8/22/1989 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

M Dune preservation, public health and safety, and aesthetics are all worthy goals, but they are not the issue of the appeal. The issue is this: does a new site plan application have to meet the existing code? The answer is yes. All aspects of either a redesign or new site plan application must meet the County's code at the time of application submittal for all improvements shown within the area of development. The proposed building is obvious- ly within the area of development. The old building height definition allowed an appligant to berm -up the building pad and achieve a higher building by starting from a higher finished (man made) grade, while the new definition sets a firm. starting point at natural grade or the .minimum flood ele- vation (whichever is higher). The new definition was specifically established to prevent the berming-up of the finished floor elevation in situations such as was done on the 1982 Sea Oaks plans. The staff acknowledges that without being able to berm -up the finished grade, the first floor of a three floor building might not have an Ocean view; instead it would have a dune view. Sea Oaks essentially wants a new site plan approved by the County, but does not want to meet all the existing regulations. It is staff's position that if Sea Oaks proceeds under the 1982 site plan approval, they can also proceed under the regulations which were in place at that time. Thus, from the staff's standpoint, the existing 1982 plan is valid; however, if Sea Oaks wants a new site plan approval they must meet all applicable criteria in the present code as any other developer in the County must do. Therefore, the Technical Review Committee granted minor site plan approval to Dune Homes V and VI with the following condition: "1. Verify that the building meets the 35' height limit as defined in section 2 and applied in section 10 (A) of the zoning code, by showing on the plans the mean roof line and the location of the average natural gradeline on the building elevations; or redesign the building to meet the 35' height limit as defi ed and applied in the zoning code." In staff's opinion, building relocation and re -design must meet the new code height requirements. It is the developer's option whether to try and get DNR approval to construct the building as it was approved by the County in 1982 (seaward of the present CCCL); or to revise the site plan by moving the building landward in order to get DNR approval, a modification requiring conformance with the present County code. Removal of the condition would violate the County Code. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners uphold the decision of the Technical Review Committee to apply the existing code requirements to the newly proposed Sea Oaks site plan. Stan Boling, Chief of Current Development, reviewed staff's recommendation to uphold the decision of the Technical Review Committee to apply the existing code requirements to the newly proposed Sea Oaks site plan. He explained that this is an appeal .of the building height restriction that was put on the site plan. AUG 2 2 19