12-19-1984
. I
Q
Q
CITY OF EDGEWATER
Planning and Zoning Board Meeting
December 19, 1984
Agenda
The Secretary called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. in the Community Center.
ROLL CALL
Members present: Messrs. Poland, Chenoweth, Quaggin and Mrs. Thomas. Excused:
Messrs. Bennington, Wheeler and Finn. Also present: Mrs. Taylor, Secretary.
Due to the excused absence of the Chairman and the Vice Chairman the members
proceeded to elect a Chairman pro tern. Mr. Chenoweth moved to nominate Mrs.
Thomas, which was seconded by Mr. Poland. The motion CARRIED 4-0.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
A motion was made by Mr. Quaggin and seconded by Mr. Poland to approve the
December 5, 1984 minutes. The motion CARRIED 4-0.
SITE PLAN REVIEWS
SP-8463 - T. L. Jones, 1958 & 1962 Fern Palm Drive - Preliminary/Fin.al
Approval - Duplex in an R-4 Zone
Mr. Poland explained the question on this request and the reason for the
continuation from the last meeting. There is a canal to the rear of the
property, the bank of which is just 7 feet from the corner of the proposed
building. There was concern that the City would be liable. The members
referred to the memorandum from Susan Mista advising that the City Attorney
stated that the only obligation and/or liability that the City has in a
situation such as this is to make sure the structure is built in a safe,
stable and secure condition for the health and welfare of the residents.
Mr. Jones was present and explained that there are two levels to the bank
and he intends to go at a gradual grade to the lower level and the water
would be two or three feet below that lower level. He intends to fence it.
He pointed out that he has a request for a variance filed with the Board of
Adjustment. This would permit a 10 foot variance to the front setback.
Mr. Jones commented that if the Board takes this attitude with the canals
in Florida Shores they are opening themselves up for many lawsuits.
Mr. Ron Lucas, present in the audience, noted that there are two other duplexes
in the area which are set at 30 feet from the front. He said that Mr. Jones
has a problem which is not of his doing and a delay can be very costly.
Mrs. Thomas read a letter from the City Engineer concerning the canal in
reference to the lots next to Mr. Jones' property; the letter, dated November
15, 1984, was addressed to Connie Kinsey, City Clerk. It was his opinion
that the canal should not be relocated, but that a variance be requested to
place the structure at 30 feet from the front property line.
The members were also in possession of a letter from the Building Official
dated December 19, which stated that the City Engineer, Public Works
Superintendent and the Building Official agree that the frontage of the
structure needs to be 30 feet from the front property line.
Mr. Chenoweth moved to grant the SP-8463 site plan request subject to
the obtaining of a variance from 40 feet to 30 feet in the front and a
provision that the proper fencing be placed in the rear of the property
where the canal is located. Mr. Poland seconded the motion. The motion
CARRIED 4-0.
SP-8469 - Edgewater Mower and Small Engine Repair - Warehouse Addition -
301 Mango Tree Drive
Mr. Poland, one of the principals of the Edgewater Mower and Small Engine
Repair Service involved in this case, submitted for the record a Form 4,
Memorandum of Voting Conflict.
o
o
The members reviewed the plans, noting that there is a shell drive circulating
around the front and that the proposed metal building will be to the south
at the rear. It was confirmed that there are a sealed survey and sealed
stormwater calculations in the file. Mr. Poland noted that he has submitted
stormwater management calculations to the City Engineer for his review. Mrs.
Taylor informed the members that the City Engineer had advised her by phone
today that the stormwater calculations were acceptable to him and that he
would get a letter into the mail tomorrow confirming this.
Mr. Quaggin moved that SP-8469 be granted preliminary and final approval;
the motion was seconded by Mr. Chenoweth and CARRIED 3-0. Mr. Poland
abstained.
SP-8470 - Ron Carwile - Addition to Coastal Tire, :1701 South Ridgewood
Mr. Carwile was present to talk to the members about his plans. The sealed
set of the plans has not been submitted to date. A variance has been
granted for the additions to the front and side of the existing building.
There will be a buffer between his property and the abutting residential
land to the east.
Mr. Chenoweth moved that preliminary and final approval be given to SP-8470,
upon the receipt of a sealed set of plans. Mr. Poland seconded the motion.
Mr. Quaggin suggested that the motion be amended to require that the storm-
water calculations be approved. Mr. Poland seconded this amendment.
Mr. Chenoweth restated his motion, and moved that preliminary and final
approval be granted to SP-8470 subject to the submission of the sealed plans
and approval of the stormwater calculation data. Mr. Poland seconded the
motion, which CARRIED 4-0.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Rezoning application from R-l to R-2 by Victor St. John for property located
on Lincoln Road.
Mr. Les Haughwout was present to discuss this rezoning request.
The members reviewed the letter from Jose' B. Alvarez, City Attorney, in
which he advises on the methods for determining "spot zoning", a question
which was raised by the Board at the previous meeting. Mrs. Thomas read the
letter addressed to the City Attorney in which the Board asked two questions
relating to this rezoning: 1# Can they legally change the zoning in this area,
or would this be spot zoning? and 2, In accordance with Section 400.01 of the
Code, how many lots does Mr. St. John own - two or three? Mr. Poland com-
mented that he does not agree with Mr. Alvarez that question two hinges on
whether or not the Board deems it advisable to rezone. He felt that question
was a straightforward request for an interpretation of the existing ordinance
on whether that particular parcel of land contains 1, 2, 3 or 5 lots. Mr.
Ron Lucas, present in the audience, commented that what you have here is
property ownership by one person that was divided by a road and he felt that
if the attorney had addressed the situation he would have told them that! to
start with, as soon as the road comes in there you do not have contiguous
lots. Mr. Poland responded that the question was whether there are two
lots there as the Chairman contended, or whether there are three lots there
as Mr. Poland contended. This issue was discussed further. Mr. Chenoweth
said that the Board is responsible for making the decision on this, regardless
of who gives them the input. He did not feel the lawyer's opinion should be
negated in any way. He stated that the attorney may have generalized in a
way but he felt that if the lots could be better utilized by going from R-l
to R-2, reasoning on a commonsense basis, and doesn't violate any of the
planning of the City, which he does not think it violates, he feels there
is nothing wrong with it. Mr. Poland said that he concurs with Mr. Chenoweth.
Mr. Quaggin asked if they were considering the Comprehensive Plan, and Mr.
Chenoweth said that he was considering it. He stated that it is not a
nonconforming, per se, continuous nonconforming. Mr. Quaggin argued that
the purpose is to go from R-l to R-2 with the idea of more buildings, and
he felt that this is not in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Chenoweth said that
he does not see what is wrong with going from R-l to R-2, unless it is the
increasing of the density, which Mr. Quaggin is objecting to. He noted that
the Board has been approving duplexes and triplexes throughout the City, and
he did not feel this situation was different. Members discussed the City
Planning and Zoning Board
December 19, 1984
- 2 -
o
o
Attorney's letter further, specifically noting his statement that, "the
basic rule is if the rezoning is reasonable, in accordance with the compre-
hensive plan and can be justified as contributing to the health, safety and
general welfare of the city, it is not spot zoning irrespective of the size
of the parcel or the apparent incidental benefit to the owner."
Mr. Les Haughwout spoke about the improvement to the community this would
bring because it would bring it into a total residential and not a commercial
area. There is a commercial shop on the property now which will not be there
when it is rezoned and subsequently built on. He also pointed out that all
five of the lots will be in excess of the R-2 requirements. Mr. Poland asked
if they would not have to get variances to build if the rezoning went through
and Mr. Haughwout responded that all of the lots would meet code with the
possible exception of one lot, which is 72' and not the required 75'.
Mr. Poland remarked that considering how far it is from Riverside Drive and
considering the purpose of R-l ie. particularly aimed at those parcels
fronting on Riverside Drive, he felt that rezoning this parcel to R-2 would
be in keeping with the spirit of the zoning by getting rid of commercial
establishment, and taking property which is not of great benefit to the City
at this time and upgrading and contributing to the tax rolls. Mr. Poland
asked what the procedure is after the Board makes their recommendation. Mrs.
Gigi Bennington, present in the audience, advised the Board to clarify the
reasons for their recommendation, if they decide to recommend the rezoning.
Mr. Poland moved that this parcel owned by Victor St. John on Lincoln Road
be recommended to Council for rezoning from R-l to R-2 for the following
reasons: One, it will remove a commercial establishment from a primarily
residential section of the City; two, it will improve the tax rolls of the
City of Edgewater by permitting development of this property as a residential
area; three, it is in keeping with the spirit of the zoning of the area,
whereas R-l is primarily a residential area on Riverside Drive; and four,
that the rezoning is reasonable and is not in violation of the Comprehensive
Plan and it does contribute to the general welfare of the City. Mr. Chenoweth
seconded the motion, which CARRIED 4-0.
Mr. Poland said he would like to have the secretary to write a letter to the
City Attorney and find out how many lots it is, because he wants to know.
OLD BUSINESS
Review Condomin'ium Plat concernlng SP-8318 - J. C. Carder Shopping Center
Mr. Ron Lucas was present to represent Mr. Carder, and produced a mylar of
the plat for the Board's approval. Mr. Lucas said he does not know if the
Board has to sign the plat and no one seems to have the answer. He remarked
that if they don't have to sign it, it would not hurt if they did sign it.
And secondly, he reported that he spoke to the City Engineer today and he
has some problems with the stormwater drainage, but according to the engineer,
it has nothing to do with the plat of the land. Mrs. Bennington referred the
Board members to page 1721, Pinal Plat Procedure, and said according to this
the Board does not have to sign it but they have to make sure that it meets
all the criteria, and then the Mayor signs it. It is considered a subdivision.
Mr. Poland suggested that this should have been done prior to the construction
but was advised by Mr. Lucas that a condominium plat cannot be signed until
it is constructed. It was originally approved as rentals. For a condominium
they have to prove that what they sign is really there. Mrs. Bennington
pointed out that on page 1724 of the Code, under Final Plat Specifications,
(21) (d) a certificate of approval by the Zoning Board is required. Mr. Lucas
discussed the proposal and asked for the Board's approval. He explained that
the project is basically complete. He said that the drywall is not in, and
the condo will be sold in a different style. In most condominiums the drywall
is put in but in this one the people have the option of buying one, two or
more units to make a bigger store. Requirements have to be met concerning
fire requirements which will be governed by the Building Official as far as
issuing certificates of occupancy, licenses, etc. There has to be a two-hour
fire rate which goes all the way to the roof~ Mr. Lucas said that the State
controls condominium, except that the building has to be built in accordance
with the requirements of the City.
Mrs. Taylor told the Board members that Mr. Alvarez had talked to her this
date and suggested that the Board make sure that they did not run into the
same problems which arose with the development on Park Avenue, in that they
did not have enough parking spaces for the businesses which bought the units.
Planning and Zoning Board
December 19, 1984
- 3 -
o
o
Mr. Lucas said that what he wants to know is, in the opinion of the Planning
and Zoning Board, does the plat meet the requirements of the site plan which
was presented.
The question arose if this structure was inspected by the Building Inspector
and Mr. Lucas said that some of it was, but he has not made a final inspection
which he will not do until someone decides to utilize a unit. Firewalls have
to be erected and inspected.
Mr. Chenoweth said he felt the question is, did the people who built the
structure do what they said they would do initially, and in his opinion they
did. He stated that he thinks they have met the requirements of what he told
the Planning Board that he would do initially, and he recommended that the
Board give him approval because they have done what they said they would do
in the use of the site with the building construction thus far, but that any
future approvals that cause radical changes in the building would have to be
subject to the Building Official's approval. Mr. Chenoweth moved that
the condominium plat be given basic approval as it is today with any future
changes subject to the Building Official' inspections. Mr. Lucas said that
Mr. Carder is well aware that he has to meet certain criteria; as of tonight
he is aware that the City Engineer is not satisfied with the stormwater
drainage and that he's going to have to do something to get going on it.
Mr. Poland seconded the motion. Mrs. Gigi Bennington spoke to the members,
stating that in her opinion, if they are approving a final plat to be sent
to the Mayor to be signed, it has to meet all the criteria, and one of the
criteria is that before final plat is submitted to the Zoning Board the
certificates of (a), (b) and (c) have to be in hand and one of them is the
certificate of approval by the City Engineer. He doesn't have to sign the
plat but he has to say that it meets all the engineering requirements. If
you send that with the problems that he says he has on it, it is her opinion
this is not the way to go. The members reconsidered the motion. Mr. Chenoweth
said that the way the motion is worded, it is subject to the approval of the
engineer and the building official. If they don't approve something it can't
go through. Mr. Lucas said that he did have a meeting with the City Engineer
today and as far as he is concerned there is no problem with the plat. He's
not even going to look at the plat. Mr. Poland said that in view of Mrs.
Bennington's comments he withdraws his second to the motion. He said to
do this thing right, and they would be setting a precedent, they should do
it by the book. He does not have the certificate from the City Engineer.
Mr. Quaggin said that he would not vote in favor of it. Mr. Chenoweth with-
drew his motion.
Mr. Poland moved that
produce a certificate
Article VII, (J) (21) .
4-0.
this case be TABLED until such time as Mr. Carder can
of approval by the City Engineer, as referenced in
The motion was seconded by Mr. Quaggin and CARRIED
NEW BUSINESS
D & J Automotive Repair Shop - Application for Occupational License - Review
to determine if use complies with the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. James Ogden was present to discuss his plans with the members. He
advised that this building is at 821 Park Avenue, across from Waco. He
said there is a body shop there and someone does cleaning and waxing of
cars. The members reviewed the permitted uses in I-I, noting that this
use is not specifically stated, but it does talk about farm machinery,
servicing, and paint and body shops, and in Mr. Poland's opinion, this
comes very close to saying automotive repair. The members wondered why
this case was sent to them.
The secretary explained that Mr. Ogden has applied for a special exception
to operate a general repair business in I-I and the special exception must
first be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board to see if, in their
opinion, the use meets the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Poland said that it seems that if you let a person repair a tractor
he should be permitted to repair a car. Mr. Poland moved that they'- "-',\L' ~_,
write a letter to the Board of Adjustments recommending that automotive repair
and rebuilding be added to the permitted uses of I-I. The secretary questioned
if he was recommending this for every case, or just this subject case. Mr.
Poland asked why not, and the secretary noted that this is not their function.
Planning and Zoning Board
December 19, 1984
- 4 -
. .
o
o
It is the job of the Planning and Zoning Board. Mr. Poland said that then
they would have to write two letters, one to the Board of Adjustments
recommending approval as a special exception in this case, and also write
a letter to the Council recommending that they amend 1-1 to include auto-
motive repair and rebuilding as a permitted use.
Mrs. Doris Massey, present in the audience, spoke to the members, stating
that she is on the Industrial Board, and she would hate to see what little
bit of industrial zoning the City has usurped with garages. She stated
that she did not mean to be unkind about it, but these things are supposed
to come before the Industrial Board whenever these things are done, and
she would rather see it come on each one as a special exception so that
the City does not get overrun. She noted that that is about all the industrial
land the City has. The secretary said that there is a copy of this application
in the Industrial Board file which will go on the agenda of the Board's next
meeting early in January. Mrs. Bennington said that she agreed with Mrs.
Massey. If you leave it as a special exception you have some control over
what goes in there. Mr. Poland wondered how you could turn someone down
in any case, and it was pointed out that there could be an overabundance
of one type of business. A special exception provides control. Mrs. Massey
said that since it is an industrial area and you can put this in other places,
each one should come before the Boards. They need industrial sites very
badly. Mr. Chenoweth said that in light of this discussion, he moves that
the Board send a letter to the Board of Adjustment advising that in their
opinion this use complies with the Comprehensive Plan. This motion was
seconded by Mr. Quaggin and CARRIED 4-0.
Review request by Doris Massey regarding Florida Shores Planting Buffer
Strip and make recommendation to Council.
Mr. Chenoweth said that he thinks that the City Council did a fine thing
back in 1978 when they wrote a resolution that the egress and entry be
allowed in a strip which has been granted piecemeal all along and that
the 6-foot requirement for purposes other than that be denied. Mr.Cheno-
weth said that he would go along with this resolution and 1E~ecoITIDend that
they establish that as an ordinance for Florida Shores regarding the 6-foot
strip. He feels that the resolution is very well done. Mr. Lucas was
present and stated that there is a State statute which did away with this
type of strip, which is called a spite-strip. This strip was put in so
that no one else could use the roads they built. He pointed out that in
one case the State ruled that such a strip is illegal. Mrs. Massey said
that her recommendation is hot to vacate, but to dedicate the entire buffer
strip around the Florida Shores area for street purposes. That way it is
not vacated so that half goes to one and half to another. The City retains
it and does not relinquish any right. She said that she would like their
recommendation, if it is their wish, that the buffer strip be dedicated for
street purposes around the entire perimeter of the Florida Shores area.
Mr. Chenoweth amended his motion to say that the buffer strip be dedicated
for a road right of way in its entirety around the perimeter as it is shown
on the map, and be retained by the City of Edgewater. He stated that he
concurs with the statements in Mrs. Massey's letter of November 27, 1984.
Mr. Poland reviewed the motion, noting that it will be retained as a road ,
right of way, and seconded Mr. Chenoweth's motion. The motion CARRIED 4-0.
There being no further business to come before the Board, upon a motion
by Mr. Quaggin and seconded by Mr. Poland, the meeting was adjourned at
8:25 p.m.
Minutes prepared by Joan Taylor
Planning and Zoning Board
December 19, 1984
- 5 -