Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDO #21-23_209 East 10th Street_RecordedThis Instrument Prepared By and Return To: Julie Adams Scofield, AICP Historic Preservation Planner Planning and Development Services Department City Hall 300 North Park Avenue Sanford, Florida 32771 Tax Parcel Identification Number: 25-19-30-5AG-1 202-0010. File #: 21-004026 Permit* COA21-000145 GRANT MALOY, SEMINOLE COUNTY CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT & COMPTROLLER CFN# 2021108682 Bk:10016 Page: 1 064-1071(8Pgs) REC: 08/17/2021 10:49:35 AM by jeckenroth RECORDING FEES $69.50 HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD OF THE CITY OF SANFORD DEVELOPMENT ORDER No. 21-23 RELATING TO 209 EAST 10TH STREETAND ISSUING CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, The Historic Preservation Board (HPB) of the City of Sanford issued this Development Order issuing a Certificate of Appropriateness relating to and touching and concerning the following described property: 209 East 10th Street, which is assigned Tax Parcel Identification Number: 25-19-30-5AG-1 202-0010 by the Seminole County Property Appraiser. FINDINGS OF FACT Property Owner: Myrtle Hills LLC, an Oregon limited liability company. 18221 SW Bickel Court Lake Oswego, Oregon 97035 Applicant: Nancy Groves Yellow Door Realty 107 South Oak Avenue Sanford, Florida 32771 Project: Approval of the HPB for alterations to an accessory structure relative to property located at 209 East 10th Street. Requested Development Approval: The Applicant requested approval of the HPB for alterations to an accessory structure relative to property located at 209 East 10th Street. Additional Findings: The project is located at 209 East 10th Street in the City's Sanford Residential Historic District as described and depicted in Schedule "S" of the City's Land Development Regulations (LDRs). The proposed alterations concern a garage that crosses the property line, with a shared roof. The garage is separated by an interior wall and accessed from the adjacent driveway. The structure is located behind the rearwall of the houses, butcan be seen from the street. The primary structures appear on a 1917 Sanborn Map on the same lot, with an accessory structure between the 2 houses. The same configuration is shown on the 1922 Sanborn Map, but the lot has been divided and the lot line divides the accessory structure. This condition is also documented by the 1947 version of the map. It is not known how long this shared garage existed, but there is a photograph taken in 1986 that shows no garage structure in place at 209 East loth Street. Sometime later the present day building was constructed, but no permit or other documentation was located to provide an exact date. The eastern two-thirds of the structure is presently in extremely poor structural condition and is beyond repair. Remedying this situation is necessary to resolve a code enforcement case that is inhibiting the sale of the property, which has not been occupied for many years. Complete demolition would adversely impact the neighbors part of the building, which has been well maintained. The remaining portion could be stabilized and rehabilitated or rebuilt. Because of the lot size and configuration, a new accessory structure could not meet the current side yard setback of 5'. The applicant is requesting approval to demolish a portion of this garage, ......... . ......... ..... .. ........ 21 Pa ge rehabilitating or rebuilding the remainder 10'x 16' portion to match the existing and to replace the rotted roof. The accessory structure proposed for partial demolition is a non-contributing structure as it is less than 50 years old and lacks architectural, historical or environmental significance individually or in relation to the ensemble of structures within the historic district. The structure is not important to the overall integrity of the historic district and does not add aesthetic interest to the historic district. The waiver of certain review criteria is appropriate. The applicant has not provided specific plans for the rehabilitating or rebuilding of the accessory structure otherthan that itwill resemble the existing with wood siding, carriage style door and shingle roof. The property owner has agreed to reinforce the shared wall as needed. Further, the property owner has provided assurance to the HPB that the rehabilitation or rebuilding of the portion of the garage thatwould remain shall occurin a mannerthatwill match the existing structure. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW (a). Pursuant to Section 8.0 of Schedule "S" of the City's LDRs, the HPB has reviewed the proposed Certificate of Appropriateness and all application documentation and matters relating thereto in accordance with the procedures for altering historic landmarks or structures within historic districts as set forth in Schedule "S". (b). Specifically, Schedule "S" of the City's LDRs provides that: (1). No landmark or structure within a historic district shall be demolished or removed, in whole orin part, until afteran application for a certificate of appropriateness has been approved by the HPB based on the following criteria: 3 1 Pa a (1 ). The historic, architectural or environmental significance of th e stru ctu re. (2). The historic, architectural or environmental significance of the structure to the overall ensemble of structures within the district and the importance of the structure to the integrity of the h i stori c d istri ct. (3). The aesthetic interest that the structure adds to the historic district, or in the case of an historic landmark, to the City. (4). The number of remaining examples of similar significance in the historic district or, in the case of an historic landmark, in the City. (5). The difficulty or impossibility of reproducing such a structure because of its design, texture, material, detail, size, scale or uniqueness of location. (6). The plans forfuture utilization of the site and the effect those plans will have on the architectural, historical, archaeological, social, aesthetic or environmental character of the historic district. (7). The reasonable measures that can be taken to save the structure from further deterioration, collapse, arson, vandalism or neglect. (8). Any measures that have been taken to prevent the 41 Page structure from deteriorating, such as performance of normal maintenance and repairs and provision of normal tenant improvements. In addition, whetherthe structure was willfully or negligently allowed to deteriorate. Properties cited for demolition by neglect that are not repaired may not be granted a demolition permit. (9). The determination by the Building Official that the structure is an imminent hazard to public safety and that repair would be impractical. (10). The economic hardship imposed on the owner if the application for certificate of appropriateness for demolition is denied. (11). The su bmittal of a detailed report describing all aspects of the structure's historical and architectural characteristics from the City's historic resources inventory and Florida Master Site File This report shall be prepared by a qualified person knowledgeable in historic preservation under contract with the City at the applicant's expense. (12). The submittal of a detailed report describing all aspects of the structure's physical condition prepared by an architect, licensed design professional or registered civil engineer at the applicants expense. (11). Accessory structures shall be of similar style, color, design and 51 Pa -c materials as used for principal residences. (c). To the extent that a conclusion of law as set forth herein also constitutes a factual finding, then such shall be taken to be so as part of this Development Order. (d). The proposed Certificate of Appropriateness is hereby found and determined to comply with the aforestated requirements and provisions. (e). Additionally, the Certificate of Appropriateness sought is hereby found and determined to be consistent with the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan and developmentof the property as proposed would be consistentwith and in compliance to applicable land development regulations and all other applicable regulations and ordinances as set forth in the Code of Ordinances of the City of Sanford. ORDER NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1). The aforementioned application for a Certificate of Appropriateness is APPROVED and the review criteria above stated in the Conclusions Of Law for the items set forth above in Section (b) (1) (1) through (12) are hereby WAIVED and the 180 day waiting period relating to demolition activities is also hereby WAIVED; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT this Development Order shall not be deemed or construed in any way to approve the entering of abutting property, damaging the property of any other property owner, a right of entry into the property of any other property owner, or the release of anydamages caused in the past or in the futureto anyother property. (2). The Development Order is conditioned upon the property owner expeditiously engaging in the necessary demolition activitywith as much as possible of the existing structure being retained from the existing structure and with all needed 61Pa ge C� permitting being accomplished, providing a specific set of drawings to the City's Building Official within 30 days and installing anew ridge capon the roof as needed (roof cap at roof peak) with the scope of work presented to the HPB being adhered to with precision. (3). This Development Order granting approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness touches and concerns the aforedescribed property and is subject to code enforcementaction in accordance with the controlling provisions of law to include, but not be limited to, the current code enforcement proceeding involving the subject property. . Done and Ordered on the date first written below. As approved and authorized for execution by the Historic Preservation Board of the City • Sanford at its meeting • June 16, 2021. eras, HPB Clerk 1871 ADDITIOV4!���—�• • • S: 7 111 - - - --------------- - ----- ------- -- - - - these presents the day and year written below and AGREES to all of the terms and conditions of this Development Order the undersigned named person having full authority to execute this document relative to all of the property associated with this Certificate of Appropriateness. Witness # I Signature Printed Name: Witness # 2 Signature Printed Name: MYRTLE HILLS LLC, an Oregon limited liability company. j a y—'A n ffc h s �4n'ager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me by means of,,k"physical presence or 0 online notarization, this day of "J-�i'I 2021 by Jay Hinrichs. He is personally known to me or produced as identification. OFFICIAL STAMP LINDA KAY ELSON NOTARY P I LtC OREGON CaMMISStaN Na.967025 My G()MM,SSION EXP{ ES SEPTEMBER 27, 2021 NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: 7 ('2--( 81 11a L) c