Loading...
09-13-1984 -. ~ o u ~ CITY OF EDGEWATER Board of Adjustment september 13, 1984 Minutes Chairman Garthwaite called the regular 7:00 p.m. in the Community Center. I meeting of the Board to order at ROLL CALL Members present: Mrs. Martin~ Mrs. Murphy, Messrs. Garthwaite, Newell, Roush, Moran and Savini. Alfo present: Mrs. Taylor, Secretary, and one member of the press. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made by Mrs. Murphy and seconded by Mr. Roush to approve the minutes of the August 9 meeting. The motion CARRIED 7-0. NEW BUSINESS There was no representative present from Coleman Construction Company. It was agreed to postpone this case until a representative arrived to the meeting. . Mr. Garthwaite stated for the information of those present that if there is any objection to the decision of this Board the appeal would be to the Circuit Court. Russell A. Gold - Request for a two foot variance to construct a 12' x 22' addition at 805 Egret Court in theR-4Zone. Advertising and posting of the property was confirmed. Mr. Gold was present to speak to the members. He was given a copy of the letter from the Planning and Zoning Board dated September 6 which stated that they have given him final approval of his plan pending receipt of a variance for the rear setback. Mr. Roush asked about the roof and if there would be a hangover. Mr. Gold advised that there would be about a foot; he will put spouting up. Mr. Garthwaite explained to Mr. Gold that the ordinance was changed in January of 1984 which changed the setback from 20 feet to 25 feet. Mrs. Murphy asked when he bought the property; he responded that it was purchased in June of this year. Mr. Gold asked if Mr. Coleman had to go to the Planning Board for his addition, which is also in an R-4 Zone. Mr. Garthwaite informed Mr. Gold that Mr. Carder got a variance at the time of subdivision approval, therefore it is a nonconforming lot, but he still needs to meet the setback requirements. Mrs. Murphy said she did not feel that Mr. Gold's addition would devalue the propertie~ in the neighborhood. Mr. Newell motioned that this variance be granted. The motion was seconded by Mr. Savini and CARRIED 7-0. MISCELLANEOUS Mr. Newell mentioned an addition built down the street from Mr. Gold which did not appear to meet the setback requirements. Mr. Garthwaite suggested that some of the sites in Shangri-La were very close to the lot lines. It was agreed to look into this matter further and discuss it at the next meeting. Screens in excess of six feet were also briefly discussed. Mrs. Murphy asked about the policy of certain property owners who use fill to enlarge their waterfront lots, and wondered if the City has any control . ~ ~ ~ over this type situation. She noted that in some cases there is a canal through the middle of the property which needs to be filled in. Her question was, Can they do this with just the Corps of Engineer~s approval, without City authorization? This subject was discussed at length but the question was not resolved. Mr. Garthwaite referred again to subject brought up by Mr. Newell, and stated that he did not believe the members should be looking for violations. On the other hand, ~n cases which the Board has ruled on, if it is not being built in accordance with the stipulations, the Building Official should be notified. Any other infractions can be discussed and forwarded on to the proper official or Board for action. The members discussed the nonconformance rule. Mr. Garthwaite referred to Sec. 400.00, page 1537 of the Code, and noted that "future amendments" of the Ordinance will make a property nonconforming. They were specifically referring to the new ordinance changing the rear setback in the R-4 zone from 20 feet to 25 feet. Therefore, those structures built prior to the Ordinance going into effect would be considered nonconforming, such as Shangri-La. This section of the Code states that nonconforming structures cannot be enlarged upon, expanded or extended, etc. Mrs. Murphy asked if anyone knew what prompted the changes in the setback requirements for R-4. Mr. Garthwaite recommended that all the members study the section of the Code pertaining to nonconformance before the next meeting. He suggested that perhaps a motion could be made contingent upon an opinion from the City Attorney. Mrs. Murphy asked how they could increase the minimum yard requirements when the subdivision is already laid out. You cannot stretch the lot, she commented, and wondered if this could pertain to Shangri-La. Mr. Garthwaite suggested that the Board request an opinion from the attorney. He asked that a letter be written to the attorney for his opinion as to whether the new ordinance pertains to subdivisions such as Shangri-La, or any that have been platted before January 23, 1984. A motion was made by Mr. Newell to table the two variance requests from Coleman Construction Company until the next meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Moran. The motion CARRIED 7-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:55 p.m. Minutes submitted by Joan Taylor Board of Adjustment September 13, 1984 - 2 - /}