Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-04-20 Hybrid Planning and Zoning Board/Local Planning Agency MinutesDANIA BEACH SEA I.UVE R. LOVE If, HYBRID MEETING MINUTES CITY OF DANIA BEACH PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY CONDUCTED USING COMMUNICATIONS MEDIA TECHNOLOGY WEDNESDAY, APRIL 20, 2022 7:00 PM ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE WITH REGARD TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING OR HEARING WB.L NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING, AND FOR SUCH PURPOSE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING IS MADE WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. LOBBYIST REGISTRATION IS REQUBtED. PRIOR TO ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES, WHETHER ORNOT COMPENSATION IS PAID OR RECEIVED IN CONNECTION WITH THOSE ACTIVITIES, EACH LOBBYIST SHALL FILE WITH THE CITY CLERK AN ANNUAL REGISTRATION STATEMENT AND PAY AN ANNUAL TWO HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS ($250.00) REGISTRATION FEE FOR EACH PRINCIPAL OR EMPLOYER, REGISTRATION FORMS ARE AVAILABLE ON THE CITY WEBSITE: W W W.DANIABEACHFL.GOV. (ORDINANCE #2012-019; AMENDED BY ORDINANCE 92019-019 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, PERSONS NEEDING ASSISTANCE TO PARTICIPATE IN ANY OF THESE PROCEEDINGS SHOULD CONTACT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. 100 W. DANIA BEACH BOULEVARD, DANIA BEACH, FL 33004, (954) 924-6800 EXTENSION 3624, AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING. IN CONSIDERATION OF OTHERS, WE ASK THAT YOU: A. PLEASE TURN CELL PHONES OFF, OR PLACE ON VIBRATE. IF YOU MUST MAKE A CALL, PLEASE STEP OUT INTO THE ATRIUM, IN ORDER NOT TO INTERRUPT THE MEETING. B. IF YOU MUST SPEAK TO SOMEONE IN THE UDIENCE, PLEASE SPEAK SOFTLY OR GO OUT INTO THE ATRIUM, IN ORDER NOT TO INTERRUPT THE MEETING. I. ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:03PM. Board Clerk Ibel Larios called the roll. The five Board Members and Staff were attending in person. Chair W. Quin Robertson, PhD, GISP Present Eve Boutsis, City Attorney Vice Chair Albert C Jones Present Eleanor Norena, CFM, Director Comm Dev Jonathan Thomas Present Corinne Lajoie, AICP, Asst Director Comm Dev Derrick Hankerson Present Richard Lorber, AICP, Planning and Zoning Manager Traian Thomas Popescu Present Ibel Larios, Board Clerk II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES L Approval of Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Board / Local Planning Agency from the March 16, 2022 hybrid regular meeting. Motion was made by Vice Cltair Jones to approve the minutes of the hybrid meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board/LOcal Planning Agency for MC[rclt 16, 2022 as presented and was seconded by Derrick Hankerson. Motion passed 54. III. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. RZ-55-21: The applicant, 3851 Stirling Holdings, LLLP, is requesting rezoning (zoning map amendment) from the Single -Family Estate Residential District (E-1) to the Planned Residential Development District (PRD4) and application of flexibility for property generally located at 3851 Stirling Road. (Continued from March 16'h meeting). City Attorney Boutsis swore in those people attending in person (e.g., Staff, Applicant, Members of the Public, etc.) who were going to give testimony today. She then went over the Planning and Zoning Board Meeting procedures and ex parte communication disclosures. Ex parte communications were disclosed by Chair Robertson, Vice Chair Jones, and Board Members Thomas, Hankerson and Popescu. They all answered separately that after their communications, they could still remain impartial. Planning and Zoning Manager Lorber gave a PowerPoint presentation for the proposed rezoning of property located at 3851 Stirling Road from E-1 to PRD-1. The site is ten acres with one existing single-family home. The applicant was proposing a mixed -use development with a total of 231 units. Townhomes would be on the eastern boundary and residential apartments would be above the ground floor's retail/commercial uses. The property was located between a single-family residential community to the east and commercial properties to the west which was keeping with the concept of increasing activity along designated transit corridors. It was encumbered by FPL power transmission towers and overhead power lines. The Planning and Zoning Board would review this application for compliance with the criteria identified in Section 645- 40 of the Land Development Code (LDC) and make a recommendation tonight to the City Commission. He explained that at the applicant's request, this item was continued from the March 16�'' meeting so that the application could be modified to include Commercial Flex for one-third acre and 221 flexible units. The applicant's land use attorneys office, Coker &Feiner, prepared a memo identifying how their request was consistent with the required criteria. Planning and Zoning Staff confirmed that the application conformed with the criteria listed in the LDC for zoning map amendments. Because the applicant's proposal was for 231 units, the applicant was requesting the assignment of 221 residential Flex Units from the citywide uniform Flex Zone of which 784 Flex Units remain. The applicant was also requesting 1/3 acre of commercial flexibility to the southern portion of the site which was 3% of the total site. No more than 5%was allowed. Commercial office or retail uses were permitted on property with a residential land use. This property met the criteria for Rezoning and Application of Flexibility. Mr. Lorber said Staff recommended that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend approval to the City Commission. The Chair called for Board questions. The Chair and all Board Members requested to reserve their Board questions until they heard from the applicant. Attorney Rod Feiner said that he represented the applicant. He agreed with everything that Staff said this evening and gave his own slide presentation. For the record, there were technical difficulties experienced during the presentation. Mr. Feiner showed an aerial of the property and its surroundings. He pointing out such things which were not limited to a high school, commercial property, multifamily property and single- family homes. He explained about the constraints due to the existing power lines (FPL easement/property) and what could be built where. He explained that the City would have enough Flex Units left to deal with pending applications, if they were granted 221 Flex Units. He said that both the City and County Land Use Plans allowed for the flexibility of commercial on residential property. The attorney explained what the PRD-1 Zoning District allowed. He said they were proposing rental apartments and townhouses instead of ownership because younger people were priced out of this area and rental would allow for them to afford to work and thrive there plus the convenience of amenities. The 231 units would entai132 townhomes and 199 apartments. He walked the Board through the proposed site plan so they could understand what was going on and to show the type and quality of the proposed development. He explained why mixed -use was so important and that the resident would want the convenience of commercial being on property. He showed a rendering of what the property would look like and a copy of the landscape plan. He said that the commercial use was designed to also be pedestrian friendly. The project had one ingress and egress through Stirling Road. He explained about the reports they received (e.g., no objection from FDOT, School Capacity, etc.). Stormwater would be retained on property and that it would get discharged into the sewer system. Mr. Feiner spoke about their substantial public outreach (e.g., in person meetings in Koosh Jewelers, virtual Zoom Meetings and GoTo Meetings). Letters were sent to surrounding residents and they spoke with Shady Ridge HOA who had some traffic concerns but were in favor of the project. The applicant also met in person one-on-one with several residents in the area. Gabriela Voit, Florida Licensed Landscape Architect / Arborist, was introduced by Attorney Feiner. She said that the existing trees (particularly Oaks) and the buffers (especially on the east side of the property) were issues. They preserved nine Oaks because she felt they could survive and other trees (2 Gumbo Limbos and 45 Sabal Palms to be relocated and preserved). The City's Arborist, Ryan, agreed with her choice for preserving the trees. Because of the power lines, they could not plant big trees. The client wanted as many trees as possible to be planted to include native trees as well as fruit trees. There would be about 575 trees planted and 220 small trees under power lines, shrubs/hedges and ground covering as well. The east buffer would be the heaviest area planted in the project. Joaquin Vargas, Traffic Engineer, was introduced by Attorney Feiner. He said he was a licensed engineer who specialized in traffic for over thirty years. He gave a brief summary of the traffic, what was done, and the conclusion. Traffic counts were collected in May and September 2021. These counts were done when school was in session. He explained how the trips were formulated and that this information was received by FDOT. All of the signalized intersections that were evaluated were projected to operate adequately with the exception of the intersection of Stirling Road and 441. The signal timing that the County had was revisited for additional optimization for the future and they would be able to mitigate the impacts at the intersection. He spoke about the driveway on Stirling Road being evaluated as good. He spoke about the opportunities for U-Turns which would operate adequately. He said that this project was reviewed by FDOT and the City's outside consultant reviewed their traffic report. He reported that the consultant's Hybrid Planning «nil Zoning Boartl/Local Plm:ning Agency Minuses 2 Apri120, 2022 comments were addressed. In summary, the traffic impact associated with this project were minimal. All levels of service have been maintained and there would be no deprivation levels along Stirling Road because of this project. Attorney Feiner said that this request did not give privileges generally extended to similarly situated properties as a result of an isolated zoning district. Also, that this project fit in quite well with changed conditions/circumstances. He asked for his video to be shown and then they would be glad to answer any questions. The three -minute video showed the quality construction B.S.D. Capital would like to bring to the City as well as quality of life and convenience. The Board did not want to ask questions at this time but wanted to hear from the. public. Assistant Director Community Development Corinne Lajoie said that the public comment section would be opened up first to those attending virtually and she explained about the "raise hand" option on the screen and stating name and address. The Chair opened up public comments with a three minute time limit for those attending virtually. Director Community Development Eleanor Norena reminded again about the "raise hand" button on the screen to be recognized for speaking virtually. Elias Bichachi and Gabriela Hirschman spoke. Gabriela was given three minutes and said that she was opposed to changing the zoning to PRD-1. Remaining as single-family was fitting for the neighborhood. On her block, there were school buses in the morning, people driving to drop children off, Dunkin Donuts had traffic issues, etc. These were just a few of her major traffic concerns. The traffic study was done on Rosh Hashanah in September last year and many schools were remote, not in session, or had hybrid programs which did not take in all traffic details. In May, many schools were still remote or had hybrid programs as well. Also, there were plenty of rentals around this area. Traffic was really bad. Something written on paper was not necessarily what it is. Most people want the luxury of their cars and not the transportation that would be available from the project. Ms. Hirschman answered City Attorney Boutsis that everything she said was truthful, and then she was sworn in. Elias Bichachi was sworn in. His presentation was shown on the screen entitled, "Koosh Living, Potential Traffic Congestion Issues" and he was also given three minutes. He explained all the reasons why he was opposed to this project. Shawn Ritterman was sworn. in. He had no concerns and was in support of this development. Harvey Sempler was sworn in. He was opposed to the project and wanted to know how this would affect the quality of life of those who already live in the area. He felt that the change was not necessary nor was it appropriate and the Board needed to ask themselves those questions about necessity and appropriateness, etc. He offered the speaking time he had left to anyone who needed more time. Lawrence Frisch was sworn in. He said he was familiar with this project. He knew some people have concerns about traffic but that was Florida now. This project provided housing and would be good for local vendors. He was a realtor and knew that housing was needed in the community and he supported the project. Vicky was sworn in. She was totally for this project. It was good for the community and was extremely important. Bonnie Friedman was sworn in. She said she backed up to the property. She could not attend the meetings at Koosh. She pointed out that in an area previously discussed tonight, there was one place to make a U- Turn not two. The owner was taking into consideration the residents' concerns and she would like traffic concerns re -visited. She was extremely impressed with the project. She was in real estate. There were no other virtual public comments and in -person public comments was opened. Attorney Tucker Gibbs, representing Harbour Hills Area Neighborhood Association HOA, asked for an extra minute as he had a presentation and represented an HOA. The Chair granted the extra time request. Attorney Gibbs said his clients opposed the proposed zoning. The applicant's project would increase the density from 10 dwelling units to 231 dwelling units. Having mixed use would allow this project to have a building height up to seventy feet. It's too big for the neighborhood in density and height. The applicant purchased this property with full knowledge of its limitations. He urged the Board to recommend denial of this application to the City Commission. It's just too big. Hybrid Planni�:g and Zoning Board/Local Planning Agency Minr�tes 3 April 20, 2022 Frank Sarantino lived in Hollywood. He approved this project and the changes over the years have been great. Koosh Living would be a great addition to Stirling Road and Dania Beach. Attorney Richard Dewitt asked for a total of five minutes for his presentation and was granted it by the Chair. He represented the largest, adjacent property owner. He said that the applicant had to meet every criterion identified in Section 645-40 in order for this to be granted. The Board must recommend denial if they did not believe each and every criterion was met. The value of a Flex Unit to a developer was approximately $45,000/unit and they requested 231. That was about $10,000,000 from the City. This amount should be given for a project that everyone liked. The surrounding neighbors did not expect this massive project to be built on that land. He went over all the criteria and explained how he felt they were not met. This was not the right project for this location and it was not compatible with the Land Use Codes. Dawn Huckestein said that she was opposed. She was at the NW corner of the proposed development. She moved there because all the adjoining properties were to be single-family. The rezoning would have negative impacts, be inconsistent with the established families in the area, would lower property values, add noise, bright lights, traffic concerns and concern for children and walkers. The recreation area would be near her house and the lights and noise would affect her. She asked the Board to vote against this zoning change. Maurice Gray said that he was Dawn Huckestein's neighbor. His house also was near the proposed development and would be affected. He agreed with all objections that were raised tonight. The worst concern was about traffic. Sometimes he had to wait ten minutes just to make a turn. Lanes needed to be widened. He was opposed. Rabbi Laredo was for this proposed project. He lived two blocks from it. As a resident in this area, he thought this idea would be great. As a leader in the Jewish community, it would be wonderful to bring young people in to live within walkable distance. (As an aside, he said there were definitely two U-Turns which were discussed earlier.) With about 45 minutes left of the meeting, Rabbi Laredo asked to speak again. The Chair granted his request. He then said he appreciated the traffic study and the experts who looked it over and Rabbi Laredo said that people were concerned about the value of their property. He felt that this project should raise the value of the homes in the area. Cynthia Rizzo explained about the dead end streets nearby and having to make right turns before they make a U-Turn to go east. She felt that this project would be a disaster. It would change the single-family home area into some kind of wild business thing. She thanked the Board and hoped they would not allow this to pass. Stephanie Jofe was opposed. Her neighborhood was single-family homes surrounded by majestic old Oak Trees. If the proposed development passed, there would be 231 additional families in this area. People living in the tall buildings would be able to look down into their windows. This apartment complex would be totally incompatible to the neighborhood. It would be unconscionable if the City of Dania Beach allowed this to happen. Don't do this so the developer could make more money. Protect your constituents. The Chair cautioned public speakers about adding more speaking time without more time being granted by the Board. Antonio Coballino said that he just moved in. He thought the project was beautiful and would enhance the neighborhood by adding jobs and people to the community. The community was outdated. Young talent had to be attracted to the City. He thought it would be great for the City. Ari Zipper said he and his wife and children moved to their home in 2012. There were no other children on that street. Now there were children and the community was thriving. They need developers to build in Dania Beach so that children can grow up and live in Dania Beach. He was for this development. Jim Rizzo was opposed to this project. He said this was about the "legal matters" that the Board had to check off. This zoning change was not transitional. He had a picture brought up on the screen stating that this property had a farm with horses and farm animals to the north, eastern border had single-family homes, Hybrid Planr:ing and Zoning Board/Local P/anniitg Agency Mi�:utes 4 Apri/ 20, 2022 and half of the western border had single-family homes. A six -story building would be out of place. He did the math and to the east above Stirling, it was 2.3 single-family homes per acre. Below it was about 2.6 single-family homes per acre. This was 231 units on about 3 acres so it was about 70 or 80 single- family homes per acre. This was not consistent and not their neighborhood. This was the law. He came back about 5 minutes later adding about the desire to develop arterial roads but he said this stretch of Stirling was not commercial. It was residential and doing this project would be disrupting. Anthony Benedict was opposed to the proposed development. The building was too big for this property next to single-family homes. It would be another Dania Pointe. There were privacy concerns as well as concerns about the property value of their homes. The building would be the tallest in Dania Beach along the entire Stirling Road but he did mention a few other tall buildings. He suggested bringing the building down to three stories. If not, people would see a concrete structure 80 feet high and lose the view, property value, etc. Michael Jofe was opposed. He treats children for severe trauma and would like to address traffic from that issue. The traffic on Stirling Road was already heavy. Instead of the ten homes this area was already zoned for, the City was asked to allow them to build an additional_ 221 dwelling units right across from schools. Factor in two cars per unit, puts an additiona1462 cars on the road. If this got approved, a perfect storm would be created for a child to be severely injured or worse. This also opened up the City and others to potential liability knowing there would be an increased risk for children with this zoning change. Remember that the property owner knew the existing zoning in place when it was purchased. Dr. Jofe asked for his video to be played but he was not sure to whom it was sent to at the City. Tracy Infintini was for the project. She liked the mixed -use and felt that it would bring the City into modern times. She stated that the project was pretty. This would change things up a bit. Igal Intalian was for the project. He has friends looking to move to South Florida but could not find anything. His house has to be renovated but he could not find a rental to move into. Another problem was that it was hard to find good working people in South Florida. Young talent was missing. The Board needed to look into the future. The developer was looking into spending millions of dollars on this project. It would bring property values up and the availability of younger people with fresh talent. There was someone online who wanted to speak. Audrea Middleman was sworn in and opposed to this project. She said it was beautiful but wrong for the location. There were major traffic concerns and she witnessed traffic accidents and bicycle accidents with cars. There would be more noise and it was noisy enough in that area especially during the quiet of night when noise could be heard from Hard Rock. The public comment portion (virtual and in -person) was now closed by City Attorney Boutsis. She asked Attorney Feiner if he wanted time for rebuttal. Attorney Feiner felt that they fully vetted this agenda item. He would just like to say in answer to the last person who spoke about noise, that the proposed building would serve as a buffer from that noise. He added that the building height was not immediately adjacent to residential. He pointed out that traffic was reviewed by their engineer, FDOT and the City's traffic engineer. They all found that everything was okay. If the Board had questions, they were here to answer them. Board Member Hankerson wanted to understand Commercial Flex better, as he understood Flex Units. He knew that developers were sitting on Flex Units into perpetuity and Assistant Director Community Development Lajoie explained that Flex Units and RAC Units were two different things. She was unaware of any properties that were holding RAC Units. Attorney Feiner explained Commercial Flex and went over rules governing it. Mr. Hankerson wanted to know if there were many people here tonight opposed to this project who attended any of the Koosh Meetings and several people raised their hands. Board Member Thomas stated that the City was in an interesting place because of what they were asking for. It was a nice project that was consistent with what we were welcoming and encouraging. A lot of people would benefit from this development. The Developer was at City events and drove the same roads. He was not too far removed. This project was what we asked for. Hybrid Planning and Zoning Board/Local Plani:ingAgency Minutes 5 Apri! 20, 2022 Board Member Popescu had no questions because all were addressed during the presentations. Vice Chair Jones said that things have changed over the years. He spoke of not being able to do Downtown because of government regulations and other things. His heart went out to those who came here tonight and felt their lifestyle would probably change. He wished there was some happy medium. He did not see where the developer did not follow every guideline in the backup. Assistant Director Community Development Corrine Lajoie then answered Vice Chair Jones' question that commercial flex was not done very often and she could not recall when the last commercial flex project was done. He wanted to know about the power lines and was it some kind of health problem. Ms. Lajoie said something like that was brought up years ago but it was debunked as a health issue. Staff could ask the applicant to contact FPL and address it when the site plan came forward. Attorney Feiner said FPL objected to any electromagnetic issue and did not care how close it was to a residential area. However, in case a line came down, they did not want it close enough to a building. Attorney Feiner said that people could congregate in that area. Ms. Lajoie answered the vice chair that for the rezoning, the applicant met every criteria. City Attorney Boutsis pointed out that the City's Code 645-40 criteria was written as an "or", so they have to meet some of the criteria that stated "this or that". He wanted to know if a happy medium could mean a decreased building height and Attorney Feiner said that they were always open to residents' suggestions but for now this was what they determined this area needed. Board Member Hankerson was re -recognized by the Chair. Mr. Hankerson said that in 2008 the nation had a banking crisis, lending crisis and slowed down residential housing development. Then there was and still is a deficit in available housing and banks were not lending for condominiums right now. Bottom line was we need housing. This project was not a perfect match but we don't know if we have the luxury of waiting for perfection. Chair Robertson said that he was torn. He spoke with neighbors to the east who did not want this in their backyard. However, with the current zoning, people would not want luxury homes built under power lines. We were here tonight to decide on zoning and not the site plan. Keep in mind today was just a recommendation to the City Commission. He was going to place on the floor a recommendation of approval to the City Commission from the Planning and Zoning Board. Motion was made by Chair Robertson to recommend approval for this agenda item (RZ-55-22) to the City Commission and was seconded by Vice Cliair Jones. Motion passed S-0. 2. TX-19-22: The applicant, City of Dania Beach, is requesting a text amendment to the Public Art Program as identified in the City's Land Development Code. Assistant Director Community Development Corinne Lajoie reminded that this PowerPoint presentation was presented at last month's meeting and nothing was changed. City Attorney Eve Boutsis said that there was an advertising issue so that was why this agenda item was brought back tonight. There was no formal vote last month because they had to meet the advertising requirement. The Board decided not to hear the presentation again tonight but to just vote. Motion was made by Chair Robertson to recommend approval for this agenda item (TX-19-22) to the City Commission and was seconded by Board Member Hankerson. Motion passed S-0. 3. TX-29-22: The applicant, City of Dania Beach, is requesting several text amendments to the City's Code, to adopt amendments and refinements to the Land Development Code. Assistant Director Community Development Corinne Lajoie said there were eight text amendments that needed to adopt amendments to the Land Development Code. She explained them to the Board. When asking for Board questions, Board Member Hankerson asked about different concepts and pictures when you talk about murals. One was from a perspective when talking about art evoking emotion and another a very large image promoting a product or a business. Ms. Lajoie explained that there would be leeway regarding signs as long as there was no name and/or logo. Vice Chair Jones asked about graffiti. Ms. Lajoie said that graffiti could be a form of art. We needed public outreach and getting community members Hybrid P/arming and Zoning Board/Loca/ Planning Agency Mirastes 6 Apri/ 20, 2022 involved. City Attorney Boutsis said it was art as long as it was done legally. Chair Robertson asked about the increase in cost for payment -in -lieu but was told that the increase was large but in the ballpark. Ms. Lajoie informed that the City's Public Art Consultant was online to answer any of the Board's questions. Motion was made by Cltair Robertson to recommend approval for this agenda item (TX-29-22) to the City Commission and was seconded by Vice Cltair Jones. Motion passed 5-0. IV. BOARD ITEMS 1. City Commission actions on items previously heard by the Board. Assistant Director Community Development Corinne Lajoie said that next week, on April 26, would be the first reading for RAC Replacement Application. 2. Upcoming Meeting Date: May 18, 2022 There would be a meeting. V. MEETING ADJOURNED As all business was finished and without objection, the meeting was adjourned at approximately 9: 59PrLI. ATTEST: L LARIOS OARD CLERK (Date) (�c� / � �/ 7iv W. QUIN ROBERTSON, CHAIR PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD (Date) Tam For more details regarding this meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board/Local Planning Agency, please request a file of the meeting by calling Ibel Larios at (954) 924-6805 X3792 or emailing ilarios@daniabeachfl.gov. Hybrid Planning and Zoning Board/Local Planning Agency Mira�tes 7 April 20, 2022