HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991 11 07 Board of Adjustment Regular Minutes
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES
November 7, 1991
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M.
BOARD MEMBERS
James Greene, Chairman, Present
Harry Reid, Vice-Chairman, Present
Frank Adams, Present
Al Becker, Present
John Heninger, Present
CITY OFFICIAL
L.T. Kozlov, City Engineer
Approval of Minutes of August 1, 1991
Reid motioned to approve the minutes of August I, 1991. Seconded by Heninger.
Vote: all aye. Motion carried.
Request of Winter Park Holding Company for Variance to Section 9-241(d) of the
Code to allow a retention/detention pond bottom elevation to be less than one
(1) foot 12 inches above the seasonal high ground water elevation.
Jim Ingel, representing Regional Engineering Planners & Surveyors stated that
the Winter Park Holding Company plans to build a wet bottom pond.
Reid asked why the Winter Holding Company needed a variance for building a wet
bottom pond? Kozlov explained that the variance process was needed to comply
wi th Code requirement as this pond was designed below the seasonal high
groundwater table and approval from the Board of Adjustment is necessary before
the design is presented to the City. Reid asked who would maintain this wet
bottom pond? Kozlov answered that the Homeowner's Association would maintain
this pond.
Greene wanted to know if the City had any engineering objections with this type
of pond. Kozlov answered it did not. However, the primary engineering submitted
showed the bottom slopes had a 2:1 slope, not 4:1; but the new engineering will
represent a 4:1 slope all the way to the bottom. Reid asked if a 4:1 slope was
safe. Kozlov responded by stating it is considered safe by both the St. Johns
River Water Management District and the City. Anything steeper, however, would
require a minimum of a 4' chain link fence.
Heninger wanted to know about impurities getting into the groundwater. Kozlov
responded that the purpose of a retention/detention pond is to control the flow
of stormwater to wherever it goes (similar to the way a dam controls water going
into a river). One of the design requirements is that the retention portion of
the retention/detention pond store the first 1/2 inch of runoff from the
impervious areas. The purpose is to retain the water with the pollutants which
in turn should be taken up with various types of vegetation that may grow on the
periphere of the ponds or percolate into the ground.
Greene asked, based upon City regulations, whether all plans for future wet
bottom ponds will have to come before the Board of Adjustment for approval.
Kozlov confirmed that this was correct. Kozlov went on to explain that the City
Code meets the criteria established by the St. Johns River Water Management
-
-
Board of Adjustment Minutes
November 7, 1991
Page 2
District regarding this matter.
Richard Conniff, 1202 Royal Oak Drive needed clarification of the location of
the pond.
John Morgan, 977 Troon Trace, objected to the variance stating the following
reasons:
(1) There is already a mosquito problem due to the two other retention ponds
nearby. One pond is within 250' northwest on the edge of the golf course,
the second pond is 300' north on Greenbriar Lane. This will be the third
pond and it will be 150' away;
(2) Removal of trees; and
(3) As the Homeowners Association has not maintained the other two ponds, how
is this pond to be maintained?
Larry Godwin, representing Winter Park Holding Company, stated that there will
be a brick wall constructed between the retention pond and Mr. Morgan's house.
The Homeowners Association Restrictions will require the Homeowners Association
to maintain the pond. Greene wanted to know if the Ci ty has an enforcement
mechanism for retention pond maintenance. Kozlov stated that the City has no
enforcement mechanism.
Greene did not feel it was the position of the Board of Adjustment to be involved
wi th engineering decisions. Kozlov explained that the Board is not to be
involved with the engineering. The Board is to concern itself with the City;
how the pond is going to effect people, safety, aesthetic looks, etc.
Reid stated that according to Section F of the Code, wet bottom ponds should not
be put in swampy areas. Kozlov acknowledged that the area does have a high water
table as does all of Greenbriar, however. the City does not regulate development
within the wetlands as it is the jurisdiction of the State. Regarding
environmental regulation, the Code states "you will make the best effort" to try
and preserve the wetlands, etc. Greene wanted to know if the City could deny
permits issued from the State. Kozlov responded that, only on the basis of
engineering design, could permits be denied by the City.
Adams motioned to deny the variance. Seconded by Becker. Vote: Heninger, no;
Adams, aye; Greene, no; Reid, aye; Becker, no. Motion failed.
Becker motioned to grant the variance. Seconded by Heninger. Vote: Becker,
aye; Reid, no; Greene, aye; Adams, no; Heninger, aye. Motion carried.
Meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
~~~ing
Board of Adjustment
Secretary