Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09191985 PZPLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 MINUTES MEETING CALLED TO ORDER BY CHARIMAN EISENBARTH AT 7:00 P.M. PRESENT: MR. JEWELL THOMPSON MR. ROBERT FULLERTON MR. WILLIAM MAHONEY MR. STANLEY KRULIKOWSKI MR. JAMES WADSWORTH MRS. EDRA YOUNG MR. ROBERT MCCARTHY (ALTERNATE MEMBER) CHAIRMAN HAROLD EISENBARTH ALSO PRESENT: MR. RANDY L. MOSBY, MOSBY-ROBBINS AND ASSOCIATES, INC., CONSULTING ENGINEER. MOTION BY MR. THOMPSON, SECONDED BY MR. MAHONEY, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES, WITH THE STATED REVISIONS. MOTION CARRIED. OLD BUSINESS: iNDIAN RIVER BAIT & TACKLE - SITE PLAN - FEY: MR. GREGORY GORE, WAS IN ATTENDANCE REPRESENTATING HIS CLIENT, MR.RiCHARD FEY. MR. GORE STATED THAT HE HAS LEARNED THERE IS PRESENTLY A SEPTIC TANK LOCATED UNDER THE STRUCTURE. MR. GORE ALSO STATED THAT HE IS AWARE THAT THE COUNTY HAS SENT A LETTER TO MR. FRANCO, BUILDING OFFICIAL, STATING THAT THERE WILL BE A FURTHER INVESTIGATION ON THIS SITE, PRIOR TO ISSUING A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. MR. GORE STATED THAT MR. GLEN RAPPAPORT, OF THE COUNTY, HAS STATED THAT IT IS POSSIBLY AN ENCLOSED SYSTEM. MR. GORE STATED THAT HE DOES NOT WISH TO PRESENT ANY FALSE STATEMENTS TO THE COMMISSION. MR. GORE STATED THAT THERE IS A SEPTIC TANK ON THE SITE, BUT DOES NOT KNOW HOW MANY YEARS IT HAS BEEN THERE. MR. GORE ALSO STATED THAT HE IS NOT SURE WHERE THE DRAIN FIELD IS. MR. GORE STATED THAT HE HAS SENT A LETTER TO MR. MIKE GALANIS, OF THE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT, STATING THAT THE COUNTY HAS ISSUED A PERMIT, AND THE PERMIT WILL NOT BE WITHDRAWN UNTIL AN.ADEQUATE HEARING HAS BEEN OBTAINED BEFORE THE COUNTY. MR. GORE STATED AS FAR AS THE ISSUING OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUP~NY, iHE BELIEVES THAT iS THE LAST LINK IN ANY CHAIN. ~I, NUTES: PAGE 2 PLANNING AND ZONING C~SSION SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 INDIAN RIVER BAIT & TACKLE - SITE PLAN ~ FEY (CONTINUED.)..: MR. GORE STATED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL, AT THEIR MEETING, SEPTEMBER 18, 1985, REVIEWED AN APPRAISAL OF THE NORTH THIRTY-FIVE FEET (35'), FOR EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS ($8,000.00). MR. GORE STATED THAT HE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AN AGREEMENT FOR DEED, THAT STATED A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF MONEY WOULD BE PAID OUT IN A PERIOD OF TIME, WITH THE BALANCE DUE AND OWING, A PERIOD SIMILAR TO A MORTGAGE ARRANGEMENT OR ALTERNATIVELY MR. GORE'S CLIENT WOULD ENTER IN TO A TWENTY (20) YEAR LEASE. MR. GORE STATED THAT HE HAS REVIEWED THE COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY MR. MOSBY. MR. GORE STATED THAT HE HAD A DISCUSSION WITH MR. FRANCO TODAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 1985, AND MR GORE STATED THAT MR. FRANCO INDICATED THAT THE BUILD- ING DEPARTMENT APPROVED MR. FEY'S SiTE PLAN. MR. GORE STATED THAT HE AND HIS CLIENT HAVE ALWAYS GONE ON THE BASIS THAT THE SITE NEEDS THREE (3) PARKING SPACES, BUT IF NECESSARY, HIS CLIENT WILL PUT IN A FOURTH (4TH) PARKING SPACE. MR. GORE STATED THAT HE INVESTIGATED THE SITUATION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, AND WISHED TO INFORM THE COMMISSION THAT THERE IS NOTHING ON RECORD, THERE IS NO PLAT MR. GORE STATED THAT THEY HAVE HAD A NUMBER OF PEOPLE, WHO HE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD, WHO HAS SUBMITTED OPPOSITION TO MR. FEY'S INTENT TO ESTABLISH A BUSINESS. MR. GORE STATED THAT HE FEELS THESE PEOPLE ARE DISGRUNTLED THAT THEY WERE NOT THE FIRST TO PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY AT THE END OF MAIN STREET, NEXT TO THE SEBASTIAN DOCK. MR.~GORE BELIEVES THAT THERE IS AN UNDERGROUND ATTEMPT ON BEHALF OF SOME OF THE "OLD TIMERS" OF.THE iCITY OF SEBASTIAN,TO UNDERMINE, AND TO ENGAGE IN WHAT WOULD ALMOST.BE CONSTRUED AS ANTI-TRUST ACTIVITY TO PROHIBIT MR. FEY FROM ESTABLISHING HIS STORE. MR. GORE STATED THAT IF MR. FEY WERE OPENING AN ANTIQUE BOOK STORE, THAT NONE OF THE COMMISSION MEMBERS WOULD HAVE RECEIVED ONE PHONE CALL. MR. GORE STATED THAT IF..THERE IS AN ENGINEERING PROBLEM, IT WILL BE SOLVED. MR. GORE STATED THAT CITY ATTORNEY, TOM PALMER, HAS STATED TO HIM, THAT HE, MR. PALMER, BELIEVES IT iS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY TO SELL THE PROPERTY RATHER THAN TO LEASE iT. VERBATIM: MR GORE: "MR. MOSBY HAS NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH MR. FRANCO, I WILL STATE IT FOR THE BOARD, ON MY HONOR, THAT TODAY, HE STATED THAT THE BUILDING PLANS, OR THE SITE PLAN, HAS RECEIVED APPROVAL FROM THE CITY." MR. GORE STATED THAT THE OTHER ITEMS IN MR. MOSBY'S LETTER CAN BE TAKEN CARE OF. MR. GORE STATED THAT HIS CLIENT HAD CONTACTED AN INDIVIDUAL WHO RESIDES ON INDIAN RIVER DRIVE, FOR THE PURPOSE OF LEASING ONE (1) PARKING SPACE, AND PAYING THIS INDIVIDUAL FOR THIS PARKING SPACE. THE INDIVIDUAL"~S HUSBAND IMMEDIATELY AGREED TO IT, SHE ON THE OTHER HAND, BEING VERY WELL ESTABLISHED IN THE COMMUNITY, RAN MR. GORE'S CLIENT OUT OF HER MOTEL, AND PROCEEDED TO FILE A COMPLAINT WITH THE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT~ HE BELIEVES ABOUT MR. FEY'S SEPTIC TANK. MINUTES: PAGE 3 ING AND ZONING SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 INDIAN RIVER BAiT & TACKLE (CONTINUED~: MR. GORE STATED THAT THE COMMISSION CAN BE ASSURED THAT HE,.~IN TURN, HAS FILED A COMPLAINT AGAINST HER,STATING THAT SHE PROBABLY HAS INADEQUATE WATER HOOK UPS, AND HER SEPTIC TANK IS IN DANGER OF RELEASING EFFLUENTS ALONG THE INDIAN RIVER. MR. GORE STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE IT MADE PART OF PUBLIC RECORD, THAT IF THE COMMISSION DOES RECEIVE CONTINUED COMPLAINTS FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE ANTi-COMPETIVE, THAT THESE PEOPLE WILL BE FOUND OUT, AND THAT THEY WILL BE PURSUED WITH ALL CONCERN AND WITH THE POWERS, THAT HE, MR. GORE, HAS BEEN GIVEN AS AN ATTORNEY TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE ALONG INDIAN RIVER DRIVE IS IN COMPLIANCE. MR. GORE STATED THAT THERE IS A WHOLE ROW OF ESTABLISHMENTS ALONG INDIAN RIVER DRIVE THAT GO BACK TO 1950, 1940, AND 1930, AND IF THE COMMISSION THINKS THEIR SEPTIC TANKS ARE IN COMPLIANCE, MR. GORE WISHES THE COMMISSION COULD DIRECT ATTENTION TO THEM AS WELL. MR. GORE STATED THAT HE AND HIS CLIENT WANT TO WORK WITH THE COMMISSION, BUT HE KNOWS THAT AT LEAST SOME OF THE COMMISSION MEMBERS HAVE RECEIVED COMPLAINTS FROM PEOPLE WHO DO. NOT WANT MR. FEY TO ESTABLISH HIS BUSINESS, BECAUSE THEY DID NOT HAVE THE FORESIGHT TO PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY, AND THAT IS NOT FAIR. IT IS UNAMERICAN, IT IS UNDERHANDED,. AND MR. GORE IS CERTAIN THAT MAYBE THE RESPONSE, IF ANY OF THE COMMISSION MEMBERS RECEIVE PHONE CALLS, WILL BE THAT MR. GORE FULLY INTENDS TO BRING PRESSURE TO BEAR FOR AN INVESTIGATION, AND WITH THE CITY, OF ALL THE ESTABLISHMENTS ALONG INDIAN RIVER DRIVE AND IN THE CITY.OF SEBASTIAN. MR. GORE STATED THAT HE WOULD AGAIN LIKE TO STATE THAT MR. FRANCO APPROVED THE SITE PLAN. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH ASKED MR. GORE IF THE.FIVE (5) ITEMS OF MR. FRANCO'S LETTER, DATED SEPTEMBER 19, 1985, HAVE THEN BEEN TAKEN CARE OF. MR. GORE STATED THAT HE HAD SPOKE WITH MR. FRANCO, AND THAT MR. FRANCO STATED THAT THE SITE PLAN IS APPROVED. MR. GORE ALSO STATED THAT HE WISHES HE COULD SPEAK WITH MR. MOSBY AND THAT AT ONE MEETING, MR. MOSBY WILL SIT DOWN AND GIVE MR. GORE HIS LIST OF A HUNDRED IMPOUNDERABLES THAT MR. GORE IS SUPPOSE TO SATISFY. MR. GORE STATED THAT HE BELIEVES THAT MR. MOSBY WILL AGREE THAT THESE ITEMS CAN BE TAKEN CARE OF. MR. GORE STATED THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE APPROVAL CONTINGENT UPON MEETING MR. MOSBY'S REQUIREMENTS AND ENTERING INTO THE LEASE OR SALE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN. MR. GORE STATED THAT IF THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT DOES NOT APPROVE MR. FEY'S SEPTIC TANK, THEN OF COURSE HE WILL NOT BE GIVEN A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, BUT THAT SHOULD NOT BE A CONCERN OF THE ZONING CODE. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO TAKE EXCEPTION TO ONE OF MR. GORE'S STATEMENTS, .AND WOULD LIKE IT PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD, THAT NO ONE HAS CONTACTED HIM FROM THE COMMUNITY, AND THAT THE ONLY TELEPHONE CALL HE HAS EVER RECEIVED IN RELATION TO THIS PROJECT WAS FROM MR. GORE. · ~MINUTES: PAGE 4 PLANNING AND ZONING ,ION SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 INDIAN RIVER BAIT AND TACKLE (CONTINUED).: MR. GORE STATED THAT HE APPRECIATED THAT, HE JUST WANTED TO STATE THAT IF SOMEONE HAS PLACED CALLS TO THE COMMISSION MEMBERS, HE WOULD LIKE TO GO ON RECORD, BECAUSE HE KNOWS THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE OPPOSED TO THIS PROJECT BECAUSE IT WILL COMPETE DIRECTLY WITH THEIR BUSINESSES. MR. MAHONEY STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO POLL THE BOARD TO SEE HOW MANY MEMBERS RECEIVED PHONE CALLS. MR. GORE STATED THAT IF NO ONE HAS RECEIVED A PHONE CALL, HE WOULD BE RELIEVED, BECAUSE THAT IS THE INDICATION THAT HE IS GETTING. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH STATED THAT HE TOOK EXCEPTION TO THIS, AND HE FEELS THAT HIS HONESTY IS BEING QUESTIONED. MR. GORE STATED THAT HE DID NOT MEAN TO QUESTION THE HONESTY OF THE COMMISSION, HE JUST WANTED TO STATE THAT IF ANYONE HAD RECEIVED A CALL, THERE WAS A REASON FOR THAT. MR. GORE STATED THAT HE APOLOGIZED FOR HIS STATEMENT. 'MR. GORE STATED THAT IT IS WITHIN THE RIGHT FOR ANYONE TO CALL A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER OR ZONING MEMBER TO DISCUSS A PROJECT THAT IS COMING UP. MR. GORE ALSO STATED THAT HE WANTED TO EXPRESS HIS CONCERN THAT IF THE BOARD HAS RECEIVED ANY CALLS, THERE ARE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF PEOPLE WHO DO NOT WANT THIS ESTABLISHMENT TO OPEN. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH STATED THAT THOSE PEOPLE ARE EVIDENTLY NOT SITTING ON THiS BOARD. MR. GORE AGAIN STATED THAT HE DID NOT MEAN TO QUESTION THE INTEGRITY OF THE COMMISSION. MR. KRULIKOWSKI STATED THAT WHETHER ANYONE IN TOWN WANTS THIS BUSINESS TO OPEN OR NOT, THAT IS NOT THE COMMISSIONS' REASON FOR SITTING AT THE TABLE. MR. KRULIKOWSKI ALSO STATED THAT THIS iS THE SECOND TIME THAT THERE HAS. BEEN POINTING AT THIS COMMISSION INPLYING THAT THEY ARE NOT DOING WHAT THEY ARE SUPPOSE TO BE DOING. MR. GORE STATED THAT HE WAS POINTING AT INDIVIDUALS iN THE COMMUNITY AND NOT AT THIS COMMISSION. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT MR. FRANK JOHNSON DOES NOT WORK FOR HIS FIRM AS IMPLIED BY MR. GORE. MR. MOSBY ALSO STATED THAT HE DOES NOT REVIEW SITE PLANS UNLESS IT IS A PRE-APPLICATION MEETING OR UNLESS IT IS REQUESTED BY THE CITY. MR. MOSBY ADDRESSED THE ITMES OF RECOMMENDATIONS OF HIS LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 16, 1985. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT NORMALLY WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE COUNTY HAS ESTABLISHED A TRAVELED ROUTE, WITHOUT RIGHT-OF-WAYS, THEY WILL TAKE THE RIGHT-OF- WAYS BASED ON'THEiR MAINTENANCE AREAS. MINUTES: ,,PAGE 5 PLANNING AND ZONING COOSSION SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 INDIAN RIVER BAIT AND TACKLE (CONTINUED): MR. GORE STATED THAT IN LINE WITH MR. MOSBY'S COMMENTS, MR. FEY HAS RECEIVED A PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION IN THE COUNTY RIGHT-OF-WAY, FOR THE DRIVEWAY. MR. GORE STATED THAT THERE WILL BE LESS USE OF THE SEPTIC FACILITIES, THEN IF THE SITE WERE USED FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. MR. WADSWORTH ASKED MR. MOSBY IF THE ITEMS OF HIS LETTER WERE ADDRESSED PROPERLY, WOULD HE THEN APPROVE THE SITE PLAN. MR. MOSBY STATED IF THE ITEMS WERE ADDRESSED ACCORDING TO THE CITY'S ORDINANCES. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT IN ADDITION TO HIS ITEMS, THE CITY'S BUILDING OFFICIAL ALSO HAD SEVERAL ITEMS THAT WOULD ALSO HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT THEY ARE NOT IN THE HABIT OF LAYING OUT SITE PLANS FOR PEOPLE WHO SUBMIT SiTE PLANS TO THE CITY. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT HE CANNOT STATE THAT THESE ITEMS CAN BE MET, JUST THAT THEY MUST BE MET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY'S ORDINANCES. MR. WADSWORTH ASKED MR. GORE IF HIS CLIENT WOULD COMPLY WITH THE FIVE ITEMS IN MR. FRANCO'S LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 18, 1985. MR. GORE REVIEWED MR. FRANCO'S LETTER AND STATED THAT HIS CLIENT WOULD COMPLY WITH MR. FRANCO'S ITEMS ALSO. MR. WADSWORTH ASKED MR. GORE IF HIS CLIENT WOULD COMPLY WITH.ALLiITEMS OF MR. MOSBY'S AND MR. FRANCO'S LETTERS. MR. GORE STATED HE WOULD WITH ONE QUALIFICATION, THAT iF ANOTHER ENGINEER DISAGREES WITH MR. MOSBY,S CONTENTIONS, MR. GORE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO PRESENT THAT AS TESTIMONY. MR. GORE STATED THAT NONE OF US ARE ERROR FREE, AND THAT IN THE EVENT THAT HE WOULD RECEIVE EXPERT OPINION THAT ONE OF THE ITEMS iS TOTALLY UNREASONABLE, AND IS NOT NECESSARY, MR. GORE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO BRING THAT TO THE COMMISSION, IN ORDER TO SAVE HIS CLIENT'S VESTED RIGHTS. MR. THOMPSON QUESTIONED MR. GORE WHY THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN SHOWED FOUR (4) PARKING SPACES AND THE MOST RECENT SITE PLAN HAS SHOWN THREE (3) PARKING SPACES. MR. GORE STATED THAT IF FOUR SPACES ARE NEEDED HIS CLIENT WILL PROBABLY PLAN TO PUT AN EXTRA ONE RIGHT ON THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, AND WAIT FOR THE COUNTY TO TELL THEM THEY CAN'T ........ - ...... ~,- ......... CHAIRMAN EiSENBARTH QUESTIONED MR. MOSBY WHY HE DISAGREED WITH THE PARKING CALCULATIONS. MINUTES: PAGE 6 AND ZONING COMMI~N SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 INDIAN RIVER BAIT & TACKLE (CONTINUED): MR. MOSBY STATED THAT THE WAY THE PLAN IS LAID OUT SHOWS A CERTAIN AREA FOR RETAIL AND A CERTAIN AREA FOR STORAGE. IF YOU' RUN THROUGH THE MATHMATICS MR. FEY iS OVER BY A FRACTION IN THE STORAGE AREA. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT HE BELIEVES IT WOULD COME DOWN TO A LEGAL INTERPRETATION, BUT HE WOULD CLASSIFY ENTRANCE WAY AND TOILET AREA AS PART OF BEING THE RETAIL SPACE. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT THERE IS FIVE HUNDRED AND FIFTEEN FEET (515') SET UP FOR STORAGE WHICH REQUIRES 1.04 PARKING SPACES. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT HE BELIEVES THE TOILET AND ENTRY AREA ARE NECESSARY PARTS OF THE RETAIL AREA. IF YOU ADD THOSE TOGETHER IT IS OVER FOUR HUNDRED FEET (400'), AND THAT REQUIRES THREE SPACES (3). MR. GORE STATED THAT THE TOILET AREA IS FOR EMPLOYEES ONLY AND WILL NOT BE USED BY THE PUBLIC. THERE WAS A LENGTHY DISCUSSION REGARDING THE FILL NEEDED FOR THE PARKING SPACES, AND THE CONCERN THAT IT WILL NOT ENCROACH ON THE WET LANDS. MR. GORE STATED THAT IF MR. MOSBY WANTED TO PULL THE DER IN ON THIS, THAT HIS CLIENT WOULD NOT GET FINISHED FOR TWO YEARS. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT WAS NOT NECESSARILY TRUE, BUT IF AN ENGINEER SIGNED AND SEALED THE PLANS AND SAID THAT ALL IMPROVEMENTS ARE ON THE UPLANDS THEN HE WOULD BE CERTIFYING THAT THEY ARE NOT ENCROACHING UPON THE WET LANDS, AND HOPEFULLY HE HAS DONE HiS HOMEWORK. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH STATED THAT HE BELIEVES THE COMMISSION IS WITHIN THEIR RIGHTS TO HAVE THE DER LOOK AT THE SEPTIC'TANK. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT AS A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, THE DER WILL NOT LOOK AT THE SEPTIC TANK, THEY WILL LOOK AT THE WET LAND ISSUES, BUT THE ONLY TIME THE DER BECOMES INVOLVE~,.IN WASTE WATER ISSUES IS IF YOU EXCEED A CERTAIN FLOW CAPACITY. iF THERE IS SOME ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH CONCERN, THEY MIGHT GET INVOLVED, BUT THE REGULATIONS OF SEPTIC TANKS IS STRICTLY.THE JURISDICTION OF THEiHEALTH DEPARTMENT. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH RAISED SOME CONCERN OVER THE STORAGE AREA NEVER SHOWING ANY ENTRANCES ON ANY PLANS SUBMITTED. MR. GORE STATED THERE WOULD BE DOORS ON THESE AREAS, BUT NOT FOR PUBLIC USE. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH STATED HE WAS CONCERNED THAT THE STORAGE AREA MIGHT END UP TO BE RETAIL. MR. GORE STATED THAT IF IT WAS A CONCERN, THEN PLEASE PUT IT AS A CONTINGENCY. MR. GORE STATED THAT IT WILL BE A DISPLAY STORAGE AREA, BECAUSE THERE IS NO OTHER AREA TO PUT THE ITEMS THAT MR. FEY WOULD LIKE TO SELL. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH STATED THAT HE WOULD HAVE A TOUGH TIME, IF A ZIPPY MART CAME IN, AND WANTED TO DESCRIBE THEIR WHOLE OPERATION AS DISPLAY STORAGE AND DID NOT WANT TO PUT IN AS MANY PARKING SPACES AS RETAIL AREAS CALL FOR. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH STATED IT IS SPLITING THE HAIR. -MINUTES: PAGE 7 NNING AND ZONING COMMISS SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 INDIAN RIVER BAIT & TACKLE (CONTINUED).: CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH REQUESTED TO SEE THE COUNTY HEALTH APPROVAL STAMP ON THE PLAN. IT WAS NOTED THAT MR. MULLEN OF~THE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT SIGNED THE PLANS. MOTION BY MR. WADSWORTH, SECONDED BY MR. KRULIKOWSKI, TO GRANT THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL CONTINGENT UPON THAT ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF MR. RANDY MOSBY'S LETTER, DATED SEPTEMBER 16, 1985, AND MR. HECTOR FRANCO'S LETTER, DATED SEPTEMBER 18, 1985, WILL BE MET PRIOR TO ANY ISSUANCE OF ANY BUILDING PERMITS, AND THAT THE CITY ENGINEER WILL REVIEW THE PLANS AND ASSURE THAT ALL REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN MET. ALSO, THAT WITH THE APPROVAL, THE RETAIL AREA OF THREE HUNDRED AND NINETY FIVE FEET (395') REMAIN THE SAME, AND SHOULD AT ANY POINT IT INCREASES, THERE WILL HAVE TO BE ANOTHER REVIEW. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: MR. THOMPSON MR. WADSWORTH NAYS: MR. FULLERTON MR. MAHONEY MR. KRULIKOWSKI MRS. YOUNG CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH MOTION NOT CARRIED. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT AFTER ALL THE TIMES MR. FEY HAS BEEN iN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION, THiS HAS BEEN THE FIRST TIME THAT A PLAN HAS BEEN SUB- MITTED THAT MR. MOSBY COULD ESTABLISH SOME AREAS THAT NEED SOME WORK. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT MR. FEY NOW HAS THE COMMENTS AND HAS THE RIGHT TO RE-SUBMIT. MR. MOSBY ALSO STATED THAT THERE ARE MANY SITE PLANS THAT ARE SUBMITTED THAT RECEIVE THREE OR FOUR LETTERS OF ITEMS THAT MUST BE ADDRESSED AND KEEP REVISING AND RE-SUBMITTING UNTIL THEY FINALLY COMPLY WITH ALL THE ITEMS. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT HE DOES MEAN THAT EVERY TIME MR. FEY RE-SUBMITS HE WILL RECEIVE NEW ITEMS TO ADDRESS. MOTION BY MR. FULLERTON, WHEN THE SITE PLAN IS RE-SUBMITTED~TO MR. RANDY MOSBY,. THAT THE COMMISSION BE NOTIFIED BY LETTER, SO THAT THE COMMISSION MAY SPEAK WITH MR. MOSBY AND TRY TO STRAIGHTEN THINGS OUT BEFORE MR. FEY APPEARS BEFORE THE COMMISSION AGAIN. MOTION DIES - LACK OF SECOND. MR. GORE STATED THAT THERE IS A POSSIBILITY, DEPENDING ON THE GOOD GRACES OF THE COMMISSION, THAT HE MAY NOT BE HERE AS A ATTORNEY TO RE- SUBMIT, AND AT THIS POINT HE HAS NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST, BUT HIS CLIENT HAS BEEN ADVISED OF CERTAIN PROPOSALS THAT HE, MR. GORE, HAS SUBMITTED TO THE COMMISSION REGARDING REPRESENTATION. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH STATED THAT HE BELIEVES THE NEXT TIME HE SEES THIS SITE PLAN THERE WILL BE NOTHING LEFT TO BE ADDRESSED. MINUTES: PAGE 8 AND ZONING COMMISS] SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 MOTiON. BY MR. THOMPSON, SECONDED BY MR. WADSWORTH TO RECESS THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. CHAIRMAN EiSENBARTH RECONVIENED THE MEETING AT 8:40 P.M. ALL THOSE MEMBERS WHO WERE PRESENT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING, WERE PRESENT AT THE RECONVIENING. HAMILTON - SITE PLAN: MR. JOHN HAMILTON WAS PRESENT AND ADDRESSED THE COMMISSION ON HIS REQUEST. MR. HAMILTON STATED HE WAS A LITTLE IN DARK AS TO WHAT HAS HAPPENED. MR. HAMILTON STATED HE WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT A MOTION WAS MADE ON JULY 25, 1985, TO APPROVE THE SITE PLAN HE HAD SUBMITTED CONTINGENT THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND ORDINANCE 202-X TO ALLOW THE COMMISSION TO REDUCE THE BUFFER ZONE, WHICH THEY DiD UNDER THEIR NEW ORDINANCE. MR. HAMILTON STATED THAT HE WAS ALSO UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT ONCE THEY AMENDED THAT ORDINANCE, HE HAD AN APPROVED SITE PLAN. MR. HAMILTON STATED ACCORDING TO CITY ATTORNEY, TOM PALMER, THE CHAIRMAN HAD NOT STAMPED THE PLAN, AND SINCE CITY COUNCIL HAD ADOPTED THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THAT NOW HE HAS FALLEN UNDER THE NEW ORDINANCES ALSO, WHICH STATES HE WOULD NEED TO BUILD HIS BUILDING TEN FEET (10') FROM THE REAR LOT LINE. MR. HAMILTON STATED THAT AT THIS POINT IT DID NOT MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE TO HIM AND HAD HIS ENGINEER DRAW UP A NEW SITE PLAN SHOWING THE BUILDING BEING TEN FEET (10') FROM THE REAR LOT LINE TO COMPLY WITH THE NEW ZONING. MR. HAMILTON STATED ALL HE WANTS IS FOR SOMEONE TO APPROVE HIS SITE PLAN SO THAT HE MAY BEGIN HIS BUILDING. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT BASED ON WHAT ATTORNEY PALMER HAS SAID HE NOW FALLS UNDER THE NEW ORDINANCE, WHICH MEANS ALL ITEMS OF THE NEW ORDINANCE, NOT JUST THE SET BACKS. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH STATED THAT HE WISHED THE CITY ATTORNEY WERE HERE TO EXPLAIN HIS THINKING ON THIS MATTER. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH STATED THAT IT IS HIS UNDERSTANDING THAT MR. HAMILTON CAME BEFORE THE COMMISSION ON JULY 25, 1985, PRESENTED THE COMMISSION A SITE PLAN, AND THE ITEM HE COULD NOT COMPLY WITH WAS THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER. A MOTION WAS MADE, SECONDED, AND PASSED, TO APPROVE THE SITE PLAN CONTINGENT ON THE CITY COUNCIL GIVING THE COMMISSION THE RIGHT TO WAIVE THE LANDSCAPE STRIP IN INDUSTRIALLY ZONED PROPERTIES., FOR SIDE LOTS. THAT WAS THE ONLY CONTINGENCY. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH QUESTIONED IF THAT CONTINGENCY MiYD? BEEN MET. MR. MOSBY STATED THE WAY THE COUNCIL DEVELOPED ANY WAIVER OF LANDSCAPE, WAS BY THE ADOPTION OF THE NEW ORDINANCE. IN DOING SO, MR. PALMER HAS RULED THAT MR. HAMILTON MU. ST EITHER SUBMIT HIS PLAN UNDER THE OLD ORDINANCE AND MEET THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENT, SINCE HE FIRST SUBMITTED UNDER THE OLD ORDINANCE, OR SUBMIT iT UNDER THE NEW ORDINANCE AND MEET ALL PROVISIONS OF THE NEW ORDINANCE, AND THAT iS WHERE THE TEN FOOT (10') SETBACK HAS COME BACK. ~INUTES: PAGE 9 AND ZONING COMMIS SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 HAMILTON - SITE PLAN (CONTINUED): MR. WADSWORTH READ THE MOTION, WHICH WAS MADE BY HIM, ON JULY 25, 1985, IN REGARDS TO MR. HAMILTON'S SITE PLAN. MR. WADSWORTH STATED THAT MR. PALMER'S RULING WAS NOT THE INTENT OF HIS MOTION. HIS INTENT WAS TO GIVE MR. HAMILTON SITE PLAN APPROVAL, AND THAT IF THE CITY COUNCIL GAVE THE COMMISSION THE'POWER.TO THE LANDSCPAE BUFFER, 'THAT MR. iHAMILTON.WOULD HAVE AN APPROVED SITE PLAN. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH ASKED IF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION FELT THAT MR. HAMILTON HAD AN APPROVED SITE PLAN. MR. FULLERTON STATED THAT HE WAS NOT IN ATTENDANCE AT THE JULY 25,1985, MEETING, AND FOR THAT REASON FELT HE COULD NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE CONVERSATION. ALL OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION WERE IN AGREEMENT THAT MR. HAMILTON DID HAVE AN APPROVED SITE PLAN. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH THEN STAMPED AND SIGNED THE ORIGINAL PLAN SUBMITTED ON JULY 25, 1985. DISCUSSION RE: ANTENNA ORDINANCE: MR. KRULIKOWSKI STATED THAT HE DOES NOT BELIEVE THERE SHOULD BE ANY ANTENNAS IN THE FRONT YARDS, AND HE FEELS THAT THE REVISED ANTENNA ORDINANCE SHOULD BE PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AS DRAFTED. MOTION BY MR. THOMPSON, SECONDED BY MR. MAHONEY, THAT THE REVISED ANTENNA ORDINACE SHOULD BE PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AS DRAFTED. MR. FULLERTON REQUESTED THAT A NEWS PAP~ER CLIPPING, REGARDING ANTENNAS FOR INDIAN HARBOUR, BE PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL ALONG WiTH THE DRAFTED ORDINANCE AND LETTER FROM THE COMMISSION. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: MR. THOMPSON MR. FULLERTON MR. MAHONEY MR. KRULIKOWSKI MR. ~D~ORTH CHAIRMAN EiSENBARTH NAYS: MRS. YOUNG MOTION CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS: MODEL HOME PERMIT - SIMES: THERE WAS A DISCUSSION REGARDING SETBACKS. MOTION BY MR. FULLERTON, SECONDED BY MR. KRULIKOWSKI, TO SUBMIT A NEW SITE PLAN UNDER THE NEW ORDINANCE FOR REVIEW. MOTION NOT CARRIED. MINUTES: PAGE 10 'LANNING AND ZONING COMMI~N SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 MODEL HOME PERMIT- SIMES .(CONTINUE.D)..': MOTION BY MR. WADSWORTH, SECONDED BY MRS. YOUNG, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE MODEL HOME PERMIT CONTINGENT ON MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR MODEL HOMES AND THE OFFSETS. MOTION. NOT CARRIED. MOTION BY MR. WADSWORTH, SECONDED BY MRS. YOUNG, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE MODEL HOME PERMIT REQUEST BY MR. SIMES CONTINGENT THAT HE MEET ALL REQUIREMENTS NECESSARY FOR OFF-SETS AND ALSO THAT HE MEET ALL THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS. MOTION CARRIED. FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT - SITE PLAN: MR. WADSWORTH STATED THAT HE HAS FILED WITH THE SECRETARY OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FORM 4 - MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT. MR. WADSWORTH STATED THAT HE IS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, AND HE DOES INTEND TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DISCUSSION AND VOTING OF THIS SITE PLAN. MR. RICK MORA, ARCHITECT,OF WOLFBERG~ALVAREZ.AND ASSOCIATES, REPRESENTING ~QR._i~PA...P~WER AND LIGHT. COMPANY .... MR. MORA STATED THAT THE ADDITION TO THE EXISTING BUILDING IS APPROXIMATELY TWENTY FOUR HUNDERD SQUARE FEET (2400'), AND THAT HIS CLIENTS ALSO INTENDS TO BUILD A STORAGE BUIDLING. MR. MORA ALSO STATED THAT THE ENTIRE AREA IS APPROXIMATELY 2.44 ACRES. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT HE HAS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THIS SITE PLAN CONTINGENT UPON TWO ITEMS. 1) APPROVAL OF THE SEPTIC TANK SYSTEM BY THE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT. 2) REVIEW OF THE OFF SITE DRAINAGE ALONG 9TH STREET AND NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE BY MR. HECTOR FRANCO, BUILDING OFFICIAL, TO MAKE SURE THERE ARE NO PROBLEMS WITH THE OVERALL DRAINAGE CONCEPT WITH THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN IN THIS AREA. MR. MOSBY REVIEWED MR. FRANCO'S LETTER AND STATED THAT MR. FRANCO AGRRES WiTH MR. MOSBY THAT THE SEPTIC TANK SYSTEM MUST BE APPROVED BY THE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT. MR. MOSBY STATED MR. FRANCO'S SECOND ITEM ADDRESSES THE EASEMENT ON THE SWALE LOCATED TO THE EAST OF THE PROPERTY. MR. MOSBY AGREES THAT THERE SHOULD BE AN EASEMENT GRANTED FOR THE CITY, BECAUSE THAT IS A COLLECTOR FOR OFF SITE DRAINAGE, AND IS COLLECTING RUN OFF FROM THE SOUTH. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT LOOKING AT THE PROFILE YOU CAN SEE THAT THE SWALE IS APPROXIMATELY EIGHT FEET (8') WIDE. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT HE BELIEVES A TEN (10') OR FIFTEEN (15®) FOOT EASEMENT TO KEEP THE SWALE OPEN WOULD BE IN ACCORD. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT MR. FRANCO WAS.CONCERNED WITH THE SIXTEEN INCH (16") CMP PIPE ALONG 9TH STREET THAT TRANSVERSES THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. BASED ON THE SURVEY AND ALSO THE WAY THE PIPE IS SHOWN ON THE PLAN, THE MAJORITY OF THE PIPE IS UNDER PAVEMENT. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT MR. FRANCO HAD INDICATED TO HIM, WHEN THEY DISCUSSED THE OFF SITE DRAINAGE, MR. FRANCO WOULD HAVE PREFERRED A CATCH BASIN CUT INTO THE SIXTEEN iNCH PIPE, AND THE SWALE GOING INTO THE CATCH BASIN, INSTEAD OF HAVING A SWALE GOING ALONG 9TH STREET. MR. MOSBY STATED HE DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT CAN PHYSICALLY BE DONE. MR. MOSBY SUGGESTED THAT BEFORE FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT BEGIN CONSTRUCTION, AND GET THEIR BUILDING PERMIT, THEY SHOULD MEET WITH MR. FRANCO, AND REVIEWTHEOFFSITE DRAINAGE PROBLEM ALONG f~INUTES: PAGE 11 AND ZONING COMMIS~N SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT - SITE PLAN (CONTINUED): NORTH CENTRAL. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT MR. FRANCO'S LETTER IS NOT QUITE CLEAR TO HIM BECAUSE DURING THEIR CONVERSATION, MR. FRANCO HAD STATED A SIXTEEN INCH PIPE (16") AND HIS LETTER STATES A TEN INCH (10") PIPE. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT HE BELIEVES THAT THE COMMISSION COULD APPROVE THE SITE PLAN CONTINGENT UPON FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT MEETING WITH MR. FRANCO AND RESOLVING HIS QUESTIONS ON THE DRAINAGE. MR. MOSBY QUESTIONED THE REPRESENTATIVES ON THEIR FEELINGS REGARDING THE EASEMENTS. MR. MIKE MILLS, SEBASTIAN BRANCH MANAGER, FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT, STATED THAT THEY WOULD PREFER TO PUT SOMETHING IN WRITING STATING THAT FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT WILL KEEP THE DITCH OPEN AND WILL MAINTAIN IT. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT SINCE IT WAS AN ITEM THAT MR. FRANCO WANTED ADDRESSED, FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT SHOULD MEET WI'TH MR. FRANCO, AND HE SHOULD AGREE THAT A WRITTEN LETTER IS ADEQUATE, BECAUSE MR. FRANCO STATED IN HIS LETTER THAT HE WANTED AN EASEMENT. MR.~'..THOMPSON REQUESTED THAT THE SITE PLAN ON FILE BE SIGNED AND SEALED. THE ENGINEER FROM WOLFBERG ALVAREZ AND ASSOCIATES SIGNED AND SEALED THE PLANS AT THE MEETING. MOTION BY MR. THOMPSON, SECONDED BY MR. KRULIKOWSKI, THAT THE SITE. PLAN BE APPROVED WITH THE CONTINGENCY THAT THE SWALE TO THEEAST'OF THIS STRUCTURE BE, AGREED TO BY FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT, MAINTANINED BY FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT, AND THAT THE DRAINAGE TO THE NORTH BE DIS- CUSSED WITH THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, TO MEET HIS SATISFACTION. MR. THOMPSON WITHDREW HIS MOTION. MR. KRULIKOWSKI WITHDREW HIS SECOND. MOTION BY MR. THOMPSON, SECONDED BY MR. KRULIKOWSKI, TO APPROVE THE SITE PLAN SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONTINGENCIES: 1) FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT AGREE IN WRITING THAT THEY WiLL MAINTAIN THE DRAINAGE DITCH TO THE EAST OF THEIR PROPERTY. 2) FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT WILL MEET WITH MR. HECTOR FRANCO, CITY BUILDING OFFICIAL, AND RESOLVE THE OFF SITE DRAINAGE PROBLEM TO THE NORTH AND WEST SIDE OF THE SITE. 3) THE SEPTIC TANK SYSTEM MUST BE APPROVED BY INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT. AYES: ROLL CALL VOTE: MR. THOMPSON MR. FULLERTON MR. MAHONEY MR. KRULIKOWSKI MR. WADSWORTH MRS. YOUNG CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH NAYS: NONE MOTION CARRIED. MINUTES: PAGE 12 AND ZONING COMMIS SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 MOTION BY MR. THOMPSON, SECONDED BY MR. MAHONEY, TO APPROVE PAYMENT TO SEBASTIAN BUSINESS SUPPLY FOR OFFICE SUPPLIES IN THE AMOUNT OF $12.24. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION BY MRS. YOUNG, SECONDED BY MR. WADSWORTH, TO APPROVE PAYMENT TO RANDY L. MOSBY, MOSBY-ROBBINS AND ASSOCIATES, INC., FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENDERED, IN THE AMOUNT OF $976.72. MOTION CARRIED. CHAIRMAN'S MATTERS: CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH STATED THAT HE IS RECEIPT OF A LETTER FROM MR. GREG GORE, ATTORNEY, APPLYING TO BE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION'S ATTORNEY. MRS. YOUNG STATED THAT SHE UNDERSTOOD, WHILE AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING, THAT THEY WERE NOT GOING TO HIRE AN ATTORNEY FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. MR. THOMPSON STATED THAT HE BELIEVES SOME OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE CONSIDERING WRITING A SEPERATE CONTRACT WITH THE EXISTING CITY ATTORNEY, MR. TOM PALMER, TO BE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION'S ATTORNEY ON AN HOURLY BASIS. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH QUESTIONED MR. THOMPSON ON WHAT FUNDS THAT EXPENSE WOULD COME FROM. MR. THOMPSON STATED HE BELIEVES IT WOULD COME FROM THE PROPOSED $4,000.00 THAT WAS BUDGETED FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION'S ATTORNEY. SOME OF THE MEMBERS EXPRESSED CONCERN THAT POSSIBLY AFTER MR. MOSBY LEAVES, THE COMMISSION WILL NOT HAVE AN ENGINEER PRESENT AT THEIR MEETINGS. THERE WAS A SHORT DISCUSSION REGARDING PLANNING AND ZONING FUNDS IN THE GENERAL BUDGET. MR. THOMPSON STATED THAT HE VIEWS WITH CONCERN THE PRESENTATIONS MR. GORE HAS GIVEN TO THE COMMISSION AND WOULD LIKE TO SEE OTHER APPLICATIONS FOR THIS POSITION. MR. KRULIKOWSKI STATED THAT FROM TH~ BEGINNING MR. GORE HAS EXPRESSED INTEREST IN WANTING THE POSITION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION'S ATTORNEY, SHOULD THE POSITION BECOME AVAILABLE. MR. KRULIKOWSKI STATED THAT IF THE COMMISSION IS IN THE POSITION THAT THEY CAN SAY YES OR NO, THEN THAT IS ONE THING, BUT HE HAS NOT HEARD ANYTHING, ANYWHERE, THAT THE COMMISSION IS IN THAT POSITION. MINUTES: PAGE 13 ING AND ZONING COMMIS~ SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 CHAIRMAN'S MATTERS (CONTINUED): MOTION BY MR. THOMPSON, SECONDED BY MR. MAHONEY, TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY USE THE CITY ATTORNEY ON AN HOURLY BASIS AS THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION'S ATTORNEY. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: MR. THOMPSON NAYS: MR. FULLERTON MR. MAHONEY MR. KRULIKOWSKI MR. WADSWORTH MRS. YOUNG CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH MOTION NOT CARRIED. MOTION BY MR. THOMPSON, SECONDED BY MR. KRULIKOWSKI, EXTEND THE MEETING FIFTEEN (15) MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH PRESENTED MR. RANDY MOSBY A PLAQUE IN DEEP APPRECIATION AND RESPECT. MOTION BY MR. WADSWORTH, SECONDED BY MR. THOMPSON, TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY PASS A RESOLUTION COMMENDING MR. RANDY L. MOSBY FOR A JOB WELL DONE. MOTION CARRIED. MR. MOSBY THANKED THE COMMISSION AND STATED THAT HE WILL BE THERE IN THE FUTURE AS IN THE PAST, TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE COMMISSION MAY HAVE, ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS. MEMBER'S MATTERS: NONE. ENGINEER*S MATTERS: THERE WAS A BRIEF DISCUSSION REGARDING THE CLARIFICATION OF UNREGISTERED FLORIDA P.E. VS. A REGISTERED FLORIDA P.E. MOTION BY MR. WADSWORTH, SECONDED BY MR. MAHONEY, FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY TO GIVE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AN INTERPERTATION, iN WRITING, OF FLORIDA STATUE CHAPTER 471. AYES: NAYS: ROLL CALL VOTE: MR. WADSWORTH MR. THOMPSON MR. FULLERTON~. MR.~MAHONEY--...' MR. KRULIKOWSKI MRS. YOUNG CHAIRMAN EISENBARTH MOTION'NOT CARRIED. MINUTES: PAGE 14 ANNING AND ZONING COMMIS:,.,jN SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 ENGINEER'S MATTERS (CONTINUED): eon") MR. MOSBY SUGGESTED THAT HE WOULD SUPPLY THE COMMISSION WITH COPIES OF CHAPTER 471 FOR THEIR REVIEW. MR. MOSBY STATED THAT HE FEELS MR. FRANCO IS VERY QUALIFIED TO DO THE JOB. MOTION BY MR. KRULIKOWSKI, SECONDED BY MR. THOMPSON TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:15 P.M. e"°1 MOTION CARRIED. WHO MUST F }LE This form is for use by any person servin~ on either ah appointed or el( whether state or local, and it appli~ ~q..uall? to members of advisory and ! interest. ,~mittee, ~fliot of As the votinl conflict requirements for Public offlcm's at the.local leveldiffer from the requirements for state off'Jeers, this form ii divided into two parts: PART A is for use by persons servins on local boards (municipal, ~)unty, special tax districtl, etc.), while PART B is prescribed for all other boardl, i.e., those at the''state' level. " PART C of the form contains instructions as to when and where this form must be filed. PART ,% VOTING CONFLICT DISCLOSURE 'FOR LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICER8 [Required by Section 112.3142(3), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1984).] The Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees PROHIBITS each mtmici~el, county, and other locelpubiic oJ~r FROM VOTING in an official capacity upon any measure which inures to his special private ~ain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly votins in his official capacity upon any measure which inures to thc special ~ain of any princ, ipal (oth~ than a Ilovernment aacncy as defined in Section 112.312(2), Florida Statutes) by whom he is retained. In any such case a local public off~er must disclose the conflict: (a) PRIOR TO TH E VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly statin$ to th~ assembly the nature of his interest in the mMter'on which h~is ab~taininlt from voting,nad (b) WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by describins the nature of his interest as a pubJic r~ord in this pan b~low. NOTE: Commissioners of a Community Redevelopment Agency created or desisnated pursuant to Section 163.356 or Section 163.357, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1964), or officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-am'c, one-vote ham are not prohibited from votintL In such ca~, however, the oral and written diaclMure of this pan must be made. 1, the undersiped local public o~r, hereby di~:lo~e that on -~'~) T ! ¢ , 1.9 ~: (a) I abstainnd from votin~ on n matter which (cbe~k on~): ,, inured to my special private ~nin; or '_----- inured to thc special ~ain of , by whom I am retained. CE FORM 4- REV. 1044 PAGE Jim Gallagher Mayor City of Sebastian POST OFFICE SOX 127 ID SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32958-0127 TELEPHONE (305) 589-5330 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 Deborah C. Krages City Clerk CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL ANNOUNCEMENTS APPROVAL OF MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 5, 1985 OLD BUSINESS: INDIAN RIVER BAIT & TACKLE - SITE PLAN - FEY HAMILTON - SITE PLAN DISCUSSION RE: ANTENNA ORDINANCE NEW BUSINESS: MODEL HOME PERMIT - SIMES FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT - SITE PLAN APPROVE PAYMENT - SEBASTIAN BUSINESS SUPPLY APPROVE PAYMENT - RANDY L. MOSBY - MOSBY-ROBBINS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. CHAIRMAN'S MATTERS: MEMBER'S MATTERS: ATTORNEY'S MATTERS: ENGINEER'S MATTERS: ADJOURN NOTE: IF ANY PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE ON THE ABOVE MATTERS, HE/SHE WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS, AND FOR SUCH PURPOSES, HE/SHE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OFTHE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY IN EVIDENCE ON WHICH THE APPEAL IS BASED.