PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION (PDC) SUMMARY MINUTES April 7, 2016

Transcription

1 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION (PDC) SUMMARY MINUTES Members Present: James Brooks, Chair, William Garvin, 1 st Vice Chair, Cheryl Phillips, 2 nd Vice Chair, David Bramblett, Wallace Higgins, Todd Nelson, John Wilson, Staff Present: Joanna L. Coutu, AICP, Director, Land Development Division (LDD), Laura Marley, Principal Planner, Joe Hochadel, Planner, LDD, Robbin Porter, Planner, LDD, Joyce Henderson, Sr. Secretary, LDD Also Present: Denise Lyn, County Attorney Absent: Chuck Dixon, School Board member CALL TO ORDER Chair Brooks called the meeting to order at 9:05 A.M. A. INVOCATION The Invocation was given by Ms. Phillips B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Ms. Phillips C. ROLL CALL Recording Secretary proceeded with roll D. CHAIRMAN TO READ THE APPEAL PROCESS AND MEETING PROCEDURES E. OPEN TO THE PUBLIC None F. APPROVE MINUTES Approve minutes, as amended, of March 3, 2016 VOTE: 7-0 G. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS: None H. EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS: 1 st Wallace Higgins 2 nd Cheryl Phillips

2 Denise Lyn polled the PDC members on whether they had any ex parte communications concerning the applications to be heard. All PDC members said they had no ex parte communications other than site visits. I. APPLICATIONS 1. LAND USE APPLICATIONS a. V Philip Ruck and Bryan Belcher NOTE: The applicant requested a continuance prior to this meeting. REQUEST: This request is for a two-part Variance from the Citrus County Land Development Code (LDC) to allow for the construction of an elevated deck (1) having less that the required 15-foot minimum building setback from the wetland boundary pursuant to Section 3501, Surface Water Protection Standards, as specified in the LDC, and (2) having less than the required 50- foot minimum building setback in a velocity zone from the mean high water line pursuant to Section 3520, Floodplain Protection Standards of the LDC, as specified in the LDC. LOCATION: Section 28, Township 20, Range 17; more specifically, Lots 10 and 11, Straughans Unrecorded Subdivision; which address is known as Chassahowitzka River, Homosassa, FL A complete legal description of the property is on file with the Land Development Division. STAFF CONTACT: Joe Hochadel, Planner, Land Development Division Robbin Porter, Planner, Land Development Division b. V Richard L. Jane REQUEST: This request is for a three-part Variance from the Citrus County Land Development Code (LDC) to allow for the construction of an open carport (1) having less than the required 50-foot minimum right-of-way setback, pursuant to Section 2300, Building Setback Requirements and Height Requirements for All Land Use Districts, as specified in the LDC, (2) having more than the maximum impervious lot coverage, pursuant to Section 2403, Coastal and Lakes Residential District (CLR), as specified in the LDC, and (3) having less than the required 50-foot minimum building setback from the mean high water line (35-foot with a berm and swale), pursuant to Section 3501, Surface Water Protection Standards, as specified in the LDC. 2

3 LOCATION: Section 14, Township 19, Range 16; more specifically, Miles Survey Lot 10 & West 1/2 of Lot 9, which address is known as W. Brookview Lane, Crystal River, Florida, A complete legal description of the property is on file with the Land Development Division. STAFF CONTACT: Robbin Porter, Planner, Land Development Division Ms. Porter said the applicant is asking for an open carport to be placed 25 feet from the inside edge of the riprap seawall of the boat slip, a 33-foot setback from the centerline of the right-of-way, and a 44 percent Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR). She said the site is affected by a boat slip that extends approximately 30 feet into the lot. She said a Variance was approved for a reduced waterfront setback on May 16, 2013 to allow for the construction of a carport and screen room, as well as conversion of an existing balcony to living area. She showed slides of the property and the surrounding area including a view of the existing boat slip. She showed a slide of the location of the proposed carport. Ms. Porter said the average waterfront setback in the general area is 21 feet and the average right-of-way setback is 32 feet. She said much of the surrounding development predates current waterfront and right-of-way setbacks and several of the existing residences do encroach within those setbacks. She said the applicant is asking to maintain the existing ISR of 44 percent. She said two unpermitted gravel driveways were added to the site since 2014 and increased the maximum allowed ISR of 35 percent. She said the proposed carport will be placed over the existing gravel driveway. She said all the properties in the general area appear to be under the allowable ISR and there are no known variances in the area to exceed the maximum allowable ISR. Ms. Porter said the applicant s request does not appear to be a minimum request. She said the site has two existing carports and storage areas and the applicant could minimize the Variance request if the existing unpermitted impervious surfaces were removed. She said based on the analysis and the Findings of Fact, staff is recommending denial. APPLICANT: Mr. Richard Jane said he disagreed with staff s assessment of the ISR. He said he measured areas of his property and he believes the ISR is only 39 percent. He had photographs of his property. He said the survey he provided did not have the screened room shown. Mr. Jane said he wants to provide a place next to the house to park his cars. Mr. Nelson asked why Mr. Jane did not receive permits for the gravel driveways. Mr. Jane said one of the driveways has been there for 15 years and he has added replacement gravel. He said he did not know he needed permits for gravel driveways. He said he also owns the vacant lot next to this property. 3

4 Ms. Phillips asked Mr. Jane to explain the difference in measurements. He said his original ISR measurement was squared off and was only 37 percent. Ms. Coutu noted that if the Variance request was approved for the 37 percent ISR as calculated by the applicant, it would need to be clearly demonstrated as such at the time of permitting. Mr. Bramblett asked if he would agree to remove some of the impervious surface. Mr. Jane said he would be willing to remove some gravel. Mr. Brooks asked Mr. Jane if he wanted to request a continuance to further work with staff on the request. Mr. Jane said he would like to request a continuance. PROPONENT: None OPPONENT: None REBUTTAL: None COMMISSION COMMENT: MOTION: 1 st Wallace Higgins 2 nd Cheryl Phillips MOTION: The finds to CONTINUE application number V VOTE: 7-0 c. V Martin & Delight Costello REQUEST: This request is for a two-part Variance from the Citrus County Land Development Code (LDC) to allow for the continued placement of two decks with roofs and an enclosed storage area (1) having less than the required 50-foot minimum building setback from the mean high water line (35- foot with a berm and swale), pursuant to Section 3501, Surface Water Protection Standards, as specified in the LDC, and (2) exceeding the maximum allowed impervious lot coverage, pursuant to Section 2403, Coastal and Lakes Residential District, as specified in the LDC. LOCATION: Section 29, Township 19 South, Range 17 East; more specifically Lot 15, Block 28 of Homosassa Company s Subdivision, Plat Book 1, Page 5, which address is known as 4460 S. Cox Pt., Homosassa, FL

5 A complete legal description of the property is on file with the Land Development Division. STAFF CONTACT: Joe Hochadel, Planner, Land Development Division Mr. Hochadel said the applicant is asking to allow for the continued placement of two decks with roofs, and an enclosed storage area with a reduced waterfront setback of 15 feet from the outer edge of the seawall, and an increased ISR of 44 percent. He showed various slides of the area, the property, and the canal. He explained the unpermitted covered decks were apparently placed by the previous property owner. Mr. Hochadel said there is a current Code Compliance case for the unpermitted placement of the decks, the enclosed storage area, and the pavers. He said the applicant has already removed the pavers. He said the decks are flush with the existing porch and will not encroach any further into the waterfront setback than what is already there. He said the storage area does not have a stabilized floor or power, and includes flood vents on all four walls with two of the walls having a threeinch space between the ground and the bottom of the wall. Mr. Hochadel said it does appear other property owners in this area are enjoying similar rights. He said the property has one of the smallest homes in this area and is on one of the smallest lots. He said the average waterfront setback in this area is 12 feet and the applicant is requesting 15 feet. Mr. Hochadel said the application is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the LDC. He said based on the analysis and the Findings of Fact staff is recommending approval with conditions which he read into the record. Ms. Phillips asked if the property is on central water and sewer. Mr. Hochadel said the applicant could answer that question. Mr. Nelson asked if the owner already has these items on site. Mr. Hochadel said yes. APPLICANT: Mr. Tom Williford spoke for the applicant and said he believes the property is being served by central water and may or may not have central sewer. Mr. Nelson asked what does the property owner intend to do if the PDC denies the application. Mr. Williford explained this home was built by a contractor that went out of business and he cannot explain why the permits were not obtained. Mr. Williford said Mr. Costello has already taken steps to improve the existing ISR by removing the pavers. He said several homes in this area have a zero waterfront setback. PROPONENT: None 5

6 OPPONENT: Mr. Michael Czerwinski said he thought a berm and swale should be required. Mr. Hochadel said as part of the permitting process, a berm and swale will be required as outlined in the LDC. REBUTTAL: None COMMISSION COMMENT: MOTION: 1 st Cheryl Phillips 2 nd William Garvin MOTION: The finds application number V CONSISTENT with the Citrus County Land Development Code and IS in keeping with the intent of the Policies of the Citrus County Comprehensive Plan and that this Board APPROVES WITH CONDITIONS of the application based upon the evidence and testimony presented and the staff report and conclusions regarding this petition with the following conditions. 1. The covered decks and enclosed storage area shall maintain a minimum 15-foot setback to the seawall, as delineated on the site plan date-stamped February 12, 2016 by the Land Development Division. 2. Development on site cannot exceed 44 percent Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR) as depicted on the site plan submitted with this application date-stamped February 12, 2016 by the Land Development Division. 3. A tie-in survey demonstrating the maintenance of the required minimum 15-foot setback for the covered decks and enclosed storage area to the seawall must be submitted to and approved by the Land Development Division within 21 calendar days of establishing the decks. VOTE: 7-0 L. ADDITIONAL ITEMS M. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS An impromptu question and answer discussion proceeded between several members of the Commission and Ms. Coutu about LDC regulations. There was also some audience participation allowed by the Chair N. ADJOURN 6

7 The adjourned at 9:50 A.M. Respectfully submitted, Joyce Henderson, Recording Secretary 7