Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02282007BOAanoF ~~ =- - HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1225 MAIN STREET SEBASTIAN, FL 32958 WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2007 - 6:00 PM MINUTES 1. 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 Sal Neglia Council Member AI Paternoster Staff Present: City Manager, AI Minner City Attorney, Rich Stringer City Clerk, Sally Maio Growth Management Director, Rebecca Grohall Growth Management Manager, Jan King MIS Systems Analyst, Barbara Brooke Shai Francis, Finance Director Jerry Converse, Acting Public Works Director 4. ANNOUNCEMENTS -none. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular Meeting of 10-25-06 On MOTION by Mr. Neglia, and SECOND by Ms. Coy, the October 25, 2006 minutes were approved with a voice vote of 4-0. 6. OLD BUSINESS -None Board of Adjustment Minutes February 28, 2007 Page Two 7. NEW BUSINESS A. The Taffi Abt was not present so the item was tabled for the time being. B. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING AVA L. WILSON, IN REGARDS TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 945 INDIAN RIVER DRIVE, IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A BUILDING ADDITION TO BE 10 FEET FROM THE NORTH SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND 14 FEET FROM THE SOUTH SIDE PROPERTY LINE, WHEREAS THE CODE REQUIRES RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES THAT ARE 35 FEET IN HEIGHT TO BE A MINIMUM OF 20 FEET FROM A SIDE PROPERTY LINE. Mayor Burkeen opened the public hearing at 6:02 p.m. No ex-parte communications were disclosed. Applicant Ava Wilson presented her request for a variance stating it is needed for her growing family. The Growth Management Manager presented their staff report. In response to Mayor Burkeen, the Growth Management Manager said the property is 50 feet wide. The Clerk swore in the applicant and staff. All previous statements were to be considered the truth. In response to Mr. Neglia, the Growth Management Manager stated letters went out to adjacent property owners. The Growth Management Director added that one property owner called and will speak tonight. The Growth Management Manager said the property to the north is a triplex with hurricane damage. The owner began repairs without permits, stopped, applied and the plans had many errors, and there was to be a two-story plus addition, which was denied based on zoning. The neighbor has since applied for site plan approval and is being reviewed. She stated their intention is to have entire structure two story. Mr. Neglia's concerns with the 35 foot height and 20 foot setback included it being non-aesthetically pleasing, taking up green space, and the only hardship is created by the applicant. In response to Mr. Paternoster, the Growth Management Manager explained Mr. Siebert applied for building permit with the same setback problem which he later redesigned or bought additional property. Board of Adjustment Minutes February 28, 2007 Page Three Mr. Paternoster asked if others enjoyed this type of variance to which the Growth Management Manager stated not to her knowledge. Mr. Paternoster said the applicant created the hardship by renovation. The Growth Management Manager explained the variance would be nice to have but may not necessarily be considered a hardship. Mr. Neglia asked Mrs. Wilson rather than go 35' high, spread out further toward U.S. 1. Mrs. Wilson said the further back the building sprawls, there will be smaller green space. In Favor Speakers -none Opposed Speakers Willard Siebert, 1013 Indian River Drive, stated he felt sorry for Ms. Wilson living next door to house devastated by hurricane but the house is planned to be rejuvenated. He further stated this is one of those situations where the riverfront ordinance was created to prevent overbuilding. He said he did not want to set precedence by applying for his variance and does not believe this will meet variance criteria. The Mayor asked Mr. Siebert if his property had an existing structure and he said it did not, it was new construction. Applicant Response Mrs. Wilson explained she and her family live on the river and care about the riverfront and she has been surprised at some of the building she has seen on the riverside. Staff Summa The Growth Management Manager stated that staff recommends denial though they are sympathetic with the family's desire for a larger structure; recommend redesign of the project. Council Deliberation Ms. Coy asked if ex-parte communication meant with the applicant or anyone. The City Attorney said it could be anyone. She then explained that she talked to Mr. Siebert today however nothing was discussed that would affect her decision. Council Action On MOTION by Mr. Neglia and SECOND by Mr. Paternoster the variance was denied on a roll call vote of 4-0. Board of Adjustment Minutes February 28, 2007 Page Four A. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING TAFFI ABT, OF MEL FISHER TREASURE MUSEUM, IN REGARDS TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1332 US 1, IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING TO BE 628 SF, WHEREAS THE CODE REQUIRES A MINIMUM OF 1200 SF. The City Attorney moved the item off the table and the Clerk swore in Ms. Abt. Staff had previously been sworn. The Mayor then opened the public hearing at 6:32 p.m. No ex-parte communication was disclosed. Applicant Taffi Abt presented her variance request to Council. Staff Presentation The Growth Management Manager stated the building is smaller than what is allowed by code for a residence. She also said there are three buildings on the site plan and pointed out a benefit with this request is that improvements on the whole site may be addressed at this time. Council Questions Mr. Paternoster asked if the structure was on a permanent foundation and Mrs. Fisher said it was on blocks with strapping but not considered a mobile home. Mr. Paternoster asked if they were granted emergency housing status at the time of the hurricanes. Mrs. Fisher said she was and at the time she was told once a building goes to residential status, it would be hard to go back to commercial. Mr. Paternoster asked if this was done on paper and Mrs. Fisher explained at the time, she was told City Hall was in shambles after the hurricanes. Mrs. Fisher said the building was strapped in and retrofitted to be a residence in 2003-2004. Mr. Paternoster asked if an inspection took place and she said no. He asked if it has been rented out since that time to which she said yes. Mrs. Fisher said she was not going anywhere, has long term goals and intends to use the dock for her own use. She also said she currently has a tenant there. Mr. Paternoster confirmed this was all done without permits and expressed concerned about the safety and welfare of the tenants. Mrs. Fisher said she is asking for the inspections now. Mr. Neglia expressed concern about it being mobile home; fire and safety hazards; and the residential dock. He said no one should be in there, however everything is in place without permits. He asked if the DEP permits were handy. The Growth Management Manager said she has the application with statement that permit was issued for residential dock and the builder jumped the gun and started the dock. She said it doesn't connect to land because the City stopped the job. Board of Adjustment Minutes February 28, 2007 Page Five Ms. Coy clarified for the public that she is impressed because the variance is asking fora lesser amount than greater amount and she was thrilled that Mrs. Fisher has offered to change the color of museum. Mrs. Fisher added they are looking for a possible metal roof. Ms. Coy asked how the City classifies mobile homes as a residence. The Growth Management Manager stated the Department of Housing and Urban Development requires stickers from the factory for structures to be classified as mobile homes, however, this structure has been there for many years and the change of use to residential at a lesser square footage is what should be considered tonight. In Favor Speakers Damien Gilliams , US 1 said he wanted to remind the Board of criteria for determining variances and look at the whole picture. He was in favor of the request because it is downzoning and she is going to change the color of the museum. Oooosed Speakers Willard Siebert, 1013 Indian River Drive, said it is preposterous that this got to this point, especially that a residential dock permit was issued, which should not have been issued. He asked if an order of commencement was issued for land not residential before the dock building began. The Growth Management Manager stated the notice of commencement has to be filed before the first inspection or so many days after the permit. She pointed out the permit was in front of her so it was built without a permit and as soon as the City discovered this, a stop work order was issued. She said the Dept. of Environmental Protection and Army Corps of Engineers have already issued permits however the residence is not grandfathered. Mr. Siebert stated if the City does not like the ordinances, change the ordinances but do not usurp the Code. Dale Simchick, 766 South Easy Street, said the bottom line is construction done was done without a permit, someone is at fault, and someone must pay. The City Attorney advised the Board that punishment is not applicable to the variance request tonight and cannot bear on determination of your response. Applicant Response Mrs. Fisher stated everyone was hit hard by hurricanes and asked that extenuating circumstances be considered. Board of Adjustment Minutes February 28, 2007 Page Six Staff Summary The Growth Management Manager asked the Board to consider the request as it is before you, stated the focus needs to be for a smaller structure than required. She also explained that if denied the applicant could come in with a building addition to make it comply with code requirements or could be two units. She closed by stating in reviewing all the facts, staff recommended approval with conditions - and noted that with change of use the City would get a crack at improving the site plan with color changes, non-complying signs and landscaping. She read the conditions outlined in staff report 1. All conditions of the modified site plan must be completed, including parking and landscaping. 2. Buildings on the site are to be repainted in compliance with the Riverfront Overlay District 3. All non-conforming signs on the property are to be removed, or modified to comply with current code. 4. A fully enclosed utility storage area of at least 60 SF shall be provided for the residence within one of the existing structures. 5. Following issuance of the building permit, owner will call for a final inspection and obtain a certificate of occupancy for the residence. Council Deliberation Mr. Paternoster asked Mrs. Fisher if she had tenants now and she said she did. He asked if they were the same people who moved in after the hurricanes and she responded they were not. He asked if she collected a rent fee and she said yes. Mr. Paternoster asked how many different tenants she has had and she said three. He asked if this was under the temporary approval and she said she thought it was permanent approval. Mr. Paternoster asked what she remembered Mr. Eseltine saying when he approved the major renovations, if it was temporary or permanent approval. Mrs. Fisher said he didn't say either but cautioned that once you change this to residential, it will be difficult or even impossible to get it back to commercial. Mr. Paternoster asked if she owned her own home and she said she did. He asked if she remembers obtaining a certificate of occupancy, inspection permits to which she said yes. The Mayor asked Mr. Paternoster of his intention. Mrs. Fisher said she did call the City but things were in turmoil and the inspector told Board of Adjustment Minutes February 28, 2007 Page Seven them to forget the paperwork at the time. In response to the Mayor, Mr. Paternoster said he is establishing that if this changed, this will be a residential dwelling and he is concerned for the safety of the people living there now. The City Attorney pointed out that there were authorizations for emergency measures for housing approved at that time and there was no formal application/paperwork that could be the basis of confusion -there were not .applications for temporary housing during the crisis which might have been root of those statements. Wayne Eseltine stated he and Tracy Hass looked at it and it was being used as an office and they determined it could be used as a temporary residence but he had no recollection of saying it could not be converted back. In response to Ms. Coy he explained it was a temporary use for someone who was temporarily displaced and he did not go back out to the structure later on. Ms. Coy said she could understand how there may have been a misunderstanding and the applicant is trying to make it right and in doing so she is giving the City something the City wants. She offered that it be inspected and the City can put a time constraint on it, and she would be satisfied. She reiterated she would recommend approval because it is not harmful to the City, there is existence of special conditions, the applicant is meeting criteria, and a time limit may be imposed. The Mayor said he appreciated the applicant admitting to a mistake and agreeing to make it right. Mr. Neglia said the City should have done more to help her, however,. since she has had three tenants she should have known it was not a temporary structure anymore. Mr. Neglia said he would like to see the fire department inspect it, and come back after inspections are done. He asked if this was ever commercial. The Growth Management Manager said it is commercial but the variance is requesting a change of use to a residential building that is smaller than required by code. A MOTION for approval was made by Ms. Coy, SECONDED by Mayor Burkeen to include special conditions and a one week time limit to complete inspections. The City Attorney stated an alternative could be--if denied tonight, the City would need to start code enforcement action to remove the tenant and she has a time frame to obtain inspections. Mr. Neglia said he would like to have fire department inspection. The City Attorney said staff could do an inspection. Board of Adjustment Minutes February 28, 2007 Page Eight Mayor Burkeen stated if the structure doesn't meet inspections, fails, then the tenants have to be moved out. Ms. Coy pointed out that tenants could be removed faster from an unsafe structure. Mr. Paternoster asked that now the City's concerns are in the open, is the City liable if something happens. The City Attorney responded that if deep in your heart you don't have a problem with the result but with how we got there, the best way to go is to approve it with immediate inspections. He said if the City looks informally a longer, different procedure would have to take place. The City Attorney stated the City would have to begin to remove the tenant tomorrow and begin it's good faith actions. Mayor Burkeen asked if the motion fails how long will it take to evacuate the tenants. The City Attorney explained the procedure for an inspection warrant through courts, then the inspection takes place-it could take months. The Mayor stated if Council approved this, with the true underlying motive being the safety of the tenants, members should vote yes. The City Attorney said that is correct. On a roll call vote of 2-2, the motion failed. (Neglia, Paternoster-nay) 8. CHAIRMAN'S MATTERS -None 9. MEMBERS' MATTERS -None 10. STAFF MATTERS -None 11. Being no further business, Mayor Burkeen adjourned the meeting at 7:37 p.m. Approved at th eptember 26, 2 7 Board of Adjustment meeting. d' Andrea Coy, Chairperson ATTE `~~ Sally A. Maio MC -City Clerk atvoF + ~ --- V ! . err=~~-- HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 1225 MAIN STREET w SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32958 TELEPHONE (772) 589-5518 w FAX (772) 388-824$ March 2, 2007 Ms. Taffi Abt Mel Fisher Treasure Museum 1322 U.S. Highway 1 Sebastian, FL 32958 RE: Residential Variance Denial Dear Ms. Abt, Pursuant to FS 166.033 the Board of Adjustment of the City of Sebastian has denied your request for a variance to the size requirements of a residential unit. The authority for this action is outlined in the Land Development Code Sec. 54-1-2.5 which enumerates the criteria for determining variances. In order to authorize any variances, the Board of Adjustment must find the following: 1) Existence of special conditions or circumstances 2) Conditions not created by applicant 3) Special privileges not conferred 4) Hardship conditions exist 5} Qnly the minimum variance is granted 6) Not injurious to public welfare or intent of ordinance 7) Conditions and safeguards must be imposed 8) Time limit may be imposed 9) No use variance permitted in specific instances There are several actions you may choose to exercise: • You may appeal the decision of the Board of Adjustment to the Circuit Court within 30 days of the decision. • The members of the Board of Adjustment who cast a dissenting vote (Council members Paternoster and Neglia) may voluntarily agree to bring the matter back far reconsideration. • You may re-apply for a variance. Based upon the evidence presented at the Board of Adjustment meeting of February 28~', 2007, you are hereby notified that you must correct the problem. Since your variance was not approved for a residential unit, you must remove the renter(s) and return that building to its approved use by Apri! '!, 2007. I am available to discuss the situation with you, I may be reached at 388-8228. Lastly, the City of Sebastian will be noti issued (Permit #31-212425-001) that i requiremen#s. As outlined in #13 of the does not eliminate the necessity to obt district authorizations. If any appeal or successful in having a residential use fying DEP that a residential dock permit has been s not in compliance with the City of Sebastian General Conditions of the DEP permit, the permit ain any required federal, state, local and special re-application options you might pursue are not approved, the City will be requesting that DEP withdraw your dock permit. The Chief Building Official, Wayne Ese[fiine, inspected the proposed residential unit on March 1, 2007. The result of his inspection is attached. Sincerely, Rebecca Grohall, AICP Director c: Rich Stringer, City Attorney AI Minner, City Manager QIY ~~F ~~` ~< =~ - - - HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1225 MAIN STREET • SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32958 TELEPHONE: {772) 589-5537 • FAX (772) 589-2566 3/2/07 Ms. Taffi Abt Mel Fisher Txeasure Museum 1322 US Hwy 1 Sebastian, Fl. 32958 Subject: Minimum Housing Safety Inspection Ms. Abt, As requested by you in writing on 2/28/07 the Building Department went to 1322 US Hwy 1 in Sebastian on 3/1/07 for the purpose ofperforming a m;nimurn housing safety inspection of the detached building on the east side of the property. The following is a report of our findings from this inspection. The building in question is currently being used as a residential rental unit. An inspection of the interior of this building revealed that the required means of egress, electrical system, smoke alarms and required venting of the bathroom appear to meet the minimum requirements of the Florida Building Code. An inspection of the exterior of the building revealed deficiencies in the tie dawn system, which anchors the building to the ground. Concrete block piers which rest on spread footings support the building and it appears that the original internal strapping system of the building no longer exists. This was evident because the original tie dawn anchors are still in the ground, but the tie down straps from the building to the anchors no longer exist. Therefore, although this building is safe to occupy from a life safety standpoint it does however, have some structural deficiencies in the tie down system, which would make the building unsafe to occupy in the event of a storm with Hurricane force winds. The building permit application that you have submitted for the change of occupancy from Business to Residential use included plans prepared by a Structural Engineer with extensive repair details showing the upgrades necessary to bring the existing building up to the current code requirements. Although your request for a variance to change this building to a residential use was denied, you still have the option to modify the plans to a Business use as before, obtain the building permit and perform the necessary repairs to bring the building up to the current code requirements. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Wa a Eseltine, Building Official "An Equal Opportunity Employer" Celebrating Our 75th Anniversary