Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005 03 28 Regular 500 Section 9-3, City Code, for Review and Consideration COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM 500 Consent Informational Public Hearing Regular X March 28. 2005 Meeting /sr- J/~~ () Mgr. / Att. / Dept. REQUEST: At the City Commission's request, the City Attorney and City Manager are presenting Section 9-3, City Code, for review and consideration. After review and consideration, the City Commission may direct that the City Attorney work with city staff to prepare an ordinance that will propose an amendment to Section 9-3. PURPOSE: The purpose of this agenda item is to give the City Commission an opportunity to review the applicability and effect of Section 9-3 and related provisions of the City Code. In addition, the purpose is to give the City Commission the ability to pro-actively direct the City Attorney and City staff to prepare an ordinance that will propose amending Section 9-3, if necessary. APPLICABLE LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY: 1. Florida Municipal Home Rule Powers Act. 2. Section 9-3, City Code. 3. Chapter 177, Florida Statutes. CONSIDERATIONS: 1. On several occasions recently, the City has been faced with addressing with several property owners the applicability and effect of Section 9-3, City Code. The property owners believe that this Page 1 of 3 section places too great a restriction on the future division of large platted lots located within the City. 2. Particularly, Section 9-3 regulates a property owner's ability to divide and develop an originally platted lot. From what can be discerned from the editor's notes in the City Code, it appears that this code section, as written, goes back to at least 1974. 3. No specific written legislative intent for Section 9-3 can be found. Some believe the intent of Section 9-3 is to preserve the existing large lots in the Ranch Lands. In general, subdivision ofland regulations, like Section 9-3, are intended to encourage harmony and compatibility, lessen congestion in the streets and highways; further the orderly layout and use ofland; provide adequate light and air; prevent overcrowding of land; facilitate the adequate and economical provision of water, sewerage, and other public requirements; provide for proper ingress and egress; promoting the proper monumenting ofland subdivided; and encourage the conveyance ofland by accurate legal description. See Section 25.03, Anderson's American Law of Zoning, 4th Edition. 4. Although Section 9-3 is attached to this agenda item in its entirety, the crux of the issue centers around the application of the first two sentences set forth in Section 9-3. a) The first sentence states, "An owner of a single lot of sufficient size, except in a platted area of a planned unit development, may, with prior approval of the city commission, divide an originally platted single lot once into no more than two (2) parcels or lots." b) The second sentence provides "[ aIn owner of a lot which has been divided shall not be granted approval for a replat which would result in dividing the originally platted single lot into more than two (2) parcels or lots." 5. This section has recently been interpreted by the City Commission and City staff to mean two things: a) A platted lot (except in PUDs) can be subdivided into two lots or parcels with prior city commission approval; and b) Once a platted lot has been divided, it can not be divided again. 6. The only relief afforded property owners from the provisions of Section 9-3 is to request a variance pursuant to Section 9-5 ofthe City Code. A variance may only be granted if the property owner can demonstrate, during a public hearing, that the variance request satisfies the stringent criteria in the City Code. The criteria include showing that Section 9-3 imposes an unnecessary hardship and the request will not be injurious to the surrounding territory. 7. Mr. Paul Rosu has submitted a "white paper" for the City Commission's review and consideration. This issue may apparently affect him in the future. Page 2 of 3 8. Further, this issue may affect Dr. Mosley in the future. Dr. Mosley owns a one parcel, thirty (30) acre platted lot located adjacent and West ofDunmar Estates. The plat is called "Dr. Mosley's Plat" and is recorded in Plat Book 34, Page 10. Dr. Mosley's situation is unique in the City. He would like to propose a subdivision which consists of several lots of at least two acres each. Unless Section 9-3 is modified in some fashion, Section 9-3 would prohibit such a subdivision and would only allow Dr. Mosley to divide the one thirty acre lot into two lots of some size. For illustrative purposes only, a copy of Dr. Mosley's conceptual subdivision proposal is attached to this Agenda Item. 9. Chapter 177, Florida Statutes, sets forth minimum platting requirements. Municipalities are permitted to adopt more stringent requirements relative to the subdivision of land under the Florida Municipal Home Rule Powers Act and Section 177.011, Florida Statutes. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The City Attorney and City Manager recommend two options at this time: a) Do not amend Section 9-3 at this time; or b) Direct the City Attorney to work with staff to prepare an ordinance which proposes creating a limited exception to Section 9-3's prohibition against subdividing originally platted lots in more than two lots or parcels and more than once. At a minimum, the limited exception shall require approval by the City Commission at a public hearing; subdivided lots must satisfy minimum lot size requirements in the applicable zoning district; and criteria ensuring such subdivisions are compatible and in harmony with lot sizes in the surrounding area. Further, some exception may have to be made for unimproved old platted lots (e.g'. D.R. Mitchels plat recorded in 1907) which do not serve more recent development trends, including the Town Center. ATTACHMENT: 1. Sections 9-1 through 9-7, City Code. 2. Paul Rosu's White Paper, dated February 18, 2005. 3. Dr. Mosley's conceptual subdivision plan. COMMISSION ACTION: 1. At the February 28, 2005 City Commission meeting, the City Commission directed that Section 9-3, City Code, be placed on a future City Commission agenda for review and consideration. G:\Docs\City of Winter SpringslAgenda\2005\9-3, City Code.wpd Page 3 of 3 February 18,2005 City of Winter Springs, Florida 1126 East State Road 434 Winter Springs, FL 32708.2799 Dear Commissioner Blake, I am writing you today concerning a matter that I have had some difficulty with. I am involved with a parcel ofland in Winter Springs that I would like to make a subdivision. I went to the planning department and explained my intentions. I was shown 9-3 of the code of ordinances and told that one could not make a subdivision of platted property. I would like to propose that Chapter 9 does allow this and I believe the oudine below bears this out. Sec. 9--1. (Code 1974, ~ 14.1) Definitions.(In Part) Lot, tract or parcel means the least fractional part of subdivided lands having limited fixed boundaries, and an assigned number, letter or other name through which it may be identified. Plan, preliminary means a preliminary plan with supporting data for a proposed development of streets. lots. block and utilities. Subdivision means the platting of real property into three (3) or more lots, parcels, tracts, tiers, blocks, sites, units or any other division of land, and includes establishment of new streets and alleys, additions and resubdivisions, and when appropriate to the context, relates to the process of subdividing or to the lands or area subdivided; and further means ~ division of a lot. oarcel or tract ofland. whether imoroved or unimoroved. into three (3) or more contiguous lots or parcels oflands. designated by reference to the number or symbol of the lot or parcel contained in dIe plat of such subdivision, for the purpose, whether immediate or future, of transfer of ownership, or if the establishment of a new street is involved, any division of such parcel. The term includes a resubdivision and, when appropriate to the context, relates to the process of subdividing or to the land subdivided. Sec. 9-2. Sale of non platted property. Lots in subdivisions may be sold only if created by: . A registered surveyor platting the lots of the subdivision to be sold. . Except as provided in section 9-3. A lot split would create two lots that did not require a plat of the lots by a registered surveyor. Sec. 9-2. (1974, ~ 14.3) Sale of non platted property. No owner of real property being a subdivision as defined in this chapter, shall sell lots from such tract without first having, in accordance with the requirements hereof, such tract surveyed and a plat of the lots proposed to be sold prepared by a registered surveyor except as orovided in section 9-3. Before such plat shall be recorded, it shall be approved in accordance with the specific provisions of this chapter and F.S. Ch. 177. No permit shall be issued for the construction of any building or for an electrical hookup on any lot sold in violation of this section. Sec. 9--3. Dividing platted property. Except in a PUD, an owner of a lot may: . Divide an originally platted single lot once into no more than two parcels (lot split). Why no more than two? Because by definition that would be a subdivision which would require a plat by a registered surveyor. . If you own one of the two lots created by a lot split, you cannot replat the original lot to obtain another lot. This would result in a total of more than two lots or a subdivision (by definition). This prevents someone from being able to 'lot split' their way into a subdivision without going through the subdivision process. This section makes provision for a lot split (dividing one into two), it does not prohibit the subdivision of a platted parcel. Sec. 9.3. (1974, i 14.3.1) Dividing platted property. An owner of a single lot of sufficient size, except in a platted area of a planned unit development, may, with prior approval of the city commission, divide an originally platted single lot once into no more than two (2) parcels or lots. An owner of a lot which has been divided shall not be granted approval for a replat which would result in dividing the originally platted single lot into more than two (2) parcels or lots. Each parcel or lot so divided shall in every respect meet the criteria established elsewhere in this Code for the category of zoning and other relevant Codes under which the property is zoned and each parcel or lot shall meet the engineering requirements set out elsewhere in this chapter. In such instance, and only within the strict application of this section, may the full provisions of this chapter be waived and variances granted thereto. No building permit shall be issued for the erection of any building on a previously platted lot which is divided contrary to this section. Sec. 9--4. Waiver to subdivision requirements. When applying for a subdivision, the preliminary or final subdivision plans may be waived if: . There are to be no new improvements when creating the subdivision such as streets, water, sewer, or drainage. The preliminary plan would show these improvements and when they already exist the preliminary plan requirement may be waived. In any case a plat is required to be reviewed by the city for compliance to subdivision regulations. How would unplatted land already have all of these improvements already in place? This would be applicable in the subdivision of certain platted lots. Sec. 9-4. (Code 1974, i 14.3.2) Waiver to subdivision requirements. For subdivisions where no new streets, water, sewer, or drainage structures are involved, application for approval of preliminary or final subdivision plans may be waived provided, however, that a plat that can be recorded of the proposed subdivision shall be submitted for review by the city staff. The recommendation of the city staff shall be subject to approval by the city commission. The purpose of this approval is to ensure that the proposed subdivision conforms to applicable requirements of the subdivision regulations. The code and public record show this to be the correct understanding of these sections as to the difference between a lot split and subdivision. This understanding is the reason that previous staff informed Mr. Backus that he could have a subdivision of his platted lot provided that it meet the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan for a subdivision. This is why he put in a sewer system for his subdivision. I have included three examples of resolutions that apply Section 9-3 (14.3.1) none of which required a plat by a registered surveyor. Also included are three examples of subdivisions created from a platted lot. Notice that they only request a waiver of preliminary plans as provided in Section 94 (14-3.2). They have had no special variances or waivers from Section 9-3 to have a subdivision from a platted lot. This is because Section 9-3 deals with lot splits and does not prohibit subdivisions so it would be inapplicable to these examples. Both of these methods of creating new lots are in complete harmony with the Code of Ordinances of the City of Winter Springs. Thank you for your consideration of this matter, it is greatly appreciated, Respectfully yours, Paul Rosu ~ . i.to~..~... .':~ Regular Meetingt City Comnrlssiont August 14t 1984 Page S 83-84-22 on the sheet also provided you is a front setback of 25. ft., a side separation of 20 ft. and a recommended 20 ft. setback from the retention area except along the west. property line where theswa1e area is where a setback of 8-10 ft. is shown. Mr. Alex Halberstadt, d~veloper spoke to the Commission. Motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs that we table until the next scheduled meeting. Seconded by Commissioner Grove. Discussion. Motion and second were wi. thdrawn. Motion was made by Commissioner Hartman that we accept the replat stating that the only place that there be a 3-1 slope is in the south edge of the retention pond abutting the road and if we g01n that area, rest of it is in compliance with the Cadet he can go to the Board of Adjustment and get his variance for the fence. Motion withdrawn. Motion was made by Commissioner Hartman that we approve the replat and the 3-1 slope along the south side of North Third Street and the rest of it be in compliance with the original plat, and if he wants a variance for a fence he goes to the Board of Adjustment. Seconded by Commissioner Linville for discussion. Discussion. Motion withdrawn. Motion was made by Commissioner Linville that we approve the conceptual plan. of cluster units. Motion withdrawn. Motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs to table until our next scheduled meeting. Seconded by Commissioner Grove. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner Adkins, aye; Commissioner Linville) aye; Commissioner Jacobs, aye; Commissioner Grove, aye; Commissioner Hartman, aye; motion carried. Request for Lot Split, Lot 3t N. Orl. Ranches Sec. l-B - Jacobs: Res. No. 455: Motion was made by Commissioner Grove, seconded by Commissioner Linville to read Resolution No. 455 by title only. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner Linville. aye; Commissioner Jacobs, aye; Commissioner Grove. aye; CommissIoner Hartman, aye; Commissioner Adkins, aye: motion carried. Kruppenbacher read Resolution No. 455 by title only. Motion was made by Commissioner Linvillet seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to adopt Resolution No. 455. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner Hartman. aye; Commissioner Adkins, aye: Commissioner Linville, aye; Commissioner Jacobs, aye; Commissioner Grove, aye; motion carried-;;,_ Park on Buttonwood Ave.: Manager Rozansky said the cost estimates for the fence are between $2300 and $3200. Motion was made by Commissioner Adkins that we go ahead and install the fence with the lowest bidder, clean it out what necessary undergrowth we have to to install it: cleaning up the area that would include leveling; hauling away the debris you cannot level and put underneath the dirt: grassing the area and then staying out of there; grassing it with seed. Seconded by Commissioner Jacobs. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner Linville, aye: Commissioner Jacobs, aye; Commissioner Grove, aye: Commissioner Hartman, aye; Commissioner Adkins. aye; motion carried.