Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10252006BOA Minutescm~ ---.~~r~l~t"11~~,j~ HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1225 MAIN STREET SEBASTIAN, FL 32958 WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2006 - 6:00 PM MINUTES Mayor Burkeen called the Board of Adjustment meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 3. ROLL CALL City Council Present: Mayor Brian Burkeen Council Member Andrea Coy Council Member Nathan McCollum Council Member Sal Neglia Council Member AI Paternoster Staff Present: City Manager, AI Minner City Attorney, Rich Stringer City Clerk, Sally Maio Deputy City Clerk, Jeanette Williams Growth Management Director, Rebecca Grohall Growth Management Manager, Jan King MIS Systems Analyst, Barbara Brooke 4. ANNOUNCEMENTS: None 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: September 13, 2006 On MOTION by Mr. Neglia and SECOND by Ms. Coy, the September 13, 2006 minutes were approved on a voice vote of 5-0. 6. OLD BUSINESS: A. Quasi-Judicial Hearing Damien Gilliams Appeal Of An Administrative Decision To Deny The Reconstruction Of A Nonconforming Sign At 1623 US 1 For Noncompliance Of The Sebastian Land Development Code. Board of Adjustment Meeting October 25, 2006 Page Two The City Clerk swore in all those who intended to offer testimony. All disclosed ex-parte communications with Mr. Gilliams. Damien Gilliams, 1623 US Highway One, Sebastian, testified on his own behalf. He said this could have been handled administratively and hoped justice will be served. He presented a letter from Attorney Burney J. Carter dated October 24, 2006 (see exhibit 1 attached) and read the letter into the record. He said he noticed that there are letters in the agenda packet from tenants of the building, and noted they are three new owners. He cited documents in the agenda packet such as the letter from former Growth Management Director, Tracy Hass dated May 17, 2005, a-mail from Building Director, Wayne Eseltine dated April 12, 2005, and inspection report from MBV Engineering dated May 23, 2005. He said there is a conflict because Jan King has been overlooking this project because her family is in real estate. He said he stopped paying his dues until the association made application for the sign; that two tenants submitted the application incorrectly. He said he followed the City's instructions and got an engineer who states it is not over 50% damaged and is then denied. He said this is political and not fair. The Growth Management Manager said the sign application was just received September 7, 2006, agreed the sign was destroyed by an act of God as stated by Mr. Gilliams, that the Riverfront has a special overlay district requirement for signs, and read the requirements. She said he has stated his sign is destroyed; and that it is the contention of Growth Management staff that the sign is more than 50% destroyed. The Growth Management Director distributed a letter from Art-Kraft signs, the original company that made the sign, stating the sign is damaged beyond 50% (see exhibit 2 attached). The Growth Management Manager said she did not understand the MBV assessment report because it contradicts itself and does it respond to the concerns expressed by the Building Director. She said in conclusion, that in accordance with the regulations in the LDC sign code and overlay district provisions the sign should be built as a new sign in a manner that meets current provisions. Ms. Coy asked about the definition of 50% damage. The City Attorney said the 50% is in the general sign provisions, but in the overlay district it states, "in the riverfront normal repair can happen to anon-conforming sign, but reconstruction cannot and staff is not to encourage survival of non-conforming signs." He said if this is a normal repair go to it, but if it is a reconstruction it cannot be done. The City Attorney said this an appeal of an administrative decision and the Board must find that staff erred in its decision. Board of Adjustment Meeting October 25, 2006 Page Three Mayor Burkeen asked how the Growth Management Manager quantified that 50% of the sign was missing. She said in her opinion with a visual review of the area, half of the sign is literally missing. In response to the Mayor, the City Manager gave a timeline of the correspondence included in the packet. The Growth Management Manager said on February 10, 2005 the Growth Management Department (GMD) received an a-mail from Burney Carter which looks like an application with a graphic, then in April 2005 GMD received an inquiry about code information, then several a-mails were sent back and forth and then GMD asked the Building Dept. to take a look which resulted in Mr. Eseltine's a-mail and Mr. Hass' letter. Mayor McCollum said this is a quasi judicial hearing and that documents are being referenced that Council should have copies of. The Growth Management Manager said these were inquiries only, citing that Mr. Gilliams is stating the application was in process for one year, and there has not been a submitted application to deny until the one received in September 2006. She said she had told a caller from the building that they had to formally apply to get a denial. The City Manager said Mr. Gilliams has brought up that he is being treated unfairly. He said our job is to not allow non-conforming signs in accordance with the code, and that an official permit application was not received until September 2006. Mr. Neglia asked if the City Engineer ever looked at the sign and the Growth Management Manager said he did not. He then asked if it was so irreparable, why is it still standing. Mr. Neglia then asked if the facade grant funds could be used. The City Manager said there will be FY 2007 funds available soon, and if Council chooses to approve the appeal this sign would not be eligible for the CRA grant because grant monies must be used on conforming projects. Mr. Neglia asked if Mr. Gilliams was willing to put up a new sign. Mr. Gilliams said he would not do that because his Mid-Florida Realty sign would not be on top as it is now, as it is a conditional of his purchase agreement to attract walk-in traffic and again, stated this was political. He also stated the Art Craft Sign letter submitted by the Growth Management Manager was now public knowledge which might hurt bid efforts and it was not reviewed by a certified engineer. Mr. Paternoster asked the Building Director in reference to his a-mail, if he was an engineer and he said he was not. Mr. Eseltine said current wind load requirements are 140 mph, exposure B, and he said he did not see Mr. Moia's reply until yesterday. Board of Adjustment Meeting October 25, 2006 Page Four Mr. Gilliams said Mr. Moia is a structural engineer. Mr. Paternoster said he is having a problem with the disparity between Mr. Moia's report and Art-Kraft's letter. Mr. Paternoster read from Jan King's letter about 23 other signs in the district that had been replaced. Side ll, Tape 1, 6:49 pm Scott Hodges, tenant of 1623 US 1, said he believes it is not more than 50% damaged and would like to see it repaired. Mr. Hodges said he was not an engineer. Mr. Gilliams said in his opening that he indicated that the application was just done recently, that this was an act of God, that there can be some leniency, and requested that staff issue him a permit. The City Attorney advised that Council look at the documents presented, stating that the Building Official was speaking to another set of provisions and the overlay district states reconstruction of damaged, non-conforming signs cannot be done, he said the engineer's report addresses structure. He said most damage is generally determined by value and in the overlay district only normal repair can happen. He explained the engineer's report speaks to structure, not value of the electrical or plastic aspects of the sign. Mr. Paternoster said he sees 50% damage and that it is interesting the City did not send out our engineer, that Mr. Moia met the request for an engineer's report, and Mr. Gilliams has met the requirements. Mr. Neglia agreed that Mr. Gilliams came back with an engineer's report as requested. Mayor Burkeen said in the future he wants all documents relative. He stated if we were hanging our hats on the Riverfront Overlay District regulations, why was the Art Kraft letter presented. Mr. McCollum said if staff is going to provide testimony, the documents should be provided to Council, and echoed if the 50% issue is not an issue, he asked why were documents provided. The City Manager stated if the 50% statement by the sign company is discounted, then the engineer's 50% statement should also be discounted, and he reiterated the code language, stating that staff is not encouraging the survival of non-conforming signs per code and that 14 other businesses have followed the code. Ms. Coy said she looked at the sign today and doing math with the sign diagrams provided, she highlighted 2/3 of the missing sign, stated the cracks are structural, the wires dangling down are structural, and in the Riverfront Overlay District the regulations exceed repair requirements. She said 23 people complied with the overlay district code and finds no difference in this permit application. Board of Adjustment Meeting October 25, 2006 Page Five On a MOTION by Mayor Burkeen, with a SECOND by Mr. McCollum, the administrative denial of reconstruction of anon-conforming sign at 1623 US 1 was overturned on appeal with a roll call vote of 4-1 (Coy-nay). 7. NEW BUSINESS -None 8. CHAIRMAN'S MATTERS: None. 9. MEMBERS' MATTERS: None. 10. STAFF MATTERS: None. 11. Being no further business, Mayor Burkeen adjourned the meeting at 7:05 p.m. Approved at the Feb. 28, 2007 ~~ ~, Brian Burkeen, Mayor Board of Adjustment meeting. ATT T: <. Sally A. Mai MMC, City Clerk Law Office of Burney J. Carter, P.A. 1623 N. U.S. #1, Suite A-2 Post Office Box 780266 Sebastian, Florida 32978-0266 Phone: (772)589-3156 /Fax: (772)388-2680 E-Mail: 2_burney(a~bell ou#h~et - October 24, 2006 City of Sebastian ._ 1225_ Main Street Sebastian, FL 32958 Attn: Jan King, Manager Growth Management Department _ ~' `~ \I~~ Re: Appeal of Denial of Sign Application, Tracking Number 60002515 Sebastian Executive Building, 1623 North U.S. Highway #1 Board of Adjustment Hearing, October 25, 2006 Dear Ms. King and Members of the Board of Adjustments: I am writing to you in my individual capacity as an owner of Unit A-2 of the Sebastian Executive Building. The Sebastian Executive Building Owners Association, Inc., has not taken a position either to support or oppose the appeal of the denial of the sign permit application. There is not a unanimous agreement among the owners regarding the issue of repair or replacement of the sign. I was a unit owner and a member of the Owner's Association when Damien and Bonnie Gilliams purchased Units A-5 and A-6 of the Sebastian Executive Building. The Association was aware that they also purchased the stock and assets of the business, Mid- Florida Realty, Inc., which occupies those units. At the time of their purchase and up until the sign was damaged by hurricanes in 2004, Mid-Florida Realty, Inc., maintained signage on the top portion of the sign. My business and some other professional offices in the Sebastian Executive Building do not rely on advertising from the sign. Real estate businesses like Mid-Florida Realty, Inc., do rely on advertising from the sign to generate business. ~x 1 _. Page Two October 24, 2006 City of Sebastian Jan King, Manager Any appeal of the permit application for repair of the Sebastian Executive Building sign should be given fair and reasonable consideration in view of the °grandfathered" rights that may benefit businesses adversely impacted by the loss of use of the sign. Personal differences among unit owners should be disregarded. Si ely rney J Attorney BJC/dd ' 10/23/06 MON 14:37 FAg 321 951 2466 ART-KRAFT SIGN CO., INC. 0 002 Electric Sign Fabrication • Installation • Maintenance duality Signs Since 7968 October 23, 2006 City of Sebastian `.:.':~:;;1y;:;'?s' ~'r:%'. Growth M~magement 1225 Main St. Sebastian, EL 32958 Attn: Jan lung Re: Sebastian Executive Building -1623 North U'S ldighway 1 Crrour~d Sign Dear Jan: pur company has assessed the extent of the damage that the sign incurred- As the origins. manufacturer of the sign, we have determined that more than fifty percent (5C~%) of the sign has either been damaged or destroyed. It is our as.,essment that the existing non-conforming sign is damaged beyond reasonable repair and will continue to rapidly deteriorate unless a major overhaul is accomplished in the near future. Please feel &ee to contact us should you need further information. . Sincerely :yours, =~_ Donald Re;.lly President _ r.---- -~ ~ ~'L021222~24 '., 25 DR/ml / ~ ~ ~ 7/ ^-/ ~ c ~~~ . ~ e~Ved °Cr 2o~ E r p&Z a ~; ~'% ~ nt ~, 2675 Kirby Circle, lVE • Palm Bay, Florida 32904 • (32i) 727-7324 • FAX (321) 95i-24fi6 • wwwART--KRAFT cam ~z