Loading...
11-09-1977 , .~ Q BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS PUBLIC HEARING - <.). November 9, 1977 Chairman Millard called the meeting of the Edgewater Board of Adjustments to order on November 9, 1977'at 7:00 P.M. in City Hall. The Board met for a Public Hearing to consider and act upon requests from William W. Wright for an area variance on his property to build a house and from Elizabeth B. Scavarda requesting a 10 ft. variance to build a carport. Roll Call Chairman Millard Neil Asting JallEs Poland Lewis lupinek Jerry Fenske Present Excused Present Present Excused Chairman Millard noted that Mr. and Mrs. Wright, Mr. and Mrs. Akeley, Mrs. Scavarda, and Mr. and Mrs. Mackie, Jr. were present. Chairman Millard remarked about cost of application to the Board. The money goes to pay the' cost for the advertisement, mailing of notices, and office expenses. The members of the Board are volunteers. The Board is representative of the community and have'all taken a cram course in the Ordinance under which they work, Ordinance 880 and its amendments, plus the State laws and various case laws. Each member of the Board is equal to the other member5 and try to do their best under the law for the applicants and their neighbors. The value of everybodys property depends upon zoning. The Board of Adjustment hears appeals from zoning laws but does not have unlimited power to grant all applications. Chairman Millard asked if the members of the Board have read the minutes of October 12, 1977. Mr. Lupinek said they should be accepted as read. Upon roll call the minutes were-accepted by the Board. Chairman Millard asked both applicants to swear that the information they were about to give was the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Both applicants answered yes. Chairman Millard asked the secretary if the owners of the abutting property had been notified and responded. The secretary answered that they had been notified, responded and that there had been no objections received. The legal advertisement was placed"in ~he newspapers. The property was posted~ Mr. Wright is requesting an area variance on the Southerly 100 ft. of property lots 11,12 and 13, Block D lying Easterly from Turgot Terrace on Riverside Dr. Chairman Millard asked if the other Board members had inspected the property in question. Mr. Poland and Mr. Lupinek said_that they had both inspected the property. Chairman Millard noted that the area did not include semi-submerged land. He asked Mr. Wright if the semi-submerged land was germaine to the variance. Mr. Wright said the area was west of the river, between the road and the river. Chairman Millard wanted to know if the area counted up to the wall or to the high water mark. Mr. Wright said that was to the high water mark, but it was dry land and from there out it is 215 ft. total plus the riparian rights. Mr. Poland read the dimensional requirements on R-1A - minimum lot size area 12,000 sq. ft. depth 120 ft. width 100 ft. We are talking about 920 sq. ft-in area, 9 ft. in average depth and 1800ths of a ft. in width as a variance. There were several points to take into consideration, the lot, as deeded, is certainly far in excess of the minimum requirements for a building lot size while it is .18 of a foot too narrow to fit in with the strict interpretation of the zoning, there should be no one who would argue over 1800 one hundredths of a foot. j . Q o. The depth of roughly 215 ft. is certainly adequate. The problem that Mr. Wright encounters is what would be required to get governmental approval from the State for a bulkhead to make the lot either the full 215 ft. deep as required by the zoning ordinance. It is extremely difficult to get a permit to bu~lhead river- front property. We are dealing with a piece pf property that is prime property in Edgewater. The question of whether or not it imposes an undue hardship on this property owner to require him to secure bulkhead and fill permits to extend the property out to the 120 ft. mark. Another question that needs to be answered is the property buildable as it stands now with the hurricane conditions that we have faced in the past. Mr. Lupinek noted that a house built on that property would be the required height from the crown of the road. The only problem seems to be the shortage of sq. ft. in area. We have 11,080 ft. instead of the required 12,000. Mr. Poland said theoretically he could ~et a bulkhead and fill permit and have the required amount of land. Chairman Millard asked Mr. Wright if his application was based upon the dry land or all the land in the deed. Mr. Wright said it was the dry land. Chairman Millard asked Mr. Wright if he planned to build a sea wall. Mr. Wright said he did not plan to build a sea wall. He wants to sell" the property to Mr. Akeley. Mr. Akeley said that it would be up to the State and other agencies that require permits. He would like a sea wall for the preservation of the property. He is under contract to buy the property from Mr. Wright, but first he wants to be assured that it is a buildable property. Mr. Poland asked if Mr. Akeley intended to get a permit to fill in and bulkhead the entire 215 ft. depth. Mr. Akeley said that he had no such intention. He feels from the survey they have 104 ft. to the north and 118 ft. to the south which is sufficient as far as he is concerned and he has sketched a house that would fit in there very nicely and be a compliment to the community. He wants to be able to put a house there, bulkhead or not, the sea wall is irrelevant at this point. He would fill in and bring the land up to the grade the city requires: He also brought up the subject of flood insurance being at a maximum in Edgewater. He is primarily interested in getting the floor level up high enough in case of flooding. Mr. Poland brought up the erosion problem. Chairman Millard said that this is similar to cases where you can grant a variance to an applicant if they cannot comply with the area due to a stream running through their backyard. Because of the river, a builder on this property would be prevented from going back very far, this is an existing lot actually two lots which is less than more than two which means something,if you had more than two lots without the proper area there would be a real problem. That was corrected by Mr. Wright. It is the riparian rights of two lots but it is one new building lot. Chairman Millard said that the spirit of the zoning ordinances was to prevent houses from becoming jammed up but in the case of this property there is enough width and distance back from the road and obviously no one can build behind them because of the river. 2 -,. . o o. Mr. Lopinek said that he felt that if Mr. Akeley was determined to build up the property to possibly over the required height~ he sees no reason why the Board could not give him a variance. Tape IB Chairman Millard said that obviously the plan is to use the property that is there, not to fill in submerged land so that the Board has to either grant or not grant the variance to use the land that is available. Mr. Poland said that it seemed to him then the Board would be granting a variance not to use the required land. We would be creating a non standard lot .out of a standard lot because according to the deed there is sufficient land. Mr. Wright said that the deed called for a southern 100 ft. but when resurveyed and changed Riverside Dr. they came up with a different area on the properties along Riverside. Mr. Poland said that he still felt that they would be creating a non-standard lot. Chairman Millard pointed out that anything the Board granted was non-standard. He also added that actually Mr. Wright's deed to property that is in the river was archaic . Mr. Poland said that the State has ruled that you cannot be denied a permit to build a bulkhead and fill 1'n property that they sold you. Chairman Millard said that it might be considered a hardship because the prospective buyer wants to build on existing land and the river is behind the property and not feasible to fill in or extend. Mr. Akeley said that he believes it is a 30 ft. rear setback. Because of the shape of the lot, he has a diagram showing proposed home to be put there, to the south side 11$ ft. to the north 104ft. and on the east 99.82 and on the southeast corner there is a 32 ft. setback which exceeds the required 30 , however, on the northeast corner it is 18 ft. That is based on the dimensions of the usable land today. Mr. Poland brought up the subject of people in California building on cliffs and then their houses slide down into the ocean. He is concerned about building in Edgewater on the river without a sea wall to protect the house. If the builder can bulkhead out to the 120 ft. mark he would not need a variance. -- Mr. Akeley said that suppose he cannot get permission to do this. He would have a piece of land he could not put a house on because the Board says he can't get a variance. Chairman Millard did not feel that.'it'was.really a concern of the Board whether the builder puts up a wall or not. It is the problem of the home owner to see that hi s property is safeguarded-;--- The Board has an app 1 i cati on for avari ance based on the information given to them and even though it may be unwise:.to.. build on the river without.a sea walL it is not the Board IS affair..- . Chairman Millard also noted at this point that since there were only 3 members oLthe Board in attendance it was necessary to establish the fact that they all plan to vote in order to get a majority vote. Mr. Poland said that he was not convinced that the Board should grant a variance. Chairman Millard said for the record that it is not the Board's area to rule on whether there is a sea wall or not. The question for the Board is do they want to give an area variance to the applicant on the useable land. The Board may not think it wise to build there, he is aware that Mr. Akeley is a real estate agent and already knows the necessity of safeguarding land. Hr. Akeley said that if he buys this property he must be assured that it is a buildable lot as it stands today. If he wants to gamble on what might happen in case of a hurricane that would be his problem, but he doesn't want a buildable lot with contingencies that he must build a sea wall. 3 o o. , There was a discussion about the height of the ground level of the house from the crown of the road~ Mr. Akeley said he was familar with most of the building codes for that area. Chairman Millard said that he saw no objectionable rules that would prevent granting a variance. However for the record this vote must be unanimous vote because there are only 3 members present. Mr. Poland said that he believes one of the criteria before granting a variance from an area requirement would be that granting the variance does not create an unsafe building lot. The Board of Adjustment would be extremely remiss in granting a variance that WDuld create an unsafe situation. He does not believe this would be a safe building lot. Mr. Lupinek questioned if that was the Board's concern. Mr. Poland said he felt it was. The purpose of the Board was to upgrade the uses of the land. Chairman Millard asked if a variance was granted could the purchaser of the property assure the Board to apply for a permit to put up a wall at least 9 ft. out beyond the lot which would give the required 12,000 ft. would the purchaser of the land be able to undertake this if it were made a condition? Mr. Akeley said that he could not answer that with a yes or no at this point. Until he was able to get some calculations with a surveyor. There is also a big cost involved. Chairman Millard said that he felt that the case should be recessed at this time until next Wednesday when they should have more Board members in attendance and the Board has time to consider all the aspects of the case. Mr. Poland asked Mr. Akeley if he could contact the Dept. of Environmental Regulations to find out if such a sea wall would be possible. There was a discussion about the fact that Mr. Wright was leaving the area and it would not be easy for him to return next week,~or another meeting. Mr. Akeley said he would find out about a sea wall. Chairman Millard asked Mr. Poland if he would prefer a recess at this time Mr. Poland answered-that he felt strongly about protecting -the property and was not ready-tO grant a variance without conditions. Chairman Millard recessed th~s Ca.5~ until Wednesday November 16, 1977 at 7:00 P.M. Tape 2 The next request was from Mrs. Scavarda for a variance to build a carport. Lot 12 of River Heights, Marion Ave., a variance to build a two-car carport to be installed over existing driveway. Carport to be attached to house and extend 20' toward front property line with set back of 20. off front property line. Chairman Millard asked if the members of the Board had inspected the property. They had. The legal advertisement had been in the newspapers, the property had been posted and the abutting neighbors had been notified and responded. There were no objections. Mr. Lupinek said that by filling in the existing carport he felt that Mrs. Scavarda had created the problem. 4 o Q. Mrs. Scavarda stated that they needed the extra room and had no place they could build onto the house. Mr. Lupinek said that the house is now 30 ft. from the property line and she wants to put a 20 ft. carport so that would be 10 ft. from the property line. The Board has to be governed by the property line. Mr. Poland said that the application says 20 ft. Mrs. Scavarda said that she measured wrong. But she is still 10 ft. short. The area is zoned R-2. Mrs. Scavarda said that their lot was fenced in and there was no other place they could put a carport. Chairman Millard said that her reasoning and her desire was certainly understandable. A variance can be granted where there is some hardship not created by the property owner or applicant. There is the possibility that if an applicant is granted a variance to build a carport that at some future date they might 'want to enclose that carport and ask for another variance to build another carport. In other words you have to stop somewhere and say wait a minute. The zoning was passed by a refendum of the public, it exists and is law. The law plainly states that if an individual creates their own problem it is not a hardship. A better reason was needed. Mrs. Scavarda said her reason was to protect expensive automobiles. Chairman Millard said that under the law she is applying for a variance to build where the law says she cannot build. The Board has to look for a legimate reason for granting a variance. There does not seem to be any legitimate reason for granting this particular variance. The Board of Adjustments shall have the power to hear and decide on applications to allow variations from the regulations of Ordinance 880 where by reason of unneccessary hardship or practical difficulty the literal enforcement of the requirement of this Ordinance woul,d not carry out the spirit and purpose. Chairman Millard asked for a-vote-from the members. Chairman Millard Mr. Poland Mr. Lupinek No No No Chairman Millard expressed his regrets to Mrs~ Scavarda but the Board-of~ Adjustments must turn down her application for a variance. Chairman Millard reminded the members that they would meet again next Wednesday, November 16 at 7:00 to continue the request for variance-from~r;--Wright. The meeting was then recessed. 5