Loading...
REZ-2001-01 (WQOP) Minutes 12.18.2001MINUTES OF MEETING OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD December 18, 2001 A regular meeting of the Community Development Board was held Tuesday, December 18, 2001, in the City Hall Commission Chambers. Present were Chair Don Wolfson, Robert Frohwein, Karl Grunewald, Samuel Jacobson, Steve Jenkins, Mary Walker, Community Development Director Sonya Doerr and Recording Secretary Susan Dunham. 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Approval of Minutes of Meeting of November 20, 2001 A motion was made by Mr. Grunewald, seconded by Mr. Jenkins and unanimously carried to approve the Minutes of the Community Development Board meeting of November 20, 2001. 4. Recognition of Visitors None. 5. Old Business a. Request to consider a recommendation to the City Commission of an application for rezoning of property from Open Rural (OR) to Special Purpose (SP) to allow an existing radio station to continue with the use restricted to radio station and accessory structures only. Said property consists of approximately 2.5 acres and is generally located north of Atlantic Boulevard and east of the Intracoastal Waterway. Ms. Doerr advised the Board that this Special Purpose District is very limited and addresses the unique needs of the existing use of the property. She further advised that since this item last came before the Board in October, the new Land Use Code had been amended and adopted, and the legal description of this property was included in Section 21-14. She stated that it is important to recognize that if this property is re-zoned to Special Purpose District, this is the only authorized use of the property without coming before the Community Development Board and the City Commission. Mr. Diebenow was not in attendance. (Arrives at 7:15 pm.) Mr. Wolfson advised Ms. Doerr that he had hoped that this property would be given a Conservation designation with a Use-by-Exception attached rather than a Special Purpose District. Ms. Doerr responded that the Special Purpose District would provide tighter control and that there is no provision for this use as a Use-by-Exception in the Conservation Zoning District. She stated that this Special Purpose District restricts the property to this use only, and it cannot be used for anything else without coming before the Community Development Board. Mr. Wolfson stated that he was concerned that they were perpetuating that use indefinitely. Ms. Doerr responded that as long as that owner owns that property, they are entitled to continue this use. Mr. Jacobson stated that this is spot zoning. He stated that if it stops being a radio station, he would like to see it revert to its original state. Ms. Doerr advised that if that use were to end, it would have to be brought back to the Board to establish rights for another use. She further stated that in Section 24-103 in the Intent Section, the following language was added, “Any use has to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.” Ms. Doerr advised that this is a legal non-conforming use and if it goes away, any future use has to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Comprehensive Plan designates that as Conservation. She further advised that whether a telecommunication tower is consistent or non-consistent with Conservation may be a legal issue. Mr. Frohwein stated that if radio stations were a permitted use, then another radio station would not be required to come before the Community Development Board. He suggested that a Use-by-Exception instead of a permitted use would be further limiting. Ms. Doerr responded that even if this specific permitted use expires if it ceases for twelve months or is abandoned, that any new use in a Special Purpose District requires the Board’s approval as would a Use-by-Exception. She further stated that that the radio station’s legal description is part of the Ordinance establishing the Special Purpose District and that this would have to be amended before any other use would be allowed or the SP district expanded. Ms. Doerr explained that even though the property is rezoned Special Purpose, it would first be subject to the conditions in the specific rezoning Ordinance in the package, since those provisions are more detailed than the zoning regulations. Ms. Doerr advised the Board that it was her feeling that the level of regulatory authority in a rezoning Ordinance is stronger than that of a Use-by-Exception. Mr. Jacobson advised that the Ordinance and the new zoning classification were in conflict where the zoning classification provides for abandonment after six months and the Ordinance gives it a period of 12 months. Mr. Steven Diebenow arrived at 7:15 p.m. and introduced himself. He stated that he was here on behalf of the radio station. Mr. Diebenow explained that the reason they asked for a year in the specific terms of this Special Purpose District was that the radio station is run solely by contributions and donations by benefactors, and that the regulations allowed the flexibility to ask for twelve months rather than six months. He stated that if the radio station were to get knocked over, he did not know if six months would be enough time to raise money and rebuild the radio station. In response to a question from Mr. Wolfson, Mr. Diebenow responded that he thought that the radio station carried insurance for that type of disaster but he was not familiar with the insurance plan. He stated that the radio station is asking for one year to put everything back in order, but if the Board thinks that six months is enough time, then the radio station would have to work with that schedule. Mr. Diebenow reminded the Board that the radio station property has already been down-zoned and down-planned not once, but twice. Mr. Diebenow stated that from the overall perspective, the radio station has had a significant erosion of their legal rights and probably an actionable erosion of their rights. He further stated that he appreciated the accommodations and the willingness of Staff, the Board and the City Commission to work with them. Discussion was held with regard to placing an ownership restriction which could possibly diminish the property value or leaving the Ordinance as is and accepting the possibility that the property could be sold to another “bigger and better” telecommunication firm. Ms. Doerr advised that zoning and ownership should not be tied together. She further stated that land use regulations should look at characteristics of use, not who owns the land, and that to make decisions based upon ownership is discriminatory. In addition, she stated that the applicant should agree to a condition that ties ownership to the use of the property. Mr. Grunewald moved to recommend to the City Commission that this property be rezoned from Open Rural to Special Purpose to allow an existing radio station to continue with the use restricted to radio station and accessory structures only with the caveat that the radio station be landscaped so that it would be aesthetically attractive. Mr. Frohwein seconded the motion. Discussion was held with regard to the possibility of the owner filling wetlands and building on all 2.5 acres. Ms. Doerr advised that a condition could be added, if the owner wants to offer this, then he would have to come before the Board. Mr. Diebenow advised that the radio station does not intend to fill wetlands the site. Mr. Grunewald withdrew the motion and Mr. Frohwein withdrew the second. Mr. Frohwein moved to recommend to the City Commission to approve the proposed ordinance with the following caveats: to have a significant amount of landscaping on site to screen the existing building; no signage and remove the existing signage; no wetland mitigation or wetland impact on the property; and that any and all future construction will be necessary to provide a site plan for this Board to view and review prior to obtaining any building permits. Mr. Grunewald seconded the motion. Mr. Wolfson referred to Section 24-177, Requirements for Buffering. He stated that the landscape element of Chapter 24 be incorporated so that it is maintained with the maximum amount of landscaping without placing an excessive burden on applicant. Ms. Doerr stated that she would work with the applicant. A vote was called and Mr. Jacobson, Mr. Frohwein, Mrs. Walker and Mr. Grunewald voted in favor of the motion and Mr. Jenkins and Mr. Wolfson voted against the motion. Motion to recommend approval of the requested rezoning carries.