Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04071992BOA City of Sebastian POST OFFICE BOX 780127 [] SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32978 TELEPHONE (407) 589-5330 [] FAX (407) 589-5570 PUBLIC MEETING CITY OF SEBASTIAN 1225 MAIN STREET INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FLORIDA THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, WILL HOLD A REGULAR MEETING ON TUESDAY, APRIL 7, 1992, AT 3:00 P.M. IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. JAN KING, SECRETARY SEBASTIAN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NOTE: ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING (OR HEARING) WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND 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 TO BE HEARD. (286.0105 F.S.) :jk 2. 3. 4. 5. City of Sebastian POST OFFICE BOX 780127 [] SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32978 TELEPHONE (407) 589-5330 s FAX (407) 589-5570 AGENDA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TUESDAY, APRIL 7, 1992 3:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL OLD BUSINESS: APPROVE MARCH 19, 1992 MINUTES PUBLIC HEARING: DONNA A. CUNLIFFE AND ALAN G. HARTMAN, IN REGARDS TO LOT 47, SAN SEBASTIAN SPRINGS, HAS REQUESTED A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A SCREEN ENCLOSURE OVER AN EXISTING DECK WHICH ENCROACHES APPROXIMATELY SEVEN (7) FEET INTO THE REQUIRED FIFTEEN (15) FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK. SEBASTIAN GENERAL PARTNERSHIP, BFT. IN REGARDS TO LOTS 3, 4 AND 5 OF CHESSER'S GAP SUBDIVISION PHASE I, HAS REQUESTED A VARIANCE TO ERECT APPROXIMATELY 493 SQUARE FEET OF WALL (FACADE) SIGNS, WHEREAS, THE ORDINANCE WOULD ONLY PERMIT 350 SQUARE FEET OF WALL SIGNS. m CHAIRMANS MATTERS: COMMITTEE MATTERS: REVIEW APPLICATIONS FOR UPCOMING VACANCIES ON BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (MARY HEINICKE TERM TO EXPIRE 4/10/92; WALTER SHIELDS TERM TO EXPIRE 5/21/92.) BUILDING OFFICIAL MATTERS: NEW BUSINESS: 10. ADJOURN ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING (OR HEARING) WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND 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 TO BE HEARD. (286.0105 F.S.) City of Sebastian POST OFFICE BOX 780127 [] SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32978 TELEPHONE (407) 589-5330 [] FAX (407) 589-5570 PUBLIC NOTICE CITY OF SEBASTIAN 1225 MAIN STREET INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FLORIDA THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TUESDAY, APRIL 7, 1992, AT 3:00 P.M. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS LOCATED AT 1225 MAIN STREET, SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA, TO CONSIDER A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 20A-3.2 D 6 b OF THE SEBASTIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. DONNA A. CUNLIFFE AND ALAN G. HARTMAN, IN REGARDS TO LOT 47, SAN SEBASTIAN SPRINGS, HAS REQUESTED A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A SCREEN ENCLOSURE OVER AN EXISTING DECK WHICH ENCROACHES APPROXIMATELY SEVEN (7) FEET INTO THE REQUIRED FIFTEEN (15) FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK. JAMES HUSK, CHAIRMAN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CITY OF SEBASTIAN ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING (OR HEARING) WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND 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 TO BE HEARD. (286.0105 F.S.) PUBLISHED: MARCH 23, 1992 MARCH 30, 1992 City of Sebastian POST OFFICE BOX 780127 r~ SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32978 TELEPHONE (407) 589-5330 [] FAX (407) 589-5570 PUBLIC NOTICE CITY OF SEBASTIAN 1225 MAIN STREET INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FLORIDA THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TUESDAY, APRIL 7, 1992, AT 3:00 P.M. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS LOCATED AT 1225 MAiN STREET, SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA, TO CONSIDER A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 20A-15.8 C 2 OF THE SEBASTIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. SEBASTIAN GENERAL PARTNERSHIP, BFT., IN REGARDS TO LOTS 3, 4 AND 5 OF CHESSER'S GAP SUBDIVISION PHASE I, HAS REQUESTED A VARIANCE TO ERECT APPROXIMATELY 493 SQUARE FEET OF WALL (FACADE) SIGNS, WHEREAS, THE ORDINANCE WOULD ONLY PERMIT 350 SQUARE FEET OF WALL SIGNS. JAMES HUSK, CHAIRMAN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CITY OF SEBASTIAN ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING (OR HEARING) WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND 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 TO BE HEARD. (286.0105 F.S.) PUBLISHED: MARCH 23, 1992 MARCH 30, 1992 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT "REGULAR MEETING" APRIL 7, 1992 - 3:00 P.M. MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY CHAIRMAN HUSK AT 3:07 P.M. THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE WAS LED BY CHAIRMAN HUSK. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: JAMES HUSK, CHAIRMAN WALTER SHIELDS MARY HEINICKE ALAN SHISGAL, VICE CHAIRMAN ALFRED VILARDI JOHN PRICE, ALTERNATE (NON-VOTING) ABSENT: FRED BUECHLING~ ALTERNATE ALSO PRESENT: BRUCE COOPER, DIR. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RICHARD TORPY, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY OLD BUSINESS: MOTION BY MARY HEINICKE, SECONDED BY ALFRED VILARDi, TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING HELD MARCH 19, 1992, AT 3:00 P.M., AS WRITTEN. ROLL CALL: YES: JAMES HUSK, CHAIRMAN WALTER SHIELDS MARY HEINICKE ALAN SHISGAL, VICE CHAIRMAN ALFRED VILARDI NO: NONE MOTION CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARING: DONNA Ao CUNLIFFE AND ALAN G. HARTMAN, IN REGARDS TO LOT 47, SAN SEBASTIAN SPRINGS, REQUESTED A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A SCREEN ENCLOSURE OVER AN EXISTING DECK WHICH ENCROACHES APPROXIMATELY SEVEN (7) FEET INTO THE REQUIRED FIFTEEN (15) FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK. DONNA CUNLIFFE WAS PRESENT. SHE STATED THAT THE DECK HAS A HOT TUB ON IT WHICH PRESENTLY HAS A COVER ON IT. THEY WOULD LIKE TO ENCLOSE IT BECAUSE OF THE LIABILITY, THE PRIVACY AND THE INSECTS. THIS DECK AND HOT TUB EXISTED WHEN MS. CUNLIFFE BOUGHT THE HOUSE iN JULY OF 1991. PICTURES OF THE SITE WERE PASSED OUT TO THE BOARD. PAGE 2 BRUCE COOPER MENTIONED THAT THE HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1982 AND THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT RECORDS DO NOT SHOW IF THE DECK WAS BUILT AT THE SAME TIME OR LATER. IF THE DECK WAS BUILT BEFORE 1985, WHICH WAS WHEN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WAS ADOPTED, IT WOULD BE GRANDFATHERED IN. DECKS WOULD NOT NORMALLY HAVE TO MEET REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACKS IF IT IS GRADE LEVEL. HOWEVER, IN THIS CASE YOU HAVE AN OBSTRUCTION ABOVE GRADE WHICH WOULD BE REQUIRED TO MEET ALL SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. BOARD ALTERNATE FRED BUECHLING ARRIVED AT THE MEETING. CARL FISCHER, REPRESENTING THE DEVELOPER OF THIS SUBDIVISION WAS PRESENT. HE NOTED THAT THIS HOUSE WAS ACTUALLY BUILT IN 1982 WHICH WAS BEFORE THE SUBDIVISION WAS ACTUALLY PLATTED. HE BELIEVES THAT THE DECK HAS BEEN THERE FOR A VERY LONG TIME. BRUCE COOPER DID NOT KNOW WHAT TYPE OF ZONING EXISTED AT THIS LOCATION BEFORE THE SUBDIVISION WAS PLATTED NOR WHAT THE SETBACKS MIGHT HAVE BEEN AT THAT TIME. HE ALSO NOTED THAT THE HOUSE IS ONLY ELEVEN (11) FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. APPARENTLY THIS WAS PERMITTED IN 1982. THERE IS NOW A REQUIRED FIFTEEN (15) FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK IN THIS ZONING DISTRICT. GENERALLY, STAFF DOES NOT HAVE A PROBLEM RECOMMENDING FOR THE VARIANCE AS LONG AS THEY DON'T GO ANY FURTHER INTO THE SETBACK. THIS BEING A SCREEN ENCLOSURE AND SOMEWHAT OF AN OPEN STRUCTURE, STAFF DOES NOT HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THIS REQUEST. ERIC CUNLIFFE STATED THAT THE STRUCTURE WILL BE TOTALLY SCREENED BECAUSE OF THE INSECTS, AND WILL BE WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE PRESENT DECK. MR. VILARDI ASKED IF THE COUNTY ROAD WHICH IS SHOWN ON THE SURVEY EXISTS. CARL FISCHER STATED THAT THE ROAD WAS ELIMINATED BY THE COUNTY AND DOES NOT EXIST. NO LETTERS OF COMPLAINT WERE RECEIVED AND ALL SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS WERE NOTIFIED. MS. HEINICKE ASKED IF THIS WOULD COMPOUND THE VIOLATION THAT ALREADY EXISTS. MR. COOPER NOTED THAT IF THIS DECK WAS GRADE LEVEL, STAFF WOULD NOT BE RECOMMENDING FOR THIS VARIANCE. HOWEVER, THE ENCROACHMENT EXISTS AND THIS IS A SCREEN ENCLOSURE, NOT AN ENCLOSED STRUCTURE. STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND THAT A CONDITION BE PLACED ON THE VARIANCE THAT THIS AREA WOULD NEVER BE ENCLOSED. PAGE 3 LOT 82 (NEXT DOOR) IS PRIVATELY OWNED, HAS A HOUSE ON IT, AND WAS NOTIFIED OF THE HEARING. NO OBJECTIONS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED. THE CODE HAS A PROVISION TO ALLOW EXISTING CONDITIONS TO REMAIN WITHOUT THE NECESSITY OF OBTAINING VARIANCES. IN THIS CASE, YOU HAVE AN EXISTING NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 3:25 P.M. THERE BEING NO INPUT, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 3:25 P.M. MOTION BY MR. VILARDI, SECONDED BY MS. HEINICKE, TO APPROVE THIS APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE TO BUILD A SCREEN ROOM AROUND THE DECK, BUT THAT IT MUST REMAIN AS A SCREEN ROOM AND NOT TO BE ENCLOSED IN THE FUTURE. ROLL CALL: YES: JAMES HUSK, CHAIRMAN WALTER SHIELDS MARY HEINICKE ALAN SHISGAL, VICE CHAIRMAN ALFRED VILARDI NO: NONE MOTION CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARING: SEBASTIAN GENERAL PARTNERSHIP, BFT. IN REGARDS TO LOTS 3, 4, AND 5 OF CHESSER'S GAP SUBDIVISION PHASE I, HAS REQUESTED A VARIANCE TO ERECT APPROXIMATELY 493 SQUARE FEET OF WALL (FACADE) SIGNS, WHEREAS, THE ORDINANCE WOULD ONLY PERMIT 350 SQUARE FEET OF WALL SIGNS. CARL FISCHER WAS PRESENT TO REPRESENT SEBASTIAN GENERAL PARTNERSHIP. ATTORNEY TORPY NOTED THAT PROCEDURALLY THIS CASE IS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT THAN OTHER CASES THE BOARD HAS HANDLED. FIRST OF ALL, THIS IS BEING BROUGHT TO YOU AS AN APPEAL OF A DECISION OF MR. COOPER THAT IN FACT THIS SIGN WOULD VIOLATE THE SIGN ORDINANCE. IF THE BOARD FINDS THAT MR. COOPER IS RIGHT, THEN IT IS A SIMPLE REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM THAT SIGN ORDINANCE. FIRST, MAKE A MOTION TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT MR. COOPER'S DECISION WAS CORRECT. IF YOU FIND THAT MR. COOPER WAS WRONG, YOU WiLL NOT NEED TO HEAR FOR THE VARIANCE. PAGE 4 MR COOPER EXPLAINED HIS INTERPRETATION OF THE SIGN ORDINANCE. THE CODE ALLOWS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE OF SIGNS BASED UPON THE ACTUAL FACADE OF THE BUILDING. THE QUESTION BEFORE THE BOARD FIRST IS HOW TO CALCULATE THAT FACADE. THE CODE STATES THAT THERE SHALL BE AN ALLOWABLE AMOUNT OF SIGN AREA FOR SIGNS ATTACHED TO THE FRONTAGE STREET FACADE OF A BUILDING NOT IN EXCESS OF THAT PERCENTAGE SHOWN ON FIGURE 1 (SEE PAGE 1030 OF SEBASTIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE). ONCE YOU DETERMINE THE SIZE OF THE FACADE, YOU REFER TO THE TABLE TO DETERMINE THE AMOUNT OF ALLOWABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE. THE CODE CONTINUES ON TO SAY IN CALCULATING THE AREA OF A BUILDING FACADE, NO ADDITIONAL CREDIT SHALL BE GIVEN FOR THE SURFACE OF ANY CANOPY OR AWNING. THE CALCULATION FOR THE ALLOWABLE FACADE CREDIT SHALL ALWAYS BE CALCULATED ON A FLAT, TWO- DIMENSIONAL PLANE AND SHALL NOT INCLUDE THAT PART OF A PARAPET, MARQUEE, PYLON OR OTHER SURFACE WHICH EXTENDS ABOVE THE ROOF LINE. A MANSARD ROOF SHALL BE CLASSIFIED AS A PARAPET WALL. IF THE LOWER EDGE OF A SLANTED ROOF OTHER THAN A MANSARD ROOF EXTENDS BELOW THE TOP OF THE SUPPORTING WALL, THE ALLOWABLE FACADE SHALL BE THE AREA OF THE WALL MINUS THE AREA COVERED BY THE ROOF. MR. COOPER'S INTERPRETATION OF THIS SECTION IS AS FOLLOWS: YOU MEASURE FROM THE GRADE UP TO THE MANSARD OR SLANTED ROOF FOR THE HEIGHT AND THE WIDTH IS MEASURED FROM THE TOTAL WIDTH OF THE BUILDING. IN THE CASE OF THE CHESSER'S GAP BUILDING, YOU HAVE A NICE DECORATIVE ROOF STRUCTURE AND ALSO A PARAPET ABOVE IT. YOU CAN PUT SIGNS ON THIS PARAPET, AS NOTED LATER IN THE SIGN ORDINANCE (1039). IT DISTINGUISHES THE PARAPET AS A PLACE WHERE THE SIGN CAN BE LOCATED, BUT NOT iN THE CALCULATIONS OF THE FACADE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO USE THE WHOLE FACADE RATHER THAN THAT BETWEEN THE LOWER EDGE OF THE ROOF AND THE GRADE. THE ALLOWABLE AREA FOR SIGNS IS NOW 350 SQUARE FEET. HOWEVER, IF YOU MEASURE THE TOTAL FACADE, YOU ARRIVE AT 493 SQUARE FEET. MR. COOPER WENT ON TO MENTION THAT THE DEFINITION FOR FRONT STREET FACADE ON PAGE 1008 STATES THAT PORTION OF AN EXTERIOR ELEVATION OF A BUILDING EXTENDING FROM GRADE TO THE TOP OF THE PARAPET WALL OR EAVES AND THE ENTIRE WIDTH OF THE BUILDING WALL ELEVATION WHICH FRONTS ON A STREET UNLESS SAID PARAPET WALL OR EAVES SHALL BE OVER THIRTY FEET IN HEIGHT, IN WHICH CASE ONLY THE FIRST 30 FEET SHALL BE CONSIDERED THE FRONTAGE STREET FACADE FOR PURPOSES OF THIS ARTICLE. ONLY ONE STREET FACADE SHALL BE DESIGNATED AS A FRONTAGE STREET FACADE. MR. COOPER NOTED THAT THIS COULD TELL YOU THAT THEY CAN USE A HEIGHT OF 30 FEET IN THEIR CALCULATIONS. HOWEVER, HE WENT ON TO SAY THAT IN THE OTHER SECTION OF THE CODE, IT SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDES THE AREA OF THE PARAPET. PAGE 5 IT WAS NOTED THAT THIS BUILDING HAS A FLAT ROOF. IT WAS ALSO NOTED THAT THE FOOD LION AREA HAS A 12 OR 14 FOOT ROOF HEIGHT WITH THE REST OF THE RETAIL AREA HAVING A 10 FOOT ROOF HEIGHT. THE ROOF LINE IS PRESENTLY DETERMINED BY THE COVERED WALKWAY ROOF LINE. THIS VARIANCE IS FOR THE ENTIRE BUILDING, NOT JUST FOOD LION. SIGN CALCULATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED FOOD LION SIGNS, RITE AID SIGNS, AND OTHER RETAIL AREAS WERE PROVIDED BY CARL FISCHER, REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT. HE ALSO NOTED THAT FOOD LION HAS ALREADY REDUCED THEIR SIGNAGE AREA BELOW WHAT THEY NORMALLY USE AT OTHER LOCATIONS. WHEN THE BUILDING WAS DESIGNED, THE WALKWAY LIMITED THE ALLOWABLE SIGNAGE BECAUSE OF THE ROOF ON THE WALKWAY. MOTION BY MS. HEINICKE, SECONDED BY MR. SHIELDS, THAT MR. COOPER'S DECISION IS CORRECT IN HIS MEASUREMENTS OF THE FACADE AREA FOR THE SIGNAGE. ROLL CALL: YES: JAMES HUSK, CHAIRMAN WALTER SHIELDS MARY HEINICKE ALAN SHISGAL, VICE CHAIRMAN ALFRED VILARDI NO: NONE MOTION CARRIED. THE BOARD NOW DISCUSSES THE APPLICATION FOR THE VARIANCE. STAFF RECOGNIZES SEVERAL CONDITIONS WHICH ARE PECULIAR ABOUT THIS PROPERTY AND NOT ANY OTHER PROPERTY OR STRUCTURE IN THE AREA. THE SETBACK OF THIS BUILDING IS A KEY ELEMENT. NO OTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY OTHER THAN THIS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (P.U.D.) WILL HAVE THIS KIND OF A SETBACK FOR A COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE. GENERALLY THEY WILL HAVE ANYWHERE FROM ZERO TO 30 OR 40 FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE EXCEPT FOR C-512 WHICH HAS A 74 FOOT SETBACK. THE ACTUAL FACADE DESIGN IS UNIQUE IN THAT THE SIGNS WILL STILL BE ON THE PARAPET EVEN THOUGH THE PARAPET IS NOT USED IN THE SIGNAGE CALCULATION. SINCE THIS BUILDING IS LOCATED IN A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (P.U.D.), THE ZONING IS UNIQUE. IT ALLOWS FOR SOME FLEXIBILITY IN THE LOCATIONS AND DETERMINATIONS OF THE BUILDING, SETBACKS, ETC. PAGE 6 CARL FISCHER STATED THAT THE PROJECT SITS ON SEVEN ACRES. THE BUILDING IS SETBACK VERY FAR ON THIS PROPERTY. THE CITY CODE PLACES THE LIMITATION ON THE ACTUAL SIGNAGE. THiS IS TYPICAL OF ANY LARGE SHOPPING CENTER WITH ITS SIGNAGE. THEY ARE NOT ASKING FOR A LOT OF GODDY SIGNS. THE BASIC LARGE ONES ARE THE FOOD LION AND THE RITE AID WITH SEVERAL SMALL LOCAL SIGNS. THE LOCALS WILL HAVE THEIR SIGNS ON THE OVERHANG OF THE WALKWAY. THE BOARD DISCUSSED WHETHER THE FOOD LION AND RITE AIDE SIGNS WOULD BE CONSIDERED ROOF SIGNS. BY DEFINITION, THEY ARE NOT. ACCORDING TO THE CODE, IF THIS BUILDING WERE TO HAVE SIGNS ON THE REAR OF THE BUILDING, THEY WILL ONLY BE PERMITTED TO HAVE 25% OF WHAT IS NORMALLY ALLOWED. OTHER THAN THE STREET FACADE, YOU ARE ALLOWED 50% OF THE FACADE FOR SIGNAGE UNLESS IT ABUTS A RESIDENTIAL ZONE WHICH WILL ONLY ALLOW 25%. MR. COOPER NOTED THAT THE SIGNAGE FOR THE SMALLER TENANTS MAY NOT EVEN BE LEGIBLE FROM THE STREET. THESE SIGNS CAN BE LOCATED ON THE FRONT CANOPY WALL, BUT MAY NOT HANG BELOW THE CANOPY. MR. COOPER ALSO MENTIONED THAT THE CODE ALLOWS LARGE SHOPPING CENTERS TO HAVE LARGER SIGNAGE FOR FREE STANDING SIGNS BUT DOES NOT MENTION WALL SIGNS. STAFF NOTED THAT CHANGES IN THE SIGN ORDINANCE WILL BE ADDRESSED VERY SOON. BASED ON THE SETBACK OF THE STRUCTURE, THE ZONING WHICH IS P.U.D., THE LAYOUT OF THE SIGNS AND THE BUILDING FACADE ITSELF, STAFF RECOMMENDS GRANTING THE VARIANCE. BASICALLY THE CODE REQUIRES THE BUILDING TO BE SETBACK DUE TO SEVERAL FACTORS. THE LOADING AND UNLOADING OF THE SHOPPING CENTER HAS TO BE TO THE REAR OF THE BUILDING. THE PARKING LOT IS ALWAYS iN THE FRONT. THERE WAS VERY LITTLE LEEWAY IN DETERMINING THE BUILDING SETBACK. IT IS FAR GREATER THAN ANY OTHER BUILDING IN THE CITY. THE SIGNAGE FOR THE P.U.D. ZONING WAS NOT ADDRESSED SEPARATELY IN THE SIGN ORDINANCE, ALTHOUGH IT CERTAINLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN. ALSO, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CAN VARY THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS WITHIN A P.U.D. WITHOUT OBTAINING A VARIANCE. MS. HEINICKE NOTED THAT THE SIGN ORDINANCE DOES NOT PROPERLY ADDRESS THIS SITUATION. PAGE 7 MR. COOPER NOTED THAT THE BOARD COULD FIND THAT SPECIAL CONDITIONS OR CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST THAT ARE PECULIAR TO THIS LAND, STRUCTURE OR BUILDING INVOLVED AND WHICH ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO OTHER LANDS. THIS AREA COULD BE CONSIDERED PECULIAR BECAUSE IT IS A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONE AND IS BEING DEVELOPED UNDER THAT CONCEPT WHICH PROVIDES FLEXIBILITY. ALSO, THE DEPTH OF THIS PROPERTY IS DEEPER THAN ANY OTHER LOTS WITHIN ANY OTHER ZONES IN THAT AREA. HE ALSO NOTED THAT TO LOOK AT THE SIGNS AND THE OVERALL BUILDING FACADE, THE INTENT OF THE CODE IS TO NOT HAVE THAT WHOLE FACADE COVERED WITH SIGNS. LOOKING AT THE SCALE OF SIGNAGE, THE BIGGER THE FACADE, THE LESS PERCENTAGE IS ALLOWED. THE PUBLIC HEAR WAS OPENED. THERE BEING NO PUBLIC INPUT, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. MOTION BY MARY HEINICKE, THAT THE WHOLE STATEMENT BRUCE COOPER JUST CAME UP WITH BE PUT INTO THE MINUTES THAT WE COULD GRANT THE VARIANCE BASED ON THAT STATEMENT. BRUCE COOPER MENTIONED THAT THE KEY HERE TO REMEMBER UNDER THE SECTION CONCERNING VARIANCES, THE APPEAL SHALL ONLY BE GRANTED IF IT IS DETERMINED THAT THE SAID VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE INTENT OF THIS CODE AND THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CODE WOULD BE IMPRACTICAL AND WOULD RESULT IN UNREASONABLE AND UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. MOTION IS SECONDED BY WALTER SHIELDS. ROLL CALL: YES: JAMES HUSK, CHAIRMAN WALTER SHIELDS MARY HEINICKE ALAN SHISGAL, VICE CHAIRMAN ALFRED VILARDI NO: NONE MOTION CARRIED. MR. COOPER ASKED THE BOARD TO CONSIDER HAVING A SPECIAL MEETING AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AT THE REQUEST OF SEBASTIAN GENERAL PARTNERSHIP (THE FOOD LION PROJECT) TO HEAR ANOTHER REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE CONCERNING THEIR FREE STANDING SIGN. THIS IS BECAUSE OF THE PLANNED OPENING DATE FOR THE FOOD LION. PAGE 8 MR. COOPER OUTLINED THE PROBLEMS WITH THEIR FREE STANDING SIGN. YOU CAN HAVE SO MUCH SQUARE FOOTAGE OF SIGN BASED ON THE FRONTAGE OF YOUR LOT. ONE SQUARE FOOT IS ALLOWED FOR EVERY SQUARE FOOT OF FRONTAGE. THIS IS NOT A PROBLEM FOR FOOD LION. THE CODE SAYS YOU ARE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM OF 100 SQUARE FEET OF ANY SIGN, DEPENDING ON THE SETBACK AND IN THE CASE OF A SHOPPING CENTER, THEY ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE 150 SQUARE FEET MAXIMUM OF SIGNAGE. A SIGN PLACED ON THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE IS PERMITTED TO BE 48 SQUARE FEET. ONCE YOU START MOVING THE SIGN BACK ON THE PROPERTY, YOU CAN GAIN MORE SQUARE FOOTAGE AT A RATE OF AN ADDITIONAL 2 SQUARE FEET FOR EVERY FOOT THE SIGN IS MOVED BACK. (TO HAVE A 100 SQUARE FOOT SIGN, IT MUST BE SET BACK AN ADDITIONAL 26 FEET OFF THE PROPERTY LINE.) THIS IS A PROBLEM WiTH THE FOOD LION SIGN. ANOTHER PROBLEM ALSO STATES THAT YOU CAN HAVE ONE OR TWO POLES, WITH A MAXIMUM SIZES OF 12 INCHES OR 8 INCHES. HOWEVER, IF THERE IS A NICE DECORATIVE BASE UNDER THE SIGN, IT HAS TO BE COUNTED AS SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE TOTAL SIGN, EVEN THOUGH THERE IS NO WRITING ON IT. THE INTENT OF THE SIGN CODE IS TO KEEP THE iMPACT OF THE VISUAL SIGN DOWN. FOOD LION ALSO HAS A PROBLEM WITH THIS. THE BOARD SECRETARY NOTED THAT A MEETING COULD BE SCHEDULED NO SOONER THAN MONDAY, APRIL 27, 1992. A GENERAL CONSENSUS OF THE BOARD WAS TO GO AHEAD AND SCHEDULE THE MEETING FOR APRIL 27. THE SECRETARY ASKED IF AN ADDITIONAL CASE (APPLICATION HAS ALREADY BEEN RECEIVED) COULD ALSO BE ADDED TO THIS SPECIAL MEETING. THE BOARD AGREED TO THIS. CHAIRMAN MATTERS: NONE COMMITTEE MATTERS: MOTION BY MS. HEINICKE, SECONDED BY MR. SHIELDS TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THAT MR. FRED BUECHLING BE APPOINTED TO SUCCEED MARY HEINICKE AS A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. ROLL CALL: YES: JAMES HUSK, CHAIRMAN WALTER SHIELDS MARY HEINICKE ALAN SHISGAL, VICE CHAIRMAN ALFRED VILARDI NO: NONE MOTION CARRIED. PAGE 9 MR. SHIELDS ASKED IF THE THREE APPLICANTS (DONALD ELSESSOR, CRANFORD SPROUL, AND JOSEPH GENERAZIO) COULD BE INVITED TO THE NEXT MEETING SO THAT THE BOARD COULD TALK TO THEM. IT WAS NOTED THAT DONALD ELSESSOR WAS BEFORE THE BOARD AT THE NOVEMBER 13, 1991, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING. MOTION BY ALFRED VILARDI TO RECOMMEND APPOINTMENT OF DONALD ELSESSOR TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN THE ALTERNATE POSITION. THEY BOARD AGREED TO ASKED ALL APPLICANTS TO COME BEFORE THE BOARD AT THE NEXT MEETING TO BE INTERVIEWED. MR. VILARDI WITHDREW HIS MOTION. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED CONCERNING THE APPOINTMENTS BY CITY COUNCIL. CITY COUNCIL WILL REVIEW ALL APPLICATIONS FOR THE BOARD, AND CAN FOLLOW THE BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS OR OVERTURN THEM. BUILDING OFFICIAL MATTERS: NONE NEW BUSINESS: NONE MOTION TO ADJOURN BY MS. HEINICKE, SECONDED BY MR. SHIELDS. ROLL CALL: YES: JAMES HUSK, CHAIRMAN WALTER SHIELDS MARY HEINICKE ALAN SHISGAL, VICE CHAIRMAN ALFRED VILARDI MOTION CARRIED. MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 4:35 P.M.