Ready? >> Good evening. You're attending a session of the city of Jacksonville Beach's board of adjustments meeting. The board of adjustments meetings are quasi judicial in nature. All decisions of the board will be based on competent
substantial evidence including testimony provided in this meeting. Any person who is not an applicant or agent that wishes to speak will need to fill out a speaker card located at the side table by the door and then turn them into the clerk. Each member of the public will be given
three minutes to speak on each item. Please refrain from speaking from the audience and applause or cheering will not be allowed. Please silence your phones. >> Can we have a roll call, please? >> Douglas D >> here. Owen Curley
>> here. Jeff Shoubler, Matt Meds >> here, >> Karen Dardy >> here, Gary Hockett >> here, >> Victor Baloon. >> Okay. Uh, moving on to the approval of minutes. I hope everybody's had a chance to review the minutes for March 17th and
April 7th. Um, if so, is there a motion? >> I make a motion to approve the meeting minutes from meetings held on March 17th and April 7th. >> I second that. >> Okay. It's been moved and seconded. Uh uh any discussion?
All in favor? >> I >> opposed. Okay. The two uh meeting minutes have been approved. Is there any correspondence? No correspondence. Okay. No old business. So, can we call
our first new business, please? >> The board calls case number BOA26-100022. Property address 3214 Ocean Drive. Motion to consider section 34-611 Echo1 Charlie Hotel for a westerly accessory structure setback of 4T in L
of 5T minimum. 34-611 Echo1 Charlie Hotel for a northerly accessory structure setback of 4.1 ft in L of 5T minimum for a new swimming pool to an existing two-story single family home. >> Okay. Uh just a remember a reminder that
each member of the public will be given three minutes to speak when we open the public hearing. Does any board member have any exparte communication? >> I have not. >> I've had I've had none. >> And I've had none. Would the applicant please phone forward to be sworn in and give their presentation?
>> Please raise your right hand, state your name and address. >> Paul Curtis, 132 coral away with epic pools. Do you swear affirm that the testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So, help you God. >> I do.
>> Okay, cool. Um, so yes, this uh family is requesting a um uh adjustment of the setbacks on the west and north property lines. Um 4 feet in lie of 5t to the back of the beam. um
with it with this lot. It's a corner lot and the coastal construction line actually cuts kind of in the middle of the uh front yard. So, when this home was built a few years ago, it kind of pushed everything back to the west and north. Um so, we're just looking to gain an extra foot on the uh on the width and
the length. Um and you know, still maintain those 4 foot or or uh setbacks to the back of the beam. We would still be 5 foot to W's edge on the west and north and then of course 5 foot to water's edge off of the main structure and covered patio. Um we would still be
under the uh approved lot coverage. Uh really not changing too much from when the house was built. Uh just really adding my uh 18 foot for my pool equipment pad. So we're going from 42.05 to 42.33. Uh any questions for the applicant?
>> I I I have one. >> Yes, sir. >> Um there was a uh previous um variance that was um approved for uh a rear setback of 14.5 ft in L of
30 feet, 48% lock coverage in L of 35%. and a swimming pool set back of 1.5 ft below of 5T from the primary structure to allow for construction of a single family home. That was in uh 2021 under the prior land development code.
My question is um what happened to the swimming pool? >> The I guess the owners or whoever built it or developed it or sold it as a spec. I don't know if the current homeowner built it with OC or if OC built it and then sold it to them. Um, but they they
did build pool with the the dome and I believe it was a it was a similar size that was proposed in that um variance. >> So, uh, how far is the swimming pool now going to be from the primary structure? >> Uh, five feet off the covered patio,
five feet off the tight pinched corner. >> So, do you know that you I mean that variance is still in effect. You you could have a swimming pool set back of 1.5 ft >> to the house. >> Yeah, this is this is what was granted.
A swimming pool set back of 1.5 ft below 5T. Okay. >> From the primary structure. >> Okay. I'll see if they want to go a little wider. I still think they wanted some space or some room for turf off of covered patio. I don't think they wanted to get too too close. >> Although the um the previous was for the
primary structure. Um right now he's asking for the um just the pool in general. So even what he's asking right now is not really for the primary structure. It's for like the um just the pool itself. But he is able to without the variance be 1.5 away from the main
structure. But the way he's trying to build the new pool is over the um the um five accessory structure um setback. Well, I guess that's what my point is that he has a swimming pool set back at
1.5 ft in low five feet from the primary structure >> already. He's got that now. >> Yeah, he has that now. But I'm looking at the um property, you can't really like unless >> you can't put a swimming pool in there. >> You can put a swimming pool in there, but it's not going to be >> Yeah. I mean,
>> it's not really going to be it's it's going to it's going to defy the um the land development code. I personally wouldn't even even if that's there. >> I'm not saying whether it would or not. I just want to know. I mean, this is the the previous >> Is this the same applicant that asked
for this variant? >> I don't believe so. >> No, this not the same applicant. Um uh the applicant that got um granted the variance that was the original owner or whoever um bought the lot um previously. >> Oh, okay. All right. So, there wasn't So, there never was a pool there, right?
>> No, sir. Okay. Is there any way to reverse the 1.5 foot variance that's already been provided such that >> No, I don't believe >> will get closer to the house. Basically, >> I don't believe we can reverse the 1.5
variance, but we can put um certain speculations or um um how would I say it? Uh certain like uh guidelines on or contingent to what we approve. We can do something like that. But um no, I don't think can reverse the um pre-biz.
>> So um I mean my I think there's a good point. So if we if we approve this variance um you know he's basically one foot off of closer to the property line on the
north, but it could be a bigger pool that then goes to 1.5 ft from the primary structure. I mean, we're we're not going to approve the final plan, but if we approve this, then we're essentially saying you could
have a pool that goes, you know, uh a foot off and then um and then 1.5 ft primary structure. I mean, >> I think we can do an amendment.
>> I think what they're proposing makes sense. Yeah, amen. A amendment would probably the best thing, but like I said, he's not doing anything too egregious. He's just >> to be real, there's nowhere else he could put the pool. >> Yeah, I agree with you. Except that they have this prior uh variant that was
approved and uh I mean, we could have pool all over the place. So, uh >> Okay. All right. Any other questions? >> Okay, sir. You could step back. Um I will now open the public hearing. Do we have any speakers cards? You you
have a seat. Speakers cards. Is there anyone in the audience who has not filled out a speaker card that wishes to speak? No. Okay. I will now close the public hearing and bring the item back to the board for discussion. Is there a motion?
I make a motion to approve BOA number 26-100022 based on the substantial confident evidence presented in the staff report and all relevant testimony presented at this hearing and that the motion meets all the standards for variances outlined in section 34-572
of the Jacksonville Beach Land Development Code. >> Okay, it's been moved. Is there a second? >> I second it. >> Okay, it's been moved and second. Any discussion? I'd like to make a motion to amend the prior motion to attach this
variance to having the pool meet the five foot minimum away from the primary structure. >> Okay, I think that's a good idea. Um, okay. It's been the amendment has been moved. Is there a second?
>> Second. >> Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Any discussion on that? >> Okay, so we all understand that we're essentially negating part of that other variance but that we're conditioning it.
>> I mean it's already 5t away from the inspection >> as proposed but they've got the existing variance of 1.5. So it says they can have either or they can't have both. They can't be a foot away from the house and four foot away from the side. So it just prevents them from extending.
>> Sounds good. >> Okay. Uh any further discussion on that? Okay. Can we have a roll call vote on the amendment, please? And so we're amending it. >> Douglasto, >> yes. >> Matt Mets, >> yes. >> Karen Dardy, >> yes.
>> Gary Hockett, >> yes. >> Owen Curley, >> yes. Okay, so the motion has been now amended. Uh, any discussion on the amended motion? >> The property is oddly platted and does not meet the minimum lot coverage. So it
it gives reason to to require a variance to make use of the lot. Um so I think that the the reasonable proposal here is a standard sizing of a pool. I think it makes sense to have it 5 foot off the structure for both safety and usability. Uh the one foot variance
on the sideyard setback um I don't think is going to encroach on anybody. We didn't hear any concerns from the public. So, I think it creates a a safer, more palatable use of the lot. Um, and the amended condition helps to alleviate concerns about potential
extension of the pool. >> Okay. Uh, any other discussion? Okay. Can we have a roll call vote on the amended motion now, please? >> Douglas Dell, >> yes. >> Matt Mets, >> yes. >> Karen Dardy, >> yes. >> Gary Hockett, >> yes.
>> Owen Curley, >> yes. Okay. Your uh variance request has been approved as amended. Okay. >> Can we call the next one, please? >> The board calls case number BOA 26-100023, property address 333 North 3rd Avenue.
SE motions to consider sections 34-617 Echo 3 Bravo for not sideyard setback in le of 10t minimum adjacent to right of way. 34-745 Bravo 4 alpha for a zero foot landscape buffer in lie of at least five foot
adjacent to the western property line. 34-702 delta for a zero foot parking adjacent to right of way set back in le of 5t for a new commercial building. >> Okay. As a reminder, each member of the public will be given three minutes to speak when we open the public hearing.
Does any board member have any exparte communication? >> I've none. >> I've none. >> I've had none. and I've had none. Would the applicant please come forward to be sworn in and give their presentation? >> Please raise your right hand, state your name and address. >> My name is Greg Barnett. I live at 128 in Plantation Strat of Jacksonville
Beach, Florida. >> Do you swear to affirm that the testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help you God. >> I do. >> Thanks. Um, I actually have uh I'm the contract purchaser to purchase 333 North Third
Street to build a new commercial office building for my new office. In doing so and working with the zoning commission with Heather and Christian, we designed a building that works for us. In doing so, I'm also trying to maximize the amount of parking because J Beach has a
parking issue. Um, Jacksonville Beach is gracious enough to give us credits for different things within the parking, but I want to maximize what I can put on the land for parking. In doing so, I have only one foot of landscape buffer on the
western side of Four Street. My proposal is to move the landscape buffer to the city right away. I've spoken with Dave McDonald at the public works. has no issue as long as I um apply for revocable and coach permit and I would just put a landscape my
landscape buffer along the 40ft rideway that's there. Um my intention is also to potentially improve some of the rightway. There's an 80 foot rightway on North Third Street. I know that would be public parking. Again, the city has parking issues. So, I'm just trying to
build an office building that meets what the code requires and also not really take all the credits that the city allows. so that I could put this building in. But in doing so, I only have a one foot buffer currently on the western side.
Um, in our uh staff report, um, it has recommended that we approve it with a couple conditions. Um, and I just want to get your thoughts on this. Um, one is that the approval is tied to the proposed use of the internal parking
designs for which the reduction in required parking um, and uh, >> can you say that again? >> Yeah. Approval is tied I'll read it to you. Approval is tied to the proposed use of alternative parking designs for
which account for the reduction in required parking as outlined in section 34- 34.707 and any change in these elements that would lead to an increase in required
parking would require a new variance. Is do you see an issue with that? Are you asking me if I design a bigger building that requires more parking that I have to come back? >> That's right. You would have to come back.
>> Correct. No, I that I am satisfied with what is here, what is proposed. Uh it is 25 parking spaces on the property. It is a 30 a roughly 3500 square foot footprint of a new office building. I plan on building a two-story office building around 7,000 square feet.
>> Okay. Uh the second uh uh recommended recommendation to the board in the staff report is that the applicant request a revocable encroachment permit from public works department to potentially locate additional landscaping in the
rightway if feasible. >> That's correct. That's what I just said. Yes, sir. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, you're good with both of those conditions. Yep. >> All right. >> That's the Oh, uh that's the only question that I have. Anybody else? >> Yeah. I'm still trying to understand just the the overview provided relative
to the image on the screen. So, this is pretty difficult. It takes me a while to >> Sure. So, let me let me show it. So, the green section on the right hand side is grass. It's three feet. Um, it allows me to have a roof overhang, allows me to put drainage in, allows me to not flood out the neighbor. Then my building, I
have a 5-ft sidewalk. The city required a 17 foot deep parking space, a 23 foot space in between to back in and out, and a 17 foot. So if you add 17, 23, 17, 5, 35, and three, it le it gets me to 99,
which is the lot's 100 ft wide, which is that one foot strip along the western side of uh third or fourth. So the slanted sort of diagonal lines just to the left on the screen there is the easement where
you would be proposing with public works to have additional landscape uh put in just to the left of that one foot strip of green. >> I don't know what you're talking about. There was there's no hash mark. I'm not >> So if I if I'm looking at the screen here the parking on the left side of the
screen then you've got the one foot of green. Yes. is just to the left of that. Is that the easement where you're going to be? >> Oh, yeah. I'm so sorry. Yeah. So, where the where the green line where the Yeah. So, that darker gray section is that was the the civil engineer showing the proposed area. Correct. But that is city
rightway. It's city property. Obviously, we business or land owners maintain that, right? So, we would maintain it, but I would landscape it. Yes, sir. And as part of your presentation, you noted uh some additional enhancement to an easement such that it would be public parking. I I didn't follow that relative
to this or maybe I misheard what you were saying. >> Yeah. So in talking with Dave McDonald, he made a comment that if I would like to put parallel parking along Forest Street, he would have no objection to it. So B when I get in and we you know if this approves I end up buying the land they start moving through it and
there's leftover funds I would love to put in four or five extra phases equally um it it's not shown here but even on third there's an 80 foot I could actually run probably another five or
six to the east of my driveway that could be public parking again that would be all city land. We plan on putting a big culbert in to handle the drainage. Um, again, that would just be enhancements just to beautify the neighborhood just because I live here. I
work here and I know we have an issue. >> Yeah, if we can go back to the image that was on the screen before. I This is not necessarily uh driving a decision one way or the other, but I'm thinking about on the left hand side there. If that's where you're putting in landscaping,
I I don't understand where there would be any opportunity for additional parking there. So, I'm >> So, there's four 40 feet, I believe it is. I think it's a 40 foot. So, a parking spot's 9 ft wide and five feet
is my buffer. So, it's 14. So, the math says there's leftover room. >> Okay. So, you're going to have I'm looking at this here. uh it doesn't really have the the length, but you're saying that that's 14 ft of additional uh city right of way to
the left of where your lot is. So, you would have five feet for landscaping and an additional 9 ft for a potential parallel to the outside. Okay. Correct. That's it's not it's not listed on those measurements. So, that's helpful context. >> The other piece I wanted to understand here, um between the parking, you're showing being able to come in both from
the south and the north and exit both south and north. Can you tell us a little bit about the what's marked as a 12- foot alley there, how that exists today and how you see that? >> Uh, so the current alley is I don't think it is paved, but according to public works standards, if I do access
it, I do have to pave it as a now I guess it would be a private road or city road, but I I would be responsible for paving that up to my property or up until I guess the edge of my property. So, your plan would be to outside of your um outside of your property pave
that 12 foot alleyway out to say Fourth Street >> out to Fourth. Yes, sir. >> Okay. It's helpful. >> Those are my only questions. >> Have you uh spoken to any of the neighbors that live around there? >> Um so, mostly around me is commercial.
um spoken to the real a the real estate agent has spoken to the neighbor directly to my east the skinny building behind Maple Street. Um he loves my idea. He actually is trying to buy me out and want me to build it for him. So
he's obviously in favor of that. Um across the street is city property. It's a city public well. Um beaches, dentistries across the street. I think that's 424. They don't have a landscape buffer. You park right through their um
front. And then next to that is Napa and they don't have a landscape buffer either. >> Any other uh questions for the applicant? >> Okay. Uh sir, you go ahead and step back, please.
Uh I will now open the public hearing. Do we have any speakers cards? Speakers cards. Is there anyone in the audience who has not filled out a speaker card that wishes to speak? >> Yeah, we do have somebody. >> Okay, sir. >> I I just walked in. I had just seen a
sign this past week and we're going to go ahead and swear you in. >> Okay. Sure. >> Please raise your right hand. State your name and address. >> Uh my name is Will uh Herbert William Mononttoya and at 402 Northport Street. Okay. Do you >> do you swear or affirm that the
testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So, help your God. >> Yes, I do. >> Thank you. >> Okay. And then when you're done, we're going to ask that you fill out a speaker. Okay. Okay. >> Whenever you're ready. >> So, yeah. No, I again I'm I'm just I'm glad
I got to at least hear your presentation because this the I didn't see the sign till uh last week and uh so I am interested in in the landscaping uh just as a as a I I've owned the
property since 1996. Uh I have a two-story uh commercial building that's used by therapists and u and so my experience along that road we are kind of the receiving line for St. Paul's and so a lot of traffic along along that
area. Um you know when you look at what we're trying to do here in city of Jack Beach you know I just think there's opportunities to beautify the area and keep it in in good standing. Um, I see that, uh, especially if you look at
Third Avenue North, um, even with Maple, the restaurant, um, you know, when you look at the public, uh, parking, it's it's kind of a embarrassment in my opinion just because it's it's right there across from city hall. And I just
would propose that uh you know whatever we do along the uh if you are planning to make anything public I mean it you know the dirt uh dirt parking spots they just look horrendous uh over time. And so I know that we've taken a lot of
pride with our property. We do landscape it uh and we do take uh pride in in making sure that it stays very nicely. But uh I would like to just see that the project does um uh is sensitive to the neighbors and some of the the uh
buildings like ours that have made a big effort to make it very appealing uh for not only the the community uh behind us which are residents uh but also uh on the commercial side as well. So that's wanted to put those two words.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. Please fill out your speaker. >> Anyone else? Anyone? >> No. Okay. >> Uh, okay. Uh, is there anything in the U in his testimony that you want to come back
up and address? >> Um, >> you don't have to. Just >> Sure. No, I'll just address it. Um, the city does have a standard based upon trees. U, based upon the linear footage of the lot, I believe I have to plant nine some sort of hardwood trees. So,
there will be nice oak trees or some sort of hardwood. Um, I don't intend on putting any sort of dirt parking in. Um, I'm I'm kind of on the same page as you. I want to see a better Jacksonville Beach versus, you know, a dirty Jacksonville Beach. Um, not that it
really matters, but my current office is is 1415 North Third. It was the old Amy's turn. It was next to the Circle K. Last two years ago, I renovated it. It's a new white stuckle building. Um, I I totally understand what you're saying and that is not my intention. My intention is to have nice landscaping,
is to have actual concrete or some sort of PA parking. Um, my parking lot would be a purious paver, right? But it would be done by the city standards. Um, we would have underground drainage like a storm tech tank. So, we're not planning on flooding out the whole street. I mean, we're going to do it the right
way. Um, so that's all. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh, okay. I will now close the public hearing and bring the item back for the board for discussion. Is there a motion? >> I make a motion to approve BOA number 26-100023,
property address 333 North 3rd Avenue, based on the substantial competent evidence presented in the staff report and all relevant testimony presented at this hearing. and that the motion meets all the standards for obeyances outlined in section 34-572 of the Jacksonville Beach Land
Development Code. >> Okay, it's been moved. Is there a second? >> I'll second. >> Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? I would like to make a motion to amend the previous motion to tie this variance to the parking designs as submitted uh as well as to the
receipt of an encroachment permit from the public works department to locate the landscaping as presented in today's uh request. >> Okay. Uh the motion has been amended. Uh is there a second? >> Anyone? I'll second. >> Okay. Uh the motion has been seconded.
Any discussion on the amendment? I think this is exactly what the uh staff had had requested and which was the basis of my questioning. I think it's a good idea. Uh anybody else? >> Nope. Okay. Uh can we have a uh roll
call vote on the amendment, please? >> Matt Matz, >> yes. >> Karen Dardy, >> yes. >> Douglas Dell, >> yes. >> Gary Hockett, >> yes. >> Owen Curley, >> yes. Okay. The motion has now been amended. Uh is there any discussion on
the amended motion? >> Yeah, I think clearly a lot of work and thought has gone into this both from the applicant and the city that he partnered with. It does seem to make the best viable use of the land as the applicant presented. It does provide ample parking that does seem to be a concern throughout the city and this does
address that. Uh it it seems that there have been discussions with the public works department that's going to address the landscaping that's that's being requested here in a meaningful and reasonable way. as we've talked about uh the size of those um city rightways and what's going to be able to acco be
accomplished there. There doesn't seem to be any concern that the applicant would not be able to accomplish what they presented here today. Uh and with the amendments made that that sort of articulate this will be happening as it has been presented uh and holds these experiences contingent to that. I think
this does present uh the best use of the land for the applicant uh making the minimum viable use for the community and the city at large. So I think I think it's a reasonable request supported by the information we received today. >> Okay. Anyone else?
>> Okay. Uh can we have a roll call vote, please? >> Matt Mets, >> yes. >> Karen Dardy, >> yes. Douglas Dell, >> yes. >> Gary Hockett, >> yes. >> Owen Kurley, >> yes. Your uh request for variance has been approved as amended.
>> Okay. Uh moving on now to uh planning department report. >> Um next meeting is uh May 5th. I believe it's May 5th, right? Two weeks from now. May May 5th. >> Sorry. >> Two weeks from now May 5th, right?
>> I think that's right. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Next is May 5th and we only have one item on the um uh docket. >> Okay. Yes, >> okay. And now my favorite courtesy of the Florida visitors, ladies. >> Nothing.
>> Man, >> officer. Nothing. One day. One day. Okay. Uh, is there a motion to adjourn? >> I move. >> Is it second? >> I second. >> Okay. It's been moved and seconded. All in favor? I
>> opposed. >> Okay. Thank you all.