Loading...
08-15-1984 '-> 0 CITY OF EDGEWATER PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING AUGUST 15, 1984 Minutes Chairman Don Bennington called the regular meeting to order at 7:03 P.M., in the Community Center. ROLL CALL Members present: Messrs. Finn, Quaggin, Poland, Bennington, and Mrs. Ann Thomas. Mr. Wheeler was excused and Mr. Chenoweth was absent. Also present: secretary, Susan Mista. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Quaggin made a motion to accept the minutes of the August 1, 1984, meeting, seconded by Mr. Poland. Motion CARRIED 5-0. SITE PLAN REVIEW SP-844l - William Riggle - Duplex - 1700 Block on Fern Palm Drive. Chairman Bennington explained that an error was made concerning approval of this site plan at the last Planning and Zoning Board meeting, wherein the Board approved same for preliminary and final, advising that Mr. Riggle did not need a variance from the Board of Adjustments. He further stated that the Board erroneously advised Mr. Riggle that the rear yard setback was in compliance with the Code requirements, however, the area requirement is what the variance was needed for. Mr. Riggle did, in fact, have to go before the Board of Adjustments and was granted a variance for the area requir.ement, subject to the Planning and Zoning Board stating that the site plan is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Mrs. Thomas made a motion that this site plan is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Finn seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 5-0. COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Bennington read the letter from Dennis Fischer, Code Enforcement Officer, regarding violation of SP-8355 - J.C. Carder, Retail Boat Sales. Mr. Fischer explained that he met with Dan Herman, Mr. Carder's represent- ative, who advised him that they would install the 11 parking spaces and stepping stones or shell to extend from the building toward Pelican Drive. Mr. Herman also advised that there would be no more alterations to the rear of the building. Mr. Fischer stated that a follow-up on this situation would be made in 10 days and if compliance has not been met, same would be forwarded to the Code Enforcement Board for further action. Mr. Poland questioned as to whether or not this matter has been resolved or turned over to the Code Enforcement Board for further action. Chairman Bennington stated that if there has been no more alteration to the rear of the building, they are still in violation and he assumes it has gone to the Code Enforcement Board. A discussion then ensued concerning who has the authority to enforce the Code requirements and how Code enforcement is handled. The members all agreed that if a system has already been established concerning these violations, then the proper authorities need to pursue these violations to make the system work. Chairman Bennington stated that if someone is in violation of the site plan that was submitted, the Building Official can refuse to issue a Certificate of Occupancy until the matter is rectified. However, he added that it is his understanding that the applicants do not always pick up the CO and the violations are never resolved. Further, he stated that at the last meeting when the City Engineer, Mr. Ferrara, was present, Mr. Ferrara suggested that the Building Official refuse to turn on the power if the project is not in o o compliance with the original site plan. The Board members decided that a letter be sent to the Code Enforcement Officer, requesting a status report on all of the violations that this Board has sent him. The site plans in question include Pelican Cove - sidewalks are to be installed in the subdivision; J.C. Carder - Retail Boat Sales concerning rear setback, sidewalk and defined parking area installed, and structure was to be used for boat sales, not storage; Jose's Pizza - parking area and driveway entrance and exit; BJ's Flowers - driveway to extend completely around the building and defined parking area; Paul Loeffler - drainage problem; Fat Bob's Restaurant - landscaping and parking; Casa EI Toro Lounge - parking. Mr. Opal, a member of the audience, questioned the new apartment complex on Marion Avenue being developed by Edwin Hall, wherein all of the trees on the project site have been removed. Chairman Bennington advised that the developer is going to plant trees on the project after it has been completed. Mr. Opal questioned whether or not the sign that is posted on the front of the property is in violation of the Code due to the fact that it is very large and it was his opinion that a sign of this size is not allowed in the City limits. Chairman Bennington stated that he did not know if the sign was in violation or not. He further added that there are a lot of Ordinance violations and in the past there has been no one to enforce them. Now the City has hired David Jones who will be working on a part time basis and part of his job will be to enforce the violations that exist in the City. OLD BUSINESS Review Definitions ln Code. Chairman Bennington advised that the Board was given a list of the defin- itions that had been worked on by the Zoning Commission and the Planning Commission in the past. He stated that the Boards have been working on these definitions for quite some time and, hopefully, this will be the last time they have to go over them and the updated list can be sent to Council for approval in the near future. As a result of the discussions concerning the changes in the definitions section of the Code, the following changes were agreed upon: ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNERS: Property owners with land contiguous to the property in question. Omit the wording: "not crossing streets". APARTMENT - GARDEN: Use the definition used in the Winter Springs Ordinance - Multifamily dwelling units not to exceed three (3) stories in height. Typically, garden apartments have units one above the other with several units sharing a common entrance hall or court. BUFFER: A six (6) foot high screen that is kept in a neat and presentable condition at all times and consists of either a decorative wooden fence, a decorative concrete block wall or plant material of sufficient opacity and density to prevent visual penetration, or a combination of any of the three. If plant material is used, it must be three (3) feet in height at planting. BUILDING, FRONT OF: Remove. CHANGE OF OCCUPANCY: Change title to read - "CHANGE OF USE" - definition to remain the same. DWELLING - TWO-FAMILY: A dwelling designed for or occupied by two (2) families, and having separate housekeeping and cooking facilities for each family with each unit separated by a party wall having a two (2) hout.fire rating: The word "two-family-dwell:ing" includes the word "duplex". FAMILY: Use the definition used in the Dania Ordinance, changing 3 persons to 5, to read: An individual, or two (2) or more persons related by legal adoption, blood or a licit marriage, or a group of not more than five (5) persons who need not be related by blood or marriage, living together as a single housekeeping unit in a dwelling. -2- Planning & Zoning Board Meeting August 15, 1984 o o LOT - CORNER: A parcel of land abbutting the intersection of two (2) or more streets. OFF- STREET PARKING SPACES: Same as in Code _, us lng "hard" surfaced area. PATIO HOMES: Use definition used by Winter Springs Ordinance: Single- family dwelling units with a private outdoor living area, the side walls of which may be party or lot line walls and having a minimum two-hour fire rating. Patio homes are designed and constructed to be individually owned and are sometimes referred to as cluster houses, single-family attached dwelling units, -atrium houses, or court garden houses. TOWNHOUSE: Use definition used in Cocoa Beach Ordinance in which the Board changed to read as follows: A dwelling unit consisting of a minimum group of three (3) and a maximum of eight (8) such units, each separated by adjoining contiguous fire walls having a minimum two-hour fire rating. A townhouse is typically more than single story and individually owned from the land to the roof. Each townhouse shall be independently served by separate heating, air conditioning, sewer, water, electric, power, gas and other utility services. STREET: The Board decided to use the seven (7) definitions under the Subdivision Ordinance, Page 1709, for the definitions for Street, Arterial, Collector, Cul-de-sac, Loca~ Marginal Access, and Public Street. It was the agreement of the Board members that any and all multi-family definitions include the wording, "having a minimum two-hour fire rating". The Board members asked that these corrections be added to the agenda for the next meeting for final reading before sending to Council for the recommended changes. Review requirements of Satellite Dishes to be added to Code. Chairman Bennington advised that he had not had time to review the Ordin- ances from other cities governing satellite dishes and suggested that this matter be tabled to the next meeting and that everyone study same prior to the meeting. It was his opinion that these Ordinances were not adequate in their wording and a new Ordinance needs to be comprised in regulating these dishes. The Board members agreed to table this to the next meeting. NEW BUSINESS Review Stormwater Management Ordinance. Chairman Bennington advised that the present Stormwater Management Ordinance requires calculations for site plan approval needed on those plans that are an acre or more in size, however, he stated that the City is, at the present time, requiring stormwater management calculations on all site plans, re- gardless of the size. He further stated that Mr. Ferrara, the City Engineer, suggested at the last meeting that they use the figure of 1,000 square feet in requiring the calculations on site plans. That figure includes the building and parking area. Anything over 1,000 square feet needs the cal- culations. Also, Mr. Ferrara suggested that an addition can be added up to 1,000 square feet, one time, without having to have the calculations. Mr. Poland said that he agrees with the purpose for stormwater management calculations and site plan approval concerning construction in the City, however, it was his opinion that these requirements create a problem to some individuals in hiring an engineer to do the stormwater management calculations, at a cost of approximately $2,000, just to find out whether or not he can open a business or construct a new business. He said he felt it was the purpose of the Planning and Zoning Board to help the City grow in the right direction, not put restrictions or hardships on applicants, thereby slowing down or stopping the growth of the City. He suggested using the percentage of land that will be used to determine which plans require stormwater management calculations. Concerning commerical building, he suggested that the calculations only be required on buildings valued at more than $25,000. The Building Code does not require a general contractor to prepare the plans on a commercial building of less than $25,000 in value, therefore, the applicant should not be required to have an engineer prepare -3- Planning & Zoning Board Meeting August 15, 1984 o u stormwater management calculations for buildings valued under $25,000. Chairman Bennington stated that the present Ordinance says these calcul- ations are not required under an acre in size, however, the City is requiring them on all site plans. Chairman Bennington questioned where you draw the line as to who does need them and who does not. He said that the State laws establish some of the requirements concerning the 100 year flood plane and the areas involved therein. It was his opinion that Mr. Ferrara's figure of 1,000 square feet was rather low in that it would be very difficult to build anything with only 1,000 square feet, including the parking area. The Board members agreed to study the Ordinances that were furnished them from the Florida League of Cities and discuss this at the next Board meeting. There being no further business to come before the Board, upon motion made by Mr. Quaggin to adjourn, seconded by Mrs. Thomas, the meeting was adjourned at 9:25 P.M. Minutes submitted by: Susan Mista -4- Planning & Zoning Board Meeting August 15, 1984