Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11212013PZ Agenda1225 MAIN STREET m SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32958 TELEPHONE (772) 589 -5518 ■ FAX (772) 388 -8248 AGENDA PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 2013 7:00 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. ANNOUNCEMENTS 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular meeting of October 17, 2013 6. OLD BUSINESS A. Quasi - Judicial Public Hearing - Riverfront Overlay District Waiver - Buried Treasures Antiques 8v Collectibles - 1554 US Highway #1 - Waiver Request from Overlay Landscaping Requirements - LDC Section 54-4 - 21.A.7 7. NEW BUSINESS: B. Accessory Structure Review - LDC Section 54 -2 -7.5 - 1517 Emerson Lane - 24'X 30'(720 SF) Detached Garage - John 8v Nancy Allen 8. CHAIRMAN MATTERS 9. MEMBERS MATTERS 10. DIRECTOR MATTERS 11. ATTORNEY MATTERS 12. ADJOURNMENT ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE ON THE ABOVE MATTERS, 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 APPEAL IS TO BE HEARD. SAID APPEAL MUST BE FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE WITHIN TEN DAYS OF THE DATE OF ACTION. (286.0105 F.S.) IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA), ANYONE WHO NEEDS SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS FOR THE MEETING SHOULD CONTACT THE CITY'S ADA COORDINATOR AT (772)- 589 -5330 AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING. TWO OR MORE ELECTED OFFICIALS MAY BE IN ATTENDANCE. CITY OF SEBASTIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING 0) C: 1 OCTOBER 17, 2013 C.0 a� Chairman Dodd called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. C c* C: — The pledge of allegiance was said by all. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Mr. Roth Mr. Dodd ® Mr. Qizilbash Ms. Kautenburg (a) ca U Mr. Durr Mr. Carter Mr. Paul Mr. McManus (a) EXCUSED: Mr. Reyes '� O CL CL ALSO PRESENT: Joe Griffin, Community Development Director Robert Ginsburg, City Attorney Jan King, Senior Planner Dorri Bosworth, Planner /Secretary ANNOUNCEMENTS: Chmn. Dodd welcomed Mr. John McManus, newly appointed alternate member, to the Commission, and stated Mr. Reyes was excused from the meeting. Ms. Kautenburg would be voting in his place. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MOTION by Paul /Carter to accept the minutes of the September 5, 2013 meeting as written. Motion was approved unanimously by voice vote. OLD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: A. PUBLIC HEARING – PRELIMINARY PLAT – RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ROHM COMMERCIAL REPLAT – A 4 LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED BETWEEN EAST AND WEST BOUND LANES OF SEBASTIAN BOULEVARD (CR 512), EAST OF WIMBROW DRIVE Chairman Dodd asked the Commissioners if they had any ex -parte communication to disclose. There was none. Mr. Joe Schulke, PE, Vero Beach, and resident of Sebastian, represented the applicant. He reviewed the history of the property and the previous development of the Sherwin Williams paint store, which was allowed through a one -time lot split. He stated there was interest from a retailer to purchase some of the remaining property. The LDC now required a preliminary plat to further subdivide the property, with Sherwin Williams having to become a part of the plat. He further explained this was really a "paper" plat as there were no [subdivision] improvements proposed because everything was built – water, sewer, access, etc. He noted the applicant, Mr. Todd Brognano, was present and available for questions. a A cc c PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 17, 2013 Jan King verified that there were no further improvements needed. She stated that the preliminary plat meets the zoning district requirements for minimum lot sizes and that staff recommends approval. Mr. Dodd asked who was going to manage the stormwater tract/lake on the property. Ms. King stated maintenance was spelled out in the Final Plat dedications of the original one -lot subdivision, along with the entrance road responsibility, and would continue with this plat. She explained it was not going to be the City, but the Association [POA]. Mr. Qizilbash asked why the process couldn't go straight to Final Plat. Ms. King stated there was no mechanism in the LDC to skip the Preliminary Plat phase. Mr. Qizilbash had further questions on the access easement. Mr. Schulke explained that because all the lots had street frontages along CR 512, a street right -of -way was not required in the subdivision. Since the easement was not a road, it did not have to meet street design requirements. Mr. Roth asked if there would be any access limitations from CR 512. Mr. Schulke stated they had met with Indian River County regarding access during development of the Sherwin Williams development and discussed any access issues. Chmn. Dodd opened Public Input. No one spoke in favor, or in opposition, of the application. MOTION. by Roth /Carter to recommend to City Council to approve the preliminary plat for the Rohm Commercial project. ROLL CALL: Mr. Durr yes Mr. Qizilbash yes Mr. Paul yes Ms. Kautenburg yes Mr. Roth yes Mr. Carter yes Mr. Dodd yes The vote was 7 -0. Motion passed. B. QUASI - JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING — RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO LDC SECTION 54- 2- 5.3.3(c) TO ALLOW QUALIFIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN CG (COMMERCIAL GENERAL) ZONING DISTRICT — 7.4 ACRES LOCATED AT 9707 US #1 AND NORTH OF THE PUBLIX SHOPPING CENTER AT US #1 AND BARBER STREET The applicants, representatives, and staff were sworn in by City Attorney Robert Ginsburg. Chairman Dodd asked the Commissioners if they had any ex -parte communication to disclose. There was none. Chmn. Dodd explained that the exception requested is from the 8 units per acre that the RM -8 permitted uses [in CG zoning] allow to the 12 units per acres that qualified housing in the CL zoning district allows. He verified they were to make a recommendation to City Council regarding the density request only, and that this was not a site plan review, which would be later. Mr. Joe Schulke, of Schulke, Bittle, & Stoddard, Inc., Vero Beach, and resident of Sebastian, represented the applicant, and handed the Commissioners a Project Summary of the proposed development (attached), and a letter from the applicant's attorney (attached) regarding the tax exemptions mentioned in staffs report. He reviewed the summary on the overhead projector, which detailed the General Description, Development Team, the Proposal, Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, Economic Benefits, and Location information. He explained that they had submitted a conceptual site plan to show the relevancy of his Summary details with an actual proposed development. He also stated that without the additional density, economically the K PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 17, 2013 project could not be built. He noted that the applicant, Dr. Hal Brown, and the architect, Mr. Anthony Donadio, were present to answer questions. Ms. Jan King commended Mr. Schulke's detailed summary, and then reviewed two fundamental differences from this application and the last special exception application for qualified housing that the Commission recently reviewed in May and recommended denial to City Council. She stated the Avery Way application included a good conceptual site plan showing enough information for the Commission and Council to determine if the project meets the required criteria to grant a special exception, whereas the previous application for Mr. Skillman offered minimum information to make that decision. She explained and re- examined Commission's previous concern with the "clustering" of the City's affordable housing projects in near vicinity of each other, and offered that the proposed location of Avery Way was a good distance from the other existing projects. She noted the required Findings of Fact were listed in the staff report along with additional staff comments. Chmn. Dodd stated that an item in the staff report that drew his attention was that affordable housing that was operated by a not - for - profit entity did not have to pay ad valorem taxes. He explained that the letter from the applicant's attorney specifically and adequately addressed that concern for him in that the financial structure of the project would not allow a change in the corporation for at least 15 years. Ms. Kautenburg verified that the housing was affordable and for persons 55 and older. She noted the information about the amount of proposed units was inconsistent — 88, 89, and 91 units. Mr. Schulke stated original calculations first used acreage from the tax maps, since from the survey. 88 units was the correct amount. Mr. Paul questioned the information provided in the Summary regarding housing for "disabled of any age" instead of only 55 and older. Mr. Schulke verified with the applicant that it was for disabled 55 and older, and stated it would be corrected for the City Council. Mr. Roth had questions regarding the tax incentives. Chmn. Dodd stated the financial issues were outside the scope of the Commission's review. Mr. Ginsburg opined that it was OK to discuss, but shouldn't be used for the basis of a decision. Density and location were the issues. Mr. Dodd summarized the letter from the applicant's attorney, and read verbatim the portion that referred to the ad valorem taxes. Mr. Paul was concerned with the possibility of the loss of tax revenues to the City if the project qualified for a tax exemption, and felt that was relevant to the discussion of the proposal. He questioned how long Pelican Isle Apartments operated before they were tax exempt. Staff stated it was less than 15 years, but the exemption was an application and process that went through the Tax Collector's office, not the City. In response to Mr. Paul's question, she did not know how much total monies the Apartment's exemption was for. The applicant, Dr. Hal Brown, Vero Beach, stated he and his partner had no intentions of becoming a not - for - profit organization, and had not even looked into the legalities of it. Because of the tax credits they were receiving, they could not for 15 years. His projects were of high - quality fashion, such as the Sebastian Medical Suites, and were 100% leased. He reiterated that he has no reason to become nonprofit. He further explained that this project was intended to help out the 3000 veterans in Sebastian and seniors on waiting lists, was a 14 million dollar project, and would generate numerous job opportunities, and additional taxes. Dr. Brown clarified for Mr. Qizilbash that the housing was 100% age 55 and over - senior living with assistance. Mr. Paul noted the bedroom sizes were listed differently on the conceptual site plan and the Project Summary. Chmn. Dodd opened Public Input. Mr. Warren Neill had questions regarding affordable housing and allowing disabled persons under 55 to live in the apartments, and location of the ingress and egress. 3 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 17, 2013 Mr. Ben Hocker, Sebastian, stated he felt that with the amenities being proposed with the project, it was open to becoming a future nursing home, or an assisted living facility, and could be sold to another party in one year. Dr. Brown responded that the apartments will not be open to residents under age 55 with disabilities, the project could not be sold for 15 years because of the tax credit financing, and the project would not become assisted living. Ms. King informed the Commission that a change of use to assisted living would require a Conditional Use hearing before them for approval. Chmn. Dodd commented that the City's Comprehensive Plan included policies to provide increases in affordable housing within the city. Mr. Durr stated that he had a friend living in Shady Rest Mobile Home Park who currently needed to find new housing in the very near future, and he was having a hard time finding affordable housing. He felt the project was good for the city. MOTION by Kautenburg /burr to move to recommend the special exception permit to the City Council. ROLL CALL: Mr. Dodd yes Mr. Roth yes Mr. Durr yes Mr. Paul no Mr. Carter yes Ms. Kautenburg yes Mr. Qizilbash yes The vote was 6 -1. Motion passed. C. DISCUSSION — OVERLAY DISTRICT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AS THEY RELATE TO THE GENERAL LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS Chmn. Dodd stated he had requested this item to be added to the agenda as Mr. Durr had brought up the subject and he felt the Commission should discuss it. Mr. Durr's concerns more specifically had to do with the waiver process in relation to the general LDC requirements. Chmn. Dodd reviewed the Sunshine law, history of the Overlay Districts, how he would like the discussion to proceed, and possible next steps. Mr. Ginsburg directed the Commissioners not to mention or involve the projects that would be coming before them for waivers in the near future as a part of this discussion, as it would be an exparte communication (i.e. without the other party present). Chmn. Dodd explained what a waiver was, and it was clarified that a waiver was relief from a specific Overlay District requirement, and that a variance would be needed for relief from requirements in the general code. Mr. Dodd stated waivers and variances were usually granted if a requirement was "onerous" for the developer of a specific project and were valuable tools for staff to negotiate with the developers, and for the Commission in their review of site plans. He felt that they should not be eliminated, but that the discussion should be - are the Overlay District requirements too restrictive? Mr. Durr stated his issues were that in the past allowances had been given to applicants /developers that hadn't been approved through waivers by the Commission. He was not sure of staffs abilities to waive requirements. His understanding was that the Overlay Districts superseded the general code, and that staff should be requiring the applicant to apply for a waiver, instead of giving allowances from the general code. He felt strongly on adherence to the Overlay District regulations, and was not in favor of changing them. Because staff may have 4 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 17, 2013 already made allowances, he could not determine if the strict adherence of the Overlay requirements were a hardship to the project. Mr. Roth stated he supported the Overlay District requirements, and if they weren't right they should be changed. Ms. Kautenburg explained that most of the properties in the Overlay Districts were platted many decades ago and did not adhere nicely with modem development, and felt that many parcels could not be used if every tenet of the Overlay was followed, hence the waivers. She did not feel that staff took liberties in granting waivers, but usually reported or noted what would need waivers. She did not want the city to become too rigid, too big -city, and hoped staff could be pro- active. Mr. Paul concurred with Mr. Durr, but felt if the rules didn't fit, they should be changed, and waivers should be site specific. Ms. Bosworth clarified that for staff the Overlay District requirements did not necessarily supersede the general code but created an additional layer of regulations. Both the general code and Overlay code had to be applied to the project. Staffs dilemma was that there were a few contradicting sections in the LDC where the general code created an allowance for a requirement but a stricter requirement for the same item was stated in the Overlay, which would now require a formal waiver from the Commission. She suggested the codes be amended or modified to eliminate the conflicting sections. Mr. Griffin thanked Mr. Durr for bringing the topic to discussion. He stated that staff, multiple times a day, have to interpret the code, and never with malice of intent, are decisions made. Staff respects the place the Commission has in the process. Mr. Ginsburg opined that the committee that formed the Overlay District regulations must have realized that the nonconforming parcels within the areas would need some relief from the codes and created the waivers, which was unique. He informed the Commission that a zoning code without the opportunity to apply for variances and /or relief is illegal and unconstitutional. He stated that the waivers were an easier process, which may have been the intention, and that it referred to State code, using similar language i.e. "inordinate burden ". The Commission was held to State and Constitutional standards when they were the "judges" [hence quasi-judicial] in waiver hearings, and rationality & common sense were the key words in making their decisions. He stated the Overlay District regulations should be applied in order to accomplice what the City Council wanted them to do in the areas they regulate. Mr. Dodd surmised that because of the pressure put on staff to expedite plans and permits, communication between staff and the Commission, with regards to waivers, and the completeness of the information given, may have been lacking. Mr. Durr summarized his opinion in that he felt the requirements of the Overlay District could not be given allowances by citing the general code, and that Overlay regulations were not an "and" but a "plus ", and that the Overlay Districts should be held to a higher standard. Mr. Dodd asked the Commissioner if there any "action items" requested. There were none stated. He asked staff to bring forward any discrepancies they felt needed resolved. CHAIRMAN MATTERS: Chmn. Dodd reminded the Commissioners that if there were any other topics or matters they would like to discuss, to bring it up under Member Matters and it would be scheduled for a future agenda. 5 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 17, 2013 MEMBERS MATTERS: Mr. Carter made a suggestion to illuminate the marquee /monument sign in front of City Hall. Mr. McManus also suggested a sign on Main Street advertising the wonderful clay tennis courts located behind City Hall. Mr. Roth brought up adding the "rope and post" design to the code. Chmn. Dodd reviewed that the FSL Grant Committee also wrestled with design issues, how hard it was to pin -point what the "fishing village" aesthetic was, and wished City Council could give the Commission something in writing to guide them. Mr. McManus stated he would like to see a sidewalk along the east side of Roseland Road, and that the County should widen the bridge, to make it safer for pedestrians and cyclists. He noted that the crosswalk should also be relocated to the eastern part of the [Roseland Road & CR 512] intersection for public safety. DIRECTOR MATTERS: Mr. Griffin informed the Commission that the City was awarded the FIND grant for Fisherman's Landing, the full amount of $157,380. ATTORNEY MATTERS: None Chairman Dodd adjourned the meeting at 8:56 p.m. (db) 0 Community Development Department Waiver Request - Staff Report 1. Project Name: Buried Treasures Antiques and Collectibles 2. Requested Action: Waiver requested from Section 54- 4- 21.A.7 of the Sebastian Land Development Code, Riverfront District Landscape Code, to allow a reduction to the total number of canopy trees, understory trees, and shrubs. Also, the perimeter landscape strip is proposed to be less than 10 feet in width in some areas. 3. Project Location a. Address: 1554 U.S. 1 b. Legal: Lot 5, Block 2, less the south 5 feet, and less highway right -of -way, Middleton's Subdivision of City of Sebastian, according to the plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 56, of the public records of Indian River County, Florida. 4. Project Owner: Renee Powell Buried Treasures Antiques and Collectibles LLC 1545 U.S. Highway 1 Sebastian, Florida 32958 5. Landscape Engineer: 6. Project Description: Scott Beckert Tropical Property Management (772)562 -1800 a. Narrative of proposed action: Renee Powell is requesting a waiver from the Riverfront Overlay District Landscape Code, proposing a reduction to the required number of canopy trees, understory trees and shrubs, and allowance to reduce the width of the perimeter landscape strip in some areas. b. Current Zoning: CWR (Commercial Waterfront Residential) 7. 8. C. d. Adjacent Properties: k Site Characteristics (1) Total Acreage: (2) Current Land Use(s): (3) Water Service: (4) Sanitary Sewer Service: Staff Comments: .32 acres vacant Indian River County Utilities Indian River County Utilities The landscape plan has been provided in the site plan packet, along with a reduced copy of the approved site plan. Staff has prepared two tables showing the contrast between our standard landscape code vs. the standard code with Riverfront Overlay District additions. Specifically, the request is to reduce the canopy tree requirement by 10 trees, the understory tree require by 8 trees, and the foundation shrub requirement by 115 shrubs. Also, the perimeter landscape strip on the landscape plan has been reduced from the standard 10 -foot width to 5 feet in a number of areas, including along the parking stalls and building sides. Staff recommends a waiver from the 10 -foot requirement in conformance with the conditions of the approved site plan. Board Criteria for Determining Waivers (Section 54- 4- 21.6): "As part of an application for development, a request may be made for a waiver of any of the provisions of this article (Article XXI. Performance Overlay Districts). The request shall be heard by the planning and zoning commission in determining if any such provision be waived, modified or applied as written. The planning and zoning 2 Zoning Current Land Use Future Land Use North CWR vacant building RMU East CWR parking for Fisherman's Landing RMU South CWR Professional Title RMU West CR retail building and offices RMU Site Characteristics (1) Total Acreage: (2) Current Land Use(s): (3) Water Service: (4) Sanitary Sewer Service: Staff Comments: .32 acres vacant Indian River County Utilities Indian River County Utilities The landscape plan has been provided in the site plan packet, along with a reduced copy of the approved site plan. Staff has prepared two tables showing the contrast between our standard landscape code vs. the standard code with Riverfront Overlay District additions. Specifically, the request is to reduce the canopy tree requirement by 10 trees, the understory tree require by 8 trees, and the foundation shrub requirement by 115 shrubs. Also, the perimeter landscape strip on the landscape plan has been reduced from the standard 10 -foot width to 5 feet in a number of areas, including along the parking stalls and building sides. Staff recommends a waiver from the 10 -foot requirement in conformance with the conditions of the approved site plan. Board Criteria for Determining Waivers (Section 54- 4- 21.6): "As part of an application for development, a request may be made for a waiver of any of the provisions of this article (Article XXI. Performance Overlay Districts). The request shall be heard by the planning and zoning commission in determining if any such provision be waived, modified or applied as written. The planning and zoning 2 commission shall hold a quasi - judicial hearing on the requested waiver. The criterion for granting a waiver or modification of any of the provisions of this article is whether the strict interpretation of the requirements of this article places an inordinate burden on the property owner as defined by Florida Statutes. The waiver procedure herein is the exclusive remedy to the application of the provisions of this article and is to be utilized in lieu of an application for a variance." 9. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the reduction of the perimeter landscape strip from 10 to 5 feet as shown on the landscape plan and in accordance with the approved site plan. Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission review the canopy tree, understory tree and foundation shrub waivers, giving consideration to the overall size of property and the criteria for determining waivers noted above. pared by Jan 3 Date Buried Treasures Standard Landscape Code ma Standard Landscape Specifications: 1. Canopy trees to be minimum 8' with minimum diameter of 1.5" DBH. 2. Perimeter landscape scrubs to be minimum 36" at planting. The landscape plan provides 187 perimeter landscape shrubs, which is a reduction of the requirement by 22 shrubs. Since this requirement is part of Article XIV, Tree Protection and Landscaping of the Sebastian Land Development Code, a waiver cannot be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission. If Ms. Powell wishes to reduce this requirement, she will need to apply to the Board of Adjustment for a variance. Standard Unit Amount Required Amount Proposed Shortage Canopy Trees: Street front perimeter 1/25' 56 LF 2 Other perimeters 1/35' North 201 LF 6 East 82 LF 2 South 184 LF 5 Off Street Parking 115 spaces 12 spaces 2 Open Space 1/2000 SF 6641 SF 3 Total Canopy Trees 20 30 Perimeter shrubs: 30" O.C. Front 56 LF 22 North 201 LF 80 East 82 LF 33 South 184 LF 74 Total Perimeter Shrubs 209 187 22 Standard Landscape Specifications: 1. Canopy trees to be minimum 8' with minimum diameter of 1.5" DBH. 2. Perimeter landscape scrubs to be minimum 36" at planting. The landscape plan provides 187 perimeter landscape shrubs, which is a reduction of the requirement by 22 shrubs. Since this requirement is part of Article XIV, Tree Protection and Landscaping of the Sebastian Land Development Code, a waiver cannot be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission. If Ms. Powell wishes to reduce this requirement, she will need to apply to the Board of Adjustment for a variance. ro Ma Buried Treasures Standard Landscape Code With Riverfront Overlay District Riverfront Overlay District Landscape Specifications: 1. Canopy trees to be minimum 12' with minimum 6' spread at planting. 2. Perimeter landscape shrubs to be minimum 36" at planting. 3. Foundation shrubs to be minimum 24" at planting. The applicant is requesting a waiver to reduce the landscape requirements by 10 canopy trees, 8 understory trees and 115 foundation shrubs. The perimeter shrubs cannot be reduced by a waiver. Standard Unit Amount Required Amount Proposed Shortage Canopy Trees: Street front perimeter 51100' 56 LF 3 Other perimeters 51100' North 201 LF 10 East 82 LF 4 South 184 LF 9 Off Street Parking 115 spaces 12 spaces 2 Open Space 1/2000 SF 6641 SF 3 Foundation Canopy 1/7 66 LF 9 Total Canopy Trees 40 30 10 Understo Trees: Street front perimeter 6/100' 56 LF 3 Other perimeters 6/100' North 201 LF 12 East 82 LF 5 South 184 LF 11 Foundation Understory 1 /10' 66 LF 6 Total Understory Trees 37 29 8 Perimeter shrubs: 30" O.C. Front 56 LF 22 North 201 LF 80 East 82 LF 33 South 184 LF 74 Total Perimeter Shrubs (36" ) 209 187 22 Foundation Shrubs (24 ") 3/10 SF 984 SF 295 180 115 Riverfront Overlay District Landscape Specifications: 1. Canopy trees to be minimum 12' with minimum 6' spread at planting. 2. Perimeter landscape shrubs to be minimum 36" at planting. 3. Foundation shrubs to be minimum 24" at planting. The applicant is requesting a waiver to reduce the landscape requirements by 10 canopy trees, 8 understory trees and 115 foundation shrubs. The perimeter shrubs cannot be reduced by a waiver. c� x n tfTI , a m° CL — 9 r O 86 E I Z ! pg1Y L a F&i CLI r gift Q a � tE (5,5 - NA -.wd •y s y: 6 4 b -C! C qi fi 17 y A p G 1, 6 i' rra v ' E5 � � � E a � C � • ` ,Y.. .. CTS _ .. a fl H � e, 7 c - .. _ ... °r r 1000��000�� -,���a �5gmr��-�a� E5p jj?j �myoo��on$��tl�sw e�ggx,aM e�m����o ! d .J A � d •i d n d ` a a��ga a j 3 - ti c ¢� o Q 2 8 Y G v N yi c a .r ti C E ^ 5 n u S n ° - i r� .,•Ny x 4 i Q N a CE � � e P t-s N � . _ 1 �aI�11 T^1� •�� °r r 1000��000�� -,���a �5gmr��-�a� E5p jj?j �myoo��on$��tl�sw e�ggx,aM e�m����o ! d .J A � d •i d n d ` a a��ga a j 3 - ti c ¢� o Q 2 8 Y G v N yi c a .r ti C E ^ 5 n u S n ° - i r� .,•Ny x 4 i Q N a CE � � e P t-s N � . k� 1 SITE INFORMATION - = mwo'"D A/C Alto 1TI { IRO=13319M . PAD want 3' I 1, OWNER/APPLICANT . 19'.OVEIOINIG - PROPOSED FORM12I0 HALL PE oN Nl FRET. NIR - G ~ _ HC 9@I PCP RETMNIO 1 IRFIEE POWE L . FAOP,osm WIELL S1D1' 1tP A11L 0E OTTER 3' Hlpl LATTICE fQIQtIC 1515 US HIS M'AY 1 SO]T11 F'HP -2o (rlp) %ALL RR A11n -v HI @l 9RNP FLA A.,- W = - �:trt4SCaPfi.AWFPLr- SURVEYOR Brl'E ADDREee a c♦ _ i11RW1 PYEK ".VRYEY, RTC 1554 16 IIICIff1AT 1 9VIli t - / «•.• - - -- 1M 7UTH STREET SmISTYH. R ]7859 X - YELP BEral. rL ]u Go G ! - PPrPPSID _ 1 \ ` LAND USE - ,ZONING a n IBFI1 @iT Lium USE - C" _ MCMUMDIT 901 _ (? - _ / \: v ` Q n Qe ° - OT - ( /�` =yl,'y _ ` - \ - `. , TAX PARCEL W. NUMBER {S)e 1C _ , -a• _ S - al:.�a_o6_oowtrm a-RLwS -P x z - Q .. - Wr6scwE , - - / - - \ -, \ ` Ems TINa SITE DATA - I d a - OUf77R _ ..' .1.25':{ , - - _ �, BUIILDIHC MEA 14'�o SF o00 A. = lwu �? m p F1ICPCISID ASFIIALi 6 , - -\ PAVEIIOR ME4 P SF O.co Ar Po Y U - - Illl9{ 10 APq @I a' -. - _ % - 1 1♦ - TEAL IPPEMMS AFrA _ 0 a 9.00 Ac 010 S �{ ,TOTAL PPEII ARE4 '74.042 Sr - 032 A-. m Im - R rlj �yP 18 \ \\ _ .- _ - 9aIT OLSTNICE HNE OF - a MCPO� - - I l .. . -. .. - SURIT PER FOOF 1110EA 546. - - - - PPOPPS[D ,LRHA[,T - - .. _ ! ®pp 0 ALL TSTR TOM H; U 546.:APRro 'PAn1@IG g - . - PROPOSED Srl-E DATA O j .. ♦ - PPW= N THIS AREA SHALL � N � - - � �7 � 1 W.O L o rn '❑ M IFORM. TO THE RE (T LNITA31 @IS _,� / - ..'Y % w 2A s5 ,. - EFL t9.90 - - - f - .. R a All&1nCIP MEA � 14-047 5ad sr 005 � ¢ - m .. ♦ :: -- PED FOOT RmQ 546. j Pm✓P , \ ME 90 0.09 .. P. N h I t _ - - d� . -.� • F- j '_ -'1 TOTAL BUILEWU ME4 2956 5F -R -Otl Ac . 2t.1 - - - - - p 45 Sr R R k 3 m , \ ` PAYEYL]R AREA - 4 4 1 J 0 l0 rh v T -8041 Sr 0.15 Ac 4'�j"j $ - NIL OI _ F=ALL u P of s MG 0 4 /+ T1mWOPLAS7IC ONE 1' 5T_NPE (IAATdi EAISTHC ♦\ n - - 3 k fi' n / - - - j \ ` . �' BUILDING DATA RrawREtt AAl1 TMYFT {�- 0 N N I I - ♦\ \� - _ _ - f 8'atz'. MCA. MTu ' 52 A, 213 s N G r $ w000 DEas d ly'c�\ \ - IIST F FLUOR : 2,]as0 sr I m vh Y -'F. APE 711muPPUSTiL'1FIDP a d O . \ ` uvluw e1mDRIC6CQ+El1AI.rt �o s T. s - m p = K u j j L KP MIITE IN COLOR mZ111 2 / j _ uanu u . 7 ~, > "'' \ - FROtR OlDG�3ElF4CK - O FCET 70.7 FEET - EL OIL 30. R1 =1 5100 t: 1 - - . ` "� ` _ S `� '(l) r IRS01 7P DErx \ -' � � STOE RLOG SEIMCII 5 FEET - - 0 h R -B FEET r � ` - - u[ REM uPl SET61IX. - 1O FELT . - 379 FIST �� 30 LF OF MIAMI CIlflO d �^ I I I E 1 - _ _\ RNIDGI 1 FR 15 FEET ],1.P OF S E I {TOP OF pIPPL'� SEE F6i OIL ` -i= pp/ DUN 'MiITE \\ - - - - uu� .5111: MFA = RIlIIl11NC. PARp11C mCrc AISLES 6 15' WEIIIWIO a \ a' WGIE ri0W ROMOwN11 _ ( ) R 3V 111E1.14OPlA+TTiC ED4E SF Si -- 1]0, 5F Q ,'� \ S70�E (MATCH EA511'IG e _ ! ^ - 0 {` - - 7V� HNIOANL (RE MW FLAFIS) �. _ . 8507 SF w 4032 uABnp ., iR¢ d -.a OYERSNIa ` - - - Z q L) 15 � \ -ARK REQ DATA - ./� I REOPRiED RRi RETAIL U A PARwI R SE-. � 1 STAGES 150 =_F nETA1L1 .3AT sF'nETNL ♦( rci3 a � ... £A15RAIL CD'ICFEIC DPrLF - � � � � 2 BIBLE 10PIIBLIC 150 d. � d I O li NIWO.D "PIER Ki{SE L OFfSIIE PMww TFATE P Crw OF LU 1-3 p % LL15 L; CONETRUCTION SCFik"'DULE a STMT ml {Sucogi OII . •EOM 201 2PT] '. - + n d 4 AIP LOIISTi11CPR11 AWICH 2Ri r� mr - - - - - - - - PERMITS RECUEIim VY7 -. - - - - - - - - - - CITY OF SUMMiAlI -a PLOP PERMIT ®' Z o q. 6ENEF'IAL^ NOIPS CRY or SEPA-SM TREE REMOVAL P17RAP. ® ui 0 U - - - CRY OF SEDAS'RNI Wm CI.Emain I m AT .. r. - , -SITE' PLAN - , - - - - - - - -IRC00 PQ" A. Lo1rTR/E'IOfl 6 RFSPOtmrn r Fm O{EIX7110 ALTI7AL SOLE FU: Wlu "tEWATER FERIAIT _ .. : 13C11GR10R5 BRDAE 51AFMIU CORSTRVCP011. To POTABLE WATER' PEiiMR SCALE : 1' 10'- - : .. _ - - - - - 2 MAY IXSCREPNRDES @I 711E ONMNLS SILALL OE BRDUGNY 1D HR FBOi DRMIACAE PII06TF �{ - : PEOR . _ CII0 . - - ARE1rRD11OF THE IWICTJI PEFIXiE COMHEIICI WORE . F=LOOD ZONE -' ]. m11IIlAC'IPII BIWL: 0BIARI ALL REDUVL.B PERNift BTTORE THE SUBJECT PRLFEIiry 15 LBGIED RI FIDOB 2011E 'Y' [quuO1CR G WARN.- PER F,I,RAI. PNPl )ICI. 120610 QIW H. .RATED OECLLOER 4, 7,013 4, COIRPACIOR SHALL RE PESPmLITTILE FOR IPCATOII OF ALL E4ESRIiG SANITARY SEWER SOURCE _ Z LIB ITIM 111E COMPACTOR SHALL CGHTACF ALL CONCERNED -. LOIR1fCT TO OIOPH.RHGT Cwrm SET(PI FRRCE WRI J lfIR1IlES AT LFAST 49 HOURS III AQYN(CE CI]IISTRUCTin . OPEPATOIIS, POTABLE WATF39 SOURCE V0 FIELD LIW{PES OR PEVTATIOIM FROM 0611,04 TO RE UADE - CmNECT in R;Dwl RNED COVIRY WATER a wRnour P79 M1 111F1( AMAW 4 PF TIE E10HIMR. �� DESCRIP7'lON Ill - - E. DkMllET11 94111 RE HO"'MO AT LEAST 4P 1iwIG Rr AINNICE FOR A P@TRP'/ tlF WNS PESIIT[6m III OFFIPAL HEC@ms BCM I]AB, 6PEE110 176 . R S NIT R 11.:. - PALE 4 OLIN( RIYDE ER ERY FLIMCI PUBLIC REC®N 7. 110MIVM [VVEff OF ALL mRlm3 9NLL BE 30 Utn s5s STALED EDi S, OLOOt 1 LESS .71T SOUTH 5 FEET. NIR 155 ill @IwAT . - - GRAPHIC SCALE - OtHSimSF_._ - - - - RIGHT or wAY. umOLETOIFS. SUUDIVsw; � o1T or SEBA511AN, A=01113 TO THE PuT BI01ETF, As FiCLUllum RI PLAT BOM Z - 0. ALL OGRIPBED AREAS SHALL BE RESIORM TO PRIGRIAL mirt1ROR PAGE 56, OF TIE PUBLIC RECCRnS of 111001 NIVSTI CWIITT; - _ NilF55 tl01EO PPi11Wi5& TLOIIOiI too ALL msrgaom ArmAs lmoR.LaMPLEnion. ENVIRONMENTAL STATEM ENT 01 n=), - 1a mInR;GTOn SHALL Df THOROUGHLY F'AI4AW1 W(nl THE Pn61ECT, TILE PnCFUSEn PRUEM RILL MIS MUCT A SMALL RETAa DJU.NO . TIILiT FWIS N{U TECUICAIIIXfi'NIU ALL LLTJ:e. SLAT£ N✓D 'MTI PAf1NR1C: 570FlM WATCH AIIU U1611T VIFRASRNCIVRE. TiF - - - - I Luis ^ 10 EL - FARLEL IS VACN(T NIO THEM ARE F40 ENBAH TED SPECIE.♦ FEDERAL AGQ LY pEW REMF7i15 FOR' COtIS NUC11o1! or 1 E eenAFIOS OR OTHER DIVIIWWWAI- CaRcual5 PREM(r. O¢ PROPOSED tup"D NOrr PR10n TO. cmeT6 omP, . -- - CIXLRRACIDR S4UL COMPLY WITH ALL PSIk Rmu6TFLPlrs FPR TRAFFIC STATEMEFIT IL ALL E11GE55 IC1R457 �IIX YATEAIAL NIP'WA57E 10.8E TVDLm •. (i]67/1,OGP) A 44.32 . 10.5 1f11P5 {Ir 014) lX LEGEND SPCCIALLl PETNL LL : - - - ON NC wr »ss1E Nm n w PR ?rnLrar canPACIP rs EAF (1} O PROPOSED corcum 13. taIiRACiDH 511A11 THE Et1HfA1E CAIIR MICA E]IGYAH D Z 1.x.1 tiMm Lk G CORMErE LEE WoRH E m4 RPLaTEDSTOR EISSiUI .14 NIRfI OF N mN1L BEFORE Nrt LU 19 sm W AMl A : wr", BIIPEIi Tay PRO. 0.T SHALL PE 6T SCRET M/]1RWICE YPPI RFSIURH411 MIT) PF nU" CIIT, ID WATER MNInDFHE1R PIRTRICT, FPTP NIP THESE PW6 NIP Y�♦ � � PROP= Aii'.INLT `- i�FIFA7lW Ls ; - .. - u p: --I a Ia. IINtrn3WICE OF TRAFFIC SIHAIL BE ALTAPBIIID M FOOT UI0CAEM LLI z O N Q - - - - t7. ALL APPT1wED FiAPPO colitifflOta, 91A 01CLIIWIC B1f: Npr UW7Etl To - - _ 0 - - - - - - - POT. FRLF, nh' NIO LOOF C 9WL BE Y IS CmRRAC10q 0 PRIOR 70 CQITAG,TI011 OF cRMFIETOIt 6Y EIIGViER . - - - - - T0. RI MOITION.70 SECIPON'700 Cf FOOTS SLNIWAD SPECIFICATION U FOP ROAD AHD MIDGE C0I5FITUC 1@I, LATEST ED111 @I, ALL SMH SHEET 'IYLFEITM STALL BE DLA11DHn GRADE DGS WIAUFALTUHED BY ]M - - - - - - - - - - - CUMPAPY OR APPROVED E41104. SISI PO515 /SUFPORIS SHALL DE - . AS PER CRT OF SEpVr1N! STN8IVR.. - - - IS, ALL PNNUIO SPACES xmE OMPIIOH or 111E HAIMICAPPED PAhU;G - . - - - SIMCES SHALL BE STIRRED W R1111E, TRAFFIC FAV NIU BE ul ACCOMOMCE WAR TIE RDAICA WAmYENT UF.IRMSFUMA110N (FDM) AA MN J. OOWLE STAP'nAll SPELIFWHONS FOP FOR ROAD A MIDGE COHS IRUCRON. - . SEcll@F 710, LATEST EDMOII. , FL P.E155313 20. ALL IwmIGPPED - PARIOIIG SPACES SFNLL BE FTICFMY OCAED AID DATEAt)G 2 6 2013 . - - - - - - - S71IFED All ACCORPNICE MTH F7TRT MAHOMP RMU 17346, UTU7, - TROPIC sHmt 40 HOURS 0"RE OICUItC - - - - - - - - - 21 COUVEa[14.JuuL11- AL aY Buimm SAIL POST A MNiwu u CALL TmL TREE - -. - T _ 1ALL IS'7R[FUi�G wntui NOT :ulrlR OF WAY SiNLL BE REMO XWltA MIAM BfICW - .. RETLCCTIVE TRAFFIO FAINT_LiHERUopU IC). - 13 -197 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Property Owner: Contractor: Requested Action: Project Location: Current Zoning: Required Findings: area SE NOME OF PELICAN NAND Growth Management Department Accessory Structure Staff Report John & Nancy Allen Homeowner Approval of a 24'X 30'(720 SF) detached garage 1517 Emerson Lane Lots 24 & 25, Block 295, Sebastian Highlands Unit 10 RS -10 Current Land Use: Single- family Residence Does COMI)IV Does Not Comply A. No accessory structure shall be constructed until the construction of the principal structure has been started. 1. House completed 11,92, ; or house under construction 2. Accessory structure to be located on same lot as principal structure ; or located on second lot that has / been combined with principal lot by a unity of title uutN of -rrrLi B. No accessory structure shall be located in any required yard (setback): 1. Front yard: No detached accessory structure shall extend beyond the front building line of the principal structure that is located on the same real estate parcel or lot. Principal structure setback is o2 S' Accessory structure setback is 2. Front yard on corner lot: Accessory structures may not be located in the secondary front yard of an improved corner lot unless the corner lot is joined in unity of title with an interior lot that contains the principle structure. However, said accessory structures shall not be located closer than 25 feet N/A from the secondary front property line in the RS -10 zoning district, and in all other zoning districts shall meet required front yard setbacks. Secondary front yard setback is and proposed accessory structure front yard setba k is Does Does Not Comply Com I 3. Side yard: Required side setback is (O r Accessory structure side setback is 14' 4. Rear yard: The required rear yard is 20t A detached accessory structure may encroach into the required rear yard, provided it meets all the following: a. It is a minimum 10 feet from the rear property line. Proposed accessory structure has a 5'0' setback. b. It is not in an easement. Rear easement is l0 r and proposed setback is SO' c. It does not exceed 400 square feet in lot coverage. Proposed accessory structure is 72.0 square feet. d. It does not exceed 12 feet in height. Proposed accessory f structure is 1 S ' feet in height. Accessory structures which are attached, or do not meet the above four requirements must meet the standard rear setback / which is oi0' Proposed accessory setback is 1/ SO � C. No mobile home, travel trailer or any portion thereof, or ✓ motor vehicle shall be permitted as an accessory structure. D. Applicant must expressly designate the type of the accessory structure (i.e. garage, shed, etc.) inn— ACt}tM fr A(rE' ✓ E. Must comply with all city codes. F. The height of accessory structure cannot exceed height of 5� principal structure. House is approximately (3. S ` , and ppi u ` ° accessory structure will be iS' eorusro no+W G. Attached or detached Quonset -type or style accessory structures are prohibited. V0, H. A residential lot is allowed 5 square feet of accessory building area (cumulative) for every 100 square feet of lot area, up to a maximum 1000 square feet. Property square footage a10 om SF x.05 = , / Allowable sq.ft. of accessory structures /o00 V Existing accessory structures (n (12"1 Z; Sn Proposed accessory structure -7 X0 SF Total existing and proposed SF 7. Planning and Zoning Commission Review: Any attached or detached accessory building, carport or breezeway over 500 square feet in area must be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission utilizing the Review fee has been paid: ZYES NO Additional Considerations: . PEP- APP`- IC�,.rr CTk�o4t 7D BE P,4iFuT� TO MA-rert t+oLCS1= � ?'2 M. PEP- s1tIN& ES oA) ?+OuSE- -- s�LUt� 9M�i 1-� RcoF oN 6-A 46-E . -lc vtSuA�L-Lj, roust AtiO Dc Ccf-Eb & 6—E' wtu— "PtDW- 7b BE' sAmE' tt4a(, -r Du.E' TO FtiAL &AM)c oP rf6LLSE- Be1N&- T*+tJ A-0- 'ACOUT- A-0i' lcuX1 LLIA2." ON VkA g- 4_oT: w Prepared 3 Date Does Does Not Comply Com 1 A. Accessory structures may not be constructed or maintained from metal or corrugated metal - looking products. / corrugated V/ B. The roof of the accessory building must have a minimum pitch of 3:12. 3.12. (ifou5E _ q:lam, C. Accessory structures 501 sq.ft. to 750 sq.ft. in size shall be compatible with the overall general architectural design of the primary residence, including facade and materials, colors and trim, roofing materials and pitch. D. Accessory structures 751 sq.ft. to 1000 sq.ft. in size shall be of the same architectural design of the primary residence, including facade and materials, colors and trim, and roofing materials and pitch. Foundation plantings shall be required on all sides of the accessory structure excluding entranceways and doorways, as follows: 1 shrub for every 3 lineal feet and 24 NIfc inches in height at planting. Lineal dimension totals - 3 = Total Shrubs Required Review fee has been paid: ZYES NO Additional Considerations: . PEP- APP`- IC�,.rr CTk�o4t 7D BE P,4iFuT� TO MA-rert t+oLCS1= � ?'2 M. PEP- s1tIN& ES oA) ?+OuSE- -- s�LUt� 9M�i 1-� RcoF oN 6-A 46-E . -lc vtSuA�L-Lj, roust AtiO Dc Ccf-Eb & 6—E' wtu— "PtDW- 7b BE' sAmE' tt4a(, -r Du.E' TO FtiAL &AM)c oP rf6LLSE- Be1N&- T*+tJ A-0- 'ACOUT- A-0i' lcuX1 LLIA2." ON VkA g- 4_oT: w Prepared 3 Date I i i 2' r clt . = Vi v 12L 2. Lo ma*, i0o C4 -4 Ll- 4�- �— -,-;, —1 1) it 1111 UPS All z W to f UIR Yr vv 115 Uj I t 11 C RJR M LOW 0- ig 121 EL R A A A v vy its 9.2 AA L.0 44 10 UP I IM C3 os ' - !t-4 -/ - i Z • � i 1 i � t 1 PERMIT # OWNE"UILDER PERMIT APPLICATION ALL OF THE FOLLOWING MUST BE FILLED IN BY APPLICANT, ACCORDING TO FS 713.135 TRACKING # I u. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PARCEL ID # RECEIVED BY: LOT: BLOCK SUBDMSION: FLOOD ZONE: TYPE OF WORK: NEW = ADDITION = ALTERATION = REPAIR = DEMOLITION 0 WORK INCLUDES: STRUCTURAL E) ELECTRICAL QPLVMBINGp MECPNICAL E) ROOFING E) OTHER WORK DESCRIPTION: ESTIMATED JOB - VyA^L /UE: $ �(/D -'�- TOTAL S/F UNDER AIR JOB NAME: JOB ADDRESS:i 7 �6y/ �nSO�lJ /�11 �Yie PROPERTYI ADDRESS:_ CTI'Y /STATE: PHONE: VX -.2Ak-A oY CONTRACTOR: j�,� „�,� p ; r �,c J ,¢� t,s� LICENSE #: ADDRESS: PHONE: _ CITY /STATE: ZIP CODE ARCHITECT/ENGINEER PHONE: ADDRESS: CITY /STATE: ZIP CODE: PRESENT USE: PROPOSED USE: OCCUPANT LOAD: NUMBER OF: STORIES F-7 BAYS= UNITS= BEDROOMS Q HEIGHT Q TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: OCCUPANCY TYPE: AREA IS THE BUILDING PRESENTLY EQUIPPED WITH AN AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM? YES = NO BONDING COMPANY: ADDRESS: CITY /STATE: MORTGAGE LENDER: ADDRESS: CITY /STATE: FEE SIMPLE TITLE HOLDER: ADDRESS: CITY /STATE: PHONE: PHONE: PHONE: I APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE TO OBTAIN A PERMIT TO DO THE WORK AND INSTALLATIONS AS INDICATED. I. CERTIFY THAT NO WORK OR INSTALLATION HAS COMMENCED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT AND THAT ALL WORK WILL BE PERFORMED TO MEET THE STANDARDS OF ALL LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUCTION IN THIS JURISDICTION. I UNDERSTAND THAT A SEPARATE PERMIT MUST BE SECURED FOR ELECTRICAL WORK PLUMBING, SIGNS, WELLS, POOLS, FURNACES, BOILERS, HEATERS, TANKS AND AIR CONDITIONERS. ETC. WARNING TO OWNER: YOUR FAILURE TO RECORD A NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT MAY RESULT IN YOUR PAYING TWICE FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO YOUR PROPERTY. A NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT MUST BE RECORDED AND POSTED ON THE JOB SITE BEFORE THE FIRST INSPECTION. IF YOU INTEND TO OBTAIN FINANCING, CONSULT WITH YOUR LENDER OR AN ATTORNEY BEFORE RECORDING YOUR NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT. A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE RECORDED NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT SIGNED BY THE OWNER, SHALL BE FILED WITH THE PER AUTHORITY IF THE VALUE IS $2,500 OR MORE, EXCEPT HEATING OR AIR CONDITIONING CHANGE OUTS LESS THAT $7,500. NOTICE: IN ADDITION TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS PERMIT, THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS APPLICABLE TO THIS PROPERTY THAT MAY BE FOUND IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF THE COUNTY, AND THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL PERMITS REQUIRED FROM OTHER GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES SUCH AS WATER .MANAGEMENT DISTRICTS, STATE AGENCIES, OR FEDERAL AGENCIES. ANY CHANGE IN BUILDING PLANS OR SPECIFICATIONS MUST BE RECORDED WITH THIS OFFICE. ANY WORK NOT COVERED. ABOVE MUST HAVE A VALID PERMIT PRIOR TO STARTING. IN CONSIDERATION OF GRANTS, THIS PERMIT, THE OWNER, AND THE BUILDING CONTRACTOR AGREE TO ERECT THIS STRUCTURE IN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE BUILDING AND ZONING CODES OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN. NOTE: THIS PERMIT APPLICATION IS VOID AFTER 180 DAYS UNLESS THE WORK, WHICH IT COVERS, HA$ COMMENCED. ALL CONTRACTORS MUST HAVE A VALID STATE CERTIFICATION, STATE REGISTRATION, OFD COUNTY COMPETENCY. PLUS A COUNTY —WIDE LICENSE PRIOR TO OBTAINING PERMIT. OWNER /AGENT SIGNATURE PRINTED NAME OF OWNER /AGENT DATE: ie A ❖ Individuals who sign as the owner's agent must first obtain owner's written authorization to sign on their behalf STATE OF FLORJRA COUNTY OF l = The oregaing /' ent was aclnowkedged before me this day of �C 2�� by, who is personally known or who has � produced identification. Type of identification produced: �. — - i tMY Py. . i L1NDA M. LOHSL °- Comrnissio Of blic Notary Seal Ex it a8 082366 ',�;�qe,• p es June � eoneed ThN troy Fa n InSELWce 8w3r'. 3: