Good evening. You're attending a meeting of the Jacksonville, the city of Jacksonville Beach Board of Adjustments. Uh the board of adjustment meetings are quasi judicial in nature. All decisions of the board will be based on competent substantial evidence, including the
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 on the side table by the door and then please turn them into the clerk. Each member of the public will be given three minutes to
speak on each item. Uh please refrain from speaking from the audience and applause or cheering will not be allowed. Please silence your phones. Uh, can we have a roll call, please? >> John Morland. >> Owen Curley
>> here. >> Jeff Trouler. Matt Mets. Laura Tierney here. Douglas Dell. >> Okay. Well, we have three members, so we do have a quorum. Um, you need uh three
votes to have your uh request for variance approved. Um, moving on. Can we have approval of minutes? Uh, is there a motion to approve the minutes from August 5th of 2025? >> I so move. >> Second.
>> Okay, it's been moved and seconded. All in favor? >> I >> opposed. Okay. Uh, moving on to correspondence. Do we have any correspondence other than the speaker's cards? Okay. Uh there's no old business, so let's get on with the new business. Can
we call the first case, please? >> Sure. The first before we start, you guys do have the right to defer since only have three members here today. So, if you wish to defer to the next meeting, I have more members available. You are free to do that. >> Uh that that's a good point. Uh normally
we do it uh individually, but what we can just we have a lot on the uh on the docket tonight. Uh so there's only three of us here tonight. Normally there's five voting members. Uh so with five voting members uh there can be some
leeway. You need uh three votes to have your uh variance approved. Um there's no room for error obviously with three. So, um, if you were interested in deferring, uh, the the
city clerks can take care of your your request. Just when we call your your case, just tell us if you'd like to defer or not, and we'll just remind you. Okay. Okay. Sorry. New business. >> All right. Um, calling case BOA number
25-1 000065, property address 4086 East Seaside Drive. Uh, the You want me to do the motion to consider? >> Uh, motion to consider. Motion to consider is a deviation from ordinance
number 2013-813 project narrative section 23A accessory uses and structures for an accessory structure setback of 3 feet in lie of 5 feet to accommodate a pool.
>> Okay. Um 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. >> 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. >> Michael Rup, 4086 Seaside Drive East. >> Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give in this matter is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help you God. >> Yes.
I also have Amy Devito here that will help uh speak on my behalf. >> Uh she uh couldn't be sworn in as well. >> All right. Please raise your right hand. State your name and address. >> Amy Divido, 4086 Seaside Drive East, Jacksonville Beach, Florida 32250.
>> Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give in this matter is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help you God. >> Yes. Okay. Go ahead, please. >> Um, do you just want like an overview?
>> Sure. Yes. Tell us what what you >> Okay. Uh, well, our lot size is a lot smaller for our location and we are left with very little coverage to be able to build the pool. So, we're asking for the additional space to accommodate
um like a 35 by 18 size pool in the backyard. Our coverage right now just doesn't allow that with the space. And it looks like our setback line in the backyard is 10 feet from the fence
versus the sides which are five. Uh okay. Uh so I have it on the uh staff report that your uh coverage is 4566 square ft uh which is slightly above the 4500
square ft minimum >> for the current lot coverage. >> Uh not not for lot coverage, just the size of your of your lot. >> Okay. And then um >> you mean like our lot is over the minimum?
>> Yeah, you're slightly larger. Well, uh slightly larger Yeah. than the minimum requirement. >> Okay. >> Um >> does Joseph have any notes on what we went over in our premeating? >> Could you speak up into the microphone, please? >> That was like a reference in our
premeating that the lot was too small. So, that was some assistance that I got. that it might be helpful to know that the lot was too small. >> Um, previously, um, when we looked at the, um, initial project, the lot was
looked at as RS1 lot, but, um, we, um, we did more research and we found out you were in the Ocean Terrace PUB, and the Ocean Terrace PD has um, their own like lot sizes and different setbacks from like regular zoning. >> Okay. So, yeah, I mean, I didn't know that.
Um, do you have input on options for being able to build beyond that 10- foot line in the back fence? >> I I don't we we only hear the variance
request. We We can't offer you um advice on how to >> Okay. >> how to meet the variance. So, based on our size and what we're submitting, what else would you need in order to be
able to review moving the setback line for the pool? >> Can can you in fact put a pool on your lot if it's slightly smaller than what you would ideally like? >> Um, yes. Yeah. Yeah. We're we're trying
to match um setups as our neighbors. They just had a pool installed. It looks great. It but based on our setback line, like even their pool is beyond our setback line for the small pull that they just
had. >> And we're a corner lot. Can >> Can you repeat what you just said? A reasonably sized pool still doesn't fit like 10 feet from the fence because
right now our setback is 10 feet from the back fence. >> So that only gives us a couple feet for a pool. >> But is is their is their property smaller or larger than your property? >> Do you know >> their backyard? >> Yeah,
>> it's it's larger by about two and a half feet. >> Larger. Okay. Your property is larger. >> No, theirs. >> No, the the neighbor's property in question, they have about additional 2 and 1/2t width. Our fence line was uh
about 2 and 1/2 ft brought in uh due to the we're corner lot, but there was trees that they didn't want to cut down when they were building an ocean Terrace >> from our actual property line, whereas the other lots are actually built to the uh property line dimensions.
>> Okay. That's helpful. Thank you. >> Excuse. Did do you say that there was a pool there already or is this a brand new? >> No, brand new. They just built it. They just finished it. >> Okay. >> So, it's already built.
>> Mhm. >> Yeah. But theirs is still up to the five feet from the fence. So, if we like currently since ours is 10 feet from the fence, it like eats half of our yard. So, I I'm looking at the the notice
and and your application and and in the published notice, the public notice, it says uh for an accessory um structure setback of three feet in le of 5T minimum single family home. And
then it has listed your your address. It doesn't say 10 feet on that. Um, is is there something missing? I'm looking at the >> at the application and it says the property our setback was 10 ft. We did
not say super pool. Uh, well, here it is. You're asking for a setback to be approved of three feet from the fence line. Um, um, are you asking for a setback of three feet or are you asking for a setback
>> of three feet all the way around? So, the way our lot is, it's currently five feet from the edges and 10 feet from the back. So, we're asking for three feet all the way around. Um, do you want this one where it shows
the 10 foot line? I think that's >> that right. >> I have the survey versus the boundary. That one's the boundary survey. I believe she's um she's referring to the um the building restriction line. The building restriction line um states 10, but I believe they want to encourage
three feet instead of the five, >> right? So it's in li of five feet, right? >> So it's not 10 feet, it's >> no um um 3T instead of five. Yeah. >> Okay. So BRL is that different where it says
>> Yeah. BRL and then um what they're asking the texture structure for that PVD is different from the building restriction line. >> Is it possible to build a pool within the um the five feet?
>> It's not 10 feet, it's five. >> It is five. Is this Can you Can I show you real quick? You can help me see on here >> if you if you We have to keep it. If you submit it, it's part of the record. Okay. Do we get it back later?
>> Um, >> like after >> it's up to the city. >> Yeah, it's up to you. Click the one copy. >> Um, >> I'm sorry. I just want to verify. Is that what we copy? >> Yeah, that's the one. >> Okay. Yeah, that's the same one. So,
yeah, where the where it says 10 BRL. So, that doesn't matter. We're allowed to build the pool beyond that. Maybe that's where the confusion is. We thought we had to be in front of where it says 10 BRL in the backyard.
>> That would be a question to the city, right? Is that >> what's question? Are we allowed to build the pool beyond where it says 10 BRL >> if approved by a variance or if you're at least 5T away from it.
>> So if approved by a variance. >> Yeah. If it's approved by a variance. Yeah. >> So okay. So that's >> because um you're asking for three but um the minimum is five. >> Oh the minimum is five. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So you're asking if we go from 10 to five if that's enough space for us.
Yeah. >> Is the question. Okay. >> If you're able to build without small. Yeah. >> So if you could build within five, right? >> Yeah. >> Do we have the option to get a variance for three? So if you're asking to move forward with
your variance request, I'm then going to ask you this question which is we have set of five criteria by the land development code, the LDC which has been recently adopted by the city. Um and we have to meet all the requirements of the
land development code. One of them is that um there are circumstances or conditions that exist which prevent compliance with site design. So in that case uh in your case you would say that you cannot build a pool um in the
allotted area using the current um setbacks. Um but then you know it the other condition is that um it's not a self-impo imposed hardship meaning
that you you you could do it but you chose not to do it >> don't want to do it >> sorry >> don't want to do it >> don't want to do it uh so uh with those two things in mind uh I I guess my question to you is one could you build
your pool with the existing setbacks. I think you thought it was 10 feet, but it's actually five, >> right? Does that include the pavers that go around the pool or the space? >> Yes, sir. >> So, the paver would end at five.
>> It would just be really tiny. >> Yeah, that's >> um I mean, if it's We're here to see if it's an option to be able to go beyond. So we have the three being the cut off
at least on on our property that's facing JTV because we lose two feet on that side because our fence is blocked because of the tree and it's also public works side of ownership. Um is it
possible to focus on that and being able to get the extra two feet since we lost that? Um, if we're talking about public works, you probably have to get a um a permit from public works to make sure you can build that. If you're in a public works ementarian,
>> right? So, for the variance request, since we're losing two feet, our setback, that's showing on here as five. >> Technically, it's like we lost two of that five. We don't even have access to two feet of that five space.
>> And you're talking about the side, right? Yeah, the side that's facing Sanctuary Parkway. So, where our property line is, we lost two feet on that side because of the tree >> that's in the middle of public works in
our yard. So, our fence was built two feet in. >> Okay. All right. >> So, when they were designing pool options, everything's shorter. >> Oh, that makes sense. Okay. So, if I understand correctly, you would be able to have a pool the
size you want if it wasn't for the tree. I personally value trees. >> No, we wanted to ask for the variance to be able to go beyond the setback so we don't touch the tree so that we can just build with the
backyard that we have. >> Good. But in theory, if you did not if you got rid of a tree, would you be able to put in the pool that you want without the variance? >> Without the variance? Um,
>> it is only two feet, but it would be a little bit bigger, but ideally no. >> Uh, do you want to discuss options? You you have questions about options. Do did you want to discuss options with the city before we
actually vote on do? >> Uh yes sir, if that's an option. >> Can they defer and then >> Yeah, if they want to defer you can sit down with me and Christian to build like um something that's more suitable. It's up to you guys.
If you defer, we would just put you on for our next meeting and then um you know, it's not like an adverse ruling or anything against your your variance request. You don't have to reapply or um show a material change in
circumstance. You would simply defer and then discuss with the city and then come up with a >> Okay. Yeah, that would be good. >> Thank you. >> So, just send me an email. We can sit down tomorrow or anytime during the week to make sure we have the right measurements.
>> Do we need to move on that? Do we need to make a motion on that? >> Yes, we do. Okay. So, uh you want to defer? Is there a motion to defer? >> Motion to defer case um BOA number 25100065. >> Okay. It's been moved to defer it. Is
there a second? >> Second. >> Okay. It's moved and second. Any discussion? Okay. We have a roll call vote on the motion uh to defer >> John Morland. >> Yes. >> Matt Matt, >> yes. >> Laura Tierney, >> yes.
>> Owen Curley, >> yes. >> Okay. Your uh request to defer has been approved. Um and then um just follow what the city says. >> Okay. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. >> Okay.
The board calls case number BOA 25-100066, property address 214218 South 7th Avenue. Motions to consider 34-761 echo1 hotel for a reduction of on-site
parking from six spaces required to two spaces maximum. 34-615 echo3 Charlie 1 for a front yard setback of 7.5 in L of 20 feet minimum. 34-615 echo3 Charlie 2 for a westerly yard
setback of a westerly sideyard setback of 6.7 ft in 10 ft minimum for the existing front structure. 34-615 echo3 Charlie 2 for a westerly sideyard setback of 1 ft in 10 ft minimum for the
rear structure. 34-615 echo3 Charlie 3 for a rear yard setback of 4.8 ft in L of 20 ft minimum for the rear structure 34-72 delta for a parking setback of 1 ft in l of 5t minimum for renovation of an
existing multif family property contained in two non-conforming structures. >> Okay. Um, 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 expporte communication?
>> I've had none. >> I've had none. >> Sorry, just give me one second. I did get a call and I'm trying to make sure this is uh >> the right one to talk about. X. >> Yeah, it was the next one. I apologize.
And I have none. >> And I have none. Okay. Uh, would the applicant please come forward to be sworn in and give their presentation. >> Please raise your right hand, state your name and address. >> If you could turn the mic on.
>> Sorry about that. Um, Matthew McCordon, 1025 4th Avenue North. I am the agent representative. >> 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 you come. >> Yes, ma'am.
and please raise your right hand, state your name and address. >> I'm Sunday Europe, 2187th Avenue. Um I'm the property owner. >> Okay. Your address?
>> Um 5375 Hala Court, Jacksonville, Florida. >> Thank you. And 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 you God. >> Yes, I do.
>> Okay. Go ahead, sir. >> Uh yes, I know that's a mouthful, but ultimately we're requesting these variances based off the uh property owner, Dr. Ro inheriting the hardships which are there. Um initially this parcel was split before the um adoption
of the 2050 comprehensive plans as well as the current land development codes. Uh he owned the front property and purchased the rear property. Uh 214 is the front property. The rear property is 218 which he has purchased. Um and we are also doing the conditional next
week. But for this we are requesting the uh reduction of those parking spaces from the uh six to the two. uh because they are within the um uh current setbacks and due to the hardships of how it was inherited and also the
development of those alleyways, you can't expand those any further as well as those setbacks as it was pre-existing before the um the uh 2050 and the land current land development codes.
>> And are there going to be three units or two units? >> Uh it'll be three units total, sir. The front unit 214 is already a twounit um property and then there's a single unit at the rear which is currently addressed as 218.
>> And does that present any parking issues? >> Uh no sir. There's um as we outlined the parking up there in the site planning survey and as you come down the alleyway, you can actually enter from either direction and have the two
parking spaces there. This will be used um as a rental property which will help. We are improving that property to the left. That metal shed is actually no longer existing and so it doesn't impede. And then uh we will be improving those as well which is going to overall
uh raise the value of the properties around it uh to make that livable and also affordable rental for folks in the area. >> So the the renovation project you're you're keeping the structure right the same the same main structures you're
just renovating the interior >> correct >> you gotten rid of the metal shed already. >> Yes sir. Ex explain where I'm you're you're there. You You said there's parking on the alley. >> Um no, sir. Access on the alley. >> Access. >> Yeah, they've recently paved that alleyway.
>> So, where where do people park now? You have two units, right? >> Yes. >> Where are they parking? >> So, for 214 on the other side, they park coming in from uh what is that? Seventh. >> Seventh Avenue. >> Uhhuh. >> Uh so, they park coming in from 7th
Avenue. And then current parking for uh the 218 right there which is pictured sir is where those two red lines have been outlined. >> Okay. >> That's that's a concrete pad there. >> So how much parking now is on the
property? >> Um the the two that you see there. >> So just just the two. >> Yes sir. >> And I and and where they park on seventh you that's public parking so you can't count that. side, right? >> Correct.
>> Okay. And is that an issue for parking right now? >> It has not been. >> No. Okay. Anybody else have any questions? >> So, we're combining 214 and 218. What is
pictured on the screen right now is 218, the only access to which is on a back alley. Correct. >> 214 has no parking. 214 has parking currently, but by bringing it to the variance board, um both properties had to be assessed because the parking is
within the um setbacks. And so that's a portion of that that's requesting a setback of uh 7.5 ft in L of 20 ft minimum. >> 214 has parking that's in the front yard setback is what you're saying. >> Yes, sir.
>> That still counts as parking. I mean, most driveways cover setback, right? Like most >> but due to like it's multif family, each unit needs at least two um parking spots each. So that's the only reason why they're asking for the parking and everything else is just um
non-conformities that already exist. >> If you combine the units, then the parking on 214 would also count for 218 because it would just be one lot. So, what's confusing me is that the request is for two parking spaces total
>> and the two parking spaces pictured are on 218, which would suggest they're asking to not have any parking at all on 7th South where there already exists parking. >> So, in the front they already have existing parking, but in order to bring the um back unit into um conformity,
they need to um ask for the parking. >> But if they combine the lots, it's all one unit. But it's not. No, technically good. They're two separate units. Technically, they have two different partial numbers. >> So, we attach the variance to the property. They're not combining the
property. It's just that they'll own two separate lots and we're only talking about a variance for lot 218. And the consideration of 214, >> correct? Yeah. >> Is just for context. >> Yeah. Just to um bring everything back into conformity and to make sure 218 is
able to have um accessible parking. Okay. >> Okay. So, it's only for 218 real >> for 218 and then the non-conform on both of the parcels, >> right? But the parking yes is 218. >> Yes, sir.
>> So, all right. I'm sorry. I was confused. How much parking is 214? >> Uh, there's currently enough for four vehicles. >> Okay. And so >> so pretty much two per unit. >> So that right there will bring really
the total up to six. >> Yeah. So two for the front, two for the or four for the front, two for the back, and then all the all the nonformities that already exist on the parcel. >> But all three residences that that would be available
are on 218 that we're talking about for this variance. 214 as a separate >> when I guess whenever they get a conditional use it'll become one but right now they're separate without the conditional use they're not technically a multif family yet >> I think next week you guys are going for
the conditional use >> yes sir yeah >> y on Monday >> so what what explain to me why they need a variance >> they need a variance for the parking and they need the variance to bring everything up to conformity >> I understand everything else. I just don't understand the parking
>> because technically 218 is not by itself yet. Once they get the conditional use, then I I believe it'll be one multifamily structure, but right now there's two different structures. >> So, how much parking does two 218 has two spots? >> Proposed.
>> Proposed. Okay. Those are So, it has none right now. >> No, not right now. >> But 214 does have adequate parking. >> Okay. All right. That makes sense to me. >> I see what's going on. All right. Uh, does anybody else have any
questions? >> No. Okay. Uh, thank you. I'll now uh close the public, excuse me, I'll uh I'll open the public hearing. Do we have any speakers cards? We have a number of speakers who have filled out speakers cards, but we don't
have any corresponding um uh >> case numbers. Is anybody here to speak on this particular case? >> You two could step back if you'd like. Thanks. >> Yeah, they're probably all in the next
one. Okay. >> Okay. Uh any uh speakers that wanted to speak on this particular uh case? >> Okay. Uh seeing that we no speakers cards and no one in the audience has uh
responded, uh 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 BOA25-1000666 based on 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 variance as outlined in section 34-572 of the Jacksonville Beach Land Development Code. >> Second. >> Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? I'd like to make a motion to amend the
previous motion to be contingent on the existing structures on the property. >> I think it's a good idea. Yes. Okay. Um is there a second to that? >> Second. >> Okay. It's moved and second. Any discussion?
I I think it's a little confusing. Um I agree with the amendment. I think it's a good idea to to tighten it up. >> Okay. Okay. Any more discussion on that? Okay. Can we have a vote on the amendment, please?
>> Matt Mats, >> yes. >> John Morland, >> yes. >> Laura Tierney, >> yes. >> Owen Curley, >> yes. Okay. So, now we're uh having discussion on the amended motion to approve. Any more discussion on that?
um once they get approved for the um if they get approved for the conditional use then I think it'll become one property right yeah but um they haven't gotten approved to be one multif family property but they are in um in line to get that approved >> okay
uh any further discussion on that okay can we have a roll call vote on the amended uh motion then >> m Yes. >> John Morland. >> Yes. >> Owen Curley. >> Yes.
>> Lauren Tierney. Yes. >> Okay. Uh your um request for variance has been approved um u as the conditions specified. Okay. Can we call the next one please?
>> Board calls BOA number 25-100067. Property address 1240 North Fifth Avenue. Motions to consider sections 34-611 echo1 Charlie1 for a front yard setback of 18.9 ft in lie of 25 ft. 34-611 echo1
Charlie 2 for an easterly yard sideyard setback of 5.4 ft in lie of 10 ft. 34-611 echo1 Charlie 2 for a westerly sideyard setback of 5.6 six in lie of 10 ft for various dwelling additions and a swimming pool addition to an existing
single family property. >> Okay. Uh 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 received a phone call uh to my voicemail indicating that applicant
would like to speak further about this uh application. And I did give a call back uh received their voicemail and just left a message reminding them of the sunshine law that everything would need to be in the sunshine. So didn't have any actual discussion around the case at all, but just disclosing.
>> Um I too had a uh call. I believe it was from the agent Ian Brown. Um I told him I would not like to speak about his uh pending matter because I did want to uh didn't want to hear it. consider it and
vote on it. Anyone else? >> I've had none. >> I've had none. >> Okay. Uh would the applicant please come forward to be sworn in and give their presentation? >> Please raise your right hand, state your name and address.
>> Microphone. >> Yeah. >> Yeah, there you go. Green. That's better. Ian Brown, 245 Riverside AB, Jacksonville, Florida 32202. >> 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 you God. >> I do. >> Okay, sir. >> Good evening. Ian Brown here on behalf of the owners. The owners are here as well as some supporting neighbors and the general contractor should those
questions emerge. Um, but we'll jump right into it. I have a PowerPoint. Um, but you also have a print out in front of you. So, if it's not on the screen, we can go analog here. Okay. So, that first page, this is just from the street. Um,
there's nothing altered with this photo. What you'll notice is how far back the front elevation of the home is. So, this is, and we'll get to the site plan and the survey. What's unique about this neighborhood is that they have 35 feet from the pavement edge to the front
parcel boundary which is fairly large. So, um although there is part of our relief is a front setback, it it is just for the existing front elevation from the pavement edge as it sits. It's almost 54 feet back from the pavement edge. Now, I know they don't own all
that, but it is set back pretty far. Um jump into page two, please. why we're here. Um, we're here with a staff recommendation of approval for a renovation and addition to a unique non-conforming property on a
non-conforming parcel. The home was built in 1988 and it encroaches into the front and side setbacks. Um, and the existing home does not have a garage, which is a code requirement of RS1. And you can see, we don't have to go back, but you can see on the front
there, there is uh neither a garage nor carport there. Um the lot is also non-conforming. This is platted in 41. Uh it's 6600 square f feet. The code requirement for this is 9,000. So it's under sized. Um I will
point out it's 60 feet wide instead of the code require requirement minimum of 90. So the lion chair or two of our three uh variance requests are for width essentially for side setbacks. We are a 60 in an area designed for a 90 foot
width. So not only are we small were narrower than code existing home it's ready for update needs a garage needs configuration changes. This hardship was not created by the owner and these owners have used a licensed architect to
work to stay in conformity with the neighborhood and provide reasonable use and not tear down an existing 1988 home. I will point out the project is otherwise conforming. So they're not seeking coverage or any other relief.
Next page. This is specifically what saw the lot size is just existing and non-conforming. Front yard setback as you saw on the on the front page that is 18.9 and that would be in lie of the current
code minimum of 25. Easterly side setback is 5.4 in L of 10 and the westerly 5.6 in lie of 10. So one, two, and three are all just existing. The last one, the Wesley site
setback allows for a single car, not double, but a single car garage to be added, which is a component of RS1 zoning, which makes it code compliant. Next page, a little more about why um it is a well-maintained dwelling, but it's ready
for renovation and addition for their growing family. um code. As you are all aware, a modest renovation of this would would quickly trigger code compliance. Currently, improvements are assessed at 192036. Once you go beyond half of that, you have to bring the whole thing up to
code. You're encroaching on the front and the side. So, we'd be here at this podium either way. Uh configuration, this allows them to fix um a poor layout in the addition process. Uh conformity, you know, this predates, it's platted in
41 and built in 88. it just predates the current code. And then there's safety. You know, this property, the entire property will be built to code, not to mention all the addition um under the strict Florida building code. And then you have aesthetics, beautifification, and value. So, just a
general improvement for that neighborhood. The next exhibit is just an aerial map. So, you can see it's an interior lot, one off from the corner. And part of why I wanted this exhibit is we do have some supporting neighbors. You can see where they live relative to the subject property. Our support
correspondence is all very proximate. Um they're not distant neighbors, they're immediate neighbors in support. Next exhibit, there's survey. This is just to evidence what I mentioned right out of the gates. This parcel boundary, it's 35
ft off of the pavement edge. Um so although there is a front setback relief for the existing elevation of what kind of a bumpout um this property is set very far back from the pavement edge. Next page is the proposed site plan.
Uh on the left is existing on the right is proposed. So what I did is I I circled essentially where we're tight where we have relief on let's start on the on the left. Those two are existing. That's the front and the side. And then
with the proposed by adding a single car garage, again, not a double, not an oversize. Um there is a five, we get to that 5 foot or 5.4 on that side. No other relief is s for coverage. Everything else is conforming.
Next page is some additional photos. The first is the driveway from the street. As you can see, there is no covered or enclosed parking. Um, the next one is the front elevation. You can see there is a bump out. It kind of juts and that's that's where we get that request
for the 18.9 instead of 25. And then the rear yard. I included this photo just to show um you do have a large rear. There's no relief sought for any of the improvements to the rear. Um and and no nothing sought for coverage. Plenty of room back there for what they've planned.
Last we have um supporting correspondence. We don't have to go back to the aerial, but the first one here is the contiguous neighbor at the rear. Um, the Andre's, they're well aware of the project. They're in support and they share a rear
a rear corner boundary. Next is the neighbor directly across the street. Um, the Sharks. Um, they look at this property every day. They are in support. They're well aware of the scope. Next one is the contiguous westerly
neighbor. They are also um they took the time to physically attend this meeting and they're in support. Um Carolyn and Bill, they're here and that would be the just to make it straightforward. That is the neighbor that the garage is going next to. So they're here and they're in support.
Last I don't want to lose anybody. We'll just quickly go through and we have criteria for approval. We came here with a staff recommendation of approval. So let's just quickly walk through them. Uh number one, there are conditions staff agrees there are conditions that are unique to this
parcel in this building and so we believe we have a unique parcel and unique structure. Number two, these circumstances were not created by these owners. Uh these applicants did not create this this situation. Uh number three, there's no special privileges
afforded by approving this variance. Number four, if the if the city or the board did literally enforce the code, uh it would deprive the applicant of rights that are enjoyed by other nearby parcels. And number five, um they these this
request is necessary to make reasonable use of the parcel in the structure. And the last one is we don't believe it creates a public nuisance um as evidenced by the supporting from the neighbors. I will uh stand by for any questions. As I mentioned, we have the
contractor and the owners here as well. Uh, should those types of questions emerge that I that I couldn't answer on the fly. >> I just have a comment. Your photographer knows how to use depth of field very effectively. >> I promise. I am the untrained photographer. I just stood at the curb
with the iPhone. Um, it is a lot of grass though. You know, it's 54 feet of lawn. Um, but yes. >> Okay. Hey, does any uh board member have any questions for the applicant? >> Can you share a little bit about what this detached accessory structure is
intended to be? Is that uh another dwelling unit or is that a sh >> I'm glad you asked because I asked them as well. It's not a dwelling unit. Um the the owners are here. One may um work out of it, but it's just going to be out there by the pool. It's not intended to
be like an ADU or another dwelling, >> I believe. And I don't know if Nevs can clarify. I don't don't think it's even allowed to have a shower, but either way, it's not intended to be an ADU or an additional unit. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions?
>> I have none. >> Okay, sir. You could step back. Um, I will now open the public hearing again. Uh if there's anybody who's here who's filled out a speaker card uh is ready to speak, we'll just sort through
your card and and find it. >> Peter Row. Okay. Homeowner. >> Oh, please please raise your right hand. State your name and address. >> Uh Peter Row, 1240 Fth Avenue North, Jacksonville Beach, 32250. >> Okay. 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 you God. >> Uh yes, ma'am. >> Thank you. Uh, I just want to say I am the homeowner uh with my wife and my young daughter who was running around somewhere. Uh, we'll be in the home in May for 10 years. So, our daughter turns
four. It's getting a little small for us and we absolutely love the neighborhood. She goes to St. Paul's. That's something we want to continue to do. And, uh, we just really, really like the neighborhood and everything. We're just starting to run out of space. So, with this, we wanted to make the additions to
give her more space, uh, to have an additional room if we do have any family members come down, which is something we don't have now, uh, and make it kind of our forever home. So, that's all I have. >> Thank you. You're welcome. >> Can you I'm sorry. Uh, can you tell me a
little bit more about that uh detached unit when when you just mentioned family? Is that going to be like a guest space or >> Nope. No, it's just going to be a room with no running water or anything along those lines. It's going to be a room that we work out in and mostly just we're going to have sliding glass doors that open up uh to the outside area. So,
just something we can open um it's not connected to the house in any way and just kind of have people in there, have a TV, uh couches, that type of thing. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> I don't know about the clock. The clock's not working.
>> I think you're good. We can let the next person might have some. >> Thank you very much. >> technical help >> for those anxiously awaiting in the audience. Typically, we give three minutes to each speaker. So, we just want to make sure that that's visible to you all. So, bear with us as we work
through the technical difficulty. Oh, there you go. >> Yeah. All right. Thank you. >> Please raise your right hand, state your name and address. >> Hi, how are you? My name's Bill Pew. >> She's swearing you in. I'm sorry. >> I'm sorry. >> Please raise your right hand, state your
name and address. >> Uh, Bill Pew, uh, 567 Palm Tree Road, Job Speech. 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 you God. >> Yes, ma'am. >> My name is Bill Pe. I live on the west
side of uh where uh Pete and Christian live. Um their garage will be within the 5 1/2 ft. We have no problems whatsoever. We don't want to lose them as neighbors. They're the best darn neighbor that has
ever been in that house since 19 or 2018 or 88. Um, it's a great uh they're great. That's all there is to it. We don't want to lose them. Uh, they do need the room and uh that's all I got to
really say is uh hope you give them the their answers. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Q. I'm sorry. >> He did. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Are there any other uh speakers?
>> You didn't want to speak. >> Okay. Kristen. Okay. Uh, anybody else that speaker card wants to speak? Okay. Okay. Uh, seeing no more speakers cards and nobody else wants to speak, I will go ahead and
close the public hearing and bring the item back to the board uh for discussion. Is there >> assume that they don't want to address any of the comments? >> I'm sorry. Yeah, looks good. Did you want to address any of the comments? You don't have to. Okay. That's what I thought. All right. So, u bringing it
back to the board for discussion. Is there a motion? >> I make a motion to approve BOA number 25-100067 based on the substantial competent evidence presented in the staff report and all relevant testimony presented at this hearing and at the motion meets all
of the standards for variance outlined as in section 34-572 of the Jacksonville Beach Land Development Code. Okay, it's been moved. Is there a second? Second. >> Second. >> Okay, it's been moved and second. Uh, any discussion?
>> I think the testimony is very clear. It's an undersized lot both in terms of width and overall area. Uh, recognizing that there is a substantial front yard extension in terms of city-owned 35 ft.
Ignoring that for a moment, 18.9 ft is still in the realm of what you would typically see for a 20 20 foot setback, though this is a 25 ft section. So, in the consideration of those two things, it's still a substantial nearly 20 foot setback plus the 35 ft of the city owned
area. I don't think that that's going to present any issue uh to the community at large and I think it fits as a overarching appropriate variance. Uh the sideyard setbacks I think are in condition with uh having 60 foot of the 90 foot. Uh this does give them the the
use there and the existing truck structure lends itself uh to both of those items. My one concern uh was the unit in the the back corner there being at 5T from the fence. uh hearing that that unit is more of a recreational sort
of pool house situation that does fall within the existing uh use cases for the code and and does meet so there's no variance that would be needed there. So I fully support I think that the situation of the lot speaks for itself
based on the evidence provided today. >> Okay, any other discussion? Can we have a roll call vote, please? >> Matt Mats, >> yes. John Morland, >> yes. >> Laura Tierney, >> yes. >> Owen Curley, >> yes. Your request for variance has been
approved. >> Can we call the next case, please? >> The board calls BOA number 25-100068, property address 2007 South First Street. Motion to consider sections 34-615 Echo1 Charlie 3 for a front yard
setback of 8 ft in L of 20 ft. 34-615 echo1 Charlie 1 for a rear yard setback of 12 feet in lie of 20 feet. 34-615 echo1 Charlie echo for 51.8% and 55.1% primary structure and required driveway
lot coverage in le of 45% maximum for two new urban single family dwellings located on two non-conforming lots of record. >> 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. Would the applicant please come forward uh to be sworn in and give their presentation. >> Please raise your right hand. State your name and address. >> Cindy Trimmer, One Independent Drive,
Sweet 1200, Jacksonville. >> 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 you God. I do. >> Thank you so much. >> Cindy Trimmer with Driver McAfee. I do
have members of the team here with me. This project was before you back in May and the board denied it having concerns with the hardship that was imposed and the proposal to develop two ex two single family residences on historic lots of record. So over the last
intervening five months, we've worked very closely with staff and with your attorney to come up with a plan that everybody could get behind that reduces the request for the deviations and we now are before you with a recommendation of approval from staff for the proposed
development plan. This is a negotiated settlement of the earlier hearing. We had filed for an administrative appeal based on the record. So this was again with your attorney, with your planning director. The notice on this one got a
little bit um confusing. There is not a requirement for you to look at the front yard setback. That is something that is approved at the director level because it was determined to be consistent with the pattern of development in the area. So the only requests at this point are
the coverage and that rear setback. The rear setback in the application pursuant to the planning director and the attorney's instruction was to actually break that down and refer to it to the building line which is your 12 feet and then to the balcony which overhangs on
the above floors which is 7 feet. So we would just ask to make sure that that is clear because that was the instruction that we got back from them. So we are hopeful understanding this is not a self-created hardship. These are historic lots of record. Much like you just heard, a lot of these historic lots
in this area are 25 2600 feet. The two here that are platted lots of record from the 20s are 2600 ft. So to be able to appro to construct appropriate houses on them, which are the type of development that is desired in the
beaches area, you can't make it within the confines of the setbacks that are required. So you have all of the outline in your report and the application an affirmative finding that each of the criteria are met in this instance. And
again this was something that everybody worked really really hard on for the last half a year to get to something that everybody could support. If you have questions happy to answer them. Like I said I do have the design team here. We would really appreciate your support so that they can move forward.
Does anybody have any uh questions? >> No. >> I have no questions. >> Okay. Uh why don't you have a seat and we'll uh open the uh public hearing. Um do we have any speakers cards? Oh, we
don't know. Has anybody filled out a speaker card for this uh particular case? I think some of these are priorities. >> Yeah, that's right. >> No. Okay. Uh, seeing how uh that we don't
have any speakers cards that we know of and no one wants to speak, I'll 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 25-10
0 68 based on the substantial comp 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 moved. Is there a second? Second. >> Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Discussion. >> No discussion. >> I think the limiting factor here is the is the size. So, uh we're in R2 where
there's already a substantially small lot. Minimum requirement of 3500 ft. This is 2600 ft. That's uh out loud. But as as provided by the applicant, uh there is a a very difficult condition to make it usable and looking at the
standards uh as provided. Uh this is a circumstance that is uh specific to the lot and not of uh the doing of the applicant and uh does provide the minimum viable use of uh the land.
>> Agreed. Any other >> 27? >> No. Okay. Any no further discussion? Can we have a a roll call vote, please? >> Matt Mets, >> yes. >> John Morland, >> yes. >> Laura Tierney, >> yes.
>> Ellen Curley, >> yes. Uh, your request for a variance has been approved. >> Okay. Can we call the next case, please? >> The board calls BOA number 25-100069. Property address 124 South 11th Avenue
C. Motions to consider sections 34-615 echo3 Charlie 1 for a front yard setback of 10 ft in le of 20 ft for construction of a second story wood deck extension to a multif family dwelling. Property addressed 124 South 11th Avenue unit C.
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. 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 my name is Hunter Buchanan and address is 124 11th A South, Unit C, Jacksonville Beach, Florida 32250. >> 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 you God. I do. >> Go ahead, sir. >> Um, my wife and I are here today to request a variance for a reduction in the setback from 20 feet uh to 10 feet
in the front yard setback um region in a um residential multifamily zoning um area. Um the reason for this request um initiated with the um termination would be the lot is in a substandard lot size um c creating a hardship that was
inherited um as he moved into the property. And um our request specifically is to extend the balcony on the second floor um to a level that would interrupt with the setback from 20t to 10 feet. Um the uh reason for
this request to provide more functional living space for my wife and I and our growing family and um we love where we live. We love the neighborhood. We love our neighbors. We love a community. But the the space which we live in is is rather crammed and small. Uh particularly that in in a substandard
size um property. it is um smaller and extending the balcony would give us more living space for our family and I think we would um it would be greatly enjoyable and give us more time to spend in the area. um looking through that um
it would u thinking through um any impact on the community we spent um time talking about with each of our neighbors and um wanted to make sure that it wouldn't um create any obstructions or any other um interruptions there and there were no objections from our
neighbors and they they were okay with it. looking through some of the other um properties on the street, it would still be behind other variances um within the within the street itself um particularly on the eastern part of the street. It would still be behind other variances that have been approved. So um it
wouldn't be creating I think an undue nuisance in the area. It wouldn't be causing any um obstruction um or anything of that nature. And so that was um that's the the reason for our request today to reduce the step back.
>> And basically it's going to come out on a second floor you're extending and it's not going to be a room that blocks view. It's going to be an open space. >> Exactly. It's going to just be an extension of the balcony. There's um with the house structure, basically
there's a small balcony on the right side of the home if you're facing the street and a small little opening on the the left side of the home and um the balcony will just extend out to a maximum of 10 ft to connect that being an open structure not enclosed um in
continuous current design of the the deck. That's correct. >> Any other uh questions for the applicants? But no. >> Okay. You can uh step back, please. >> Thank you. >> Uh I will now open the public hearing. Do we have any speakers cards? Well, we
don't know. Is there uh there's one here. Sorry. Go ahead. >> Please raise your right hand. State your name and address. >> Stephanie Drog and I am at 124 Leth Avenue South with the unit B. 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 you God. >> Yes. >> Uh, good evening, members of the council and planning staff. Uh, my name is Stephanie Drog, and I live right in the same condo complex as um, Prienne Hunter, so I'm in the unit behind them.
I'm speaking in support of their request for a setback and a variance to add a balcony. Uh, this addition will give their growing family a safe and comfortable outdoor space, something that's difficult to achieve within the limited layout of the complex. Um, I personally know Pri and Hunter very
well. They're great friends of mine. They're wonderful neighbors, and I know that the design will be modest and respectful of the neighboring units. Um, it will not impact privacy. It will not block views or uh significantly alter the overall appearance of the property.
Um, I think it will enhance a livable space while remaining consistent with the character of the neighborhood. Um, so for these reasons, I do respectfully ask the council to approve the request for the setback. Thank you so much. >> Thank you.
>> Any other uh speakers? >> Don't know. Okay, I will now uh 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
25-100069 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. >> Second.
>> Okay, it's been moved and second and uh discussion. I have one I I I'll call it a point of interest is that the variance that we would be approving is specific to the lot and the request
uh of a 10 ft in L of 20t front yard setback in the context of a balcony extension isn't inherently of concern. But having a 10 foot setback attached to the lot where they could potentially
build other things that be could become obstruction of view. >> Yeah, we usually uh do a condition condition upon um approval condition upon uh the plans presented for a deck. So, >> but would the variance carry beyond the
deck for future construction? Is there a condition we can put just that it only applies to the deck? Yeah, that's the condition you can apply make it apply to the plans presented for a deck. >> Okay. >> And then you're right it, you know, the
predecessors could come forward and say, "Well, I have a variance. I can destroy the front of it and build out 10 more feet or whatever." So with that, I'd like to make a motion to amend the prior motion on BOA number
25-100069 uh to make this uh attached to the deck as presented in today's hearing. >> So it's a conditioned upon uh approval is conditioned upon uh the plans presented for a deck.
>> Approval conditioned upon the plans presented for the deck. Okay. Any discussion on All right, we have the second. Second. >> Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Any discussion on that? >> I think it's a great idea. I think it it does what what the applicants want and
does what we would like to. >> Okay. Uh, can we have a roll call vote on the amendment, please? >> John Morland, >> yes. >> Matt Matz, >> yes. >> Laura Tierney, >> yes. Owen Curley.
>> Yes. Okay. So now uh any more discussion on the amended uh motion to approve? So it's conditioned upon uh the plans presented at us. >> I think it's very good use of space what they wanted to do. Very reasonable,
>> right? >> Yes. Anybody else? >> Yes. No, I think that also it >> Okay. Can we have a roll call vote about that, please? >> John Morland. >> Yes. >> Matt Matt. >> Yes. Laura Tierney, >> yes. >> Owen Curley,
>> yes. Your request for a variance has been approved with those conditions. >> Can we call the last case, please? >> The board calls case number BOA25-100070. Property address 964 North 21st Street.
Motions to consider sections 34-612 echo1 Charlie 2 for a northerly sideyard setback of 5 feet in le of 7.5 ft and 12.5 ft total in le of 15 ft total for construction of a onecar garage addition
to an existing single family dwelling >> okay uh just as a reminder uh each member of the public will be given three minutes to speak when we open the public hearing does any board member have any expert or take 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. >> Katie Corbo, 964 21st Street North, Jacksonville Beach, Florida. >> 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 you
God. >> Yes. >> And is he able to guess speech as well? Uh, please raise your right hand, state your name and address. >> Uh, Michael Gray, 964 21st Street North, Jacksonville Beach, Florida 32250.
>> 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 you God. >> Yes, I do. >> To prevent a problem, could you both make an effort to speak a little stronger? >> Sure. Yes, sir.
>> Yes. No problem. Um, so we're here today to request a 2.6 foot variance um from the side setback to a allow a singlecar garage addition. Um, due to the home's existing placement, uh, meaning the full setback
isn't possible. Um, it should not affect the uh overall value or the uh neighborhood or visuals negatively. Um and the request is the minimum relief necessary that we would need in order to get a onecar garage um addition onto the
property. Um we do have um a written statement from three of our neighbors. We are at the end of a uh dead end. So we have our uh next door neighbors, our neighbors across the street and um the neighbors adjacent to us. Um and we have
it over there with signatures that they are supportive of the the variance approval. Um, >> yeah. So, also if you we have I also passed out um some of the drawings on the surveys. Um it's kind of cut and
dry. Um that's that's basically what we need for the um the one single onecar garage. Um it's not oversizing. It's it's um one car. It's what is um in the code.
Where is it? >> That's okay. >> Yeah. What's in the case? Y >> exist when your house is built. >> Yeah. >> But yes, that's basically it. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Any questions uh for the
applicants? Can you describe the uh hardship that exists for the for the property that resulted in this variance request? >> Sure. Um so the property right now doesn't have uh a lot of storage space
for um any really outdoor um equipment or um you know anything that might necessarily need to go into a garage. We did spend about an hour with our architect walking around the property to see if there were any other options to put a garage in. Um but unfortunately it
looks like this is the most reasonable um option to place a onecar garage on the property. Um we would be um running into another issue if we tried to go forward and then on the other side of the property it's even a smaller um
section that we have available. So, this seemed like the most reasonable option. >> And the uh placement of the home uh also creates for you, correct? >> Yes, correct. >> It's because I believe it's because
we're right near an easement as well, so they they stuck the home farther on the ement side. So, >> okay. Uh any other questions for the applicants? >> I have nothing. >> Okay. Uh you guys can step back and I'll now open the public hearing. Uh do we
have any speakers cards? Seeing how we have no speakers cards, u I will 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 25-10
070 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 a variance as outlined in section 34-572 of the Jacksonville Beach Land Development
Code. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Okay, it's been moved and seconded. uh discussion. I'll just point out that um the uh the unique circumstance for this lot I think
is the placement of the home onto the lot uh as it appears to be a uh conforming lot. But um I think that in of itself creates this unique special circumstance. And also uh the applicants
are not looking to do a land grab here. They're considering something fairly modest in their plans. That's just me. >> Could you say more about the placement of the home on the lot relative to its
surroundings? >> Uh, yeah. >> I'm trying to see it in the in the >> document provided in the staff report. Yeah. >> And it's it's hard to contextualize the constraints. I uh
just going with the staff said it was difficult placement created I guess uh not not sufficient room on either side. Well, the one side that they have it on,
but um yeah, that's I think it's the placement. Uh, okay. Any further discussion on this? >> We're all good.
>> Okay. Uh, seeing how there's no further discussion, uh, can we have a roll call vote, please? >> Matt Mats, >> no. >> John Morland, >> yes. Laura Tierney, >> yes. >> Owen Curley, >> yes. Uh, your request for variance has
been approved. >> Okay. Uh, moving on, we have the, uh, planning department report. Um, our next meeting will be on October 21st and we have two new cases plus the deferred case from today.
>> October 21st is our next one. >> Yes, October 21st, which will be a Tuesday. Okay. And then my favorite uh courtesy of the Florida visitors. Anyone? >> Anyone? Okay. Is there a motion? >> Say something.
>> Yes, that's right. Motion. Is there a motion to adjurnn? >> I move. >> Second. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> opposed. Okay. Thank you. Did you say October 21st?