Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09021997BOA CITY OF SEBASTIAN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 1997 Chairman Oberbeck called the meeting to order at 7:04 P.M. The pledge of allegiance was said. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: EXCUSED ABSENCE: ALSO PRESENT: Mr. Crocket Chmn. Oberbeck Mr. Devito Mr. Capp OLD BUSINESS: Mr. Gore Mr. Beckwith (a) Mr. Freeland (a) Robert Massarelli, Community Development Director Ann Brack, Recording Secretary Approval of minutes of August 5, 1997 MOTION by Gore/Devito I move to approve the minutes. (8/5/97) A voice vote was taken. 5 - 0 motion camed. The secretary noted that Mr. Beckwith would be voting for Mr. Capp. NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARING - Charles J. Bailey - 679 Vocelle Ave. - Lot 25 Block 43, Sebastian Highlands Unit #2, City of Sebastian - requesting a variance from section 20A-5.9C1 of the Sebastian Land Development Code. Chnm. Oberbeck explained the format and procedures for the quasi-judicial hearing. MOTION by Freeland/Devito I make the motion to put everybody (who will testify) under oath in this quasi-judicial heating. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 2, 1997 Roll call: Mr. Devito - yes Mr. Crockett - yes Mr. Gore - yes Chmn. Oberbeck - yes Mr. Beckwith - yes The vote was 5 - 0. Motion carried. The public hearing was opened at 7:07 P.M. The applicant, proponents and opponents, and Mr. Massarelli were sworn in by the Secretary. Mr. Massarelli gave staff presentation, noting that the applicant, Mr. Charles J. Bailey is requesting a fence height variance at 679 Vocelle Avenue. He is asking for a variance to construct an eight (8) foot high fence along the rear property line, whereas the code limits the height to six (6) foot. He also noted that there is presently an eight (8) foot high fence behind an adjacent property and the applicant wishes to continue the fence along the rear property line of lot 24. After the staff report was presented, it was noted that staff recommends approval. Mr. Charles J. Bailey of the above address was present and noted that his two problems were drainage and privacy. Board members, Mr. Freeland and Mr. Devito noted that they had visited the site. It was established by Mr. Crockett and Mr. Bailey that there are residences on Lots 1 and 2, which abut Lots 24 and 25, and they were built after Mr. Bailey's residence. Mr. Bailey noted that he has already installed a footer, has a permit for a six (6) foot high wall, and is only before this Board for a variance for the extra two (2) feet in height to bring the wall to eight (8) feet. Mr. Crockett noted that this would be a wall instead of a fence. In response to a question from Mr. Crockett, Mr. Bailey noted that his residence is on Lot 25, and his garage is on Lot 24, with an abandonment of easement in between. It was noted that the drawing that Board members were looking at did not show the garage. PROPONENTS: Mr. Charles Geisz, Building Inspector for the City of Sebastian, noted that the variance being applied for is more for privacy than anything else, and everything that Mr. Bailey has ever done on his property has been to code with permits. He noted that all Mr. Bailey is asking for is the extra two (2) feet (in height). He also commented that the way lots are being built up with fill, a six (6) foot fence is becoming a three (3) foot fence, and does not afford privacy. He pointed out that the material being used is not up for debate, just the extra two (2) feet in height. Mr. Geisz also noted that he has done no inspections on Mr. Bailey's footers, and his name is not on the application, but he is here on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Freeland noted that the survey sketch as submitted was not proper as it did not depict the garage on Lot 24. He noted that the twelve (12) foot wide driveway, as depicted, is in reality a BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 2, 1997 double-wide driveway. He proceeded to ask what the garage was used for, asked about his Main Street business address and usage, and he noted that he walks by Mr. Bailey's residence every morning and watches the workmen come there to fill their trucks, and said that Mr. Bailey stores all his matrials there. Mr. Freeland suggested that it is the same as a Home Occupational License, but he (Bailey) doesn't have a Home Occupational License, and the Main Street location is an address for convenience. Mr. Bailey noted that he has equipment at that location. After more discussion between these two men, Chmn. Oberbeck and several other Board members commented that they didn't think this issue was germane to the variance applied for. Mr. Freeland asked for a chance to explain his comments, and noted that he felt this is why the fence is going up, to conceal this operation. He commented that Mr. Bailey never had a neighbor behind him till recently, and the neighbor has to look at Mr. Bailey's back yard. He noted that there are culvert pipes and forms and other things that he uses in his back yard. Chron. Oberbeck commented that this is an issue that would be the responsibility of Code Enforcement or the Community Development Director, and suggested that any documentation be turned over to Mr. Massarelli or Code Enforcement. Mr. Freeland went on to note that the Church (on Main Street) has never claimed any taxes on it, which must be done if any commercial activity is done on its property, as evidenced by information he received from the Tax Assessor's office. He also objected to Mr. Geisz, as Building Official, being present and speaking for the applicant. He also suggested that Mr. Bailey has been receiving special treatment from the Building Department all along. He also noted that he would not be voting on this tonight (he is an alternate member). Mr. Massarelli entered into this debate, and noted that no special consideration has ever been given to Mr. Bailey and everything that's been done has been done by the code. He commented that the information that Mr. Freeland presented is news to him, asked for a copy of it, and will give it to Code Enforcement tomorrow morning and it will be investigated. He noted that this is a separate issue (from the variance). Mr. Bailey interjected that his backyard neighbor has been intruding on his privacy, and cited an event with a video camera. Mr. Massarelli asked Mr. Bailey to repeat why he is applying for a variance. Mr. Bailey explained the history of the eight-foot fence between his Lot 25 and Lot 1, to the rear, and the cooperation between him and the residents on Lot 1. He then explained that a resident buik his home on Lot 2, and at a later date built a swimming pool which comes close to the property line. Among other things, he stressed the reason as privacy for requesting the additional two (2) extra feet of height on the fence (wall). Mr. Freeland asked how the fence (wall) was to be finished on the outside face, and asked if he would object to the neighbor to the rear finishing offthe outside face. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 2, 1997 Mr. Massarelli noted that the drainage problem that has been referred to docs not require an eight foot high fence or wall, and Mr. Bailey agreed. The privacy issue was determined to be the reason for the eight foot high fence(wall). Mr. Massarelli asked the applicant if he created the condition that exists that requires him to have the eight (8) foot high privacy fence, and Mr. Bailey responded that he did not. He was then asked if eight feet of height was the minimum needed to get privacy. Mr. Bailey indicated the eight feet would be adequate. Chmn. Oberbeck suggested basketweave on the top two extra feet of fence (wall) and Mr. Bailey indicated that since he is a masonry contractor, he does not want to use wood. Mr. Beckwith asked if the material in the new fence (wall) would be compatible with the material in the existing fence. Mr. Bailey responded no. Mr. Devito asked what aspects of privacy were being violated. Mr. Bailey responded that he was tired of having a camera run on him. He noted that this fence (wall) would give both him and his neighbor privacy. There was much more discussion on this issue and the subject of the volleyball was covered. PROPONENTS: Mr. Bruce Stewaxt, 678 Jordan Avenue, was present and proceeded to give a history of his relationship with Mr. Bailey. (His property is Lot 2 which abuts Mr. Bailey's Lot 24 to the rear.) He commented that he had spoken to a Code Enforcement officer and his superior about the issue. He then commented that he was planning to support Mr. Bailey on an eight-foot fence till he found out that the exterior side was to be left unfinished. In response to a question from Mr. Crockett, it was established that there is nothing in the City Code that would require the finished side of a fence to face out. iNFORMATIONAL TESTIMONY: Ms. Pamela Holyk, 680 Jordan Avenue, Lot 1, directly behind Mr. Bailey's residence spoke in favor of the eight-foot fence. Her concern was whether the out-facing portion of the fence (wall) would be finished or left raw. She also fully agreed that there is a privacy issue between Mr. Bailey and Mr. Stewart. Her main concern was being able to finish the out-facing portion of this fence (wall) so it would not devalue properties in the neighborhood. Several Board members asked Mr. Bailey if he would object to the outside portion of the fence (wall) being painted, in respect to the entire community. Mr. Bailey responded that he would take the mortar off and if Mr. Stewart wants to stucco or paint it, that's fine. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 2, 1997 Mr. Stewart commented that Mr. Bailey could come on his property anytime to service the fence, but that he (Stewart) would like to paint the side that faces his yard. He also noted that the camera issue was done on the advice of his attorney, but he noted that he does not have a big problem with Mr. Bailey. He then asked Mr. Bailey if he would put the net up after the fence (wall) is constructed to keep the volleyball from coming onto his property. Mr. Devito noted that it would be advantageous if Mr. Bailey would let the neighbor paint the other side. He noted that "give and take" is important because we all live in the same community. He commented that the only way out of it that he could see was "if this Board would make a recommendation that you can put up the wall....eight (8) foot wall, with the stipulation that the people on the other side can paint the color that they want on their side and maintain it that way, and he also said that he would give you the right to maintain the wall if it broke, or something like that, or you need to repair, so .... ". Mr. Gore said to Mr. Bailey that he "can't imagine why you would object to what goes on on the other side of the wall, as far as paint goes. You're not going to see it." Mr. Bailey again stated that whoever lives on the other side of the wall can paint it. Chmn. Oberbeck made the suggestion to Mr. Bailey that, if approved at the eight (8) foot point, he will either tool or cut the joints so it can be painted in a decent fashion. Mr. Bailey responded that he would cut the joints. After some discussion, Mr. Massarelli commented that "the compromise, if you will, that's been developed is a good one. Again, I'd recommend that the ..... of the condition, include that it be an agreement between the two property owners so that, in the future, there will be something to spell out how that will be handled". Chron. Oberbeck: "And the agreement is to be recorded, and, - at the County - recorded along with the deeds at the County Court House and a copy delivered to the City prior to construction". Chron. Oberbeck repeated: "That there be an agreement between the affected parties, it be recorded at the County Court House, and that a copy be furnished to the - to City Hall prior to the start of construction, for anything above six (6) foot, because that had already been approved. So I'd entertain a motion to that effect, if...". MOTION by Beckwith/Gore I so move. Mr. Massarelli: "That motion does include the findings that are on paragraph twenty-two (22)" (of the staff report). Chmn. Oberbeck stated "findings of staff, yes". BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 2, 1997 Roll call: Mr. Devito - yes Mr. Crockett - no Mr. Gore - yes Mr. Oberbeck - yes Mr. Beckwith - yes The vote was 4 - 1. Motion carried. Chron. Oberbeck noted that there was no other action to come before this Board this evening. He adjourned the meeting at 8:14 P.M. 6 City of Sebastian 1225 MAIN STREET [] SEBASTIAN, F:LORIDA 32958 TELEPHONE (561) 589-5537 t'"] FAX (561) 589-2566 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ANN BRACK, SECRETARY BOACS.DOC