good evening you're attending a session of the board of adjustments just a quick remind thank you make sure you turn your mics on sorry good evening you're attending a session of the board of adjustments um we can get a script what
script are we using uh well tonight we're uh the script so okay uh can we have a roll call please john Morland here owen Curley here jeff Trullard here jennifer Williams here
matt Mets here laura Tierney douglas Dell here okay uh I don't have a U agenda sorry anybody have an agenda i could I'll
just Sorry thank you i didn't think we were gonna Okay uh do we we don't have any mo uh minutes to approve we don't have any correspondence we don't have any old business so our new business is the annual business meeting elections so um what do we have to do
for that so as it's written in the new bylaws and this is taking kind of a page out of our old city attorney Sandy's book um in essence uh since you're electing a chair Nebs would be the one to take motions and then call for the
vote and then whoever becomes chair they can run it from that point as far as vice chair ah okay i see that's okay so um uh so do you have to do a motion for chair or does anybody just say they want to be uh yeah I mean you can nominate somebody there's not really a formal
process so all right it's probably good to have something that sets it on the record i I think I've only done it for one year so it's a two-year term up to two years up to two years yeah um is that a subtle hint okay thank you uh
there'll be a chicken in every pot chocolate in your pot okay all right and then uh is there a nomination for um vice chair i just have to as my communication is guarded on my commitment i mean committed to everything I can
challenging it's hard for me vice chair i just don't want to disappoint position right now it's pretty good i'm not I'm not on the board so I've Okay I got you yes absolutely yeah well you don't have to accept the vice
chair you can I struggle trying to Anybody else want to be vice chair need a vice chair he makes it look easy you just have to read uh we need a nomination vice chair okay do you want to be the vice chair all
right that's gonna be the vice chair all right anybody else okay then we do a vote uh yeah i mean that's typically how it's done so okay so I'd be the chair and Matt would
be the um vice chair all in favor opposed okay there we go uh and so now thank you congratulations to you Matt adopt uh so we have to adopt the board of adjustments bylaws so we
have a new set of bylaws uh I hope everybody has had a chance to read them they um are not substantially different from what you guys saw last time we did make a couple tweaks to try and make them consistent from board to board um but just to walk
you through it there are things in here that are replicated in the code particularly things like how council puts people on the the board and things along that nature but what we've done is we've taken most of the board running procedural stuff out of the code and put
it in bylaws that you guys can amend that have some flexibility and allow you to do things to basically make your meeting more of a a personal running uh event um so uh the powers and duties are taken
right out of the code qualifications appointments terms of office removals from office um I know uh number of years ago when Alexi was still here we had an issue with um how the code had written like how we deal with attendance and
reporting stuff and it ended up that she had to write a letter to the mayor and it was really awkward for everybody so we've changed that basically saying that um we'll keep track of it we will let the council know and they can do whatever they want it doesn't fall on the chair to have to do anything
basically between the clerk and I if we notice an issue that you know we can move that forward um but again there's a lot more in here about notifying staff or notifying the share ahead of time and then that can be you know an excused
absence as it were so really it's for just somebody who decides they're just going to walk away so it just uh more of a courtesy to let the other board members know if you can in advance otherwise we'll send it out as part of the notice that we give you guys
um see so the other thing we did is we added um a thing called the chair prom we've had a number of cases at planning commission where the chair and vice chair were both out and did not have a process by which to have somebody run
the meeting and we kind of invented one and it did not go well so what we've done is basically uh set it up so that at the beginning of the meeting if the chair and vice chair aren't there the board just elects somebody is the chair prom for that meeting and they would just run the meeting which is why
everybody has the scripts and things in the back of the the bylaws so you can refer to those um it's very simple but that way it officially has someone designated as the chair um let's see so meeting schedule is
something new um we've taken the requirement of the day and time out of the c the city code and put it into the bylaws so um the only caveat is that uh our meetings are designed to be held
after 5:30 which I believe is reflected in state law for some things mostly for councils not for you guys but generally it's been the policy that we do these in the evenings um I know that uh planning commission is probably going to move their meeting because that has always conflicted with the um council briefings
and so they have to wait and start at seven so we'll probably be shifting that around but um if you guys want to think about it there are uh um I think Wednesdays and Thursdays are also potentially available if that is something you guys want to consider
right now we're probably going to have the planning commission move to the opposite Tuesday of you guys so it'll be a little more consistent for the public but again that's going to be totally up to you guys um let's see you're saying we may be moving our data i'm saying if
you want to you can now before it was literally like day in the code had no exceptions exactly um but for that we would still have to look at the potential conflicts for the room and so yeah the clerk's office runs the the reservations that's
why I said that right now uh for you guys you have this Tuesday and then Wednesday and Thursday as options but also the time where you need can move around uh let's see um we did put a provision in here for um
an agenda review i've done this with a lot of different boards basically if the chair wants to get together and you've got a whole big docket of things you want to know about it we can go over that it's not a conflict because it's you're meeting with staff just to familiarize the chair with all the uh items and you know any feedback that
we've gotten so when it comes time to run the meeting they've got a good idea they're not just going in blind it is entirely optional simply something I wanted to offer um can you uh if they did it would have to be a
noticed advertised meeting they can meet one-on-one like I said in the past I've usually just done it with whoever's going to be at the meeting so if the vice chair knows he's going to run the meeting ahead of time I'll do that but um again it's totally optional for you guys it's not a
requirement um let's see sorry going back to that second yeah chair vice chair can meet with city staff before the meeting to maybe clarify some questions they may have yeah you guys are welcome to meet with us anytime you want it's just oneonone
no you're meeting with staff there's no The only only sunshine rule pertains to two people on the same board talking to each other about business so you guys are welcome to email me with questions or I would say don't call just because my voicemails like but uh yeah I mean
anything not even just related to the bylaws um I think so the other um important note is that the um bylaws are um both approved and
amended by you guys but it'll be a vote of the entire board including the alternates because these things will affect them as well so it's a simple majority if you want to vote on something to change in the bylaws but um you'll have participation from the alternates as well um what I told the planning commission
um kind of reflecting the same thing here uh I think it would be best because we've never done this before to unless there's something glaring that you want to change tonight adopt this you know in substantially similar format and then we'll try it out and if there's
something that doesn't work we can fix it because again we don't have to schedule it or do any I mean we can put it on the agenda obviously but like there's no advertising there's no notice it's just procedural for you guys to go ahead and change that so um like I said unless there's something obviously
terrible um I would say we try it out for a little while and then we're probably going to go back and do some amendments to the land development code after we find all the mistakes that we made uh so it's going to be kind of a repetitive process um you know to address it but if it works great then
you know we're done okay um with that glowing endorsement is there a motion to adopt these bylaws second okay uh the motion has been to
adopt the bylaws uh which are are uh dated April 14th 2025 and it's been seconded any discussion okay seeing no discussion can we have a uh roll call or roll call vote please
john Morland yes jeff Troular yes jennifer Williams yes matt Mets yes owen Carly yes okay the um bylaws uh have been adopted okay and now we're on to the land development code training all right um
just a quick reminder uh you notice that we don't get massive feedback anymore with these um that's because the microphone next to you isn't picking up the person who doesn't have their mic on so make sure you have your mics on to talk otherwise you just leave them on you can it's just you know if you're not
I mean anything you say will be picked up and broadcast that way so you have the option of turning them off but if you don't have it on the tape's not going to hear it the public probably won't hear it either but it won't uh it won't get feedback i won't right yeah okay
um I'm going to cover kind of the some changes specifically to your guys' process um and how the new code is going to approach variances heather's going to go over some of the highlights uh after that with um other substantive changes
that we've made um in the code as a whole so you kind of have a feeling on how that's going to work but some of you have seen this in its original form i've made some changes to reflect the changes here but um I'm going to probably speed through the things that aren't 100% relevant right now um oh one other thing
that we did put uh I'm pretty sure in the bylaws is that um we're going to do basically an annual procedural training for you guys so like we did that I don't know three years ago we had the other attorney um come in do some model motions let everybody try out being
chair if they want that way it's everyone's more comfortable and then we can you know have a refresher on sunshine and that kind of stuff so that'll be something that we'll do on a regular basis um similar to this so uh we want to familiarize you
guys with basically the much more standard practice that you'll find in both state statutes and 99% of the other cities we've been a a very strange outlier up to this point um so we want to make you guys comfortable
with how it's intended to work now um that's just what I said okay so uh obviously this seems pretty straightforward but in essence you're approving somebody to do something that would otherwise be illegal under the
code um just as an example you know if somebody is required to have 100 parking spaces they have to have 100 parking spaces um you guys saying "Oh you only need 60." That's a relief from the laws under the code so if they are supposed
to have them you guys don't grant them any relief technically they're in violation they can go through the code enforcement process uh so this is kind of where things are going to get a little bit different um traditionally we've been very broad in what we've uh interpreted
to be a hardship predominantly because very few of the properties in the city had any correlation to the minimum lot sizes and ability to have setbacks and things like that one of the things that we've changed in the new code is we've reduced the minimum lot size to match
the lots that are on the ground as best we can based on averages so um like RS1 went from 10,000 to 9,000 um I think RS3 is 5,000 now
um and uh we've also changed some of the setbacks and then we've changed uh lot coverage i'll get to that in a little bit so in essence uh the traditional interpretation of a variance is that if
the lot is such a you know has so many restrictions that they can't do what they would normally be allowed to do so in this case let's say it's a question of building a single family home if it's in a single family zoning district like RS1 that's really the only use you can
have there so if they can't use that property then that property has no value um in that sense you would basically grant relief for them to build that house uh within as much of the code as
you can so if they need minimum setback relief or a little bit of you know lot coverage it's really supposed to be proportional to what everybody else has legally so if their lot's 8,000 square feet they don't really get much to bring them into compliance with what everybody else has
um in essence it's not something to get a use that's not allowed or change the densities that are allowed uh or just because they want to or they want to build a bigger house or make more money or what whatever those reasons are um in commercial particularly uh under
the state law and under many rulings through the court system uh if you can't do anything that is considered a taking in the sense that you devalue that person's property if they can only do one thing but that's a thing that's allowed in the code that's fair you've
given them value and use to their property um so kind of a again sort of long-standing uh tradition is that um the how do I say this the standards
um in our code are to be basically strictly followed and adhered to the relief granted to people is not something that should be doled out easily um typically in cities that they're very rarely used
uh I've said this a number of times but in the city of Jacksonville they do less variances than we do and they're hundred times bigger um so one of the things we've always kind of struggled with is the sense of like what is a hardship and what's a
self-imposed hardship um under the new code as I've said we've tried to create a situation where most of these lots now are legal and they won't have a hardship in that sense now the structure could still have been built a long time ago and that may cause some complications
but in essence um the self-created aspect of variances has changed and that's kind of one of the big things you guys are going to have to take into consideration as you go through this that if somebody has a substandard lot
that you know maybe isn't a platted lot but existed 30 40 years they're buying that lot knowing that it's too small because they have to do their due diligence when they buy the property that is in essence self-imposed now that doesn't mean they don't qualify for a
variance but it does mean that there are going to be some limitations on that it's going to be more of a strict um you have to really have an actual point 2 reason um the uh
so I mean let's just go back to that because we we've seen that and that's that's bone to pick uh which I I think is right but uh you know these guys buy these super small lots which were then non-conforming and then you know they
want a variance for everything to put to put a house on it and you know what what is is So is our approach under the new land development code going to be different that we Yes this is a a a fundamental change for you guys
so we can look at that and say you know the behavior is your behavior that you know you bought a small lot and now you can't put anything on it right really small so in essence the city can't have a regulation that prevents any use of
the property and the term reasonable is sometimes used um the easiest way to think about it like I said it's kind of like that single family element if you can't build the house they're entitled to some relief so they can build the house and our zoning districts have a minimum house size and requirements so
that's basically what they should be granted anything more than that is because they want it what What is that minimum by the way it's different depends on the um each zoning district so we'll go through some of that but this will also apply in the staff's report oh absolutely this this will be
more forward written in the staff report i mean also on the staff side we're going to explain to people that you know this is not something that we're going to support this is not something the board will probably support maybe change your plans let's make this
um and again the reason we've always been a little lax on that is because we had 80% of the city was non-conforming and so you were in a situation where nobody could legally do anything and that's not a good place to be and we've used variance as a sort of a relief valve for problems with the code now
hopefully the code is right and we don't have to do as much of that um the other thing that you know we've talked about in the past the hardship has to be related to the property um or the structure and not simply
because I can make more money building a bigger house um we had talked in the past that obviously this will come up a few times but um nothing you guys do sets any precedent
um as I'd said before the the major issues that we've seen over the years we've tried to find the middle ground where council was happy with you know allowing some leeway in in design and lot coverage and setbacks to solve some
of the problems that we've been basically resolving with hundreds of variances so uh this included things like I said minimum lot sizes and um I'll go over the lot coverage stuff in a little bit but in essence finding that hardship is going to be very obvious
that it's there or it isn't so we're going to see a lot of um like if if we'll see variance requests on irregular shaped lots but not but maybe not so much people coming in saying "Hey I bought a really small lot." Yeah um I
think you'll probably see a lot of them for a while because people are going to try and push the envelope but I think once it gets out that these are the new rules and we're sticking to them it'll slow down eventually but that might take 6 months or a year now that's not to say
there aren't lots that qualify um but the other thing that we have that um hasn't necessarily come up because we weren't always tracking it um not every lot is a legal lot there are a number of lots that are created when somebody splits a property that are
not conforming and because they didn't split the lot through our process we don't have to consider it buildable we don't have to give them anything they've made an illegal lot really yes is that where the county has predefined those lot splits what's the difference so the
county does not regulate what people do with their property and actually the state statute specifically says that the property appraiser can have no role in that so if somebody comes into the property appraiser and splits their property they will say "Sure here's a new parcel number." because they can't get involved in that they don't want to
know what our code says they they aren't interested and they're not allowed so ideally somebody will come to us before that and we'll tell them what they can do but that's not always what happens and when they produce a lot that can't in some way be tied back to either a
historic lot of record or historic plat it's just a too small lot yeah i think that's where I'm confused is I think what we've observed is there are homes that are built across two platted lots mhm and then those homes are torn down and the person that purchases the
property says "I have these two lots that are no good." And so in that situation they were already platted that way are would that qualify what you're saying as an illegal lot or no because they were platted that way those are legal lots and we have to consider them
as undersized lots and appropriate variances in that small space because they were pre-platted even though the historical use was a home that was on a significant lot significantly sized lot
um that the owner decided to split essentially by tearing down the home and taking advantage of the lot our code defines non-conforming lots and lots of record as basically anything that was historically platted and anything that was created prior to the adoption of the
comp plan in the early 90s so because of that uh those lots have always been there that person has always had the entitlement to those lots and by splitting them they're not doing anything that wasn't already theirs to do uh if they wanted to take those and
that doesn't change when it changes ownership right like the the owner of the first house sells the house and both lots that it's on and the person that acquires it still acquires those rights of the separate property yeah side of the property specifically that plaid now
second part of your question those lots will likely now fall into the conforming category in that they will be the right size and won't qualify i've heard that a lot in the review meetings i disagree in terms of the ones that we've
observed that have come to us it might be that there are a lot of lots out there that that will happen but the ones that come to us would still be unconforming on most of what has come through in the new land development like it gets closer but it I mean there there are always going to be lots that don't conform and part of that is because it's difficult to change somebody's zoning
without uh crossing that line into a taking and so we didn't want to mess with the zoning lines so we tried to do as much as we could inside each zoning category yes there are definitely plats that don't meet the minimum those we'll have to deal with um and you know I
don't think there are that many vacant lots out there anymore people are really when they're looking for houses to tear down that means they're scrging up whatever's left i saw that happen in Riverside but it's definitely going to be less it won't be none i I just don't think we've seen a lot of
people splitting lots as much as leveraging the pre-flatted split that was used in the past again it's it's an entitlement they already have but um we do have a number of people that have split lots illegally typically after they've constructed whatever it is they
were making and then when that person buys it they're kind of getting you know a lot that they don't even think is too small because it looks fine and it was platted or not but it was split by the county where that where where we've seen that is where somebody asked to build a
structure in their backyard like a a live-in like a separate house and then have it sort of attached with like a walkway and then we allow that and then they go and split the property and then
the person who buys the small things says "Well I need a variance now to to do whatever you know to unless they know because we have a record of that not being a lot and you guys have split it illegally enjoy your time." And that should that should well hopefully that
will restrict that but in that example the person that asks has already paid for a property they didn't know wasn't so it's like due diligence that falls under the due diligence of purchasing property i mean you get a survey you see what the come talk to the city i mean
obviously I know this because I do this for a living but certainly when I bought my property I talked to the neighbors i did all that stuff um to your point about the additions with the walkway that's changed in the code um it now has to be an air conditioned connection and
it can't be more than 10 feet long so they can do a slightly separate edition they can do like a you know bathroom pool house kind of thing but it literally has to be part of the house so if somebody decides they want to try and split it well you've got AC ducks and electrical and all those things that are tied together because you only get one
meter and you only get you know one electrical panel so uh hopefully that'll solve some of that and we'll get into the separate dwelling units towards the end uh but again I want to is not a reason um
going back to that you know lowest intensity as long as they can do something with the property that reasonable use pretty much means whatever the minimum is the lowest intensity if that's a single family home whatever the smallest single family home that's allowed we would give them relief
for that uh but not because the lot's you know 10% too small they get a 100% lot coverage like it's going to be something specifically proportioned to say everyone in this zoning district gets this you have a little bit less we'll give you a little bit to make you basically whole as though you were on a
regular property is there a measurement that you use for that or percentage or how do you Yeah I mean in essence the um there's lot coverage that determines what you know the limits of the house are the code has some requirements for how big
the air conditioned space of the house needs to be and when you put those two things on the plat or on the piece of paper um it'll show you what the setbacks need to be and at that point you can kind of determine how much lot coverage they might need based on what they should have if they were a
full-size lot and then what setbacks they would need if the lot was big enough is there any um if we turn down a variance and it's 25% reduction does that still apply in the new code yes we
do have some provisions for um uh subsequent applications um Heather will probably touch on that a little bit different than what we've had before okay so we're going to be covering that later okay yeah I'll touch it thank you what's our ability to uh use our judgment around what seems
reasonable so I'll give the example of why I'm asking the question if and I don't know the new lot sizes but uh I think RS1 used to be 10,000 ft but then you'd have a lot that was like 5,200 and they're like 35% of 10,000 is 3500
feet so we want 3,500 ft on 5,000 and they're now at 66 and us to say we recognize you're in an undersized lot we're not going to give you 66% coverage we think 50% is reasonable though that's less square footage than a full lot
might have relative to the lot that you have that we feel like meets your need like that's pretty gray and nuanced into whoever's on the board coming up with an arbitrary number so I don't think that that's necessarily direction but I'm just curious what's our ability to do something like that so actually that
hopefully will be more of what you guys can do um like I said in the code we're trying to give very specific this is the minimum thing you can do so in this case the minimum sized house to meet the requirements of the code this is how much lot coverage that would give you
and then you get this much more for impervious surface for like sheds and stuff like that the intent we split the lot coverage question like lock coverage now is only for the house and driveway and then there is a 15% additional impervious surface ratio for anything
else AC pads pool decks all that kind of stuff um one of the things we're hoping to be very strict on is that percentage stays that percentage so somebody can't say well I want to get 50 for the house well no you get 35 for the house and
driveway and the driveway is one that a lot of the developers are upset about um but it's always been 35% for the house and driveway and other stuff so we've actually moved that line um hopefully as we do the staff reports we'll give you guys the tools to sort of decide you
know we recommend this lot coverage these setbacks based on this information so you're not grasping at straws i guess what I'm getting at is what is our ability to use judgment versus be formulaic in those exceptions do we do we need to apply a consistent formula
across the board or is by the nature of a variance us providing an exception and us being able to say this is what the board feels if it was a 100% strict thing we wouldn't have a board to decide it um your judgment is part of what is built into the process um and obviously
communally your judgment as well um I would say being consistent is good and uh more importantly tying your discussion and decision to the evidence you have at hand um if there's you know a reasonable amount of law coverage that
makes sense based on everything you you're given and it's not what they're asking for you can point to that um or you know any of the other new relevant code changes that we've made to say you get this and this is actually pretty good so we're going to give you a little bit extra to make it work but again you
have to meet that minimum standard and again think of reasonable use as only use lowest possible use um because that pretty much checks the same box christian just a quick quick question so like a hardship that a neighbor might say they have because of the change
that's being proposed that that's irrelevant it's all focused on just the use of the land correct um yeah so the neighboring property should have no bearing on Okay what you guys look at unless it's something like a conflict between an existing structure that might
be on the property line and what they're asking for there may be some you know obvious relevant things but all your decisions are going to be based on what the applicant provides what the staff report says and anything you take in during the meeting whether that's more testimony or you know handouts that
somebody brings but that's the bulk of evidence that's why it's quasi judicial if it were formally judicial everything would be through like a discovery process this is sort of a easy gentle version of that uh let's see where are we
okay um going going back to that last slide it sounds to me as though on the one hand we want to get stricter and as long as there is a legitimate use they're not eligible for variance
but on the other hand we talk about the fact that um we we may give them a variance to to do what they want to do with the property not necessarily the what what is another reasonable use that would suggest that
they cannot um or should not have bought the property yeah so because they want it is basically not a reason for you guys to grant a variance it's that would that would eliminate about 90% of the parents request that's that's the point
and again we've tried in the code to give a little bit there as well um because you know 15% that pretty much is the thing that people need out because we did a lot of analysis on the the historic last five years of variances and typically the average request was
about 48% and a lot of that was driven by patios or small additions or you know uh pool decks and things like that so we have built in an extra 15% for all those
accessories um and therefore the need for the variance won't be there so the swimming pool guys shouldn't be coming back to you unless there's a really obvious reason why they need relief and just because I want a bigger swimming pool or my outdoor kitchen needs a bigger roof sorry man your lot's 50 feet
wide i don't know what to tell you um and this is uh again kind of uh the demonstrated hardship is related to any reasonable use the um question of
whether the action is self-created if it creates an economic disadvantage to the owner or the investor um or because the applicant uh purchased the property with a very obvious problem that in itself doesn't limit the use of the property so
if you bought an oddly shaped lot you can still fit your house you can still fit your pool but you can't build a giant house on it sorry you bought a weird lot but if that lot will not let you build a house then they might qualify for some relief could you repeat that i didn't hear the
last part what you said um so because you have an oddsized lot as long as you can build the house there within the confines you don't need relief if you want to build a bigger house that's not a reason to grant them relief because the minimum is all that they're entitled
to um if they bought a weird lot they're knowingly buying that lot with the limitations especially people who are doing development they know what they're getting into so that it won't be a reason because they want to build a threetory 8,000 foot house well only
5,000 square feet fit here uh again the hardship is tied to the land and the structure not the project not the what they want to do is very strict to is the land weird or is the structure old and how those two things are going to relate to each
other so um we've kind of uh changed some of the language in the code to help reflect this um and so our uh new um language actually this part is
pretty similar but in essence it's saying that um the deviation from the terms of the LDC won't uh create a public nuisance and won't uh violate the comp plan and won't create any kind of
precedent for the future so I'll use the 10 foot wide house as an example that lot was 25 ft wide it was the only one in that flat that was 25 ft wide we don't know why it was there that builder got well he didn't get any relief but he was able to build the house in the the
confines of that with weird you know gymnastics but had you granted relief for that that is no reason to assume the next guy who's got a lot in the same subdivision is entitled to all that relief cuz obviously his limitations were such that if it had qualified that
lot was just impossible to build on um but you know if he bought the lot knowing he could build a house but not two houses again that's on the developer um so originally our criteria the six criteria under the code really didn't
line up with the standards in the state law also they didn't make a lot of sense the way they were written u we have hopefully corrected that and brought them more into alignment um so these are going to be the new conditions and how they line up
with the Florida law so first criteria there are conditions or circumstances that exist which prevent compliance with the site design development standards or which are unique to the parcel of land building or structure that is basically
saying the um hardship on the property is basically preventing them from meeting the dimensional standards for the minimum use um the lot is oddly shaped and creates some hardship in that regard or potentially it's an older house or an older commercial structure
that they can't physically meet the needs there um and a lot of times particularly with like commercial properties it may have been running as an enterprise without any variance because it's always been that thing and then one day they sell
the property somebody buys it it's not obvious that they're going to have a parking issue but they do and there's really no way to correct that in some cases so that may be a reason why that would get relief um the state statute
uh requiring circumstances must be unique to the applicant's property or structure not shared by other properties uh within the area so if I have a 50 by 100 lot and my neighbor has a 50 by 125 lot um and you guys grant relief on the
100 by 50 foot you have no ties to grant the same thing on the one next door and if the one next door is the same size as his and the one next door is the same size as his he doesn't have a hardship they don't all have hardship the hardship is unique to that property so just saying you know I've got this tree
where I want to put my pool so I need to get relief from that build a bigger build a smaller pool make it a kidney shape you know do whatever you have to but your lot has to be different from the lots in the same area or in the same zoning category significantly in some
cases to qualify and again this will make more sense as you guys start to do some of these and hopefully we'll explain it in the staff report um so that's the you know the former DCA basically um variances have been granted
in similar situations as the applicants or in the community none of that provides any uh precedent or reason to approve something in the future this is the big one the conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant
and would not constitute a self-imposed hardship our previous criteria was a little bit weirdly worded um and the state statute is basically the same thing prove that you didn't make this problem you didn't buy this property with this problem your request isn't out
outlandish to require relief um and we'll we'll try and break that down in a lot more detail probably change the staff report a little bit as well um so uh there would be no special privilege afforded to the applicant by granting a variance that is not
available to other parcels of land building or structures with similar conditions or circumstances so this is that that single family example if the neighbors are entitled to build a single family home and you can't build the same sized home that the minimum for that lot
so I think RS1 it's like 1100 square feet of air conditioned space if your neighbor can build that and you're stuck at a thousand well you can't build that house legally then they're entitled to some relief but the guy down the street who has the same size lot as his
neighbor and want just wants to put more in there sorry this is what you bought um and again that's why I said those uh relief mechanisms are going to be tied specifically to what relief is needed to meet the minimum standards for the code
um but because you did this in the past or we've always done it this way is not a reason uh similar but strict interpretation and enforcement of the code would deprive the applicant of the rights commonly enjoyed by other parcels of land and would provide an unnecessary
or undue hardship so you're in a plat that has 50 by125 lots yours is 50 by 100 you get enough to make you whole as compared to the other lots not I'm in RS1 and that guy's got a 10,000 foot lot
and he's got a 5,000 foot house i should be able to put 5,000 feet on my 6,000 foot lot no you get a comparable proportional similarity this seems distinguishable from the any use so how does this how do you determine when the any use policy applies and when this
because this is way more lenient um because we're saying like they they we should be limiting them to any use of their property and if it's you know it should be that strict before we give them a variance whereas this is saying not the
same use as my neighbors this is basically saying that um if you didn't grant them a variance they couldn't build the minimum use on that property or um couldn't build
uh I'm trying to think of a good example it's really like if if I have if I'm I'm seeking a variance and I have a a smaller lot than my neighbors you're not saying you can't build a house you're saying everyone
else has a house and you can build a house on yours but it just can't be as big as those other to be the minimum house yeah and you could always put that and so they they've rewritten the code so if you think about it in the opposite it would be comparing to the neighbors then in that instance no it's you know
what I mean but I think that the so the comparison is they have a single family home you get a single family home but you don't get their single family home yeah well and just to make it a little bit easier so in commercial categories there's a whole list of uses that you can have
um the um trying to think how to say this so if they can't use a variance to get more than what's allowed it's the best way to say that um if they're in a residential
zoning district they can't build an office they can't get a variance to build an office they can't change the things that are required to build that office but they can get relief to build a home so in this sense you're you're looking at it pretty much by zoning district but also kind of surrounding
properties because we do have some areas where you know commercial and multif family but um that doesn't entitle the multif family to be commercial so you're looking at a number of different factors but this is really more of a limit than a um cart launch it's saying that these are the strict things that you can do in
this district and in this neighborhood um or plat not neighborhood um and we will grant you enough leniency to be able to do the same thing not exactly the same thing but roughly proportionally um and there's that any use and
reasonable use and again this is like I said it's tied to similar properties not necessarily uh exactly the same uh and this is uh if the variance request is granted it
will make possible the reasonable use of the parcel of land building or structure and reasonable use is any use it's the minimum use so this is in essence saying we will grant you the minimum you need to accomplish said goal of whatever use
is the reasonable use of the property um but we're not going to give you more than that there unless there's a compelling reason and it has to be genuinely compelling so you know I get an extra 15% lot coverage but on my lot that's only you know 30 square feet
instead of 500 well you know you get 30 square feet in that case you can still build a house you can still have a little patio but you don't get a giant patio just because your lot's a little bit smaller uh this is the one that we basically got rid of the entire thing
related to the comp plan because you couldn't violate the comp plan anyway um and got this back closer to what the intent of this is which is kind of finding a balance between the community and the individual um the basically the
variance uh will not result in the creation of a public nuisance um a public nuisance is different than a private nuisance so I live next door to somebody who's got a junk car and it's leaking oil and I hate it that is
personal use that is two property owners that have an issue between them a public nuisance is I own a factory and it belches smoke and it flows over a neighborhood or into a school it is literally something that affects large
swaths of the city um generally if it's uh two neighbors disputing over something and they start calling code enforcement it really isn't related to anything that we do um would an example be like maybe because of the variance we're giving them they're only going to be able to park here and it's going to
block visibility would that be an example of a public nuisance and that's Yeah I mean that's actually perfect example um there would be some condition created that would affect the general public either in the vicinity or who might be in the area for that period of
time um if you like if they want to build the house on the property line because their lot's narrow that could potentially create visibility issues it could create runoff issues there's a lot of things that are in play but basically one of the things we're going to look at when
we bring it to you and you need to consider is that will this create a situation that even though the applicant might need some relief what he's asking for is going to have a bigger impact on the community and that's not acceptable but what do you what about a situation
where you've got a duplex and it's rented out each side is rented out to four UNF students each of whom has a car and there are not there's not even a potential to have that many cars parked
on the lot so they're going to be parking on the public street that that is a a nuisance but in the past we've said we can't take into consideration how someone what what they're going to use the land for we are
stuck with just the dimensions and and so if we can't say how many students are you going to be renting to or can we put a a limit on the number of vehicles that can be permanently attached to each side no um parking on
the public rideway is legal um parking where on the public rightway on the street is legal you can you can park your car on the street unless it's you know a fire lane or something like that um and we can't regulate how many cars they own um we can regulate things like
you know unlicensed dilapidated cars which can be a nuisance but um I think uh the minimum size of um town homes has gone down the uh width of the town home
lot has gotten bigger and the requirement for parking has gotten more substantial so going forward any townhouse the lot's 25 ft wide they have to have at least a onecar garage and they have to have a twocar driveway and that is you know in essence to try and
make as much equitable uh change as we could to balance again the the ability of the city to provide um relief from the neighbors well so they have to have more parking but also you know not require 90% of the lot to be paid for
parking um I think it's going to be one of those things that if somebody's building a new town home and they don't want to put in three parking spaces you guys look at them and say "Make a smaller house you have to have three parking spaces." Um but uh
it's this one's kind of uh the reason public nuisance isn't like crisply defined in any code or law is because you can't anticipate what's going to be a nuisance in every case you know we didn't think that LED lights were going
to be a thing and some of them fail and turn purple and those can be a problem we we would never have thought of that as basically a nuisance we do now but it's always basically a kind of common sense is this doing something to the
health welfare well-being enjoyment of life of the community getting a town home next to you if you're in a multif family district that's not necessarily uh an impact that is a nuisance you may not like it but they were entitled to
build town homes if you let them build a town home property line to property line and they literally have no space to like go and paint their house anymore um that could be a nuisance and that could be something that we wouldn't want to approve it's going to be very case by case unless there are some obvious other
standards that have been you know like clean air and clean water acts those have very defined things you have to do so um there's a example in Jacksonville there's a company that makes perfume and they have for years gotten complaints from the neighbors about the smell of
alcohol and like these you know pungent um things wafting over large swats of the neighborhood and uh nobody really did anything until the city's environmental group got involved and went and did some mayor testing and said "Oh yeah you guys are wrong go fix your
factory." Um but outside of that it's it's really going to be situational dependent and uh again you know if you're not on the corner lot it may not have an impact with visibility so that's just going to be something that's determined case by case and we'll again
try and give you the best tools to understand in that situation what we think the nuisance is going to be um but that's why it says things like annoy the community or endanger in the comfort health and repose of the safety
of the citizens these are all things out of the state statutes and laws um but it's broad on purpose um we've been through appeals before some of you have been through several uh the important thing and
um probably the the thing that will come up the most if someone challenges something in the court system um the well again we don't have an internal review process but uh somebody
has to go to the court um they are going to challenge you based on a number of factors with regards to how your decision was made what considerations you made for the evidence that was presented did somebody just throw their feelings into it did you say
we're not going to approve this but gave no reason why um so when a judge looks at it they're basically going to say did you follow the law did you follow your own rules
and was this decision made on the things that were there they're not going to look at the content of your decision 90% of the time because they're not there to invade our home rule with regards to lot sizes and things like that but they are going to look at your process and
determine if the process was followed correctly and if not how that could be addressed through the court sometimes a lot of cases they just refer it back to you for rehearing and you get all the evidence again you make it and you look at it and say "Okay it still is a no but
these are the reasons why." That's perfectly fine but this translates into as you guys are going through your process making sure you are following your procedures that you're sticking to the code and that you're um basing your
decisions verbally in your motions on the things that are in front of you referencing the standards and then saying you know this lot is this small so they should be able to get this much relief that way if it ever goes to court odds are nothing's going to happen with the appeal because you've done your job
well i think you already covered this but I just on this slide think it makes sense to cover it again which is no variant sets a precedent and so the stent from variance to variance to variant they're going to look at that one in isolation going back to D where it's like enforcement of the code would
not deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other parcels of land is kind of the loose interpretation of that is are you doing something different on this variance than you did on my buddy's variance or something like is that part of the appeal process or is it strictly did we use these rules and
call out why we've declined the variance and is it on a standalone basis justifiable there are probably cases where the judge has gotten into the weeds on the criteria it doesn't happen often um but that criteria again is
worded similarly to most communities have something similar to that and what it's driving at is we're not allowing something to happen that isn't allowed on properties nearby so a good example is going to come up is um accessory
dwelling units there is a very specific place time and thing that happens where you get an accessory dwelling unit uh somebody can't come in and ask for a variance to get that accessory dwelling unit regardless of whether their neighbor has it or not they have to meet those criteria like every other property
in the zoning district um there may be some other issues that are uh acceptable that aren't obvious you can have single family homes in multif family zoning we actually have a lot of that um and to build a multif family use like C1
commercial is a good example you can now have a single family home that's been there but if you want to build something new there's a limit on the types of uses that you can have that are not residential so if somebody comes in and say "Hey I'm going to put an office here
and I need a variance for parking." Just because the lot next door has a house on it doesn't mean they're not entitled to that variance because of the conditions of the lot it's really like an application of the the standards and um the similar properties throughout the
city that you know C1 commercial on third street everybody has this problem so or everyone has this option for development that's kind of the point it may seem like it's uh really open to
interpretation but I think um I'll see if I can find some examples for you guys to kind of read through but um I think you'll see in practice it really does make sense um but most of the time no the judge isn't going to look at the criteria and say you guys have interpreted your own criteria wrong
they're going to look at did you follow the law was your decision based on e competent evidence and if you can demonstrate that they're not going to get involved because that's really they're a procedural review they don't get into our uh individual home rule
rights um back to what I was saying earlier so uh if you have a lot that is 100 square feet smaller than the neighborhood lot doesn't meet the minimum standard by 100 square feet and you have a site plan
that shows they want to do way more than they're really entitled to and you say "Hey we're going to approve this but with these conditions based on this thing that I have in front of me that measures this way um there's absolutely no judge is going to be like oh that wasn't competence with Angel Evans." But
if you just get up there and say "I will never ever approve a swimming pool ever," then yes you're going to probably lose that challenge so it's it's important to verbalize that and then when we write our final orders we incorporate that into the final order so
we're always kind of hitting that um box um this is another one of those uh kind of not hard fast rules and and there's a reason uh you guys are not judges you are sort of judges you're quasi judicial so you don't have to adhere to the same
evidentary rules as a judge or a court you have a lot more leeway but there are some boundaries to what is considered competent and substantial if I get up and say "This shed is going to devalue my property and I'm just the guy that lives in the house." he's not an expert
on property values so that isn't necessarily competent evidence in determining whether or not this will have an effect on that property um if it's an appraiser who comes in and says "Hey I did an appraisal on this did comparables and we think that this shed is actually going to reduce that
property value or you know it's going to block the sun at this time of day and they can't grow veget." Um that person is an expert that testimony is competent substantial evidence so you have to consider it it doesn't mean you have to decide a certain way or not but um the the term for legal sufficiency is
basically can you base your decision on it is it something a reasonable person could look at and say yes I understand um there are like I said some stuff that's introduced um before the hearing everybody's going to get a copy if you
meet with a developer and you disclose your exparte conversation that's perfectly fine if all you guys know that you don't like this guy and you get up and vote and kind of make up some reasons that's not going to stand as confident evidence but um it's it's uh
pretty well tried in the courts that as long as it's again something that reasonably can be understood by somebody else that that decision makes sense based on what was presented then you guys will be fine again our basis is going to be the applicant's uh documents and supporting
material the staff report and any testimony or evidence given at the hearing um when you guys have your conversation if they didn't present an argument to address the fact that you know there's a utility easement running through the backyard it is not uh
competent substantial evidence for you guys to discuss that and say "Hey I think that there's a drainage easement here we shouldn't you know no one's presented that that no one has talked about that public works hasn't shown up and complained about it um because you know something unless it's tied to a thing that you can give to the court to
understand and it's part of what's in the room when you make the decision um it's not considered competent evidence which is why we generally discourage you guys from like visiting the sites and making some determinations because even if you disclose that from an exparte
standpoint if that becomes the reason why you deny something that's not going to hold up in court because it's not based on anything the developer or the staff or the neighbor said it's just because you so if we feel that meaningful evidence has not been provided that we think should be
provided we would make a motion to defer and ask the city to review you can yes okay and uh I don't think I covered in the bylaws but you were like I said always welcome to call staff and discuss each item if you want oneonone because there may be
questions you don't know and that's what we're here for but if it's something that you think there hasn't been provided enough evidence to support or make your decision one way or the other absolutely you can defer it and say "Hey you need to go give us more because we can't really understand whether this is right or
not." Um so we've generally covered uh what a variance is and how it's going to be strictly applied going forward um why the variance is going to be not based on any prior approvals or
precedents or things we used to do that the hardship is related to the structure or the land and not the project or the request um then it must be a realistic hardship that's created or exists
um the hardship uh must be a legal one in that they cannot use their property without the variance as opposed to I won't be able to fully enjoy my property if I've got a commercial lot that's very small I cannot build a shopping mall on it and just because I want to doesn't mean you're denied use of the property
but you can put like you know a little real estate office and have like one real estate agent in there and that's considered a reasonable use so the idea that they are entitled to everything in that zoning district is not correct there are other limitations in the code that prevent
that um and then making sure your decisions are obviously based on competent substantial evidence um let me think uh there was something else I wanted to cover oh um in the planning commission side of
the new code certain uses have standard required conditions um and those are things that they can't ask for a variance from because those aren't dimensional standards they're not landscaping standards they're things that are specific to that kind of use so
as an example the accessory dwelling unit not only does it have to be in a certain zoning category but you have to have a certain size lot you have to have a single family house not a duplex or um apartments you have to have uh there's a maximum size for the unit there's a
maximum height for the unit all that's written into if somebody approves it these are the things they have to do and so you may get requests that are kind of hairy when it comes to that stuff we're going to sort that out ahead of time so you know that this request isn't going to violate that thing because there are things that will go to planning
commission and then come to you guys but um just understand that people might ask for things that you can't consider or give them that sound like their dimensional standards sound like they're parking standards but they don't they're or they're not they apply to that use and they are immovable in essence so uh
it's not a lot but it does include things like daycarees and shooting ranges and camps grounds stuff like that things that have a pretty can have a substantial impact so um ADUs are new and there's a lot of resistance to them so we tried to make sure that it was
really clearly defined what that box is um so hopefully that won't be a conflict for you guys but we'll as we go through that you'll get the hang of it it's it will be in the code but I don't think we've given you that section because it's not really something you guys are going to deal with but we'll provide that information if it's
necessary and I think that's all I had so I will let Heather take over guys have any follow-up questions for Christian not that he's going anywhere but um I think Christian did a great job in covering really what's the most
important for you guys which is these updated standards and how they're consistent with Florida law and and how will we will be applying them moving forward uh because while we know that the changes we made aren't going to make every single lot conforming or give
everyone what they need um I think it makes it a lot better so all these folks that are m you know buying a house where the developer maxed out their property so they don't have room to put a pool well they should now um it also will limit these some of these very very
large houses we see being put on tiny lots unless that lot warrants it because again there's nothing else you can do i there are some lots legitimately are 3,2500 square feet they have to have variances or they can't build anything um so again he covered the most
important stuff for you so I'm going to be a little bit more bigger picture with the whole code um you have copies in front of you as Christian said it's not the entire code but what is most pertinent to the board of adjustment so articles 1 through seven um the
definition section has gotten much much larger and I know in a year when we review this code we're going to find some terms we forgot to put in there and so we might add a few down the road um as we identify some we need to to um provide if we can't find it elsewhere
like the Florida building code or Florida statutes as far as the role of the board of adjustment that remains the same um again we did provide some flexibility with your meetings and such and the bylaws uh it's the most important thing again
to note are those changed um standards and kind of our updated process moving forward so you guys have copies in your binders of um the zoning districts and the parking standards since those are the most things you're going to see folks requesting relief from are going
to be those dimensional standards rarely you'll see uh something to do with perhaps landscaping for example but like Christian mentioned if it was something really small in an area of the code uh like that we would you know reiterate those standards to you and what they're asking for relief from so we'll
obviously if you don't have it and you do want the whole entire rest of the code let me know i'll be happy to print it out for you we just didn't want to give you stuff you didn't necessarily need so it's 321 pages it's also 320 pages and so we also didn't want to you know kill that many trees if we if we
could help it um Yeah yeah so just some of the kind of highlights uh for you guys number one the whole code has changed its numbering um format so Christian and I are still learning it so if anybody says a section
number we're going to like have no idea i have to look in the code too um just not on the top of our heads yet of what those new numbers have or sections have been numbered we'll get the hang of it eventually uh there's also some figures and new tables in there that hopefully will be easier for some people to
understand things like all of our public notice requirements public uh hearing requirements it's all in one one location now we did make those a little bit more consistent across the board with different types of applications um Christian mentioned the conditions on conditional uses so I think that will be
very helpful to uh the board of or the planning commission as the updated standards for variances will be helpful for um for this board we did update our parking requirements i know you guys have heard us talk about this in all all the different workshops
to change what the requirements are for some uses have a little less uses in the list uh so that it's easier to kind of change uses without triggering a change in the parking that would result in maybe possibly a variance if the parking
is is appropriate for what's there um and they don't need to have any kind of reduction or anything um so we don't really know what impact that'll have on parking variances we'll have to see how that kind of shakes out as we implement the code over the next year or so
um but the I think something for you guys to know and and you know please study this section and let us know if you have any questions or you want to discuss is the ability for a commercial property to do some parking reductions for pro providing some alternate parking
options like golf carts EV bike racks scooters and motorcycles things like that so seeing as how we're built out and we don't have a lot of vacant land left we don't know who and when that might get used um it could be an existing commercial property that maybe
wants to retrofit so uh I might go looking for like a guinea pig to kind of try this out and see if anybody wants to put in some golf cart and EV parking so we can kind of practice that that formula because it really mostly will come into play I think when properties uh redevelop and we're looking at a new
building a new use a new parking um layout and things like that just real quick so it's kind of structured basically so there's an absolute maximum reduction you can get which for normal zoning is 30% for downtown is 50 um but that's also based on a percentage that
is reduced with everything that they do so if you provide um good example uh so if you provide a compact space and uh well if you provide a bunch of compact spaces you can only get a 5%
reduction by doing that and it's basically 1% for every five compact spaces so if you provide five compact spaces you reduce your required size parking by five but ultimately no matter how you play the game you can only get 30% at the end and
to get that 30% you have to do all the things and you have to do them in the way that is prescribed in the code um and we've got new standards for what golf cart parking is and how bike parking is going to work in essence a bike parking space is going to have to require space for so many bikes like the
bike rack has to be able to handle I don't remember if it was 10 or 20 bikes um and that gets them one parking space reduction um but yeah that table's in there um kind of look at it this is all stuff that will probably happen before
anything comes to you so they may come in looking for additional reductions but they may have done a bunch of things to get to where they are but these percentages that you're talking about they're going to be included in the staff report so you're going to say they're putting these compact spaces in
so therefore they qualify for the 5% or what have you yeah so So I mean it's not something that we have to have memorized i mean it's going to be in staff report i don't even plan to have it memorized i'm thinking Well I'm just thinking with the like when you're talking about all these math you know if if we're talking
like earlier were saying the minimum home that could be put on this lot should be at least this and if we're talking about that and you know you would tell us what the difference is from what they have right now to what the minimum would be so we don't have to do you know I know John's going to be
disappointed he loves but you know trying to figure out what the math is here right because in essence if someone's coming to you for a parking reduction part of that discussion is going to be well they've already gotten a reduction of this many spaces through providing all these alternate means they've maxed out what they can do we
will explain all that in the staff report like I said we'll probably restructure the staff reports a little bit i know Nibs is probably having a quiet panic attack over there but it'll be fine we'll do as much math as we can which we appreciate i think we've you know historically done in the past when
it was appropriate to say this lot is this square footage too small based on the zoning district or percentage too small or they can't get the minimum size home unless they get these stepbacks so um I know those are some of the more complicated cases that you might hear
again a lot of what you guys are used to seeing is "I have a small lot and I need a pool cuz my dog has arthritis or something like that." I think that's what my neighbor actually said when she came in front of you so I apologize um but she's an attorney so she was trying to you know do her thing but um those
you know did we a lot of Yes i don't think anyone except maybe Mr morland was on the board at that time um but it's I think those type of things you were seeing over and over and over again hopefully you won't you won't continue to see because again we've now given the
allowance for additional stuff above and beyond what you can get for your house and what's required for you to have a driveway and parking for your car so we'll see we'll see how this this hashes out i think the definition of permeable space changed from the time that I started on the board to even before this
land development code passed with regard to how deck spacing is considered or how pools are considered or how permeable pavers are treated is that outlined in any detail in the new code or is that still something that um and we some of it's the same some of it we've changed
um I'm trying to think a good example so pvious pavers is still going to be a max of 50% and it's still going to be based on how the manufacturer determines that pvious rate um decks if they're over dirt there's nothing underneath them they're not going to count because
literally the water can go through them and hit the dirt it's not actually covering anything so the deck's not getting the 50% limitation it's just a zero yes yeah and that's that's the way we've been doing it it wasn't in the code before um just even the definition
of pvious versus impervious so we've we've added that um we have allowed some flexibility with materials and like Christian said we were giving credit for pvious pavers just by policy it wasn't in the code so now the code specifically recognizes alternative materials uh
where it didn't before such as astroturf and you know things like that you just we just got to imply some uh common sense to some of these thing that we weren't doing before necessarily yeah i just remember in 2016 I had to get rid of my driveway and
put in a new one and I was putting in papers and they're like "Yeah it's 100% coverage." And I'm like "It's literally 40% holes." And they're like "Nope sorry." And same thing with the deck they're like "That's 100% coverage." And to your point I'm like "It's over dirt and it's got a hole every six inches."
Like it's just Yeah uh but I thought and you know I'm happy to hear that it's not but I thought that the decks were being treated similar to permeable pavers where the spacing had to be so wide and then you got a percentage credit but that you're saying that's outlined in the code more explicitly now right um
I'm I don't think I mean in essence yeah that's how we were doing it because you know if it wasn't technically water could flow off but um I think it doesn't have a spacing requirement i think it just says deck but again yeah and some of that comes down to Florida building code and how they're required to be constructed and
you know for anyone that has concerns about that this all the setbacks still apply so we're still not allowing people to build right up to their property line regardless of of what it is residential specifically commercial has different standards so you know we still would
have the buffer around the property um whatever structures are on the property um a minimum of five feet in every pretty much every commercial or uh residential zoning district for every kind of structure um someone had asked a question oh yeah I'm sorry Jennifer yeah no no problem um so I'm looking at the
you know the new percentages of 35% for the house and the driveway and then 15% additional so I presume that if the house say with the driveway is 40% you know then 10% left for the accessories is that how we're to do it you got it
right so if there's an existing house that it's already at 40% they're still limited to 50 they don't get 15 on top of whatever they have they're still limited by that that 50% so that's the way that would work okay just um to your question Matt in the definition section
there is pvious parking and pvious paving materials and what those mean so they have been defined um and then I was going to say something else and I've forgotten did you ask for no I didn't need one to get my driveway
done as long as he got a permit i did get a permit to build it because they spaced it out differently but they wouldn't let me build what I wanted because it was going to Maybe you can now just make an appointment well now it's going to be a credit it's going to be like you're way under your permeable
space build something up um and also to to Jennifer's point um there will be situations where there might be some flexibility on that 35 and 15% depending on the circumstances but I promise you you're going to have a bunch
of developers coming in and saying "I can't possibly make money if I have to include the driveway in this." Yes and we I was going to say that's how it's done now but uh we had a very like over and over detailed discussion with council on this and the intent of a lot
of this code is to provide neighborhood preservation and character preservation so preventing people from building gigantic footprint houses next to small 1950s houses um so that standard was is is designed to be as strict as possible
if there are some you know situations where LEO really makes sense we'll obviously explain that um if it's a tiny amount there's still the chance that we can do it administratively it still doesn't need to come to you guys but um for the most part yeah that's going to be a line in the sand but expect to get
a lot of requests for it i know u someone had a question about the successive applications i had to pull up that section um it's 34506 now i don't know what it was before uh so essentially we we took out that 25% because in some cases it was really hard
to quantify because are they reducing a setback a lot coverage both just where does that fall so we made it a little bit more gray on purpose um to basically say if it's material materially different involves a change in use uh or
decrease in the density or intensity of what they had previously been asking for that was denied then they can come back and that really is going to fall on staff to make that determination and we can say yes we think it's different enough or no and bring it to you guys if if it is and then it's up to the board
to kind of look at that new request um in light of the standards uh that would be applicable so I think my question was if the 25% pushes them under the minimum requirements and you got a condund there yeah that so yeah yeah that and that definitely could be uh something that happens where if you know they have to
change it if they have to change it by as much as 25% then they don't meet the minimum house size for example that's what I was thinking about yeah so that again all that would be taken into consideration when we look at someone's request to be reheard and then again obviously provide that to you guys in the staff report like this is kind of
the background this is what they've done to reduce it and this is the background of our recommendation i can't remember did I did I answer that question or were there other ones that you guys had on that um I I don't have anything else to talk about as far as like the overall I don't think um again
Christian covered really the most important stuff for this board so really just happy to answer any questions you guys have or if any of you want to meet still and and go over any questions or concerns or whatever as you you know review this or as we you know begin to
implement it a little bit more um again we know we're going to make some tweaks and changes down the road in about a year so we're going to be looking for some input from you guys the one area that I wasn't clear on when we were doing the the meetings leading up to where you guys finalized was I heard you
earlier when you said for an accessory dwelling unit on a home there has to be an air conditioner electrical like it can't just be like a roof but that's an attached um accessory dwelling units are are literally separate okay but um they
can only be I think 500 square feet they can only be 15 feet tall and um they you can't subdivide the property okay so what uh what I wanted to get clarification on in the new code without having to read it is the town homes that were being built that just had the little breezeway that went to no door
and nothing and just was is that still how how was that handled uh so we have changed the town home pro uh definitions pretty much across the board um two family dwellings which are duplexes are not really a product in the building
code anymore they are basically attached or detached single family so we've created a two-unit town home that has specific requirements associated with it and then uh we've increased like I said the minimum lot size for all the town homes in a unit in a in a block to be 25
feet and then we've limited the size to four units in a row as opposed to six um we have also created and the the strict definition of like a party wall will apply the little awning bridge thing what we did is basically we created um
in the higher density um areas like around downtown um what we're calling an urban single family which based on most of those units they are going to be standalone homes that they can build and sell one at a time or in batches if they
want but there's no little connection because it really was just a fire hazard and a way to get around the code so now and actually the requirements for that are slightly bigger than a town home anyway um and uh like I said we've based it on other products that have been done so a town home can be 25 ft wide uh
these have to be minimum of 30 on the lot and um the setbacks are five on either side some of the ones we have seen they were like three and a half and four and a half but uh fire marshall definitely prefers having 10 feet but it also it's a single family home not a town home so there should be some you
know grass and ability to work on your house and stuff like that so it's a new product we actually have I think an application for some of them coming up so um and that may be coming to you i don't remember uh because there are some wacky lots out there but regardless yeah
we've hopefully uh fixed that loophole so there's a new subset under single family that these are defined in here there's dimensional standards for where you can have them and um like I said it's only a handful of zoning districts but let me see if I can Yeah we um we
again created that urban single family and it's only allowed in RM2 and CBD so on the east side of Third Street like Christian mentioned where it's more dense um on this side more urban hence why we called it urban single family but it it should kind of bridge the gap
between the townhouse with the breezeway and a and a single family home that had more suburban standards but that's what was allowed over here but it didn't make sense so we tried to create that new product to kind of fit right there in the middle and again like he said I think we'll be seeing some soon which is
good because that means it worked and no breezeway and it provides the option of somebody building one house instead of two which before was pretty much their only option to split the lot and make a duplex um just to go over those real quick so the minimum lot area is 3500
square f feet the minimum width of the lot is 30 feet the front yard setback is 20 the rear yard setback is 20 the sides are five because again more urban area so we want those to be less restrictive um the single family home at a minimum
has 1,000 square feet of air conditioned space and a onecar garage uh the garage isn't counted as part of the um calculation um and then they also have to provide a twocar driveway so they can park two cars in front of the house if they decide to turn their garage into a
storage unit um the lot coverage we tried to again kind of uh find the middle ground knowing that it's a single family home and not a town home uh but also that it's a single family home um we've allowed uh a maximum lot coverage
for the house and driveway to 45% and then they get up to 60 for the accessory uses a town home can have 65% lot coverage so that's kind of yeah somewhere in the middle height is obviously always going to be 35 um and
then uh oh that's the other thing so um for accessory uses we've always had this kind of vague language as to where they can't go um we have basically said now if you have a house that has a rear yard set back and a corner sideyard whatever
um the accessory use of any kind can't be forward of the front plane of that house so even if the house is 30 feet back that accessory unit can't be at 25 it's got to be at 30 as well that way the house is the thing that is on the property not your swimming pool on the street
so hopefully that will make some sense as we go forward but um that's going to be in a lot of those standards when you look at them now is it's uh not forward of the dwelling along the street frontage or not forward to the front plane of the house depending on what it is yeah
uh multif family actually didn't change much we kept that about the same yeah we have um I forgot we had a table that shows all of the new dimensional standards for just all this the residential zoning district so I'll get that emailed to you guys because I
realized I didn't make a copy for your packet and it would be very Yeah I've been looking at it summary version yeah it's just one page so it's it's easy to just throw it in your in your binders i think it's pretty impressive work i guess I think it will I think it will also address the people
who put down pavers and are break you know even higher than a 50% i think this will address all those right allowing them the you know 15% on top of the driveways and and because we increased what would be allowable on a single family lot we took away the wheel strip thing you guys remember when we added
that no yeah there nobody liked it public works hated it because gravel or whatever they put in between would go everywhere and inevitably whoever bought the house from the developer would fill it in anyway without a permit and now we're just back to square one so we just kind of eliminated that as an option
because it was thrown in there to kind of alleviate some of these you know going over the lot coverage just by building the house and so that hopefully will be remedied as well that and the pvious pavers and and all the other things we've done yeah and that would probably be something you get requests for too is can I put in ribbon
strips you know because I want a bigger house right and again what's the hardship you just want a bigger house but we don't like wheel strips so what other questions do you guys might have at this time and how certain the builders I guess
notified us already when they come how do how do they just out of curiosity how do the builders know know that these apply when they well some of them have been all the meetings and have complained about it the entire time so they're very much aware um but like anything else now I mean people come in
um and if they just turn in a permit it gets reviewed if it's doesn't work we'll tell them we'll have a meeting if need be um if we get them at the early stage and they want to discuss it we can certainly explain it to them at that point prior to the design we always try and encourage people to come in and ask
what they can do before they do it um but inevitably it'll be looked at before anything gets built um pretty much all plans that have some element of this get reviewed by somebody in our department so um if it turns out that you know
they've designed a house they've got a full set of plans and it doesn't work well we're going to sit down and explain to them why it doesn't work and that again you're not really entitled to anything more so you need to change your design so you guys won't have to deal with that but we can't deny them the
right to apply so there will be some grumpy people in front of you which you're used to so I think a lot of our frequent flyers as far as our developers especially residential were were part of the process at some point okay so they're aware like in as soon as the code was adopted we got were just
inundated with phone calls and people walking in asking questions and that's really died down because I think the word has got gone out um we also did a lot of just outreach and putting stuff on our website and Facebook and and social media just to let people know the code was changing so um I think most
people know we just haven't seen the impact of it quite yet it's a little too soon you all have worked hard about a month we have seen a lot of swimming pools come through that were fine and so there's a lot of graduation parties that are going to be fine this time they're not going to be pushed into the summer
so it's a hardship yeah party if you guys don't have any other uh questions Mr chair we're Well thank you uh we can go on to the planning department report do we have any um
um our next meeting is on uh May 20th and we have four items may 20th is our next one 20th oh okay may 20th not April i thought we had one before that but I guess not one before that no yeah
because we had a pause in application i restarted everything from May instead so we can um catch up and stuff yeah all right excellent so the meeting on May 20th we'll use the new code new code so you got time to study okay and then um yeah so I had written
down the sixth um Okay and then courtesy of the Florida visitors anyone anyone all right i always find that funny okay uh
is there a mo a motion to adjurnn motion second okay it's been moved and seconded all in favor i opposed