Loading...
02-06-1985 ~ 0 CITY OF EDGEWATER PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING FEBRUARY 6, 1985 Minutes Chairman Don Bennington called the regular meeting to order at 7:05 P.M. in the Community Center. ROLL CALL Members present: Messrs. Bennington, Wheeler, Quaggin, Finn, Poland, and Ann Thomas. Mr. Chenoweth was excused. Also present: Susan Mista, secretary and one member of the press. ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN AND VICE-CHAIRMAN Chairman Bennington opened the floor for nomination of Chairman and Vice- Chairman. Mr. Quaggin nominated Mr. Bennington for Chairman. Mr. Poland seconded the nomination. Chairman Bennington asked for other nominations or volunteers for the Chairmans job. There being no other persons nomin- ated, Chairman Bennington closed the floor for nominations of Chairman. Upon roll call, Chairman Bennington was again nominated as Chairman. Roll call vote was 5-1 with Chairman Bennington voting NO. Chairman Bennington then opened the floor for nomination of Vice-Chairman. Mr. Poland nominated Mr. Wheeler for Vice~Chairman, seconded by Mr. Finn. There being no other nominations or volunteers for Vice-Chairman, the floor was closed for nominations of Vice-Chairman. Upon roll call, Mr. Wheeler was nominated for Vice-Chairman. Roll call vote was 5-1 with Mr. Wheeler voting NO. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Wheeler made a motion to approve the minutes of the January 16, 1985, meeting, seconded by Mrs. Thomas. Motion CARRIED 6~O. SITE PLAN REVIEWS SP-8502 - William Rossiter - Quadraplex - Gas Lite Square - Lot 11. Ann Thomas advised the Board that she would be filing a Conflict of Interest Statement because she is employed by Mr. Rossiter and will be representing these site plans this evening. James Monicatti, a member of the audience, asked to be heard by the Board regarding his property abuuting the main artery of Gas Lite Square and the problems he is having with people driving through his property to Juniper Street, which is about 125' to the end of the road. He asked if he could have a buffer put in where this main street from Gas Lite dead- ends at his back property line. The Board then reviewed this situation, locating on the map where Mr. Monicatti's property is in relation to Gas Lite Square. Mrs. Thomas said she would notify Mr. Rossiter of this situation and she was sure he would put in a buffer. Mr. Monicatti advised that he had contacted the Police Department and the City and nothing has been done about it and this has been going on over a year. He further advised that he filed a complaint not too long ago when people were throwing eggs at his home. He asked the Board not to issue anymore permits for Gas Lite until this situation can be resolved. Chair- man Bennington pointed out that Mr. Monicatti lives in an R4 zoning and Gas Lite is also zoned R4, this is why a buffer was not required between his residence and the subdivision. Councilman Neil Asting, a member of the audience, advised Mr. Monicatti that he would take care of this problem for him tomorrow norning. Mr. Monicatti said he would appreciate any help he can get in resolving this problem. Q f..) Chairman Bennington stated there were no architectural drawings of this structure and he cannot tell the size of the units from what they have been given. He also advised that an architect's seal is required because they are quadraplexes. Mrs. Thomas informed the Board that the architect has the drawings now and will be sealing them and she will be sure the Planning Department gets copies of same with the seal on them. Chairman Bennington said that the plan meets the setback requirements. Mr. Finn asked whether or not all three site plans are missing the construction drawings, to which Chairman Bennington replied, yes. Chairman Bennington stated that he is not sure the size requirements are met. The plans show 2,970 square feet and the Code requires 3,000 square feet living area. Mrs. Thomas said there are a lot of existing trees :on the lot that will be left. Mr. Wheeler made a motion to TABLE this site plan until they receive the architectural drawings. Mr. Quaggin seconded the motion. Mr. Poland stated that Mrs. Thomas should be sure that the drawings show the correct size requirements, that being 3,000 square feet of living area. Mrs. Thomas said that all the quadraplexes will be the same. This particular plan is shown on a larger lot, that is the only difference between the two site plans that have been presented for review. Upon roll call, motion CARRIED 6-0. SP-8503 - William Rossiter - Apartment Building - East Village Green. Chairman Bennington read into the minutes the memo from Terry Wadsworth, Utilities Supervisor, regarding sewage and water utilities, which stated that the City would be able to provide same. The Building Official commented that the project needs stormwater calculations approved by the City Engineer. Chairman Bennington said he agreed with this. He added that there were problems in the area in the past concerning the size of culvert that needs to be installed and this matter should defin~ itely be addressed by the City Engineer. Mr. Wheeler made a motion to TABLE this site plan until an architect's sealed set of plans are submitted and a report is received from the City Engineer concerning the drainage system. Mr. Poland seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 6-0. SP-8504 - Willia~ Rossiter -.Qu~draplexes - Gas Lite Square. Chairman Bennington said that this site plan is for three quadraplexes which are the same as the first one they looked at this evening. Mr. Wheeler made a motion to TABLE this site plan, also, until the architectural drawings are received. Mr. Finn seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 6-0. OLD BUSINESS Review application for rezoning by Donnie Williams for property located at 119 E. Park Avenue, from R3 to B3. Chairman Bennington stated that this item was tabled at the last .meeting so that the Board could look further into rezoning the entire strip of land on Park Avenue from Ridgewood Avenue to Riverside Drive to B3. Mrs. Thomas said she looked into the businesses and residences that are situated on this street and she spoke to Councilman Asting about it and both of them decided that it would be in the best interest of the City and the best use of zoning to rezone the entire street to B3. The street is primarily being used for businesses at the present time. Chairman Bennington said his only concern was any problems that might arise because this would be City initiated rezoning. The original request that Mr. Williams presented cannot be legally done. Mrs. Thomas said -2- Planning and Zoning Board Meeting Fe b rua ry 6, 198 5 o (,) that at one time someone else residing in that area requested a rezoning to B3 and then dropped the request, therefore, she could see no problem with having this area rezoned. Mrs. Thomas made a motion to send a recommendation to Council to rezone this property to B3. Chairman Bennington noted that one side of the street on Park Avenue is R2 and one side is R3. The Church is in R2 zoning. He suggested they use the lot numbers. On the north side of Park Avenue aE Lots 6, 7, 4M, 4N, 40, 4P and 4Q. On the south side of Park Avenue are Lots 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 16A, 16B, 16C, 17, 17A. He said that the property Mr. Williams is requesting to have rezoned is located on Lot 4M. The entire area will have to be rezoned which will make it more compatible with the present zoning. Chairman Bennington asked the secretary to include in the recommendation to Council the lot numbers involved in this rezoning request. Mr. Poland seconded Mrs. Thomas' motion. Motion CARRIED 6 -0. At this time, 7:50 P.M., Chairman Bennington called a recess. The meeting was called back to order at 8:00 P.M. Review Section 706.00 - Fences, Walls and Hedges - with Dennis Fischer, Building Official. Mr. Fischer advised the Board members that he needs for the Board to clarify some of the requirements regarding fences, walls and hedges. The Ordinance is limited and he needs some clarification when permitting fences. He gave each Board member a drawing of examples of fences being installed with neighbors on both sides and on a corner lot. He referred to the drawing with neighbors on both sides. The Ordinance states rear and side up to dwelling line, 6', opaque but not concrete. He said that to him that means from the front of the house to the corner, progressing to the rear, along both sides and acrOS5 the rear, it can be 6' high and basically solid. He went on to say he has had problems with the wording, "not concrete". He said he thought the Ordinance means a 6' high fence along these lines of the house that you cannot see through would be permitted. Chairman Bennington said that Section 705 affects residences, not businesses. He added that he could not understand the wording in the Ordinance which says vision cannot be impeded between the height of 2~' and 10'. He said it appears to say you can go up as high as 2~' and then start again at 10'. This is for a residential corner lot ~ not businesses. The Ordin- ance addressing businesses states a corner lot cannot be fenced. Mr. Fischer said one of the questions he runs in to is what is not opaque. The dictionary states it is something you can see through. He determines not opaque is a fence that has 50% or less voids in it. He stated he has been forced to make his own determination in regards to this Ordinance. Chairman Bennington read the definition of a "buffer" into the minutes, stating that same contradicts the fence Ordinance, stating a 6' high screen consisting of either a decoratiye wooden fence that is 50% to 75% solid or a decorative concrete block wall. The fence Ordinance says you cannot use concrete. In regards to the item in Mr. Fischer's letter on aesthetics, with the finished side toward the outside, Mr. Fischer gave as an example a per- son putting a pool in their yard and it has to be fenced, many people put up decorative wooden fences and the finished side toward the inside of the pool area. Neighbors complain about looking at the bad side of the fence. Chairman Bennington said that the Ordinance regarding pools states that fences are to be constructed so as to not be easily climbable -3- Planning and Zoning Board Meeting February 6, 1985 o o by small children. Concerning aesthetics of a fence, if someone puts up a fence he would not want the neighbors to look at the good side. Mr. Fischer said a lot of fences are being put up along canals to hide the looks of the canal. Mr. Fischer asked the Board to also consider the location in regard to property line. There should be something in the Ordinance stating it should be erected so many inches off the property line. Six inches seems to be what is used by other surrounding communities. Concerning commercial property owners, Mr. Fischer advised that he has had several requests from people wanting 8' fences for storage areas. The present height limitation is 6', which these people feel is not high enough for security purposes. He also stated some people are wanting to put spas on their back porch with a fence around the back yard so that when they stand up to get out of the spa, the fence will provide privacy so that no one can see over the fence. With the spa being two to three feet off the ground, do you measure the fence two to three feet off the ground and then six feet up or from the ground level? The people are not asking that the fence be higher than six feet, they are asking that the fence start two to three feet off the ground and be only six feet tall from that point. Chairman Bennington said that in his opinion the Ordinance should also stipulate that no fence should be erected that would block any public access. In reference to corner lot situations, Mr. Fischer referred the Board members to the second drawing that he gave them, which shows two side streets. He said he has been allowing people to install a 4' high chain link fence or split rail fence on a corner lot - it allows sufficient visibility and the Police Department found no problem with this type fence on a corner lot. Chairman Bennington agreed with Mr. Fischer and noted that Section 706 says you cannot put a fence up over 4' high and Section 70S says you cannot impede the vision above 2~'. In summary, Chairman Bennington stated that the Board needs to review the Ordinance concerning what opaque means, what is meant by concrete, designated number of inches off the property line, consider 8' height for commercial property. Mr. Poland asked Mr. Fischer a question which he said was not on this subject, that being whether or not he requires a building permit for the new satellite dishes. Mr. Fischer said there is no Ordinance for these dishes, however, he requires a building permit to erect one. It was his suggestion that an Ordinance needs to be adopted because these dishes are popping up allover and more frequently than in the past. Mr. Wheeler said they could address this subject at a later time. Chairman Bennington asked Mr. Fischer if there is a problem with people putting the good side of the fence in or out, other than around pools, to which he replied, yes. There are problems with neighbors complaining about the stockade fences and the finished side being installed toward the owners property. Mr. Poland said that people do have a moral obligation to not use their property in a manner which might be offensive to their neighbor. Chairman Bennington asked Mr. Fischer if there were any other problems concerning these fences that need to be addressed. Mr. Fischer replied that that was all that he was having problems with. Chairman Bennington then asked Mr. Fischer if his department was having problems concerning receiving stormwater calculations on the site plans that were being approved by the Board. Mr. Fischer said that that problem has been resolved. He is presently requiring a letter from Mr. Ferrara at the time the permit is requested, stating that the stormwater system meets his approval. No building permit will be issued until Mr, Ferrara OKs the stormwater system. ~4~ Planning and Zoning Board Meeting February 6, ~98s o o Chairman Bennington questioned J. C. Carder's shopping center, stating he read a letter from Mr. Ferrara saying the stormwater calculations were not in and basically the project should be shut down until the stormwater system is installed and given approval. He noted that he went by there the other day and the pizza restaurant was open and doing business. Mr. Fischer explained that he met with Mr. Ferrara and Mr. Carder and Mr. Carder's engineer and as a result of their meeting, Mr. Ferrara gave approval to the opening of the pizza restaurant but no other place of business can be opened until the stormwater calculations are reviewed and approved. Chairman Bennington noted that the building was approved for a convenient store. He said more and more buildings are being passed by the Board and then being constructed for something else. He then read from the Code which states that minor changes in the locating, siting and height of building structures may be authorized by the Zoning and Planning Board, if required by engineering or other circumstances not foreseen. All other changes infue use or any rearrangement of the parking areas, buildings, lots or any changes in the provision of common open space must be made by the Planning and Zoning Board. No amendment may be made in the approved site plan unless the changes are shown to be required by changes in conditions that have occurred since the site plan was approved. It was his opinion that people are getting approved what will pass and then building whatever they want. Chairman Bennington said that the Board got the letter from Mr. Fischer in September and they asked him to corne to the next meeting and he could not attend that meeting, asking that it be postponed to the first of the year, which the Board did. He said he was upset in reading the Council minutes that Mr. Fischer said he requested the Board to review this Ordinance and got no response. He said that was an unfair statement that Mr. Fischer made to the Council, in his opinion, saying the Board did not want to do something about this Ordinance when they tried to last September. (The letter is in reference to the Fence Ordinance.) Mr. Poland asked the Board to skip the next item on the agenda, going back to it later, so that Mr. and Mrs. Shaffer could be heard by the Board concerning their request under New Business. The Board agreed to Mr. Poland's request. NEW BUSINESS Review a lication of Michael Shaffer's request for S ecial Exce tion to operate an auto repair an pafts sale USlness in 11. Chairman Bennington said that any permitted use in zones Bl through B6 can be used as a Special Exception in II and this Board must review the application to be sure it complies with the Comprehensive Plan and make a recommendation to the Board of Adjustments concerning same. If the Special Exception is granted, then he will have to meet the zoning requirements. If the use is permitted in the B3 zone, they have to comply with the B3 requirements and this Board is to determine whether or not they can comply with same if granted the Special Exception. A discussion then ensued concerning the requirements of 'zoning, deter: mining that it is a permitted business in the B zoning and, therefore, an authorized special exception in the industrial zoning. Mr. Wheeler made a motion that this application complies with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the zoning requirements for the B3 zoning. Mrs. Thomas seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 6-0. Review letter from James Wagner concerning front lot line of property on which he proposes to build two single family residences. Mr. Wagner was present to discuss this matter with the Board. He asked that the Board determine which is the front and which is the rear of the houses he wants to build. The property abutts the sewer plant. It is his intention to subdivide the property into two lots. He does not own the property on the corner, which is 75' wide. The property is zoned R3. There will be a 25' drive along the 'side of the property to get to the back lot. -5- Planning and Zoning Board Meeting February 6, 1985 ~ o Chairman Bennington said if he uses 25' on the side of the lot for a driveway, the lot will only be 75' x 110' and the Code requires 75' x 115', making the property 5' short. Therefore, he cannot legally sub- divide the property into two lots because the Code states you cannot reduce a lot in dimension or area below the minimum requirements. Even though the property exceeds the minimum area ~ize, it does not meet the required lot size, and therefore cannot be subdivided. Mrs. Thomas made a motion to TABLE the item on the agenda that was skipped over, concerning reviewing the B@ Permitted Uses until the next meeting. Mr. Poland seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 6-0. Mr. Wheeler made a motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Mrs. Thomas. The meeting was adjourned at 9:12 P.M. Minutes submitted by: Susan Mista -6- Planning and Zoning Board Meeting February 6, 1985