BOAMin03-01-89BOARD OF AOJ O6TMENT
LONGWOON, FLORIDA
MARCH 1, 1989
Present: Joyce Sober
Oou9 Carroll
Pamela Mc Lin
Bernard Linton
Buford Helms, Building Official
Christian Nagle, Li ty Planner
Jackie Schaefer, Secretary
Absent: Nancy Mc La roan
1. The meeting was called [n order by Ms. Su ber, Chairperson, at
J:30 p. m.
2. AOProval of Minutes: 11o Lion by Ms. Su be r, s onded by Ms. Mc Lin
to approve the m notes o{ February 15, 1989 mee tinq. Motion
ca rr; ed by a unan,mous roll cart vote.
3. RELO NFt RMATION OF SPG VAR [ANLE: LOCATION: W SINE Of LR 42],
1 MM EOlATELY 5 OF ROW FOR EIGHTH AVE. REp VEST TO ALLOIJ A PIGNET
STYLE 6 FOOT FENCE WITHIN THE SETBACK OF LR 42] F00. SECORiiY
PURPOSES 0.N0 LAN BSCAP[NG PURPOSES, ZONING: 1-1, LAND OSE-GENERAL
COMMERCIAL.
Ms. Sober opened the meeting. SM1e noted the Board had made a
decision granting a e to SPG and it w s granted based o
those things the Board rw asked for. However, SPG tli dn't pain
fence up that they originally had proposed to the city.
Mr. Linton asked Mr. Na91e what the Land Planning Agency approved
regards to tM1e fence at the time of their meeting. Ne said
there w s discussion c ing the berm and the height of the
fence (6'). Mr. Naglenpo toted out to Board members that there
a drawing of the fence proposed Ny the applicant to be e ected
nsthe property included in tNe orlg ina1 v e packet. He stated
M1lr. Linton w ect in that at the LPA meeting .s e d£scus lion
made c ing the height of the proposed fencem TM1e original
endatio nrto the LPA w s that the fence should probably be ]'
highminstea0 of 6' high because p of the r s for the fence
s to help beautify the site antlnal so help s n the v of the
erhead doors Lo the buildings which face 42jreeThe eoardwoF
A d. us [n:ent felt that a 6' fence wo ultl be suf fi dent for s ri ty
purposes and also for the s ing pvrpo se s. Mr. IJa gle stated
he put this request to the BOAeas he needed direction from them.
Ne stated The project is finf she d, but the applicant i ai ti ny
fisua nce of the Certificate of Occupancy (CO) For the boil di n9 s.
BOARD Of ADJUSTMENT, MARCH 1, 1989 Page 2
He has not r e vetl it yet because of this matter c ing tM1e fence.
[[ w s Mr. Nagle's un tle rstandi ng from r ing then80A m notes and
packet that the BOA granted v e forvaespecific styleffence. St
a fence composed of v cal/metal posts approximately 1" wide,
there w r of them tend it rote rspe rced with s of railings.
There w ea to ebeestuc coed, c rate columns with lightrfix LUres to
break the fence up. [t w s his unders tantli ng the LPA also understood
Chat the v requested w s for this specific fence. However,
the fence the tni n the siteai a 6' high chain link fence that i
red with greenovi nyt. Originally tM1at fence had barbed w
itVe The barbed w e has s e been partially r vetl. The approved
boil tli ng permit for the fence did not au tho ri zeebarbetl w ectio n.
Mr. Carroll asked if only the barbed w along 42] had beeper vetl,
it w along the sides and ba cksi tle~al so. Mr. Nagle said itmhas
been r ved just On the front. Mr. Nagle told the board he had r -
wedethe building permit far the fence and the permit does make e
reference back to the original fence and tM1at the fence t0 be e acted
s per the aDOro vetl plans and the original fence and n t for the [ha in
link fence that w nstalled. Mr. Nagle said before the fence w
si
Led, Mr. Piloian v sited him aC hfs office and told him Chat he and
hiscpa rtners could not afford to install the original fence for which
the building permit w s granted. Mr. Piloian asked Mr. Nagle if e action
of the 6' high chain link fence w s permissible. Mr. Nagle replied yes
Lo Mr. Piloian's request. Because of it being a hectic day, Mr. Nagle
did not r w the file upon which the v s grante tl. Mr. Pi TOian
subsequentlyeinqui red a what the holtlupaw of his CO.
Mr. Nagle fnformetl him that tM1e approved buildingn0ermi to and v
did not authori ie the fence which w acted. Mr. Nagle tot dahi mn that
M1e did not have the authority un de ra the city codes to tell him to remove
or maintain the existfng fence.
Mr. Piloian spoke for SPG De veto pment. Ne reiterated what Mr. Nagle
had already said. He said the original v n't granted a
o ntl it ion of site approval. He stated SPG rhadctheaoption of putting
a fence up o not, bvt Chat c of original fence w side rably
higher than estimated. Pfr. Pilvian stated the site landscaping would
eventually hide the fence from view.
Ms. Sober asked Mr. Na91e if ii would have been m appropriate for
Mr. Piloian to have filed £or a e to the oviginal site plan
fence instead of being placed oagenda n Mr. Nagle replied
the code i not clear on that point. Ne sa idwthe re w e three possible
ways to dpsit: (1) refile v application fora ratCer-the-f acC
r (2) take the matte rnback to the BOA for r solution, o
volveeMr~ Piloian i code enforcement action because the fencer
acted w in violation of boil ding permit and of the original
dOARp OF ApJ USTM ENT, MARCH 1, 1989 Page 3
Mr. Linton suggested that s e Cype of c rage be required to be
applied to the fence to givems appearance of a opaque fence,
o pppsetl to tearing it do wn.oa MS. Suber stated she did not want
to penalize Mr. Pil Dian far s ethin9 the staff had done, but the
Board understood that he knewoabout the original fence and v
Mr. Piloian replied that he was not an experienced builder; thisnis
first project he had done.
Michael Speck. Treasurer of SPG Development spoke stating they had
bids for 530' of fence on 42I, ranging from between $30,000 and b40,000
SPG has already paid darfieid Fence Company o r $20,000 for the fence
along cR 42I. He said that SPG had spent $25V000 on landscaping and
that the fence will be academic because of the lan dsca pi nq.
Ms. Suber asked if anyone else w ted to say any thi n9. She then
asked to close the public hea ri ngn No motion was made to close.
The Roard then r wed the three ai to rnati ves a outlined in Mr.
Na91e's 2/24/89 m o to them. After discussion,smoti on by Mr. Linton
o nd ed by Mr. Carroll to allow the chain link fence t0 r but
that the barbed w e be r ved and SPG to complete a ci tyea ceptable
landscape m in tenance/repl a~ement agreement which r with the
prpverev owner(s) tp maintain and rep~a~e sate tandsca p;n9.
Motion nnan~mo nsty ca rri ea
Mr. Piloian agreed with the Board's decision and thanked [hem for
their cooperation.
4. Meeting adjourned at 8:20 p. m.
Jackie Schaefer, Secretary