Loading...
01/23/1992 DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD January 23, 1992 Members present: Thomas J. Graham, Chairman John W. Homer Alex Plisko Emma C. Whitney Absent: Otto P. Gans, Vice-Chairman (excused) Also present: Miles Lance, Assistant City Attorney Scott Shuford, Planning Manager Mary K. Diana, Assistant City Clerk Gwen J. Legters, Staff Assistant II The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 1:07 p.m. in the Commission Chambers of City Hall. He outlined the procedures and advised that anyone adversely affected by any decision of the Development Code Adjustment Board may appeal the decision to an Appeal Hearing Officer within two weeks. He noted Florida law requires any applicant appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings to support the appeal. In order to provide continuity, the items will be listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. I. Public Hearings 1. Andrew D and Patricia K Rackstein for a variance to permit a three ft high chain-link fence in setback area adjoining waterfront at 167 Bayside Dr, Bayside Sub No 4, Lot 14, zoned RS 8 (single family residential). V 92-06 Planning Manager Shuford explained the application in detail stating the applicant wishes to construct a three-foot-high chain link fence in a setback area adjoining a waterfront to secure the property for his dog. Andrew Rackstein, owner and applicant, stated the proposed fence will match an existing fence on the west side of the subject property which extends from the house to the seawall. The fence is needed to contain his Labrador retriever. In response to questions, Mr. Rackstein indicated he feels the three-foot height will be sufficient for his purposes and the adjacent property owners to the east have indicated support of the application. Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Homer moved to grant the variance as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards for approval as listed in Section 137.012(d) of the Land Development Code subject to the following conditions: 1) the fence shall be only three feet high, shall be of chain link construction, and shall be constructed as indicated on the site plan and 2) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Request granted. 2. James A Jr and Sherral A Martin for variances of (1) 2.95 ft to permit dock width of 25 ft; and (2) 2.5 ft to permit boathouse 17.5 ft from an extended side property line at 145 Devon Dr, Bayside Sub, Lot 43 and land to bulkhead, zoned RS 8 (single family residential) and AL/C (aquatic lands/coastal). V 92-07 Planning Manager Shuford explained the application in detail stating the applicant wishes to construct a boathouse on an existing non-conforming dock which was constructed prior to the current Code. He indicated there is no objection from the City Harbormaster. Assistant City Attorney Lance arrived at 1:15 p.m. Thomas Nash, attorney representing the applicant, indicated the request is minor, the boathouse will maintain the integrity of the neighborhood and a hardship exists due to the placement of the dock. Concerns were expressed regarding whether or not the adjacent property owners signed the county dock permit indicating approval of the application. Mr. Nash said confirmation has not been received from the estate owning the property to the east and indicated the property owners to the west have no objections. Robert S. Ress, representing the applicant, said the boathouse will have a roof and no sides, as county regulations prohibit structures of this nature to be enclosed. Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Homer moved to grant the variances as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards for approval as listed in Section 137.012(d) of the Land Development Code subject to the requisite building permit being obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Request granted. 3. Ultimar Development Corp/USX Corp for a variance of 5 ft to permit construction of stairs seaward of Coastal Construction Control Line (C.C.C.L.) at 1520 Gulf Blvd, Sec 19-29-15, part of M&B 43.02, zoned B (business). V 92-08 Mr. Graham declared a conflict of interest with regard to this case and Mr. Plisko assumed the chair in the absence of the Vice-Chairman. The applicant was advised he required the approval of all three voting members for approval of his request. Planning Manager Shuford explained the application in detail stating the applicant wishes to construct wooden stairs seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL) to permit public and private beach access. He indicated the application will require State approval resulting in additional time being needed to obtain the necessary permits. In response to a question regarding whether or not the stairs could be built of concrete, it was indicated there is difficulty getting such an application through the State permitting process as concrete is considered to be shore hardening. Steve Seibert, attorney representing the applicant, stated the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) permit has been obtained to install beach access stairs. In response to questions, Mr. Seibert indicated the appropriate codes relating to handicapped standards will be met and the stairs will not have open risers. Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Ms. Whitney moved to grant the variance as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards for approval as listed in Section 137.012(d) of the Land Development Code more specifically because, the variances arise from a condition which is unique to the property and not caused by the applicant; and the variances are the minimum necessary to overcome the hardship created by making access to the beach at mean high water possible subject to the conditions: 1) all necessary permits and variances shall be obtained by the applicant from other applicable State and City review agencies and boards and 2) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within twelve (12) months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and upon the vote being taken, Ms. Whitney and Messrs. Homer and Plisko voted "aye"; Mr. Graham abstained. Motion carried. Request granted. The meeting recessed from 1:34 p.m. to 1:52 p.m. II. Stormwater Presentation by Tom Miller Public Works/Environmental Assistant Director Tom Miller presented an overview of the activities of the Environmental Management Group relating to stormwater management and the associated fees. He indicated this is a comprehensive issue which can be addressed in greater detail at a future meeting and distributed handouts prepared by Budget Analyst Tina Wilson outlining the revenues and expenditures to date relating to the stormwater utility fee. Mr. Miller summarized the watershed program and the primary benefits of better resource management; pollution control, public edification, aesthetics, improved water quality, identifying flood hazards and reducing flood insurance costs. Discussion ensued regarding the stormwater utility fee and the funding sources for stormwater management projects. Concern was expressed that information presented at the January 10, 1991 stormwater utility fee presentation regarding the funding sources for stormwater projects once the fee is implemented may have been inaccurate. A question was raised as to whether the utility fee would support the entire stormwater operation or if money would continue to be received from ad valorem taxes to help fund stormwater projects as in the past. Staff was requested to provide a transcript from the January meeting. Mr. Miller said the stormwater utility fee is an attempt to equitably distribute expenses regarding water quality projects to ensure that everyone pays a fair share and to relieve the burden on the general fund. He indicated some stormwater projects are funded through various funds outside the utility fee such as the Transportation Fund. A question was raised whether the monies collected from the stormwater utility fee are applied to the district from which they are collected. Mr. Miller said a plan would be developed for each individual basin. Concern has been expressed regarding how the county is dealing with enclaves. Mr. Miller said the State of Florida is in the process of analyzing county and municipal ordinances relating to water quality management. Mr. Miller said each developer's operation needs to be looked at before a solution can be determined. He said an audit would be done to track where the monies from the stormwater utility fee are going. Staff was requested to provide a copy of the audit when available. Discussion ensued regarding the City's street sweeping policy, retention pond pollution and better methods of storm drain maintenance. Mr. Miller said staff is looking to develop an environmental circular. III. Election of Chairman and ViceChairman Mr. Homer nominated Mr. Plisko as Chairman. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Mr. Plisko was elected Chairman. Mr. Homer nominated Mr. Graham as Vice Chairman. Mr. Graham declined the nomination. Mr. Graham nominated Ms. Whitney as Vice-Chairman. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Ms. Whitney was elected Vice-Chairman. IV. Board and Staff Discussion Assistant City Attorney Lance reported a State Hearing Officer overturned the Board's August, 1991 decision to grant setback variances for a triplex to Don Curtis Pierson. Mr. Lance indicated the order could settle a long-standing dispute between Mr. Pierson and his neighbor. Mr. Homer departed at 2:45 p.m. Discussion ensued regarding concerns that variance fees be in keeping with the type of variance being requested. Various criteria were suggested for use in setting fees. V. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 2:51 p.m.