Good evening. You're attending a session of the board of adjustments for the city of Jacksonville Beach. All board of adjustment meetings are quasi judicial in nature. All decisions of the board will be based on confident substantial evidence, including testimony provided
in this meeting. Any person who is not an applicant or an agent that wishes to speak will need to fill out a speaker card, which are located by the side table by the door and 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 cell phones. Can we have a roll call, please? >> Douglas Dell >> here. >> Owen Curley >> here. Jeff Troular, Matt Mats
>> here, >> Karen Dardy >> here, >> Gary Hockett >> here, >> Victor Malone. >> Okay. Uh, next on our uh agenda is the approval of minutes. If everyone's had a chance to review the minutes from the
meeting on May 5th. Um, is there a motion to approve those? >> I move. >> I second. >> Okay, it's been moved and seconded. All in favor of adopting the uh meeting minutes for May 5th. >> I I >> opposed. Okay, those have been adopted.
Do we have any correspondence? >> No correspondence >> other than what they gave us. Yeah. >> Okay. Uh we have no old business. So, can we call our first business? >> The board calls case number BOA 26-100029.
Property address 27th South 32nd Avenue. Motion to consider sections 34-611 Echo1 Charlie1 for a front yard setback of 20 ft in L of 25 ft minimum. 34-611 echo1 Charlie 3 for a rear yard setback of 10
ft in le of 30t minimum for construction of a new single family home at the property previously. Noted. >> Okay. Uh as a reminder, each member of the public will be given three minutes to speak. Can we open the public hearing? Does any board member have any exparte communication?
>> I've had none. >> I've had 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. >> Uh Stephanie Gallagher with Star Sanford Design. Our address is 374th Avenue
South, Jacksonville Beach, 32250. >> 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 to help? >> Yes. Yes, I do. Um, good evening. Thank you. Um, I'm Stephanie Gallagher. I'm a planner with Star Sanford. We're the
architectural designer for this project. Um, it kind of has a long history. Y'all may remember it was here about a year and a half ago. Um, a developer had bought this property and property next door and torn down the house that was there and uh created a smaller lot and
then this lot is slightly larger. They did get a variance for the smaller lot and that was purchased by a neighbor. They then sold this property to the BBO family who are um looking to build a family home here. So again um I think
the application kind of lays out, you know, you may remember a lot of this from the the last review of this and again that that variance was never approved. It kept getting deferred and then they eventually just sold the lot. So, um, they're looking to build a
pretty modest family home, um, under 4,000 square ft. Uh, even if you were to apply all the setbacks, you could build a larger house here. Um, but that's not really what they're looking for. They knew there would be challenges. Um, you
know, the lot size is smaller. It's on a corner location. It's a kind of trapezoidal shaped lot. It's also within the D coastal construction line boundary. So the ground floor really is uninhabitable. It has to be um it's
unairconditioned space and has to be raised up to to 15 ft. So the roads at about nine. So you have to raise it up. Um and again that's just the house. So usually your ground floor is um not habitable storage.
Um so that kind of pushes the space up to that second and and third floor. So, um, we always start with the standards and how we can meet them. And I'm a planner. I started as a planner in Orlando. So, you know, I understand the pressures of growth and I understand
what the setbacks are for. Um, I'll admit now that I'm on the design side, I kind of see where, you know, when you're just applying setbacks, it doesn't do much for design. Um, so just applying setbacks doesn't give us better development or better architecture. And the architect is here tonight. She's
going to speak a little bit um about design, but again um you know, it's a process. We look at the surrounding environment. You know, the the new build owners want to be good good neighbors and design something that's appropriate for this area of Jacksonville Beach.
Again, they're not looking to build the biggest thing they can on the lot. So, you won't see us a lot here. We only ask for variances when they're warranted. We're pretty creative and occasionally find a way to to meet all the standards. We're with this one, we're meeting the lot coverage. um you know, we'll meet
35% and then we had no problem meeting the maximum um of 50%. So, we don't need anything in terms of lot coverage. We were able to meet the the north side yard of 10 and the southside yard um on the street of 16. We did have a little bit of an encroachment on the front um
just so you can have some porches out there. And then what we're really asking for is kind of that rear yard set back. I know that in looking at the variants that came here before, we kind of looked at some of the comments from the neighbors and and talked to some of them and in talking to the neighbor to the
west who also bought the vacant lot. Um he seemed okay with reducing the setback back there because that goes up against his sideyard and it meant we could kind of bring the massing down from those top two stories and give him a better view. So he's here tonight um to speak about
that. So, it's really a trade-off. You know, um like I said, the setbacks on these lots that are smaller, um obviously you deal with this regularly. Um you know, we're not trying to get away with the rules. We're really trying to design a better product here. So, um
early discussions with staff, they thought the 10 feet might be acceptable given some of the other concessions we're making, um meeting the other setbacks, meeting ISR, uh reducing the top stories. Um, but we really looked at how we could move the structure around
without massing the top two stories. So, we did get the staff report on Friday. Um, and this the staff was recommending, you know, something a little a little more. So, we looked at um, basically pushing that out a little
more. I think you may have did they get the revised site plan in there? Um, I think it was It's this one. And I can hand that out.
>> The the one we emailed. >> Am I allowed to hand these out? They were by sight. Okay. So, we did look at moving the house up. And again, you know, when we say a 10-ft rear yard setback, it's really for that the lower stories. Um, if you'll look at
this, we we shifted it over a little bit more. So, um, you have a 13T set back in one area. Um, the northern part of the house is set back 17 ft. And then that upper story is actually set back 22 feet. And the architect's going to talk about this a little more. Um, some cities are going towards more of a
form-based code where, you know, like I said, we're not just looking at the setbacks on the ground that we're actually looking at the design of the entire structure. Um, and and that's just as important or more important than what's there on the ground. So, we also provided on the second page of this
handout. Um, and like I said, we always kind of start with what what can you do on this lot. So, that second page shows again, um, I mean, you're obviously aware all the houses on this block received variances. And I did include an image in your packet kind of showing
what all those were. But the house to the north, um, you know, again, all of these properties received multiple variances, some up to five for all the setbacks and the impervious surface. So, we felt like just given the existing context, um, the house to the north has
a 13 foot rear yard. They received a variance. Um, the house next to that, it's only about seven and a half feet in the rear yard. But that second page shows you if we were to build a house and max it out to what your code allows, it would be a much bigger house. Um, and
you could still do a pool in the back and an accessory structure. So, like I said, I feel like our our design is kind of making some concessions and that they're not maxing out the rest of the property and the second and third floor.
So again, I think staff documented in the report, we seem to meet the the standards for the variance um and certainly have shown the the hardship. I think the question is um you know, do we get a better design out of this and with
some of the concessions that we're willing to make on other areas of the house. So I think the architect can talk a little bit more about the design challenges. Again, you know, we've worked to, you know, make sure this site is not going
to contribute to flooding and um block views of the neighbors. You know, we listen to the comments that came around with this last variance when they came through. And again, that was a developer. Um we're just looking to build a nice family home. So, I'd be more than happy to come and answer any
more questions y'all have after we hear some comments. And I'm not sure if you want the architect to speak next since she's with our >> I do have a quick question for you. Uh so page two that has the pool and the um uh one-story accessory structure that's
not being asked for. >> No, we that's says code buildable lot. We're just showing you an example in comparison like what could be built to code. Uhhuh. >> And then that first page is our it's our revised site plan that we worked on to
um kind of show you the massing showing this is what we're proposing. Um is the reduced setback in the rear. Again, our rear that 13 comes up against the side neighbors >> uh vacant lot. Um and he's here can
probably talk a little bit more about about his property. So that that second page is just to give y'all an idea of what could be built as a comparison. >> And uh and you realize that we have a new land development code. >> Excuse me. >> The city has a new land. >> Oh yes. Yes. I'm familiar with that.
>> So these variances were all approved under the prior land development code. >> The the one on the smaller lot, I believe it was February 2025 it got approved. >> Yeah, I think that was under. And then like I said, the other one um
never came through. So, >> okay. Excellent. Thank you. Does anybody else have any questions? >> Okay. And then uh wait a minute before you leave. So, I understand that the um it's a non-conforming lot in terms of
shape and size, right? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> That's right. Yeah. Okay, thank you. >> We're going to swear you in. >> Would you mind turning the mic on? The little button. >> You just have to see the green button. >> The green button.
There you go. >> Please raise your right hand and state your name and address. >> Uh Julia Star Sanford, Star Sanford Design, 370 4th Avenue South, Jacksonville Beach. >> 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. South?
>> Yes. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Hi. Hi. I um I wanted to point out these two drawings that we gave you. You're asking about that, right? And everyone is seeing that.
>> So this per code is what could be built on this. >> You have to speak into the microphone and address us, please. >> This per code is what could be built on the lot. That's certainly not what we're proposing. What what we've worked very
hard to do is is there another slide that after this that shows the renderings of the house? Could you could you speak into the microphone? Maybe look at us and speak into the microphone. That will help you.
>> Did Did you have that other rendering to put up? >> Um, while they're looking for that. So, this is what we're proposing. So, we worked really >> the video for public record is coming from right here. So, it's not going to see you at all. if you're looking behind you
>> and that we're not recording your voice. So, I gotta ask you >> image. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, what we worked really hard to break the massing down of the of this house so that we didn't build a huge box on the corner and we're
very conscious of the view corridors on the corner to keep those open. So, the this section of the house is one story. It runs all the way across the back. Um so that the setback on the sideyard on
the well the rear yard on the property adjacent to the west um as Stephanie said it goes from 10 feet or potentially 13 feet to 17 feet and then to 20s on the second floor. So the the massing was
used to reduce the overall feel of the size of the house. And as she said it's not a very big house. It's under 4,000 square feet because the D requires us to go up. Um it feels large like all the other houses in the in the neighborhood
do. But um we've been very careful to work to reduce the mass of the house and to make a lot of outdoor living spaces on the corner to take advantage of the ocean breeze and to protect that view corridor. The materials we're proposing
are solid masonry with stucco and a cedar shingle roof and we think it'll be a beautiful addition. So that's all if you have any questions. >> Can you say some more about the D requirement that you just mentioned? I don't recall seeing that in staff notes
or have any reference to that. >> Yes. If you see um on your packet there's a line that runs through the first third of the property. It's the coastal construction control line. So the D requires your first floor to be elevated above that. It also maintains
that the house is going to have to be on pilings. So it's an unusual in that that this coastal con control line runs so far inland. Usually it's only affects the oceanfront homes, but in this case it
comes well into this lot. It's a real challenge for design. >> Yeah. You you made reference to the tearing of the home across stories. Can can you articulate how that's related to the first floor requirement of being
raised relative to that impacting any other floors? >> Can you ask that in a different way? I think I'm not sure I understand. >> I might have misinterpreted your statements during your testimony, but it sounded like you were saying the reason that the home has multiple stories is
because of that. And then when I asked you to explain what the requirement was, it sounded like you said the requirement only applied to the first story. Yes. So I'm trying to >> Yes. Correct. The D requirement pertains to elevating the first floor. >> So it doesn't have any impact on the
necessity to to build an additional story in any way. It's just what the elevation of the first floor would have to be. >> Yeah. I mean you could build you could build a one-story box that's but it would require it be required to be elevated that high. >> Okay. the finished floor for flooding
purposes. >> Thank you. >> Does that answer your question? >> I think so. Thank you. >> And the tearing that I was mentioning has to do with the bringing the massing down from the sides. So, it's mainly on
on the west side. It's it's stepped in. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Somebody else have any questions? >> Okay. Ma'am, you can step back. Uh, do we have any speakers cards? >> We have emails to read and it appears we
do have speakers cards on the way. I'll start with you. >> Speak cards on the way. >> Start with the email um if you don't mind. So, the first uh message is from Mary Bordeaux. Uh, subject um
letter for commission consideration BOA26-100029. Dear Mr. Papali and Mr. Joseph per Stephanie Gallagher's instruction. Please find attached letter from my husband and me for the board's consideration at tonight's meeting. We are so appreciative of everyone's time on our behalf. Sadly, we are unable to make the trip for Nashville for today's
meeting, but have been working very hard with Julia and her team at Star Sanford who have so much experience designing homes in the area. In our absence, we wanted to provide some additional thoughts on our excitement for the opportunity to retire in South J Beach. Further, after reviewing the email sent
last Friday, we felt there could have been some confusion over which parcel we owned given its recent subdivision prior to our purchasing the parcel last May. My husband is from Florida and grew up regularly enjoying the Atlantic Coast beaches, namely New Smeirna, and yes, he
can check the Shark Bite box. We are thrilled to have the opportunity to return to South Jack and are hopeful to construct a home that will welcome family, friends, and neighbors for many years to come. Best regards, Mary, Margaret, and Bordo. The second bit is the letter
um hand delivered. Dear members of the board, I haven't read it, so I can't summarize it. I just got it when I got here. It's not that I've ignored it. Uh dear members of the board, first a sincere note of thanks for your time and consideration of our development permit
application and the related requests for certain variances from the requirements of the land development code made therein. We received a link to the staff report this Friday and wanted to write to provide some additional color regarding the plans submitted as well as some relevant details regarding our unique parcel. First, some background
about us. Florida native, grew up in Orlando, originally from Nashville. Uh not our goal or um we know uh the fear of having outsiders pour into your town. That is not our goal. We have two daughters and are
hoping to build a house which they can return to bring friends, ultimately their families one day. Been so fulfilling to watch Peter's excitement to search to get his roots on the Atlantic coast again. The parcel was unique in that it was initially much larger. It was purchased
by a developer in late 2024 and subdivided. Our western neighbor Chuck Horn purchased the rear western 50 foot of the above parcel in March of 25. That parcel is shown in the overhead BOA red
imaging as parcel zero in our application. The remaining much smaller smaller parcel post subdivision is now legally described as lot five and the easterly 45 ft lot six block three Atlantic Shores oceanfront division B
according to the plat book 15 pages 92 public records Duvall County Florida. Um, if you look closely at the overhead BOA red imaging, you can see the old house which fills our entire parcel and even spills onto Chuck's Horn's lot to zero. Prior to purchasing the lot, we
conducted some critical preliminary diligence confirming that variances are typically granted in situations where the unique parcel of land creates conditions that prevent compliance with design and development standards, namely current setback standards. After reviewing certain variances granted of adjacent properties, we felt comfortable
with moving forward with the purchase and started our diligence to secure a local architect with expertise in the area and exceptional regard for maintaining the fit, character, and feel for South Jack Beach. We know we found just that in Julia and her amazing team at Star
Sanford. We have spent a lot of time working with floor plans and massing with SSD and we do not want an oversized house that does not fit the narrative of South Jack. Uh I'll defer to Julie on the number of iterations we have made tastefully, conservatively, and efficiently uh
an efficiency site to the house on the parcel. We were adamant to only look to only ask for what is critically necessary in our request for variances. Stephanie took our preliminary renderings to the city and received general approval for the proposed floor plan and schematic design reflecting the
variances and setbacks submitted. SSB also shared the same with our adjacent neighbor Chuck Horn who understood was quite pleased with what was submitted. We are certainly thankful for the front variance granted. However, given the preliminary diligence of work above, we
were truly disheartened to see that staff recommendation with the condition that the rear yard setback becreased to 20 feet instead of the requested 10 feet stating that 10 feet is excessive. That condition makes it nearly impossible to properly site and construct a tasteful under 4,000 square foot residence. We
would like to respectfully reiterate that we did not ask for any sideyard setbacks and requested a very moderate front yard setback of 20 ft instead of 25. Further, that condition modification is inconsistent with the general preliminary approval SSD received from the city with other and more extreme
variances granted to our immediately adjacent neighbors, many with five foot rear yard setbacks granted and even with the staff recommendation to approve the more extreme variances granted in the next case for parcel just one block over from ours. We apologize. Uh, sorry. In
the next case to be heard, BOA26-100030 for a parcel just one next block over from others. We apologize that we cannot attend the meeting in person, but no SSB and their experienced representatives are committed to designing a tasteful and conservative home for this parcel. We are respectfully requesting two modest variances to achieve that goal.
We hope we are hopeful of receiving your approval for the front and year rear yard setbacks variances as initially submitted. Many thanks for your time and consideration. All right. And then for speakers cards,
uh, where's the DOA number on this one? >> I guess they're all addressed. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, both of them. Okay. Uh the first one is Jan and Simon Rhodess. Please raise your right hand. State your
name and address. Just if you want to take turns, just state your name and address. >> 2831st Street, text. >> Are you both testifying? >> Uh, I'm here to help. >> Okay, that's >> get this point across.
>> Okay. >> We live in >> And 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. Yes. Yes. >> Yes. >> So, you want us to read that? >> Yes. >> Okay.
>> Wait. >> Speaking. >> Okay. So, we ask that the committee reject this request in its current form. The lot is not a small size or an unusual configuration. In fact, it is by far the largest lot on the block. The buyers knew the size and shape of the
lot when they purchased it, and it was even bigger before they cashed in and sold a portion of it. Well, other people, but we oppose the 10-ft rear setback. The builder proposes to elevate the ground on which the dwelling is constructed. We hope that the maximum
height of the dwelling will still be measured from the street level, and we were, as far as we're aware, 35 feet from the center of the road to top. So if they add to we want to know you don't go from the new soil they added you go from the center of the um
street. What will the city do? What will the city do to mitigate flooding at that corner? Um, and my question is that they've got this um, I don't know two or three foot garden wall they're calling it all the
way around that street floods. You know, it floods. They all flood mostly. In my experience, a lot of it is if there was just grass there and if people would pull their grass off the asphalt, there's plenty of um, way for
the rain. I know it rains very hard, very quickly, but w with that wall there, that is just going to block all the rain water and it's just going to sit there and it will just now build up there on that corner, which is a dangerous situation. Um,
people are going the wrong way on that one way. Kids are on their motorbikes. All right. Is that it? >> Yeah. And the setback would be coming to 10 feet is right in our backyard then
with their HBAC units are there. So we all have them. I know. >> Thank you. >> Next speaker Kathleen Lewis. Use your right hand. State your name and address. >> My name is Kathleen Lewis. I reside at
2431st Avenue South Jacksonville Beach and we have owned the property for 50 plus years. >> 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, >> yes, I do. >> Thank you. I'm sad that I'm here again because I
thought we would be diminishing with our new rules the requirements for variances. The new variances are supposed to protect all of the residents of Jacksonville Beach from the intrusion, the flooding, and the raping of our land
and our ecological system by overbuilding. One of the reasons that we have flooding problems is because the other properties were given such huge variances and they're concrete walls. If you look at our street and our constant calling the city because we're flooding,
then you'll know why we do not accept this proposal. I live in the north of the house, I don't accept a 10- foot or a 20 foot variance. 30foot is acceptable. It will eliminate flooding and stop the encroachment of the
building on the back of my house and my windows and the noise. I would like you all to be the guardians of our community. Keep the Jacksonville Beach the way it was originally designed, which is what we voted for. I came to every single meeting except maybe five
of them to put in the new bylaws, and I would like you all to abide by those. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. All right, next speaker card is uh Micro Michael Sherrode possibly.
>> Please raise your right hand. State your name and address. >> My name is Michael Sherry, 3704 South. >> 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. yourself. >> I do. >> Thank you. >> There's a lot of really concerned
neighbors here and I think I can speak for the owners who are building on this lot. Uh they also want to and will be a concerned neighbor. I know they cannot be here tonight, but I know they're looking forward to moving here full time.
It's been a pleasure to work with uh the team designing the structure because we are trying to be very careful with the neighborhood and the original value of the street by actually keeping
the house built down. We're trying to help the neighbors by having more yard on the east and the south side for great collection. We're trying to help the neighbors by not building the biggest box that we can build. Right? So, this
this matters to me. It's matters to my livelihood. Matters to how we see our beaches, whether it's from Atlantic to Neptune to Jack's Beach. We're trying to help families have an enjoyable place and neighbors to have an enjoyable place. So you'll notice the design of
this house provides ample water storage on the east and the south side and bringing down the size of the house from some monster box and stepping it back and asking for an easy variance that is
on the west side that's gives a lot more lenience compared to all the other houses I think is fair. So you'll see some that are 7.5 ft, some are 13, some are eight. We're only asking for what's fair in order to help
provide a lot more storm water retention and provide a nicer looking home. That's it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Next, we have Julia Sanford.
spoke. >> She spoke in. Thank you. Uh, next we have Ralph >> Banooki. >> Please raise your right hand, state your name and address. >> Ralph Badinowski, 3201 Ocean Drive
South, Jackson Beach. >> 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. Thank you. So, we live directly across from that lot on the corner of 3201 and Ocean Drive. And our mics and
I's major concern is that there's lack of a stop sign. When you come into our house going down 32, you drive right into our driveway and there's no stop sign. There's a stop sign for people coming from the north to the south. And uh we're plagued by ebikes and
bicyclists going the wrong way in both directions, 30 miles an hour, and not stopping. And the way this house was designed with this wall and I I like the idea it might block the water. I don't believe it. But we're have every time it rains this corner floods.
And so when you're coming down Ocean Drive, I mean at 32 to my house and you try to look left and you want to see if there's bike bicyclists or walkers or somebody. If they put all this vegetation up above this corner here,
you won't be able to see around the corner. Right now, there's a palm tree there and you can't see around the corner. And also, right next to our house is a walkway. And um tons of people use it. They come down with their babies and their carts.
They're coming on a fivest step walkway and they're running right into this corner with the bikes and the cars coming from three directions and bicycles. So I just want to make sure that when they build this that the visibility is clear so people don't get
killed. That's basically anything else going. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Next we have Chuck Horn. Please raise your right hand. State your name and address. Uh >> my name is Chuck Horn. I live at 3115
First Street South. >> 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 do you. >> Yes, I do. >> Um anyway, um anyway, I live at 315, so I'm basically on the corner of First
Street and 32nd. So, I've recently purchased a lot between my home and this new home that that they're trying to put up. Um, so basically I'm a 50 foot by 80 foot lot between my house and this and
this new house and uh them coming to 10 foot of the rear parking lot is fine with me. I mean, I'm I'm going to look at that for the rest of my life. I'm okay with that. It's a beautiful home. It really is. They've made some really good concept of the home. They they've
tiered it. So, it's got multiple levels. Um, they didn't have it. They had to put it at this height for the first floor because of deep peak. So, it made it even even harder to make it, you know, uh, look decent. And they really spent a lot of time at it. And, um, I'm I'm I'm
in favor of it. Um, everybody that lives in the beach has got variances to build their homes. I I've got four variances in my home. Okay. Um, we've got some people that have have, you know, lots. We got one guy near us that has he's six foot on his property line. Doesn't
bother me. I'm okay with that. But he's up but he's up here complaining about 10 foot. Well, 10 foot's not so bad. I mean, we were in Jackson Beach. Land is land is valuable. It's getting more valuable. Um people have a right to build build on our lots. Um, and these
people are spending, you know, really good money to hire a really good architect who's trying to do the best that they can for for for the lot and and for and for our neighborhood. And I I really believe it's going to be a a good addition to our neighborhood.
That's that's all I have to say. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> That was the last speaker's card. >> Okay. Um, with the applicants uh or their agents like to address any of the concerns raised by the public?
>> Yes, thank you. I'm Stephanie Gallagher. Um again, going back to the prior meeting comments, we were very conscious of the storm water and that's actually why we put one the wall around it. Um again, we we're not raising the dirt on
the lot. Um, I think the rendering we're showing the wall. The wall is kind of like a retaining wall. It would help water from flowing off the lot. And again, this house will be brought up to code. It'll have gutters that drain, but but we were trying to retain water on
site. The wall, I think we can work on the design on the wall and the landscaping. Um, you know, we like doing on-site uh retention and and things there. So, and then the the corner um you know the rendering we're showing some landscape in the wall, but you know the city's we're going to keep that
down. You have a site visibility clearance that you have to get there, but again the we're meeting the 35% coverage and I think we were well under the 50% total. Um we usually do pvious driveways. So, um we're hopeful that
that it'll actually be an improvement certainly um better than what was there. So, we're supportive of any design changes to improve the flooding and the drainage. >> U, is there anyone else in the audience who uh wanted to speak on this item but
did not fill out a speaker card? Okay. Uh, seeing there's no more, 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. Turn my mic on. I make a motion to
approve BOA number 26-100029 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, any discussion? Oh, sorry. There hasn't been seconded. Any second? >> I'll second. >> Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? I'll start. We have a non-conforming lot in both shape and size and it's on a
corner. Uh I appreciate the public's comments about flooding. Uh I know in that area flooding is a serious concern. It is a um uh though it's not necessarily the purview of this board.
Um but there is going to be um I appreciate the comments made by the design professionals that they will be uh retaining water in the lot and preventing it from flooding out and having water mitigation on the lot. Uh
and also addressing the concerns about traffic sight lines. I I appreciate that. That is tight in there in that neighborhood. Um, I do appreciate the applicants um not grabbing for additional lot coverage
that was not necessary and the steps that they went through to try and conform um their design onto the lot. And um I thank u Mr. Horn for testifying that he's not object to the 10- foot setback.
So with respect to our criteria, uh do you think we have an undersized lot in shape size and it being on the corner that presents challenges? It makes it nonconforming and um that is not the result of the
applicant. Any other comments? My one question is uh we the documentation we have is for a template setback on that's been submitted and we've been discussing 13. So what are we
proving? >> I think it's a 10 10ft setback. Is that right? It's it's a 10 foot. >> Staff recommended 10 foot um but the uh applicant um was willing to do 13 to
meet us in the middle. Okay. The the public hearing is closed. I'm sorry. >> You're saying they wanted 13? Yeah, they um they would um they would get amended to 13 if they could, but um staff was recommending 10 and then they were
requesting 20. And then the required is 30 and that's in the rear. >> The required is 30. They were requesting a 10 foot setback. So a 20 foot adjustment or variance because >> they were requesting 20, but we were
recommending 10. But they were able they were um willing to amend the 432. >> Yeah. I'm just let let me say it again. I want to make it clear because the public is struggling to understand you. I understand you clearly. The 30 foot is the requirement for the setback from the
home to the property line. They're requesting 10 foot from the home to the property line. The city recommended 20 foot from the home to the property line and they said that they would meet in the middle at 13 which is what's presented in the report but not what is
proposed currently. So currently or we are voting on or discussing the approval of a 10 foot from the home to the property line uh variance which is 20 ft variance to the to the code. >> You said we will have to amend the
motion >> if we wanted it to be the third. Yeah. >> So, uh, any more discussion on this before we >> The other question I had was on the height of the building then? Um, if I look at the line that says it's the plus
15 ft, it appears to be for only a small portion of the property, not so I that would be my question. Is the whole property going to be at 50 ft? 15 plus 35. My understanding is that because of the
uh the um they have different names. It's a coastal line. Yeah. >> That's on here. >> Since it's since it encompasses part of the lot and the front part of the proposed home that they raised um the that section of the
>> Is it just that section? That's what I'm asking. >> Well, no, it's not just the section that falls in it. They've raised it up. They've raised up that they've raised up that center sort of this part of it, the lighter gray part of it gets gets raised up.
>> So what is the total height then of the structure? >> That that's a good question. Okay. Do you know the total height? >> They haven't requested a variance. So it's less than 35 ft. >> Yeah, they're they're they're fine on the height. So >> yeah, I'm just I'm going through one by
one uh the standards applicable. And so before I read through this, I'll just pause to see if anybody plans to amend so that I don't have to do it twice. No. Okay. All right. Uh conditions circumstances exist which prevent compliance with site design. So as
indicated there is unique standards uh applied to this lot due to its undersized nature and its overlow shape. Um conditions do not result from the action actions of the applicant. Uh I think that is true. Um this is the lot
that they purchased as is uh with nothing on it. So to build on it would be the only way to make use of the lot as it was purchased. No special privileges afforded to the applicant by granting a variance not applicable not available to other parcels of land. Uh we'll circle back to that. Strict
interpretation and enforcement of the code would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other parcels of land and would provide an unnecessary and undue hardship. We'll circle back to that. The variances requested if granted will make possible a reasonable use of the parcel of land, building or structure. I think uh based on the
evidence provided, this is a a reasonable home. Uh whether or not it is the reasonable use of the lot, I think as we discussed C and D or items three or four of the the standards to be considered um that that can be cleared
up. The variance request, if granted, will not result in the creation of a public nuisance. Uh I think we've got several comments from the public on this lot uh addressing many items. some of which are within the board's perview, some of which are regulated outside the
board just by the city. So, from a flooding perspective, from a water drainage perspective, that's typically something that we're looking at from a permeability lot coverage, they've met those guidelines. Um, that that's not something that I'm taking into consideration at this point. Uh, with
respect to variances on this lot. Um, that being said, I I think the testimony also uh highlighted that there are uh rules and requirements for uh water management that that the applicant intends to follow uh which hopefully
further supports and address those concerns. The only setback are or the only variances that are being requested that we're considering here is whether or not the front of the building uh needs to be 5t
closer to the street than is outlined in the existing code and whether the rear of the building needs to be 20 feet uh deeper into the lot than is allowable by code. Uh the rear of the building uh to
be very clear as this is laid out is the west side of the structure. So we did have comment about 10 ft being close to some of the homes on the northeast side of the lot. Uh while I can appreciate that uh from the public that is within
code uh as a sideyard setback, that is not something that that we're that we're considering at this point. We're really looking at the 10 feet on the rear which uh approaches uh Mr. Horn's lot that he
has purchased that he indicated uh is not of concern for him personally. That being said, it's relative to a lot, not an individual on the lot. Um so it it would present some constraints potentially on that lot in the future if Mr. Horn was
ever to sell uh his property and I I respect that. Um overall 20 ft in lie of 25 ft relative to the home to the north of it uh seems to be in character with the neighborhood doesn't appear to be an overreach. The
lot is undersized both in length and width. Uh as as indicated by the total property area, I think five feet is probably a reasonable uh expectation. It's it's really the rear yard setback that gives me pause in terms of what's a
reasonable use for this lot uh as it's been acquired. Um and you know there were multiple references to the home being under 4,000 square feet. There's nothing in the code that says a home should be 4,000 square feet. I'm not gonna um
speculate as to whether or not that's an appropriate benchmark, but I will say that I I have concern with the the rear yard being 10 feet and sort of indicating that that is that is what is necessary to allow a reasonable use of
of this lot as it exists today. Do you want to amend or you just want to vote? >> I I don't think that my concern would be resolved by a 13 foot. So, I'd have a similar concern. >> Okay. >> So, I have no no desire to amend.
>> Any other comments? >> Anything? >> Anything? >> Okay. Uh can we have a uh roll call vote, please? Douglas Dell, >> no. >> Matt Mets, >> no.
>> Owen or sorry, Karen Dy, >> no. >> Gary Hockett, >> no. >> Owen Curley, >> yes. >> Okay, sorry. Request for variance has been denied. >> Should we call the next uh the next case, please?
>> You guys didn't address staff serving condition. You guys should have addressed your staffing condition at least said if um you guys can amend it to staff recommendation instead of just going that way. >> The staff recommendation was 20 ft. Is that correct? >> Yeah. 20 ft and a little of 30.
>> So if we wanted to make that amendment and approve that amendment is what you're asking us to >> Yeah. >> consider does anybody want to amend to staff recommendation of a 20 foot rear yard setback? >> I think we just voted on it. Yeah, we just voted on
>> that's I we said a couple of times anybody want to advance. So apologies if that did not >> cross. >> Can we defer this? >> If it's already been voted I think. >> Yeah, I think it's voted. So we have to
>> we can answer. You want to call >> the board, >> the uh city >> to see if we're able to not make them go through. >> Want to defer it to the next meeting? I guess. >> Well, do you want to ask the city attorney since we just voted on it if
it's a possibility >> amend it and call it back or not? >> I guess we have to talk the city attorney then. >> Yeah. Do you want >> Yeah. >> Well, you know, let's speak the city attorney to see if we can defer it. >> Okay. So, we may be back.
>> Okay. Yeah. Thank you. >> The board calls case number BOA26-1000030. Property address 3015 South First Street. Motion to consider 34-611 echo1 Charlie 1 for front yard setback of 8.17
ft. Low 25 ft minimum. 34-611 echo1 Charlie 2 for a southernly corner setback of 10 ft and low of 16 ft required. 34-611 echo1 Charlie 3 for a rear yard setback of 5 ft in 30 ft minimum to allow for construction of a
new single family home. >> 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 had none. >> I've had none. >> I've had none. >> And I've had none. The applicant, please
come forward to be sworn. >> Please raise your right hand. State your name and address. >> Eric Bejornson, 3015 First Street South, Jacksonville Beach, Florida 32250. >> 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 me. >> Yes, I do. >> Great. Thank you. Well, as stated, I'm Eric and this is my wife, Ameilia, and our son, Jasper. Uh we've been Jack Speed's residents for 20 years now and
have been at 315 since uh 2012. So uh 14 years. Uh we love the neighborhood. Um we've seen the neighborhood change and continue to change and we'd like to be a part of that change with the neighborhood. Um so you have what we're um asking for this evening in the
variances to the setbacks. Um we have an irregular shaped lot and an undersized lot and additionally it's a corner lot. Um so we uh the current house um the current setbacks for the
house that was built in 1950 are 6.8 ft corner sideyard setback I'm sorry a rear yard setback were 6.8 ft a corner sideyard setback of 6.8 8 ft and a front yard setback of 8.17 ft.
The uh front yard setback was approved in 2013. Uh the proposed setbacks are substantially similar to the current home which has existed for 70 years. Um and the new structure we anticipate
to be generally in the same footprint of the existing structure. Um if we are not allowed the current setbacks we're asking for because of the substandard lot and size and shape um uh
if you impose the current um uh regulated setbacks we would only be able to build a 154T home based on those setbacks. So smaller than what is currently there. Um, and if you take away the garage space of that, you leave
an 854 square foot home, which is not allowable. It's smaller than you can build. Um, so those are our um hardships and why we're asking for uh the variances so we can build a new home uh basically on
the same footprint that we have now. Okay. Does anybody have any questions for the applicant? >> I apologize. I can't get my um spreadsheet up to do math on a lot of this stuff. So, I'm gonna ask you some funky questions. And if you don't have the answer, just >> tell me you don't have the answer. Um it
looks like your lot is about twothird of the size of a standard lot uh for for the area at what is it 6600 ft or something? 6,400 square feet. Um, is it is it more narrow
uh than than width or is it like not as long as it should be? How is it boxed in relative to a standard lot? >> It's just relative to those setbacks. I'm trying to get a sense of like my lot was pinched so I had to get a front yard and a rear yard and my lot was stretched. So, >> Sure. So, the irregular shape is in
length and width. So, we have a um western front property line length of 80 feet, an easterly rear property line of 78.7 feet, and a northern northern side
property line of 89.36 feet, and a southern corner side yard of 75 ft, giving you a total of 6468 square feet. So, just reiterating uh here, a standard lot is 9,000 square
feet and standard lot width is typically 90 feet. So, you're looking at a 90 by 100 foot lot and you guys on the narrow side of either end of that are at 70 feet or sorry, um 75 feet. Is that the
width that's 75 feet instead of 90 feet or the length at 75 feet instead of 100 feet here? >> I think it's the width. >> Yeah. So, so you're 75 ft in width and 78 79 feet in length relative to the 90 by 100. >> Correct.
>> Okay. >> Okay. So, just for me mentally, this isn't a hard and fast rule by any means, but it helps me sort of contextualize that you're 15 feet shy on your side yards from what would be normal and you're, you know, 21 feet or so shy from
the length. So, as we look at those setbacks, that's that's something that I find helpful to understand. Uh I think you had made mention of the uh I'm sorry. Do you have your questions? >> You go ahead. >> Mention of the current um footprint of
the current structure. How how does it uh differ from what's up there now? >> Um we're adding a two-car garage versus a onecar garage that we currently have. >> Okay. >> And um really if you look at uh this
little Okay. So, your garage is bigger and that little box that sticks out is bigger. >> The southeast corner has sort of a jut that wasn't there historically. >> That's correct. And current the current onecar garage sits back further. Um, it's not on this slide. Then part of the package up there should be a survey with
the existing home on it that you can see. I just don't have an I see the existing survey. I just don't have like an overlay. I just don't have an overlay. I can see I can see the old one. I just don't have an overlay of what you're doing. Just
trying to see. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So, really what again we're not asking for additional coverage either. So, really we're taking the footprint of the home that the current footprint and really just trying to adjust it forward. >> Yeah. Uh so we can have a backyard area uh as opposed to right now most of our
yard is in the front of the house. >> All right. Any other questions for the applicant? >> Just bounce back and forth. Give me just a second to see if I can Sorry. >> There's just like every every setback is there. I'm trying to see them visually.
the rear yard set back of 5T that's against the garage on the eastern side. >> That would be on the eastern side. That's correct. And the current existing house, this current existing setback on that side is 6.8 ft. And the current house is um 7 feet from the property
line currently. Oh, I'm sorry. I was just looking at the gray space. There's There's also a pool that's going to be off that garage and a patio. I was just trying to see if that's like living space. That's That's >> Yeah, the white space behind that again
is outdoor backyard space. So, it's an open air patio and and a pool. >> Okay. Okay. >> All right. We've got a couple of speakers cards. >> Okay, sir. If you want to step back and then Simon Res.
for this one. >> Simon Roads 2831st Avenue. Swear from the testimony about you given this matter as the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. So help you got >> I do. >> Thank you. >> This is simple. We live across the road.
We think this is a reasonable proposal. We are saying you support it. >> I just want to repeat. I'm sorry. It wasn't as clear for me. Did you say you think it is a reasonable proposal and
you support it? Yes. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. >> Okay. And then our last speaker's card this evening is Kathleen Lewis. >> Raise your right hand. State your name and address.
My name is Kathleen Lewis. I live at 2431st Avenue South, Jacksonville Beach. Do >> you sir affirm that the testimony you want to give in this matter is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help you out. >> I do. >> Thank you. >> Would you like to see the video of the
the house? >> Has to be received into the record. So why don't I'm sorry. It has to be received into the record. I'm not sure how we receive it at this point. So, why don't you go ahead and give us your testimony? >> My testimony is that for the front yard
setback to be 8.7 ft, is going to push that property again up towards the road, which is a wide road with bikes and the cars parked there. So, when you try to come out of the stop sign, it's going to skew the vision there. I understand they
want a backyard, but I think 8.7 foot set back for 25 is way, way too much. And they have a a car garage already with an apartment on top of it. I wonder if they're still going to keep the
apartment on top of it. And then again 5 ft in l of 30 ft minimum is a huge discrepancy there for absorbency watershed land coverage.
>> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Any other speaker cards? No. >> Is there anyone else in the audience who's not filled out speaker card that wishes to speak? >> Okay. Uh would the applicant uh care to
come forward and address any of the comments made? >> Yes, I will address a couple of the comments made. Um, kind of repeating what I stated earlier, our current front yard setback, it's approved at 8.17 ft,
which is about 17 feet from the curb line. Um, so as you pull up to the stop sign, uh, it's a one-way street going from south to north, and there's plenty of visibility looking south and plenty of visibility looking north to see any foot
traffic or um, motor vehicle traffic. Additionally, our current rear setback is 6.8, not 30 feet. Um, so our current existing structure, as I mentioned, sits 7 feet
from the easterly or rear property line. Currently, we do not have an apartment garage. We have a third bedroom above our garage which connects to our house which we live in is not an apartment has never
been rented and will never be rented. Those are my comments. >> Your your current front yard setback is 8.17. That's not the current structure, right? >> That's correct. And that's what you're asking for when you rebuild. That is correct.
>> I just had one question. The driveway, how long is your driveway plan? >> Um, so I believe it's 20 ft. It's above the minimum 17 as needed. So we will have a twocar garage plus additional
parking for two car cars in the driveway, which will be longer than 17 ft. Perfect. Any other questions? Okay, sir, you could step back. I will now uh I will now close the
public hearing um and bring the item back to the board for discussion. Is there a motion? I make a motion to approve BOA number 26-100030 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 variances outlined in section 34-572 of the Jacksonville Beach Land Development Code. >> Okay, it's been moved. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Okay, it's moved and seconded. Any
discussion? I think what we have here is a undersized lot that's of odd shape with an existing structure uh that is outdated and and out of code that they're looking to um revise into a
livable home. The footprint is somewhat similar um in the sense of the applicant statement where the existing front yard setback uh and the requested front yard setback uh is mirrored and the existing rear yard setback relative to the
requested rear yard setback is within two feet. So going from roughly seven feet to five feet. Um I'm trying to see this sideyard setback looks like it's currently at 8 and a half feet. So, uh, actually improving that sideyard setback from that 8 and a half feet to 10 feet
in and what's being requested from what I'm seeing on this survey that I'm hoping I'm reading correctly. Um, so knowing that it is an undersized lot with an existing structure and and an attempt to mirror that footprint um while maximizing the use of the
property, I think is is what's standing out to me. The question I have is um whether or not that five feet rear yard setback uh is the minimum necessary to make use of the undersized lot. I'm looking at
the the 2/3 size of a full standard lot really compressing. I think the applicant uh not requesting any additional coverage even considering that undersized lot uh indicates they're they're not looking for an overreach and
uh would help to mitigate any potential drainage concerns. Also, updating the property to a new construction is going to help uh ensure that there's there's proper um drainage from the home in that regard. >> Okay. Okay. Any more uh comments?
>> Okay. Uh can we have a roll call vote, please? >> Mets, >> yes. >> Karen Dardy, >> yes. >> Douglas Dell, >> yes. >> Gary Hockett, >> yes. >> Owen Curley, >> yes. Your request for variance has been
approved. >> Uh moving on to the planning department report. Do we have one? Um, next B meeting is June 2nd and we have two cases on the um cases on the agenda. >> All right. Uh, and then, uh, courtesy of
the Florida visitors, does anybody want to uh um All right. Is there a motion to adjourn? >> I move. >> It's been moved. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Okay. It's been moved and seconded. All in favor? >> I