PZ 02/09/2011 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning & Zoning Commission/ Local Planning Agency February 9, 2011 Page 3 In response to the Commission's question regarding the interpretation of the Code, Ms. Reischmann stated that the language in the Code requires that the literal interpretation of the section would deny the applicant reasonable use of the property and there is nothing that supports the denial of reasonable use of the property. A general discussion ensued regarding the criteria necessary to grant a landscape waiver and possible revisions to the City Code to address landscape waivers, In response to the Commission's question, Mr. Raasch explained that under normal circumstances the certificate of occupancy is issued to the original property owner after all the outstanding requirements are met, He said this is a very unique situation because the certificate of occupancy was issued without meeting the landscaping requirements. In response to the Commission's question regarding preventing a property from being sold without the property owner addressing any outstanding issues on the site, Mr. Raasch explained a lien filed on the property would be the only way a new property owner would be made aware of any outstanding issues on the property. It was stated that a lien could not be placed on the property because the property is technically owned by Seminole County. A general discussion ensued regarding the actual debt incurred by the new owner, changes to the Code to require a lien be filed on a property if monies are owed to the tree bank fund and the new property owner was not aware it was inheriting this outstanding issue. In response to the Commission's question regarding eliminating past problems with a property if the property changes ownership, Ms. Reischmann stated that typically you would not want to eliminate past problems. She explained that this is an unusual situation because the certificate of occupancy was issued with the outstanding landscaping issues. A general discussion ensued regarding the City's policy regarding attaching a lien on a property, the purpose of the contribution to the tree bank fund and landscaping requirements. Mr. Aramendia asked for a motion to address SPR 10-01. Mr. Bakalla recommended denial of SPR 10-01 based on the staff report dated February 4, 2011 and the attached Exhibits A - F. Mr. Aramendia seconded the motion. The Board was polled.