DO #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