Loading...
12-19-1985 ~ , ; 4 ~ u PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 19, 1985 9:00 A.M. COMMUNITY CENTER Mr. Jake Wheeler called to order a regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board at 9:00 A.M., December 19, 1985 in the Community Center. ROLL CALL: Members present: Messrs. Jake Wheeler, Paul Loeffler, Jim Mackie and George Quaggin. Members excused were Don Bennington and Fred Finn. Also present was Dennls~Fis~heE~~.guil~ing Official and Jan Morris, Secretary. The minutes of December 5, 1985 were presented for approval. Mr. Loeffler made a motion to accept the minutes as written. Mr Mackie seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 4-0. SKETCH PLANS: SP-8532 LUIS C. GEIL - OLD TYME GENERAL STORE OF EDGEWATER, INC. 30th STREET B-2 The Board reviewed a sketch plan for Mr. Geil, who requested to build a convenience store and miniwarehouses at 30th Street between India Palm and Hibiscus. The Board discussed the plans in relation to the B-2 zoning. It was stated that the gas pumps are not a perillitted use in the B-2 zoning however there is an ordinance in process to make this a permitted use if approved by the City Council. Mr. Loeffler made a motion to approve the sketch plan with the gas pumps approval depending on the City Council's action on the ordinance amending the B-2 zoning. Motion seconded by Mr. Mackie. Motion CARRIED 4-0. SP-8533 LUIS C. GEIL - HALIFAX COURT - CONDOMINIUM RECREATION AREA B-3 The Board reviewed a sketch plan for Mr. Geil. Mr. Geil requested to amend the plans for the Halifax Court Condominiums. He wanted to eliminate one building in the plans and replace it with a. recreation area. The Board discussed the plans which included a pool, a recreation building and shuffle board court. They also discussed the landscaping. Mr. Mackie made a motion to approve the sketch plan, seconded by Mr. Quaggin. Motion CARRIED 4-0. CERTIFICATES OF ZONING: COZ 85-36 WILLIAM D. ROSSITER - RETAIL SALES - 931 S. RIDGEWOOD B-3 The certificate of zoning 85-36 had been tabled from the October 16, 1985 meeting awaiting advice from the City Attorney. The Board discussed the COZ extensively. They were concerned about the parking at the plaza and issuing more than one license for this location would create more parking problems. It was stated that the owner..of the plaza said the buildings were not set up to have more than one business in a unit because you don't have the parking. Mr. Rossiter said the last time he was before the Board for this COZ it was tabled in order to get a legal opinion from the City Attorney who was supposedto be at this meeting but since he didn't show he thought the Board should table it until later. The Board told Mr. Rossiter he needed two licenses since he has license for a construction office now but wants to sell satellite dishes he needs a retail sales license also. Mr. Ed Hall, owner of the building, stated that it was simple that you could only have one business per unit. Mr. Mackie stated that the biggest problem with the COZ was the parking. Mr. Mackie made a motion to deny the COZ 85-36 and if Mr. Rossiter wants he may take it to City Council and if they want to overturn the Planning and Zoning Board then it will be up to them. Mr. Loeffler seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 4-0. COZ 85-52 NORMAN ~COX 2102 S. RIDGEWOOD U RETAIL MERCHANDISE B-5 The Board reviewed a COZ for Norman J. Cox, who wants to open a retail merchandise store at the Downtown Edgewater Plaza. It was found that there is plenty of parking in the area. Mr. Cox told the Board that his sign would be a l4'X3' self contained illuminated sign and was within the sign ordinance of the City. Mr. Quaggin made a motion the Certificate of zoning No. 85-52 be approved. Motion seconded by Mr. Mackie. Motion CARRIED 4-0. COZ 85-53 JON RIC HAIR DESIGN 2102 S. RIDGEWOOD BEAUTY SALON B-5 Mr. COZ The John Rando was present to discuss this COZ. The Board reviewed the and finding ample parking Mr. Loeffler made a motion to t approve i . motion was seconded by Mr. Mackie. Motion CARRIED 4-0. COZ 85-54 CHARLES T. SHIELDS 1511 S. Ridgewood Video Tape and Player Rental B 3 Mr. Shields was present to answer questions the Board might have about this COZ. The Board reviewed the COZ to determine the exact location. Mr. Loeffler stated that this was located in his building and he would abstain from voting on this COZ. Mr. Shields informed the Board that there would be a television for children to watch cartoons while their parents are shopping. Mr. Shields stated he would be renting video machines and films to the public. Finding everything in order Mr. Mackie made a motion to approve the COZ. Motion was seconded by Mr.Quaggin. Mr. Wheeler informed Mr. Loeffler to file a conflict of voting interest but he would have to vote. Motion CARRIED 4-0. COZ 85-55 - JOHN D. CIAFFONI 102 LOUISE DR. RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION B-3 Mr. Ciaffoni informed the Board that this was the Lovell property. The Board discussed the parking at the building. The Board informed Mr. Ciaffoni that each business in the building needed their own separate parking. Mr. Ciaffoni said he had been operating his business out of this home. When asked about his license Mr. Ciaffoni stated he had State, County and City licenses. After discussion and finding everything in order, Mr. Loeffler made a motion to approve the COZ. Mr. Quaggin seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 4-0. City Attorney Alvarez joined the meeting at this time. OLD BUSINESS: MEMO FROM BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS IN REFERENCE TO LUIS GEIL (SP-8529) REQUEST FOR VARIANCE 612 N. RIDGEWOOD. A memo from the Board of Adjustments was discussed. The memo requested that Planning and Zoning consider rezoning a B-5 area off North Ridgewood between Knapp Avenue and Live Oak Street. The Board of Adjustment stated that these lots were to small to build on under the current zoning and they could not grant variances except in the case of a hardship not created by the owner. The Board and the City Attorney discussed the rezoning at length. Mr. Alvarez, City Attorney, informed the Board that the rezoning had to be in keeping with the comprehensive plan of the surrounding area. The Board found that rezoning this area to B-3 excluding the shopping center would be keeping with the zoning along Ridgewood which is B-3. The Board discussed the property owners around the area would have to be informed and a public hearing would have to be held. The Board decided to let the City Council have the hearing and inform the property owners. Mr. Alvarez informed the Board that the easiest way to go would be send a letter to the Council requesting they rezone the area. Mr. Loeffler made a motion to send a letter to the City Council requesting they rezone the B-5 area to B-3 excluding the shopping center. Mr. Mackie seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 4-0. -2- Planning and Zoning Board Regular Meeting Minutes December 19, 1985 ~ u SET BACK ENCROACHMENTS FOR ENTIRE R-4 AREAS. SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING Mr. Fischer stated this was incorrect on the agenda that it should be set back encroachments for the entire City. Mr. Fischer, Building Official stated that he wanted to add set back encroachments to the zoning, not change anything. Mr. Fischer and the Board discussed the set back encroachments. Mr. Fischer told the Board that right now we have no regulations for patio slabs and their location. The Board also discussed the zoning of Pelican Cove West at this time. They discussed setting a date for a hearing but decided they needed more of the Board members present for a decision on these two subjects. Mr. Fischer informed the Board that if they were going to zone Pelican Cove West, Phase I and Phase II, they needed to get the requirements for R-4A and determine what set backs, what regulations, encroachments and things they will permit in the new zoning. He said we don't have anything on that right now. Mr. Wheeler stated he thought we should have a workshop on that. The Board discussed the Pelican Cove West area and that it had never been zoned since being annexed into the City. Mr. Loeffler made a motion to table the set back encroachment for the entire City and the zoning of Pelican Cove West until they get more facts on it. Mr. Mackie seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 4-0. ZONING OF PELICAN COVE WEST SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING (This subject discussed above and tabled) RIVERSIDE DRIVE - PRESERVATION OF_OPEN SPACES The Board discussed a memo for the City Clerk. The memo was about the vegetation line in the River with a drawing of a site plan attached. They discussed the people building to close to the water line. Mr. Mackie said there is not enough set back in the rear yard to support the property. He said the land could not be classified as buildable because it is submerged. Mr. Wheeler informed the Board that Mr. Bennington was getting in touch with the Department of Natural Resources. Mr. Alvarez said this might answer all the Board~ questions. The Board discussed having bulkheads in this area. Mr. Fischer stated that they need clarify for him "rear yard" in the Code Book. He said it reads from the rear property line. Mr. Alvarez said this is that special district that is along the river. Mr. Alvarez said this is a clear issue that needs to be resolved. The Board referred the the Code B'ook and the definition of rear yard. Mr. Loeffler made a motion to table this subject until after the first of the year. Mr. Mackie seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 4-0. Mr. Alvarez, City Attorney, said they had to realize they have a unique situation along Riverside Drive. He said they needed to establish a clear guideline they could enforce that what we have now is applicable to any lot throughout the City. He also said that is not the case here because the lot goes into the river. He said there will have to be a change in the ordinance to specify in the same way as for open space R-IA the distance from the river. Is it going to require a bulkhead or is it going to require thirty (30) feet of dry land.or is it going to be thirty (30) feet that reads from the high tide? There has to be a criteria adopted. Mr. Fischer drew diagrams on the blackboard explaining the problems he is faced with in issuing the building permits. He said according to the Code now it reads it must have the frontage and the square area.He said not all lots are made square. He said a lot is sometimes irregularily shaped. He stated that some are partially submerged. He said if a home is to be built on these lots they need ten feet from the side property line, forty feet from the front property line and they have a thirty feet rear set back. He said it doesn't say where it has to be the lot line, rear lot line. The definition of rear yard is the rear line adjacent to both side lines to the rear most portion of the structure and that requires presently thirty feet in this area. He said if a man wants to build a house, he can not build into the rear without dredge and fill permits from Department of Environmental Regulations, so he wants to build away from it using the area in the back (submerged land) as his set back. He said the present definition of rear set back says from the rear of the building to the property line. Mr. Fischer also related if this were changed where it said the rear set back from the property line to the -3- Planning and Zoning Board Regular Meeting Minutes December 19, 1985 '" . ~ u RIVERSIDE DRIVE - PRESERVATION OF OPEN SPACES CONTINUED existing high water table or that the thirty (30) feet be maintanined, he would have to move the house forward of if he could not do that he would need a dredge and fill permit. If it could be obtained then he would have the required land and if denied then a house could not be built upon that area. The mean high tide was discussed. Mr. Fischer informed the Board that a surveyor could determine where the high water mark is. He also said that this could be indicated upon the site plans. Mr. Fischer stated right now they have a legal survey of a lot, the person owns all that land on the lot and some of it is submerged or partially submerged. He said they do not own the water but legally own all the land under the water. It was stated that these people pay taxes on this submerged land. There was a discussion about holding up any building permits being issued for this area until the Board maked a decision about the rear set back. The Attorney was asked if they might declare a moratorium in this area until this is resolved. Mr. Alvarez replied that he would like to stay away from a moratorium. Mr. Mackie then asked if the Building Official could not bring any of the building applications in the R-lA are to the Planning and Zoning Board for review until this is resolved. The Board discussed doing something to take the pressure off of the Building Official as to issuing permits in this R-lA area. Mr. Alvarez suggested that the Board recommend changing the ordinance to read thirty (30) feet from the rear of the building to the high water mark. A discussion ensued about the Ordinance 880 and what the intentions were of the people who drafted it and how past Building Officials interpreted it. Mr. Alvarez stated that common practices with other municipalities was to measure from the rear of the building to the high water mark. Mr. Fischer said we could require the thirty (30) feet set back be measured from the rear of the building to the mean high tide level. He also related that would be indicated on the survey and within the survey require it to show the vegetation line and all wetlands. Mr. Alvarez stated that if the City's practice has been to measure the rear yard from the high water mark and if someone can testify that was the intent when the Code was written, then we could establish a policy almost immediately while a zoning amendment is pending. Otherwise if we try to enforce measuring the rear yard from the high water mark before the zoning amendments are made and while the Code Book states from the rear property line we could get a judgement against us. He said "I think it would be a reasonable interpretation to measure the rear literally to the high water mark like all other jurisdictions do. The Building Official agreed with the City Attorney. Mr. Mackie stated that if the Building Official could not follow the criteria in the book then he could send the people to the Planning and Zoning Board. Mr. Alvarez stated that the Board needed to send a recommendation to the Council and in the meantime the way the Ordinance reads now the Building Official is mandated by law to follow the ordinance and he is the one who issues building permits. The Board decided that if Mr. Fischer has a problem with a building lot on Riverside Drive he should bring it back in front of the Board with his recommendations. After a very lengthy discussion Mr. Mackie made a motion to send a letter to the City Council asking that they amend the zoning in the R-lA area to read rear yard thirty (30) feet from the rear of the building to the high water mark. Mr. Loeffler seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 4-0. HOUSE NUMBERING PROJECT AND SIGN ORDINANCE 79-0-25 Mr. Loeffler made a motion to table the house numbering project and the sign ordinance 79-0-25. Motion seconded by Mr. Mackie. Motion CARRIED 4-0. There being no further business to come before the Board, Mr. Loeffler made a motion to adjourn. Motion seconded by Mr. Mackie. Meeting adjourned at 12:05 P.M.. Minutes respectively submitted -4- Planning and Zoning Board Regular Meeting Minutes December 19, 1985 Jan Morris FORM 4 ,-... MEfttORANDUM OF YOTI CONFLICT LAST NAME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME ~ c; eD ;:- )- Jty.- (/ I MAILING ADDRESS /50 r ;701-11-0'( /) Y CITY J:c-I ~ IV' ^- r; y DATE ON W ICH VOTE OCCURRED / J - I Y'J- NAME OF BOARD. COUNCIL. COMMISSION. AUTHORITY. OR COMMITTEE THE BOARD. COUNCIL, COMMISSION. AUTHORITY. OR COMMITTEE ON WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF: o CITY 0 COUNTY 0 OTHER LOCAL AGENCY 0 STATE COUNTY.I / . lie/uS" NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OR STATE AGENCY WHO MUST FILE FORM 4 This form is for use by any person serving on either an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority, or committee, whether state or local, and it applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are faced with a voting conflict of interest. As the voting conflict requirements for public officers at the local level differ from the requirements for state officers, this form is divided into two parts: PART A is for use by persons serving on local boards (municipal, county, special tax districts, etc.), while PART B is prescribed for all other boards, i.e., those at the state level. PART C of the form contains instructions as to when and where this form must be filed. PART A VOTING CONFLICT DISCLOSURE FOR LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS [Required by Section 112.3143(3), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1984).] The Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees PROHIBITS each municipal, county. and other local public officer FROM VOTING in an official capacity upon any measure which inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting in his official capacity upon any measure which inures to the special gain of any principal (other than a government agency as defined in Section 112.312(2), Florida Statutes) by whom he is retained. In any such case a local public officer must disclose the conflict: (a) PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of his interest in the matter on which he is abstaining from voting; and (b) WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by describing the nature of his interest as a public record in this part below. NOTE: Commissioners of a Community Redevelopment Agency created or designated pursuant to Section 163.356 or Section 163.357, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1984), or officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not prohibited from voting. In such cases, however, the oral and written disclosure of this part must be made. JJ - I 'I - 8~- I, the undersigned local public officer, hereby disclose that on , 19 _: (a) I abstained from voting on a matter which (check one): V. d '1" _ Inure to my specla prIvate gam; or _inured to the special gain of . by whom I am retained. CE FORM 4 - REV. 10-84 PAGE 1 ". (b) The measure on which 'I abstained and the nature of my interest in the measure is as follows: /J-~i- $""> Date Filed ~vjJ ~/af Signature / Please see PART C for instructions on when and where to file this form. PART B VOTING CONFLICT DISCLOSURE FOR STATE OFFICERS [Required by Section 112.3143(2), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1984).] Each state public officer is permitted to vote in his official capacity on any matter. However, any state officer who votes in his official capacity upon any measure which inures to his special private gain or the special gain of any principal by whom he is retained is required to disclose the nature of his interest as a public record in Part B below within 15 days after the vote occurs. I, the undersigned officer of a state agency, hereby disclose that on , 19 _: (a) I voted on a matter which (check one): _ inured to my special private gain; or _ inured to the special gain of . by whom I am retained. (b) The measure on which I voted and the nature of my interest in the measure is as follows: Date Filed Signature Please see PART C below for instructions on when and where to file this form. PART C FILING INSTR"UCTIONS This memorandum must be filed within fifteen (15) days following the meeting during which the voting conflict occurred with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who shall incorporate the memorandum in the meeting minutes. This form need not be filed merely to indicate the absence of a voting conflict. NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES 0 I 12.317(1983), A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MA Y BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND. OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED SS,OOO. CE FORM 4. REV. 10-84 PAGE 2