Loading...
03-28-1979 ~ . o o CITY OF EDGEWATER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARING March 28, 1979 Chairman Millard called the regular meeting of the Edgewater Board of Adjustment. 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 Excused Also Present: Mr. Loveland Mr. Fredericks Mr. and ~1 r s. L 0 e s c her Mr. and Mrs. Shaeffer Mr. Meyers Mr. and Mrs. Stuppy Mr. Canfield M r s. ~1 u r p h y Mr. Loeffler APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chairman Millard asked the Board if there were any corrections or additions to the Minutes of the February 28, 1979 meeting. He asked the secretary to make an addition to the minutes stating that Mr. Cameron had been informed that a buffer would be necessary on the West line of his property where it borders Mr. Weisenberger~s property and that on the North line of Mr. Weisenberger's property the Board of Adjustment said that Mr. Weisenberger could request a buffer if a building goes up there. This should be called to the attention of the Building Inspector. Also, in the part of the minutes referring to Mr. Brown, Mr. Millard said that he would like to poll the members of the Board and ask them one question only. "Did we secure Mr. Bro\'Jn's agreement to the conditions before"we voted for the Special Exception? Mr. Lupinek: Yes ~1 r. Pol and : Yes Mr. Gnau: Yes Mr. Millard: Yes Mr. Millard added that Mr. Glaser has already spoken at the Council Meeting where he confirmed that so we will show that he also ~aid that. Mr. Brown's agreement to the conditions should be part of the minutes. It is not directly stated in the minutes. The Board': has just confirmed that that is what transpired and this should be added to the minutes. Mr. Millard then asked the Board members when they might be able to reconvene to hear Mr. Brown's protest about the placement of his b u i 1 din g . ~1 r. B row n 's not i fie a t ion , '. . t hat hew a sin v i 0 1 a t ion 0 f the Special Exception, was on March 21, 1979. The 880 Ordinance states that the enforcement official shall give the permittee notice of intention to revoke such permit at least ten (10) days prJor to a Board of Adjustment review. He asked the Board members ,f they would be able to attend a Special Meeting on Wednesday, April 4, 1979, to discuss this case. The members agreed on this date for a Special Meeting. ~ . u u . The Board discussed the variance granted to Mr. Wright by Resolution No. 759 on December 19, 1977. The Zoning Ordinance (904.06) states that a "variance applies for an indefinite period of time unless otherwise specified at the time the variance is granted, except when a variance has not been used within one (1) year after the date it was granted, the variance shall be cancelled by the enforcement official and written notice given to the property owner. Mr. Millard directed the secretary to notify the building official so that he can take the necessary action. Chairman Millard called the Public Hearing portion of the meeting to order. The secretary stated that all property had been posted. The Public Hearing had been duly advertised and the abutting property owners notified by certified mail. There were no written objections from abutting property owners. The first application was from Mr. Robert Stuppy for a variance to build a single family dwelling on the east side of Riverside Drive at the end of Orange Ave. ~ Mr. Canfield, Indian River Real Estate, spoke as a representative of Mr. Stuppy. The property is being transferred from Mr. Meyers to Mr. Stuppy. The property has been owned by Mr. Meyers since 1957 and it is a single non-conforming lot of record. The particular hardship arises because Orange Ave is a platted street on the south property line, any builder is subject to a 30' setback on the side which makes it difficult to construct a residence of any sort of dimension. Orange Ave. is not cut through east of Riverside Drive. Mr. Millard asked Mrs. Blazi if the Council had discussed this area recently and if it appeared that the City had any plans to use this street east of Riverside. Mrs. Blazi said that the Council had been requested to deed this particular strip of land back to adjacent property owners. However, upon the advice of the City Attorney, the Council had denied this request stating that there were already too few public places of access to the river and if this was turned back to private property owners it would continue a trend to inhibit public access to the river. Mr. Canfield showed the Board a drawing showing the location of the proposed dwelling. There was a discussion about riparian rights and the difficulty of building any kind of bulkhead to protect the property. Mrs. Alice Murphy spoke from the audience concerning the problem of continued building on the east side of Riverside Dr. Mr. Canfield said that his client was asking for relief on the south side of the property from the side setback from 30' to a 141 side setback. Also a. 21 reduction from the setback on Riverside Dr. reducing it from 40' to 38'. On the north line they have no problem. The Board discussed the total area of the property. They are proposing a house of 60lx 341, a little over 1800 sq. ft. Mrs. Murphy asked to have the legal description of the property read. The secretary read the legal description. Mrs. Murphy asked if this was filled land is it really a lot of record? The Board determined that this was a lot of record. Mr. Millard said that the property to the north, owned by Mr. Akeley, had received a variance but that nothing had been done on the land for over a year and the variance had been revoked. Mr. Stuppy said that he was not planning to build on this land for at least four or five years. 2 . (.) Q ... Mr. Millard said that he did not feel that this application had been well prepared. The Board needs a better drawing that shows the setbacks. Mr. Poland spoke about the problem of erosion and protecting the property east of Riverside Dr. The courts say you can build if you own the land (riparian rights) but the Environmental Protection Agency will not grant permits to build into the river. Mr. Millard said that he did not believe they could consider a front setback on Riverside. The area of the lot is over 2500' short of the required area. There is actually 9300 sq. ft. the requirement is 12,000. It is the practice of this Board to deal only in the dry land not land in the river. The Board has never granted front setbacks because of the possible widening of the road and the parklike atmosphere of Riverside Dr. It would be detrimental to the neighborhood. Mr. Poland asked if the variance request was for five years from now? Mr. Canfield said that they had been led to believe that a building variance once granted would run with the property. Mr. Millard said that the ordinance states unless otherwise specified the variance runs with the property and unless otherwise specified the variance runs for one year. The Board has an option. He asked Mr. Stuppy how long it would take to make a more careful plat plan of the house? He would like to suggest that the Board recess this application and give the applicant more time to prepare his information. Mr. Poland read from Ordinance 880 concerning the cancellation of variances not used within one year. The Board of Adjustment voted to recess this application until April 25, 1979. The vote was 4-0. Chairman Millard called a brief recess. Public Hearing called back to order. The next application was from Mr. Thomas Loveland for a variance to extend a wall of his house 41- to enlarge a bathroom. There were no objections from adjacent property owners. Mr. Loveland stated that the change would be in conformity with the rest of his house. The Board discussed the change and if it would effect the property in any major way. The Board of Adjustment voted to grant this variance. The vote was 4-0. The n e x tap p 1 i cat ion was fro m Mr. J. I :Swa rt for a va ria n c e to b u i 1 d a single family residence on the West side of Riverside Dr. at the corner of Parkwood and Riverside. Mr. Michael Fredericks appeared as a representative for Mr. Swart. The Board discussed this building lot with Mr. Fredericks and studied the plans and drawings that had been submitted to the Board showing the location of the house on the land. Mr. Millard said that he was concerned about the rear setback. The front setback seems to be in line with the rest of the houses on the street. The Board discussed the rear setback and it was the consensus of opinion that this setback was also in line with the rest of the houses. Mr. Millard said that the Board would need a copy of the deed showing ownership of the land. Mr. Fredericks said that he could bring the deed to City Hall tomorrow. 3 . Q ~ . - Mr. Millard said that this pre-1974 lot requires a 5 ft. variance on the front yard and an 8 ft. variance for the back. The Board agrees that the building lines are in conformity with other homes on the street. There were no objections from any neighbors. The Board voted to grant this variance~ subject to the Chairman reviewing the deed of ownership. The vote was 4-0. The final"application was from Mr. and Mrs. Michael Loescher for a Special Exception to operate a used car lot at 1515 S. Ridgewood. The Board discussed the plans submitted by the Loeschers and the written answers to questions concerning use of the area~ adjacent businesses~ parking~ hours of operation~ etc. The conditions set by the Board were: 1. Those stated by the owners on attached sheet. One night light 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 buildino. 5. Minor auto repairs within the buildinq. - 6. Outside area to comply with attached drawing. Mr. Paul Loeffler, owner of the building that the Loeschers will rent for the used car busines~ agreed to comply with the clearing of the junk and debris behind the building. Mr. and Mrs. Loescher agreed with the conditions set by the Board. There were no objections from adjacent property owners. The Board voted 3-0 to grant this Special Exceptions with the above conditions. Mr. Poland abstained from voting for general reasons and without prejudice to applicant. Mr. Poland said that he did not believe he could vote on a Special Exception without more definite guidelines from the Council (governing body). Mr. Millard informed the Loeschers that the Board imposed conditions on Special Exceptions according to the power given the Board in the Zoning Ordinance and also because Special Exceptions are created because of the desire of the City to control certain types of businesses and/or building within the City. He also informed the applicants that failure.to comply with the conditions would mean revocation of the Special Exception. New application forms for Board of Adjustment variance and special exception applications were given to the Board members. Mr. Millard ask the members to study this form and make any changes or additions they feel would be helpful. The Board will discuss new application forms at their next regular meeting. Mr. Gnau said that he and Mr. Lupinek had checked out Mr. Rickelman's used car business and the conditions set in the Special Exception for that business have not been met. There is still no buffer along the back line of the property. Mr. Lupinek said that he had noticed what appeared to be major repairs being done at the used car lot. The Board agreed that the general appearance of the used car lot was not neat or orderly. The Board was informed that the Zoning Enforcement Official has begun notifying various businesses in the city in regards to buffer zones. There was no further business before the Board. The meeting was adjourned. Minutes submitted by: Nancy Blazi 4 1 o o CITY OF EDGEWATER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARING March 28, 1979 Chairman Millard called the regular meeting of the Edgewater Board of Adjustment. 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 Excused Also Present: Mr. Loveland Mr. Fredericks Mr. and Mrs. Loescher Mr. and Mrs. Shaeffer Mr. Meyers Mr. and Mrs. Stuppy Mr. Canfield M r s. ~1 u r p h y Mr. Loeffler APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chairman Millard asked the Board if there were any corrections or additions to the Minutes of the February 28, 1979 meeting. He asked the secretary to make an addition to the minutes stating that Mr. Cameron had been informed that a buffer would be necessary on the West line of his property where it borders Mr. Weisenberger~s property and that on the North line of Mr. Weisenberger's property the Board of .Adjustment said that Mr. Weisenberger could request a buffer if a building goes up there. This should be called to the attention of the Building Inspector. Also, in the part of the minutes referring to Mr. Brown, Mr. Millard said that he would like to poll the members of the Board and ask them one question only. "Did we secure Mr. Brown's agreement to the conditions before'.we voted for the Special Exception? Mr. Lupinek: Yes ~1r. Poland: Yes Mr. Gnau: Yes Mr. Millard: Yes Mr. Millard added that Mr. Glaser has already spoken at the Council Meeting where he confirmed that so we will show that he also said that. Mr. Brown's agreement to the conditions should be part of the minutes. It is not directly stated in the minutes. The Board" has just confirmed that that is what transpired and this should be added to the minutes. Mr. Millard then asked the Board members when they might be able to reconvene to hear Mr. Brown's protest about the placement of his building. Mr. Brown1s n6tification,'.that he was in violation of the Special Exception, was on March 21, 1979. The 880 Ordinance states that the enforcement of.ficial shall give the permittee notice of intention to revoke such permit at least ten (10) days prior to a Board of Adjustment review. He asked the Board members if they would be able to attend a Special Meeting on Wednesday, April 4, 1979, to discuss this case. The members agreed on this date for a Special Meeting. 1 o o The Board discussed the variance granted to Mr. Wright by Resolution No. 759 on December 19, 1977. The Zoning Ordinance (904.06) states that a IIvariance applies for an indefinite period of time unless otherwise specified at the time the variance is granted, except when a variance has not been used within one (1) year after the date it was granted, the variance shall be cancelled by the enforcement official and written notice given to the property owner. Mr. Millard directed the secretary to notify the building official so that he can take the necessary action. Chairman Millard called the Public Hearing portion of the meeting to order. The secretary stated that all property had been posted. The Public Hearing had been duly adverti.sed and the abutting property owners notified by certified mai.l. There were no written objections from abutting property owners. The first application was from Mr. Robert Stuppy for a variance to build a single family dwelling on the east side of Riverside Drive at the end of Orange Ave. ~ Mr. Canfield, Indian River Real Estate, spoke as a representative of Mr. Stuppy. The property is being transferred from Mr. Meyers to Mr. Stuppy. The property has been owned by Mr. Meyers since 1957 and it is a single non-conforming lot of record. The particular hardship arises because Orange Ave is a.platted street on the south property line, any builder is subject to a 30' setback on the side which makes it difficult to construct a residence of any sort of dimension. Orange Ave. is not cut through east of Riverside Drive. Mr. Millard asked Mrs. Blazi if the Council had discussed this area recently and if it appeared that the City had any plans to use this street east of Riverside. Mrs. Blazi said that the Council had been requested to deed this particular strip of land back to adjacent property owners. However, upon-the advice of the City Attorney, the Council had denied this request stating that there were already too few public places of access to the river and if this was turned back to private property owners it would continue a trend to inhibit public access to the river. Mr. Canfield showed the Board a drawing showing the location of the proposed dwelling. There was a discussion about riparian rights and the difficulty of building any kind of bulkhead to protect the property. Mrs. Alice Murphy spoke from the audience concerning the problem of continued building on the east side of Riverside Dr. Mr. Canfield said that his client was asking for relief on the south side of the property from the side setback from 30' to a 14' side setback. Also a. 2' reduction from the setback on Riverside Dr. reducing it from 40' to 381. On the north line they have no problem. The Board discussed the total area of the property. They are proposing a house of 60'x 34', a little over 1800 sq. ft. Mrs. Murphy asked to have the legal description of the property read. The secretary read the legal description. Mrs. Murphy asked if this was filled land is it really a lot of record? The Board determined that this was a lot of record. Mr. Millard said that the property to the north, owned by Mr. Akeley, had received a variance but that nothing had been done on the land for over a year and the variance had been revoked. Mr. Stuppy said that he was not planning to build on this land for at least four or five years. 2 ? . o o Mr. Millard said that he did not feel that this application had been well prepared. The Board needs a better drawing that shows the setbacks. Mr. Poland spoke about the problem of erosion and protecting the property east of Riverside Dr. The courts say you can build if you own the land (riparian rights) but the Environmental Protection Agency will not grant permits to build into the river. Mr. Millard said that he did not believe they could consider a front setback on Riverside. The area of the lot is over 2500' short of the required area. There is actually 9300 sq. ft. the requirement is 12,000. It is the practice of this Board to deal only in the dry land not land in the river. The Board has never granted front setbacks because of the possible widening of the road and the parklike atmosphere of Riverside Dr. It would be detrimental to the neighborhood. Mr. Poland asked if the variance request was for five years from now? Mr. Canfield said that they had been led to believe that a building variance once granted would run wit,h the property. Mr. Millard said that the ordinance states unless otherwise specified the variance runs with the property and unless otherwise specified the variance runs for one year. The Board has an option. He asked Mr. Stuppy how long it would take to make a more careful plat plan of the house? He would like to suggest that the Board recess this application and give the applicant more, time to prepare his information. Mr. Poland read from Ordinance 880 concerning the cancellation of variances not used within one year. The Board of Adjustment voted to recess this application until April 25, 1979. The vote was 4-0. Chairman Millard called a brief recess. Public Hearing called back to order. The next application was from Mr. Thomas Loveland for a variance to extend a wall of his house 41- to enlarge a bathroom. There were no objections from adjacent property owners. Mr. Loveland stated that the change would be in conformity with the rest of his house. The Board discussed the change and if it would effect the property in any major way. The Board of Adjustment voted to grant this variance. The vote was 4-0. The n ex tap p 1 i cat ion was fro m Mr. J. I :Swa rt for a va ria n c e to b u i 1 d a single family residence on the West side of Riverside Dr. at the corner of Parkwood and Riverside. Mr. Michael Fredericks appeared as a representative for Mr. Swart. The Board discussed this building lot with Mr. Fredericks and studied the plans and drawings that had been submitted to the Board showing the location of the house on the land. Mr. Millard said that he was concerned about the rear setback. The front setback seems to be in line with the rest of the houses on the street. The Board discussed the rear setback and it was the consensus of opinion that this setback was also in line with the rest of the houses. Mr. Millard said that the Board would need a copy of the deed showing ownership of the land. Mr. Fredericks said that he could bring the deed to City Hall tomorrow. 3 ~ . o o Mr. Millard said that this pre-1974 lot requires a 5 ft. variance on the front yard and an 8 ft. variance for the back. The Board agrees that the building lines are in conformitv with other homes on the street. There were no objections from any neighbors. The Board voted to grant this variance, subject to the Chairman reviewing the deed of ownership. The vote was 4-0. The fin~l""application was from Mr. and Mrs. Michael Loescher for a Special Exception to operate a used car lot at 1515 S. Ridgewood. The Board discussed the plans submitted by the Loeschers and the written answers to questions concerning use of the area, adjacent businesses, parking, hours of operation, etc. The conditions set by the Board were: 1. Those stated by the owners on attached sheet. One night light 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. Mr. Paul Loeffler, owner of the building that the Loeschers will rent for the used car busines~ agreed to comply with the clearing of the junk and debris behind the building. Mr. and Mrs. Loescher agreed with the conditions set by the Board. There were no objections from adjacent property owners. The Board voted 3-0 to grant this Special Exceptions with the above conditions. Mr. Poland abstained from voting for general reasons and without prejudice to applicant. Mr. Poland said that he did not believe he could vote on a Special Exception without more definite guidelines from the Council (governing body). Mr. Millard informed the Loeschers that the Board imposed conditions on Special Exceptions according to the power given the Board in the Zoning Ordinance and also because Special Exceptions are created because of the desire of the City to control certain types of businesses and/or building within the City. He also informed the applicants that failure.to comply with the conditions would mean revocation of the Special Exception. New "application forms for Board of Adjustment variance and special exception applications were given to the Board members. Mr. Millard ask the members to study this form and make any changes or additions they feel would be helpful. The Board will discuss new application forms at their next regular meeting. Mr. Gnau said that he and Mr. Lupinek had checked out Mr. Rickelman's used car business and the conditions set in the Special Exception for that business have not been met. There is still no buffer along the back line of the property. Mr. Lupinek said that he had noticed what appeared to be major repairs being done at the used car lot. The Board agreed that the general appearance of the used car lot was not neat or orderly. - The Board was informed that the Zoning Enforcement Official has begun notifying various businesses in the city in regards to buffer zones. There was no further business before the Board. The meeting was adjourned. Minutes submitted by: Nancy Blazi 4