05-07-1996
CITY OF EDGEWATER
CONSTRUCTION REGULATION BOARD
PUBLIC HEARING
COMMUNITY CENTER
TUESDAY, MAY 07, 1996
7:00 P.M.
COMMUNITY CENTER AGENDA 102 N. RIVERSIDE DRIVE
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC HEARING
1) Appeal by Edwin A. Baetzman, 206 S. Ridgewood Avenue, of
Unsafe Building or Structure determination, Section
901(J) of the Land Development Code of the City of
Edgewater, and the Standard Unsafe Building Abatement
Code, 1985 Edition.
ADJOURN
Pursuant to Chapter 286, F.S., if an individual decides to appeal any decision made
with respect to any matter considered at a meeting or hearing, that individual will
need a record of the proceedings and will need to insure that a verbatim record of
the proceedings is made.
:tle
h:\tonya\crb\agenda\0507.96
Nowle woe
CONSTRUCTION REGULATION BOARD
HEARING REQUEST
Name: Edwin A. Baetzman Date : March 11 , 1996
Please attach additional pages if unable to complete statements on form supplied
Location of property by street address or legal description:
206 S . Ridgewood Ave . Edgewater , Florida
Specific section or order being appealed:
Certified letter dated February 8 , 1996 from Robert A. Dunn
Building Official regarding existing structure .
Statement identifying the legal interest of each appellant:
100% ownership by Edwin A. Baetzman.
Statement detailing the issues on which the appellant desires to be
heard:
The structure a ) is secured, b) is unoccupied , c ) is not connected
to electric and d ) is not connected to water or sewer .
Because of the above, I request the building remain until I can
find a tenant for the property and then bring it to code .
Legal signature of all appellants :
Edwin A. Baetzman 01-{—'k� 1– 3(1.3C'2
Official mailing address:
202 Flagler Ave.
New Smyrna Beach, FL 32169
Fee's : Appellant is required to pay any applicable advertising
costs . Prior to advertizement being published, appellant will be
notified of cost and all fee 's shall be paid before the
advertizement is published.
City of Edgewater
Department of Community Development, Building Division
P 0 Box 100, Edgewater, FL 32132-0100
(904)424-2411
h:\tonya\crb\hearing
,:)°E-w4 ,;, , lie
°, THE F CITY OF EDGE WATER
a . 4;
POST OFFICE BOX 100-EDGEWATER, FLORIDA 32132-0100
S.
•
'''6.,'''6., G.
4
�,yY
February 08, 1996
Certified Mail No. : P 578 925 703
Edwin A. Baetzman
202 Flagler Avenue
New Smyrna Beach, FL 32169
Subject: 206 S. Ridgewood Avenue, Edgewater FL, Parcel No. : 7452-
01-00-0310, Legal: Lot 31 exc E 15. 3 ft on N/L & 17 . 3 ft on S/L &
exc W 115 ft of N 65 ft & exc W 115 ft on S 70 ft Alvarez Grant
Dear Mr. Baetzman:
The building or structure located at the above mentioned address
has been declared unsafe by the Building Official in accordance
with Section 901 (J) of the Land Development Code of the City of
Edgewater, and the Standard Unsafe Building Abatement Code, 1985
Edition. See attached inspection report.
You are hereby notified that the building or structure must be
repaired or demolished within sixty (60) days. Applicable
building, electrical, mechanical, plumbing and/or demolition
permits must be obtained from this office prior to the starting of
any repairs or demolition of the building or structure.
In the interest of the health, safety, and general welfare of the
residents of the community, the building or structure must be
adequately secured to prevent the entrance of unauthorized persons.
The premises must be properly maintained to prevent the overgrowth
of weeds and accumulation of trash and debris. These actions must
be accomplished within twenty (20) days from the date of this
notice.
You may appeal this notice within thirty (30) days of the date
written above by filing a written request with the secretary of the
Construction Regulation Board. Such request shall state the
location of the property by street address or legal description;
the specific section or order being appealed; a statement
identifying the legal interest of each appellant; a statement
detailing the issues on which the appellant desires to be heard,
and the legal signature(s) of all appellants and their official
mailing addresses.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT-139 EAST PARK AVENUE
(904)424-2412 FAX-(904)424-2423 SUMCOM-383-2412
BUILDING DIVISION-(904)424-2411
CODE ENFORCEMENT-(904)424-2414
S4I ETY DIVISION-(904)424-2414
"oorie Norio
•
Edwin A. Baetzman
February 07 , 1996
Page -02-
Failure to respond or commence work within thirty ( 30 ) days may
result in the City of Edgewater taking action to repair the
building or structure to the extent required to render it safe or
the City may demolish the building or structure. The cost of
repair or demolition shall constitute a lien on the property and
shall be collected in a manner provided by law.
Sincer ly, i;;;?
obert A. Dunn, Building Official
Department of Community Development
Building Division
RAD\tle
CC: Mark P. Raret, Director of Community Development
Krista Storey, City Attorney
h:\tonya\bob\baetzman/ltr
t
INSPECTION REPORT
206 S. RIDGEWOOD AVENUE
EDGEWATER, FL 32132
The following is a detailed report documenting the conditions we
have found at 206 S . Ridgewood Avenue, Edgewater, FL:
1 ) The structure has been damaged to the extent that the
structural integrity of the building or structure is less than
it was prior to the damage and is less than the minimum
requirement established by the 1994 Standard Building Code
Chapter 16 for new buildings.
2 ) The exterior appendage of the structure is not securely
fastened, attached or anchored such that it is capable of
resisting wind or similar loads as required by the 1994
Standard Building Code Chapter 16 for new buildings.
3) 1994 Standard Building Code Section 103.5 Unsafe Building or
Systems - All buildings, structures, electrical, gas,
mechanical or plumbing systems which are unsafe, unsanitary,
or do not provide adequate egress, or which constitute a fire
hazard, or are otherwise dangerous to human life, or which in
relation to existing use, constitute a hazard to safety or
health, are considered unsafe buildings or service systems.
All such unsafe buildings, structures or service systems
are hereby declared illegal and shall be abated by repair and
rehabilitation or by demolition in accordance with the
provisions of the Standard Unsafe Building Abatement Code.
4 ) The building, structure or portion thereof as a result of
decay, deterioration or dilapidation is likely to fully or
partially collapse.
5) The structure is in such a condition that it constitutes a
public nuisance.
h:\tonya\bob\206ridge.ins
i4'p�
SHE CITY OF 14,D WA
TER
rr uy:,,, POST OFFICE BOX 100-EDGEWATER, FLORIDA 32132-0100
Y
Mayor Ja� . ayman City Manager George E. McMahon
District 1 Councilman Danny K. Hatfield City Attorney Krista A. Storey
District 2 Councilwoman Louise A. Martin City CIerk Susan J. Wadsworth
District 3 Councilman Michael D. Hays
District 4 Councilman David L. Mitchum
Via Certified Mail
April 15 , 1996
Edwin A. Baetzman
202 Flagler Avenue
New Smyrna Beach, FL 32169
Re: Unsafe Building/Structure
206 S. Ridgewood Avenue
Dear Mr. Baetzman:
Notice is hereby given that the Construction Regulation Board of
the City of Edgewater, Florida, will hold a public hearing on
Tuesday, May 7 , 1996, at 7 :00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the
matter may be heard, in the Community Center, 102 N. Riverside
Drive, Edgewater, to consider your appeal of the decision of the
Building Official determining the building or structure located at
206 S. Ridgewood Avenue, Edgewater, Florida, to be unsafe in
accordance with Section 901 (J) of the Land Development Code of the
City of Edgewater, Florida, and the Standard Unsafe Building
Abatement Code, 1985 Edition.
You may choose to be represented by counsel at this hearing. You
may present relevant evidence and will be given an opportunity to
cross-examine all witnesses. You may request the issuance of
subpoenas to compel witnesses to appear and/or for the production
of other supporting data or documentation by filing a written
request with the secretary of the Construction Regulation Board.
Such requests shall be filed in sufficient time to allow reasonable
notice of the hearing to a witness or for production of documents .
If any person decides to appeal any decision made by the
Construction Regulation Board with respect to any matter considered
at such hearing, a record of the proceedings may be needed, and in
that event, such person may need to ensure that a verbatim record
of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and
evidence upon which the appeal is based.
Sincerely, ,
k,,,./k__ A- ,14-0A-e-,81
Krista A. Storey
City Attorney
Copy to: Director of Community Development
Building Official
CITY ATTORNEY
(904)424-2403
104 NORTH RIVERSIDE DRIVE
FAX (904)424-2415 or 424-2409 SUNCOX 383-2403
♦e-Me-1
t
REPORT ON INSPECTION
OF
STRUCTURE LOCATED AT 206 S. RIDGEWOOD AVE.
EDGEWATER, FLORIDA
PREPARED FOR
CITY OF EDGEWATER, FLORIDA
PO BOX 100
EDGEWATER, FL 32132
PREPARED BY
JOE D. MARTIN, P.E.
EAST VOLUSIA ENGINEERING, INC.
435-B1 Air Park Road
Edgewater,Florida 32132
FAX(904)423-7324
(904)423-8988
1 MAY, 1996
• f
NOW' 4100°
East Volusia Engineering, Inc.
435-B1 Air Park Road
Edgewater, Florida 32132
FAX(904)423-7324
(904)423-8988
1 May, 1996
Mr. Mark Karet, Director
Department of Community Development
City of Edgewater
PO Box 100
Edgewater, FL 32132
Dear Mr. Karet:
This letter transmits my report on the structural inspection of the building located at 206
South Ridgewood Avenue, Edgewater, Florida. The inspection was performed on 23
April in the presence of the owner, Mr. Alec Baetzman, and Mr. Robert Dunn, Chief
Building Official, City of Edgewater.
Since there was no electrical power available at the site, the interior of the building was
inspected using flashlight as a source of illumination. The exterior of the building was
photographed in key areas and the photographs are an integral part of the report.
If I may be of further assistance, please call.
Sincerely,
1
Joe D. Martin, P.E.
Florida Registration 14527
cc: Mr. Robert Dunn, Chief Building Official, City of Edgewater
NNW 'rri
t
LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS
Photo 1 North wall at northeast corner of building.
Approximately 1/2" crack through wall extending to ground. Reinforcing steel in lintel at
window stops at crack. There is no evidence of a bond beam above this level. This crack is
located 12'-8" from the front wall.
Photo 2 South wall at southeast corner of building.
Approximately 1/2" crack through wall extending to ground. There is no evidence of a bond
beam above this level. The wall has displaced outward approximately 1/8 " at the base
course. This crack is located 15'-4" from the front wall.
Photo 3 Front wall/parapet wall at northeast corner of building.
Masonry is not constructed in running bond and there is no evidence of bond beams
connecting the walls at this corner.
Photo 4 Front wall/parapet wall near southeast corner of wall.
Stairstep cracking pattern in front wall.
Photo 5 Archway in front wall at southeast corner of building.
A cedar tree has pushed the stack bond column northward approximately 1/2" below the
mortar joint at course 4 and 5.
Photo 6 South wall at southwest corner of building.
Wall at bathroom (plywood area) has settled approximately 3/4" and shifted outward
approximately 1/2". This wall appears to have been constructed on a 4" slab (sidewalk?)
rather than a footer. See photo 7.
Photo 7 West wall at southwest corner of building.
See photo 6.
/_ -...
r r`."� i try ��
y
' b
f .
11::::...,:. , i'de:
k
, �' ti ,
t !F
, ? . ''
1f. 1
Xn ( j .
' µ
1 l ':.. :, Z t '
i z
4
% K
Y..
.. ,��`,
,, i f•; '
1
•
y ,
0
- I .....
% •••.,. ' • ''' .' .14 ',..• ..4-., ' ... . •':*/ .. 'h, ' ' .
A ' / , .•t .:. '- "I'' ' • • +.
. . . •
•, . . •(..,
, 4- •r--, ,.........,,,41 , , , .. ,
' 4 r•4•• .' • .
'" .4. 4. ... .
-xo id/ *lc
,
• Or'
4i.
. • '... ,,,
..-/ \:'.......''' ,. . . „r i':44 . '
y .S_ (,-., '• , , ... ^
• ' .'", ' I- • - -^, - ., .! '? r '
, ( .
'.1 *I II
.• Is, . . • ,..
' ■ o • - I • illik 4f , ' ;
, 4
•..„.
•
, . ...-,
. ..
:-. 1
. ,„ ,
- ':',$› ., ^ •,'fi
V, . . . , ,-;•• ,.,r'.
ii,,,,..; .. .
I 107-,,.. . 4 • 'lk,,,` -,'' ' - . .
, . .. •-
!-'fri '. 1 • . .; '.. ..,." .. ^' ... . .,,.; 74. , ., •
. -
. .
4:-• - . 3 k.i...i,'4°,',,';v, ..........".; t,,,. ... .
I 4 •' '
‘ % li-, ' .4. 1'
i.' ••"
7 -.I
' ' . ".• :J I' lf7 ,•. I ,
77•
4 2 '
L- -4,1N1 l' '''‘k • •-- -,,,,, . ,. ..
. . . ,
. _ ', •'''''-'40--,.
.A . •• .
, ,..,
■.' It -/ '. ' ,..
. .
. '; .'-iN''.t, 'I'
1/4-I, ''''• .• -i . •
....„. ,
•,.. , ,
. ,.
..., . -: - .. • ::14.; !. ..,.., t,. • . 0..., - , . ,,,or •oto, .
r.t *,.• '
, x 4 - •%. .... -.4-.• ..,. r i
,, 1,• 0,. './S..4.-.-44 aCitia, . .44441e..-* ••1;4 ,.'.•• . . • lo
. - •
,.• • i. •fr , . .•;:..,,,,iti. t.,„,
. . -..:,
, .,.. , :••... .,,.,. ... . .., ., ief -4 .
_ ... .
, 1 . --- •- • .• .. ,. .. t
.
•
. ..„ • • ,',• .•
: . . . ..,,o,
,..--,.
9, „..
. ..i.:,.-
L
, """ :- 1
, .,•ii''
1: i i• ' ,.. i , - --- • ., .
.• •• i '4 t
"44 /
',.
CIV .-1 1 _......• ........4%,L. 1.- ... ',,r,111%!.;}• ,
r • . - -.,1, .. - 4,.., .- ,',i.,,...... ,..44-,' - toi.), ;as.,•.• , .
..., ■,-, 4,7k• :..'; 0'
..- **-1 , de.r.r: " • -. -, ,. ,I, . 'ri
1' ;• . : i
, • , •
l'.
; A 1/4•• .',...-
, • - •••
t .
•, ,.. ,
. .P
-1 - -• "' -
I
, .. . ,,,,- i
A •
,...'' .
.
' •' •-
. ti.‘‘..61„ ......"‹ V
...
..+ •; :4,I , •
. -.:',1#1?
' / "?:-. f•.7
"'''''. •'.••tei;te,:tr. t■t
_•■•••01111'7:-:---4.- i.•.' • , i to . ' •, ,t .,,- I fir A.,,,. .' , iiir , ,
'I - '.•
4 !i•-'-' , ,. - ..
,. .. ,
I 4 .2.„rafts V
. .. - i'''.!-.;,f-112. ,•,-,.—1 i
- .076,0-
;TP #' •r, —
, ..
74'
2 4' t. .
•
•• it.n47 t,.
• P.,%;
.....„..„... '• • al,P .• ...... ,
. . _,,,,,,...,„......„.,,•. ..„..,....._ ,. •.. .., .....:k..._. _ • • ..,., •
•
,
1 1
J • -1 ' _I, ^^1 ... . •
... . - -
I.- ,.....- i'..". ', " ‘1„.„ -
' ''''''' • 444"Nod soldwishogra— astallalla 1,-, -), . k 1....;40.0,L
. .. '
. _:v.., .1.4..1747 4 .i
1 ''''. '- ' ' rtiOr'...la■lr'''' '
, - ''• -''' -- •
- -.• .'-'4W:1■ •''--
. , ' • ' 1. ,
• ,
. .
-...;; ''•-:7`;.'4 4 ' - ..-
:;.■,,I. . ,, ' ' ' - ::-•,', 4-U6'
0",',1-!;',.-. ...` -.. r•i ' '-"' Alt"'''4' : 1.-..'..
.....
„.•
...-
a'..,-....• •,,,.., 1-'-,1,F;',-^:- - -•-;___.....'• '
.411111A.; . ---!...t.7-..,,. - -.4,:---.'• '.3•-*:..-----
, ..-,, ,A .,:.Z.t. . ,,. , ,. . •
.::,-. ,'... .,....*. ;\
. .
.,..
....__...
'_ . •-•
.. „
-.... . . - - .--k' ' , ' • -' ' - ----- ''. -...r 1411:-,4e,., ..,..,1-..,:.
, ...
. .,
. ,.. . . ,.....,. ..,
.., ..,
� r
*Of
OBSERVATIONS
Truss numbers 1, 2, and 3 (number 1 closest to the front wall) have fractures in the northern half
of the lower chord. These fractures extend through approximately the lower 1/3 of the chord. A
similar fracture exists in the southern half of truss number 6. Truss number 7 was not inspected.
All seven photos (see list of photographs) show evidence of deterioration of the masonry wall
structure. Photos 1 through 5 indicate that the portion of the building extending from the crack in
the side walls (photos 1 and 2)to the front wall at Ridgewood (photos 3, 4, and 5) has rotated
about a point near ground level at the location of the crack.
The magnitude of the cracks shown in photos 1 and 2 indicate that: (a) there is no continuous
horizontal reinforcing above the wall openings, or(b) the reinforcing has fractured. Probing the
crack at the lintel level in photo 1 disclosed the end of a horizontal reinforcing bar extending from
the lintel. The shape of the end of this reinforcement indicated it was a manufactured end, as
opposed to an end produced by a fracture of the reinforcement. There is evidence of stormwater
undermining the sidewalk adjacent to the cracked wall of photo 2. This could help explain the
reason for the differential settlement in this area of the building, i.e. locally high water table in
conjunction with vibration from vehicular traffic may be causing a pumping action on the soil
under the footer.
Photo 3 illustrates the corner is not restrained by running bond, however some restraint has been
provided by a wall-tie placed in the horizontal mortar joint at the base of the lintel level.
Photo 4 shows a stair-step crack extending from lower left to upper right. The majority of the
vertical joints between blocks located above lintel level in the area to the right (not shown) are
also cracked. While these type cracks are not uncommon in concrete masonry walls, they are
indicative of relative displacement in the structure caused by shrinkage, settlement, or
temperature changes.
In photo 5, the masonry units below course 5 have been pushed aside by the growth of a cedar
tree. This column supports an archway that is an integral part of the front wall. It is my opinion
that this column could fail at any time under windy conditions. Even moderate winds causing
motion of the cedar tree are daily increasing the likelyhood of collapse.
Photos 6 and 7 show settlement and displacement of masonry wall that apparently was not part
of the original construction. This wall was constructed over a 4" concrete slab(sidewalk?) and
there are no shear ties connecting this addition to the original masonry. Stormwater runoff ponds
against the wall and may have contributed to the deterioration.
CONCLUSION
The addition to the building shown in photos 6 and 7 was not constructed on a proper foundation.
Atlthough the west wall segment of this addition does not show the distress of the intersecting
walls segments, it may be damaged when these segments ultimately collapse.
Continuous horizontal reinforcing steel at levels above the wall openings in the original primary
masonry structure does not exist, or else the reinforcing steel has fractured. It appears that the
only restraint against rotation of the wall is provided by shear diaphragm action of the roof
structure acting as a drag strut. However, given the deteriorating condition of the roof structure
at the eaves, and the cracks noted in the lower chord members of the roof trusses, it is only a
matter of time before this restraint, if any, becomes ineffective.
• • • s
*we
•
It is my opionion that the masonry wall segments to the front of the cracks will continue to rotate
until failure occurs. The rate of rotation is indeterminate, but may be accelerated by the
combination of stormwater runoff under the sidewalk at the south wall and vibration from
vehicular traffic on Ridgewood. It is also possible that collapse will be triggered by action of the
cedar tree on the archway column.
Given the apparent lack of effective steel reinforcement, when collapse does occur, it will be
sudden and without warning. This is true whether triggered by continued rotation of the wall or
by collapse of the archway column.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Repair the roof truss lower chords and any deteriorating roof structure.
2. Remove the addition at the rear of the building and replace with properly constructed wall and
foundation.
3. Remove approximately 15' of the front section of the building walls, including the front wall
and archway, and replace with a properly constructed wall supported on a new or repaired
foundation.
4. Provide stormwater runoff control to direct runoff away from building.
5. Provide a protective barricade around the front portion of the building until it is repaired or
demolished. The barricade should be constructed in a manner to prevent debris from rolling
onto Ridgewood Avenue.
Jan Paul, A WOMAN-OWNED COMPANY Robert R.Bullard,P.E.
President Contract Engineer
ABSOLUTE ENGINEERING, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
218 SOUTH BEACH STREET
DAYTONA BEACH,FL 32114-4404
Telephone(904) 255-9400
Mr'. Alex Baetzman May 18 , 1994
Peninsula Land Realty
202 Flagler Avenue
New Smyrna Beach, FL 32169
Re: 206 South Ridgewood Ave. , Edgewater; Pyevac-Lumbert/Lasalandra
Parcel
Dear Alex:
Today, I inspected the referenced premises in the company of Messrs.
Mark Karet and Robert Dunn, Director of Community Development and Chief
Building Official , respectively, for the City of Edgewater.
In my professional opinion, the existing derelict structure can be
structurally rehabilitated for less than fifty per cent of the cost of
a replacement structure of the same building materials and dimensions .
Some of the measures which would be employed to this end are:
1 . Installation of external pilasters on each corner of the four
primary corners. (The semi-porch addition on the rear or west side
is probably not as salvagable as the primary structure. ) The
pilasters would be doweled into the adjacent existing masonry and
placed on footing extensions doweled into the existing building
footing. The tops of the pilasters would be connected by an eight
inch deep tie-beam scabbed on the existing tie-beam with dowels .
Wall cracks would be seal grouted with non-shrink adhesive grout.
2 . The interior site-built wooden dimensioned lumber roof trusses
appear to be intact, albeit significantly deflecting. The
integrity of the roof trusses would be assured by jacking them to
a positive camber, center-shored and stiffened with the addition of
webbing, and , perhaps, chord members. Simpson steel tie-down
straps would be placed at the ends of the trusses, both on the
existing masonry and on the new tie beam. Furring elements
(probably 2 X 4's) would be strategically located and affixed to
the interior of the wall to properly anchor masonry units which
have loosened or have been used to fill window openings.
3 . Without performing calculations and a more detailed inspection of
the interior wall surfaces, I am unable to offer an opinion as to
the suitability of the more heavily wind-shear-loaded walls (front
and rear) to resist such loads. I do know, however, that by a
combination of steel strapping and furring members, it would be
possible to bolster these walls sufficiently to resist a 100-mph
wind loading.
continued. . . Page 1 of 3
DESIGN AND PROJECT OFFICES: 140 SO. GRANDVIEW, DAYTONA BEACH , FL 32118
PRIORITY TELEPHONE NUMBERS: 904/254-2909; 255-9419 (FAX & MODEM)
• r ,✓
Jan Paul, A WOMAOW
N- NED COMPANY Robert R.Bullard,P.E.
President Contract Engineer
ABSOLUTE ENGINEERING, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
218 SOUTH BEACH STREET
DAYTONA BEACH,FL 32114-4404
Telephone(904)255-9400
Mr. Alex Baetzman May 18 , 1994
206 South Ridgewood Ave. , Edgewater Page 2 of 3
4. The east wall and portions of the adjoining side walls have
settled, causing the side walls to crack from the top down about
ten feet from the east wall in a fashion which indicates that the
tie-beam is probably devoid of steel reinforcing . Because the
structure is at least twenty years old and contiguous to a major
roadway and a sewer, causing, respectively, vibratory settlement
and a loss of soil buoyancy due to the water table being depressed
by infiltration to the sewer, any settlement which is likely to
have occurred has probably already occurred for a given regime of
superimposed loading ( in this case a single story masonry
structure) . The additional loading proposed by the improvements
described above are a small percentage of the present superimposed
loading and should not be the cause of further settling. The
structural consequences any further modest settlement should be
quite subdued as a result of the structural bolstering as described
herein.
5 . Any structure restored as described above would comply with the
various loading (Dead, Live and 100-mph-Wind Load) requirements of
the SBCCI .
With respect to the comments in Mr. Mark Karet's letter of April 15 ,
1994, I offer the following general responses:
6 . 1 . In its present condition the ability of the structure to resist
"wind , seismic or similar loads as required by the Standard
Building Code" (SBCCI ) is very much in question. The
remediations recommended in 1 . through 5 . are long overdue. The
building in its present form is not suited for occupancy and
would very likely be a source of wind-blown debris during a major
wind storm.
6 . 2 . The potential for "full or partial collapse" of the building in
its present condition is very real .
6 . 3. Because of its condition, there is no doubt the building is in
"violation of a specific requirement of the Standard Codes of the
City. "
6 .4. I agree -- "The building is in such a condition as to constitute
a public nuisance. " There was evidence of use of the premises
for impromptu lodging.
6 . 5 . I agree -- "The building. . . is unsafe, unsanitary, etc . "
continued . . .
I,' L..
, `ry
A WOMAN-OWNED COMPANY.
Jan Paul, Robert R.Bullard,P.E.
President Contract Engineer
ABSOLUTE ENGINEERING, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
218 SOUTH BEACH STREET
DAYTONA BEACH,FL 32114-4404
Telephone(904) 255-9400
Mr. Alex Baetzman May 18 , 1994
206 South Ridgewood Ave. , Edgewater Page 3 of 3
Even though the structure, as I have pointed out, may be rehabilitated
to meet current Building Code requirements, Messrs. Karet, Dunn and I
were of the opinion that the main reason for a prospective user to wish
to undertake such an enterprise would be to preserve a "grandfathering"
status for the present set-back from U. S. 1 instead of having to
conform to the forty foot set-back as would apply to a new building.
In my opinion the prospective user and the City should have some room
to negotiate their respective positions on this. Quite obviously,
there are reasons that a user may wish to have his building closer than
the forty-foot set back would permit. Some of these reasons may derive
form other statutory development limitations , which in the grand scheme
of things , may be of less significance in the City's ( public interest)
realm than the forty foot set-back. I can not believe that the City
would be so inflexible as to force a prospective user to bend over
backwards to make an otherwise marginal structure work in the user' s
business plan solely as a means of preserving the benefits of a relaxed
set-back. On the other hand, if such is what the user must do to
achieve his business goals, the building can be made usable as I have
described above.
I hope that I have been helpful in this matter and may continue to be
so.
Respectfully,
/ S #iuL1
Robert R. Bullard, P. E.
Contract Engineer
LASALAN1
Iwo low
March 7, 1996
Robert A. Dunn, Building Official
Dept. of Community Development
Building Division
City of Edgewater
P.O. Box 100
Edgewater. FL 32132-0100
Subject : 206 S . Ridgewood Avenue, Edgewater FL, Parcel No. 7452-01-00-0130,
Legal : Lot 31 exc E 15 . 3 ft on N/L & 17 . 3 ft on S/L & exc W 115 ft Of N
65 ft & exc W 115 ft on S 70 ft Alvarez Grant
Dear Mr. Dunn:
My interest in the above mentioned property is as an owner.
Currently I am in search of an occupant or user of the property. The pro-
perty is actively for sale or lease. At the time of sale or lease, the
existing structure would be brought up to code or removed, depending on
the new desired use .
I have met city requirements for site clean-up and securing of the struc-
ture.
I do not feel I should be required to bring the structure to code until time
of occupancy. I understand it should kept secure.
It would be a hardship to invest additional monies until a tenant or user
is found. A new owner may decide to remove the structure. There is value
in the existing structure remaining. Until that decision is made, as to
credit for different impact fees etc. , I want the structure to remain.
Again, I have and will continue to comply with the city of Edgewater for
grounds upkeep and securing the structure.
I do request the structure remain in a secured manner until a "user" is
secured for the structure.
I have attached a letter dtd May 18, 1994 by Absolute Engineering, Inc.
Consulting Engineers regarding subject structure.
Thereby, I request your letter dtd February 8 , 1996 be satisfied until a
new occupant is secured for the structure or site.
Sincerely,
EDWIN A. BAETZMAN
202 Flagler Ave.
New Smyrna Beach, FL 32169
904-427-6799
enclosure
cc: Edgewater City Atty. , Edgewater Mayor, Mark Hall , Atty.
EAB/ld
*tow law
SUGGESTED CRB PROCEDURES FOR APPEAL
OF UNSAFE BUILDING DETERMINATION
Generally
1. Before making factual statements or factual representations,
each speaker shall take the following oath or affirmation to be
administered by the Secretary:
Do you swear or affirm that the
factual statements and
representations which you are about
to give to this Board are the truth,
the full truth, and nothing but the
truth?
2 . Speakers addressing the Board, including Staff, should identify
any educational, occupational and other experience which they
possess which would be relevant to the matter under consideration.
3. After completion of a presentation by any speaker, the Board,
Staff, or any party shall have the opportunity to ask questions or
seek clarification from the speaker. Such requests shall be made
through the Chairman.
4 . Any documentation presented to the Board shall be offered into
the record by submitting a copy of the document to the Secretary
who shall keep the documents as part of the record of the
proceeding. The Staff report with all attachments shall be deemed
part of the record as well as copies of all notices.
5. The Board's decision must be based on competent substantial
evidence defined as evidence a reasonable mind would accept to
support a conclusion. This includes the testimony of qualified
witnesses as opposed to the opinions and objections of interested
parties. In determining what constitutes competent substantial
evidence, the Board must determine the facts and not merely poll
interested parties. Accordingly, general public commentary and the
presentation of petitions would not give sufficient basis for a
decision.
Procedures
1. Public hearing opened after announcement of issue before the
Board.
2 . Staff shall make the initial presentation regarding the item
under consideration. After completion of the presentation, the
Board may ask Staff questions. Then, any party may ask questions
or seek clarification from Staff through a request to the Chairman.
3. The property owner shall next be allowed the opportunity to
make a presentation to the Board. After completion of the
presentation, the Board may make ask the property owner questions.
Then, Staff may ask questions or seek clarification from the
property owner through a request to the Chairman.
4 . Staff shall be allowed an opportunity for response to the
presentation by the property owner.
5. The property owner shall be given a final opportunity to rebut
comments made by Staff.
6. Public hearing closed.
7 . The Board shall have a final opportunity to comment or ask
questions of Staff or the property owner.
8. The Board decision shall follow.
KAS
5/7/96
�rA
MOTION REGARDING APPEAL OF
UNSAFE BUILDING DETERMINATION
After hearing the testimony presented, I hereby move in
reference to the appeal by Edwin A. Baetzman that the unsafe
building determination (CHOOSE EITHER: (1) be upheld because the
building is in fact unsafe as set forth in the Building Official 's
inspection report. Mr. Baetzman is hereby ordered to repair or
demolish the building within 30 days. OR (2) be overturned because
the building is not in fact unsafe as defined in Section 202 of the
Standard Unsafe Building Abatement Code.
KAS
05/07/96
Motion.CRB