04-04-1979
-.
u
u
CITY OF EDGEWATER
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SPECIAL MEETING
April 4~ 1979
Chairman Kenneth Millard called the Board of Adjustment Special
Meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. in the Edgewater City Hall.
ROLL CALL
Mr. Millard
Mr. Lupinek
Mr. Poland
Mr. Gnau
~1r. Glaser
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Also present:
City Attorney Judson Woods
Mr. Harold Brown
Mr. Millard said that the Special Meeting had been called to review
the notification made by the Building Official to an individual
who had previously been granted a Special Exception.
Mr. Millard quoted from Sections 903.01 and 903.03 which deal
with special conditions that may be attached to the granting of
a Special Exception and also with the revocation of that Special
E x c e p t ion i f the s e con d i t ion s are not met..."
Mr. Harold Brown was granted a Special Exception for a used car lot.
There were conditions attached to that Special Exceotion. One of
the conditions was that the building must have a 201 side setback from
the property line. However~ Mr. Brown continued to build on the
lot line and that is why the Building Official suspended the permit.
The Board of Adjustment held two Public Hearings regarding the
Special Exception for Mr. Brown. The Board then recommended to the
Council that a Special Exception for a Used Car lot be granted to
Mr. Brown with certain conditions. The Council accepted the recommenda-
tion of the Board and on March 12~ 1979 passed Resolution No. 79-R-35.
This resolution granted the Special Exception with conditions~ one of
which was the side yard set back.
Mr. Brown wrote to the Council ~ after he received notice that the
Special Exception was suspended. The Council referred this back
to the Board of Adjustment for review and recommendations.
Mr. Brown spoke to the Board and said that he believed he should
be allowed to build on the lot line. If this was illegal then why
did he get a building permit?
Mr. Woods said that it was illegal for Mr. Brown to build on his lot
line because of the Special Exception and the condition that makes
it mandatory for Mr. Brown to put the building 201 from the lot line or
be in violation of the Special Exception and the Council resolution.
Mr. Millard said that the Board is not talking about the Building Code
they are talking about the Special Exception with the condition of
where the building should be located. It was the combined judgement
of the Board and the consensus of opinion of the Zoning Board and
the Planning Board~ that a Special Exception for a Used Car lot would
not be granted with the building on the lot line.
There was a rather lengthy discussion between Mr. Brown and the City
Attorney as to the legality of this condition. Mr. Woods continued
to state that these conditions were accepted by Mr. Brown at the
time of the Public Hearing~ at the time of the Council decision to
accept the recommendation of the Board of Adjustment and at the time
of the reading of the resolution granting the Special Exception. Mr.
Brown is in violation of the Special Exception and the Council resolution. 1
(.)
o
Mr. Glaser pointed out that under B-3 a side setback is 20' from the
lot line except where there is a common wall connecting the buildings.
Mr. Brown said that he had already started building before he got the
Special Exception.
Mr. Millard polled the members of the Board to see if there might be a
case of undue hardship. The Board unanimously agreed that there was
no case of undue hardship.
Mr. Brown continued to insist that it was legal, according to the
building code, to build on the lot line.
Mr. Woods said that it is quite possible that the original building
permit may have been issued in error. However, this is not the case
under review at this time. It.is illegal for Mr. Brown to put the
building on the lot line.
Mr. Brown said that he might want to get out of the used car business
some day and build a string of building across his property and that
is why he should be allowed to build on the lot line. The ordinance
says that if he owns all these parcels of land, he does not need a
20' setback.
Mr. Millard asked Mr. Brown if he could change the olacement of the
building to comply \'lith the Special Exception. The' Board would be
willing to grant him a reasonable period of time to accomplish the
moving of the building.
r~r. Brown still insisted that it was not illegal for him to have the
building on the lot line. If it is necessary for him to move it, he
may have to recover the cost of construction from the City. He added
that he could not understand why there was so much objection to the
building being left where it was.
Mr. Millard said that the only issue was Lot 2 and a used car operation
on that lot. The Planning Board, the Zoning Board and the Board of
Adjustments all believed that the building should have a 20' side
setback. No one believes that there is a valid, reasonable reason
for building on the lot line. There appears to be no justification
for what Mr. Brown wants to do other than he wants to build on the
lot line because at some other time he may want to add on to the
building.
Mr. Brown said that if the City Attorney tells him that this building
is illegal on the lot line, he will abide by that decision.
Mr. Woods said that Mr. Brown came to the Board of Adjustment for a
Special Exception, under the 880 Ordinance. Regardless of what the
ordinance may say about setbacks, the Board of Adjustment can impose
any reasonable requirements that they feel are necessary, before
granting a Special Exception.
Mr. Brown again wanted to know why the Board insisted on a 20. side
setback.
Mr. Millard said that it was to keep Lot 2 conforming so that any future
activity on that lot would not be nonconforming. Mr. Brown has not
established a reason for putting the building on the lot line that can
be, validly, taken into account. He again asked Mr. Brown if a month
was a reasonable length of time to correct the placement of the
building and comply with the conditions of the Special Exception.
Mr. Brown said that leaal matters take longer than a month. He believes
he has been "shoved the wrong way" and he can't even get an opinion
from the City Attorney.
Mr. Millard asked the City Attorney if Mr. Bnown had an appeal going,
is it true that any action would be held in abeyance?
Mr. Woods said yes, if Mr. Brown is going to file some kind of appeal.
2
v
o
Mr. Millard said that the Board should vote on whether to revoke
the Special Exception or not.
Mr. Brown said that before they do that he would like to go back
to the issue of the building permit. If that permit was issued
illegally then he can go back to the City and get his money back.
Mr. Millard said that he would like a committee of two from the
Board of Adjustment to discuss with Mr. Murphy the issuance of that
permit and bring a report back to the Board.
Mr. Glaser and Mr. Millard were selected to speak with the Building
Official on the matter of Mr. Brown's building permit.
Mr. Millard asked if the Board was ready to vote or did they want
to recess.
Mr. Lupinek and Mr. Gnau suggested that the Board recess.
Mr. Poland said that no action has been taken to correct the violation
of the Special Exception. Perhaps, if no action has been taken by
the time of our next regularly scheduled meeting that would be the
time to vote on revocation.
Mr. Millard said that if Mr. Brown plans to appeal to some other
body, he has nothing to appeal unless the Board acts now.
The Board decided that they should vote now.
Mr. Millard said -a YES vote would mean that the Board member
is voting to revoke the Special Exception. A NO vote would mean
that the Board member is willing to let the Special Exception stand.
Upon roll call the Board of Adjustment voted YES to revoke the
Special Exception issued to Mr. Harold Brown.
Mr. Millard said that there is no provision for review when the
Board revokes its own action.
Mr. Woods said that Mr. Brown would have to go to court.
The Special Meeting was adjourned.
Minutes submitted by:
Nancy Blazi
3
0:-.
o
o
CITY OF EDGEWATER
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SPECIAL MEETING
April 4, 1979
Chairman Kenneth Millard called the Board of Adjustment Special
Meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. in the Edgewater City Hall.
ROLL CALL
Mr. Millard
Mr. Lupinek
'Mr. Poland
Mr. Gnau
Mr. Glaser
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Also present:
City At~orney Judson Woods
Mr. Harold Brown
Mr. Millard said that the Special Meeting had been called to review
the notification made by the Building Official to an individual
- who had previously been granted a Special Exception.
Mr. Millard quoted from Sections 903:01 and 903.03 which deal
with special conditions that. may be attached to the granting of
a Special Exception and also with the revocation of that Special
Exception if these conditions are not met.~'
Mr. Harold Brown was granted a Special Exception for a used car lot.
There were conditions attached to that Special Exceotion. One of
the conditions was that the building must have a 20' side setback from
the property line. However, Mr. Brown continued to build on the
lot line and that is why the Building Official suspended the permit.
The Board of Adjustment held two Public Hearings regarding the
Special Exception for Mr. Brown. The Board then recommended to the
Council that a Special Ex~eption for a Used Car lot be granted to
Mr. Brown with certain conditions. The Council accepted the recommenda-
tion of the Board and on March 12, 1979 passed Resolution No. 79-R-35.
This resolution granted the Special Exception with conditions, one of
which was the side yard set back.
Mr. Brown wrote to the Council, after he received notice that the
Special Exception was suspended. The Council referred this back
to the Board of Adjustment for review and recommendations.
Mr. Brown spoke to the Board and said that he believed he should
be allowed to build on the lot line. If this was illegal then why
did he get a building permit?
Mr. Woods said that it was illegal for Mr. Brown to build on his lot
line because of the Special Exception and the condition that makes
it mandatory for Mr. Brown"to put the building 20' from the lot line or
be in violation of the Special Exception and the Council resolution.
Mr. Millard said that the Board is not talkinq about the Building Code
they are talking about the Special Exception with the condition of
where the building should be located. It was the combined judgement
of the Board and the consensus of opinion of the Zoning Board and
the Planning Board, that a Special Exception for a Used Car lot would
not be granted with the building on the lot line.
There was a rather lengthy discussion between Mr. Brown and the City
Attorney as to the legality of this condition. Mr. Woods continued
to state that these conditions were accepted by Mr. Brown at the
time of the Public Hearing, at the time of the Council decision to
accept the recommendation of the Board of Adjustment and at the time
of the reading of the resolution granting the Special Exception. Mr.
Brown is in violation of the Special Exception and the Council resolution.
;::-.
o
o
Mr. Glaser pointed out that under B-3 a side setback is 20' from the
lot line except where there is a common wall connecting the buildings.
Mr. Brown said that he had already started building before he got the
Special Exception.
Mr. Millard polled the members of the Board to see if there might be a
case of undue hardship. The Board unanimously agreed that there was
no case of undue hardship.
Mr. Brown continued to insist that it was legal, according to the
building code, to build on the lot line.
Mr. Woods said that it is quite possible that the original building
permit may have been issued in error. However, this is not the case
under review at this time. It.is..ille~Bl for Mr. Brown to put the
building on the lot line.
Mr. Brown said that he might want to get out of the used car business
some day and build a string of building across his property and that
is why he should be allowed to build on the lot line. The ordinance
says that if he owns all these parcels of land, he does not need a
20' setback.
Mr. Millard asked Mr. Brown if he could change the placement of the
building to comply with the Special Exception. The Board would be
willing to grant him a reasonable period of time to accomplish the
moving of the building.
Mr. Brown still insisted that it was not illegal for him to have the
building on the lot line. If it is necessary for him to move it, he
may have to recover the cost of construction from the City. He added
that. he could not understand why there was so much objection to the
building being left where it was.
Mr. Millard said that the only issue was Lot 2 and a used car operation
on that lot. The Planning Board, the Zoning Board and the Board of
Adjustments all believed that the building should have a 20' side
setback. No one believes that there is a valid, reasonable reason
for building on the lot line. There appears to be no justification
for what Mr. Brown wants to do other than he wants to build on. the
lot line because at some other time he may want to add on to the
building.
Mr. Brown said that if the City Attorney tells him that this building
is:illegal on the lot line, he will abide by that decision.
Mr. Woods said that Mr. Brown came to the Board of Adjustment for a
Special Exception, under the 880 Ordinance. Regardless of what the
ordinance may say about setbacks, the Board of Adjustment can impose
any reasonable requirements that they feel are necessary, before
granting a Special Exception.
Mr. Brown again wanted to know why the Board insisted on a 20' side
setback.
Mr. Millard said that it was to keep Lot 2 conforming so that any future
activitj.'on t~at lot would not be nonconforming. Mr. Brown has not
established a reason for putting the building on the lot line that can
be, validly, taken into account. He again asked Mr. Brown if a month
was a reasonable length of time to correct the placement of the
building and comply with the conditions of the Special Exception.
Mr. Brown said that leaal matters take longer than a month. He believes
he has been "shoved th~ wrong way" and he can't even get an opinion
from the City Attorney.
Mr. Millard asked the City Attorney if Mr. Bnown had an appeal going,
is it true that any action would be held in abeyance?
Mr. Woods said yes, if Mr. Brown is going to file some kind of appeal.
?
J
o
o
Mr. Millard said that the Board should vote on whether to revoke
the Special Exception or not.
Mr. Brown said that beftire".they do that he would like to go back
to the issue of the building permit. If that permit was issued
illegally then he can go back to the City and get his money back.
Mr. Millard said that he would like a committee of two from the
Board of Adjustment to discuss with Mr. Murphy the issuance of that
permit and bring a report back to the Board.
Mr. Glaser and Mr. Millard were selected to speak with the Building
Official on the matter of Mr. Brown's building permit.
Mr. Millard asked if the Board was ready to vote or did they want
to recess.
Mr. Lupinek and Mr. Gnau suggested .that the Board recess.
Mr. Poland said that no action has been taken to correct the violation
of the Special Exception. Perhaps, if no action has been taken by
the time of our next regularly scheduled meeting that would be the
time to vote on revocation.
Mr. Millard said that if Mr. Brown plans to appeal to some other
body, he has nothing to appeal unless the Board acts now. .
The Board decided that they should vote now.
Mr. Millard said -a YES ,. vote would mean that the Board member
is .voting to revoke the Special Exception. A NO vote would mean
that the Board member is willing to let the Special Exception stand.
Upon roll call the Board of Adjustment voted YES to revoke the
Special Exception issued to Mr. Harold Brown.
Mr. Millard said that there is no provision for review when the
Board revokes its own action.
Mr. Woods said that Mr. Brown would have to go to court.
The Special Meeting was adjourned.
Minutes submitted by:
Nancy Blazi
. .
3
u
TO:
FROM:
o
\tit!' of ~bgtwattr
v olusia County, Florida 32032
Post Olfice Box tOO ~
. r'1arch 30, 1979 ~v
. I, 2 Qvtl1
Mayor and City Council ~\
~.
Board of Adjustment
At the Public Hearing on March 28, 1979, the Board of Adjustment
took the following action. These requests are being submitted
to the Council for their consideration and action.
(1) Mr. Thomas Loveland, 606 N. Riverside Drive applied for a
.variance to extend a wall of his house forty-one inches
r (4111) for the purpose of enlarging a room. The property is
described as Lot 46, Palmetto Park - Shepherd & Sanchez Grant
Per DR 1873 Pg. 460. The property is located at the inter-
section of Sanchez and Knapp on the West side of Riverside Dr.
The Board voted gto grant this varinnc:e. The improvement will
be in the same style and character as the rest of the house.
There were no objections from abutting property owners.
(2) Mr. Jacques Swart applied for a variance to build a single
.family residence on.the West side of Riverside Drive at the
corner of Parkwood and Riverside. The property is described
as Lot 1 Parkwood Sub Map Book 8 Pg. 297 Parcel 8402 34 00 0010.
The Board voted ~to grant this variance. This pre-1974 lot
requires a 5 ft. variance UII Lne Tront yard and an 8 ft. variance
for the back. The building lines are in conformity with other
homes on the street. There were no objections from any abutting
property owners.
(3) Mr. and Mrs. Loescher applied for a Special Exception for a used
car lot at 1515 S. Ridgewood. The property is described as
2 18 34 tri parcel in parcel 28 and part of Darcel 29 being
N. 222.1 ft. S. of River Heights Sub. MB 19 Pg. 139 of \~ 221.9
ft. meas. on. The property fronts on the East side of U.S.1
(S. Ridgewood) between the intersections of E. Marion Ave. and
Rhode Island St.
The Board voted 3-0 to grant this Special Exce~tion_subject to
conditions agreedrt:o by applicant. Mr. Poland abstained for
general reasons and without prejudice to applicant.
Conditions are:
1. Those stated by owners on attached sheet. One night 1 ight for security.
2. No junk cars - operative cars only to be displayed.
3. Area in rear will be completely cleared of debris.within 30 days.
4. Screening in rear (east) side of entire building.
5. Minor auto repairs within the building.
6. Outside area to comply with attached drawing.
There were no objections from abutting property owners.
I ~
/~~.
Kenneth Millard
Chairman
~V~~'~ l~-----~----j-
fV'/'-'\ .. -. - I
Co +-t I :n \le.. E I
R1'C I
_~rQP. L\(\~
u .-...-.---.
~d.'
?J)'
~se. -\'-0<<- @ Col\P.
- --wr
/ ~P~\lY~A'I
I F~ ENt
/7~.
/ ....
/// /
'/ ~
4l~
/ ~~
./ /' Q
/ / . /' .~
/&FI~()R / /' ~If.
/ osa; ~S~ /~
// / /7~'
\:tl E T.
"'d \? ....4 "'5
('"PA~I<.'f\G \O/)C 15') C u.6TorrcR.
ED I
:R~
"'-
fi5
f ~. USEDr:c..Pr~e;
:1! I :Jl ~ d4 :.5
,., .... .-1 ,.-1,.,
~ .....-1vv.-~-'-'1.- ~ .' -,.- . '.. 1
V - .----- - 1\
d.5ll. q / ---4-
(3D ' ) /f' \
})R\~E VJ~~ \ ~
---"----
.... ....-~-~-..-....".-'!".~_JlL.,______"_________
,
,
;,
1
,
(,
-!
~ - --
i < _
~ :> I
L
, o{J..;r
1 0 4::
~~3t-3
~.:j~~ I
7 1- a:~ I
;:-- -~
~ I.
Qi dl ru
~L \-U n
;~ ~ r
i<( c
~<~ ;
~/ tt 1
~~ ,~i
f ffi Lil
"1 ~ C:-l
! C) ~l
? ~ !~I
(., ~!
uS
",(i..~1a ~;
. "I
f:t '1 . ~~I
> ~
j~8
~l
L.:H g
I
t:it/o
~ .
~II":fI.r I\/\lV'-"\/"~
\
,
/
/ ..
..
. /7/LY..' ":.. :__::> i "_ \_L.'__V._ '.J,-. '_ '_ ' ~I "/ ' I
To ~ ~..0_QJn(}~ J}i~~~~~{!..~/)!}5?!~n~~!!:~
c' .. r,t(\f\r::1.h mill AQ.[)
( EAsT 5dJt.~ c-5 ::7 / )
~ bLLLW.i()~ ,\'S \cf.0io-.CL Qt 1515 ~, ~;dp~u-'cod
&t.w2.-EJ\. cQQt 111 ARIOC) d l~hC('1e. l--s/A(Li ~t_
1hi0 wi \ \ t:e.- -thE:-, ell \ L\ tLSc~D UJR \ Dt wltJ')
Q f\~eJ\. \'J.l~~ -CC~I're-, rCC~o\de., I Qrd -tc
1\12J- SDLGJ\ '0)c\e_ cf lot-) tlbD IlCftf---
J01'X- .fi:.ct. ~~f\Q.e- CL-L f~.A1( J tlOCkl ()~ CLlL
R~\C'luJ\l((\tL ppc~Ee~. . .._
D PilfPrt ~ -tIu::\ , Cill U.:b~ 'c c..omrfff~LC:ili. llJ.C:.peJ2_-
r{\AY\~. :0 -\.hE:-.. ~L-lJ:h ) cdJjJJOJJL)L \\J tD IIc)R-th!
. ~tEJ\l'\ ~\"U~j \ IILal \ ~ 1\ \ 1ie:2_ -tel \i0t.~j\ ~ l-\~(\[) LlJ~(J
)
Kt~~\d2~:) tel i-he.-/ E A:sT.
j niHil\ bJ_&.di.:t) o~ Lt{Y!lcL b~ 5 bYJ)IJ1J1.bt>'
~8J)(tttL ,\J ~) C.oRP.(::stcroff:j ~) LC0EYK Hu5C'
4) Ilo lIr-l~-lC'_ C'LPfJPSl1Qn f~(\-\-fSi 1fJJ1-ui- c9. dRJ~ WAWI
'J ) J
erDi2-f1l'0eb) ctWK -\\''=lLL S hQ)LQL}, wd:11 "-
T urJzc-\C. fy) 0f\-t . \D -\-~i:: ~~) u.l~CJ. IlloRc
GW.)101l1Ctz ~ ro m --U1CL, ReM QL k:JJJJ~dJJ\Q..
6) ft;up~) 9J, opCI2.PWJJIL: q - ~ nlL~~~t ~~\jA~
~ATlLo"<-OH:J q - I -~ ~G W TEd AT ()! i3H I *
e) C?f-:QCLW 17LLr;bCE- ~ u.:MCL CQJ23 J.J!dlt'CtfL
:3-2\ QLcto~ . J
7) fl. Ie) x~c~) I2t/O:JJ2___ ~'J1()~~l Lie. l2aL2k uti~
12t. UJJLcL --'601e 8.Q/~LW:..C:... O!JLC/) L;f
r\. . .. c.
l-DE :=~}lt-K. iJLLTDniu-r \ \~~