FORT MYERS BEACH

LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY MEETING

MARCH 19, 2002

Town Hall - Council Chambers

2523 Estero Boulevard

FORT MYERS BEACH, FLORIDA

 

 

 

I.          CALL TO ORDER

The meeting of the LPA was opened by Chairman Betty Simpson on Tuesday, March 19, 2002, at 12:00 p.m..

            Members present at the meeting:   Anita Cereceda, Hank Zuba, Betty Simpson,  Harold Huber, Jodi Hester, Nancy Mulholland, Jessica Titus and Jane Plummer.

            Excused absence from meeting: Roxie Smith

Staff present at meeting: Town Manager Marsha Segal-George, Deputy Town Manager John Gucciardo, Dan Folke and Bill Spikowski

                       

II.         INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

            Invocation was made by Chairman Betty Simpson.  All assembled and recited the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

III.        PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS

            None.

           

IV.        APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM FEBRUARY 19, 2002

           

            Corrections and changes to minutes:

1.  Hank Zuba - Page 2 - A duplication from the second page exists - Strike everything from “She                 mentioned” down to “ inconsistency exists”.

            2.  Hank Zuba - Page 2 - Bottom of page, second to last paragraph - Strike regards and replace                   with regard.

            3.  Betty Simpson - Page 2 - Second paragraph - strike should and replace with she.

            4.  Nancy Mulholland - Page 2 - bottom of page - strike apply and replace with comply.

            5.  Jodi Hester - Page 2 - middle of page - strike he and replace with the.

            6.  Jodi Hester - Page 3 - 2nd paragraph, second line - add the word “it’ between but and was.

            7.  Jodi Hester - Page 3 - halfway down strike business and replace with businesses.

            8.  Hank Zuba - Page 4 - 5th paragraph  - strike the question mark and replace with a period.

            9.  Hank Zuba - Page 4 - Halfway down - amend sentence to read ” lives in this building they            will legalize the second unit while the owner is in residence.  Strike for existence only.

            10. Hank Zuba - Page 6 - Top of page - replace and with but.

 

            MOTION:          Made by Anita Cereceda and seconded by Jodi Hester to approve the minutes of February 19, 2002 with corrections.  Motion passes unanimously.        

                       

V.         DISCUSSION OF ARTICLES I & II OF CHAPTER 34 - LDC

Bill Spikowski, Planning Consultant for the Town, came forward.  He explained that Article I, except for a few general provisions in the beginning and end, are primarily definitions.  In the entire code there are a group of definitions in Chapter I, which apply throughout the code.  He expressed that this group in Chapter 34 is very large.  Many terms have been eliminated.   In the definition section Article III is the actual zoning districts, zoning map and description of each zoning district.  In a lot of ways it is the most important part of the code.  It is the part which effects what people can do with their property.  The existing code has a lot of land uses defined in Article I.  The existing code has another section which does not define the land uses, but describes them by specific type. 

            Discussion was held regarding the definition of light trespass.  Jodi Hester questioned if this is new?  Bill Spikowski replied that this is new and mirrors the exact language adopted by Lee County about 2 years ago.  It is used later in the code in the section for sea turtles and shielding lights of commercial areas. 

            Jane Plummer questioned if this would apply to boats in the bay doing construction?  Town Manager Segal-George replied that it would have to be in their jurisdictional limits.  Bill Spikowski does not feel that the wording deals with this situation.  He expressed when they get to that section they should look at it more carefully.  

            Hank Zuba mentioned the definitions for drive thru’s and speakers.  He asked if there is a separate definition for speakers?  Bill Spikowski replied that there is not a separate definition for speakers.  He explained that there are two definitions for drive thru’s (restaurants and pharmacies/banks).  The Council eliminated all drive thru’s from fast food restaurants. 

            Town Manager Segal-George expressed that the speaker issue would be handled in the rezone to CPD.  This is where the conditions come up.  Bill Spikowski replied that this is looked at on a case by case basis vs. having specific regulations regarding hours or volume from speakers. 

            Hank Zuba asked why the street setback was changed from the centerline to the edge (page 27)?  Bill Spikowski replied that the County had measured all street setbacks from the centerline.  All major roads in the County would be widened to 4 or 6 lanes before long, so you must setback 100 ft. from the centerline regardless of where the edge of the right-of-way is.  On Fort Myers Beach they will not be widening the roads, so they will keep it simple by going to the edge of the right-of-way.  The edge is very defined and makes it much more precise.   The only exception would be along Seafarer’s, because 5 more feet of right-of-way is needed.  He expressed that this is going to be donated through the Seafarer’s zoning case.            

            Jane Plummer questioned the date of September 23, 1993 and where it came from?  Bill Spikowski replied that this was the date the County originally adopted the existing  concept.  He is unsure if he wants to keep the date the same.  This decision can be made at the very end when the zoning districts are reviewed.  If there is a zoning district that has an existing use that is not a permitted use in the new district the use will either become non-conforming or those that are already existing can stay forever and will not be deemed non-conforming.  They may end up not even needing this definition or adjusting the date to reflect the adoption of this Chapter vs. the County’s date. 

            Anita Cereceda questioned if Council should consider while making motions for denials the thought of whether or not they are denying with or without prejudice? She expressed with all the cases they have had this has never once been said.  Town Manager Segal-George replied that they have always been user friendly.  It has always been the Council’s desire to be user friendly.  The Town continues to work with everybody pending a result that the Council is happy with.

            Jessica Titus discussed page 17.  She referred to the definition of family.  She felt that this included all people.  Bill Spikowski replied that pending the resolution of the discussion a month or two ago he has made no changes to the family definition.  Town Manager Segal-George replied that this is the existing definition. 

            Jodi Hester went to page 26 regarding restaurants with drive thru’s.  She pointed out with the Type 2 drive thru, if Bill Spikowski refers to the definition of drive thru, this will help them go back to page 15 and look at the definition.  Bill Spikowski replied that he will do this.  He asked the LPA to point these out, because if they are confused others will be also.  

            Bill Spikowski began with Article II and indicated that each is broken into divisions.  Division I is the most simple and deals with the ex parte communication issue.  The language is straight from state law.  The wording really cannot be changed.  Everyone should be aware and remember abundance of caution keeps everybody out of trouble.  Any question about a conversation should just be disclosed.

            Anita Cereceda commented that the more communication you have the better the outcome will be in the end provided that it is disclosed.  She asked if there was anything in this section that should be passed on to the Council? Bill Spikowski replied that this is very much the way it is being handled now.  If the LPA recommends the Land Development Code to Council with this in it this will be the recommendation from the LPA to keep it this way.  He has had no feeling that the Council is wanting to make a change.

            Anita Cereceda asked Bill if he felt there was a down side to this?  Bill Spikowski replied that the down side is that people tell you one thing in a private conversation and try to get you to commit to their project.  He commented that know one should obligate themselves at all.  Do not obligate yourself until you have cast the vote after the public hearing.  Bill discussed that the County has gone to the other extreme.  They had adopted their rules of no communication before the court case.  The County attorneys have advised the Commissioners if they do this they will be under grave risk.  Even though the legislature has opened up this exception it was in violation of a court ruling.  Bill feels that this has worked very well on Fort Myers Beach. 

            Bill Spikowski went on to Division II.  He explained that this is headed Town Council, but describes all the things the Town Council can do with regard to zoning actions.  It is not just rezoning applications, but is also other related applications that may come before the Council.  The very end gives a description of some processes under state law of what people can do if they are unhappy with the Council’s decision after it is made, but before they go to court.  This is the mediation procedure.  He explained that this not greatly different from before.  In the current code this information is spread out over three different divisions and is impossible to find. 

            Division III is the Local Planning Agency.  All of this information is underlined, because it is being added to the Land Development Code with a few exceptions.  This is not new material to Town ordinance.  When the Town was formed and the LPA was created two different ordinances specified everything about the LPA.  For the most part this is the same material.  He pointed out the addition of the Historic Preservation Board as a function of the LPA (page 46). 

            Jane Plummer mentioned some conversation which took place when the Chairman was voted on this year for the LPA.  She remembers discussion regarding the length of the term and how they can serve.  She pointed out that this Division does not include this information.  Town Manager Segal-George replied that this was a specific administrative procedure not completed in the ordinance, but done separate by the LPA going back six years ago.

            Bill Spikowski moved on to Division IV.  He indicated that this information is incredibly important to the applicant.  It pertains to all the things that must be completed within the application.  The Town has made a number of changes a couple years ago by ordinance.  This section is basically comprised of two parts.  The first part is all applications and the second refers to the planned development districts.  Additional details regarding the planned developments are included within this division.  The most important section is 34-223 regarding the movement of buildings.  This is new material that is being proposed for the first time.  He referred to page 61 and stated that the previous rules indicated if you wished to move a building a list of application requirements were listed, and the building official was present to be sure the building did not fall down while being moved.  This was the extent of the requirement.  New criteria stops looking so much at the building itself, but looks at where the building would be moved to.  He went on the discuss when a building is designated historic the property the building sits on is designated.  The first set of criteria pertains to those buildings eligible for historic designation.  If it is eligible for historic designation the criteria for getting a house move approved is more lenient. 

            Town Manager Segal-George explained that this issue was raised by Council.  A couple of properties are ready to be moved on the island (White Cap).  The first one in the front is in rough shape and they plan on moving it to Lover’s Lane.  The one in the back is wanting to go to Donora.  The Council decided that they wanted to expedite this particular section and move it ahead of Chapter 34.  Council wants buildings that are being moved on the island to be brought up to code including the new regulations for hurricanes.  An exception will be made for historic properties.  Attorney Dick Roosa was directed to prepare a resolution evoking Smith vs. Clearwater for the April 1st meeting.  This will put people on the island on notice that these rules are coming forward.  Council also asked for the Architectural Review Board to be pulled out of Chapter 34 and moved forward.  Both of these will come to the LPA.  She explained the case of Smith vs. Clearwater.  Council is not limiting the movement of homes, but would like the homes being moved to come under the same rules as if you built the home. 

            Harold Huber questioned the Pink Shell movement of cottages.  Attorney Dick Roosa felt that they could not be moved because they are commercial.

            Town Manager Segal-George explained that Attorney Dick Roosa believed if a property was being used as hotel unit and because of its use it could not be moved onto a single family lot.  He was misconstruing the definition of use under the code.  This is not true.  She does not believe Council can ban house moving, but they can condition how a move will take place. 

            Anita Cereceda questioned if they must enact Smith vs. Clearwater every time you anticipate changing a particular ordinance?  Town Manager Segal-George replied that it must be regulation specific.                             

                Town Manager Segal-George explained that she has received complaint letters from residents on Donora.  This is how she found out the destiny of the White Cap building.

            Discussion was held as to the length of the Development Order.  Presently it states that you must get a Development Order within 5 years.  This number can be shortened.  Town Manager Segal-George replied that they can have 5 years total.  Bill Spikowski feels that this would ample. 

            Hank Zuba asked for the consensus of the LPA.  Everyone seemed to be in agreement with this change.  Bill Spikowski will include this in the next draft and at the public hearing they will have another opportunity to decide if this is the right number.  He will give some thought to the time frame and the elimination of the percentage for the next hearing.  Town Manager Segal-George suggested adding the 5 years, except for a specific phasing plan that is approved.  The LPA was in agreement with this language.

            Bill discussed that Division V is straightforward.  This is in reference to how the notices are sent out and how applications are continued.  The new language states a continuance will be granted as long as it is received in writing within a certain time frame.  If a case is continued to a date certain you will announce the date and no additional cost will be incurred.  If it is to a date uncertain and must be reset a fee will be charged. 

            Bill went to Division VI and expressed that the administrative setback is important on page 67.  This was done by the County in the early 1990's.  He explained that this is lenient, but he feels it is worthwhile to keep. He has never seen it be abused in all the years it has been used by the County.  The list could be expanded or contracted. 

            Nancy Mulholland questioned the building on Estero with the overhanging addition with pink railings and asked what can be done about this?  Town Manager Segal-George explained that this was legally approved many years ago.  This is one property and nothing can be done.  She expressed that they have been sited many times with regard to the property maintenance code. 

            Bill mentioned that next month the LPA will have the comprehensive plan amendments.  Two cases may be on for April 9th.  A public hearing will need to be scheduled for the building moving and commercial design standards. 

 

VI.        LPA MEMBER ITEMS

            Harold Huber - Asked for an update on the Burandt case.  Town Manager Segal-George replied that Council made a motion last evening to reconsider.  This case will be re-heard by Council. 

            Hank Zuba - Will need two excused absences in April.

            Jane Plummer - Mentioned that she was invited by Lee County to attend a program on Main Street on Thursday.  She questioned if they could receive minutes from the meeting?  Town Manager Segal-George did not feel that they could.  She replied that this is not recorded.

            Jessica Titus - Asked the legal lot size?  Bill Spikowski replied that this is a complicated question.  It depends when the lot was created. 

            Jessica questioned the movement of an existing home on a lot and the building of another home.  Town Manager Segal-George replied that the answer is presently no.  This violates the Comprehensive Plan and will be revisited at the hearing in April on substandard lots.

            Jessica questioned if it is legal to put up informational boxes containing literature?  Town Manager Segal-George replied that it depends on the circumstance.  A house would not need an informational sign for a residence.  She went on to add that these boxes are not allowed under the sign ordinance.   It is very restrictive as to the real estate signs. 

            Chairman Betty Smith - Questioned the Town Manager if they have a new CRAB member?  Town Manager Segal-George replied that they have two new members.  The Council decided to increase the CRAB member numbers and appoint two people. 

           

VII.       PUBLIC COMMENT

            Paul Schnayberger from Island House Beach Club came forward.  He is President of the condominium.  He mentioned the March 1st change in state law regarding hurricanes.  He announced that they have made some changes in their building to accommodate these changes.  The building has a/c units on the top.  The installer is suppose to put on hurricane straps.  The hurricane strap is a small piece of metal and he does not feel that this is very secure.  This needs to be addressed.  He has been a Township Trustee and member of the Zoning Board.  He feels that he understands some of the LPA problems.  Now that they have finished major construction on their building he will have more time and will spend it doing this sort of thing. (The LPA welcomed him)  

                       

VIII.      ADJOURN

            The meeting was adjourned at 1:56 p.m.. 

 

Respectfully Submitted,

 

 

Shannon Miller

Transcribing Secretary