HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-20-2018 Board of Adjustments Agenda PacketKmin Wi lson
Mqyor
Co1111cil Memb ers
Kevin G. Bo,1 ne
Robert A. Brown
la ck BurreU , ACMO
Jimmy Conyers
Jay Robinso n
Lisa A. Hanks , MMC
Ci{Y Clerk
Michael V. Hinson , CPA
City Treasurer
J 61 North Sec ti on Str eet
P 0. Drawer 429
Fairhope, Alabama 36533
251-928-2136
251-928-6776 Fax
w\1~1·.fairhopeal .gov
rnnmt .. ,r. ffl]"dr1{ p,rpcr
1. Call to Order
City of Fairhope
Board of Adjustment and Appeals
5:00 PM
City Council Chambers
August 20, 2018
2. Approval of the July 16 , 2018 minutes
3. Cons iderat ion of Agenda Items :
A. BOA 18.1 O Public hearing to consider the request of Doyle
and Jo Ellen Porter for a Special Exception to allow
a restaurant for property located on the north side
of Porter Lane between Ingleside Street and US
Hwy. 98.
PPIN #: 18341
B . BOA 18 .11 Publ ic hearing to consider the request of Magnolia
Church , LLC for a Special Exception to allow
parking in the front for property located at 301
Magnolia Avenue .
PPIN #: 15164
4. Old/New Business
5 . Adjourn
July l6, 2018
Board of Adjustment Minutes
The City of Fairhope Board of Adjustments and Appeals met on Monday, July 16,
2018 at 5:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at the City Administration Building,
located at 161 N. Section Street.
Members Present: Anil Vira, Chairman; Harry Kohler; Christina Stankoski; John
Avent; Cathy Slagle; Wayne Dyess, Director of Planning; Buford King, Planner;
and Emily Boyett, Secretary.
Absent: Troy Strunk, Vice-Chair and Dick Schneider
The meeting was called to order at 5:00 PM by Chairman Vira.
The minutes of the June 18 , 2018 meeting were considered. Cathy Slagle moved to
accept the minutes as corrected and was 2nd by John Avent. Motion carried unanimously .
BOA 18.09 Public hearing to consider the request of A&A Corte Family Limited
Partnership for a Special Exception to allow a clinic for property
located on the north side of Fairhope Avenue directly across from
Hoff ern Drive.
Mr. King gave the staff report.
Summary of Request:
A & A Co1ie, FLP and A & D Corte, FLP, are requesting a clinic use, allowed on appeal,
for Lot lB of the resubdivis ion of Lot 1 Planters Plaza consisting of 8.82 acres, located
on Fairhope Avenue. The subject property is zoned in B-2 General Business District
which is designed to accommodate the following:
B-2 General Business District: This district is intended to provide opportunity for
activities causing noise and heavy traffic, not considered compatible in the more
restrictive business district. These uses also serve a regional as well as a local market
and require location in proximity to major transportation routes. Recreational vehicle
parks, very light production and processing activities are included.
The term "clinic" is defined by the Fairhope Zoning Ordinance in Article IX. Section
B .5. as follows:
5. S ervice Use Category
The Service Use category is for businesses that offer clients, customers, or patrons
goods for consumption on the premises, or offer services for pe1formance and delivery
on the premises.
b. Clinic -a place used/or the care, diagnosis and treatment of ailing, infirm,
or injured persons, and those who are ill need of medical and surgical attention,
but who are not provided with board.
The table of permitted uses Table 3-1 provides that a clinic in t he B-2 District is only
allowed on appeal.
The Comprehensive Plan does not mention medical uses from a land use planning perspective.
However, on page 5, Stakeholder Interview Summarization says "The largest economic engine in
Fairhope is medical. The city n eeds to su ppmi the hospital and doctors as much as possible."
The development of appropriate medical office uses will further this go al.
1
July 16, 2018
Board o f Adjustmen t Minutes
The Fairhope Zoning Ordinance does have a medical overlay district (Article V Section H.
Medical Overlay District). The boundaries of the overlay are near and around Thomas Hospital.
The intent of the overlay is as follows: "The MO District is also intended to establish and
accommodate highly specialized, unique uses and development types related to the medical field
and to accommodate additional specialized needs and growth of the medical field and
community."
The subject prope1ty is not in the Medical Overlay District. However, it is adjacent to
the new USA Mitchell Cancer Institute Kilborn Clinic and located near the Baldwin
County Satellite Courthouse. After reviewing the cunent Medical Overlay District, it
appears that there is not sufficient and available lot area within the overlay boundaries to
accommodate the proposed medical use. Therefore, additional sites should be explored.
The proposed medical is anticipated to have limited hours of operation consistent with a
medical office. It should be noted that the medical use is less intense than most of the
allowable uses in the B-2 General Business District. The proposed use would serve
medical needs of growing community as well support the economic aspect of community
development. The proposed use is consistent with the existing development pattern and
does not pose a threat to sound planning principles.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends APPROVAL of the appeal to establi sh a medical clinic on the subj ect
property.
Mr. A vent stated this l ocation makes sense with the existing cancer center next door and
Mr. Dyess agreed. Mr. Kohler asked if the cancer center also received a variance and Mr.
A vent responded it is a State facility and it was not required.
Althur C01te address the Board saying when the property was originally annexed, a
medical office was allowed by right in the B-2 zoning district. Mrs. Stankoski asked if it
will be a hospital or medical office and Mr. Dyess clarified it will not be a hospital.
Mr. Vira opened the public hearing. Having no one present to speak, Mr. Vira closed the
public hearing.
Ms. Slagle stated the site is 8.2 acres and asked what other uses will be allowed on the
property. Mr. Dyess responded all allowable uses li sted in the B-2 z oning district will be
allowed.
Cathy Slagle made a motion to accept the staff recommendation to approve the sp ecial
exception to allow a medical clinic on property PPIN# 63508. Christina Stankoski 2nd
the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: A YE -Harry
Kohler, Christina Stankoski, John Avent, Anil Vira, and Cathy Slagle. NAY -none.
Having no further business, Cathy Slagle made a motion to adjourn. Christina Stankoski
2nd the motion and the motion can-ied unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 5:11
PM.
2
Summary of Request:
Doyle and Jo Ellen Porter are requesting via appeal and subject to conditions the allowance of retail,
restaurant, and conference facilities as allowable uses for the property located along Porter Lane. The
subject property is zoned in M-1 Light Industrial Di strict and is also located in the Medical Overlay
District.
Comments:
The subject property is zoned M-1 Light Industrial District which does not not allow a restaurant use
pursuant to Article Ill. Section B. Table 3-1: Use table. However, the subject property is also located in
the Medical Overlay District pursuant to Article V. Section H. Retail, re staurant, and conference
facilities uses are allowed on appeal in the Medical Overlay District.
Article V.H.3.C. Uses Permitted Subject to Appeal and with Conditions includes the following uses :
(1) Commercial communication towers
(2) Detoxification centers and substance abuse centers associated primarily with the primary medical
facility
(3) Retail, restaurant, personal services, branch banks, offices, conference facilities, clinics and similar
workplace support uses when within any individual structure, gross floor area shall be limited to 10
percent of the total gross floor area
(4) Crematorium
Analysis and Recommendation:
The subject property is currently forested, undeveloped property located along Porter Lane,
approximately 250 feet east of Ingleside Street. Subject property is located east of the adjoining Faith
Temple Church of God in Christ property. A recorded plat i s not on file with the Baldwin County Judge
of Probate Office related to subject property, however slide number 2081-E, record June 5, 2002 for
the nearby Bosby Subdivision (PPIN 247937 and 24699) describes Porter Lane as a narrow (20' wide)
unpaved right -of-way immediately adjacent to Faith Temple Church of God in Christ which allows
access to subject property. The City of Fairhope currently provides no maintenance of Porter Lane and
Porter Lane appears to be privately maintained . The current application for appeal is the addition of
retail, restaurant, and conference facility uses on the subject property. The applicant also indicated
the desire for a catering use, which is a function of a restaurant as defined by the City of Fairhope
Zoning Ordinance Article IX, Section B.o. Retail, restaurant, and conference facility uses are allowed in
the Medical Overlay District on appeal pursuant to Article V.H.3.C.
The review criteria for a use appeal is as follows, pursuant to Article II Section C.3.e.(1) items (a)
through (d) noting that an application for a variance shall b e granted only on th e concurring vote of
four Board members; and
Article II Section C.3.e(2) items (a) through (n) ind ica te below with staff's re spo nse in bold text:
(a) Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan;
Response: The Comprehensive Plan makes several references supporting Thomas Hospital due to its
economic generator status. The subject property is slightly more than ½ mile south of the
southernmost property line of Thomas Hospital. It is possible the addition of a restaurant/catering
facility/conference facility may support the hospital and its related uses. The Comprehensive Plan
2 BOA 18.10 Porter Lane -August 20, 2018
provides no specific details or guidance for determining the level of support to the hospital of a
proposed restaurant/catering/conference facility as a function of its proximity to the hospital site.
(b) Compliance with any other approved planning document;
Response: A specific development application has not been submitted for subject property at this
time that would require evaluation of development of subject property above and beyond the
zoning ordinance. However, the applicant is advised the right-of-way improvements likely necessary
to Porter Lane to accommodate a retail/restaurant/conference facility must comply with the
standards of the Baldwin County Highway Department and the necessary ROW permits must be
submitted to and approved by the Baldwin County Highway Department.
(c) Compliance with the standards, goals, and intent of this ordinance;
Response: The subject property is located within the Medical Overlay District and the desired uses
are a supporting use to the hospital and therefore maintains the intent of the ordinance.
(d) The character of the surrounding property, including any pending development activity;
Response: Adjoining properties west, north, and east of subject property are all zoned M -1 with uses
consistent with M-1 and/or the Medical Overlay District. An existing fast food restaurant currently
exists approximately 370' northeast of subject property, and an existing hotel is located
approximately 170' east of subject property. The northern adjoining property appears to operate as
a type of entertainment facility. An additional restaurant will not affect the character of the zoned
areas north of Porter Lane.
(e) Adequacy of public infrastructure to support the proposed development;
Response: As stated previously, a number of existing facilities surround the subject property to the
west, north, and east, and a single-family residence in unzoned Fairhope ETJ is located immediately
south of subject property along Porter Lane. Though adequate infrastructure exists to support the
existing facilities near subject property, the applicant is advised to contact Fairhope Public Utilities
to determine the applicable aid to construction costs that may be required to provide adequate
utilities for any development proposed for subject property.
(f) Impacts on natural resources, including existing conditions and ongoing post-development
conditions;
Response: The subject property is undeveloped, forested land. Staff strongly recommends the
applicant contact the City of Fairhope Building, Public Works, and Utilities departments to discuss
the development activities for the site prior to the submission of building plans. Site access, rights of
way, drainage, waste collection, and utilities for the site may require engineering and various pre-
development activities prior to submission of building plans. Further, the applicant is advised the
right-of-way improvements likely necessary to Porter Lane to accommodate a
retail/restaurant/conference facility must comply with the standards of the Baldwin County Highway
Department and the necessary ROW permits must be approved by the Baldwin County Highway
Department.
(g) Compliance with other laws and regulations of the City;
Response: No issues noted.
(h) Compliance with other applicable laws and regulation s of other jurisdictions;
Response: No issues noted.
3 BOA 18 .10 Porter Lane -August 20, 2018
(i) Impacts on adjacent property including noise, traffic, visible intrusions, potential physical impacts,
and property values;
Response: Applicant is advised that development activities on the site may require a site plan review
pursuant to Article II, Section C.2. of the City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance which will require
engineered plans describing site access, parking, drainage, screening and buffering, etc. If a site plan
review is not required, a planning and zoning review will occur as a component of the building plans
review of the site, including but not limited to a compatibility analysis of the proposed use.
U) Impacts on the surrounding neighborhood including noise, traffic, visible intrusions, potential
physical impacts, and property values.
Response: Applicant is advised that development activities on the site may require a site plan review
pursuant to Article II, Section C.2. of the City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance which will require
engineered plans describing site access, parking, drainage, screening and buffering, etc. If a site plan
review is not required, a planning and zoning review will occur as a component of the building plans
review of the site, including but not limited to a compatibility analysis of the proposed use.
(k) Overall benefit to the community;
Response: It is likely the addition of a restaurant/catering facility/conference facility will support the
hospital and its related uses.
(I) Compliance with sound planning principles;
Response: Staff believes the proposed use is consistent with sound planning principles.
(m) Compliance with the terms and conditions of any zoning approval; and
Response: No issues noted.
(n) Any other matter relating to the health, safety, and welfare of the community.
Response: No issues noted.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends APPROVAL of the appeal to allow retail, restaurant, and conference facility
uses at PPIN 18341 located along Porter Lane.
4 BOA 18.10 Porter Lane -Au g ust 20, 2018
The applicant states the indicated cond ition s of the subject property include a "grade differential
across the site (that) is approximately 15'. The use of retaining wal ls and terraced building areas makes
it difficult to have vehicle access to the rear of the Church St . frontage lots". The applicant states the
indicated conditions preclude reasonable u se of the land because the "rear parking as required for
residential use presents an extraordinary use of land for circulation".
City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance Article V, Section 8.4.d. states the following regarding parking
requirements within the Central Business District (CBD):
d. Parking -
{1} No parking is required for non-residential uses in the CBD. If parking is provided, it shall
be located behind the building, screened from public rights-of-way, and have a direct
pedestrian connection to the primary building entrance of the public right-of-way.
(2) Dwelling units in the CBD shall provide the required parking. It shall be located behind
the building, screened from public rights-of-way, and have a direct pedestrian connection
to the primary building entrance of the public right-of-way.
(3) Residential and office is encouraged on the upper floors of buildings; lower floors are
encouraged to be retail or restaurants.
The 20-space off-street parking area located behind (north) of the two apparent commercial units is
not required in the CBD as explained in the zoning ord inance excerpt above, and parking for the
residential units is required, also as described above. However, Article IV, Section E.2. states
"businesses in the CBD Overlay are encouraged to provide off-street parking facilities" for commercial
uses. It appears the rear parking area satisfies the parking loading of the two proposed mixed-use
units based upon the sq uare footage of the commercial units, as if onsite parking was required for
those commercial units, and that parking is located behind the mixed-use buildings as required by
Article V, Section 8.4.d.(1} shown above.
Comments:
The City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance defines a va riance as follows:
Variances: A modification of the strict terms of the relevant regulations in a district with
regard to placement of structures, developmental criteria or provision facilities. Examples
would be: allowing smaller yard dimensions because an existing lot of record is of
substandard size; waiving a portion of required parking and/or loading space due to some
unusual circumstances; allowing fencing and/or plant material buffering different from that
required due to some unusual circumstances. Variances are available only on appeal to the
Board of Adjustment and subject to satisfaction of the standards specified in this ordinance.
The Board of Adjustments is authorized to grant variance through Article II.A.d(3) which says
the following:
d. Duties and Powers: The Board shall have the following duties and powers:
(3) Variances -To authorize upon appeal in specific cases variance from the terms of this
ordinance not contrary to the public interest where, owing to special conditions, a literal
enforcement of the provisions of this ordinance will, in an individual case, result in
unnecessary hardship, so that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed, public safety and
welfare secured, and substantial justice done.
Prior to granting a variance, the Board shall find that:
(a) There are extraordinary and exceptional conditions pertaining to the particular piece of
3 BOA 18.11 301 Magnolia Avenue -August 20, 2018
4
property in question because of its size, shape, or topography;
(b) The application of this ordinance to the particular piece of property would create an
unnecessary hardship;
(c) Such conditions are peculiar to the particular piece of property involved; and,
(d) Relief, if granted, would not cause substantial detriment to the public good or impair the
purpose and intent of this ordinance; provided however, that no variance may be granted for
a use of land or building or structure that is prohibited by this ordinance.
The Ordinance provides guidance for variance requests through the following criteria:
Article 11.C.3.e.
Criteria -(1) An application for a variance shall be granted only on the concurring vote of four
Board members finding that:
(a) There are extraordinary and exceptional conditions pertaining to the particular piece of
property in question because of its size, shape, or topography;
(b) The application of the ordinance to this particular piece of property would create an
unnecessary hardship. Personal financial hardship is not a justification for a variance.
(c) Such conditions are peculiar to the particular piece of property involved; and
(d) Relief, if granted, would not cause substantial detriment to the public good and impair the
purpose and intent of this ordinance; provided however, that no variance may be granted for
a use of land or building or structure that is prohibited by this ordinance.
When a variance is granted by the Zoning Board of Adjustment it has the following effect:
Article 11.C.3 .g .
Effect of Variance -Any variance granted according to this section and which is not
challenged on appeal shall run with the land provided that:
(1) The variance is acted upon according to the application and subject to any conditions of
approval within 365 days of the granting of the variance or final decision of appeal,
whichever is later; and
(2) The variance is recorded with the Judge of Probate.
Analysis and Recommendation: Variance Criteria
(a) There are extraordinary and exceptional conditions pertaining to the particular piece of property
in question because of its size, shape, or topography.
Response: The subject property is rectangular in shape and approximately 22,400 sf, or slightly
more than ½ acre in siz e. The shape of the lot i s not uncommon, and no minimum lot size is
r equired for B-2 zoning. The lot ha s no visible extraordinary or exceptional topographical
conditions. The applicant indicated grade differential on the lot is 15'. This grade differential
may be see n in the map excerpt below from the Baldwin County Parcel viewer with subject
property outlined in black:
BOA 18.11 301 Magnol ia Avenue -August 20, 2018
6
{d) Relief, if granted, would not cause substantial detriment to the public good and impair the
purpose and intent of this ordinance; provided however, that no variance may be granted for a use
of land or building or structure that is prohibited by this ordinance.
Response: Staff acknowledges the proposed development related to subject property is still in
the design stage, and as a result sufficient data further-explaining the believed hardship created
by the size, shape, and topography of subject property may not be available at this time. As
stated in section "c" above, staff requests the applicant provide follow-up information with
additiaionl engineering drawings better-describing the how the hardship caused by the
topography of the subject property is best mitigated by allowing front screened parking in lieu
of grading operations necessary to allow rear parking as required by Article V, Section 8.4.d.(2).
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends this request for variance be TABLED for additional study. Staff understands the
proposed development for subject property is still undergoing engineering design and detailed
engineering data may not have been available at the time the variance request was submitted. Staff
requests the applicant provide sufficient engineering data and drawings supporting the assertion the
size, shape and specifically topography of the lot creates a hardship if Article V, Section B.4.d.(2) is
enforced . The applicant is advised additional information supporting its request for variance shall be
submitted to staff by the close of business on Monday, September 10, 2018 for inclusion on the
September 17, 2018 Board of Adjustments meeting agenda. Staff will request the assistance of the
public works director for review of the follow-up engineering drawings and data.
Prepared by:
J. Buford King
City Planner
BOA 18.11 301 Magnolia Ave nu e -August 20, 2018
MAGNOLIA
A V E N u
CHURCH ST. ELEV
McCOWN
DESIGN
mccown d Ill ion . com
E