Loading...
04-11-2001 ~ ..", f QTY OF EDGEWATER Planning and Zoning Board Regular Meeting Wednesday, Aprilll, 2001 6:30 p.m. Vice-Chairman Masso called to order the regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board at 6:30 p.m., April 11, 2001 in the Community Center, 102 N. Riverside Drive, Edgewater, Florida. ROll CALL Members present were Mr. Masso, Mr. Hellsten, Mr. Mullen, Mr. Vopelak, and Mrs. Zeese. Mr. Youkon and Chairman Garthwaite were excused. Also present were Lynne Plaskett, Planning Director; Bonnie Wenzel, Planning Secretary; Pat Drosten, Board Coordinator. AFPROV AL OF MINUTES Mr. Hellsten made a motion to approve the minutes of March 14, 2001. Mr. Vopelak seconded. Motion PASSED 6-0. OID BUSINESS v A-0005; V A-0006; V A-0007 - Friendly Shores Home Owner's Association, seeking a variance for lots 3, 17, and 33, 2201 S. Ridgewood Avenue, Friendly Shores Mobile Home Park. Ibis was a continuation from the November ~ 2000, December 13, 200~ February 14, 2001, and March 14,. 2001 meetings. Vice Chairman Masso asked Ms. Plaskett to give the Board some background. Ms. Plaskett read the staff report and recommendation into the record. Ms. Drosten displayed a photo presentation of the park so the Board could see how the homes are currently situated and where the new homes would be placed. Ms. Plaskett stated that this request did not seem unreasonable. Mr. Vopelak asked how long this park has been in existence. Ms. Plaskett was unable to answer and suggested that Ms. Petersen may be able to enlighten the Board.. Vice-Chairman Masso opened the public hearing at this time. Ms. Norrine Petersen, Friendly Shores Mobile Home Park Homeowners Association President, stated the Association purchased the park in 1988 and most of the homes were 1972 models, so she would assume the park has been there since at least the early 70's. Ms. Petersen further stated that she was confused by the setbacks. Ms. Plaskett explained, and informed Ms. Petersen that staff was trying to get some conformity to the park. She stated staff was trying to accommodate replacement of the same size homes, but not the Planning & Zoning Board 04-11-0 I.doc 1 I ...... ...., accessory uses such as porches or carports as the fire department requires a 10-foot setback between structures for fire safety. Much discussion ensued regarding the size of the homes that could be placed on the vacant lots. Mr. Hellsten asked if they would need a variance every time a home would be replaced. Ms. Plaskett stated that was correct. Mr. Sam Ascherl, Friendly Shores Mobile Home Park, informed the Board that he would like to replace his current home with a double wide, which would be 22'- 6" x 44' and would only need a three inch (3") variance on either side. Mr. Ascher! stated that he currently has 13' to 14' on either side of his home and would be able to put the size home he wants on the lot with only a three inch (3") variance on either side. Ms. Zeese asked if the porch could be put on the front or rear of the home. Mr. Ascher! stated he had no desire for a screen porch. Ms. Plaskett stated that the smallest nomes currently in production are 16' x 60' (single wide) and the request is for a 12' x 60' home with a porch. Mr. Hellsten asked if the request was for a 12' x 60' mobile home with a screen porch or a 16' x 60' mobile home without a screen porch, adding that a 16' x 60' home would be more of a solid structure than with the screen room. Mr. Masso asked if the variance was granted would they be able to put either a 12' x 60' or a 16' x 60' mobile home on the lot. Ms. Petersen stated she would rather have the larger home than have a screen room. Mr. Vopelak asked if they could grant the variance stating the home and screen room could not cover more than 16', as the Fire Department is more concerned with the separation of the homes. Mary Allen, Florida Shores, was interested in lot 33 and wondered what she would be able to put on the lot, and if she could purchase a used mobile home. Ms. Plaskett stated as far as a new or used home she would have to speak with the association. Mr. Masso explained that the variance requested if approved would determine the size home that could be placed on the lot. Discussion ensued as to what the actual setbacks would be if the variance were granted. Vice-Chairman Masso closed the public hearing. The Board then voted on the six standards of granting a variance for item V A-OOOS as follows: 1. The variance requested arises from a condition that is unique and peculiar to the land, structures, and buildings involved and is a condition that is not ordinarily found in the same zoning district. Item PASSED 4-1 Mr. Hellsten voted No. Planning & Zoning Board 04-1 1 -01.doc 2 '-'" .,., 2. Strict compliance with area, setback, frontage, height, bulk, and/or intensity requirements would result in unnecessary hardship for the applicant as distinguished from restrictions imposed by this Article on all other property in the same zoning district. Item PASSED 5-0 3. The condition is not the result of the actions of the applicant or the property owner. Item PASSED 4-1, Mr. Hellsten voted No. 4. Granting of the variance will not create unsafe conditions or other detriments to the surrounding properties or public welfare. Item F An .En 3-2, Mr. Mullen, Mr. Hellsten, and Mr. Vopelak voted No. 5. The variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land or structures. Item PASSED 4-1, Mr. Hellsten voted No. 6. The variance desired will not be opposed to the general spirit and intent of this Article and the City of Edge-water Comprehensive Plan. Item FAILED 3-2, Mr. Mullen, 'Mr. Hellsten, and Mr. Vopelak voted No. Mr. Hellsten moved to approve VA-ODDS with a unit no larger than 12' x 60' and all other staff requirements bernet, seconded by Mr. Mullen. MOTION PASSED 5-0. Staff recommendation is as follows: a variance of nine feet (9') from the required 20-foot front setback; eight feet, seven inches (87") form the required 10-foot side setback on the west side, and three feet (3') from the required is-foot rear setback. The Board then voted on the six standards of granting a variance for item V A-0006 as follows: 1. The variance requested arises from a condition that is unique and peculiar to the land, structures, and bUildings involved and is a condition that is not ordinarily found in the same zoning district. Item PASSED 4-1 Mr. Hellsten voted No. 2. Strict compliance with area, setback, frontage, height, bulk, and/or intensity requirements would result in unnecessary hardship for the applicant as distingUished from restrictions imposed by this Article on all other property in the same zoning district. Item PASSED 5-0 3. The condition is not the result of the actions of the applicant or the property owner. Item PASSED 4-1, Mr. Hellsten voted No. 4. Granting of the variance will not create unsafe conditions or other detriments to the surrounding properties or public welfare. Item F All..ED 3-2, Mr. Mullen, Mr. Hellsten, and Mr. Vopelak voted No. Planning & Zoning Board 04-11'{) I.doc 3 ~ .' ~ """, 5. The variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land or structures. Item PASSED 4-1, Mr. Hellsten voted No. 6. The variance desired will not be opposed to the general spirit and intent of this Article and the City of Edgewater Comprehensive Plan. Item FAILED 3-2, Mr. Mullen, Mr. Hellsten, and Mr. Vopelak voted No. Mr. Hellsten moved to approve V A-0006 with a unit no larger than 12' x 60' and all other staff requirements be met, seconded by Mr. Mullen. MOTION PASSED 5-0. Staff requirements are as follows: a variance of six feet (6') from the required 20-foot front setback; and three feet - four inches (3'4") from the required is-foot rear setback Mr. Vopelak moved to not vote on the criteria for VA-ODD? as they have established a consensus, seconded by Mr. HeIIsten. MOTION PASSED 4-1, Mr. Mullen voted No. Mr. Hellsten moved to approve VA-ODD? with a unit no larger than 12' x 60' and all other staff requirements be met, seconded by Mr. Vopelak. MOTION PASSED 5-0. Staff requirements are as follows: a variance of one foot (1 ') from the required 20-foot front setback; three feet - six inches (3'-6") from the required 10-foot side setback on the west side, and one foot -eleven inches (1 '-11") from the required is-foot rear setback Vice-Chairman Masso called a recess at 8:10 p.m. Vice-Chairman Masso resumed the meeting at 8:20 p.m. RZ-OOOl- Louis Sage, authorized agent, requesting rezoning for property located at 108 Thomas Avenue; 1403 4th Street; and 1409 4th Street from R-3 single family residential to RP, residential professional office. Vice-Chairman Masso read into the record that this request has been withdrawn by the applicant. NEW BUSINESS None at this time. DISCUSSION ITEMS 1. Planning Director' Report a. Discussion of Development Agreement requirements. Planning & Zoning Board 04-11-0I.doc 4 " '. -- .... Ms. Plaskett stated she has supplied the information regarding Development Agreements due to some concerns Mr. Vopelak had about the proposed golf course community. Ms. Plaskett explained a Development Agreement and the process. b. Discussion of land Use Density determinations. Ms. Plaskett stated this information was being supplied also do to Mr. Vopelak's concerns. Ms. Plaskett explained how land use density was determined and gave an example of a PUD. She further noted that all PUD's were a conditional use and would be brought before the Board for approval. 2. Chairman's Report None at this time. Mr. Vopelak asked if the Council has approved the proposal from the Citizens Review Committee regarding R.V.'s, Abandoned Vehicles, Boats, etc. Ms. Plaskett stated the issue has had a first reading and the Council is revisiting some of the sections of the proposal. Mr. Mullen asked about meeting with a potential developer on an individual basis. He recently called staff and was informed that the legal department and the City Manager's assistant strongly discourage discussions with the developer. Ms. Plaskett stated there is nothing to stop them from meeting and that decision should be made by each individual. However. she further added that if any of the Board member's were to meet with a developer they are to disclose that information and what was discussed at any meeting the developer comes before them as a Board. Mr. Hellsten felt is would be beneficial to each member to meet with the developer; this would allow them to have many of their questions answered. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Minutes respectfully submitted by: Bonnie A. Wenzel Board Secretary. :haw Planning & Zoning Board 04-11-0 I.doc 5