Central Planning Authority · Location Whirlwind Drive, Bodden Town ... proposed 2 Duplex on Block:...

1

Central Planning Authority

Agenda for a meeting of the Central Planning Authority to be held on April 18, 2018 at 10:00 a.m. in the Conference Room, 1st Floor, Government Administration Building, Elgin Avenue. 9th Meeting of the Year CPA/09/18

Mr. A. L. Thompson (Chairman)

Mr. Robert Watler Jr. (Deputy Chairman)

Mr. Kris Bergstrom

Mr. Peterkin Berry

Mr. Edgar Ashton Bodden

Mr. S. T. (Tommie) Bodden

Mr. Joseph Coe

Mr. Ray Hydes

Mr. Trent McCoy

Mr. Rex Miller

Mr. Eldon Rankin

Mr. Selvin Richardson

Mr. Fred Whittaker

Mr. Haroon Pandohie (Executive Secretary)

Mr. Ron Sanderson (Deputy Director of Planning (CP))

1. Confirmation of Minutes 2. Applications 3. Development Plan Matters 4. Planning Appeal Matters 5. Matters from the Director of Planning 6. CPA Members Information/Discussions

2

List of Applications to be Presented at CPA/09/18 1. 1 Confirmation of Minutes of CPA/08/18 held on April 4, 2018. .......................... 3

2. 1 SUMMER COVE HOMES Block 243 Parcel 303 (F18-0026) (P18-0087) ($1,200,000) (KA) [ELECTRONIC FILE] ............................................................ 4

2. 2 XIANG LONG DEVELOPMENT Block 22D Parcel 182 Rem 4 Lot 3 (F18-0035) (P18-0107) ($611,531) (CS) [ELECTRONIC FILE] ................................... 5

2. 3 XIANG LONG DEVELOPMENT Block 22D Parcel 182 Rem 4 Lot 6 (F18-0036) (P18-0108) ($611,531) (CS) [ELECTRONIC FILE] ................................... 8

2. 4 DWAYNE & JASMINE MCKENZIE Block 25C Parcel 539 H2 (F15-0101) (P18-0052) ($26,000) (EJ) [ELECTRONIC FILE] .............................................. 11

2. 5 KEL THOMPSON Block 25B Parcel 575 H11 (F18-0095) (P18-0201) ($192,000) (EJ) [ELECTRONIC FILE] ............................................................... 14

2. 6 GARETH GRIFFITHS Block 8A Parcel 219 (F18-0075) (P18-0167) ($6,000,000) (MW) ............................................................................................... 16

2. 7 RUPERT ACKERMAN Block 14C Parcel 1 (FA90-0037) (P17-0885) ($312,000) (KA) ................................................................................................... 23

2. 8 CEC PHASE 1 Block 21B Parcels 127 and 354 (F17-0278) (P17-1271) ($39 million) (KA) ........................................................................................................ 24

3

APPLICANTS APPEARING BEFORE THE CENTRAL PLANNING AUTHORITY

APPLICANT NAME TIME ITEM PAGE Summer Cove Homes (KA)

10:30 2.1 4

Xiang Long Development (CS) 11:00

2.2 & 2.3 5 & 8

Dwayne & Jasmine McKenzie (EJ)

11:30 2.4 11

1.0 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

1. 1 Confirmation of Minutes of CPA/08/18 held on April 4, 2018.

4

2. 1 SUMMER COVE HOMES Block 243 Parcel 303 (F18-0026) (P18-0087) ($1,200,000) (KA) [ELECTRONIC FILE]

Application for two (2) duplexes.

Appearance at 10:30

FACTS

Location Whirlwind Drive, Bodden Town

Zoning LDR

Notice Requirements No objectors

Current Use Vacant

BACKGROUND

CPA/07/18; Item 2.13 - The Authority the adjourned the application to give the applicant an opportunity to appear

Recommendation: Discuss the application, for the following reason:

1. Deficient lot size (14,758 sq. ft. vs 25,000 sq. ft.).

APPLICANT’S LETTER

“On Behalf of our client, we wish to apply for a variance in regards to the proposed 2 Duplex on Block: 24E Parcel 303. The request for a variance pertains to the size of the parcel. The parcel exceeds the lot size requirements for 1 Duplex, but it falls short for the proposal of 2. In reference to section 8(13) of the Development and Planning Regulation, our proposal characteristics are consistent with that of the surrounding area. In the case of the adjoining parcel 569 it has a 2 building apartment complex. Across the road have apartment on parcels 315 and 314, which lot sizes do not meet the min lot size requirements for apartments. Nevertheless the developments are all of tasteful character and do enhance the area. On our lot it would be capable to proposed 5 unit apartment complex, but we would rather 4 units in the form of 2 duplex. Which will give the project a better balance with the adjoining complex on parcel 569. We hope that CPA will favorable consider our proposal.”

PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS

General

The application is for two (2) duplexes. The site is located on Whirlwind Drive, Bodden Town

Zoning

The property is zoned Low Density Residential.

2.0 APPLICATIONS APPEARANCES (Items 2. 1 TO 2. 3)

5

Specific Issues

a) Lot Size

Section 9(8)(e) of the Development and Planning Regulations (2017) states the minimum lot size for each duplex shall be 12,500 square feet. As the applicant is proposing two (2) duplex units, the minimum lot size requirement is 25,000 sq. ft., however, the parcel is 14,758 sq. ft. Regulation 8(13) states the Authority may grant permission to carry out development that does not comply with all or any of the provisions in Section 9(8) if the Authority is satisfied that there is sufficient reason to grant a variance and an exceptional circumstance exists and the adjacent land owners have been notified.

SUPPLEMENTARY ANALYSIS

At CPA/07/18; Item 2.13, the Authority resolved to adjourn the application to give the applicant an opportunity to appear to discuss the details of the application.

2. 2 XIANG LONG DEVELOPMENT Block 22D Parcel 182 Rem 4 Lot 3 (F18-0035) (P18-0107) ($611,531) (CS) [ELECTRONIC FILE]

Application for a house.

Appearance at 11:00

FACTS

Location Near Victory Avenue, Prospect

Zoning LDR

Notice Requirements Objectors

Parcel Size 10,177 sq. ft.

Current Use Vacant

Proposed Use House

Building Size 4,892 sq. ft.

Number of Bedrooms 5

Site Coverage 25.2%

Proposed Parking 3

Required Parking 1

BACKGROUND

There is no planning history for this lot.

Recommendation: Discuss the application, for the following reasons:

1. Front setback variance (14’-4” vs. 20’).

6

2. Objector’s concerns.

AGENCY COMMENTS

Comments from the Department of Environment are noted below.

Department of Environment

“Under delegated authority from the National Conservation Council (section 3 (13) of the National Conservation Law, 2013), the Department of Environment offers the following comments for your consideration:

The applicant should be advised to stockpile construction materials away from the canal edge to prevent run-off and debris from entering the marine environment. In addition, we recommend that the applicant plant and incorporate canal-side vegetation into the landscaping scheme. Canal-side vegetation provides a natural buffer to help intercept surface water that may runoff the land into the canal which, in turn, will help maintain the water quality of the area. In particular, we encourage the use of native vegetation as it is best suited for the habitat conditions of the Cayman Islands, resulting in vegetation that requires less maintenance, and is therefore a very cost effective choice.

Please do not hesitate to contact the Department should you require further assistance.”

OBJECTION

“I just received this notice (copy attached) via registered mail on March 16, 2018 which was post marked February 28, 2018

I object to the request by Xiang Long Development to have a variance for the listed purpose; location of the septic tank because it encroaches the side setback. Why can't they place the septic tank where it has to go according to code and maintain the proper setbacks?

My other concern is that this will be a continual procedure for this developer on the rest of the project going forward. In the past I did object to the canal they dug where there is no seawall to adjacent properties but only on the side where they are developing, only to be told that this was alright and the developer was given the ok to get some lot size changes thru. Now this setback change is brought out, but I would have thought that in all their previous changes/variances, designs and site layout that they would have made sure that the building and septic fit according to the code. Now there is some reason that they need to get another change/variance thru. Will this be a constant issue of not planning the project properly and just going back to planning every time they discover a new problem?

Hopefully this will be stopped so the developer and their associates will comply with the existing codes and setbacks going forward.”

7


“We are submitting this letter to explain the circumstances that exist in order that we may construct the proposed Two-storey Single Villa Precast House Model 2 of its septic tank location on B1ocl‹ 22D Parcel 182REM4 Lot 3. Although we respect the fact that under the Development and Planning Regulations (2017 Revision) under Section 9(8)(i) the minimum front and rear setback is 20 feet. The proposed house footprint is within the required setbacks.

However, the location of septic encroach the front setback and we are applying for a consideration for setback variance as it was designed. The Lot configuration, site plan and the Single Villa Precast House Model 2 Design for lot 6 as such, do not have enough space although it suited well in Lot 2 and would like to keep the Model 2 Design on Lot 3 and Lot 6 as these houses are made in Precast Panel and it’s economical in the production. We don’t want the septic tank to be located at the back where the canal/lake is situated and for its maintenance purposes. Currently the Phase 1 of the subdivision is being developed with typical Single Villa House and only Lot 3 and Lot 6 have variances for septic tank and not detriment to adjacent lots.”


General

The applicant is requesting planning permission for a house.

Zoning


Specific Issues

a) Front Setback

The house and garage do comply with all setback requirements; however, the proposed septic tank is proposed at 14’-4” from the front boundary versus the 20’ required setback (Regulation 8(5)). The applicant’s justification for the variance request is included in this report. The Authority should consider the merits of the applicant’s request.

8

2. 3 XIANG LONG DEVELOPMENT Block 22D Parcel 182 Rem 4 Lot 6 (F18-0036) (P18-0108) ($611,531) (CS) [ELECTRONIC FILE]

Application for a house.

Appearance at 11:00

FACTS

Location Near Victory Avenue, Prospect

Zoning LDR

Notice Requirements Objectors


Current Use Vacant

Proposed Use House


Number of Bedrooms 5

Site Coverage 25.2%

Proposed Parking 3

Required Parking 1

BACKGROUND

There is no planning history for this lot.


1. Side setback variance (7’-2” vs. 10’).


AGENCY COMMENTS



“Under delegated authority from the National Conservation Council (section 3 (13) of the National Conservation Law, 2013), the Department of Environment offers the following comments for your consideration:

The applicant should be advised to stockpile construction materials away from the canal edge to prevent run-off and debris from entering the marine environment. In addition, we recommend that the applicant plant and incorporate canal-side vegetation into the landscaping scheme. Canal-side vegetation provides a natural buffer to help intercept surface water that may runoff the land into the canal which, in turn, will help maintain the water quality of the area. In

9

particular, we encourage the use of native vegetation as it is best suited for the habitat conditions of the Cayman Islands, resulting in vegetation that requires less maintenance, and is therefore a very cost effective choice.

Please do not hesitate to contact the Department should you require further assistance.”

OBJECTION

“I just received this notice (copy attached) via registered mail on March 16, 2018 which was post marked February 28, 2018

I object to the request by Xiang Long Development to have a variance for the listed purpose; location of the septic tank because it encroaches the side setback. Why can't they place the septic tank where it has to go according to code and maintain the proper setbacks?

My other concern is that this will be a continual procedure for this developer on the rest of the project going forward. In the past I did object to the canal they dug where there is no seawall to adjacent properties but only on the side where they are developing, only to be told that this was alright and the developer was given the ok to get some lot size changes thru. Now this setback change is brought out, but I would have thought that in all their previous changes/variances, designs and site layout that they would have made sure that the building and septic fit according to the code. Now there is some reason that they need to get another change/variance thru. Will this be a constant issue of not planning the project properly and just going back to planning every time they discover a new problem?

Hopefully this will be stopped so the developer and their associates will comply with the existing codes and setbacks going forward.”


“We are submitting this letter to explain the circumstances that exist in order that we may construct the proposed Two-storey Single Villa Precast House Model 2 of its septic tank location on Block 22D Parcel I82REM4 Lot 6.

Although we respect the fact that under the Development and Planning Regulations (2017 Revision) under Section 9(8)(j) the minimum side setback is 15 feet for a more than one-storey. The proposed house footprint is within the required setbacks. However, the location of septic encroach the side setback and we are applying for a consideration for setback variance as it was designed. The Lot configuration, site plan and the Single Villa Precast House Model 2 Design for lot 6 as such, do not have enough space although it suited well in Lot 2 and would like to keep the Model 2 Design on Lot 3 and Lot 6 as these houses are wade in Precast Panel and it’s economical in the production. We don’t want the septic tank to be located at the back where the canal/lake is situated and for its maintenance purposes. Currently the Phase l of the subdivision is being developed with typical Single Villa Precast House and only Lot 3 and Lot 6 have variances for septic tank and not detriment to adjacent lots.”

10


General

The applicant is requesting planning permission for a house.

Zoning


Specific Issues

a) Side Setback

The house and garage do comply with all setback requirements; however, the proposed septic tank is proposed at 7’-2” from the side boundary versus the 10’ required setback (Regulation 8(5)). The applicant’s justification for the variance request is included in this report.The Authority should consider the merits of the applicant’s request.

11

2. 4 DWAYNE & JASMINE MCKENZIE Block 25C Parcel 539 H2 (F15-0101) (P18-0052) ($26,000) (EJ) [ELECTRONIC FILE]

Application for an addition to house.

Appearance at 11:30

FACTS

Location Rose Valley Drive

Zoning LDR

Notice Requirements Objector


Current Use House

Proposed Use House Addition

Building Size Proposed 206 sq. ft.

Density 5.30

Allowable Density 4

Building Coverage 19.78%

Proposed Parking N/A

Required Parking 1

Number of Units 1

BACKGROUND

May 26, 2015 - The Department granted permission for a 3-bedroom house.

May 2, 2016 - The Department granted permission for a deck addition. April 4, 2018 – The subject application was adjourned in order to re-invite the applicant and objector to the meeting


1. Rear setback variance.

2. External door.


AGENCY COMMENTS



“Under delegated authority from the National Conservation Council (section 3 (13) of the National Conservation Law, 2013), the Department of Environment

12

confirms that we have no comments at this time as the site is man-modified.”

LETTER FROM APPLICANT

“We write on behalf of the applicant with regards to the following;

• A rear setback variance – to allow the proposed house with a lesser setback of from the boundary 10ft4in instead of the required 20ft.

We request permission for the subject matter per the drawings provided and humbly give the following reasons:

1. Per section 8(13)(b)(iii) of the Planning Regulations, the proposal will not be materially detrimental to persons residing or working in the vicinity, to the adjacent property, to the neighborhood, or to the public welfare;

2. Per section 8 (13) (d) of the regulation, the adjacent properties were notified by registered mail.

3. The application complies with all other relevant planning requirements.

We look forward to your favorable response to this variance request. Should you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact us.

LETTER OF OBJECTION

“I humbly ask that you record and register my strongest objection to this application and proposed addition to this building for the following reasons:

1. I object to the variance because it reduces the emergency accesses to the rear of the property.

2. There is an existing propane tank between our common boundaries which is an explosion hazard.

3. There is already an extension in the way of a side porch/deck which not only obstructs the clean out and septic tank and the covers which is close to my window to my bedroom. This can only cause problems if the septic overflows and cannot be easily and quickly cleaned and pumped.

4. To reduce the access by allowing the variance is to add trouble to an existing issue over which the owner of 539H2 and I have already had serious verbal altercation.

5. The noise, drunken behavior, and loud music which goes on on this deck at late hours of night, which deprives me of sleep (I go to work very early in the mornings) is unbearable. To allow addition to this and deprive the space of the proper setback is to compound a presently bad situation.

6. The additions compromises the appearance and integrity of the building and the appearance of the development which is in a very visible environment being so close to the East West Arterial highway.

7. A formerly refusal of the owners to locate the garbage can in the proper location for pick up, and to compound the issue with more garbage generated by more occupants in a location just outside my bedroom window, is totally unacceptable . And with an unwillingness on the part of the owners to cooperate previously, can only compound an already bad situation, to the

13

disgust of the other homeowners who wish to enjoy the peace and comfort of this neighborhood.

It is for this quiet and peaceful enjoyment of this neighborhood of all the present owners that we humbly ask that you subscribe by denying this application made 7th February and received February 10, 2018.”


General

The applicant is seeking a setback variance from the Authority for the proposed bedroom/bathroom addition.

Zoning


Specific Issues

a) Setbacks from Rear Boundary - Regulation 9 (8) (i)

The applicant is seeking a setback variance from the Authority for the proposed 206 sq. ft. bedroom and bathroom addition, proposed at 10.4’ from the rear (northwest) boundary instead of the required 20’ setback. The Authority must determine if the applicant has demonstrated that there is sufficient reason and exception circumstance to warrant allowing the lesser setback per Regulation 8(13)(b).

b) Floor plan design

The Authority should note that the proposed bedroom includes an external door, whereas the existing two bedrooms do not include doors.

SUPPLEMENTARY ANALYSIS

No changes have been made to the plans as the application had been adjourned in order to re-invite the applicant and the objector to the meeting.

14

2. 5 KEL THOMPSON Block 25B Parcel 575 H11 (F18-0095) (P18-0201) ($192,000) (EJ) [ELECTRONIC FILE]

Application for a 3-bedroom house.

FACTS

Location Existing Driveway off Poindexter Road

Zoning LDR

Notice Requirements No Objections


Current Use Vacant

Proposed Use House

Building Size Proposed 1,535 sq. ft.

Density 5.07

Allowable Density 4


Proposed Parking 1

Required Parking 1

Number of Units 1


1. Front and side setback variance requests.


“Further to the application submitted to build Three (3) Bedroom- One Storey House on Block 25B Parcel 575H17, we hereby request for a setback variance of which requires a 20 ft. Side Setback . This request for a renewal of planning application is in respect to the floor plan and site plan which has previously been approved for the unit on this strata lot. The previously approved plan has the approval of the Building Control Unit as well as the CPA.

We would appreciate your consideration for this variance request on the following basis:

A. Under Regulation 8 (13)(b), the characteristics of the proposed development are consistent with the character of surrounding area and the proposal will not be materially detrimental to persons residing or working in the vicinity, to

2.0 APPLICATIONS REGULAR AGENDA (Items 2. 5 TO 2. 8)

15

the adjacent property, to the neighborhood, or to the public welfare. We’d like to present the following points for consideration:

1. While we have complied with more than the minimum required rear and front setback of 20ft. and 10’ on left side, we would like to request for a side setback variance of 6’-11” on the right side.

2. The proposed application is a renewal as it was already been approved by Planning and CPA with the same condition with a slight increase in square footage because of an additional back porch.

3. The regulations pursuant to the Strata Titles Law provide the authority to Planning and the CPA whereby the CPA has discretion with regard to the setbacks between a building and its strata lot boundaries; in fact, apartments have 0 inches setback between their walls and the common property.

4. There is no material change between the previous approved plan and the proposed renewal planning application.

Attached to this letter is a copy of the previously approved site plan and a copy of the new proposed site plan where the additional back patio is highlighted.

Thank you in advance for considering this modification.

If you require additional information or further clarification, please don’t hesitate to contact us at the numbers & e-mail below. Thank you and God bless.”


General

The applicant is seeking a setback variance from the Authority for the proposed 3-bedroom house.

Zoning

The property is zoned Low Density Residential. The Department offers comments on certain specific issues addressed below.

Specific Issues

a) Side and Front setback variances

The applicant is seeking a side setback variance from the Authority for the proposed house at 6.11’ instead of the required 10’ side setback. Additionally, the proposed septic tank does not meet the required front (road) setback and setback, proposed at 12.8’ and 6.7’ respectively instead of the required 20’ and 10’. The Authority needs to determine if the applicant has demonstrated that there is sufficient reason and exceptional circumstance to warrant allowing the lesser setbacks per Regulation 8(13)(b).

16

2. 6 GARETH GRIFFITHS Block 8A Parcel 219 (F18-0075) (P18-0167) ($6,000,000) (MW)

Application for a 2-storey house with guest quarters, pool and ancillary features.

FACTS

Location Conch Point Rd., West Bay

Zoning HT

Notice Requirements No Objectors

Parcel Size Proposed 2.32 ac (101,059.2 sq. ft.)

Parcel Size Required 12,500 sq. ft.

Current Use Vacant

Proposed Use House, Guest Quarters etc.



Proposed Parking 6

Required Parking 1

Number of Units 6


1. HWM and side setback variances.

AGENCY COMMENTS



“Under delegated authority from the National Conservation Council (section 3 (13) of the National Conservation Law, 2013), the Department of Environment offers the following comments for the consideration of the Central Planning Authority.

The application site is located adjacent to a Marine Protected Area - a Replenishment Zone - and is located on an active turtle nesting beach. Sea turtles are listed in Schedule 1, Part 1 of the National Conservation Law as being ‘protected at all times’. The development site (northern parcel) is comprised mainly of coastal shrubland, while the land based southern parcel is seasonally flooded mangrove forest and woodland as shown on figure 1; we note that the current application does not incorporate any activity on the southern parcel. Coastal shrublands are important as they assist with the stabilisation of the beach ridge and provide habitat for a diverse range of species.

17

FIGURE 1: DOE’S HABITAT MAP (2013) SHOWING APPLICATION SITE OUTLINED IN RED

FIGURE 2: LIS 2013 AERIAL IMAGERY SHOWING APPLICATION SITE OUTLINED IN RED.

Comments

• The application site is located on one of the final stretches of unfragmented coastal shrubland. The coastal shrubland in this area incorporates a diversity of vegetation types and forms, which are tolerant to being wind-exposed and

18

salt spray. It is therefore recommended that the applicant retains as much native beach vegetation as possible on site, along with incorporating salt tolerant native species into the landscaping scheme. This will help reduce the spread of invasive floral species and will present a more cost-effective, robust landscaping solution.

• The Department notes that the proposed vehicular entrance into the site is positioned primarily within the vegetated areas, as shown in Figure 3. Given the ecological value of the coastal shrubland, it is recommended that the driveway is repositioned to follow the footprint of the existing entrance into the site. This would allow the applicant to retain a significant amount of the western section of the shrubland, which could be incorporated into the landscaping scheme.

FIGURE 3: SHOWING SITE PLAN OVERLAID ON LIS 2013 AERIAL IMAGERY (SOURCE: JOHN DOAK ARCHITECTURE, 2018)

• The applicant has met the minimum required HWM setback of 75ft, which is important in helping to prevent coastal erosion and conservation of nesting habitat. Therefore the Department is encouraged to see a coastal setback of 100ft.

• The application site is on an active turtle nesting beach and therefore we recommend that the development should incorporate turtle friendly lighting to mitigate impacts to nesting females and hatchlings. The Department has published Turtle Friendly Lighting Guidelines and a Technical Advice note to assist with designing a turtle friendly lighting scheme. The documents can be

19

found at www.doe.ky. If the CPA is minded to grant planning permission we recommend the inclusion of a planning condition which states:

The applicant shall prepare and submit a plan to the Department of Environment for turtle friendly lighting, which minimises the impacts on sea turtles. All lighting shall be installed in accordance with the plan, to be approved by the DoE.

• Any sand excavated during the construction of the building should be retained on site and beach quality sand should be put back along the active beach profile of the property. The DoE is aware that the beach profile in this area, extending landward to the beach ridge and beyond was the subject of sand mining (both legally and illegally). As can be seen from the digital terrain modeling of this area (shown in Figure 4), there are low spots on this site and surrounding area which are likely due to previous excavation activities. Therefore, if there is an excess of sand that cannot be accommodated on the active beach, it should be utilised elsewhere on the site to reinstate the historical elevational profile of the site.

FIGURE 4: LIS 2013 DIGITAL TERRAIN MODEL SHOWING APPLICATION SITE (OUTLINE IN RED) AND ITS

IMMEDIATE SURROUNDING AREA

• The southern parcel which is comprised of tidally flood mangroves and mangrove lagoon/ponds (as shown in Figure 1), should not be used for ancillary storage in conjunction with this application (e.g. for stockpiling of construction materials and excavated sand). Any works such as land clearing, filling or for the storage of materials/ equipment on the southern parcel should be the subject of a separate consultation.”


“With reference to our client's application for planning permission for a residence, swimming pool and associated works, we request the Central Planning Authority's approval:

• to vary the HWM setback for a 4ft high wall on both the east and west to be

20

terminated at a distance of 50ft from the high water mark as shown in the attached plans and as described below.

The applicant also seeks the CPA's favourable response to variances to the side setbacks as follows:

• to allow the NW tip of the pool deck to be setback 14'-10" from the west boundary instead of 20ft setback.

• to allow the corner of the guest cabana to be setback 18'-9" from the west boundary instead of 20ft setback.

• to allow a 4ft high wall to the AC equipment enclosure to be setback 10'-6" from the west boundary instead of 20ft setback.

• to allow the generator to be setback 10’-0" from the west boundary instead of 20ft setback

• to allow the corner of the pool deck by the BBQ to be setback 14'-6" from the east boundary instead of 20ft setback.

• to allow the 4ft high equipment enclosure wall to be setback 11'- 3" from the east boundary instead of 20ft setback.

• to allow the dining cabana to be setback 18'-11" from the east boundary instead of 20ft setback.

• to allow the ac equipment enclosure by the Bath House to be setback 17'-6" from the west boundary instead of 20ft setback.

Our client proposes to build a single family residence on the property comprising a two storey Great House residence along with other stand alone buildings and structures including Guest House, Dining Cabana, Gym and Fitness, Garage, Carport, Swim Pool, Decking in water Pool Cabana.

The applicant, who is the owner of the subject Block 8A Parcel 219 seeks the CPA's favourable consideration to vary the setback and to build the various structures as a single family residence, noting as follows:

• The subject proposed residence, pool and associated works respect the 100'-0" setbacks from the HWM. The house is between 120 -140ft from both the roadway and from the HWM.

• The proposed pool is 110'-0"" from the HWM, the proposed swim pool is 75'-0" from the HWM.

• Side setbacks for the proposed residence are more than 20'-0" from boundary to the face of the house, garage and other outbuildings. Roadside setbacks to the garage are in excess of 120'-0".

• Our client proposes to install a wooden beach deck, essentially 4" above beach level, as a sunbathing area, easily accessible for elderly members of the family and young children.

• The deck is 100ft from the HWM at its closest point.

In accordance with the Development and Planning Regulations and Clause 8(11) we note as follows:

21

(a) The elevation of the property- the property has a storm beach ridge consistent with all properties along this section of Conch Point Road and the proposed house and building respect the existing ridge levels.

(b) The geology of the property - the land is predominantly sand beach ridge

(c) The storm beach ridge - the existing profiles and geology are to be maintained

(d) The existence of a protective reef adjacent to the proposed development- there is a protective reef offshore to the north of the subject development proposal

(e) The location of adjacent development - there are no developments in close proximity. It is anticipated the properties to the immediate west and east of the applicant's properties (which are owned by family and associates of the applicant) will be developed as single family residences and their distances from the shore would be similar/same as the subject planning proposal

(f) Any other material consideration which the Authority considers will affect the proposal - the shoreline along this section of beach is stable and of consistent depth

In accordance with 8(13) (b) there is sufficient reason to grant a variance and an exceptional circumstance exists, which may include the fact that

(i) The characteristics of the proposed development are consistent with the character of the surrounding area - the proposed development is for a single family beach residence, swim pool and associated works which is consistent in scale and massing with the character of Conch Point Road and the surrounding residential areas of Barkers and West Bay. The proposed house is aligned with existing building frontages of Hotel Tourism zoned lands.The proposed house compliments existing developments further to the west along the north/northwest coast of Grand Cayman.

(ii) Unusual terrain characteristics limit the site's development potential- the boundary walls' encroachment of 50ft into the HWM setback will assist the transverse stability of the storm ridge. The 50ft setback of the wall does not hinder access along and to the beach and waters edge. The terrain of the property is not detrimental to the subject application. The proposals do not modify nor reduce the existing storm ridge and natural profiling of the lands on the subject land and to either side of the lands.

(iii) The proposal will not be materially detrimental to persons residing or working in the vicinity, to the adjacent property, to the neighbourhood, or to the public welfare - the proposed encroachment into the setback will not negatively impact persons residing or working in the vicinity and will therefore not be materially detrimental in any respect.

Our client requests the Central Planning Authority's approval for the buildings, swimming pool and associated works, and respectfully requests the CPA's favourable review of the above noted variances.

22

If you have any queries or require further information prior to reviewing this application please do not hesitate to contact the writer. We look forward to hearing from you.”


General

The application is for a 2-storey house with guest quarters, pool and ancillary features located on Conch Point Road, West Bay.

Zoning

The property is zoned Hotel/Tourism.

Specific Issues

a) HWM Setback

Regulation 8(10)(e) states in a Hotel/Tourism zone, all structures and buildings up to three storeys, including ancillary buildings, walls and structures, shall be setback a minimum of 130’ from the high water mark. The proposed boundary wall would be a distance of 50’ from the HWM and pool deck would be 100’-5” a difference of 80’ and 29’-7” respectively.

b) Side Setback

Regulation 10(1)(f) state the minimum side setbacks are a minimum of 20 feet. The northwest corner of the pool deck shall be setback 14’-10” from the west boundary and the corner of the guest cabana be setback 18’-9” from the west boundary. A difference of 5’-2” and 1’-3” respectively. The A/C equipment enclosure with 4’ wall shall be setback 10’6” from the west

23

boundary, in addition the proposed generator would be setback a distance of 10’ from the west boundary a difference of 9’-6” and 10’.

From the east boundary the corner of the pool deck is to be setback 14’-6”, the Pool equipment enclosure with 4’ wall setback 11’-3”, dining cabana 18’-11” and the A/C equipment enclosure by the bath house 17’-6”. A difference of 5’-6”, 8’-9”, 1’-1” and 2’-6” respectively.

The adjoining parcels were notified and no objections were received. The Authority should assess if there is sufficient reasons and an exceptional circumstances in accordance with section 8(11) & (13) to warrant granting the HWM and side setback variances.

2. 7 RUPERT ACKERMAN Block 14C Parcel 1 (FA90-0037) (P17-0885) ($312,000) (KA)

Application to modify planning permission in order to: revise the ground floor plan to change one large service area unit into three smaller retail units; add a new second floor area for meeting rooms; and revise the site plan to add additional parking spaces.

FACTS

Location Godfrey Nixon Way, George Town

Zoning GCOM


Current Use Commercial Building

BACKGROUND

CPA/07/18; Item 2.13 - The Authority the adjourned the application to give the applicant an opportunity to appear

Recommendation: Modify planning permission.


General

The site is located on Godfrey Nixon Way, George Town.

Zoning

The property is zoned General Commercial.

Specific Issues

a) Parking

The ground floor space was previously one large service area for cars. The applicant would now like to divide the space into three (3) retail units. The 2nd floor is an addition where there was previously no floor. The space would be

24

used to provide three (3) meeting rooms. The applicant has revised the site plan to provide the required 89 parking spaces.

2. 8 CEC PHASE 1 Block 21B Parcels 127 and 354 (F17-0278) (P17-1271) ($39 million) (KA)

Application for two (2) commercial office buildings and two (2) generators.

FACTS

Location off Fairbanks Road, George Town

Zoning LDR


Current Use Vacant – Approved Planned Area Development

BACKGROUND

CPA/25/15; Item 2.1 - The Authority the granted permission for a Planned Area Development.

Recommendation: Grant planning permission.

AGENCY COMMENTS

Comments from the Chief Environmental Health Officer, National Roads Authority, Water Authority and Department of Environment are noted below.

Chief Environmental Health Officer

“The Department has no objections to the proposed in principle. The applicant must submit the specifications for the generator for review and approval.”

National Roads Authority

“Road Capacity Issues

The traffic demand to be generated by the above proposed development of 65,962 sq. ft. has been assessed in accordance with ITE Code 820 – Shopping Centre. The anticipated traffic to be added onto Fairbanks Road is as follows:

Expected Daily Trip

AM Peak Hour Total

Traffic

AM Peak

In

AM Peak Out

PM Peak Hour Total

Traffic

PM Peak In

PM Peak Out

2,818 63 37 27 245 119 126

Based on these estimates, the impact of the proposed development onto Fairbanks Road is considered to be moderate. The applicant has submitted a Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) in which the NRA is in midst of reviewing.

25

Access and Traffic Management Issues Two-way driveway aisles shall be a minimum of twenty-two (22) ft wide.

Entrance and exit curves shall have no less than fifteen (15) feet radius curves, and have a width of twenty-four (24) ft.

Tire stops (if used) shall be place in parking spaces such that the length of the parking space is not reduced below the sixteen (16) feet minimum.

Stormwater Management Issues The applicant is encouraged to implement state-of-the-art techniques that manage stormwater runoff within the subject parcel and retain existing drainage characteristics of the site as much as is feasible through innovative design and use of alternative construction techniques. However, it is critical that the development be designed so that post-development stormwater runoff is no worse than pre-development runoff. To that effect, the following requirements should be observed:

• The applicant shall demonstrate, prior to the issuance of any Building Permits, that the Stormwater Management system is designed to embrace storm water runoff produced from a rainfall intensity of 2 inches per hour for one hour of duration and ensure that surrounding properties and/or nearby roads are not subject to stormwater runoff from the subject site.

• The stormwater management plan shall include spot levels (existing and finished levels) with details of the overall runoff scheme. Please have applicant provide this information prior to the issuance of a building permit.

• Curbing is required for the parking areas to control stormwater runoff.

• Roof water runoff should not drain freely over the parking area or onto surrounding property. Note that unconnected downspouts are not acceptable. We recommend piped connection to catch basins or alternative stormwater detention devices. If catch basins are to be networked, please have applicant to provide locations of such wells along with details of depth and diameter prior to the issuance of any Building Permits.

At the inspection stage for obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall demonstrate that the installed system will perform to the standard given. The National Roads Authority wishes to bring to the attention of the Planning Department that non-compliance with the above-noted stormwater requirements would cause a road encroachment under Section 16 (g) of The Roads Law (2005 Revision). For the purpose of this Law, Section 16(g) defines encroachment on a road as

"any artificial canal, conduit, pipe or raised structure from which any water or other liquid escapes on to any road which would not but for the existence of such canal, conduit, pipe or raised structure have done so, whether or not such canal, conduit, pipe or raised structure adjoins the said road;"

Failure in meeting these requirements will require immediate remedial measures from the applicant.”

26

Water Authority

“Wastewater Treatment and Disposal

The developer, or their agent, is required to submit an Onsite Wastewater Treatment Proposal, per the attached Form, which meets the following requirements. Water Authority review and approval of the proposed system is a condition for obtaining a Building Permit.

• The proposed development requires Aerobic Treatment Unit(s) with NSF/ANSI Standard 40 (or equivalent) certification that, when operated and maintained per manufacturer’s guidelines, the system achieves effluent quality of 30 mg/L Biochemical Oxygen Demand and 30 mg/L Total Suspended Solids. The proposed system shall have a treatment capacity of at least 9,444 US gallons per day (GPD).

* The calculated flows are based on low water use; if a food service or other high-water use tenant is permitted, additional requirements may apply. Any food service will require the installation of in-the-ground grease interceptors, to be sized by WA based on details of facility.

• Treated effluent from the ATU shall discharge to an effluent disposal well, constructed by a licensed driller in strict accordance with the Authority’s standards. Licensed drillers are required to obtain the site-specific minimum borehole and grouted casing depths from the Authority prior to pricing or constructing an effluent disposal well.

• To achieve gravity flow, 4’ 8” above MSL. The minimum invert level is that required to maintain an air gap between the invert level and the water level in the well, which fluctuates with tides and perching of non-saline effluent over saline groundwater.

Water Supply:

The proposed development site is located within the Water Authority’s piped water supply area.

• The developer shall contact Water Authority’s Engineering Services Department at 949-2837, without delay, to be advised of the site-specific requirements for connection to the public water supply.

• The developer shall submit plans for the water supply infrastructure for the development to the Water Authority for review and approval.

• The developer shall install the water supply infrastructure within the site, under the Water Authority’s supervision, and in strict compliance with the approved plans and Water Authority Guidelines for Constructing Potable Water Mains.

The Authority will not be held responsible for delays and/or additional costs incurred by the developer due to the developer’s failure to provide sufficient notice to the Authority.

27

Elevator(s):

An approved oil / grit interceptor is required for the discharge from a hydraulic elevator’s sump pit, unless an approved pump with oil-sensing shut-off is installed. Contact the Water Authority at [email protected] for design and sizing criteria. Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be employed to prevent or minimize spills of hazardous materials stored / used at the facility. The oil / grit interceptor shall be routinely maintained.

Generator(s) and Fuel Storage Tank(s):

In the event underground fuel storage tanks (USTs) are used the Authority requires the developer to install monitoring wells for the USTs. The exact number and location(s) of the monitoring wells will be determined by the Authority upon receipt of a detailed site plan showing location of the UST(s), associated piping, and dispensers. The monitoring wells shall comply with the standard detail of the Water Authority. All wells shall be accessible for inspection by the Authority.

In the event above ground fuel storage tanks (ASTs) are used, monitoring wells will not be required.

Geothermal Cooling:

Plans indicate a chiller plant. Proposals for geothermal cooling systems require that the developer first complete a Geothermal Installation Notification Form which provides outline information on the scale and type of system proposed. This information is needed to determine requirements under sections 22 and 34 of the Water Authority Law (2011 Revision) for groundwater abstraction licences and discharge permits, respectively.”


“Under delegated authority from the National Conservation Council (section 3 (13) of the National Conservation Law, 2013), the Department of Environment (DoE) provides the following comments for your consideration. The DoE provided comments on the Planned Area Development application for the overall site in November 2015 and expressed concerns regarding the following issues:

1) The ongoing drainage and flooding issues in South Sound and seeking to ensure that the development doesn’t contribute to these problems.

2) The loss of primary mangrove wetland habitat, in terms of ecological functions and carbon sequestration.

3) Maintaining good water quality in the proposed artificially created waterbodies.

We maintain these concerns but note that a condition of planning approval for the PAD was the requirement for the submission of a comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan to the NRA, prior to the submission of any application for development within any phase of the PAD. We trust that this Plan has been submitted and agreed with the NRA. The recent heavy rains and associated

28

flooding in the South Sound drainage basin reiterates the importance of designing and implementing a comprehensive drainage strategy, prior to commencing a development. Retrospectively tackling drainage issues can be significantly less effective and more expensive.

Furthermore, a condition was included on the original planning approval for the PAD which stated that an engineering, hydrological and biological analysis of the living lake and filtration wetlands shall be submitted to the CPA for approval, following consultation with the DoE. This was stated as being required prior to the submission of any application for development within any phase of the PAD. However, recent correspondence with the Planning Department has confirmed that this condition was subsequently modified and the applicant is now required to submit details when they are ready to create the lake. Given that this lake was intended to provide fill for the development, the DoE recommends that clarification is sought at this time regarding the source of fill for the current phase of the development.”

Petroleum Inspectorate

“OfReg Fuels has reviewed the above captioned plans and found that there is not enough information to make a determination at this time.

We require the following information from the applicant:

1. Type of fuel to be stored (diesel/propane/etc).

2. Total number of tanks.

3. Capacity of each tank. (specify US or Imperial Gallons)

4. Tank type (aboveground or underground)”


“Applicant Responses to Agency comments

OfReg Fuels Queries

Type of Fuel to be Stored. (Nov 2nd)

Please note the design intent is to use diesel. This may change depending on the final design. If this occurs, a Planning Modification would be submitted accordingly.

Total number of tanks. (Nov 2nd)

Please note the design intent is to have (2) Generator tanks (1 per building). This may change depending on the final design. If this occurs, a Planning Modification would be submitted accordingly.

Capacity of each tank. (specify US or Imperial gallons). (Nov 2nd)

Please note the design intent is to have (2) 3,500 gallons size tanks (1 per Generator). This may change depending on the final design. If this occurs, a Planning Modification would be submitted accordingly.

Tank Type (underground or aboveground). (Nov 2nd)

29

Please note the design intent is to have (2) Generator tanks (1 per building) which will be partially underground. This may change depending on the final design. If this occurs, a Planning Modification would be submitted accordingly.

Water Authority-Cayman Queries (WAC_4322ii)

We have noted the comments on the Memorandum (WAC_4322ii) received via email on November 17th. We will provide the requested information at permit submittal to comply with the WAC requirements.

Department of Environment Queries

We have noted the comments on the Memorandum referencing F17-0278 (P17-1271) received via email on November 17th. We will provide the necessary information required for each phase of the PAD approval. Regarding the source of fill for Phase 1.1, this will be tendered locally at the appropriate time (post Planning Approval / pre-Permit approval).

Department of Environment Health (EH/17/8703)

We have noted the comments on the Memorandum (EH/17/8703) received via email on November 28th. We will provide the requested information at permit submittal.”


General

The application is for two (2) commercial buildings and two (2) generators. The site is located off Fairbanks Road, George Town

Zoning

The property is zoned Low Density Residential and is overlaid with a Planned Area Development.

Specific Issues

The proposed office building is considered to be in line with the approved Planned Area Development. This phase of the development would be within the Commercial /Institutional Zone of the PAD which permits a building height of 65’ and a road setback of 7’. The parking requirement is the same as required in our current Regulations, 1 space per 300 sq. ft. The proposal would meet all of these requirements.

3.0 DEVELOPMENT PLAN MATTERS

4.0 PLANNING APPEAL MATTERS

5.0 MATTERS FROM THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING

6.0 CPA MEMBERS INFORMATION/DISCUSSIONS

Central Planning Authority · Location Whirlwind Drive, Bodden Town ... proposed 2 Duplex on Block:...

Documents

Transcript of Central Planning Authority · Location Whirlwind Drive, Bodden Town ... proposed 2 Duplex on Block:...