03-14-1991 Joint w/Sign Ad Hoc Committee
o 0
0<''''-
. V'')
CITY OF EDGEWATER
JOINT MEETING
LAND DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATORY
SIGN AD HOC COMMITTEE
THURSDAY, MARCH 14, 1991
6:30 P.M.
COMMUNITY CENTER
AGENCY
Chairman C. Peter Hellsten called to order a joint meeting of the
Land Development and Regulatory Agency and Sign Ad Hoc Committee
at 6:30 p.m., Thursday, March 14, 1991, at the Community Center.
ROLL CALL:
Land Development and
Requlatory Aqency
Siqn Ad Hoc Committee
Mr. Masso
Mrs. Blazi
Mr. Fazzone
Mr. Garthwaite
t"lr. Klein
Mr. Hildenbrand
Mr. Hellsten
Present
Excused
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Mr. Cichewicz
Mrs. Bennington
Mrs. Hill
t"lrs. Borner
Mr. Hellsten
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Also present were Mark P. Karet, Planning and Zoning Director,
Lynne Plaskett, Assistant Planning and Zoning Director, and
Beverly Kinney, Recording Secretary.
Chairman Hellsten thanked the Ad Hoc Sign Committee for their
diligence in preparing the draft ordinance.
Chairman Hellsten stated that this evening the draft is being
presented to the Agency, and added that public hearings will be
held at Council level.
Chairman Hellsten stated that what happens to non-conforming
signs when the new sign regulations go into affect will have to
be addressed by the Agency.
Mrs. Plaskett reviewed some minor changes to the draft.
Mr. Karet stated that
new Land Development
a process by which
concurrently with the
fees are not addressed specifically in the
Regulations. The new regulations establish
fees are considered on an annual basis
budget.
Mr. Fazzone asked about participation from the people who will be
affected by these regulations. Chairman Hellsten stated there
was not much input. Mrs. Bennington stated the Committee members
spoke to various people and brought their comments to the
Committee meetings.
Chairman Hellsten stated that equal enforcement across the board
is of the utmost importance.
Mr. Klein asked how
sign regulations.
( 60% ) .
many existing signs will
Mrs. Plaskett stated it was
not meet the new
over sixty percent
Mrs. Bennington stated the illustrations included were in the
proposed regulations so they will be easily understood. She
added that aesthetics were also taken into consideration.
Chairman Hellsten stated that the basic illustrations were from
the Boca Raton sign ordinance and the Committee used height and
coverage requirements that will work in the City of Edgewater.
Mr. Cichewicz stated there has been discussion at Committee
meetings to have signage brought into compliance with the change
of tenancy or ownership.
1
o
o
Chairman Hellsten stated that are
because some businesses along U.S. 1 do
for ground or freestanding signs, and
the Agency for relief.
provisions for pole signs,
not have sufficient room
those people can come to
Mr. Cichewicz discussed allowing "landmark" signs, such as
Loveland Groves, to remain. Mrs. Hill stated that she has a
problem with grandfathering signs. Mrs. Bennington stated that
if landmark signs are to be allowed then there needs to be a
definition in the regulations.
Mr. Klein stated he would like more time to review the draft.
Mr. Hellsten stated that the Agency and Ad Hoc Committee should
meet again in two (2) weeks. Mr. Fazzone moved to have a special
meeting in two (2) weeks to discuss and take action on the
proposed sign regulations. Mr. Klein seconded. Motion Carried
10-0.
Mr. Cichewicz moved to adjourn,
joint meeting of the Agency
approximately 7:10 p.m..
seconded by Mrs. Bennington. The
and the Committee adjourned at
Chairman Hellsten reconvened the meeting of the Land Development
and Regulatory Agency at 7:24 p.m..
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of January 23, 1991 were
presented for approval. Mr. Fazzone moved to approve, seconded
by Mr. Garthwaite. Motion Carried 5-1. Mr. Hellsten voted no,
because he was not at the January 23rd meeting.
The minutes of February 14, 1991 were presented for approval.
Mr. Garthwaite moved to approve, seconded by Mr. Fazzone. Motion
Carried 6-0.
Chairman Hellsten stated that items 6, 7, and 8 (new business)
will be heard prior to item 5 (continued business).
NEW BUSINESS:
SP-9011 Ocean Breeze Plaza II: William Wagner and Dominic
Caputo, property owners, were present. Mr. Karet stated the
applicant's are requesting site plan approval for a chicken and
ice cream shop on U.S. 1. There was discussion regarding
department head comments. Mr. Karet stated that all comments
have been addressed, and staff recommends approval. Mr.
Garthwaite asked if the project will be done in phases. Mr.
Caputo stated the project will not be constructed in phases. Mr.
Fazzone moved to approve, provided that all comments have been
addressed, seconded by Mr. Garthwaite. Motion Carried 6-0.
VA-9101 3016 Needle Palm Drive: Joseph and Valerie Deimel,
property owners, are present to request a variance from sections
301(d) and 602.04(d)(2) of the Zoning Ordinance in order to
construct a carport five (5) feet from their side property line.
Mr. Karet reviewed the criteria in granting a variance. Mr.
Karet stated: 1) There is nothing irregular about the lot or
terrain; 2) The applicants have the same buildable area as
other 80' by 125' lots in their district; 3) No special
circumstances have been indicated by the applicant; 4) Setbacks
serve a legitimate public purpose by providing access to the
sides and rear of buildings, prevent the spread of fire, and
promote aesthetics; and 5) Granting the variance would reduce
the required side setback, and increase the amount of buildable
area.
Joint Land Development and Regulatory Agency
Sign Ad Hoc Committee
Thursday, March 14, 1991
2
o
o
Mr. Deimel stated he would like a variance to keep 2 cars out of
the elements. Chairman Hellsten asked if there were any special
circumstances that will support the request. Mr. Deimel stated
he was just asking for the variance, and it cost him $75.00 to
make the application. Mr. Karet stated that in an earlier
conversation with the Deimel's, he told them that staff would not
support the applicants request. Mr. Fazzone stated he
sympathizes with Mr. Deimel, but he explained that in order to
grant a variance, the applicant must meet all of the criteria
listed in the Code of Ordinances.
George Schmeil, aluminum contractor for the Deimel's, asked if a
carport can be erected if it is within the setback requirements,
with the permitted setback encroachment for the overhang in the
side yard. Mr. Karet stated yes, the posts are to be no more
than 8'8" on the east side and 8'7" on the west side, and the
overhang can be 11 '8" on the east side and 11'7" on the west
side. Mr. Garthwaite moved to deny the request, seconded by Mr.
Klein. Motion Carried 6-0.
RZ-9101 2120 South Ridqewood Avenue: Nancy Barbara, property
owner, requests the rezoning of Belmont Plaza from B-5, Planned
Shopping Center district, to B-3, Highway Service Business
district, on property which contains a 32,162 square foot strip
commercial center. Mr. Karet explained that the property abuts a
strip commercial center zoned B-5 to the north, vacant property
zoned R-4 to the south, vacant property zoned B-3, and a mobile
home park, zoned MH-S to the east, and vacant property zoned R-4
to the west. Mr. Karet stated that both the existing and
requested rezoning are consistent with the comprehensive plan
which has a designation of commercial on the future land use map.
Mr. Karet stated that since there are no specific criteria in the
Code of Ordinances, the Planning and Zoning Department used the
following criteria: 1) Is the proposed rezoning consistent with
the existing pattern of land use? Mr. Karet stated that
development patterns extremely similiar; 2) Have changed or
changing conditions in the surrounding area made the rezoning
necessary? Mr. Karet stated no. However, the applicant wished
to be rezoned because the B-3 has a greater number of permitted
uses than the B-5. He added that staff has no objections to
granting the request.
Mr. Garthwaite asked if Mrs. Barbara is willing to fix the old
parking stall lines (that show through) across from Kenny's
convenience store, and restripe the stalls correctly. Mrs.
Barbara stated she is willing to comply.
Chairman Hellsten asked Mrs. Barbara if she was aware that some
uses may be denied because of fire regulations. Mrs. Barbara
stated she had been informed by Mr. Karet, and she will do
whatever is necessary.
Mr. Fazzone moved to recommend approval of the rezoning request,
seconded by Mr. Hildenbrand. Motion Carried 5-1, with Mr. Klein
voting no.
SP-9013 Windview Development: Mary Hanson, attorney, was
present to represent Thomas and Lois Kane, and James Davenport,
owners. Ms. Hanson stated that at the last meeting questions
arose about the effective date of the Comprehensive Plan, Floor
Area Ratio (FAR), traffic impacts, and the actual size of the
lot.
Land Development and Regulatory Agency
Regular Meeting
Thursday, March 14, 1991
3
'->
o
Ms. Hanson read a letter she had received from Thomas Cloud of
Gray, Harris, and Robinson, Attorneys for the Volusia Growth
Management Commission (VGMC), regarding the effective date of
Comprehensive Plans in Volusia County. Mr. Cloud states in his
letter "that in reviewing the Volusia County charter and the
statutory provisions of Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes,
the Comprehensive Plan does not go into effect until the
certification of consistency is granted by the VGMC.
Ms. Hanson read a memo regarding the interpretation of FAR from
York Phillips of LaRue Planning and Management, the consulting
firm hired by the city to prepare the city's Land Development
Regulations. I"lr. Phillips states that "the intent of FAR is to
limit the quantity of activity on site in order to control
intensity and demand for facilities (traffic and sewer
generation, and water demand, etc.). Gross floor area assumes
that a percentage of the building will be involved in mechanical
equipment, storage, etc. When a floor is not in actual use (such
as parking) it is not contributing to the demand for services.
Ms. Hanson also read
states "the plat of
and 28,000 square feet
a letter from Ron
record shows 27,160
for lot 7, which is
Lucas, surveyor, which
square feet for lot 6,
1.266 acres.
Ms. Hanson stated that 1.266 acres x .30 = 4,884 square feet per
floor x 3 floors = 14,652 square feet which is 1,900 square feet
less than the maximum permitted intensity. Ms. Hanson asked that
the Agency make a decision tonight.
Mr. Karet stated that the city's former attorney stated that the
Comprehensive Plan went into effect when it was adopted.
Mr. Karet stated that he had met with Glenn Storch, attorney
(Storch and Hanson), and Bill Hathaway, attorney for Ray Anderson
of 1905 S. Riverside Drive. Mr. Karet stated that if the site
plan is found to be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan then
the Agency must report their findings of inconsistency. Mr.
Karet stated that he also discussed the Coastal High Hazard Area
(CHHA), and Floor Area Ratios (FAR) with both attorneys. He
commented that FAR's are derived by dividing the total area of
the building by the site (lot). The original site plan shows
approximately .90 acres. Calculating 4,884 x 4 floors divided by
the gross area of the lot equals a FAR of .5 which is too high
per the city's Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Karet, referring to Ron Lucas' letter, stated that the LDRA
has previously approved plans where the actual usable area is not
as large as the total area of the lot. He cited Section 502.05,
of the Code of Ordinances, which states that "where bulkhead
lines have been established the boundary shall follow such
bulkhead lines".
Mr. Karet and Mr. Storch had previously discussed whether the FAR
includes each floor of the building, or the three (3) floors
above the parking. Mr. Storch argued that the parking should be
excluded because FAR are an intensity control. Mr. Karet did not
necessarily concede, but agreed to contact the consultant who
wrote that portion of the Comprehensive Plan. The consultants
response was previously read into the record by Ms. Hanson.
Chairman Hellsten questioned which lot size is correct, .90
acres or 1.266 acres. Mr. Karet stated that the applicant's are
using the bulkhead to increase the overall size of the lot.
Land Development and Regulatory Agency
Regular Meeting
Thursday, March 14, 1991
4
u
o
Chairman Hellsten pointed out that the land is submerged. Ms.
Hanson stated that it is still privately owned and part of the
lot. There was some discussion regarding permitting and the
possibility of filling at a later date.
Mr. Fazzone stated that the Agency should not be asked to make a
decision tonight because important information has been given to
the members at the last minute, and now, according to the
applicant, the size of the lot has gotten larger. He added that
the correspondence read by Ms. Hanson was not made available to
the Agency members, and he doesn't think the request is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Fazzone stated that
he would like to know the city's legal opinion.
Mr. Hathaway reminded the members that Acting City Attorney,
Nikki Clayton, had indicated that if there is any inconsistency
with the Code, then the Comprehensive Plan is to be followed, and
if the site plan is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan the
Agency has a valid reason to deny the request. Mr. Hathaway
discussed information provided to the members by Mr. Ray Anderson
which points out the inconsistencies. Mr. Hathaway stated there
are still questions to be answered; 1) Is the Comprehensive Plan
in effect; and 2) Is the property in question .90 acres or 1.266
acres.
Ms. Hanson reiterated her request for the Agency to make a
decision to either approve or deny the site plan tonight.
Chairman Hellsten stated that the information provided tonight
shows him that the height of the project should be no more than
2.4 stories, and he believes the Comprehensive Plan is in effect,
and with that being the case, he asked for a motion to deny the
site plan.
Mrs. Montqomery. 1901 S. Riverside Drive stated that all she has
been hearing is discussion about the Comprehensive Plan. She
added that the residents in the area pay high taxes and get
nothing.
Mr. Garthwaite moved to deny the site plan on the grounds that it
is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Hildenbrand
seconded.
Mr. Fazzone stated that the Agency can't take personal feelings
into consideration, they have to go by the Code (of Ordinances).
Ray Anderson, 1905 S. Riverside Drive stated that in November of
1989, there was a request to rezone property on Riverside Drive
from R-l to R-5 and it was denied, because it was found to be
inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Motion Carried 5-1, with Mr. Masso voting no.
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
Planninq and Zoninq Director's Reports: The members were given a
summary of cost estimates regarding AN-0490. Mr. Karet stated
the figures were on a per capita basis. He added that the
applicant is also preparing data for the members to review.
Mr. Klein stated that he was under the impression that the
applicant's had withdrawn their request for annexation. Ms.
Hanson stated that she had spoken with Acting City Attorney Nikki
Clayton, and Ms. Clayton stated that since the letter of
withdrawal had not been formally accepted by the city, the
request for annexation is still valid.
Land Development and Regulatory Agency
Regular Meeting
Thursday, March 14, 1991
5
o
o
. ,
Chairman Hellsten asked when AN-0490 is scheduled to go before
the Council. Ms. Hanson stated if there is no reason for
reconsideration then the recommendation for approval previously
voted on by the Agency will go to the Council as soon as
possible.
Mr. Klein and Ms. Hanson discussed Robert' Rules of Order vs.
constitutional rights regarding reconsideration.
Chairman Hellsten asked to have this item placed on the agenda
for the special meeting to take place in two (2) weeks so the
members can discuss new information and send their comments to
Council.
Ms. Hanson stated she
Agency for review. Mr.
their review be given to
chance to look it over.
will be forwarding revenue data to the
Fazzone asked that any information for
them prior to the meeting so they have a
Mr. Klein brought up the letter of withdrawal again. Mr. Karet
reiterated Ms. Hanson's statement that the Acting City Attorney
stated it was not formally accepted by the city.
Mr. Fazzone stated he wants to see the city's expected revenues.
Mr. Karet stated he will provide the information.
Mr. Karet stated that when Pelican Cove East was platted it was
platted for townhouses, however, no townhouses were placed on the
lots. Now there are only a few lots left to be developed. J.C.
Carder has applied for a variance from the required setbacks, and
he has other lots which are similarly situated. Mr. Karet
stated that Mr. Carder has been informed by staff that the city
can not recommend a variance, because it is not a unique
situation. Mr. Karet asked the Agency to hear this issue April
14th as a variance. Mr. Klein stated that the "blanket variance"
was approved by past Councils for Mr. Carder's Pelican Cove West
development.
Chairman's Reports: Chairman Hellsten
information presented to the members at
be accepted, because the members do
review the information.
stated that last minute
meetings will no longer
not have enough time to
t"lember Repor ts:
None.
There being no further business to
Masso moved to adjourn, seconded by
adjourned at approximately 9:10 p.m.
come before the Agency, Mr.
Mr. Garthwaite. The meeting
Land Development and Regulatory Agency
Regular Meeting
Thursday, March 14, 1991
Minutes respectfully submitted by:
Beverly Kinney, Recording Secretary
6