Loading...
06-23-1981 ~ ~~ o u CITY OF EDGEWATER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING June 23, 1981 Chairman Millard called the Public Hearing of the Board of Adjustment to order at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall conference room. ROLL CALL Also present: Mr. Millard Mr. Wetzel Mrs. Martin Mrs. Walker Mr. Butt Mr. Newell Mr. Roush Present Present Present Present Present Present Present City Manager Joseph Mitchell Building Official Charles Murphy Mr. Frank Opal (late) Mr. Robert Moore Mr. W.R. Aikens Mayor Christy City Attorney Clay Henderson Mr. John Wharton CASE NO.1 Mr. Robert N. Moore is requesting a rear setback variance in order to build a screen enclosure on the back of his home at 1622 Lime Tree Drive. Chairman Millard verified that the applicant was present, that he had posted the property with the sign furnished to him and v that the legal ad and certified letters wer mailed out to adjoining property owners. Mr. Newell questioned Mr. Moore as to whether he intends to extend the pad that is already there. Mr. Moore stated that he is not going to extend the pad that is presently there, he just wants to screen it in. There were several comments made from the board members about the character of the other houses in this neighborhood, and it was the general consensus that this imporvement would comply with the area. Chairman Millard stated that this man did not create the hardship himself since the slab was already down when he purchased the house. He added that this would not be granting something that would be denied to the other residents in the area. At this time Mrs. Walker entered the meeting. There was discussion with the Building Official as to the setback requirements. It was determined that this house was originally set back farther than it should have been and it was unclear as to exactly what figure should be used for granting the variance. Chairman Millard suggested that an exact number be left out of the matter. The vote would be on granting Mr. Moore a variance to screen in the concrete pad on the rear of his house. He is not to add to the size of the pad that is already there. Upon roll call the vote CARRIED 7-0 to grant Mr. Moore this variance, with the conditions as stated. ~ Q o CASE NO.2 Mr. W. R. Aikens is requesting a seven foot front setback variance in order to build a patio cover in the front of his place of business at 333 North Ridgewood Avenue. Chairman Millard verified that the applicant was present, that he had posted the property with the sign furnished to him and that the legal ad and certified letters were mailed out to adjoining property owners. Chairman Millard began going over the history of this particular piece of property. A special exception was granted to Mr. William Rickelman in 1978 with conditions attached and the same conditions were put on a special exception which was granted to Mr. Aikens in 1979. At this point Mr. Aikens told the board how he had to fight for his license before and that if he is given a hard time now, he will come right back again. He does not feel that the past has anything to do with his present request. He reiterated some threats that he had made previously in regard to the special exception. Chairman Millard established the ~act that a special exception was granted to Mr. Aikens, however the conditions have not been complied with. He explained that in order to grant a variance to someone, undue hardship must be established. Mr. Aikens questioned some other construction taking place on U.S.l which doesn't comply with the requirements. Chairman Millard explained that other buildings not complying has nothing to do with this particul~ case. He went on to say to Mr. Aikens that his belligerent attitude is only serving to fog the issue and the board members may loose their desire to try to help him. Mr. Aikens apologized for his attitude, stating that he just does not want to discuss the past. Chairman Millard asked Mr. Aikens if he is in a position to get a buffer put up as it is stated in the conditions of the special exception? The secretary was requested to read the buffer requirements from the Code book. Mr. Aikens stated that none of the adjoining property owners are complaining about his business the way it is now, however he will be glad to put up this buffer. Chairman Millard spoke of this being a non-conforming building and no permanent additions should be allowed, he would have to suggest that if this be granted, that the patio cover be a temporary addition. Mr. Aikens explained that it would be temporary; he only leases this property and he would not leave anything there that he pays for himself. -2- Bd. of Adjustment 6-23-81 Q o Chairman Millard explained that the vote will be on a variance allowing Mr. Aikens to put up a 12' x 22' temporary patio cover that he will take with him when he leaves this location. Also, Mr. Aikens is agreeing to put in a buffer strip according to the regulations between the commercial and residential lines, approximately 105 feet from U.S. 1. Upon roll call the vote CARRIED 7-0 to grant this variance with the conditions as stated. Chairman Millard asked Mr. Aikens if someone was living in the travel trailer that is presently parked behind his business? Mr. Aikens stated that no one is living in it; it is for sale. Chairman Millard asked Mrs. Martin if she would like to have a comment on the record in regard to Mr. Aiken's previous request before the board? Mrs. Martin stated that when the special exception case came before the board, no decisions were made because of threats made by the applicant or pressure put on the members. The members acted upon the paperwork and information that was presented to them. Chairman Millard told Mr. Aikens that he would be requested to sign the letter in regard to the action taken at this meeting, and he will be furnished with a copy of the buffer requirements. He also asked if Mr. Murphy would show Mr. Aikens where the buffer should be placed. Mr. Murphy was given the floor. He stated the construction that Mr. Aikens referred to on U.s. 1, which does not comply with the setback requirements was referred to the Zoning and Planning Board. He added that he issued the building permit upon instruction from that board. Public Hearing adjourned. REGULAR MEETING No roll call necessary. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mrs. Martin made a motion to accept the minutes as read, being seconded by Mr. Newell. Motion CARRIED. Chairman Millard stated that we need a volunteer to go to Deland and look up the property owners in regard to the property that Mr. Wharton has complained about. Mr. Wharton entered the meeting room, stating that he looked up this information in the tax roles at the County Courthouse Annex. Mrs. Carlson owns the property immediately east of Riverside Drive back to Mr. Schick's property. Mr. Murphy spoke to the board in regard to this situation, stating that he knows for a fact that this is correct. He added that he agrees with Mr. Wharton's statements, however Riverside Drive is the legal address given to Mr. Schick. Perhaps something can be done about changing the address, however even if that is done, Mr. Schick could not be made to remove anything that is presently on his property. Bd. of Adjustment 6-23-81 -3- o o Chairman Millard stated that the Zoning laws do not give the Board of Adjustment the authority to handle the changing of an address. He asked Mr. Wharton what remedy he is asking for? Mr. Wharton explained that he wants to eliminate the possibility of the lots between Mr. Schick and Riverside Drive from doing the same thing that he has done with the building setbacks. Mr. Murphy explained to Mr. Wharton that the same thing could not happen, because he would not issue a building permit unless the requirements were met. What Mr. Schick has done is allowable due to the legal address being Riverside Drive. Chairman Millard stated that this board has nothing further to discuss in regard to this matter. There was disucssion about a day during the week that all of the board members could get together to inspect a piece of property in the event a case comes up that they should all go out to investigate. All of the board members stated that they do inspect the properties on their own, and there was no definite day deter- mined to do this as a group. Chairman Millard went over some of the changes that Attorney Henderson suggested in regards to the rules and regulations. There was a lengthy discussion about the paragraph in regard to the amount of absenses allowed to the board members, and the definition of excused absenses. Attorney Henderson explained that the board is adopting a standard by which to send the matter to the Council. Any violation of these rules and regulations would be cause to send recommendation to the Council. City Attorney Henderson furnished the board members with the present laws in regard to Board of Adjustment duties and authority. He suggested that the board stay as close to the statutory language as possible when making their decisions. He spoke briefly to the board about the proposed ordinance revisions and explained that the board members will be re- ceiving copies of this proposal and they may have some input for him. He also explained the circumstances involved with the building going up on U.S.l that has been brought up during the Public Hearing tonight. This non conforming lot was platted prior to the adoption of the City's zoning ordinance and the law reads that in cases such as this, the setbacks can be deter- mined by the surrounding properties. City Manager Mitchell spoke briefly to the board expressing that he is looking forward to working with them. Chairman Millard declared the meeting adjourned at 8:50 P.M. Minutes submitted by: Debbie Sigler -4- Bd. of Adjustment 6-23-81