ITEM DESCRIPTION:
Title
VA-2402 - Request for several variances from Article XX, Section 21-640.05 and 21-640.10, to allow for a self-service car wash to have prohibited façade treatments for the property at 618 N. Ridewood Avenue.
Body
OWNER:
618 N. Ridgewood Avenue LLC
APPLICANT:
Steve Lukin
REQUESTED ACTION:
1. The Applicant is requesting a variance from Section 21- 640.05(2), Prohibited Façade Treatments, to allow the self-service car wash to allow “garage doors” for vehicular service on the façade of the building to face US-1.
2. The applicant is requesting a variance from Section 21-640.05(3), Prohibited Façade Treatments, to allow for glass curtain walls.
3. The applicant is requesting a variance from Section 21-640.10(a), Building Color, to allow for teal and purple façade color treatment in addition to rainbow colors illuminating from the building at night.
PARCEL ID:
754001000110
PROPOSED USE:
The Applicant is proposing to redevelop the Property with a ±4,478 SF self-service car wash (“Project”).
CURRENT LAND USE:
Vacant
FLUM DESIGNATION:
Commercial
ZONING DISTRICT:
Highway Commercial (B-3)
VOTING DISTRICT:
District 1, Councilwoman Charlotte Gillis
According to Article IX, Section 21-100.04(d), Non-Administrative Variance, City of Edgewater’s Land Development Code;
In order to grant a non-administrative variance, the P. & Z. Board shall make the following findings of fact:
1. That granting of the proposed variance is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan;
2. That granting of the proposed variance will not result in creating or continuing a use which is not compatible with adjacent uses in the area;
3. That granting of the proposed variance is the minimum action available to permit reasonable use of the property;
4. That the physical characteristics of the subject site are unique and not present on adjacent sites; and
5. That the circumstances creating the need for the variance are not the result of actions by the applicant, actions proposed by the applicant or actions by the previous property owner(s).
6. That granting of the proposed variance(s) will not cause substantial detriment to the public welfare or impair the purposes and intent of the Land Development Code.
Explanation of hardship by applicant:
No matter the proposed orientation of the self-service car wash building, the entrance or exit to the tunnel will always be visible or facing a portion of US 1. From an operational perspective, the geometry of the property would not allow for proper access to the building tunnel if considering the option where the building and tunnel oriented in a north- south direction along the long axis of the building and further West into the property as the property becomes narrower in that direction, and the equipment required for the car tunnel to function must be a straight path for over 25’ into and out of the tunnel while also providing reasonable queueing and turning space for vehicles into and out of the tunnel. This is not an option because if the building is oriented north-south, the entrance and exit doors are then more visible in both directions, northbound and southbound. Considering safety, the proposed site layout intends to provide more traffic queueing space for vehicles to enter off of US-1 and 10th St, it also allows closer pedestrian connectivity and allows a closer access location for the fire department to the building. This demonstrates the hardship is not self-imposed but rather one related to location and shape of the property and that the current layout is the best available option considering safety of the general public, operational requirements, and traffic safety.
1. Will granting the proposed variance result in a conflict with the Comprehensive Plan?
a. Staff’s response:
After review, Staff has determined that granting the variance would result in a conflict with the Comprehensive Plan.
1. Policy 1.6.6: Guidelines for the SR 442 and U.S. 1 Corridors.
The City shall continue to use the Indian River Boulevard-S.R. 442 Corridor Design Regulations (adopted in April 2004) and the Ridgewood Avenue Corridor Design Regulations (adopted in 2012) as a guide to implement regulations for specific streetscape, landscape, architectural design standards and all other applicable requirements for properties developed along the S.R. 442 and U.S. 1 corridors.
This criterion has not been met.
2. Will the granting of the proposed variance result in creating or continuing a use which is not compatible with adjacent uses in the area?
Applicant’s Response: This variance application is not creating or continuing a use which is not compatible with adjacent land uses which are also commercial uses while the north, east and west sides are bordered by public right of way. The use of self-service car wash is permissible by right within the B-3 Highway Commercial Zoning District per Section 21-33.05 Table III-3 and is consistent with the Future Land Use Designation of Commercial (COMM) per Chapter 1 Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
a. Staff’s response: No, granting the variance will not result in creating or continuing a use which is not compatible with adjacent uses.
i. The following neighborhood property currently faces US 1 within the City limits of Edgewater on the Ridgewood Corridor.
1. 606 N Ridgewood Avenue
This criterion has been met.
3. Is the proposed action the minimum action available to permit reasonable use of the property?
a. Applicant’s response: The minimum action available to permit use of the property has been implemented. The self-service aspect of the car wash would not be feasible without at least one façade of the building with the “garage doors” vehicle service use facing US-1. The proposed site plan is the most code compliant option in terms of considering safety, pedestrian connectivity, and traffic circulation in the adjacent road networks and operational requirements as an allowed use. To alleviate some of the impact from a visual perspective, the design proposes additional landscape screening along all property lines.
b. Staff’s response: No, the applicant could build a number of other highway commercial uses that would fit on the property to allow reasonable use.
This criterion has not been met.
4. Are the physical characteristics of the subject site unique and not present on adjacent sites?
a. Applicant’s response: The site is a corner lot with ample visibility from US 1 in the northbound and southbound directions in comparison to adjacent sites. For this reason, the site layout is incapable of complying with Section 21-640.05.2.
b. Staff’s response: No, the property is not unusual or unique. Many properties have two street frontages. For Example, 10 W Indian River Boulevard has frontage on both US 1 and State Road 442 and has complied with Article XX.
This criterion has not been met.
5. Are the circumstances creating the need for the variance the result of actions by the applicant or actions proposed by the applicant?
a. Applicant’s response: The geometry of the site, the location, and the frontage from US 1 are existing conditions not proposed by the applicant. These limitations affect the applicant’s ability to propose a self-service car wash, which is permissible by right.
b. Staff’s response: Yes, the applicant is requesting a variance to approve building design standards currently not permitted per the Ridgewood Avenue Corridor Design Regulations (Article XX).
This criterion has not been met.
6. Will the granting of the proposed variance cause substantial detriment to public welfare or impair the purposes and intent of the Land Development Code?
a. Applicant’s response: The granting of this variance will not pose a detriment to the public welfare, on the contrary it will allow for safer traffic circulation and pedestrian connectivity and it will not impair the purpose of the Land Development Code by allowing one façade of the building with the “garage doors” vehicle service use facing US-1 is the most appropriate way to try and meet the requirements of the LDC within the current hardships the site imposes.
b. Staff’s response: Yes, though granting the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare, it will impair the purposes and intent of the Land Development Code.
This criterion has not been met.
Staff Summary
Staff received the following feedback from City Departments:
• Environmental Services:
o After reviewing the submittals for the subject variance, the request does not interfere with the function of traffic, stormwater, or other services within the purview of the Environmental Services Department. Environmental Services does not object to the requested variance.
• Fire:
o No Comments or Concerns
• Economic Development:
o The supporting documents for the above referenced project application have been reviewed and the following comments are offered:
§ Building and Site Plan should adhere to Article XX of the Land Development Code ‘Ridgewood Avenue Corridor Design Regulations’. As this parcel is located at the entrance to the City of Edgewater, it should be as welcoming as possible.
§ Note: County did Deed the portion of the parcel to the City, please see attached Deed. (OR 8489 pg 2872 CD to City of Edgewater) City of Edgewater is in the process of having a survey of this parcel and stakes will be inserted into the ground.
Staff does not recommend approval of the Variance for application VA-2402 because all six (6) criteria could be met in accordance with Section 21-100.04(d), Non-Administrative Variance.
Variance general requirement for the Board’s consideration:
Economic, personal, or any other hardship that is self-imposed shall not be sufficient justification to grant a variance. Hardship for the purpose of this section is defined as a restriction on property so unreasonable that it results in an arbitrary and/or capricious interference with basic property rights. Hardship relates to the physical characteristics of the property, not the personal circumstances of the owner or user, and the property is rendered unusable without the granting of a variance.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Motion to deny VA-2402.