Planning and Zoning Board

AGENDA PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD REGULAR MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 at 7:00 PM 2020 WILTON DRIVE, WILTON MANORS, FLORIDA 33305 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. September 9, 2019 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting Minutes 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS Any member of the Public may speak on any issue for three (3) minutes. 6. STAFF COMMENTS a. 2020 Planning and Zoning Board Calendar 7. BOARD COMMENTS a. Discussion related to potential Unified Land Development Code Changes. 8. ADJOURNMENT NEXT MEETING DATE ­ December 9, 2019 All interested persons are invited to appear and be heard, subject to proper rules of conduct. Persons who cannot appear and be heard are encouraged to submit their written comments. Written comments filed with the Community Development Services Director will be entered into the record. Persons with disabilities requiring accommodations in order to participate should contact the City Clerk at 954­390­2123 at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Pursuant to FS. 286.0105, if a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Board, with respect to any matter considered at the meeting, or hearing, he/she will need a record of the proceedings and that for such purposes he/she 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 based. Any person requiring Auxiliary Aids and Services for the Meeting may call the ADA Coordinator at (954) 390­2120 at least two working days prior to the meeting. If you are hearing or speech impaired, please contact the Florida Relay Service by using the following phone numbers: 1­800­955­8770 Page 1 of 32 (voice) or 1­800­955­8771 (TDD). All materials may be reviewed at the City of Wilton Manors Community Development Services Department at 2020 Wilton Drive, Wilton Manors, Florida 33305, between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday, excluding legal holidays. Page 2 of 32 COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: Monday, November 18, 2019 From: Prepared by: Evangeline Kalus (a) Subject: September 9, 2019 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting Minutes (b) City Manager Recommendation: (c) Report In Brief: (d) Discussion: Approval of September 9, 2019 Planning and Zoning Board Minutes (e) Strategic Plan Consistency: (f) Concurrences: (g) Fiscal Impact: (h) Alternatives: (i) Attachments: 1. 090919 WM PZ 2nd draft minutes Page 3 of 32  1 DRAFT 2 PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD 3 COMMISSION CHAMBERS 4 2020 WILTON DRIVE, WILTON MANORS, FLORIDA 33305 5 MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 2019 – 7:00 P.M. 6 7 MEMBERS ATTENDANCE 8 Don D’Arminio, Chair P 9 Nick Berry, Vice Chair P 10 Peter Flint P 11 Daniel Keester-O’Mills A 12 Richard Safaty A 13 Jeb Shafer A 14 Brad Sterl A 15 Tim Theisen P 16 17 Staff 18 Mike Cirullo, Assistant City Attorney 19 Roberta Moore, Community Development Services Director 20 Evy Kalus, City Planner 21 Brigitte Chiappetta, Prototype, Inc. 22 23 I. Call to Order 24 25 Chair D’Arminio called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. 26 27 II. Roll Call 28 29 Roll was called by Ms. Chiappetta. It was noted a quorum was present. 30 31 III. Pledge of Allegiance 32 33 Chair D’Arminio recognized that City Commissioner Paul Rolli was in attendance. 34 35 IV. Approval of Minutes – July 8, 2019 36 37 Motion made by Board Member Theisen, seconded by Vice Chair Berry, to approve. 38 39 Chair D’Arminio noted the following corrections to the July 8, 2019 minutes: 40  P. 5, line 7: the Chair felt the first sentence was not in the proper context, and 41 had discussed potential Code changes that could steer vacation rental properties 42 away from single-family neighborhoods and into Transit-Oriented Corridors 43 (TOCs) 44  P. 7, line 10: change “are parked at” to “require” 45 46 In a voice vote, the motion passed 4-0 (unanimously) as corrected. Page 4 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 2 1 2 Chair D’Arminio also recognized that Vice Mayor Tom Green was in attendance. 3 4 V. Public Comments 5 6 Tony LoGrande, 517 NE 23 Street, stated that he was supportive of all variance 7 requests by WM 1501 Venture LLC presented at tonight’s meeting. He felt the 8 development would secure more daytime businesses and attract office uses. He also 9 supported the Item proposed by 2262 Wilton Drive Owner, LLC, which requests an 10 outdoor patio and expansion of an existing nightclub. 11 12 Mr. LoGrande continued that while he appreciated the clarification of amendments 13 proposed as Public Hearing Items, he did not feel they were sufficient to encourage 14 tourist accommodations and tourism as part of the City’s economy. He advocated for 15 making the vacation rental process easier in order to encourage greater compliance and 16 develop a stronger tourist economy. 17 18 Peter DeKaj, 2505 NE 15 Avenue, stated that he opposed the project requested by WM 19 1501 Venture LLC, as he operates a business close to their location. A high volume of 20 traffic already exists in this area. He felt the proposed project would bring more traffic 21 and noise to the area. 22 23 Assistant City Attorney Mike Cirullo advised that individuals will have the opportunity to 24 address specific Agenda Items as they are presented. Public comments related to 25 individual cases will be incorporated into the record for those cases. 26 27 Michael Wright, 2301 Wilton Drive, commented that he was in favor of variances 28 requested for a project proposed for 1501 26 Street. He added that Hunter’s Night Club 29 regularly checks identification at their doors and complies with the Fire Marshal’s 30 regulations regarding capacity. 31 32 Mr. Cirullo clarified that because only four (4) of seven Board members were present at 33 tonight’s meeting, passage of any Item on the Agenda would require three (3) 34 affirmative votes. 35 36 VI. Quasi-Judicial Public Hearing 37 38 a) CU 19-01 39 WM 1501 Venture, LLC 40 2875 NE 191 Street, Suite 800 41 Aventura, FL 33180 42 43 WM 1501 Venture LLC, property owner, is requesting Conditional Use 44 Approval for a coffee shop / tea house per Article 105 of the Unified Land 45 Development Regulations for the property located at 1501 NE 26 Street. Page 5 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 3 1 2 b) V 19-03 3 WM 1501 Venture, LLC 4 2875 NE 191 Street, Suite 800 5 Aventura, FL 33180 6 7 WM 1501 Venture LLC, property owner, is requesting variances for the 8 property located at 1501 NE 26 Street as follows: 9 1) Variance to allow the sign band to be five (5) feet in vertical dimension by 10 any length in lieu of two (2) feet for three (3) sign bands, per Article 030- 11 130(A) of the City’s Unified Land Development Regulations (ULDRs). 12 2) Variance to allow freestanding monument sign on commercial properties 13 constructed after February 14, 2012 at seven (7) feet in height in lieu of a 14 freestanding monument sign constructed prior to February 14, 2012 at a 15 maximum of three (3) feet in height, per Article 030-130(G)(3) of the ULDRs. 16 3) Variance to allow structures and uses (for dumpster enclosure and loading 17 area) that are required in Section 030-081 to be screened to be located 18 adjacent to a frontage line, and to be visible from the public rights-of-way per 19 Article 030-070(D). 20 4) Variance to allow loading docks and service area to have direct views from 21 adjacent properties and public rights-of-way in lieu of loading docks and 22 service areas shall be screened with landscaping or fencing to prevent 23 direct views of such areas from adjacent properties and public rights-of-way, 24 per Article 030-081(E)(2) 25 5) Variance to allow mechanical equipment, dumpsters, above-ground 26 transformer boxes and backflow preventers not to be screened pursuant to 27 Section 150-180 in lieu of mechanical equipment, dumpsters, above-ground 28 transformer boxes and backflow preventers to be screened pursuant to 29 Section 150-180, per Article 030-081(E)(4), Article 150-180, and 045-110. 30 6) Variance to allow menu sign to be nine (9) feet nine (9) inches in height in 31 lieu of menu sign shall not exceed six (6) feet in height, per Article 145- 32 140(H). 33 7) Variance to permit backout parking onto a public right-of-way in lieu of not 34 to permit backout parking onto a public right-of-way, per Article 135-020(J)(1) 35 of the ULDRs. 36 37 c) SP 19-02 38 WM 1501 Venture, LLC 39 2875 NE 191 Street, Suite 800 40 Aventura, FL 33180 41 42 WM 1501 Venture LLC, property owner, is requesting site plan approval for a 43 new 2,280 square foot commercial building with drive through, outdoor 44 seating and parking lots located at 1501 NE 26 Street. Page 6 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 4 1 2 d) SP 19-03 3 2262 Wilton Drive Owner, LLC 4 2977 McFarlane Road, Suite 300 5 Miami, FL 33133 6 7 2262 Wilton Drive Owner, LLC, property owner, is requesting site plan 8 approval for a new 675 square foot outdoor patio and 1,216 square foot 9 tenant expansion for the existing Hunter’s Night Club for the property located 10 at 2200-2292 Wilton Drive. 11 Mr. Cirullo explained the quasi-judicial process, stating that those wishing to speak on 12 any quasi-judicial application should raise their right hand and be sworn in. He 13 performed the swearing in for the hearings at this time. 14 15 The Board agreed by consensus to hear the three (3) Items – Conditional Use, Site 16 Plan, and multiple variances -- together and vote upon them separately. 17 18 Applicant 19 Scott Helms, Applicant, explained that the office building at the subject location had 20 been unoccupied and was in disrepair when he purchased it. He has made 21 approximately $6 million in improvements to the property and the first tenant has moved 22 into the building. 23 24 The site under discussion at tonight’s meeting is a drive-through area that was formerly 25 part of a bank and has not been used in many years. The tenant, Starbucks, has a 26 national corporate mandate to modify its existing stores to provide drive-through 27 service. A zoning modification was required for the property to allow drive-through 28 service within the sub-market. The City Commission voted unanimously to approve this 29 modification. 30 31 Vincent Griffith, representing the Applicant, addressed the project’s seven (7) variance 32 requests, beginning with the sign band. The Applicant requests a variance on the basis 33 of the building’s setback from the property line. Code refers to storefronts with single 34 frontages on the roadway, while the subject property has multiple faces that require 35 signage. A monument sign is also proposed due to the building’s setback. The 36 proposed sign meets all other Code requirements, including design and style. 37 38 Mr. Griffith continued that because the property has frontage on both NE 26 Drive and 39 NE 26 Street, it is difficult to completely surround its dumpster enclosure with shrubbery 40 to conceal it from the rights-of-way. The property proposes a loading dock for its rear 41 section, where deliveries will be made. Because this is not a typical loading space, the 42 Applicant requests that no landscaping or shrubbery be required to screen the area. 43 Page 7 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 5 1 Mr. Griffith advised that the dumpster itself would not be screened on one side, which is 2 another variance request based on the configuration of the site. The Applicant hopes to 3 continue working with Staff to discuss possible screening, such as greenery or a mural. 4 5 While Code restricts menu signage to below six (6) feet in height, Mr. Griffith noted that 6 the awning over this space is designed to protect customers from rain while ordering 7 from the menu. He characterized this as an accessory to the drive-through menu rather 8 than signage. 9 10 James Fitzgerald of Kimley-Horn and Associates, also representing the Applicant, 11 advised that this firm performed traffic analysis for the project. The configuration of the 12 site provides only one ingress and egress, which manage traffic efficiently. A traffic 13 impact analysis studied roadway links within a one-mile radius of the site and 14 determined that the development would not affect the level of service on those roadway 15 links. Based on this, as well as on a stacking analysis also performed by Kimley-Horn, 16 no significant adverse effects of the development are anticipated for traffic or roadways. 17 18 Mr. Helms concluded that the Site Plan encompasses two thousand two hundred eighty 19 (2280) square feet with the building in its center and traffic flow moving around the 20 building. 21 22 Questions of Applicant 23 Vice Chair Berry asked why the Applicant felt the sign code was not written for the 24 scenario proposed by the development. Mr. Griffith replied that there are multiple Code 25 sections addressing signage; however, Sign Code is very rigid and does not allow for 26 unusual circumstances, such as atypical or modern building construction or 27 development with significant setbacks. 28 29 Board Member Theisen also requested clarification of “significant” impact on traffic flow 30 in the area. Mr. Fitzgerald replied that these effects were analyzed based on City and 31 County standards: trips per day were assigned to different driveways in the area to 32 determine whether or not they would affect the roadway’s level of service (LOS). It was 33 ultimately determined that there was no such effect. 34 35 Board Member Theisen also asked if it would be possible to predict how traffic might 36 change once the Starbucks relocates to the subject property. Mr. Fitzgerald advised that 37 the site’s configuration would allow traffic to use both NE 26 Drive and NE 26 Street, 38 which would prevent a significant burden on either roadway. 39 40 Board Member Theisen observed that the backout parking variance request was not 41 addressed as part of the presentation. Mr. Fitzgerald stated that backout parking would 42 occur on NE 26 Drive, where overflow parking already exists. Customers and 43 employees are already required to back out of this area. 44 Page 8 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 6 1 Board Member Theisen asked if it would be possible to reconfigure this space to make it 2 a closed parking lot with single ingress and egress without backout parking. Mr. 3 Fitzgerald replied that the Applicant’s team did not feel this was possible, given the 4 existing conditions of the overflow parking area. 5 6 Board Member Theisen asked if the loading area would accommodate semi trucks, and 7 whether this type of vehicle can turn in this area. Mr. Helms replied that most deliveries 8 are made with vans, although a semi may come to the site approximately once a week. 9 He added that deliveries are made late at night. 10 11 Board Member Flint also addressed the traffic analysis, pointing out that a table 12 included in the Applicant’s materials shows potential degradation of turning movements. 13 He requested more information on how this would not negatively affect traffic. Mr. 14 Fitzgerald explained that while the level of service (LOS) may be changed on some 15 adjacent roadways, the impacts of the development are not expected to be significant. 16 The roadways remain within the City’s required LOS. 17 18 Board Member Flint expressed concern with the need to implement seven (7) variances 19 in order to bring a Starbucks to the subject site. He pointed out that hardships must be 20 demonstrated when variances are requested. He also addressed stacking in the drive- 21 through facility, requesting clarification of how many cars can stack there without 22 blocking traffic. Mr. Fitzgerald advised that because the drive-through wraps around the 23 building, he estimated that up to twelve (12) vehicles can stack there. 24 25 Chair D’Arminio requested clarification of how the Applicant opted for “stacking over 26 screening.” He noted that Code requires a twenty-five (25) foot stacking area before the 27 first parking space is reached. Mr. Vincent explained that screening referred to the 28 dumpster enclosure and loading zone; because the area is in a tight space, some back 29 side screening/landscaping was limited in order to accommodate the full drive-through. 30 31 Chair D’Arminio asked if the Applicant feels they have requested the minimum 32 variances necessary to realize the development. Mr. Vincent confirmed this. 33 34 Staff 35 City Planner Evy Kalus stated that the subject site consists of two (2) parcels on NE 26 36 Street and NE 26 Drive. The first parcel, adjacent to both roadways, contains a newly 37 renovated ten thousand seven hundred thirty (10,730) square foot office building with 38 ancillary parking and a drive-through on approximately one point six (1.6) acre. The 39 second parcel, which is adjacent to NE 26 Drive, contains overflow parking for the first 40 parcel and is less than one (1) acre. 41 42 The proposed Site Plan includes a new coffee shop and tea house with a drive-through, 43 outdoor seating, ancillary parking, and overflow parking. The proposed tenant is 44 Starbucks. Ms. Kalus provided aerial views of the site depicting all property under the Page 9 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 7 1 same ownership, proposed overflow parking, the former drive-through facility, and areas 2 currently used by the newly renovated office building. 3 4 There are three (3) requests by the Applicant: 5  Conditional Use to allow the proposed coffee/tea shop use 6  Variances for signage, screening, loading and dumpster areas, and backout 7 parking 8  Site Plan for the new two thousand two hundred eighty (2280) square foot 9 commercial building with drive-through, outdoor seating, and parking lots 10 11 Ms. Kalus noted an error in the Site Plan report available online: on p. 5, under 12 recommendations, the correct date is August 21, 2019. This correction is highlighted in 13 the Staff Report. 14 15 Regarding the Conditional Use, Staff has reviewed the Applicant’s conditions and 16 confirmed that they meet all necessary criteria. A total of seven (7) variances are 17 requested for the following: 18  Sign height, including the freestanding monument sign, canopy, and wall sign 19  Landscaping of dumpster enclosure and loading areas 20  Screening of dumpster area 21  Backout parking 22 23 Upon reviewing Code standards, Staff determined that the Applicant exceeded parking 24 requirements and met landscaping requirements, including provision of trees and 25 shrubs. All but four (4) existing trees will remain on the parcel. Two (2) backout parking 26 spaces on NE 26 Drive will be removed to accommodate vehicles entering and exiting 27 the loading area. A landscaping buffer is provided on the north side of the property. 28 29 Staff recommends the following: 30  Conditional Use approval for the coffee/tea shop, dependent upon approval of 31 the variances and Site Plan, as well as the condition of drive-through hours 32  The seven (7) requested variances as described within the Staff Report 33  Site Plan approval, with the recommendation that a mural be provided on the 34 side of the dumpster that cannot be screened by landscaping 35  Green building requirements, including placement of utilities underground and 36 construction of an eight (8) foot hedge in the rear 37 38 Questions for Staff 39 Board Member Flint addressed conditional use, asking if the office building would retain 40 sufficient parking to meet Code once the project is constructed. Ms. Kalus explained 41 that the office building is independent from the Starbucks, with no shared parking. 42 43 Board Member Flint also noted that the first variance would allow the size of signage to 44 increase from two (2) to five (5) feet vertically with a length of ten (10) feet for the three Page 10 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 8 1 (3) proposed signs. He asked if Staff had considered establishing a maximum square 2 footage for signs. 3 4 Board Member Flint suggested limiting the wall sign to the square footage that would 5 have been required without the variance. Ms. Kalus advised that there is no square 6 footage requirement for the wall sign, although there is a limitation on monument signs. 7 The Applicant is requesting a variance for the height of the sign only. Board Member 8 Flint also requested clarification of the screening variance for the dumpster and loading 9 area. Ms. Kalus clarified that only the dumpster is missing its screening. 10 11 With regard to the height of the menu board, Board Member Flint asked if the Applicant 12 was asked to remove signage from this structure to allow for weather protection without 13 requiring a variance. Ms. Kalus noted that the menu board structure remains nine (9) 14 feet and nine (9) inches, even if the Starbucks name were removed. 15 16 Board Member Flint expressed concern with backout parking, stating that he did not 17 consider this a hardship because parking could be reconfigured. He felt there could be a 18 better way than backout parking to address this issue. 19 20 Board Member Theisen asked if there are enough parking spaces within the subject 21 property that overflow parking is not required for compliance. Ms. Kalus confirmed that 22 overflow parking is not required by Code. Board Member Theisen advised that for this 23 reason, he found the variance request for backout parking to be unnecessary. 24 25 Board Member Theisen asked what protection exists for seating on the south side of the 26 building from the traffic on NE 26 Street. Ms. Kalus replied that there will be concrete 27 walls for this purpose. Board Member Theisen also asked how customers would cross 28 NE 26 Drive from the overflow parking lot. Ms. Kalus noted that there will be a painted 29 crosswalk provided for this purpose. 30 31 Board Member Theisen concluded that while members of the community may be 32 pleased that a Starbucks is coming to the area, this desire may have overridden 33 concerns related to Code. He advised he was uncomfortable approving seven (7) 34 variances when only four (4) Board Members were present at tonight’s meeting. 35 36 Vice Chair Berry pointed out that if residents of the subject neighborhood were opposed 37 to the project, they would be present at the meeting. While he felt positively about how 38 the Applicant was repurposing the area, he was also concerned with the number of 39 variances. 40 41 Vice Chair Berry asked if the limitation on the sign band exists throughout the entire 42 City. Ms. Kalus replied that this regulation applies only in the Arts and Entertainment 43 District and the TOC. Staff is recommending approval of this variance due to the 44 building’s setback and its frontage on two (2) streets. 45 Page 11 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 9 1 Vice Chair Berry asked if Staff would also recommend a variance for sign bands at 2 several City businesses that are set back a similar distance from the roadway. Ms. 3 Kalus advised that she could only speak to the Application currently before the Board. 4 Vice Chair Berry also took issue with the backout parking request. He concluded that he 5 did not feel the variance requests were in response to hardships as required by Code. 6 7 Chair D’Arminio referred to the Conditional Use Staff Report, which specifies vehicle 8 stacking distances that “anticipate expected demand without impairing traffic 9 circulation.” He requested clarification of the stacking area required by Code. Ms. Kalus 10 replied that the City’s Civil Engineer reviewed the Application and determined that this 11 requirement has been met. Code requires six (6) inbound and one (1) outbound 12 stacking space. 13 14 Chair D’Arminio asked if Staff believes the seven (7) variances are the minimum 15 required by Starbucks. Ms. Kalus confirmed this, adding that justifications for approval 16 were presented in the Staff Report. 17 18 Chair D’Arminio asked if any of the sign-related issues would be addressed in the Sign 19 Code amendments to be heard later in the meeting. Ms. Moore replied that some of 20 these items would be affected by the draft amendments, as they refer to common 21 issues faced by the business community. She pointed out that the monument sign in 22 particular would be allowed within the City’s Urban Center if the amendments were in 23 place. 24 25 Vice Chair Berry asked if the proposed sign changes would increase the width of the 26 sign band at a certain setback distance. Ms. Moore replied that while the amendments 27 do not address distance from the street to the building, they do refer to square footage 28 and the number of signs that would be permitted on any business. The band size would 29 remain at a two (2) foot maximum height. 30 31 Public Comments 32 At this time Chair D’Arminio opened public comment. 33 34 Tim Moffitt, 2616 NE 14 Avenue, stated that he drives on NE 26 Avenue every day. He 35 pointed out that other businesses have existing backout parking on this roadway, which 36 does not create any issues. 37 38 Ron Falk, 517 NE 23 Street, advised that he works near the existing Starbucks and has 39 never seen semi trucks at the location before 10 p.m. He was in favor of the project. 40 41 Celeste Ellich, 36 NE 25 Street, described NE 26 Drive as a dangerous road for traffic 42 pulling out onto 16 Avenue. She added that the existing Starbucks results in stacking 43 that impedes traffic on two major roadways. She felt the proposed business would 44 create similar issues on NE 26 Street. 45 Page 12 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 10 1 Ms. Ellich continued that the existing Starbucks also contributes to parking issues. She 2 concluded that the project did not seem to have been brought before the community 3 effectively, and did not know if it the East Neighborhood Association (ENA) had met with 4 the developers. 5 6 Peter DeKaj, 2505 NE 15 Avenue, restated his concern with the traffic the project would 7 generate, as well as stacking from the drive-through facility. 8 9 David Walker, 2157 NE 17 Terrace, advised that he was not notified through ENA or the 10 City regarding the project. His concerns included parking and increased traffic, as well 11 as a roadway behind the business. He was also not in favor of a dumpster without the 12 required screening. He concluded that if Starbucks is allowed increased signage, all 13 other businesses should be given the same opportunity. 14 15 As there were no other individuals wishing to speak at this time, Chair D’Arminio closed 16 public comment. 17 18 Vice Chair Berry noted that members of the public had referred to turning onto NE 16 19 Avenue from NE 26 Drive, and asked if this should be an area in which only right turns 20 were permitted. Ms. Moore replied that Staff can reevaluate this intersection if 21 necessary. Vice Chair Berry commented that because the City hopes to increase its 22 density, older portions of Code, such as permission for backout parking, should be 23 reevaluated as sites are developed or redeveloped. 24 25 Mr. Griffith, representing the Applicant, addressed the monument signage, pointing out 26 that the sign is set so far back that it would be blocked by the concrete wall surrounding 27 the site. Vice Chair Berry noted, however, that he would like to see Code changed to 28 provide a level playing field for other businesses with similar setbacks. 29 30 Mr. Helms, Applicant, addressed parking, pointing out that there is sufficient parking for 31 the office building as well as Starbucks. He reiterated that there are only eight (8) 32 backout parking spaces on NE 26 Drive. Vice Chair Berry observed that it would be 33 possible to configure the rows of parking from north-south to east-west. He stated that 34 he would not support a variance allowing for backout parking because he did not feel 35 circumstances constituted a hardship. 36 37 Board Member Theisen requested clarification of the height of the menu portion of the 38 menu board and canopy. Mr. Griffith replied that if the text were removed, the menu 39 portion of the board is below six (6) feet six (6) inches. He characterized this issue as 40 one of interpretation: specifically, whether the canopy is an accessory or part of the 41 actual signage. He felt lettering could be removed if the Board felt it constituted signage. 42 43 It was clarified that the Board would vote on the Conditional Use, followed by votes on 44 each individual variance. 45 Page 13 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 11 1 Board Member Flint pointed out that the Applicant made offers to minimize some of the 2 variances, which he felt would be conducive to their approval. He added that when the 3 Board approved a Code change to specifically permit a drive-through gourmet 4 coffee/tea shop, they had not anticipated a request for a significant number of 5 variances. Starbucks had offered no variations to this plan until this point. 6 7 Board Member Flint continued that the backout parking creates a safety issue and does 8 not represent a hardship for the Applicant, as restriping and curbing could make the 9 subject area a more standard parking lot. He felt sign length should be limited to no 10 more square footage than they would have on the side of the building, and lettering 11 should be removed from the drive-through order sign. He concluded that the Board 12 should minimize the variance requests while allowing the Application to proceed. 13 14 Board Member Theisen observed that while revisions to Code are forthcoming, the 15 current Code has requirements that must be met, particularly for items that may not be 16 necessary to development. He noted that this is not the case of a new Starbucks 17 coming to the community, but of a business relocating to its benefit. He reiterated his 18 opposition to backout parking on NE 26 Drive, and suggested limiting the square 19 footage of the menu and monument signs. 20 21 Motion made by Board Member Theisen, seconded by Vice Chair Berry, to approve the 22 Conditional Use with conditions as stated by Staff. 23 24 It was clarified that the conditions as written would require Planning and Zoning Board 25 approval of all seven (7) variances. 26 27 Vice Chair Berry asked if it would be possible to approve the Conditional Use based on 28 approval of Site Plan 19-02 as well as the drive-through hours, leaving approval of the 29 variances aside. Mr. Cirullo advised that the Board may eliminate Condition one (1). 30 31 Motion made by Vice Chair Berry, seconded by Board Member Theisen, to approve 32 Conditional Use 19-01 with Staff recommendations number two (2) and three (3). In a 33 roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously (4-0). 34 35 Motion made by Board Member Flint, seconded by Vice Chair Berry, to approve 36 variance number one (1) under V19-03, for signage, with the condition that the 37 maximum square footage of the signage would not exceed two (2) feet high times the 38 length of the building or a maximum square footage of twenty-five (25) feet. 39 40 It was clarified that this would mean the sign’s total square footage may not exceed the 41 width of the building. 42 43 Vice Chair Berry observed that this would mean the Applicant could propose a sign of a 44 different configuration as long as it does not exceed the square footage referred to in 45 the motion. Board Member Flint further clarified that this would allow the Applicant to Page 14 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 12 1 post the signage they want without allowing a subsequent applicant to post larger 2 signage. 3 4 Board Member Theisen noted that the building’s length is eighty (80) feet, which means 5 there could be a sign of one hundred sixty (160) square feet. Ms. Kalus noted that the 6 sign code does not specifically refer to the length of the building. There is also no limit 7 within the subject zoning district to the percentage of wall space that can be taken up by 8 signage. 9 10 Ms. Kalus stated that the Site Plan lists the Starbucks logo as five (5) feet by five (5) 11 feet, with the drive-through signage adding to this total. Board Member Theisen 12 commented that limiting signage to thirty-five (35) square feet would cover both signs. 13 14 Board Member Theisen suggested amending the motion to allow the vertical height to 15 be raised to five (5) feet, but that the total square footage of all the signs on any one 16 side not exceed thirty-five (35) square feet. Board Member Flint and Vice Chair Berry 17 accepted this amendment. In a roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously (4-0). 18 19 Motion made by Board Member Flint, seconded by Board Member Theisen, to allow 20 the free-standing monument [sign] as proposed by the Applicant and recommended by 21 the Staff. 22 23 Chair D’Arminio acknowledged that Staff has proposed amending the section of Code 24 that deals with monument signage. He explained that he did not wish Starbucks to be 25 unduly affected by what could be perceived as antiquated Code. Board Member Flint 26 pointed out, however, that because the maximum square footage is already twenty-four 27 (24) square feet, the Applicant would not be permitted an unduly large sign. 28 29 Board Member Flint further clarified that the Applicant’s plans show the sign is thirty-two 30 (32) inches in height by six (6) feet ten (10) inches in width. The Applicant is not 31 requesting for approval of a specific sign, but of a variance up to the maximum square 32 footage. 33 34 In a roll call vote, the motion passed 3-1 (Vice Chair Berry dissenting). 35 36 Motion made by Vice Chair Berry, seconded by Board Member Flint, to approve 37 variance number three (3) with no conditions. 38 39 It was noted that the proposed mural for the dumpster area was not included in the 40 Applicant’s Site Plan. Vice Chair Berry and Board Member Flint amended their motion 41 and second to include the proposed mural. In a roll call vote, the motion passed 42 unanimously (4-0). 43 44 Motion made by Vice Chair Berry, seconded by Board Member Flint, to approve [the] 45 variance for the loading area. Page 15 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 13 1 2 Board Member Theisen asked if Starbucks would consider placing traffic cones in the 3 loading area to ensure sufficient space and turning radius for large trucks. Mr. Griffith 4 confirmed this could be done. 5 6 Board Member Flint asked if there should be any restrictions on delivery hours due to 7 the site’s proximity to residential development. Ms. Kalus advised that existing Code 8 addresses hours for loading/unloading. The City’s Noise Ordinance also addresses any 9 noise generated by idling vehicles and the hours in which this is permitted. 10 11 In a roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously (4-0). 12 13 Motion made by Vice Chair Berry, seconded by Board Member Theisen, to approve 14 variance number five (5) with the Staff-recommended mural. In a roll call vote, the 15 motion passed unanimously (4-0). 16 17 Motion made by Vice Chair Berry, seconded by Board Member Flint, to approve the 18 variance for the menu signs. 19 20 Board Member Flint proposed the following amendment to the motion: that the 21 Starbucks logo or lettering be removed as a nonconforming sign from the menu board 22 structure. Vice Chair Berry accepted the amendment. In a roll call vote, the motion 23 passed unanimously (4-0). 24 25 Motion made by Vice Chair Berry, seconded by Board Member Flint, to deny the 26 variance for backout parking. In a roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously (4-0). 27 28 Motion made by Vice Chair Berry, seconded by Board Member Flint, to approve Site 29 Plan 19-02. 30 31 Mr. Cirullo read the following Staff conditions into the record: 32  Approval of the Conditional Use Application 33  Approval of the variance Application(s) 34  No drive-through hours shall be permitted between the hours of 10 p.m. and 5 35 a.m., per Article 030-060 Subsection 17 36  Mural on the southern dumpster enclosure to be approved by the Community 37 Development Services Director [and] completed prior to issue of a Certificate of 38 Occupancy (CO) 39  Site Plan approval is granted based on the Site Plan prepared by Michael D. 40 Spruce, Engineers; landscape plans prepared by Stephen M. Feccia; survey 41 prepared by Miguel Espinoza, Land Surveyor; survey architect drawings 42 prepared by Joseph Oliveiri, Architect; photometric drawings prepared by William 43 O. Ritola, Engineering (all specific materials included in Application package) Page 16 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 14 1  Implementation of sustainable requirements based on green building 2 components in the Unified Land Development Regulations (ULDR) at the time of 3 first submittal of building permit 4  All utilities for the project must be underground 5  Flood elevation certificate is required with building permit submittal, current within 6 thirty (30) days 7  An eight (8) foot continuous hedge, four (4) trees, eighty (80) shrubs, and ground 8 cover will be required as a condition of approval to satisfy Section 030-081.B; 9 revised landscape plan to be submitted at the time of building permit submittal 10 11 Mr. Cirullo included an additional condition: the Site Plan must conform with the denial 12 of the backout parking variance. 13 14 In a roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously (4-0). 15 16 The Board took a brief recess from 9:03 p.m. to 9:15 p.m. 17 18 d) SP 19-03 19 2262 Wilton Drive Owner, LLC 20 2977 McFarlane Road, Suite 300 21 Miami, FL 33133 22 23 2262 Wilton Drive Owner, LLC, property owner, is requesting site plan 24 approval for a new 675 square foot outdoor patio and 1,216 square foot 25 tenant expansion for the existing Hunter’s Night Club for the property located 26 at 2200-2292 Wilton Drive. 27 28 Mr. Cirullo performed the swearing-in of any individuals wishing to speak on the Item. 29 30 Applicant 31 Bill Hammell, 1101 SW 4 Avenue, consultant to the owner(s) of Hunter’s Night Club, 32 explained that the business has proposed an outside patio within its existing parking 33 area. The lounge would take over four (4) of the existing parking spaces. The proposed 34 area would comply with a zoning Ordinance that permits outside dining and furniture. 35 They also propose bollards for the safety of patrons on the patio. 36 37 Through the Development Review Committee (DRC) process, the owner met with the 38 City’s Chief of Police and reviewed requirements for bollards to be implemented. The 39 patio would be located within the shopping center and would not be easily visible from 40 Wilton Drive. The shopping center plans to submit another Site Plan which would follow 41 the Site Plan submitted by Hunter’s Night Club. Mr. Hammell advised that the language 42 used in Code categorizes the Hunter’s Site Plan as “a major Site Plan development” 43 due to the use of existing parking spaces. He described the scope of work for the Page 17 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 15 1 project as very narrow, although some of the comments on the Application were more 2 reflective of major Site Plan approval. 3 4 Questions of Applicant 5 Vice Chair Berry asked if the Applicant was agreeable to the 14 recommendations 6 proposed by Staff. Mr. Hammell replied that these recommendations did not apply to 7 Hunter’s, as there was no large scale approval at stake. He felt the recommendations 8 would be better directed to the owner of the shopping center. 9 10 Vice Chair Berry pointed out that there are 14 Staff Conditions attached to the Site Plan 11 for Hunter’s Night Club which are not associated with plans for the shopping center. 12 These conditions include the need to bury electrical lines, meet flood elevation 13 standards, and prohibit amplified sound outdoors. 14 15 Mr. Hammell advised that he had read all of the conditions included in the Staff Report 16 and did not agree to all of them. He clarified that he is a consultant to the owners of 17 Hunter’s Night Club as well as to Grass River, the owner of the shopping center, as it 18 applies to the club. The process of Site Plan approval for the shopping center and the 19 nightclub were split up in order to provide some separation between the two Site Plans. 20 21 Chair D’Arminio asked if Mr. Hammell had the authority to agree to the 14 Staff 22 Conditions. Mr. Hammell replied that he had authority to represent “Hunter’s for Grass 23 River.” 24 25 Ms. Moore read an agent authorization email she had received from Grass River, which 26 was signed by Peter LaPointe, a principal of Grass River. The letter authorized Mr. 27 Hammell to sign necessary submittal documents for the subject location and address 28 any questions or concerns regarding the Hunter’s Night Club outdoor patio project on 29 behalf of Grass River. 30 31 Ms. Moore continued that after receipt of the agent authorization, she responded to 32 Grass River, asking if they authorized Mr. Hammell to agree to the conditions outlined in 33 the Staff Report, as the email had not indicated that he would have authorization for 34 anything other than the patio area. She then received an email response from an 35 associate of Grass River which agreed with the Staff Conditions “except numbers three 36 (3), six (6), seven (7), eight (8), nine (9), ten (10), eleven (11), and thirteen (13).” She 37 subsequently received another email from Mr. Espinal with additional comments 38 regarding conditions numbered three (3), six (6), seven (7), eight (8), and thirteen (13). 39 40 Ms. Moore explained that the second email provided comments on Grass River’s 41 objections regarding conditions of approval; however, no one was present to speak on 42 behalf of those specific objections and/or conditions. 43 44 Chair D’Arminio commented that the Board may hear and approve the Item based upon 45 the Staff Conditions or may choose to remove some of the conditions. Mr. Cirullo Page 18 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 16 1 clarified that they may remove the recommended conditions if that is the Board’s desire. 2 Any conditions applied to the Site Plan must be met before the Site Plan may be 3 implemented. The conditions may also be appealed. 4 5 Mr. Hammell addressed the following conditions and was agreeable to them unless 6 otherwise noted: 7 1. Underground placement of utilities for the outdoor patio 8 2. Flood elevation certificate required prior to building permit 9 3. Drive aisle access adjacent to the proposed outdoor seating must be twenty-four 10 (24) feet in width: with the removal of some existing parking spaces, it is possible 11 to provide a drive aisle of twenty-three (23) feet nine (9) inches 12 4. Bench or landscaping must be installed on the north side of the proposed 13 outdoor patio adjacent to an existing landscape island 14 5. No amplified music permitted in outdoor areas 15 6. Landscaping/screening requirements as described in the Staff Report: Mr. 16 Hammell advised that this was difficult for the Applicant within the scope of work, 17 which addressed only the outdoor patio; the Applicant did agree with re- 18 landscaping of an island and preservation of an oak tree in the patio area 19 7. All dead plantings on-site must be replaced within thirty (30) days: Mr. Hammell 20 felt the time frame could be difficult to meet, and responded that this condition 21 constituted a maintenance requirement rather than a condition for the nightclub 22 8. All irrigation must be functional in all landscape areas within thirty (30) days of 23 Site Plan approval 24 9. All dumpsters must be enclosed, constructed, and screened from view 25 10. Uber/Lyft pickup and drop-off location shall be moved to the north side of the 26 parcel within thirty (30) days of Site Plan approval: Mr. Hammell advised that he 27 had received no communication regarding this condition, but he was willing to 28 comply with the requirement 29 11. All conditions of approval associated with the Site Plan, including but not limited 30 to a pedestrian accessway on the site, must be completed within ninety (90) 31 days; Board Member Flint explained that this meant Site Plan 17-09 will need to 32 be brought into compliance before completion of SP 19-03 33 12. All standard and handicap-accessible spaces on the site must be consistent with 34 Code within six (6) months of approval by the Planning and Zoning Board 35 13. All drive aisles must be consistent with Article 135 within six (6) months: Mr. 36 Hammell advised that he did not agree to this condition, as it can be difficult to 37 implement on an existing site; however, the project is moving toward conformity 38 by coming close to the twenty-five (25) foot width; this condition would be noted 39 and addressed in any future Site Plans 40 14. Site Plan approval granted based on the Site Plan prepared by Charles Mitchell, 41 P.E. (all specific materials included in Application package) 42 43 Mr. Hammell asked that the Board approve the Application based upon the scope of 44 work and the effort the Applicant is making to improve Wilton Manors. He reiterated that Page 19 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 17 1 he did not feel conditions nine (9) through thirteen (13) applied to the scope of the 2 project. 3 4 Board Member Theisen stated that it did not seem to be clear to Mr. Hammell that the 5 City is seeking to compel the property owner to address existing violations on the 6 shopping center property. Chair D’Arminio added that this is because the Application 7 comes from this property owner. Staff identified all the changes that need to be made 8 on that property. Hunter’s itself cannot submit its Site Plan because it is not the owner of 9 the property. 10 11 The Board Members discussed some of the potential changes to the property, including 12 bollards that would prevent vehicles from driving into the patio area. The bollards meet 13 requirements established by Florida Building Code as well as by the Federal 14 Emergency Management Administration (FEMA). 15 16 Staff 17 The Board determined by consensus that no Staff presentation was necessary. 18 19 Questions for Staff 20 Board Member Flint requested clarification of why the minor change proposed by 21 Hunter’s Night Club would trigger major changes for an entire shopping center. Ms. 22 Moore explained that the subject property has gone through transitions of ownership, 23 and a Site Plan Application has been in process since 2017. Due to the modifications 24 proposed by Hunter’s, which would eliminate parking spaces, concerns remain based 25 on the nature of the shopping center and its uses. 26 27 When Staff evaluated the Application, they were required to take the 2017 Application 28 into consideration as well to ensure that certain Code requirements are met. The 29 Application on tonight’s Agenda is tied to the property owner who submitted it, even 30 though it is based only upon one tenant who hoped to make a modification to their 31 business plan. 32 33 Ms. Moore continued that Staff has evaluated outdoor activities throughout the business 34 community and determined there are concerns for the safety of patrons in 35 establishments that do not have permanent outdoor seating areas. For this reason, Staff 36 determined they would no longer sign off on temporary liquor licenses that did not 37 accompany permanent outdoor patios or seating areas. This was why Hunter’s is 38 seeking to make its outdoor space permanent. 39 40 Ms. Moore addressed condition number eleven (11) in particular, stating that it is 41 important for the City to ensure the required sidewalk is installed. It will provide a safe 42 space for patrons to walk, as they are now walking in the drive aisle. This sidewalk was 43 first approved in 2017-2018 but has yet to be constructed. 44 Page 20 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 18 1 Board Member Flint commented that there appeared to be two other access points to 2 the right-of-way aside from the drive aisle. Ms. Moore advised that the property owner 3 agreed to provide a sidewalk as part of the earlier Application due to patterns of 4 pedestrian traffic. 5 6 Ms. Moore further clarified that there is no guarantee the 2017 Site Plan submitted by 7 the property owner would be moving forward. This is why Staff is requesting the 8 conditions as part of the Site Plan Application before them at this time. If conditions of 9 approval are not met, the property owner would be charged with a violation or violations. 10 The tenant would not be held responsible for these violations. 11 12 Board Member Theisen asked if the property owner would have been cited for violations 13 if no Site Plan had ever been submitted. Ms. Moore noted that there are ongoing Code 14 cases, such as the landscaping issue and dumpster enclosure. The sidewalk and 15 parking space dimension issues arose due to submittal of the Site Plan Application in 16 2017. She characterized the issue as “inconsistent plans” submitted to the City. Most of 17 the conditions are improvements that need to be made to ensure the property is 18 consistent with Code. 19 20 Chair D’Arminio requested more information on parking, noting that there are two 21 hundred thirty-two (232) spaces provided between two buildings when the requirement 22 is for seventy-five (75) spaces. It was clarified that seventy-five (75) parking spaces 23 would trigger a requirement for three (3) spaces that are compliant with the Americans 24 with Disabilities Act (ADA). Ms. Moore explained that the number of ADA-compliant 25 spaces is based upon the number of spaces provided rather than required: the site is 26 required to have ten (10) ADA-compliant spaces because of their total number of 27 parking spaces, even though it is excess parking. 28 29 Chair D’Arminio also noted that the four (4) parking spaces which would be removed to 30 construct the proposed patio were not shown as being removed from the site’s overall 31 parking calculation. It was clarified that because there is excess parking, the four (4) 32 spaces to be removed would be eliminated from the total number of provided spaces 33 rather than required spaces; however, the required number of spaces would increase 34 due to the addition of the patio. 35 36 Mr. Hammell advised that Hunter’s planned to provide low-voltage LED lighting for the 37 patio space. The patio itself will be uncovered and lighting from the parking lot will help 38 to illuminate it. 39 40 Public Comments 41 At this time Chair D’Arminio opened public comment. 42 43 Ron Tenenhaus, 2111 NE 3 Avenue, pointed out that the only legal justification for a 44 variance is to address a hardship. He did not believe Hunter’s Night Club is 45 experiencing hardship. The business has used an outdoor speaker at full volume after Page 21 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 19 1 11 p.m. in violation of the City’s Noise Ordinances, which is a problem for nearby 2 residences. 3 4 Ray Carrier, 2048 NE 6 Terrace, stated that his home is directly behind the shopping 5 center. Although the City Commission voted in 2012 to provide a buffer between 6 residential and commercial development, there is currently no such buffer, and the 7 property owner has met with nearby homeowners and requested that they not be asked 8 to build the required buffer. The homeowners did not agree to this request. He asked 9 that nearby residents’ quality of life be protected. 10 11 Ron Falk, 517 NE 23 Street, advised that while he is in favor of the improvements 12 planned by Hunter’s, he agreed that they should not receive a Certificate of Completion 13 until the required sidewalk is built. 14 15 As there were no other individuals wishing to speak at this time, Chair D’Arminio closed 16 public comment. 17 18 Mr. Hammell stated that Hunter’s Night Club hoped to maintain good relations with 19 neighboring residents. He pointed out that the list of conditions includes a requirement 20 that no amplified music be played outdoors, and asserted that the business would 21 comply with this Code requirement. 22 23 Motion made by Vice Chair Berry, seconded by Board Member Flint, to approve Site 24 Plan SP 19-03 with Staff recommendations one (1), three (3), four (4), five (5), and 25 eleven (11). 26 27 Board Member Theisen commented that the request is for an improvement to the 28 property of an Applicant who was not present. He did not feel he could support the 29 motion without all Staff Conditions, as the owner must be held accountable for required 30 improvements. 31 32 Board Member Flint pointed out that many of the conditions refer to ongoing Code 33 Compliance issues, and the Code Compliance process may be used to resolve them. 34 He added that the Application does not involve a variance and therefore does not 35 require proof of hardship, and he did not find it appropriate to penalize a tenant for a 36 property owner’s lack of cooperation. 37 38 Chair D’Arminio asked how Hunter’s could comply with condition eleven (11), which 39 addresses the sidewalk down the main drive aisle, as they are not the property owner. 40 Mr. Cirullo reiterated that the Applicant in this case is the property owner: this owner is 41 required to comply with the conditions listed in the motion. They also have the option of 42 appealing the condition before the City Commission. 43 44 Chair D’Arminio expressed concern with this and other violations for which the property 45 owner is responsible, and asked why certain conditions were attached to the motion Page 22 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 20 1 but not the full number of conditions. Ms. Moore replied that for recording purposes, Site 2 Plan Application 19-03 is not considered subsequent to the previous Site Plan 3 Application, 17-09. Both Applications are still in full force and effect. Approval of SP 19- 4 03 does not override the requirements of SP 17-09. 5 6 Vice Chair Berry asked if the Applicant would be able to proceed with constructing the 7 patio if s/he signs the Site Plan with the conditions attached. Ms. Moore clarified that the 8 sidewalk would still be necessary, as it has been reiterated in SP 19-03. 9 10 Board Member Theisen felt this was misleading, as the Applicant is not the party that 11 would oversee the patio. The party responsible for using the patio would be “almost 12 irrelevant” to the decision regarding the Site Plan. He pointed out that the request takes 13 multiple Code issues, including the amplified music prohibition, and includes them as 14 part of Site Plan approval. Chair D’Arminio observed that Hunter’s has used outdoor 15 space for several years, and denial of the Application could have a negative effect on 16 their business. 17 18 Ms. Moore requested that condition fourteen (14) be added to the motion, as it 19 specifies the Site Plan. Vice Chair Berry and Board Member Flint accepted this 20 proposed amendment. 21 22 In a roll call vote, the motion passed 3-1 (Board Member Theisen dissenting). 23 24 VII. Public Hearing 25 26 a) Amendment to Unified Land Development Regulations to create Article 175 – 27 Reasonable Accommodation. 28 29 Staff 30 Ms. Moore explained that this Amendment would create Article 175 within the City’s 31 Code of Ordinances to grant reasonable accommodation to individuals or entities who 32 meet certain criteria pursuant to the federal Fair Housing Act, Americans with 33 Disabilities Act (ADA), Civil Rights Act, and Rehabilitation Act. 34 35 As part of the proposed regulations, the City would provide notice to the public advising 36 that individuals may request reasonable accommodation. Notification may include use 37 of the following: 38  Physical or electronic bulletin board 39  Hard copies of forms, policies, and procedures throughout City Hall 40  Verbal discussions with individuals who may need reasonable accommodation 41 42 The regulations would provide submittal requirements and confidentiality of submitted 43 information. No fee is associated with a reasonable accommodation application. 44 Decisions on reasonable accommodation requests are subject to response and timing 45 requirements, and there would be an appeal process. Page 23 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 21 1 2 Questions of Staff 3 Board Member Theisen asked how the term “reasonable” is defined in this case. Ms. 4 Moore replied that applications are submitted to City Staff, who makes the 5 determination. Documentation must be submitted by an applicant in order to justify the 6 reasonable accommodation that is being requested. This may include medical 7 information, some of which may be confidential and not subject to public records laws. 8 Mr. Cirullo added that the determination is based in part on case law. Applicants may 9 have an established disability and the request must facilitate their ability to perform 10 major life functions based on that disability. 11 12 Board Member Theisen noted that there may be the potential for reasonable 13 accommodation to be abused by an applicant. Ms. Moore replied that this is the subject 14 of discussion with the City Attorney’s Office in order to address ongoing questions. The 15 purpose of the law is to provide relief to disabled individuals. Notice is not required for 16 all reasonable accommodation requests. 17 18 Chair D’Arminio commented that it is important the reasonable accommodation for one 19 individual not create an undue burden or hardship on persons around that individual. He 20 suggested that this be added to the language of the proposed Amendment. Mr. Cirullo 21 advised that this type of addition should be avoided, and noted that the proposed 22 Ordinance is similar to what has been approved by the U.S. Department of Justice in 23 other venues. 24 25 Public Comment 26 At this time Chair D’Arminio opened public comment. 27 28 Jon O’Connor, 2309 NW 5 Avenue, stated that he was speaking on behalf of the West 29 Side Association of Wilton Manors as their vice president/secretary. While the 30 Ordinance is necessary to comply with federal law, he wished to point out that it has 31 been brought forward in response to issues raised by a West Side resident who violated 32 setbacks to both the subject and adjacent properties. 33 34 Mr. O’Connor continued that this request goes beyond reasonable accommodation, 35 particularly to adjacent neighbors. He felt any consideration of reasonable 36 accommodations should emphasize the well-being of neighbors affected by any 37 variances needed to achieve these accommodations. He also recommended that 38 applicants’ cooperation with authorities or lack thereof should be considered when 39 granting reasonable accommodations. 40 41 Mr. O’Connor concluded that when reasonable accommodation is requested, its effect 42 on neighbors should be factored into consideration, with minimum notice to residents in 43 the event of a public hearing. 44 Page 24 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 22 1 As there were no other individuals wishing to speak at this time, Chair D’Arminio closed 2 public comment. 3 4 Board Member Theisen asked if the proposed Ordinance would allow Staff to grant a 5 variance for an item if it did not come before the Planning and Zoning Board. Mr. Cirullo 6 replied that this type of variance would be unlikely to come before the Board or to meet 7 the multiple criteria for a variance. The City is limited in how it may write the proposed 8 Ordinance: determinations can be made regarding disability or no disability and 9 reasonable accommodation or no accommodation based on circumstances. City Staff 10 would make these decisions in consultation with the City Attorney’s Office. 11 12 Motion made by Vice Chair Berry, seconded by Board Member Theisen, to approve. In 13 a roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously (4-0). 14 15 b) Amendments to Code of Ordinances, Article XIII. – Vacation Rental, of 16 Chapter 10 – Licenses, Permits, and Business Regulations. 17 18 Staff 19 Ms. Moore stated that the vacation rental regulations adopted by the City Commission 20 in 2016 define vacation rental properties as well as the time period for which they may 21 be rented. It is illegal to operate vacation rentals without first receiving approval to do so 22 from the City. 23 24 Staff proposes the following Amendments to these regulations: 25  Section 10-276: add a definition of “permanent residence” 26  Section 10-278: amend the application to require an email address and proof of 27 Broward County and Wilton Manors business tax receipts 28  Section 10-282: delete requirement of Florida Department of Revenue 29 Certification of Registration 30  Section 10-283: provide clarification of fence requirements, allowable types of 31 smoke alarms, placard identifying the emergency contact and responsible party, 32 public safety contact placard, calculation of maximum occupancy, and 33 video/audio surveillance 34  Section 10-284: modify the requirements for inspections from initial and routine to 35 initial only 36 37 Questions for Staff 38 Vice Chair Berry recommended consideration of adopting electronic vacation rental 39 processes similar to those of Fort Lauderdale, which provide links to necessary sites as 40 well as a checklist. He noted that there are two requirements in Fort Lauderdale that are 41 not required in Wilton Manors: an on-site landline for emergency purposes, and the 42 address and phone number of the closest hospital. 43 44 Chair D’Arminio pointed out that Broward County requires any party renting a non- 45 homesteaded property to acquire a business tax receipt, and anyone renting a portion Page 25 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 23 1 of a homesteaded property to forfeit a part of their exemption. He felt the Ordinance 2 penalizes non-homesteaded properties for this reason, as homesteaded properties 3 would not be required to contact the County. Ms. Moore confirmed that Staff can look 4 into the possibility of requirements for homesteaded properties as well. 5 6 Chair D’Arminio emphasized the importance of requiring life safety requirements for all 7 properties being rented, include rentals within an occupied home. He felt rentals are 8 divided evenly between homesteaded and non-homesteaded properties, but only non- 9 homesteaded properties would be affected by the proposed Amendments. He added 10 that homesteaded properties should also be required to follow an application process by 11 the City and notify Broward County as well. 12 13 Board Member Theisen commented that this would constitute a major change to the 14 proposed Ordinance, which he did not support at this time. He observed that the Board 15 is asked only to agree or disagree with the changes presented by Staff, and suggested 16 that the Board instead request Staff to look further into the issue of requirements for 17 homesteaded properties. 18 19 Ms. Moore advised that Code does not differentiate between homesteaded and non- 20 homesteaded properties: instead it requires the submittal of documentation. It is then 21 left to the City or County to determine whether or not they will issue a business tax 22 receipt. Staff does not propose any changes for homestead exemptions at this time. 23 She confirmed, however, that should Broward County become aware that a 24 homesteaded property is being used for other purposes, they will rescind the owner’s 25 homestead exemption. 26 27 Ms. Moore continued that the City’s proposed budget includes funding for the purchase 28 of software that will assist Code Compliance in locating illegal vacation rentals. This will 29 help the City to proceed with Code Compliance cases against those properties. 30 31 Chair D’Arminio stated that if the City is not requiring all rental properties, including 32 homesteaded properties, to comply with Broward County regulations, the reference to 33 Broward County should be removed from the proposed Ordinance. 34 35 Public Comment 36 At this time Chair D’Arminio opened public comment. 37 38 Ron Tenenhaus, 2111 NE 3 Avenue, stated that he believed landlines would eventually 39 become obsolete, and that a requirement for a landline would create an undue burden 40 on short-term rental property owners. He noted that there is no such requirement for 41 long-term rental property owners. He also objected to the requirement of a placard with 42 hospital and emergency information for the same reasons. 43 44 Jon O’Connor, 2309 NW 5 Avenue, commented that vacation rentals should include 45 contact information for the owner or property manager. He had experienced difficulties Page 26 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 24 1 with vacation rental properties in his residential neighborhood, and it was not unusual 2 for Police called to the scene to have no way to contact the parties responsible for the 3 vacation rentals. He also did not feel routine inspections should be discontinued. 4 5 Tim Moffitt, 2616 NE 14 Avenue, president of the Wilton Manors Business Association, 6 reported that members of this organization regularly report that the City makes it difficult 7 to do business in Wilton Manors. He felt the proposed Ordinance is an example of this 8 difficulty. He and advocated for fewer restrictions on these business properties. 9 10 As there were no other individuals wishing to speak at this time, Chair D’Arminio closed 11 public comment. 12 13 Vice Chair Berry stated that Fort Lauderdale requires vacation rental properties to 14 provide notice of trash pickup, explanation of sea turtle lighting, evacuation maps, 15 mandatory landlines, and hospital information. He pointed out that if a visitor loses 16 his/her telephone, a landline would be necessary for emergencies. He also felt routine 17 inspections should not be discontinued. 18 19 Board Member Flint observed that he has also heard complaints that it can be more 20 difficult to do business in Wilton Manors than in other nearby municipalities. He felt the 21 process should be made as easy as possible without creating a burden on neighboring 22 properties. 23 24 Chair D’Arminio also felt the City should embrace vacation rentals, as they may create 25 fewer issues in residential neighborhoods than long-term rentals. Although some of the 26 regulations would be removed under the proposed Ordinance, he considered many of 27 the remaining requirements to be less than welcoming. 28 29 Board Member Theisen commented that as a business owner, he was in favor of 30 Ordinances and regulations as a means to ensure competition among reputable 31 properties. He also felt routine inspections should be maintained. 32 33 Motion made by Vice Chair Berry, seconded by Board Member Theisen, to recommend 34 the Amendments of the Code of Ordinances, Article XIII, Vacation Rental, Chapter 10. 35 In a roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously (4-0). 36 37 c) Amendments to Articles 30, 45, 50, 145, and 150 relating to Signage. 38 39 Motion made by Vice Chair Berry, seconded by Board Member Theisen, to table the 40 Amendments to Articles 30, 45, 50, 145, and 150 of the ULDR to a date uncertain. In a 41 roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously (4-0). 42 43 VIII. Staff Comments 44 Page 27 of 32  Wilton Manors – Planning & Zoning September 9, 2019 Page 25 1 Ms. Moore stated that there has been a request to schedule a joint meeting between the 2 Planning and Zoning Board and the City Commission. As the full Board was not present 3 at this time, she suggested that the members consider items they might wish to discuss 4 in a joint workshop with the City Commission. Once a list of these items is available, 5 Staff can schedule a date and time for the meeting. 6 7 Chair D’Arminio requested clarification of when an Urban Form and Density Report is 8 expected to be made available to the City. Ms. Moore advised that this document is due 9 in November 2019. It was determined that height and density would be discussed at a 10 joint meeting, as well as potential relaxation of the City’s residential parking 11 requirements. Ms. Moore encouraged the Board to be very specific regarding the 12 Agenda Items they wished to discuss with the City Commission. This would be 13 discussed at greater length at the next Board meeting. 14 15 IX. Board Comments 16 17 Board Member Theisen asked if members of the public are prohibited from speaking 18 during both general public comments and on quasi-judicial items as well. Mr. Cirullo 19 clarified there is no such prohibition: individuals who wish to address a specific 20 application are encouraged to provide their public comments during consideration of 21 that application, unless they cannot remain at the meeting until the item is presented. 22 General public comments may address items not on the Agenda. Comments provided 23 during public comment are not the same as sworn testimony on quasi-judicial items. 24 25 Board Member Theisen asked if there is a target date by which materials must be 26 provided to Board members. Ms. Moore replied that ideally, these are provided one 27 week prior to the meeting. Vice Chair Berry noted that the materials for tonight’s 28 meeting were provided within a shorter time frame. Ms. Moore advised that Staff can 29 make arrangements to provide hard copies if that is the members’ desire. 30 31 X. Adjournment 32 33 Upon motion duly made and seconded, the meeting was adjourned at 11:16 p.m. 34 35 [Minutes prepared by K. McGuire, Prototype, Inc.] Page 28 of 32 COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: Monday, November 18, 2019 From: Prepared by: Evangeline Kalus (a) Subject: 2020 Planning and Zoning Board Calendar (b) City Manager Recommendation: (c) Report In Brief: Approval of 2020 Planning and Zoning Board Calendar (d) Discussion: Approval of 2020 Calendar for Planning and Zoning Board (e) Strategic Plan Consistency: (f) Concurrences: (g) Fiscal Impact: (h) Alternatives: (i) Attachments: 1. 2020 PZ Meeting Dates 11.12.19 Page 29 of 32  WILTON MANORS, Island City 2020 WILTON DRIVE, WILTON MANORS, FLORIDA 33305 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES (954) 390-2180 FAX: (954) 567-6069 Planning and Zoning Board 2020 Meeting Dates Meetings are held at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall  January 13, 2020  February 10, 2020  March 9, 2020  April 13, 2020  May 11, 2020  June 8, 2020  July 13, 2020  August 10, 2020  September 14, 2020  October 19, 2020 (moved due to Columbus Day)  November 9, 2020  December 7, 2020 November 12, 2019 Page 30 of 32 COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: Monday, November 18, 2019 From: Prepared by: (a) Subject: Discussion related to potential Unified Land Development Code Changes. (b) City Manager Recommendation: (c) Report In Brief: Discussion related to potential Unified Land Development Code changes. (d) Discussion: Discussion related to potential Unified Land Development Code changes. (e) Strategic Plan Consistency: (f) Concurrences: (g) Fiscal Impact: (h) Alternatives: (i) Attachments: 1. Code Discussion Memo 11.12.19 Page 31 of 32  WILTON MANORS, Island City 2020 WILTON DRIVE, WILTON MANORS, FLORIDA 33305 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES (954) 390-2180 FAX: (954) 567-6069 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Zoning Board FROM: Evangeline (Evy) G. Kalus, City Planner THRU: Roberta Moore, Community Development Services Director DATE: November 12, 2019 RE: Item No. VII – Potential Unified Land Development Code Changes Item No. VII on the agenda is a discussion of potential changes of Part II, Appendix – A, “Unified Land Development Regulations” of the City of Wilton Manor’s Code of Ordinances. Appendix A can be found via www.municode.com. Page 1 of 1 Page 32 of 32