Loading...
09-27-1984 o Q CITY OF EDGEWATER Citizen Code Enforcement Board September 27~ 1984 Minutes Mr. Prater, Chairman~ called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Community Center. ROLL CALL Members present: Messrs. Rotundo~ Prater~ williams~ Rosa and Turano and Mrs. Kane. Absent: Mr. Richardson. Also present: Mrs. Taylor, Secretary. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Rotundo motioned to approve the minutes and Mr. Williams seconded the motion, which CARRIED 5-1. Mr. Prater voted No because he was not present at the August 30 meeting. PUBLIC HEARING Continuation of 84-CC-8 - David W. McCallister~ 2020 S. Ridgewood Avenue; storage of pipe in an R-4 zoning district Mr. Prater referred to the letter from the City Attorney in which he stated that Mr. McCallister's property was zoned agricultural before the new zoning ordinance went into effect~ and thus~ it retained a nonconforming use status. Mr. McCallister offered to move the pipe to where it would not be an eyesore~ but explained that he did not want to move it to another parcel of property. The members discussed the City Attorney's letter~ noting that he feels moving the pipe to another location on the property is a reasonable solution. Mr. McCallister said that he is willing to do this. Mr. Rotundo motioned that this case be continued for another 30 days to give Mr. McCallister ample time to comply; upon receipt of a Now-in-Compliance form filed by the Code Inspector the case will be removed from the Board. The motion was seconded by Mr. Turano and CARRIED 6-0. Case 84-CC-ll - J. C. Carder, 2305 S. Ridgewood, Boat shed - not in accordance with the approved final site plans Mr. Rotundo read from Mr. Carder's letter in which he states that he has not finished the building nor has he asked for a final inspection. Mr. Rotundo questioned why the case is before this Board if it is not completed. The members discussed the letter from Mr. Carder in which he stated that he will be out of town the date of the hearing and asked for a postponement. He also explained that he plans to convert the existing shed to office buildings and will apply for a variance to the rear setback requirements. Mr. Opal, present in the audience, spoke to the Board of his knowledge of the case, stating that Mr. Carder had agreed to tear down and rebuild that part of the building which sets too close to the property line; he stated that this is on County land. According to the City Attorney's letter, Mrs. Kane noted, the Board should consider the ongoing violation and should give Mr. Carter a date by which action should be taken to remedy the situation. Mr. Williams noted that this project has not beenapproved; in his opinion the case should go back to the Planning and Zoning Board. After some dis- cussion, Mr. Williams motioned that the whole case, #84-CC-ll, be sent back to the Planning and Zoning Board because the building is uncompleted and should not be before this Board. Mr. Turano seconded the motion. Mrs. Kane questioned the motion stating that the reason the Board got the case is because Mr. Carder did not conform to begin with with the site plan require- ments that were set out for them originally by the Planning Board. Councilwoman Bennington was present and brought the Board up to date on the case~ noting that the boat shed was built without Planning and Zoning Board approval. When it was called to Mr. Carder's attention it was brought to the Planning and Zoning Board as a boat shed and Mr. Carder agreed to tear o o down a portion of the building to bring it into conformance with the Code. Mr. Carder did not do this. Mr. Turano questioned if it was built with plans and was advised that the plans were presented after the building had been constructed. Mrs. Kane said she did not see any use in sending the case back to the Planning Board because they have already told him to tear it down and he has not complied. The Planning Board cannot make him tear it down, she noted, but the Code Board can. Mr. Williams withdrew his motion and Mr. Turano withdrew his second. It was pointed out that Mr. Carder was cited for violations to the sidewalk and parking codes, as well as the setback violation. Mr. Williams said that he feels everyone is entitled to fair consideration and because this is the first time this case has been brought to the Code Board, he motioned that Mr. Carder be given 30 days to take action and apply for a variance to correct the setback, sidewalk and parking violations and to conform with the site plan; if he does not comply Mr. Carder must be at the next meeting to explain why he hasn't complied. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Kane. Mr. Turano asked if this meant that Mr. Carder did not have to do anything except to apply for a variance and correct the building, and not anything else. Mr. Williams said this is for everything listed on the Statement of Violation. Mr. Turano said that this is an unrealistic request, because he did not believe Mr. Carder will do this. He stated that if he tears the building down he will not need to comply with the other requirements, ie. sidewalks and parking. He felt to ask that Mr. Carder do everything at once will be confusing. Mr. Turano recommended that they ask him to go for a variance for the building setback at this time. Councilwoman Bennington explained that Mr. Carder had site plan approval for the building as a boat shed, and as part of that approval he was required to put in the parking, shrubbery, etc. If he wants to change the use of the building, he will need to go back to the Planning and Zoning Board with a new site plan, as well as get a variance from the Board of Adjustment; this will take two to three months, she noted. Mr. Turano asked if Mr. Carder can start the wheels turning within 30 days; Mrs. Bennington advised that he could. Mr. Williams agreed that to ask that he put in a sidewalk and parking at this time would be ridiculous. Mr. Williams withdrew his motion. Mrs. Kane with- drew her second. Mr. Turano motioned to require Mr. Carder to start the process of getting a variance for the boat shed and to correct the other violations, or, if he intends to change the use of the building then he must make application for site plan approval for a different use and get a variance for the building; This process must be started within 30 days. Mr. Williams seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED 6-0. MISCELLANEOUS Mr. Williams commented that he would like to see the City Attorney attend the Code Board meetings. Mr. Turano suggested that the Code Inspector should attend the meetings. Mr. Prater explained that he had intended to come to the meeting tonight until the letter from the City attorney was received. Mr. Prater said that he had advised Mr. Fischer that it was not necessary for him to attend tonight's meeting. Mr. Frank Opal asked if the Board had received a complaint concerning a hugh sign and was advised by the secretary that there has been no violation filed with the Code Board to date. Mr. Prater asked Mrs. Bennington what the legal size of signs is in the City of Edgewater and she responded that if you read the sign ordinance you will find that very few signs in the City are legal. The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 p.m. Minutes prepared by Joan Taylor