan that would be binding and that is not being eliminated. None of the requirements are
being changed with the submittal. Chairman Williams said he thinks about height as being why CUP’s
are applied for and asked what other kind of CUP’s would an applicant apply for, for large
developments. Mr. Traphagen said a CUP would be required for an ALF, the movie theater needed a
CUP for height and for the use itself. Mr. Traphagen said height is a part of CUP’s but is not always all
of it.
Vice Chairman Chavier suggested giving two years with the potential one year extension from the City
Manager and after that third year is up the applicant would have to come back before the Planning and
Zoning Commission to give an explanation.
Member Bobik asked if a submittal is made to the Corp of Engineers, does that stop the time because
the applicant does not have any control as to how long they will take to do their thing. Mr. Traphagen
said that does not stop the time.
Assistant City Attorney Farrell said she will try and make this make a little more sense. In 2009 the
State Legislature has enacted State Laws that gave an automatic extension of two years because of
market conditions. The City of Titusville has acknowledge that and in reflection of that extension was
automatically granted without any hearings or notice required to the public that automatic extension
essentially gave those developers up to four years to do those projects if they had an active permit with
St. Johns River Water Management District or some other agency that you are referencing. It doesn’t
have any impact on our City interpretation of CUP’s whether or not those other agencies are brought in
that was referenced by the State Legislature which had a result of making four year periods of
development. That is the end result of this Ordinance is to put that four year timeframe at the start
rather than having an effective two year extension in the future if the State Legislature were to redo
what they have done for several years in the past.
Dr. Fayson said we have heard from Staff, legal panel and the Commission and asked if anyone in the
public would be impacted by this Ordinance.
Sid Chehayeb of 3650 Bobbi Lane Titusville, Florida came to speak regarding this item. Mr. Chehayeb
said he has run into this issue, he is an engineer. Mr. Chehayeb said one of the things that the
Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) did was they changed their permit approval or
expiration date from three years to five years because sometimes it takes a long time to develop
something. Mr. Chehayeb said the site that he is referencing is the ACLF. The ACLF is a big project
and it takes a tremendous amount of time and energy between the engineers and architects to get
something in front of the City and Commissions for approval. Mr. Chehayeb said one situation is
mitigation, if a bank is in mitigation it can hold up permits. Mr. Chehayeb said the process that has to
be done to get a CUP is a lot and any leeway that is given would be helpful. Mr. Chehayeb said
Page 3 of 16
Page 6 of 56
Regular Meeting
April 6, 2016
speculation is a part of all projects. He agrees that there does have to be good faith effort. Mr.
Chehayeb said there should be a combined effort with the City and permitting agencies. Mr. Chehayeb
said the time should be extended so the Developer has time to do what he needs to do. Dr. Fayson
asked how much time does Mr. Chehayeb think it would take. Mr. Chehayeb said he would suggest
following the lines of the DEP and the Water Management District, which is five years.
Chairman Williams suggested the two years with a one-year administrative extension and a year to
complete. Assistant City Attorney Farrell asked if Chairman Williams was referring to the language on
page 2 of 4 of the Ordinance (f)(1)(a); changing the four years to two years which then contemplates
the one year extension. Chairman Williams said yes. The first year must have engineering submitted.
Assitant City Attorney Farrell said that would be going back to the way the code is currently written.
Chairman Williams said yes, he does not have a problem with the way the code is currently written.
Chairman Williams said it is saying we are giving a year extension for the engineering and then they
can go out a year, so it is really three years. Dr. Fayson said the Ordinance should be changed to three
instead of four years. Dr. Fayson said it sounds reasonable. Chairman Williams said it should say two
years and they should come in after and explain if they are having problems and then it could be
extended a third year. Dr. Fayson said then it should say two years with the potential one-year
extension. Chairman Williams said two years after engineering approval. Mr. Traphagen said right
now it is one year. Chairman Williams said okay, it is one year after engineering approval. Chairman
Williams said it is the same. Mr. Traphagen said basically the Chairman is suggesting keeping the code
the way it is currently written only he is adding in the administrative one-year extension. Mr.
Traphagen said the applicant would have one-year then an administrative one-year extension for
difficulties with permitting and then one additional year for construction. Mr. Traphagen said basically
it would be how the code is currently written but with that caveat in it. Vice Chairman and Dr. Fayson
said that is reasonable. Assistant City Attorney Farrell said that since this is a significant departure
from the Ordinance as presented she would probably recommend something along the lines of a denial
with a recommendation to create an Ordinance with the suggestions that were just discussed. Chairman
Williams said that is what he was thinking.
XXX
Dr. Fayson made a motion to deny Ordinance No. 5-2016 relating to CUP Expirations. Vice Chairman
Chavier seconded.
Roll call was as follows:
Vice Chairman Chavier
Dr. Tibbitts
Secretary Chambers
Dr. Fayson
Member Bobik
Chairman Williams
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Motion passed.
XXX
Page 4 of 16
Page 7 of 56
Regular Meeting
April 6, 2016
Dr. Fayson made a recommendation based on the input from Council. Leave the Ordinance the same
with the recommended language that was previously discussed of adding the administrative change,
two years plus the one. Dr. Tibbitts seconded.
Assistant City Attorney Farrell said this is going before City Council for the first read on April 12,
2016 and second hearing on April 26, 2016.
Dr. Fayson
Secretary Chambers
Member Bobik
Dr. Tibbitts
Chairman Williams
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Motion passed.
XXX
CUP o. 2-2016 Outdoor seating 106 Main Street
Mr. Ford gave an overview of this item.
Dr. Fayson asked what kind of live music would be allowed. Mr. Ford said the applicant could answer
this in detail but from what he understands, it will be one man playing an acoustic guitar and singing.
Dr. Fayson said this would be east of Washington Avenue. Mr. Ford said yes. Mr. Ford said this is on
Main Street across from Babcock Furniture. Dr. Fayson said he was concerned about the noise level.
Mr. Ford said they would have to meet the City’s noise Ordinance. Member Bobik said it is 60
decimals. Mr. Ford said it would become a police action if it became a problem. Assistant City
Attorney Farrell said there are conditions with this CUP and they are expressed on page 20 of the
agenda packet. Mr. Ford said if the music is a concern the Commission can make a recommendation to
add another condition regarding the music, time etc. Chairman Williams said he lives two miles from
Cracker Jacks and he can hear the music from there live music band outside. Chairman Williams said
Cracker Jacks would be within the code so he does not feel that the music request for this CUP would
be a problem.
Vice Chairman Chavier asked if any feedback was received from the surrounding properties that were
notified. Mr. Ford said he has not received any feedback from anyone but the owner. Vice Chairman
Chavier said the photo that was in the agenda packet shows a trailer park. Vice Chairman Chavier said
the entertainment would be outside to the east of the building and adjacent to the trailer park. Mr. Ford
said yes. Vice Chairman Chavier said he likes the idea but he is concerned about the folks that live in
the area and the noise level. Vice Chairman Chavier suggested allowing this for a year and if
complaints come in and the control is not there that the music could be stopped. Assistant City
Attorney Farrell said she can explore this option but she is not sure you can put an expiration in a use
the way that is being described. Perhaps a condition could be thought of that would satisfy the concern,
maybe a limit on the number of complaints that would result in an expiration of the conditional use.
Maybe three complaints in a six month period. Vice Chairman Chavier said it is just a concern with
Page 5 of 16
Page 8 of 56
Regular Meeting
April 6, 2016
the trailer park so close. Mr. Traphagen said his only suggestion with another condition being placed
on the CUP is that it is clear as to if it impacts the outdoor entertainment only or the outdoor seating
because they are essentially two separate uses and Staff would need to be clear as to the specifics of
the recommendation so it can be enforced.
Member Bobik asked what currently happens when a complaint is received regarding music. Assistant
City Attorney Farrell said noise complaints are answered by the Police Department and Code
Enforcement. Assistant City Attorney Farrell said Code Enforcement has decimal meters and can go
out and take readings to see if there is a violation. Member Bobik said there is already a noise
ordinance and a procedure and does not feel that the Commission needs to recreate the wheel because
a procedure is already in place. Assistant City Attorney Farrell said that the noise ordinance is citywide
but this is different because this is a Conditional Use and specific conditions can be placed by the City
and if the Conditional Use conditions are in violation, the Conditional Use permit may expire because
it is in violation of some of the conditions.
Vice Chairman Chavier asked if the Commission can hear from the applicant.
Secretary Chambers said this is not the only establishment with outdoor live music and he is not aware
of any problems. He does not have any issues with allowing this and does not think any further
restrictions should be placed on the Conditional Use permit.
Dr. Fayson said it is a Conditional Use Permit and he would suggest the one-year trial period as Vice
Chairman Chavier recommended.
James Bovaso of 27 E. Broad Street Titusville, Florida came to speak in favor of this item. Mr. Bovaso
is the property owner. Mr. Bovaso has no objections to the Conditional Use but he does have some
concern about the potential noise from the music. Mr. Bovaso said everyone loves music except when
you are trying to sleep or keep a trailer park quite at night. Mr. Bovaso said he had three people leave
his trailer park because of the noise from the train at night. Mr. Bovaso said there is about thirty people
minimum living in the trailer park at any given time. Mr. Bovaso said he wants to see Mr. Quam
succeed but he does not want to have to call the police for any problems. Mr. Bovaso said he would
suggest having the time lowered and he would not want to see a hard liquor license be allowed. He
said beer and wine is fine. Mr. Bovaso said he would suggest lowering the time to 9:00pm. Mr. Bovaso
said he likes the suggestion of seeing if it will work out.
Barbara Bovaso of 27 E. Broad Street Titusville, Florida came to speak in favor of this item. Ms.
Bovaso said they are so excited to have Russ Quam doing the work that he is doing on the beautiful
building. Ms. Bovaso said it is an amazing building and it is getting a new life in Titusville thanks to
Mr. Quam. Ms. Bovaso said they are really happy and they hope he does very well. Ms. Bovaso said
with regards to the time and music she would just like to keep it pleasant for everyone around. It will
be a great place to come. There is a noise restriction that is imposed on the trailer park residents, which
is 9:00pm during the week. Ms. Bovaso said she has no objections and just wants to work together to
be good neighbors.
Secretary Chambers asked if an acoustic barrier could be placed around the musician. Ms. Bovaso said
she does not think it could be acoustically buffered.
Page 6 of 16
Page 9 of 56
Regular Meeting
April 6, 2016
Russ Quam of 1025 Lundy Drive Titusville, Florida came to speak in favor of this item. Mr. Quam is
the applicant for the CUP. Mr. Quam said the music was a second thought and he really wants the
deck. Mr. Quam said he can do without the music if needed. Mr. Quam said the music would be great
and he would adhere to any restrictions that were given. Mr. Quam said he would have a concern about
the one year with regards to getting complaints because he said someone who could get mad at him
could make fake complaints. Mr. Quam said that is all he would have problems with but he would
leave it up to the Commission.
Chairman Williams said he looks at the map and sees three bars near this location. The music is not a
deal breaker. The music might enhance the business. Chairman Williams asked if Mr. Quam would be
willing to cut the music hours if asked. Mr. Quam said yes. Chairman Williams asked about the kind
of music, would bands or jukebox music be allowed. Mr. Quam said no. Chairman Williams said there
are already three bars within earshot of these residents and he feels the same code should be applied
for all to play fair. Chairman Williams said the music could be potentially a benefit to the business and
he would like to give Mr. Quam every opportunity to be successful.
Assistant City Attorney Farrell said she wanted to note that the property owner did speak before the
applicant and the owner can write in the lease the hours of operation. Chairman Williams said that is
correct, the owner can modify the lease if needed.
Dr. Fayson said Mr. Quam should have the same applied to him that applies to others in the City. Dr.
Fayson said he should have the same opportunity as the others in Downtown.
Dr. Tibbitts said since Titusville is trying to get back to the quaint look this is an excellent 1913
building. It is very appealing and useful.
Vice Chairman Chavier said he has no problems with the hours that are presented. Vice Chairman
Chavier would suggest just trying it out for one year and see what happens.
Titusville Police Officer came and said he does not believe there are many complaints that come from
the Downtown area as far as music and alcohol is concerned. The most complaints come from Cracker
Jacks.
XXX
Member Bobik made a motion to approve CUP No. 2-2016. Dr. Tibbitts seconded.
Dr. Tibbitts
Secretary Chambers
Dr. Fayson
Member Bobik
Chairman Williams
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Motion passed.
Page 7 of 16
Page 10 of 56
Regular Meeting
April 6, 2016
XXX
Extend the Moratorium on the Redevelopment of Golf Course
Vice Chairman Chavier said he would make a motion to approve the Moratorium the 180 days on the
Redevelopment of Golf Courses. Chairman Williams said no, the Commission is not ready to make a
motion yet. Vice Chairman Chavier said he thought this was something that was ready because he is
anxious to approve this item. Chairman Williams said it needs to be opened to the public first.
George McOuat of 1860 Knox McRae Drive Titusville Florida came to speak regarding this item. Mr.
McOuat said he is a snowbird and there are literally hundreds of snowbirds that come from the North
to beautiful Titusville. Mr. McOuat said he has been here for 19 years as a snowbird. Mr. McOuat
suggested the six month extension be made into a year extension because most of the snowbirds are
going to be up North during this six month period and would not be in town to be a part of the
discussions. If not extended a year this could be very well in front of City Council by the time the
snowbirds come back. Mr. McOuat said that the snowbirds have a major impact in Titusville because
we pay taxes 12 months of the year when we are only here for 5 months. We pay school taxes and
many do not have school age children. The snowbirds are a big impact to the community. Mr. McOuat
said he bought in Titusville for reasons such as the living on a golf course. If the golf courses are not
here and development of urban areas are established then the snowbirds will probably leave the area
and find other areas with golf courses. Mr. McOuat would suggest the one-year extension.
Vice Chairman Chavier said the Commission has talked about this for a while and he has not had many
opportunities to talk to any of the homeowners. Vice Chairman Chavier wanted to ask what the general
response is of the community regarding the golf course. Mr. McOuat said the general feeling is that the
people are very upset about it because it is an eyesore and the residents have to drive many miles away
to play golf. There is a strong feeling to support keeping the golf course. Dr. Fayson asked if there is a
Homeowners Association. Mr. McOuat said this area is very large and there are Homeowner
Associations but not one for all of the golf course. There would be several Homeowner Associations
for different areas around the gold course.
Assistant City Attorney Farrell said the 180 days is set by the Ordinance that was approved and set in
place last year when the one year moratorium was approved with an extension of 180 days.
Chairman Williams said Mr. McOuat said everything he has previously said in previous meetings.
Chairman Williams said it is a horrible idea for the City of Titusville to even entertain the idea of it
being changed other than being a golf course. Chairman Williams said it is a mistake for the City of
Titusville to move in this direction. It is his opinion to make this move and change and allow the
property owner to make this change. Chairman Williams said he knows there are allowed uses that
could come in such as cemeteries. Chairman Williams said he thinks Vice Chairman Chavier made a
good point with having the City and County partner up to buy the golf course and run it. Chairman
Williams said he has read about a city taking over a golf course and run it. Even if the golf course is
bought and turned into a park. This is what the residents in this area bought into, a premium spot on a
golf course. Chairman Williams said he cannot be supportive in changing this from a golf course.
Page 8 of 16
Page 11 of 56
Regular Meeting
April 6, 2016
Thomas Kenyon of 1880 Knox McRae Drive Titusville, Florida came to speak against this item. Mr.
Kenyon said he comes down for the winter and does not live too far from Mr. McOuat. Mr. Kenyon
said last year when they came to the meeting they had said that the moratorium was for one year and
this is the first time he has heard that it only for 180 days. Mr. Kenyon said he agrees with Mr. McQuat
that if it is only 180 days then it is over and it will not give the snowbirds a chance to have any input.
Mr. Kenyon said he agrees with the Chairman that the cities and counties are helping take over the golf
courses and he would agree that this is something that should be looked at.
Vice Chairman Chavier asked how far along is Staff with regards to guidelines. Mr. Traphagen said
said Staff met this morning and actually came up with two different options. Mr. Traphagen said the
options can be put together also. One of the options is a Village Center which would allow very low
intensity commercial uses, no strip centers. They would be required to have parking behind the
building and make it a very pedestrian oriented area to serve not only the new homes but the residents
that are established around the golf course. There would be limitations as to where they can go and
how much of the golf course could be dedicated to the commercial uses. The second option is called a
Clustered subdivision or Conservation Subdivision which means a large portion of the property has to
be maintained in Open Space. This is between 35 and 50%. Staff is not done with these guidelines yet.
As a minimum, there will be a buffer between any existing and new development. Mr. Traphagen said
there is still a lot to review and work with Planning and Legal to make sure we are not setting
ourselves up for trouble in the future.
Vice Chairman Chavier said this is a long way off still because all of the legal problems have to be
resolved still. Vice Chairman Chavier said this is just paper planning on the City’s part in case
someone come to the City with a plan. Mr. Traphagen said correct, the City of Titusville is not coming
up with any proposed plans as to how this will look but coming up with regulations to protect the
neighboring property owners and have the flexibility to facilitate a unique style of development
because of the uniqueness of the property. Mr. Traphagen said that Staff has not been tasked with
coming up with an exact plan. Vice Chairman Chavier said a concept plan incase things fall apart.
Assistant City Attorney Farrell said in the event that any owner in the City of Titusville that owns a
golf course comes to the City of Titusville to rezone or redevelop their property with plans to do
something different, then the standards that Staff is talking about would apply. Staff is only talking
about hypothetically doing something different if the Developer wants to do something on their own
initiative on a property that they own. The City is trying to take preventatives when it comes to
buffering, stormwater, and conservation that is existing. Vice Chairman Chavier said he wanted to
bring this up because he wants everyone to understand what this looks like because there has to be
boundaries.
Secretary Chambers said this came up last year. If there can be rules and regulations to protect gopher
turtle holes and wetlands why can a prime golf course not be put under the same protection rules.
Secretary Chambers said the Commission was adamant last year to protect this golf course. Secretary
Chambers would like to see the County and the City to take it over. Secretary Chambers said he is
dead set against it being changed from a golf course.
Dr. Fayson said he agrees with Secretary Chambers. Dr. Fayson said special conditions are placed on a
golf course in the first place. The residents do not get the same spacing as ordinary areas but the
recreation area on the golf course helps compensate for this.
Page 9 of 16
Page 12 of 56
Regular Meeting
April 6, 2016
Member Bobik asked if anyone has approached the City or County regarding possibly taking over the
golf course. Mr. Traphagen said no. The only direction that Staff has received was from City Council
to research what was going on across the state and country with defunct golf courses. Member Bobik
asked if this request would have to come from City Council. Mr. Traphagen said yes. Member Bobik
said it would be the obligation of the public to approach City Council and voice their concerns and
desires.
Dr. Tibbitts said this seems to be all about money. Dr. Tibbitts asked who the owners are and what is
going on. Chairman Williams said he was curious about the owner also. Assistant City Attorney
Farrell said there was a lawsuit to quite title. Royal Oak Golf Club Inc. is the owner according to the
Brevard County Property Appraisers and the Official Records with Brevard County. The owner who
tried to purchase the property last year was declared void. There have been two foreclosure actions
filed by the mortgage holder who holds the note against the property. There is current litigation against
one the golf course and two the Condo Association which is two separate parcels regarding the
foreclosure actions. These are both separate from the owner. Dr. Tibbitts said nothing will be done
until all of this litigation is over. Assistant City Attorney Farrell said she highly doubts anything will
be done until the foreclosures actions are resolved. Dr. Tibbitts said this was a beautiful golf course
years ago and just has gotten worse and worse. Dr. Tibbitts said having a little village or homes put on
it is just unbelievable to her. Dr. Tibbitts said it could be turned back into a beautiful golf course. Dr.
Tibbitts said she would like for the City and County to do something.
Vice Chairman Chavier said everyone here expresses their desire for this to remain a golf course,
however the mortgage holder is not under any obligation to keep it as a golf course. Vice Chairman
Chavier said we don’t know what the final outcome will be and as much as we would like for the
mortgage holder to keep it a golf course, the City of Titusville does have to prepare for the eventuality
that the bank gets it back and they will want to dispose of it somehow. The bank will want to get rid of
it or make it profitable and will not just let it sit there. This is where the City of Titusville is coming
from, they have to prepare for that eventuality that as much as we want it to be a golf course the bank
does not have to do that and as the property owner can do with it what they wish. Vice Chairman
Chavier said this is why the City of Titusville is going down this road to make preparations instead of
waiting for the last minute.
Dr. Fayson said special compensation was given to golf course residents as it relates to spacing, would
that condition hold for the residents. Mr. Traphagen said through the research he has done some places
on the golf course are like that if they were developed as a Planned Unit Development. Mr. Traphagen
said the plats for Royal Oak in particular do not include this; they do not even include the golf course
as part of the plat. They were platted around the boundaries of the golf course and no special
conditions were on the plats themselves. They were developed in accordance with the City’s singlefamily zoning districts so they are not any narrower or any smaller lots that is typically found in those
zoning districts. Mr. Traphagen said this is a little unique compared to others in the state because there
were no special conditions that went along with the plat to protect the homeowners.
Chairman Williams said the ownership is still in question but he wanted to know if the person who was
interested in buying it is no longer in pursuit. Assistant City Attorney Farrell said that is correct, it
reverted back to how the deed was prior to September. Chairman Williams asked if the bank has
foreclosure proceedings against Royal Oak Golf Club. Assistant City Attorney Farrell said Royal Oak
Page 10 of 16
Page 13 of 56
Regular Meeting
April 6, 2016
Golf Club Inc. is who is being foreclosed on. Chairman Williams asked if Royal Oak Golf Club Inc. is
an active existing Corporation. Assistant City Attorney Farrell said she believes yes but she cannot
certify that. Chairman Williams said if the bank is filing against a defunct group that it will default.
Assistant City Attorney Farrell said it is a contested foreclosure. Chairman Williams said at the same
with Royal Oak Condo Association is involved in this also. Assistant City Attorney Farrell said it is a
separate action but the same process. Assistant City Attorney Farrell said it is two different parcels,
two different notes, two different entities who own the note on the golf course and condo association.
Chairman Williams said on one side of the street it is the Condo Association and on the other is it
Royal Oak Golf Club Inc. Assistant City Attorney Farrell said yes. Chairman Williams said we still
don’t know who will be the winner in this but most likely it will be the bank and it is probably a year
and a half away.
Chairman Williams asked if Mr. Traphagen said that this area is not really platted to be a golf course,
it is open and blank space with lots platted around it. Mr. Traphagen said yes. There are not plats for
the golf course itself. The surrounding properties around it create the layout of the golf course.
Chairman Williams said in his mind when he looks at it, it is platted. It is not subdivided, it is one huge
parcel with different zonings within the one lot. This is how he perceives it. No one would have
thought it would be perceived years later that it would not be looked at as platted. Mr. Traphagen said
it was never officially platted. Chairman Williams said the zoning on it does not make it readily
available to change or is it financially feasible to change it. Chairman Williams asked how many acres
is it. Mr. Traphagen said between 150 to 160. Chairman Williams said he can’t see anyone taking 100
acres and putting thirty houses on it. It just is not financially feasible unless you are going to put
mansions and it is still not financially feasible. Chairman Williams said for the City of Titusville to do
nothing is something. Chairman Williams said they say not getting an answer is an answer, in this case
he sees this as the answer. The correct zoning is the current zoning and they are supposed to come and
show why it needs to be changed. Chairman Williams asked Assistant City Attorney Farrell if there is
any liability to the City of Titusville if it is rezoned. Assistant City Attorney Farrell said she has
looked at this in the converse as in if the City of Titusville restricts a property owner from
development that is within their right. If a rezoning application came before the City of Titusville to do
something different from the General Use that it currently has on it then we would need to determine if
it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the current zoning with surrounding properties to
make the determination of any applications that come before you. The Commission would see that and
have to make the determination at that time regarding the rezoning of the property and the size of the
property and history of the property. Chairman Williams said it is not taking the property it is saying
that the property needs to be used for the intended use. Assistant City Attorney Farrell said if you deny
a property owner the right to actually use their property and deny their economical rights. Chairman
Williams said you are not. Assistant City Attorney Farrell said if they have a plan to do something and
they can propose that there is some viable plan that they would present to the City and the City says
you cannot do that, then that could be a taking. Chairman Williams said the City of Titusville has
denied many plans. If the City of Titusville says no, it is being denied. Assistant City Attorney Farrell
said maybe one plan can be denied but if the City says you cannot rezone and do any economic viable
option as you discussed the 30 mansions on the parcel would not be financially feasible and if the City
says that is the only thing that is allowed and you cannot do any other economical projects then that
would result in litigation that I would be concerned about. Chairman Williams asked what about the
litigation from the surrounding residents. Assistant City Attorney Farrell asked who would they be
suing. Chairman Williams said the City of Titusville. Assistant City Attorney Farrell said the City of
Page 11 of 16
Page 14 of 56
Regular Meeting
April 6, 2016
Titusville would not be an interested party. The City of Titusville might be brought in but I would
defend that the City of Titusville is not the person to go after. Chairman Williams said the City is
changing the land. The changing of the zoning of the property that they paid premium to live on is
lessening there property value. Chairman Williams said a couple hundred people could file suit, which
is how he is looking at it. He is not encouraging it but is just pointing it out. Assistant City Attorney
Farrell said the intent of the standards is to prevent that and that is what the City of Titusville is trying
to do. The future owner has potential to make changes and we want them to realize that there are
property owners with expectations of living on a golf course and would like to have something that
they have always had there.
Chairman Williams would like to see it extended a year. Assistant City Attorney Farrell said she is not
sure extending it a year is possible because the 180 days is following the existing Ordinance that was
approved a year ago. The existing Ordinance has a 180 days extension. Assistant City Attorney Farrell
said an additional six month extension could be recommended. Chairman Williams said the
Commission extended the moratorium to waive fees for annexed properties for years. Chairman
Williams said it might be good to deny this extension and create a whole new Ordinance. Mr.
Traphagen said the moratorium would lapse because there would not be enough time to create a new
Ordinance and bring it back in time. Chairman Williams said he is not concerned with someone
coming in and doing something with the property. Member Bobik asked who the meeting was with
earlier today that involved discussion about the golf course standards. Assistant City Attorney Farrell
said it was internal Staff only.
Member Bobik said if someone wanted to come in and establish a goat farm that would be acceptable.
Mr. Traphagen said GU is zoned agricultural. Assistant City Attorney Farrell said that would be
acceptable with current zoning.
Vice Chairman Chavier said he does not have an issue with the 180 days, he would like it to be more
but if it is acceptable by City Council then he is good with it. Vice Chairman Chavier said he would
like to see the upkeep of the golf course because it is really looking shabby. Vice Chairman Chavier
asked what can be done to get the golf course looking better. Assistant City Attorney Farrell said the
City of Titusville would have to move forward with Resolution of Necessity and getting the City to put
a lien against the property and going forward with having the City of Titusville to get the property cut.
Assistant City Attorney Farrell said this has not been initiated this year but it can be brought up to City
Council and see if this is something that they would like to pursue. It takes three to four Council
hearings to get a Resolution of Necessity. This has been used in the past on this property to get the
owner to take care of the property. Dr. Fayson said there is an overgrowth Ordinance on the books
right now. The property is in violation, the city goes out and cuts the property and the property has a
lien on it. Chairman Williams wants to know the Code Enforcement status on the property. Chairman
Williams said he is not encouraging someone to take over someone’s land but this is a large property
for someone to take care of. The bank has an obligation to take care of the property.
Mr. McOuat said the Corporation has about 95% of the ownership. Mr. McQuat said he is concerned
with knowing that Staff is preparing for this to not be a golf course. He would like for someone with
the City Council to be in support of keeping it as a golf course, there has to be some way that the golf
course can be preserved. Mr. McQuat said the City of Titusville has had the golf course cleaned up
once or twice. There is a safety issue with snakes and rats encroaching on the households and that
Page 12 of 16
Page 15 of 56
Regular Meeting
April 6, 2016
cannot just be let go. Mr. McQuat said he was hoping that when the report from Staff came out it
would have a preamble that said something like the first objective is to keep this as a golf course and if
it cannot remain a golf course here are the regulations. Mr. McQuat wants commercial to be kept out
of this area. The planning should only allow residential in the area.
Chairman Williams said he is not comfortable with just 180 days and it should be another year.
Chairman Williams said he would suggest approving the 180 days with the recommendation of another
year.
XXX
Vice Chairman Chavier made a motion to approve Extending the Moratorium on the Redevelopment
of Golf Course 180 days with a recommendation to extend it an additional year if allowed and also be
able to extend it again after that time is up. Dr. Fayson seconded.
Dr. Fayson
Secretary Chambers
Member Baker
Dr. Tibbitts
Member Ritchie
Chairman Williams
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Motion passed.
XXX
Conditional Use Permit CUP# 4-2016
Sid Chehayeb of 3650 Bobbi Lane Titusville, Florida came to speak in favor of this item. Mr.
Chehayeb said this site used to be Sunbelt. They used it for outside storage all the time. This is being
called a warehouse but it is actually a GSA administration building. Mr. Chehayeb said a security
fence will be around it and the closest thing to call it is a warehouse. This is why it is a CUP in front
of the Commission. Mr. Chehayeb said the four conditions are good conditions and they will all be
met, however the conditions are already a part of the code. If the Planning and Zoning votes and agrees
to approve this CUP with the conditions then any changes have to come back and be approved by the
Planning and Zoning Commission. One of the conditions is putting the landscaping outside the fence,
how can the landscaping be maintained if it is outside the fence. We have a plan and it shows
landscaping that is allowed. The whole site is paved, what we are doing is adding a building the same
size as existing building in the back of the existing building. This is all that is being done. What is
being asked is to approve the CUP without the conditions because the conditions are going to be met.
Mr. Chehayeb said if changes need to be made they will have to go before the Board of Adjustment
and Appeals. Mr. Chehayeb said he would like to have the conditions taken out because they have to
be met anyway. Chairman Williams said the difference between the Board of Adjustment and Appeals
Page 13 of 16
Page 16 of 56
Regular Meeting
April 6, 2016
(BAA) and having the approved conditions on the CUP is that BAA can grant an adjustment on a
fence and if you have the conditions on the CUP they cannot. Mr. Chehayeb said that is correct.
Chairman Williams said Mr. Chehayeb said he would meet the code but now he is saying he will meet
the code but if he wants to make a change he will go to BAA. Mr. Chehayeb said that is how he is
reading it. Mr. Chehayeb said he will use the security fence as an example. If they install a security
fence and want to use barbed wire then he would have to come back to the Planning and Zoning
Commission because they would have to have the specified fence that is set forth in the condition. Mr.
Traphagen said the fencing has been addressed as security fencing. Security fencing would allow barb
wired, the intent is that they would have to meet the height, opaqueness and landscaping criteria as set
forth. The security fence can be put in as long as it meets the intent of the code. Mr. Chehayeb read the
lighting condition. Mr. Chehayeb asked why they just can’t meet the code regarding the lighting
because he does not understand what this is saying. Chairman Williams said it means that the lighting
needs to be directed away from the Urban Village but this is going to be ten stories high. Mr.
Traphagen said it would be required to be down lit. Mr. Traphagen said if it is the desire of the
Commission to remove this condition they can choose to do that. Mr. Chehayeb said the other one is
the landscaping outside the fence. Chairman Williams said he works on an industrial property and
there is stormwater that surrounds it and a security fence. We have a stormwater area that is very
pristine. There is a gate and they have to go out on a weekly basis and mow. Chairman Williams said
he can understand the concern with this being on US Highway 1 with security and access. Mr.
Chehayeb said with a fence there is a certain amount of landscaping and you will get into someone
else’s property. The fence is right on the property line. Chairman Williams said he reads it as if they
have landscaping on the outside of that but if you don’t it does not apply. Mr. Traphagen said security
fencing actually does require landscaping on the exterior of the fence to soften the look of a high
security fence. Chairman Williams said could they have palm trees. Mr. Traphagen said they would
just have to meet the landscaping like any other requirements. Mr. Chehayeb showed on a map that he
brought the property layout. Mr. Chehayeb pointed out where the fence is located. Chairman Williams
asked about access. Mr. Chehayeb said there is two ways to access the property the north and on US
Highway 1. The main access is on the north side. Chairman Williams said if this is controlled access it
could be a problem. Chairman Williams said this will cause major problems if you don’t have
overflow for vehicles like that. Mr. Chehayeb said the City Engineer is a Traffic Engineer who will
help keep us out of trouble. Mr. Chehayeb said they are trying to fence the GSA building. Dr. Fayson
said he likes to see that the City of Titusville look nice, the fence might need to be moved back so that
it can be landscaped. Mr. Chehayeb said the Staff requirements will be met. Mr. Traphagen suggested
changing the wording on condition No. 2 and removing “of the property” and it will just leave it to say
at the north of perimeter on the exterior side. Mr. Chehayeb said he was good with that. Mr.
Traphagen said this will meet the requirements. Mr. Chehayeb said one of the recommendations of the
GSA is to have barb wired security fence. Mr. Traphagen said the code allows barb wire and the
security fence has to meet the intent of the code.
Mr. Traphagen said if he understands correctly condition No. 1 is being completely removed and
condition No. 2 is having the words “of the property” removed.
Grady Strickland of 4955 Hamlin Circle Mims, Florida came to speak in favor of this item. Mr.
Stirckland said he is one of the owners of the property. Mr. Strickland said this is a ten year GSA
lease. Mr. Strickland said there will be a twenty ton forklift on site, semi-trucks coming and going, and
storage containers from cargo ships stored onsite. The back end of the building has a computer lab in
Page 14 of 16
Page 17 of 56
Regular Meeting
April 6, 2016
it. There will be about 8 to 12 employees on site. Vice Chairman Chavier asked if the containers will
be screened. Mr. Strickland said the fence will hide them. Vice Chairman Chavier asked about the
contents of the containers. Mr. Strickland said he does not know what is being stored in the containers.
Mr. Strickland said he is looking at a Phase 1 and Phase 2 lease and it could be allowing Sunbelt to
come back in. Chairman Williams asked about the curb cuts. Mr. Chehayeb said there will be two
access points. Mr. Strickland said any easement to the M2 zoning will come into his properties
easement.
XXX
Vice Chairman Chavier made a motion to approve CUP No. 4-2016. Dr. Fayson seconded.
Dr. Tibbitts
Secretary Chambers
Dr. Fayson
Member Bobik
Chairman Williams
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Motion passed.
XXX
Dr. Fayson made a motion to take the By-Laws off the table. All of the Planning and Zoning
Commission Members were in agreement. Assistant City Attorney Farrell said this item is now open.
Old Business
Planning and Zoning By-Laws
Assistant City Attorney Farrell gave an overview of this item.
Dr. Fayson made a few grammatical corrections.
Vice Chairman Chavier suggested one change.
Assistant City Attorney Farrell said the corrections and changes will be made.
XXX
Dr. Fayson made a motion to approve the Planning and Zoning By-Laws with discussed changes. Dr.
Tibbitts seconded.
Page 15 of 16
Page 18 of 56
Regular Meeting
April 6, 2016
Dr. Tibbitts
Member Bobik
Secretary Chambers
Dr. Fayson
Chairman Williams
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Motion passed.
Reports
School Board Member Patricia Hare gave an update. Mr. Lindemann sent Patricia Hare, BPS Liaison,
two major news items for the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting dated Wednesday, April 6,
2016.
The first item to report was a draft of the 2016-2017 Student Accommodation Plan for the next
academic year; this 74 page document is on the Brevard Public School, BPS, website. The Plan is
scheduled as a Consent Agenda Item for the April 26 School Board Meeting.
This plan is prepared each year by BPS Facilities Services Planning staff and Area Superintendents
and school principals. The plan involves ensuring that facilities are appropriate for student /teacher
needs and for programs planned for the following year,
Secondly, for the next year, 4 relocatable classrooms have been requested at a cost of no more than
$288,188.00, not to exceed this amount. A separate agenda item is an expenditure of $10,000.00 for
administrative and permitting costs
Both items will be agenda items for the April 26, 2016 School Board Meeting.
XXX
Dr. Fayson read Section 13-106 regarding blight.
Vice Chairman Chavier said that the Titusville Environmental Commission will be involved with
Arbor Day and Earth Day.
XXX
Petitions and Requests from Public Present
None
XXX
Adjournment 9:23 p.m.
Page 16 of 16
Page 19 of 56
Category: 9.
Item: A.
City of Titusville
REPORT TO COUNCIL
To:
From:
Subject:
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 3-2016 to permit a building in
excess of 35 feet in height in the Planned Industrial Development
(PID) zoning district.
Department/Office: Planning
Recommended Action:
Conduct public hearing of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 3-2016 to allow a building in excess
of 35 feet in height in the Planned Industrial Development (PID) zoning district.
The applicant, Vision Tract G, LLC, is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow building
height greater than 35 feet for a proposed hotel. The Applicant is proposing a maximum of 60
feet in height for the proposed hotel. The property is located on the east side of US 1, at the
south side of the entrance of Vectorspace Boulevard, approximately 1,500 feet south of NASA
Causeway (SR 405). Staff is recommending approval of this request of a CUP with four
conditions.
The conditions are as follows:
1) Compliance with the City’s landscape code, including larger trees and shrubs, that are at
least one size larger than required by the City’s Land Development Regulations, must be
provided along the south and west property lines to buffer the additional height:
a) Trees – Overstory: 4 inch caliper; Coniferous: 3 inch caliper; ornamental: 3 inch caliper at
planting or retain the existing canopy
b) Shrubs – 7 gallons at planting
2) Recording of airport related “Waiver of Claims” and “Notice of Disclosure” legal documents
prior to site plan approval (Sec. 59-975).
3) Compliance with the required 30 foot landscape buffer along U.S. Highway 1 as required by
the Land Development Regulations [Ordinance 6-2006] unless a variance is granted.
4) Compliance with the maximum 125 percent off-street parking ratio specified in Section 39-70
of the LDRs unless approved by the Administrator through the site plan review process or a
variance is granted.
5) Submit a current “Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation” or other documentation to
prove the proposed development includes no “potential airport obstruction” prior to site plan
approval.
Page 20 of 56
Alternatives:
1) Recommend approval, as presented
2) Recommend approval, with changes
3) Do not recommend approval
Item Budgeted:
NA
NA
Strategic Plan:
No. 2 – Economic Development
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Upload Date
Type
Staff Report
4/14/2016
Backup Material
Concept Plan
4/14/2016
Backup Material
Aerial Map
4/14/2016
Backup Material
Zoning Map
4/14/2016
Backup Material
Application
4/14/2016
Backup Material
Map of Code required 30-foot buffer
4/14/2016
Backup Material
Page 21 of 56
City of Titusville
Planning Department Staff Report
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) o. 3-2016
Meeting Dates:
Planning and Zoning Commission:
City Council Public Hearing:
April 20, 2016
April 26, 2016
Prepared By:
Trevor Traphagen, Senior Planner
Applicant(s):
Visions Tract G, LLC
Applicant’s Request:
To allow additional building height over 35 feet for a proposed hotel (60
feet in height) in the Planned Industrial Development (PID) zoning
district in Vectorspace Park.
Staff Recommendation:
Approval of only the hotel and no other office or retail building or
appurtenances on the hotel to exceed 60 feet per the conditions in the
report.
Background Information
The applicant, Vision Tract G, LLC, is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow building height
greater than 35 feet for their proposed hotel. The property is located on the east side of US 1, at the south
side of the entrance of Vectorspace Boulevard, approximately 1,500 feet south of NASA Causeway (SR
405).
The property is zoned Planned Industrial District (PID) zoning district. A hotel is not a permitted use in
the City’s PID. However, when the Vectorspace development (now known as Riverfront Center) was
annexed into the City, the County’s permitted and conditional uses were adopted by reference. A hotel is
therefore a permitted use according to Annexation Ordinance No. 19-1999.
The ordinance specifically states, “Pursuant to the annexation agreement dated July 19th, 1988 and
recorded in Official Records Book 2931, Pages 1993-2001, Public Records of Brevard County, Florida,
all permitted and conditional uses allowed in the Brevard County PIP ordinance (as adopted in February
1988) will be similarly allowed in the City of Titusville.” [Ord. 19-1999].
The City’s PID zoning district does not have a height limitation; the taller the building the greater the
setback. However, by virtue of the uses provision in Annexation Ordinance No. 19-1999, a conditional
use permit for any building above 35 feet is required.
The history of the development is provided below.
• In 1987, the Vectorspace Development of Regional Impact (DRI) was established by resolution of the
Brevard County Board of County Commissioners (ORB 2791 PG 2986).
• In 1988, an agreement was completed between the City and Vectorspace Associates, LTD., with
provisions related to water and sewer services and the timing of annexation.
• In 1999, the City annexed the Vectorspace DRI, designated the Planned Industrial Park future land
use category onto the properties, and rezoned the area with the Planned Industrial District (PID)
zoning classification.
• In 2014, the Vector Space DRI expired.
Page 1 of 5
Q:\Planning Admin\Working Files\(CUP) Conditional Use Permits\CUP-#3-2016-Vectorspace Blvd\Staff Report CUP 3-2016.docx
Page 22 of 56
CUP o. 3-2016
The Master Plan for Vectorspace lists the allowable uses on each Tract. The table below offers a
snapshot of the existing build-out of the former Vectorspace DRI. As noted above, the DRI is now
expired and the table below serves to illustrate the amount of development that was originally approved
for the properties within the Vectorspace Park.
Development Distribution in Vectorspace Park*
Approved
Developed to date
Proposed
Remaining
Development
Development
Development
Commercial
221,800 sq. ft.
137,932 sq. ft.
20,776 sq. ft.
63,092 sq. ft.
Office
544,459 sq. ft.
90,940 sq. ft.
16,676 sq. ft.
436,843 sq. ft.
Industrial
856,334 sq. ft.
0 sq. ft.
0 sq. ft.
856,334 sq. ft.
Hotel
500 rooms
0 rooms
136 rooms
364 rooms
* Data obtained from Vectorspace DRI Reports to the State of Florida and City approvals
Use
Property Information
Property Use
Existing
Proposed
Vacant
Hotel & office/retail
Surrounding Property Information:
Existing Use
Future Land Use
Zoning
Planned Industrial Park
Planned Industrial
Development (PID)
Future Land Use
Vacant
South
Boeing Office Building
East
Office Building
West
US Highway 1 / vacant
Commercial High Intensity
orth
Zoning
Planned Industrial
Development (PID)
Planned Industrial
Development (PID)
Planned Industrial
Development (PID)
Community Commercial
(CC)
Analysis
The applicant’s request is for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow building height greater than 35
feet, to a maximum of 60 feet. The applicant desires to construct a 136-room hotel with a restaurant and
conference rooms at a total height of sixty (60) feet (see concept plan) and a total footprint of 25,437
square feet. The proposed office/retail building will contain 2 floors (35 feet in height) and 14,400 square
feet of gross floor area. The office/retail building does not necessitate conditional use permit approval
since this building meets the height restriction.
This same request was brought before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council as
Conditional Use Permit Application No. 10-2006. The request was approved by City Council on
September 12, 2006, with 9 conditions. The application submitted with CUP 3-2016 has been modified
to address some of the conditions that were included in the approval of CUP 10-2006.
Conditional Use Criteria
Section 47-119(a) of the LDC states that before any Conditional Use is granted, City Council shall apply
the standards set forth below and shall determine that satisfactory provisions and arrangements of the
following factors have been met by the petitioner, where applicable. The following are staff’s findings
based on the CUP request.
Page 2 of 5
Page 23 of 56
CUP o. 3-2016
1) Comprehensive Plan Consistency statement.
The use, its location, and facilities proposed in CUP application o. 3-2016 are consistent with the
City’s Planned Industrial Park Future Land Use designation. The uses referenced in Annexation
Ordinance 19-1999 were found consistent with the City’s comprehensive plan with the approval of
Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) o. 98-1D.
2) Ingress and egress to the property and proposed structure with particular reference to automotive and
pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access [in] case of fire or catastrophe.
The property has access to both U.S. Highway 1 and Vectorspace Boulevard. The access point to
U.S. Highway 1 is existing and will be shared with the adjacent Boeing property to the south. There
are no sidewalks along this portion of U.S. Highway 1. The Fire Department had no objections to the
CUP request.
3) Off street parking and loading area where required with particular attention to ingress and egress.
The proposed hotel is required to provide 1 space per unit for a total of 136 spaces. The included
concept plan shows 178 spaces have been provided for the hotel. The proposed retail/office space is
required 1 space for 250 square feet for a total of 58 parking spaces. The included concept plan
shows 68 spaces provided. Total parking counts for the property are 194 spaces are required, and
246 spaces are provided. Chapter 39 allows parking up to 125% of the required minimum parking
for the proposed use. The proposed parking numbers are approximately 127% of the minimum
required parking. If the applicant is to exceed the 125% maximum parking threshold, a variance will
be required. All parking regulations will be reviewed during the site plan process.
4) Refuse and service area with particular reference to ingress/egress and off street parking.
The City currently provides solid waste services to the existing building and no issues with access are
anticipated. As noted above, the dumpster enclosure on the provided conceptual plan should provide
sufficient space for multiple dumpsters. The Public Works Department had no objections to the CUP
request.
5) Nuisance factors detrimental to adjacent and nearby properties and the City as a whole. Nuisance
factors shall include but not necessarily be limited to noise, odor, smoke, glare, electrical interference
and/or mechanical vibrations.
The City’s PID zoning district does not have a height limitation, the taller the building the greater the
setback. However, by virtue of the uses provision in Annexation Ordinance o. 19-1999, a
conditional use permit for any building above 35 feet is required. Staff does not believe the proposed
hotel use will create any nuisance factors that will be detrimental to nearby properties.
6) Utilities with reference to location, availability and compatibility.
The existing building is located in the City’s urban service area and water utilities are available to
serve the site. The Water Resources Department did not have any objection to the application.
7) Screening and buffering with reference to type, dimensions and character.
This use will be required to provide screening and buffering pursuant to Chapter 35 of the Land
Development Regulations. Chapter 35 requires a 30-foot landscape buffer along this portion of U.S.
Highway 1. The proposed conceptual plan only proposes a 10’ landscape buffer along the U.S.
Highway 1 frontage. All additional landscaping requirements will be addressed during the site plan
process.
In 2006, the City increased the required buffer from twenty (20) to thirty (30) feet on certain
arterials, including this segment of Hwy U.S. 1. Ordinance o. 6-2006 was adopted “in an effort to
increase city-wide curb appeal and in response to the Titusville 2020 Action Plan” The concept plan
does not include the 30 foot buffer requirement. A variance may be required to allow the row of
parking adjacent to US 1 in lieu of the 30 foot buffer.
Page 3 of 5
Page 24 of 56
CUP o. 3-2016
The conceptual site plan does not show an area designated for mechanical equipment. Screening may
be accomplished by locating mechanical equipment behind a parapet if on the top of the building or
wall/fencing/landscaping at least 6 feet in height if located on ground level.
8) Signs and proposed exterior lighting with reference to glare, traffic safety, economic effect and
compatibility and harmony with properties in the district.
Pursuant to Section 47-132(b) “Design requirements” no conditional use permit shall be approved
which fails to meet the signage requirements specified in Chapter 39, Article V of the Code. Signage
is permitted separately and shall be reviewed consistent with the Code when an application is
submitted.
9) Required yards and other open spaces.
Based on the dimensions provided on the conceptual plan, the proposed development appears to meet
the minimum dimensions for all required yards and open space.
10) General compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district. AND
11) The proposed change out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the City.
A 60-foot (5 story) building is similar in scale with the other existing building in the park. The
Boeing office building south of this property is 4 stories in height.
12) Special requirements set out in the schedule of district regulations for the particular use involved.
The property’s location, regardless of the height of the building proposed places the project under an
additional layer of review, namely the compatibility of the buildings within the airport noise and
height review areas. Tract G is located both within the “Airport Height otification” and “Airport
oise Impact” areas. The site is not within the airport runway path, which has further restrictions
regarding building design and height according to the City’s Land Development Regulations.
Sections 59-974 and 59-975 of the Zoning Code are Airport Overlay codes which address noise
issues related to impact to the airport. Section 59-974 sets out the types of uses allowed in the airport
noise area, and hotels are allowed per the code. Section 59-975 provides the protection mechanisms
for the airport, in that any new development within the airport must execute binding easement
agreements absolving the airport of legal complaints regarding noise impacts. The applicant has
provided unsigned and unrecorded copies of the easement agreements. Staff recommends these
documents be executed as a condition of approval prior to site plan approval.
Section 59-549(e) establishes two regulations regarding lighting in the Planned Industrial
Development (PID) zoning district. Sec. 59-549(e)(1) states: “Artificial lighting utilized to illuminate
the premises shall be directed away from adjacent properties and streets, shining only on the subject
site.” Sec. 59-549(e)(2) states: “ o free standing light fixtures shall extend higher than twenty-five
(25) feet. Such fixtures shall be approved by the administrator to assure design compatibility with
principal buildings and the planned industrial business park.” These standards will be reviewed
during the site plan process to ensure any proposed development meets the criteria established for
the PID zoning district.
Section 59-549(g) establishes regulations for mechanical/electrical equipment for buildings which
states: “Mechanical equipment or other utility features on roof, ground or buildings shall be
screened from public view with material harmonious with the building or they shall be so located as
not to be visible from any public street or adjoining property.” These standards will be reviewed
during the site plan process to ensure any proposed development meets the criteria established for
the PID zoning district.
Recommendation
Page 4 of 5
Page 25 of 56
CUP o. 3-2016
There were 9 conditions originally approved with the 2006 conditional use permit. Several of the
conditions are no longer applicable including those related to the location of dumpsters, parking spaces,
building design, and a previously proposed driveway onto US 1. The staff recommends approval of
conditional use permit No 3-2016 to allow a building with a height of 60 feet in lieu of 35 feet per
Ordinance 19-1999 with the following conditions:
1) Compliance with the City’s landscape code, including larger trees and shrubs, that are at least one
size larger than required by the City’s Land Development Regulations, must be provided along the
south and west property lines to buffer the additional height:
a) Trees – Overstory: 4 inch caliper; Coniferous: 3 inch caliper; ornamental: 3 inch caliper at
planting or retain the existing canopy
b) Shrubs – 7 gallons at planting
2) Recording of airport related “Waiver of Claims” and “Notice of Disclosure” legal documents prior
to site plan approval (Sec. 59-975).
3) Compliance with the required 30 foot landscape buffer along U.S. Highway 1 as required by the
Land Development Regulations [Ordinance 6-2006] unless a variance is granted.
4) Compliance with the maximum 125 percent off-street parking ratio specified in Section 39-70 of
the LDRs unless approved by the Administrator through the site plan review process or a variance
is granted.
5) Submit a current “Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation” or other documentation to prove
the proposed development includes no “potential airport obstruction” prior to site plan approval.
Page 5 of 5
Page 26 of 56
Page 27 of 56
R
ON D
HORIZ
US 1
HW Y
S
D
BLV
AC E
P
S
TOR
VEC
US 1
HW Y
S
Legend
Subject Property CUP #3-2016
Page 28 of 56
.
AERIAL: CUP #3 - 2016
0
100
200
400
Feet
Page 29 of 56
Page 30 of 56
Page 31 of 56
Page 32 of 56
Category: 9.
Item: B.
City of Titusville
REPORT TO COUNCIL
To:
From:
Subject:
Code Update - Chapter 28, Zoning - Accessory Use Section
Department/Office: Planning
Recommended Action:
Accept the draft accessory use table, standards, and format for the accessory use portion of the
proposed draft of Chapter 28.
Staff is currently in the process of reorganizing the City's Land Development Regulations
(LDR's). At the January 6, 2016 meeting, the Commission was presented Chapter 27, the first
chapter, of the draft code dealing with the relationship of the Comprehensive Plan to the LDR's.
At a workshop on February 3, 2016, the Commission was presented Chapter 28, the second
chapter, of the draft code dealing with the zoning districts, use standards, and development
standards.
This item is an additional section of Chapter 28, specifically dealing with accessory uses, use
standards, and development standards. The format of this section is the same as the previous
sections of Chapter 28. There will be a master use table for accessory uses, then a list of all
uses with a small use table and any standards associated with that use, and finally the
development standards that all accessory uses must adhere to.
Attached is the master accessory use table, and section on accessory uses from the proposed
Chapter 28.
Alternatives:
1) Accept the draft format of the accessory use section of Chapter 28.
2) Do not accept the draft format.
Item Budgeted:
NA
NA
Strategic Plan:
Page 33 of 56
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Upload Date
Type
Accessory Use Table
4/14/2016
Backup Material
Draft Accessory Use Section - Chapter 28
4/14/2016
Backup Material
Page 34 of 56
ACCESSORY USE TABLE
Agriculture and Public
Permitted Principal Uses
GU
OR
P
Residential Districts
RE
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
Commercial Districts
R-3
Key: A = Accessory Use
Accessory Uses
Accessory Dwelling Unit
Arbor
Attached Screen Porch
Automated Teller Machine (ATM)
Automatic Vending and Transaction Machines
Clubhouse
Detached Accessory Building/Structure
Dock
Dormitory (as accessory to education use)
Home based business
Outdoor areas of seating assembly and/or music
entertainment
Outdoor display of merchandise
Outdoor storage (as an acessory use)
Parking or storage of motor vehicles, recreational
vehicles, boats, airboats, or trailers in residential
districts
Real Estate Office
Recreation Court
Retail sales (as accessory use)
Security Dwelling Unit
Screened enclosures with screened roof
Skateboard Ramp
Swimming pool or spa or hot tub
Temporary Storage Units
L
L
L
P
L
L
L
P
L
L
L
P
L
P
L
L
L
L
P
L
L
L
L
P
L
L
L
L
P
L
L
L
L
P
L
L
L
P
RMH-1 RMH-2
T = Temporary Use
L
L
L
P
RHP
L
L
L
P
L
L
L
P
HM
T
NC
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
RC
CM
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
M-2
M-3
Mixed Use
L
L
P
P
P
P
P
L
A
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
P
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
P
P
L
P
P
P
T
P
T
P
L
P
T
P
L
P
T
P
L
P
T
P
L
P
T
P
L
P
T
P
L
P
T
P
L
P
T
P
L
P
T
P
L
P
T
P
L
P
T
A
Common recreation services
L
L
L
L
L
L
T
T
T
UMU
Midtown
Civic
Waterfront
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
P
P
L
C
C
L
P
P
L
L
L
L
P
L
L
L
C
C
C
C
L
L
C
C
L
L
L
L
L
L
P
P
T
P
T
T
T
T
T
Standards
RMU
SMU
100
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
P
L
P
P
P
L
L
200
300
IRCN
UV
400
500
C
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
P
P
L
P
P
L
L
P
L
L
L
L
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
A
L
L
P
P
P
L
L
L
P
P
T
P
P
T
T
P
T
T
A
A
A
This is already a permitted principal use in the CM zoning district.
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
Recreational and entertainment uses inside or outside of Same as outdoor areas of seating and entertainment (listed below)
the principal building and incidental to the principal use
A
Storage as accessory to retail use on the same property Same as outdoor storage (listed below)
Uses and structures which are on the same lot and of a
nature customarily incidental and subordinate to the
A
A
principal building structure or use
Uses and structures which are in keeping with the
A
A
A
character of the district
Uses and structures which are on the same lot and of a
nature customarily incidental and subordinate to the
A
principal governmental use or structure
Uses, structure and operations which are in keeping with
the character of the district
A
Page 35 of 56
P
T
A
Pool
Within each hospital, clinic, medical or dental building
permitted in this district, accessory uses may be
permitted for the convenience of employees, patients,
and visitors, provided that such accessory uses shall be
confined to the interior of such building, and that access
shall be from within a lobby or corridor of the principal
building. There shall be no advertising or visible
indication of such accessory uses from the outside of
the principal building
P
A
Customary accessory buildings
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
Customary uses required to maintain or support any use
permitted in this district such as retail or wholesale sale
of products manufactured on site, meeting rooms,
stroage and display areas, facilities for employees, and
the like
Home occupations subject to the provisions of Section
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
59-35
Ice vending buildings as defined in Section 27-11
provided that the ice vending building is located on
This use was previously permitted in the CBD zoning district, which is no longer applied to any properties within the city.
property adjacent to an arterial road
No residential facilities shall be permitted except for
watchment or caretakers whose work requires residence
These are accessory dwelling units (listed below)
on the premises or for employees who will be
temporarily quartered on the premises
Private swimming pools and tennis courts
R
L
L
P
T
DMU
PID
P
L
Any hotel or other tourist accommodation containing fifty
(50) rental units or more shall be permitted to establish
accessory uses within the principal building designed to
primarily serve the guests of the facility, such as: drug
This is a use standard and will be included under the Hotel/Motel use standards.
and sundry shops, florists, gift and souvenir shops,
confectionery stores, newsstands, personal services,
etc.
Buildings or structures used for dairy barns, hog pens,
poultry houses and stables provided said buildings or
structures shall be no closer than fifty (50) feet to any lot This is a use standard and will be included under the Agricultural Pursuits use standards
or property line
Clubhouses, maintenance structures, snack bars and
other incidental uses clearly accessory to the principle
A
use of the land
Pleasure craft marine parts and equipment sales
M-1
Downtown Uptown
L
L
L
P
P
Industrial Districts
OP
Blank Cell = Use Prohibited
P
L
CC
The uses listed here are already addressed by other specific accessory uses
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
See Noted Section
for Use Specific
Standards
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. ARTICLE V – ACCESSORY USE TABLE
The following regulations apply only to those uses that are accessory in nature to the principal use of a
property.
Sec. 28-28 – Use Table Key
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
In the event of a conflict between the use table contained in Sec. 28-XX and any other use table
listed in Article VI – Accessory Use Standards, the use table contained in Sec. 28-XX shall prevail.
Types of Use.
(1) Accessory Uses Permitted By Right “P”. A “P” indicates that a use is allowed by right in the
respective district. Such uses are subject to all other applicable requirements of these
regulations.
(2) Accessory Uses Permitted with Limitations “L”. An “L” indicates a use that will be permitted
subject to the use limitations in Ch. 28, Article VI (Accessory Use Standards). Such uses are
subject to all other applicable requirements of these regulations.
(3) Accessory Conditional Use “C”. A “C” indicates a use that is allowed only where approved as a
Conditional Use by the City Council and require public hearings. Such uses are subject to the
use limitations in Ch. 28, Article VI (Accessory Use Standards) and all other applicable
requirements of these regulations.
(4) Temporary Uses “T”. A “T” indicates a use that is permitted on a temporary basis subject to the
limitation in Ch. 28, Article VI (Accessory Use Standards). Such uses are subject to all other
applicable requirements of these regulations.
Uses Not Allowed. A blank cell in the use table indicates that a use is not allowed in the respective
district.
Standards. The “Standards” column on the use table is a cross-reference to any limited or
conditional use standards in Ch. 28, Article III (Use Standards). All uses are also required to comply
with the appropriate dimensional standards in Article IV [Citation to be added later].
Sec. 28-269 – Accessory Use Table
Reserved for
Accessory
Use Table
Page 36 of 56
Page 112 P and Z Regular - April 20, 2016 - 6:00 PM
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. ARTICLE VI – ACCESSORY USE STANDARDS
The following regulations apply only to those uses that are accessory in nature to the principal use of a
property.
Sec. 28-270 – Accessory Dwelling Unit
1. Districts where permitted
RE
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
L
L
L
L
L
HM
T
NC
CC
RC
GU
OR
P
L
L
D
L
DMU
U M
L L
C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
RHP
OP
CM
M-1
M-2
M-3
UMU SMU
L
L
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
PID
IRCN
C
R
L
L
2. Definition
Accessory Dwelling Unit: An accessory dwelling unit is an ancillary or secondary living unit to a
single-family dwelling use that has a separate kitchen, bathroom, and sleeping area, existing
either within the same structure, or on the same lot, as the primary dwelling unit.
3. Standards for Permitted Uses with Limitations
a. An accessory dwelling unit is permitted only as accessory to, and on the same lot as, a singlefamily dwelling, and are not permitted as accessory to a two-family dwelling, multifamily
dwelling, or mobile home dwelling.
b. Not more than one accessory dwelling unit per lot is permitted.
c. An accessory dwelling unit may be within or attached to the principal dwelling (e.g., a
downstairs apartment), or exist within or as a detached structure (e.g., an apartment above a
detached garage or a guesthouse). An accessory dwelling unit attached to the principal
dwelling shall have an operative interconnecting door with the principal dwelling, and shall
have a principal access only from the side or rear yard of the principal dwelling.
d. The use of a mobile home, recreational vehicle, or a similar vehicle as an accessory dwelling
unit is prohibited.
e. The floor area of an accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed the lesser of 1,000 square feet or
25 percent of the floor area of the principal use.
f. At least one, but no more than two, off-street parking spaces shall be provided for an
accessory dwelling unit (in addition to the off-street parking required for the principal use).
g. In the Downtown Mixed Use (DMU) zoning district, accessory dwelling units are limited to the
upper floors of buildings.
h. In the Indian River City Neighborhood-Commercial (IRCN-C) zoning district, accessory
dwelling units:
i. Shall be limited to one ADU per commercial lot
ii. Shall have a minimum living area shall be 600 square feet plus 100 square feet per each
additional bedroom.
[Second option for ADU inclusion in the code]
(a) Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) – A secondary dwelling unit that is located on the same parcel or
lot yet clearly subordinate to the principal dwelling unit, which may be either attached to or
detached from the principal dwelling and which has a separate egress/ingress independent from
the principal dwelling and provides complete independent living facilities from the principal
dwelling including provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation. Specifically the
Page 37 of 56
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. unit shall include a bathroom complete with sink, toilet and shower/tub and the kitchen shall
include, at a minimum, a sink, a refrigerator and electricity for cooking.
(1) Eligibility.
a. ADUs shall be a permitted use in the Residential Estate, Rural Residential, SingleFamily Low Density and Single-Family Medium Density zoning categories subject to
administrative review and approval of an application for an ADU permit. An ADU is
only permitted where the owner(s) of the property occupy either the primary dwelling
unit or the ADU as their primary home and claim homestead exemption there.
b. All property owners seeking to establish an ADU as an allowed use must submit an
application for an ADU permit and comply with the standards and requirements
applicable to an ADU.
c. All permits for an ADU shall be valid for one year and may be renewed annually upon
written request of the owner-occupant, subject to continued compliance with
established regulations.
d. Previous violation of the ADU standards and requirements or other zoning or
subdivision provisions may be grounds for denial of an application for an ADU or
renewal of an ADU permit.
e. If an ADU does not meet the criteria for administrative approval, it may be permitted
as a conditional use in the following zoning categories: Single-Family High Density,
Urban Mixed Use, Shoreline Mixed Use, Residential Historic Properties and Planned
Unit Development.
Zoning District
Residential Estate
Rural Residential
Single Family, Low Density
Single Family, Medium Density
Single Family, High Density
Urban Mixed Use
Shoreline Mixed Use
Planned Unit Development
ADU as a
Permitted Use








ADU as a
Conditional Use
ADU Not
Permitted
(2) Number: Only one ADU is permitted per single-family residentially-zoned lot.
(3) Creation: An ADU may be created through new construction, conversion of an existing
structure, addition to an existing structure or conversion of a qualifying existing house to an
ADU while simultaneously constructing a new primary dwelling unit on the property.
(4) Occupancy and Use: Occupancy and use standards for an ADU shall be the same as those
applicable to a primary dwelling unit on the same lot, subject to meeting all applicable
regulations for the ADU.
(5) Approval: An ADU may be approved as a permitted use by the Administrator so long as the
following conditions are met.
a. Before approval of a permit for an ADU, the Administrator shall find that:
i. A single family dwelling unit exists on the lot or will be constructed in
conjunction with the ADU.
ii. The owners of the property occupy the primary dwelling unit or the ADU as
their principal residence and claim homestead exemption there.
iii. The ADU may be attached to, or detached from, the principal dwelling unit.
iv. For an attached ADU, the entrance(s) to the unit shall be located on the side
or rear of the building.
Page 38 of 56
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. v. In no case shall the ADU be more than ten (10) percent of the lot area, nor
more than eight hundred (800) square feet, nor less than three hundred (300)
square feet, nor have more than two (2) bedrooms.
vi. Any additions to an existing dwelling unit to create an ADU shall not exceed
the allowable lot coverage or encroach into the existing setbacks.
vii. A detached ADU, not part of a garage structure, shall be no more than one
(1) story and no more than fifteen (15) feet in height or the height of the
primary dwelling unit, whichever is shorter.
viii. A detached ADU, not part of a garage structure, shall be located behind the
primary dwelling unit and separated by a minimum of ten (10) feet.
ix. A detached ADU, not part of a garage structure, shall be screened from view
from adjacent property owners either by a six (6) foot high opaque fence or a
continuous six (6) foot high landscape buffer.
x. If the primary dwelling unit has a detached garage, the ADU may be located
on the second story of the garage, as long as the overall height complies with
all zoning regulations and City codes.
xi. An attached ADU shall be designed to incorporate the primary dwelling unit’s
materials, colors, window style and roof design. An attached ADU shall not
be distinguishable from the primary dwelling unit.
xii. The ADU shall meet all requirements of the applicable building code.
xiii. Off-street parking for all tenant vehicles shall be required. The lease for the
ADU or primary dwelling unit shall stipulate that all tenant vehicles shall be
parked on the lot either in the garage, carport or on the paved driveway. The
application will require that the applicant/property owner provide a copy of
the lease to be used for the ADU or primary dwelling unit to verify this
condition.
xiv. If the approval is provided for an ADU, prior to receiving a building permit for
the ADU, the applicant must file a Declaration of Restrictions with the
Brevard County Clerk of the Court containing a reference to the legal
description of the property and the deed under which the property was
conveyed to the present owner stating:
1. The ADU shall not be sold or conveyed separate from the principal
residence;
2. The ADU is restricted to the approved size;
3. The use permit for the ADU shall be in effect only so long as either
the principal residence or the ADU is occupied by the owner of
record as their principal residence;
4. The declarations shall run with the land, shall be binding upon any
successor in ownership of the property and that non-compliance
shall be cause for code enforcement and/or revocation of the ADU
approval;
5. The deed restrictions shall only be removed with the express written
consent of the City but shall lapse upon removal of the ADU; and
6. The ADU shall not be used for commercial purposes, other than
being leased for residential purposes.
xv. All adjacent property owners have been noticed of the application for an ADU
and have had an opportunity to provide comments to the Administrator. The
notice shall provide a basic site plan and advise those adjacent property
owners that they have fifteen (15) calendar days to provide comments to the
Administrator. (After administrative approval, the Administrator shall provide
notice of the approval of the ADU to those adjacent property owners. This
notice shall state that the ADU complies with the standards of this section,
describe the requirements for maintaining the ADU and explain how the
Page 39 of 56
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. adjacent property owners may obtain general information, file an appeal to
the administrative approval, or report code violations.)
xvi. As part of the approval process, the applicant shall provide a covenant in a
form acceptable to the City Attorney and suitable for recording with Brevard
County, providing notice to future owners or long term leasers that the
existence of the ADU is subject to an annual permit, compliance with
applicable code provisions and predicated upon the occupancy of either the
ADU or the principal dwelling unit by the property owner. The covenant shall
also require any owner of the property to notify a prospective buyer of the
limitations of this Section.
xvii. Administratively approved ADU permits shall require renewal application
annually. A notarized letter from the property owner(s) indicating compliance
and a desire to renew shall be reviewed by the Administrator.
xviii. As part of the application package, the applicant shall provide certification or
proof from the appropriate agencies that adequate potable water supply and
sewage disposal facilities are either in place or can be established as part of
the ADU permitting process. The Administrator may impose conditions of
approval on a permit necessary to adequately address public health, safety
and welfare and to assure compliance with applicable ADU standards and
requirements.
xix. The written decision of the Administrator shall be issued within thirty (30)
days of a complete application.
xx. An administrative permit for an ADU may be revoked or declined for renewal
by the Administrator if the Administrator determines that the ADU or the
permit holder is not in compliance with City codes or conditions of approval.
If a permit is revoked or declined for renewal, the property owner shall
restore the property and bring it into compliance with City ordinances,
including any necessary removal of improvements, within thirty (30) days.
Individuals effected by the approval, denial or revocation of an ADU permit
may appeal the decision of the Administrator in accordance with Section
b. Before approval of an ADU as a conditional use, the
Board must find that the
application for an ADU complies with the above (5) a. i. through xx. The Board may
place conditions on the use as it deems appropriate.
c. No building shall be constructed or changed in use or configuration, until the Building
Official has issued a building permit. No building permit shall be issued until a
sewage disposal permit or letter of approval from the Health Department has been
issued. No building shall be occupied until a certificate of occupancy has been
issued by the Building Official.
d. An ADU will not be approved if prohibited by the declarations, covenants, conditions
and restrictions of a homeowners’ association.
(6) Commencement of Construction. Construction or use of an ADU according to the
administrative or conditional use permit shall commence within six (6) months after the
issuance of a permit. Construction must proceed in a continuous and expeditious manner
and shall be completed not more than six (6) months from issuance of a building permit.
Failure to comply with this requirement shall constitute an expiration of the permit and the
applicant must submit a new application for an ADU subject to current ordinances and
standards.
Address, Mailbox. The principal dwelling unit and ADU shall have the same house number and street
name for addressing and emergency response purposes; however, the ADU will be given a .
Sec. 28-271 – Arbor
RE
Page 40 of 56
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
RHP
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
HM
T
NC
CC
RC
OP
L
CM
M-1
M-2
M-3
GU
OR
P
L
L
DMU
U M
D
C
UMU SMU
L
L
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
L
PID
IRCN
C
R
L
2. Reserved
3. Standards for Permitted Uses with Limitations
a. In all zoning districts, arbors:
i. Shall not exceed one-hundred twenty (120) square feet.
ii. Shall not exceed twelve (12) feet in height.
iii. Shall be set back a minimum of five (5) feet from all property lines.
iv. Shall not be located in the sight distance triangle.
v. Shall not be used for storage, including vehicular storage
Sec. 28-272 – Attached Screen Porch
RE
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
RHP
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
HM
T
NC
CC
RC
OP
L
CM
M-1
M-2
M-3
GU
OR
P
L
L
D
DMU
U M
C
UMU SMU
L
L
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
L
PID
IRCN
C
R
L
2. Reserved
3. Standards
a. Reserved
Sec. 28-273 – Automated Teller Machine (ATM)
RE
RR
R-1A
HM
L
T
L
NC
L
GU
OR
P
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
RHP
CC
RC
L
L
DMU
D U M C
L C L L
OP
L
CM
L
M-1
M-2
M-3
UMU SMU
L
L
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
L
PID
IRCN
C
R
L
2. Definition
Automated Teller Machine: An automated device that performs banking or financial functions at a
location remote from the controlling financial institution.
Page 41 of 56
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. 3. Standards
a. Placement must be outside required landscape islands and stormwater management
systems.
b. Anchoring to trees, traffic signs, fire hydrants, fire connectors, lift stations or other site
infrastructure is prohibited.
c. Dispensers and service machines placed in parking lots shall have a finished exterior of brick,
stucco, stone, stained wood, or similar materials and shall not contain windmills, nor be
shaped to resemble objects (animate and inanimate).
d. A sloped roof with a peak or parapet roof is required to be affixed to dispensers placed in
parking lots with shingle, tile or other roof material in accordance with Florida Building Codes.
e. Advertising, other than signage with the logo and name of the item being dispensed or
service provided is prohibited.
a. Parking for at least one space per each unmanned paid dispenser unit shall be provided
unless otherwise specified in the Land Development Regulations. Required parking for the
commercial accessory use cannot occupy required parking for the principal use.
Sec. 28-278 – Automatic Vending and Transaction Machines
RE
RR
R-1A
HM
L
T
L
NC
L
GU
OR
P
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
RHP
CC
RC
L
L
DMU
D U M C
L C L L
OP
L
CM
L
M-1
M-2
M-3
UMU SMU
L
L
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
L
PID
IRCN
C
R
L
3. Definition
Detached Automatic Vending and Transaction Machines: Any unattended self-service device
that upon insertion of coin(s), token(s), or by similar means dispenses any item or conducts a
transaction. These self-service devices may be attached, contained within, or adjacent to another
structure or detached (freestanding and not adjacent to another building or structure).
4. Standards
a. Placement must be outside required landscape islands and stormwater management
systems.
b. Anchoring to trees, traffic signs, fire hydrants, fire connectors, lift stations or other site
infrastructure is prohibited.
c. Dispensers and service machines placed in parking lots shall have a finished exterior of brick,
stucco, stone, stained wood, or similar materials and shall not contain windmills, nor be
shaped to resemble objects (animate and inanimate).
d. A sloped roof with a peak or parapet roof is required to be affixed to dispensers placed in
parking lots with shingle, tile or other roof material in accordance with Florida Building Codes.
e. Advertising, other than signage with the logo and name of the item being dispensed or
service provided is prohibited.
f. Parking for at least one space per each unmanned paid dispenser unit shall be provided
unless otherwise specified in the Land Development Regulations. Required parking for the
commercial accessory use cannot occupy required parking for the principal use.
Page 42 of 56
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. Sec. 28-277 – Clubhouse
RE
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
HM
T
NC
CC
RC
OP
CM
M-1
M-2
GU
OR
P
L
DMU
U M
L L
D
L
C
UMU SMU
RHP
M-3
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
L
L
PID
IRCN
C
R
2. Definition
Clubhouse: A clubhouse is a building or room used for social or recreational activities by
members of a club (e.g. golf course clubhouse) or occupants of a residential or other
development.
3. Standards
a. A clubhouse is allowed as an accessory use to a membership club or a multifamily
development in any district in which those uses are permitted. They are also allowed as an
accessory use to a residential subdivision development. Clubhouses:
i. Shall limit food and alcoholic beverages sales to members and their guests, and patrons
actually using the club facilities.
ii. Shall require a clubhouse that is accessory to a residential subdivision or multifamily
development be proposed, reviewed, and developed in conjunction with the subdivision, or
approved phase thereof.
Sec. 28-287 – Detached Accessory Building/Structure
RE
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
RHP
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
HM
P
T
P
NC
P
OP
P
CM
P
M-1
P
M-2
P
M-3
P
GU
OR
P
P
P
P
CC
RC
P
P
DMU
D U M C
P P P P
UMU SMU
P
P
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
P
P
P
P
P
P
PID
P
IRCN
C
R
P
P
2. Definition
Detached Building/Structure: A detached subordinate structure(s), the use of which is incidental
to that of the principal structure and located on the same lot therewith. Examples of detached
accessory building/structure are a garage, shed, carport or similar detached accessory
building/structure.
3. Standards
a. Reserved
Sec. 28-279 – Dock
Page 43 of 56
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. 1. Districts where permitted
RE
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
RHP
P
HM
T
NC
GU
OR
P
CC
RC
DMU
U M
P
D
P
C
P
OP
CM
UMU SMU
P
M-1
M-2
M-3
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
P
P
PID
IRCN
C
R
2. Definition
Dock: A dock is a structure consisting of a fixed or floating platform extending from the shore
over the water.
3. Standards
a. Reserved
Sec. 28-280 – Dormitory (as accessory to education use)
RE
RR
R-1A
HM
P
T
NC
GU
OR
P
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
RHP
CC
RC
P
P
DMU
D U M C
OP
CM
M-1
M-2
M-3
UMU SMU
P
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
P
PID
IRCN
C
R
2. Definition
Dormitory: A building intended or used principally for sleeping accommodations where such
building is related to an educational or public institution.
3. Standards
a. Reserved
Sec. 28-290 – Home Based Business
RE
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
RHP
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
HM
T
NC
CC
RC
OP
L
CM
M-1
M-2
M-3
GU
OR
P
L
L
D
L
DMU
U M
L L
C
UMU SMU
L
L
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
L
L
L
L
PID
IRCN
C
R
L
2. Definition
Page 44 of 56
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. Home Based Business: A work activity carried on for profit or for nonprofit purposes, where all or
part of the activity takes place within a structure where the principal use is for residential
purposes.
3. Standards
a. Home occupations shall only be permitted to exist in those particular instances whereby the
residential character and integrity of the neighborhood are not disturbed. The occupational
activity at the home shall not be noticeable. Home occupations which are characterized by a
high intensity of use, only appropriate to a commercial zoning district, shall not be allowed as
home occupations within residential districts.
b. Home occupations shall be permitted for purposes of regulation and protection of residential
neighborhoods. Home occupations which do not involve client business visits to the home
shall be permitted. This type of home occupation is typified where business transactions with
clients are conducted by telephone, mail or off the premises of the license holder. Typical
examples of home occupations that may be conducted within the bounds of the above are
found in the definitions Business Service and Professional Service (see Section 27-11).
c. The following uses by the nature of the business investment and/or conduct or the
environmental and social impacts, have a pronounced tendency to exceed the performance
limits placed upon home occupations allowed under this section, and ultimately have a
detrimental effect on the residential character of a neighborhood. Therefore, the uses listed
below and others similar in nature shall not be permitted as home occupations when the
specified activity is carried on at the home premises.
 Auto mechanical/body repairs, painting of vehicles, trailers or boats.
 Beauty salons and barber hair styling shops.
 Carpentry, cabinet makers, furniture refinishing or upholstery.
 Contractor's equipment storage yards.
 Escort services and massage parlors.
 Marijuana cultivation.
 Professional offices of medical doctors, dentists, chiropractors, ophthalmologists and
optometrists and other health care professions.
 Restaurants and taverns.
 Retail/wholesale merchandising with in-person sales.
 Tow truck services.
 Veterinary uses.
In addition to these enumerated, any work activity held illegal by other applicable civil or
criminal statutes shall be prohibited as a home occupation.
d. Performance standards. In order for any home to be permitted or continue to be permitted, the
following performance standards shall be agreed to in writing by the applicant and be
maintained for the duration of the permit.
i. The home occupation shall be clearly incidental and subordinate to the residential use,
and shall under no circumstances change the residential character of the dwelling unit.
ii. Number of occupations. Multiple home occupational licenses may be permitted subject to
the following restrictions:
1. All multiple licenses shall only be for residents of that dwelling unit
2. The total floor area for all licenses shall be subject to the requirements noted in
Section 28-XX(d)(4).
iii. The home occupation shall be conducted at the permitted address only by residents of
that dwelling unit.
iv. The home occupation shall only be conducted within the living area of the dwelling unit
and shall not occupy more than twenty-five (25) percent and up to a maximum of four
hundred (400) square feet. The living area is that part of the dwelling unit which is
enclosed and which is protected from the elements and heated, including interior halls,
closets, utility and storage areas, but excluding garages, carports, screened porches,
unenclosed and unheated areas. In the event a residence has multiple licenses, the
Page 45 of 56
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. maximum floor area for all licenses shall not exceed the above noted maximum square
footage.
v. No activity of a home occupation including the storage and outdoor storage or window
display of merchandise is permitted.
vi. There shall be no change in the outside appearance of the premises nor the installation of
any sign to give indication that a home occupation is being conducted.
vii. No supplies or equipment shall be used in the home occupation which create fire or
explosion hazards, electrical interference, noise, vibration, glare, fumes, or odors
detectable to the normal senses off the lot if the occupation is conducted in a single-family
dwelling unit or mobile home or residential coach. In the case of electrical interference, no
equipment or process shall be used which creates visual or audible interference in any
radio or television receivers off the premises, or causes fluctuation in line voltage off the
premises.
viii. In the conduct of the home occupation, the use of commercial vehicles by the home
occupation personnel shall be limited to no more than one (1) vehicle which shall be no
greater in size than one (1) ton, and shall be parked in an adequate off-street parking
area. No auxiliary equipment or trailers shall be stored on site unless they are enclosed in
a garage or screened from view. In the event a residence has multiple licenses, the
maximum number and size of commercial vehicles for all licenses shall not exceed the
above noted requirements.
ix. No advertising in the public media shall include the residential address of the home
occupation. Telephone numbers may be included in such advertising.
e. Through the conditional use permit procedure outlined in Chapter 47, Article VII,process the
City Council may modify the foregoing requirements of this section to accommodate the
special needs of handicapped individuals applying for home occupation permits, provided that
the public welfare would not be adversely affected.
f. A home occupation shall be subject to all applicable City occupational licenses and other
permits and approvals as necessary.
Sec. 28-294 – Outdoor Areas of Seating Assembly and/or Music Entertainment
RE
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
RHP
HM
T
NC
CC
RC
OP
CM
M-1
M-2
M-3
GU
OR
P
D
C
DMU
U M
C C
C
C
UMU SMU
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
PID
IRCN
C
R
2. Reserved
3. Standards
a. In the Downtown Mixed Use (DMU) zoning district, licensed restaurants that are either "stand
alone", part of a strip center or located within a shopping center to provide outdoor eating
areas (open air) to their patrons when adhering to the following conditions: outdoor areas of
seating assembly and/or music entertainment:
i. Shall have outdoor food service and music or other entertainment terminate no later than
10:00 p.m. on weekdays (Monday – Thursday) and 11:00 p.m. on weekends (Friday –
Sunday) when the outdoor area is located within fifty (50) feet of the Residential Historic
Preservation zoning district.
Page 46 of 56
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. ii. Shall include the number of outdoor seats provided by a restaurant as part of the
restaurant's total permitted seating allotment and shall be shown on an approved site plan
and/or survey of the property with a drawing indicating the seating area and compliance
with parking requirements and all other conditions of this Section.
iii. Shall not cause a licensed restaurant's required parking to become inadequate.
iv. Shall not encroach upon public rights-of-way, or public easements except public
sidewalks, civic spaces or public plazas.
v. Shall be restricted to the sidewalk or building frontage of the subject licensed restaurant,
the rear yard or a side yard if the side yard is abutted by a nonresidential use or zone
unless otherwise specified in a binding development plan.
vi. Shall be clearly delineated with planters, decorative fencing, and/or hedges to distinguish
such area from the parking area serving the restaurant. When such seating areas are
permitted to locate on elevated walkways, piers or docks, this condition does not apply.
vii. Shall comply with all city performance standards.
viii. Shall not encroach upon surface water/stormwater areas except as permitted by the City.
ix. Shall maintain either a five-foot wide clear pedestrian path or fifty (50) percent of the
sidewalk width, whichever is greater when outdoor seating is provided within a public or
private sidewalk area. Such clear pedestrian paths shall be maintained at all times.
x. Shall not place tables and chairs within five (5) feet of bus stops, fire hydrants,
aboveground public utilities, bike racks or any type of public street furniture.
xi. Shall be maintained in a neat and orderly appearance at all times and must be cleared of
all debris on a periodic basis during the day and at the close of each business day.
xii. If found to be necessary for the protection of the health, safety and welfare of the public,
the city manager or his/her designee may require the subject property to immediately
remove or relocate all or part of the tables, chairs, etc. of the outdoor seating area.
xiii. Serving or consumption of alcoholic beverages within an outdoor seating area shall
comply with the regulations of applicable government agencies.
xiv. Shall not allow advertising signs or business identification signs within the outside seating
area unless permitted by the city sign regulations.
Sec. 28-295 – Outdoor Display of Merchandise
RE
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
RHP
HM
T
NC
CC
RC
OP
CM
M-1
M-2
M-3
GU
OR
P
D
DMU
U M
C
UMU SMU
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
PID
IRCN
C
R
2. Definition
Outdoor Display of Merchandize: The placement of products or materials for sale or rental
outside the entrance of a retail or wholesales establishment.
3. Standards
a. To be created at a later date
Sec. 28-XX – Outdoor Storage (As an Accessory Use)
Page 47 of 56
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. 1. Districts where permitted
RE
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
RHP
HM
T
NC
CC
RC
OP
CM
M-1
M-2
M-3
GU
OR
P
DMU
U M
D
C
UMU SMU
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
PID
IRCN
C
R
2. Definition
Outdoor Storage: The exterior depository, stockpiling, or safekeeping of materials, products,
merchandise, vehicles, trailers, and the like on commercial or industrial properties. Outdoor
storage may be enclosed by a structure that includes a roof, but no side walls, in which case the
structure shall be deemed outdoor storage; outdoor storage may involve fencing or screening
without a roof in which case fencing or screening shall be deemed outdoor storage. Parking lots
do not qualify for outdoor storage. Outdoor storage does not involve any product representation
or signage except for those emergency or safety-related signs specifically approved by the city.
Automatic vending or transaction machines accessory to allowable uses do not constitute outdoor
storage. The parking or storage of vehicles, equipment, and merchandise for a period of less than
twenty-four (24) hours does not constitute outdoor storage.
3. Standards
a. Reserved
Sec. 28-XX – Parking or Storage of Motor Vehicles, Recreational Vehicles, Boats,
Airboats, Or Trailers in Residential Districts [This is currently listed in Ch. 20-58, but it is
hidden in Miscellaneous Parking Regulations. Could be beneficial to move to this section.]
RE
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
RHP
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
HM
T
NC
CC
RC
OP
CM
M-1
M-2
M-3
GU
OR
P
L
L
D
DMU
U M
C
UMU SMU
L
L
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
L
L
PID
IRCN
C
R
L
2. Reserved
3. Standards
a. There shall be no off-street parking in the front yards, rear yards, and side yards, street side,
of single-family dwellings, except as normally exists in driveways or designated parking
spaces or areas, unless otherwise provided in this section.
b. No owner of property within the corporate limits of the city shall permit the parking,
maintaining or keeping upon his property and no person shall park, maintain or keep any
travel trailer, camper trailer, cargo trailer or boat trailer for more than twelve (12) hours,
except as provided by this section, and further excepting from operation of this section, trailer
sales of new and used unoccupied trailers, house cars or camp cars by an individual, firm or
Page 48 of 56
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. corporation, properly licensed according to the ordinance of the city, at a location that is
zoned for trailer sales use.
c. Parking of trailers. Travel trailers, camper trailers and boat trailers of any length, and cargo
trailers not in excess of fourteen (14) feet in length shall be permitted to park on private
property in any residential district provided they are:
i. Located behind the front building line and its most forward projection is not less than
twenty-five (25) feet from the front lot line; or
ii. Located in carport or garage; or
iii. Located in the driveway area permitted for the parking of passenger cars as long as there
remains sufficient area in the driveway area for the off-street parking of two (2) passenger
cars, without blocking the sidewalk area.
d. Self-propelled mobile homes. Self-propelled mobile homes of any length shall be permitted to
park in any residential district in accordance with the provisions of subsection (c) above. Selfpropelled mobile homes shall not be used as a living unit when parked in a residential district.
e. Parking on public property prohibited. No trailer or mobile home shall be parked upon any
public or private street, park or other public property within the corporate limits of the city
more than two (2) hours, and a trailer or mobile home shall not be used for sleeping,
housekeeping or living quarters while so parked, unless located in an area publicly
designated for such use.
f. Construction trailers. Trailers used for construction offices on a construction site or in a
subdivision shall be permitted during the period of construction only after a building permit for
the construction job has been issued; such trailer or trailers must be removed from the site or
subdivision before a certificate of occupancy is issued for the new construction. Such
permitted trailers shall not be used for sales, habitation or promotional purposes, and shall be
permitted only after receiving a permit from the building official for each such trailer.
Sec. 28-XX – Real Estate Office
RE
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
HM
T
NC
CC
RC
OP
CM
M-1
M-2
GU
OR
P
D
DMU
U M
C
UMU SMU
RHP
M-3
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
PID
IRCN
C
R
2. Reserved
3. Standards
a. Within the Rural Residential (RR), Residential Estate (RE), Single Family Low Density (R-1A),
Single Family Medium Density (R-1B), Single Family High Density (R-1C), Multifamily Medium
Density Residential (R-2), Multifamily High Density Residential (R3), Residential Manufactured
Housing (RMH-1) and Residential Manufactured Housing Park (RMH-2) zoning districts, real
estate sales offices:
i. Shall be permitted provided that there is only one (1) such sales office for each subdivision
or unit in the process of being developed.
ii. May be in a temporary structure within the development area for a period not to exceed
one (1) year, or may be located within a model home or dwelling being offered for sale for
a period not to exceed two (2) years.
Page 49 of 56
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. iii. Shall be limited to only for the sale of dwellings within the development or project in which
the sales office exist.
Sec. 28-XX – Recreation Court [Previously “Tennis Court”]
RE
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
RHP
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
HM
T
NC
CC
RC
OP
P
CM
M-1
M-2
M-3
GU
OR
P
P
P
D
P
DMU
U M
P P
C
UMU SMU
P
P
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
P
P
P
PID
IRCN
C
R
P
2. Definition
Recreation Court: An improved surface, typically concrete or asphalt, that is used for accessory
outdoor recreation uses such as tennis, basketball, and other similar uses.
3. Standards
a. Reserved
Sec. 28-XX – Retail Sales (As an Accessory Use) [This use is mentioned, but is currently a
limited principal use in some of the industrial districts.]
RE
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
RHP
HM
L
T
NC
CC
RC
OP
CM
M-1
L
M-2
L
M-3
L
GU
OR
P
D
DMU
U M
C
UMU SMU
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
PID
L
IRCN
C
R
2. Definition
Retail Sales: As specifically permitted in Chapter 59, Article IV, Commercial Districts and shall
include those business activities which customarily provide retail convenience goods. Such uses
may include department stores, variety stores, including retail pharmacies, however, excluding
cash-only pharmacies, restaurants, delicatessens, cafeteria, grocery and markets, gift shops,
wearing apparel, home and auto supply, furniture and appliances, hardware, package stores,
cocktail lounges, taverns, newsstands, book and stationery stores, shoe repair shops, luggage
shops, bakeries and candy shops (provided that products made on the premises are sold on the
premises), camera and photo supply shops, radio and television sales and services, floor
coverings, sporting goods, florists, jewelers, music and piano sales and services, art shops,
pawnshops, electrical and lighting, laundry and dry cleaning pickup stations, coin-operated or
self-service laundry, farm and garden supplies excluding farm machinery and equipment, pet
shops, and similar uses.
3. Standards
Page 50 of 56
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. a. Reserved
Sec. 28-XX – Security Dwelling Unit
RE
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
RHP
HM
T
NC
CC
RC
OP
CM
M-1
L
M-2
L
M-3
L
GU
OR
P
DMU
U M
D
C
UMU SMU
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
PID
L
IRCN
C
R
2. Definition
Security Dwelling Unit: A dwelling unit associated with non-residential uses for the purposes of
security.
3. Standards
a. Reserved
Sec. 28-XX – Screen Enclosure with Screened Roof (including pool enclosures)
RE
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
RHP
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
HM
T
NC
CC
RC
OP
P
CM
M-1
M-2
M-3
GU
OR
P
DMU
U M
P P
D
P
C
UMU SMU
P
P
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
P
P
PID
IRCN
C
R
P
5. Definition
Screen Enclosure with Screened Roof: An enclosure, at least one (1) wall of which is a common
wall to the principal building, the remaining wall surface area consisting of screen mesh with no
more than a 32-inch splash wall. All walls, except those common to the principal building, shall
provide for the free flow of air between the outside and the interior of the enclosure.
6. Standards
a. Reserved
Sec. 28-XX – Skateboard Ramp
Page 51 of 56
RE
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
HM
T
NC
CC
RC
OP
CM
M-1
M-2
RHP
M-3
PID
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. GU
OR
P
DMU
U M
D
UMU SMU
C
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
IRCN
C
R
2. Definition
Skateboard Ramp: An outdoor structure whether or not permanently affixed to the ground that
has a semi-circular, or semi-oval shape, or more than one (1) surface and that is intended or
used to permit persons on skateboards or roller skates to move continuously from one (1) side to
another.
3. Standards
a. All skateboard ramps in excess of six (6) feet in height are prohibited within all residential
districts.
b. Skateboard ramps less than six (6) feet in height may be permitted as an accessory structure
provided a permit is obtained for the erection of said ramp and full compliance with applicable
lot and building requirements, noise ordinance, and other applicable codes.
Sec. 28-XX – Swimming Pool or Spa or Hot Tub
RE
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
RHP
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
HM
T
NC
CC
RC
OP
P
CM
M-1
M-2
M-3
GU
OR
P
P
P
D
P
DMU
U M
P P
UMU SMU
C
P
P
P
RMU
UV
100 200 300 400 500
P
P
P
P
PID
IRCN
C
R
P
2. Reserved
3. Standards
a. Swimming Pools shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 18 of the Code of Ordinances.
Sec. 28-XX – Temporary Storage Units
RE
RR
R-1A
R-1B
R-1C
R-2
R-3
RMH-1
RMH-2
RHP
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
HM
T
NC
CC
RC
OP
CM
M-1
M-2
M-3
PID
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
GU
OR
DMU
UMU
SMU
P
RMU
UV
IRCN
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
2. Definition
Page 52 of 56
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. Temporary Storage Units: Transportable units designed and used primarily for temporary storage
of building materials, household goods, personal items and other materials for use on a limited
basis on residential and commercial properties. This definition does not include storage units
authorized by the Florida Building Code pursuant to § 553.73, F.S. Truck bodies and semi-trailers
are prohibited.
3. Standards
a. Temporary Storage Units are permitted provided the following criteria are met:
i. A maximum of one (1) temporary storage unit is permitted per lot with a maximum of one
(1) placement permitted per year. Additional units may be placed in Special and
Commercial zoning districts provided they are approved by the administrator and criteria
items in subsections 59-11(a)(2)—(10) are met. In the event that additional units are
permitted, they will not exceed two (2) placements per year;
ii. The maximum size of the temporary storage unit is eight (8) feet wide, twenty-four (24)
feet long, and nine (9) feet high;
iii. The maximum time a temporary storage unit is permitted to remain on the lot is thirty (30)
consecutive days;
iv. The temporary storage unit shall not be placed in any right-of-way or easement and shall
not create a sight obstruction for any vehicular or pedestrian traffic;
v. The temporary storage unit shall not be utilized for the storage of live animals, hazardous
or flammable materials, or human habitation;
vi. Advertising is prohibited on the temporary storage unit with the exception of the name
and phone number of the vendor of the unit;
vii. The exterior of the temporary storage unit shall be maintained in good repair, structurally
sound and sanitary. Peeling, flaking and chipped paint shall be prohibited;
viii. A twenty-five dollar ($25.00) permit fee shall be required for the placement of each
temporary storage unit on any lot;
ix. The applicant must affix a placard, issued at the time of permitting and clearly visible from
the nearest roadway, to the temporary storage unit which provides information identifying
the placement date, date of required removal, and the number to report violations to the
Code Enforcement Department which shall impose a $35 a day fine for expired
temporary storage permits;
b. Exemptions. The above regulations shall not apply to temporary storage units that are placed
for construction purposes (truck bodies and semi-trailers are prohibited from use as
construction offices on project sites) in connection with a valid building permit or during any
period of declared emergency by federal, state or local official action.
Page 53 of 56
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. ARTICLE VII – ACCESSORY USE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
This article establishes minimum standards to which the development of accessory uses must adhere.
DIVISION I – Residential
The regulations in this section apply only to the development of accessory uses within the residential
zoning districts (RE, RR, R-1A, R-1B, R-1C, R-2, R-3, RMH-1, RMH-2, and RHP) within the City.
Sec. 28-XX – Residential Accessory Buildings and Structures
(a) Accessory buildings and structures may be erected on any lot, provided that such buildings and
structures comply with the provisions of this section.
(b) No accessory building or structure shall be constructed on any lot of record which does not have a
completed principal structure on the same lot.
(c) The cumulative area of all accessory buildings or structures, excluding swimming pools and pool
enclosures, shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of the square foot area of the principal structure.
(d) Any accessory building or structure, excluding swimming pools and pool enclosures, exceeding
twenty (20) percent of the square foot area of the principal structure shall be compatible in
architectural style, color and exterior facing material to the principal structure.
(e) A building permit is required for all accessory buildings and structures. Accessory structures not
exceeding one-hundred twenty (120) square feet, which are not physically anchored shall not require
a permit. No accessory structure shall encroach into a utility/drainage easement.
(f) Accessory structures shall not be located in the front yard with the following exception: One detached
landscape feature, arbor, or trellis under one hundred twenty (120) square feet, with a maximum
height of twelve (12) feet, a minimum of five (5) feet from the property line, and shall not be placed in
the sight distance triangle as specified in Sec. XX-XX [Citation to be added later. Currently Sec. 3941(e)]. Such landscape feature shall not be used for storage, including vehicular storage.
(g) Accessory buildings and structures shall meet the standards for the zoning district in which they are
located with the following exceptions:
i. Rear Yard Setbacks for Accessory Buildings and Structures (all dimensions are in feet):
Detached
Building/
Structures
Attached
Screen
Porches
Swimming
Pools
Pool
Enclosures
RE
RR
R-1A R-1B R-1C
R-2
R-3
10
10
7.5
5
20
20
20
13
13
10
10
RMH-1 RMH-2
RHP
SMU
RMU
5
5
5
5
15
5
5
5
15
15
10
10
7.5
15
15
15
15
10.5
8
8
8
8
8
18
8
8
8
7.5
5
5
5
5
5
15
5
5
5
ii. Side Yard Setbacks for Accessory Buildings and Structures (all dimensions are in feet):
Detached
Building/
Structures
Attached
Screen
Porches
Swimming
Pools
Page 54 of 56
RE
RR R-1A R-1B R-1C
R-2
R-3
10
10
7.5
5
20
15
15
23
18
18
5
5
10
5
10
10
10
10
13
13
13
13
RMH-1 RMH-2
RHP
SMU
RMU
15
5
5
5
7.5
15
10
15
15
10.5
18
13
8
8
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. Pool
Enclosures
20
15
15
10
10
10
10
7.5
15
10
5
5
DIVISION II – Commercial
The regulations in this section apply only to the development of accessory uses within the commercial
zoning districts (HM, T, NC, CC, RC, OP, and CM) within the City.
Sec. 28-XX – Accessory Buildings and Structures
(a) In no instance shall the total floor area of all detached accessory buildings exceed three hundred
square feet on lots less than one acre, or six hundred (600) square feet on lots larger than one acre.
(b) Detached accessory structures shall adhere to the front and side corner yard setbacks of the zoning
district and shall be placed at least one hundred (100) feet from the nearest residentially zoned
property.
(c) Accessory structures placed in the front or side corner yard of commercially zoned properties shall
adhere to the landscape code at the property line or close to the building.
(d) The use shall be clearly incidental to the use of the principal building, and shall comply with all other
city regulations. No accessory structure shall be used for activities not permitted in the zoning district.
(e) Sanitary Facilities and/or human habitation shall be prohibited in accessory structures.
(f) Structures shall not be placed in any public drainage and utility easement.
(g) Erection of tents as permanent accessory structures is prohibited.
(h) Accessory structures shall not exceed twenty-four (24) feet in height nor the height of the principal
structure, whichever is the lesser
(i) All detached accessory structures shall conform to the following minimum setbacks:
Structure Size
Structure Height
Rear Setback
(in feet)
Side Setback
(in feet)
300 s.f. or less
<8 ft.
5
5
300 s.f. or less
>8 ft.
10
7
301 – 600 s.f.
<8 ft.
12
10
301 – 600 s.f.
>8 ft.
15
10
DIVISION III – Industrial
The regulations in this section apply only to the development of accessory uses within the Industrial
zoning districts (M-1, M-2, M-3, PID) within the City.
Sec. 28-XX – Accessory Buildings and Structures
Accessory structures shall meet the principal structure setbacks of the industrial zoning district in which it
is located.
DIVISION IV – All Other Zoning Districts
The regulations in this section apply only to the development of accessory uses within the zoning districts
not previously addressed by Division I, II, or III.
Page 55 of 56
Proposed New Chapter 28 Zoning Text highlighted in yellow indicate staff’s note. Strikethrough indicates deleted code language. Underline indicates new code language. Sec. 28-XX – Accessory Buildings and Structures
(a) In the Open Space and Recreation (OR) zoning district, one dwelling unit may be provided for
each park, recreation area, golf course, or tennis club provided the principal use exceeds five
acres and is in single ownership.
(b) In the Open Space and Recreation (OR) zoning district, all accessory uses must abut either a
public or approved private road right-of-way or other approved means of access.
(c) Accessory buildings and structures shall meet the standards for the zoning district in which they
are located with the following exceptions:
Side
Setback
Rear
Setback
Maximum
Height
Maximum
Size
Architectural
Compatibility*
Maximum
Number of
Structures
UMU
5 ft.
5 ft.
25 ft.
50% of
principal
structure
>20% size of
principal
structure
1 per
principal
structure
IRCN-C
5 ft.
5 ft.
25 ft.
50% of
principal
structure
>20% size of
principal
structure
1 per
principal
structure
IRCN-R
5 ft.
5 ft.
25 ft.
50% of
principal
structure
>20% size of
principal
structure
1 per
principal
structure
*Any accessory building or structure, excluding swimming pools and pool enclosures, exceeding the
percentage established in the table above of the square foot area of the principal structure shall be
compatible in architectural style, color and exterior facing material to the principal structure.
Page 56 of 56
Page 132

April 20, 2016 agenda

Transcription

Similar documents

141 HIsTES Of I(i~CLjLA,(tlEtTl hG `a CITY YLt.55114G ,uji) au~aSC

I`m helping to end MS by participating in the 2016 Jayman BUILT MS

The Board of Directors of Qatar Fuel (WOQOD) is pleased to invite

What does “Commercial/Industrial Mean to NAHBA Today?

5 `S` Training Program at ABV-IIITM, Gwalior on 21.07.2016

Who Are The Malaysians Who Made It On To

2008 Annual Report - CoastHills Credit Union

Porky Expo Flyer

The NeuLion Report

Sept 30-Oct 2, 2016 Nov 4-6, 2016 @Camp Tadmor