01-08-1987
.,
.p-
(.)
.Q
..
CITY OF EDGEWATER
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS
January 8, 1987 7:00 p.m.
City Hall
MINUTES
The meeting was called to order by the Chairman, Mr. Garthwaite,
at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall of the City of Edgewater.
ROLL CALL-
Members present were: Jimmie Newell, Louise Martin, Alice Murphy,
Ray Savini, Robert Wolfe and Robert Garthwaite. Mr. Richard Moran
was excused. Also present were Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth Schultz,
Mr. James Mackie, Mr. Michael Frederick, and reporter Beth Weilenman.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Garthwaite asked for approval of the minutes of the December
11th, 1986 minutes, but Mrs. Murphy interrupted at this point and
discussed the Lipscomb case by saying she wanted it to be known
Mrs. Lipscomb admitted she knew she had covered over 29% of her
property when the Board gave her permission to build the carport
and why, then did she go ahead and build a storage shed or work
shop when she knew she would be over. She stated this did not come
out in the minutes and Mrs. Murphy's concern was if this is taken to
court, this fact wouldn't be known. The secretary stated the court
could listen to the tapes and Mrs. M~rphy said that's o.k., then.
Mr. Garthwaite stated Mrs. Lipscomb said she had used the figures
from the surveyor which, with the garage and the carport, would be
slightly under 30%. Mrs. Murphy said Mrs. Lipscomb had the property
surveyed before she did any building and Mr. Garthwait said yes,
but she did not use those figures from the surveyor to recheck her
previous figures. Mr. Garthwaite then asked if there were any
other comments on the minutes, and Mrs. Martin stated on page 2,
three lines from the bottom, it should read "30 feet is sufficient"
instead of "ten feet is sufficient". The secretary said she would
make the change on the original and Mr. Savini moved the minutes be
accepted as corrected, seconded by Mrs. Martin. Motion CARRIED 6-0.
NEW BUSINESS
KENNETH SCHULTZ, request for variance of twenty feet from required
thirty foot setback, Lot 2, Lowd's Subdivision, Riverside Drive and
Hardin Place. Mr. Garthwaite had Mr. Schultz sworn in and Mr. Schultz
then took a seat at the table. Mr. Garthwaite announced the property
had been posted and Mrs. Murphy said she would like to know when the
sign was posted, as she didn't see it. It was explained by the secretary
that Mr. Schultz was called Wednesday, December 31, to pick up the two
signs, as Thursday was New Year's Day, but Mr. Schultz didn't get in
until Friday. Mr. Schultz then explained the signs blew away during
the heavy winds and the secretary said Mr. Schultz came in immediately
when the signs blew down and the secretary made him two new signs at
once, which he then posted. Mrs. Murphy stated she didn't think we
should cut down on the time the signs are posted. Mr. Garthwaite then
asked Mr. Schultz if he had brought his abstract and Mr. Schultz said
his proof of ownership is a letter from the City saying he had a
buildable lot. Mrs. Martin asked how, if ~IA requires a 100 foot
width, can this be a buildable lot, and Mr. Garthwaite answered it
was plotted prior to 1974, which was the enactment of the 880 Ordinance.
Mr. Garthwaite then read a letter to the Board from Dennis Fischer,
Building Inspector, to Mr. Schultz, informing him he could build, the
requirements to be nothing less than 1300 square feet living area, and
Mr. Schultz is asking for a twenty foot variance because of the 30 foot
setback required on a corner lot. The Board then discussed the difference
in requirements before the Ordinance 880 was enacted, and Mr. Garthwaite
stated that for one, a lot has to have a 100 foot frontage, and if this
lot was platted prior to the 880.0rdinance in 1974, it can be built on,
and that is what Mr. Garthwaite wanted to be sure of before the Board
could act. Mr. Garthwaite also stated you couldn't put a road down to
Q
o
the river for any useful purpose because of marsh land and the
mangroves. Mrs. Murphy stated she looked at old plats in City Hall
when the Hardin Subdivision was laid out and there was just one lot,
called Lot 10, and was just shoreline on the river, no numbers; that
they were not lots. She continued that since No. 10 was. such a big
lot, running from Rhode Island to Hardin Place, it was eventually
divided into two buildable lots, and it looks as though someone got
hold of that dredged up land and started to slice lots off of it and
when they got to Hardin Place they had just 60 feet left. Mrs. Muprhy
said she doesn't know if the City ever acknowledged it was a buildable
lot. mr. Schultz then stated the lot was recognized as buildable in
1965 by the City of Edgewater, stating it had to have 1200 square feet
of building area, and that again in 1976 a man came up and wanted to
build two houses on that lot, which was denied, but he was told he
could build a single family home, but no two houses. The Board
discussed a letter from a Mr. Labondi, ~€a~~€~~*stating this lot was
buildable. Mr. Garthwaite said he was looking for information that
this lot was existing prior to 1974. Mr. Savini stated it shows it
was a separate lot, not cut off of anything, and that it has been there
way back to 1966.
Mr. Garthwaite then discussed a letter from Mr. Labondi in 1965 to
a Mr. Robinson, which concluded the lot has a front footage of 60 feet.
and can be used to build, as per zoning law, a one-story one-family
residence, with the requirement of nothing less than 1200 square feet
building area. Mr. Garthwaite continued that in 1976 Mr. Mallard
(former Chairman, Board of Adjustments) had written to Cecil E. Reed,
that the Board of Adjustments found, from inspection of the property,
that (1) although the lot does not conform to the required width, it is
permissable to build a single family dwelling on it; (2) that the
minimum set back from the side lot line is ten (10) feet facing
Hardin Place; that the minimum setbacks are 40 feet from Riverside
Drive and 30 feet from the Schultz property, facing Hardin Place; that
the minimum setback from the side lot line would be 10 feet; that the
ordinance prohibits the building of two dwellings on a non-conforming
lot. Mr. Garthwaite then continued that we do know now that the lot
was in existence prior to 1974 and is a non-conforming lot; that what
Mr. Schultz is looking for is a variance of the side set back of 30
feet from Hardin Place, and since it is not a road, it might be a good
idea for Mr. Schultz to go to the City and see if the City would vacate
or sell that property. Mrs. Murphy objected to this, saying she would
hate to see another road going which is a gateway to the river, a right-
of-way used by the public.
Mr. Garthwaite asked for any more discussion on this property, and a
Mr. Michael Frederick of 1606 South Riverside Drive asked to be heard
and stated he lived across the street from Mr. Schultz and haslived
there from 1974; that the people used to walk to the docks, throw
garbage, and that parties went on until one or two o'clock in the
morning, and that Mrs. Murphy doesn't know what was going on. Mr.
Garthwaite reminded Mr. Frederick to not make derogatory remarks
concerning the Board. Mr. Newell then stated a lot people misues a
short street like that. Mr. Garthwaite then remarked that if Mr.
Schultz did not want to go to the City the Board must act on this.
Mr. Schultz stated he had seen an attorney about vacating the property
but the attorney cambe back and said the City would never consider this;
that this was about eight months ago. Mrs. Murphy then asked Mr.
Schultz why he was building his house so much further forward to
the water than the other houses and a brief discussion of this subject
was held, with Mr. Garthwaite asking if Mr. Schultz should come back
25 feet and Mr. Wolfe replied no, as long as he is 40 feet back. Mr.
Garthwaite then asked the Board to turn to page 1538.1 (b)
concerning non-conforming lots and read: "All new dwellings built
upon nonconroming lots of record shall be placed upon such lots in
accordance with the following requirements when adjacent dwelling
have existed and have been listed on the tax rolls before July 1, 1974."
Mr. Garthwaite then directed the Board to go down to (2) which states:
-2-
Board of Adjustments
Minutes of January 8th,
1987 Meeting.
~ti4
Y/fjJf7
** Building Official for the City of Edgewater back in 1965.
~du/.;
"j/jt~f7- )i.t!I
(.)
(.)
"New dwellings shall be placed so as to conform to the front
setbacks of existing dwellings on thesame street.", and (3) "The
side setbacks for new dwellings shall be ten (10) percent of the
width of the lots, except that no such side setbacks shall be less
than five (5) feet." Mrs. Murphy stated she cannot conceive of
anyone wanting to block the river view and then asking us for a
favor; he is still pushing forward and blocking off the view of
other people. Mr. Wolfe answered the Supreme Court has said you
have the right to the use of your land, and Mrs. Murphy said not
if you do not have a buildable lot. Mr. Garthwaite stated the Board
has determined this is a buildable lot, and he believes Mr. Schultz
needs about a 16 foot variance. Mrs. Martin asked Mr.._Schultz where
.".. . ..... .. . . ._ '/ .... _ . __ ,_ ........ ',... -. _ r- ."
he was going to place his ~e~~~,-andMf~~S~fiHf~~=5~f~~e~=H~~~~R~~~€-ye~
eetlie-eeme-~~~ft~-eewft-~e-ft~s-ftetlSe-f~em-R~~e~s~ee~ house, facing Hardin
or Riverside, and Mr. Schultz answered Riverside, the driveway cominq*
The Board then turned to the five criteria which must be met, the
Board voting that (a) special circumstances do exist which are
peculiar to the land, particularly the narrowness of the lot; that
(b) the Board would be denying Mr. Schultz his .right to build a
livable home, as 24 feet is all that would remain if the applications
of this ordinance were applied. The Board agreed this criteria, too,
had been met. They went on to (c), that special circumstances and
conditions are not the result of actions from the applicant, with
Mr. Garthwaite stating he believes they were not, but Mrs. Martin
stated Mr. Schultz knew the size before he bought it and Mr. Garthwaite
agreed, but adding Mr. Schultz was told it was a buildable lot. Mr.
Garthwaite said the Board better vote on this, as it was represented
as a buildable lot, with Mrs. Martin still saying he knew he would
have a problem when the lot is only 60 feet wide. Mr. Garthwaite
then called for a vote, resulting in a 4-2 vote, Mrs. Martin and Mrs.
Murphy voting no but a majority of the Board voting this criteria
had been met. The Board then discussed (d), that granting of the
variance will not cause detriment to the public welfare or impair
the purposes and intent of this ordinance. Mrs. Murphy still believes
he is putting his house too far toward the river, saying she is very
concerned. Mr. Garthwaite then said he has received phone calls
concerning this variance, so other people are aware of it. A small
discussion ensued between some Board members, resulting in Mr.
Garthwaite calling' for any objections from the Board that Mr.
Schultz does not meet this criteria. Mrs. Martin then spoke up and
said she would like to say that once in a while, someone says everyone
has a right to do with their property as they please, and if that is
true, why do we have Board? Why do we even meet? Mr. Wolfe answered
that it does state you have to be back 40 feet and this gentleman, then,
has to be back 40 feet, but Mrs. Murphy says he cannot be down by the
river and I disagree with that, for if he can get the 40 feet, fine, and
if he doesn't get it, that's fine, too, as he can still build a house,
although it would have to be 24 feet. Mr. Frederick, a neighbor,
spoke again and said there are only about two people who would be
projecting out toward the river, and no one has appeared here to object
to this variance; that he lives across the street and it is not going
to hurt him at all. The Board then took a vote on criteria (d),
which passed with a majority vote of the Board.
Mr. Garthwaite then read Section (e) from the text, which states "That
granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special
privilege, that is denied by this ordinance to other lands,
structures or buildings in the same district." Mr. Garthwaite
explained the Board has to look at the facts that this lot is non-
conforming, prior to 1974; that the lot is buildable; that we are
looking at a 40 foot right-of-way which we could say, with some
certainty, will never be paved; that it does not go down much beyond
where Mr. Schultz's house will be as you get into the mangroves and
the water. Mr. Garthwaite also added he does not believe this will
be a special privilege due to the narrowness of the lot, and other
conditions; that in order to build a livable home, it would almost
require this variance and asked the Board if there were any objections
and Mrs. Murphy said Mr. Schultz could build a livable home; a 24 foot
home is livable, but Mr. Garthwaite stated he believes what people are
looking for on Riverside Drive is building a home comperable to the
homes that are there. The Board discussed quite thoroughly the fact
that this is filled land: that Mr. Schultz had consulted with DER and
the Environmentalist;he needed permission, as he wants to put up a
dock later and Mrs. Martin asked if there was any preparation for
* ' ht d th 'd f 1 t l'nto Board of Adjustments
rlg own e Sl e 0 my 0 M' t f J 8th
h _ 3- lnu es 0 anuary ,
my ouse. ,
1987 Meetlng
~-
o
o
\
~
run-off onto other properties, and Mr. Garthwaite asked Mr. James
Mackie if he could clarify retention of water on a platted lot; does
the first inch have to be retained? Mr. Mackie stated he has to
retain all the water on his lot unless he has some way of running
it off without interfering with other properties, and possibly the
Ci~Engineer could pick that up and check it out himself, as Mr.
Mackie had to do himself. Mr. Mackie also added that since he was
speaking he would like to state that he, also, has a 30 foot setback
in the back of his yard, that it is 30 feet at an times; that there
/ has to be land there, not the river running over part time; that
there has to be 30 feet of solid land at all times. After a discussion
of high tides occurring, etc., Mr. Mackie said he would recommend the
Board emphasize that Council vacate that road or put up barricades.
as there is no way of getting into that river unless the City
would fill it in with stone and dirt. Mr. Garthwaite stated he doesn't
believe it is a Board matter, that Mr. Schultz should take this to
Council. Mrs. Murphy then stated Mr. Fischer had told her there was
no rule about residential having to have swales, and from the drawing
(pointing it out to the Board) it looks as though Mr. Schultz does
not own that portion. Mr. Schultz then stated the papers have all
gone through and he should be getting them back anyday. Mr. Garthwaite
emphasized to Mr. Schultz that he could not build on that portion until
it is deeded to him, when it will become part of his setback. Mr.
Garthwaite then stated all of this really has nothing to do with the
variance and asked for a motion. Mrs. Murphy stated she would grant
the variance with the condition that Mr. Schultz puts his house back in
line with existing houses to the North, but the motion failed due to
lack of a second. Mr. Newell then said he would like to know what
the phone calls to Mr. Garthwaite were about, and Mr. Garthwaite
answered just ordinary questions, such as; is the property a
buildable lot; is the property carved from another lot; just ordinary
questions. Mr. Garthwaite then stated we still need a motion, and Mr.
Newell moved the variance be granted, provided it follows all criteria,
that is, everything has to be met before it is built. Mr. Wolfe asked
if he could put in there the question of the rear setback from the
easterly line of Lot 2, Lowd's Subdivision; where is the 30 foot
setback going to come from? Mr. Newell said Mr. Schultz knows the
30 foot setback is there, and he has to prove to the Board he owns
it before he builds or he must move forward in order to have the 30
feet. Mr. Schultz said the Building Department will require him to
meet these setbacks or he will not get the permit. Mr. Wolfe said
that is exactly what he wants, to make sure the Building Department
knows about this. A further discussion followed, with- Mr. Wolfe
moving that the Board grant the variance, and that Mr. Fischer be
made aware of the 30 foot setback from the easterly line of Lot 2,
Lowd's Subdivision, seconded by Mr. Newell. Motion CARRIED 5-1,
Mrs. Murphy voting No. Mr. Garthwaite then announced the Board would
take a five minute break, and the meeting resumed at 8:20. Mr.
Garthwaite informed the Board there was a request from Mrs. plaskett
regarding the Planning and Zoning Board meeting with the Board of
Adjustments concerning Outside Display, and asked them to turn to
the Memo. Mr. Wolfe said he was against the six foot high fence;
where is it going and how is it going to be on the property, as
commercial has to have fire lanes and that is why he is concerned. He
also said he is concerned as to views, that if the building sits on a
corner with a fence, how can you see? Mr. Garthwaite said you would
almost have to set it behind the setback, or behind your property.
Mr. Garthwaite then read the new wording of the Planning and Zoning
Board regarding Section 606.02 (d) (1), Outdoor Display. The Board
discussed various aspects of the changes, including the fact that
the purpose of this ordinance is to get everything off the highway
and back into the buildings. After discussing the types of fences
that could be used to enclose outdoor storage, Mrs. Martin moved
the Board accept the changes in Section 606.02, seconded by Mr.
Wolfe. Motion CARRIED 6-0. Mr. Savini asked the Board if Mr.
Mackie could receive a copy of the voting, and Mr. Garthwaite
explained it will be given to Mrs. Kinney, secretary of the Planning
and Zoning Board. Mr. Wolfe asked if we were going to get a letter
from the City Attorney regarding Mr. Nolan's case, and Mr. Garthwaite
said to hold on, that there was another subject to be discussed and
-4-
Board of Adjustments
Minutes of January 8th,
1987 Meeting
o
o
explained the Planning and Zoning Board asked this Board to decide
if the OUtside Display, encompassed by a 6' high fence, be a
Permitted Use or a Special Exception, and the Board voted it
should be a Special Exception, The secretary was instructed to
send this memo to the Zoning Board's secretary.
Mr. Garthwaite then stated we had one more discussion concerning
replatting, and read Mr. Fischer's reply to a memo from Mrs.
Plaskett, originating from the Board of Adjustments. The Board
discussed the matter, stating that although not all banking
institutions require replatting, the Board doesn't care what (
the banks do; they would like to see an ordinance change, with
the Building Official doing this on his own and signing that it
is properly laid out. The secretary was asked to send a memo to
the Mayor and City Council Members that the Board would like to
see an Ordinance change as requested in their letter of December 15,
1986 so the Board does not have a reoccurence of the Dan Nolan
problem, attaching, also, a copy of Mr. Fischer's reply dated
January 5, 1987.
There being no further business, Mr. Savini moved the meeting adjourn
seconded by Mr. Wolfe. The meeting then adjourned at 8:55. p.m.
Minutes submitted by
Dorothy C. Garrity
Board of Adjustments
Minutes of January 8th,
1987 Meeting.
-5-