Loading...
04-13-2023 VC WS-MMINUTES OF THE WORKSHOP SESSION VILLAGE COUNCIL OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 13, 2023 Present: David B. Norris, Mayor Susan Bickel, Vice Mayor Darryl C. Aubrey, Sc.D., President Pro Tem Deborah Searcy, Councilmember Chuck Huff, Village Manager Len Rubin, Village Attorney Jessica Green, Village Clerk Absent: Mark Mullinix, Councilmember ROLL CALL Mayor Norris called the meeting to order immediately following the Regular Meeting. All members of Council were present except for Councilmember Mullinix who was out of town. All members of staff were present. OFF STREET PARKING SPACES AND ACCESSORY STORAGE STRUCTURES Chuck Huff, Village Manager, introduced the item. Alex Ahrenholz, Senior Planner, made a presentation on behalf of staff. Mr. Ahrenholz stated that the Ad Hoc Residential Code Committee had recommended two (2) changes. The Planning Commission reviewed the changes in March. Mr. Ahrenholz explained that both changes were in the R1 Zoning District. Mr. Ahrenholz shared the proposed regulations for parking within R1 districts (Section 45-27), as follows: G. Off-street parking regulations. At least two parking spaces measuring at least nine (9) feet by eighteen (18) feet (one hundred sixty-two ) 162) square feet) shall be provided. All parking spaces may be enclosed in the dwelling, in an accessory building or in an unenclosed area or a driveway. All vehicles parking on a lot must be parked on a durable surface, as specified in Section 15-3(n) of the Village Code. The off-street parking spaces required by this section shall be accessed via a durable surface and shall be located a minimum of two (2) feet from all property lines. Mr. Ahrenholz explained language that required the surface be approved by the Community Development Director, was removed due to its vagueness. Mr. Ahrenholz shared reference images to provide context. Village Council Workshop Session held April 13, 2023 Page 2 of 6 OFF STREET PARKING SPACES AND ACCESSORY STORAGE STRUCTURES continued Councilmember Searcy asked whether the requirement was for two (2) parking spaces in theory or in practice. Councilmember Searcy stated that many residents use their carports for storage. Mr. Ahrenholz confirmed the requirement was to have the spaces, not necessarily to use them for that purpose. Councilmember Aubrey confirmed that existing homes with one (1) parking space would be grandfathered. Mr. Ahrenholz stated that that existing homes with one (1) parking space would be considered existing nonconforming. Mr. Ahrenholz reviewed the materials outlined in Section 15-3(n) of the Code and discussion ensued briefly regarding individual materials. Mr. Ahrenholz shared the existing and regulations for accessory structures within R1 districts, as follows: Section 45-27.F (R1 Accessory Structure): One detached automobile garage and one (1) open-air pavilion may be constructed on any lot within the R1 single-family dwelling district Section 45-36. C (General Provisions): Detached garages not more than one (1) story in height may be erected and maintained within seven and one-half (7 %) feet of the rear line of any such lot Mr. Ahrenholz explained that since sheds were not stated in the code as a permitted accessory structure, they were considered prohibited. Mr. Ahrenholz stated that residents had added storage rooms to their house as an addition, which was permitted as long as it met all principal building regulations. Mr. Ahrenholz shared reference images of structures that would fit the current requirements and provided an overview of regulations in neighboring municipalities. Mr. Ahrenholz shared the proposed regulations for accessory storage structures: Prefabricated storage building: 1. Plastic/metal shed screened from adjacent neighbors, no permit required up to 64 square feet and eight (8) feet in height. 2. Only domestic supplies and equipment. No vehicles, plumbing, or electrical. 3. Only in side and backyards. 4. Side setback —five (5) feet. 5. Rear setback five (5) feet. 6. Inspection may be required for setback, anchoring, screening. Storage structures that exceed 64 square feet (requires building permit): 1. Can store anything, including vehicles, and have plumbing and electrical 2. Only inside and backyards, except garages 3. Site setback — 10 feet, Rear setback — 7.5 feet 4. Same architectural materials and features as principal 5. Metal and plastic okay, as long as architectural consistent 6. Maximum height of 16 feet 7. Shall not exceed 35 percent gross floor area of principal structure Village Council Workshop Session held April 13, 2023 Page 3 of 6 OFF STREET PARKING SPACES AND ACCESSORY STORAGE STRUCTURES continued Mr. Ahrenholz noted the recommendation was a revised version of the regulations in the Town of Jupiter. He added that accessory units had come up as a part of the discussion, and direction from Council was to not include that type of unit. Mr. Ahrenholz noted that a bedroom with a bathroom could be constructed under the regulations for large storage structures, unless language was added to restrict habitable space and limit to storage only. Mr. Ahrenholz stated the the Planning Commission had recommended approval with the following changes, which staff had since integrated into the ordinance: 1. Accessory structures shall not exceed the height of the principal structure. 2. No kitchen shall be permitted. 3. Colors should match the principal structure. Bill Whiteford, Chair of the Ad Hoc Residential Code Committee provided additional comment, asserting that while accessory structures had long been disallowed, the time had come to review the need for sheds. Mr. Whiteford discussed the sizing recommendations briefly. Councilmember Aubrey asked whether "no kitchen" was a sufficient limitation, as a person could use a hot plate. Discussion ensued regarding the proposed restriction on plumbing. Mayor Norris read two (2) public comments submitted online prior to the meeting, as follows: Sandy Budd, 708 Alamanda Drive, wrote regarding the lack of storage on her property stating that she desperately needed a shed but wanted to construct one legally. Ms. Budd asked that Council consider the regulation change. Amber Schlick, 961 Dogwood Road, wrote in support of the proposed changes to allow storage structures. Ms. Schlick stated that the proposal included sufficient guardrails to ensure structures were safe and to maintain the integrity and aesthetic of the neighborhood. Mayor Norris opened the floor to in-person public comments. Stephanie Camp, 704 Buttonwood Road, spoke in support of allowing sheds. Ms. Camp noted small, older houses were not built to accommodate modern households, and sheds would help to alleviate this issue and improve quality of life for residents. Rita Budnyk, 804 Shore Drive, asked how the proposed changes regarding parking would work with the existing RV ordinance, and how many driveways were permitted. Ms. Budnyk referenced an example property on Pelican Drive. Mr. Whiteford responded briefly. Mr. Rubin noted that the code also includes a maximum driveway width. Ms. Budnyk stated that she understood the need for additional storage on properties without garages, but her concern was with having architecture that was aesthetically pleasing. Ms. Budnyk noted that she did not think sheds should be allowed along the North Palm Beach waterway. Village Council Workshop Session held April 13, 2023 Page 4 of 6 OFF STREET PARKING SPACES AND ACCESSORY STORAGE STRUCTURES continued Discussion ensued regarding the requirements to screen from the waterway. Tim Hullihan, 840 Country Club Drive, stated that the code speaks to backyards that back up to parks, the golf course, and the waterway as unique. Mr. Hullihan asserted that Council should consider that sheds not be allowed in those types of yards. Mayor Norris closed the item to public comment. Mr. Huff stated that the Neighborhood Enhancement Team had focused on the area west of Prosperity Farms Road and north of Lighthouse Drive, and that lack of appropriate storage had come up as a frequent issue. Mr. Huff noted a number of those residents had highlighted the need. Councilmember Searcy stated she would be in favor of setbacks from the waterway and golf course, but every resident should be allowed to have a shed. Vice Mayor Bickel stated she believed waterway and golf course properties should be looked at separately. Vice Mayor Bickel asked for clarification on the setback and height requirements. Mr. Ahrenholz explained a number of existing garages were taller, so the height recommendation was to accommodate those structures. Discussion continued. Councilmember Aubrey asserted he did not want to fall into the trap of not having sufficient regulations against potential use as a second residence. Mayor Norris stated he did not like the sheds, especially the smaller category. Mayor Norris argued that the aesthetics would be horrible and it would change the look of the Village. Mayor Norris noted that he could live with larger sheds that match the aesthetics of the main house, but they would have to deal with the issue of waterfront and golf course lots. Vice Mayor Bickel stated she supported moving the changes forward with modification. Vice Mayor Bickel noted that she understood the need for storage, especially on the west side of the Village, but will not support a height of 16 feet that close to the property line. Consensus was to move the ordinance forward to a Regular Meeting agenda. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND C-3 REGIONAL BUSINESS DISTRICT ZONING Mayor Norris noted that Council had done a first reading on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and C-3 Regional Business District Zoning change, and the purpose of the agenda item was to allow for an additional opportunity for public comment. Mr. Huff shared a brief timeline for meetings related to the former Twin Cities Mall site and associated proposed zoning text amendments and Comprehensive Plan change. Mr. Huff explained the Village had engaged Treasure Coast Urban Design Council to make recommendations, and the changes had gone through several reviews by the Planning Commission. Mayor Norris read three (3) public comments submitted online prior to the meeting, as follows: Kevin Ring, 408 Flotilla Road, wrote that the old Twin Cities Mall site and surrounding area had been an eyesore for decades. Mr. Ring stated that it was not to the standard of North Palm Beach and was the right location for the commercial and retail offerings the Village lacks. Village Council Workshop Session held April 13, 2023 Page 5 of 6 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND C-3 REGIONAL BUSINESS DISTRICT ZONING continued Jamie and Leslie Parrish, 744 Westwind Drive, wrote in support of the changes. The Parrishes stated that the development would be a significant improvement to the Village and its residents. Eric Cooper, 406 Oyster Road, wrote in support of the code amendment. Mr. Cooper stated that the site was unsightly and in need of new development and could become a new destination with shops and restaurants that would allow the family to stay close to home while enjoying their free time. Mayor Norris opened the floor to in-person public comments. Chris Ryder, 118 Dory Road South, referenced the history of the Comprehensive Plan and Master Plan. Mr. Ryder stated that not much had changed since the plan was set, and it did not make sense to throw it out the window after hiring planners and engineers to create it. Mr. Ryder discussed the proposed project and the influx of population it would entail, and asserted it should not be done without contemplating the full impact on infrastructure. Amy Beer, 512 Gulf Road, stated she was opposed to any change that would allow development higher than six (6) floors. Ms. Beer asserted that at best, the change was tone deaf to the community, and would be very unpopular. Tim Hullihan, 840 Country Club Drive, stated that the language in the incentive clause was very weak, and he hoped that it would be improved so the Village could have control over getting a project they like. Mr. Hullihan referenced the Camelot site and stated there that were issues as a result of whispers about allowing high rises on the property. Mr. Hullihan stated they should be asking how to stop it once it starts. Mary Phillips, 525 Ebbtide Drive, asserted that the public perception of the property was set during the charrettes that were held. Ms. Phillips stated that a lot of residents were not aware of the potential for very tall buildings being built on the land and encouraged additional resident input. Ms. Phillips noted that the wide public input made the Country Club a beautiful project. Sherie Katz, 137 Gulfstream Road, shared her experience living in overcrowded and overbuilt communities. Ms. Katz asked that Council consider unintended consequences of the changes, and preserving what makes the Village of North Palm Beach different. Ms. Katz discussed sheds, golf carts, and making the park a County park. Ms. Katz stated the development would result in an influx of residents and traffic. Benjamin Schreier, 137 Cruiser Road South, stated that he was pleased to hear the support for the project, and hoped it would continue. Mr. Schreier noted economic conditions had changed drastically since the original plan was created, and the proposed development was an incredible opportunity for North Palm Beach to create something special in a location that would not impact the Village negatively. Tom Gallagher, 704 Teal Way, thanked Council for their consideration. Mr. Gallagher stated that there was a sense of urgency from the residents who had not been involved in the discussion on a weekly basis. Mr. Gallagher noted that the current Code should be treated as a checklist, and the Council should take a pause before allowing for exceptions. Mr. Gallagher stated that he did not see the project as a benefit to himself or other residents of North Palm Beach. Village Council Workshop Session held April 13, 2023 Page 6 of 6 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND C-3 REGIONAL BUSINESS DISTRICT ZONING continued Deborah Cross, 2560 Pepperwood Circle South, stated that she liked the idea of developing the site, but changing the code to give all that they are asking for was a disservice to the Master Plan. Ms. Cross noted that the density should also be considered, and addressed issues of traffic, parking, and safety. Rob Rennebaum, 928 Shore Drive, spoke in support of the project. Mr. Rennebaum stated that he had been a resident for 35 years and wanted to show that the vocal minority does not represent him. Mr. Rennebaum noted that the project would be a jewel in the community. Rita Budnyk, 804 Shore Drive, stated that no one had said they were against redevelopment of this property, but the density and height were an issue. Ms. Budnyk argued that the Village was having an identity crisis and should remain a special place. Ms. Budnyk stated that increasing the population would make it difficult for municipal services. Ms. Budnyk asked that development take place within the existing code. Corey Cross, 2560 Pepperwood Circle South, stated that the revisions would allow developers an opportunity to increase height on the site in exchange for providing other benefits for the Village. Mr. Cross noted the changes would not increase density or the number of units that can go on the site. Mr. Cross noted that the Village would have the opportunity to request more pedestrian amenities and other features not provided for under the current regulations. Mayor Norris closed the item to public comment. Councilmember Searcy stated that the changes gave a process by which a developer can ask for more things if they also gave more, but there were not any additional entitlements being given. Councilmember Searcy noted that there were taller buildings on both ends of the Village, and a lot of residents were in support. Councilmember Aubrey commented that the Master Plan was not a blueprint, but a concept. Councilmember Aubrey stated he supported the concept of a small Village idea, but that does not mean it is applicable in every site. Councilmember Aubrey noted that height on this property would be offset by other public benefits, and stated this project could be a good southern anchor for the Village. Vice Mayor Bickel asserted that she could not support the changes as written, but probably could if the incentive clause was strengthened as Mr. Hullihan had suggested during public comment. Vice Mayor Bickel stated the height and density were concerns. Mayor Norris stated he was in favor of the changes, and believed that as written it would give Council power to make sure that if they granted the maximums, it would be a project that the Village would love. Mayor Norris added that this is a unique property in North Palm Beach and should be developed in a unique way. ADJOURNMENT With no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Jess' a Green, MMC, Village Clerk