##VIDEO ID:vpwiK_TBE4o## good evening you're attending a c a session of the city of Jacksonville Beach Board of adjustments the board of adjustments meetings are quasa J judicial judicial in nature excuse me all decisions of the board will be based on confident substantial evidence including testimony provided this meeting any person who is not an applicant or agent that wishes to speak will need to fill out a speaker's card located at the side table by the door and turn them into to 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 the cheering will not be allowed please silence your C can we have a roll call please John Morin here Owen Carly here Jeff TR Jennifer Williams here Matt Mets here Laura Douglas Dell here okay uh next on our agenda is the approval of minutes we have two sets of minutes for December 17th 2024 and January 7th 2025 everybody has reviewed those we have a motion please I make a motion to approve the prior meeting minutes second okay it's been moved in second it all in favor I I opposed okay those meeting amends have been passed uh is there any correspondence need to be aware of okay uh seeing that we have some old business wonder you call that first I call boa2 24-100 z89 applicants Salt Air homes agent Oliver J Kraut motion to consider sections 34-33 a e1f for 43% lock coverage and L of 35% for construction of a single family dwelling okay is 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 expart communication none none 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 do you swear or affirm that the testimony about to given us matter is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth to help you God I do please state your name and address my My Name is Oliver crra uh I live at 226 Tallwood Road Jacksonville Beach 32250 all right I'm uh I guess in front of you tonight and I'm requesting a variance for a lot coverage of 43% instead of 35 um my hardship is that I have a nonconforming lot in width um if the lot was a 60 foot wide lot uh I would be at 34 8% on my lot coverage and um the lot that the house that I'm proposing to build new home would be consistent for what's being built in Jack Beach and um it wouldn't negatively affect any of the adjacent property owners and um yeah that's simple as I can make it board member have any questions looking at the lot it looks like the lot is greater than the 6,000 square foot minimum it's the width that's off right so instead of a 60 foot width you have a 50 foot width would would suggest that the depth is deeper than a a minimum lot area is there a reason that it needs to be as wide as youve proposed versus a deeper structure to fit within the existing Land Development criteria so um so up and down those streets in there the lots are all 125 in depth and uh I am not uh I am not going into the I'm not affecting the rear setback the front setback nor the side setbacks so I have fitted in within the existing setbacks not to you know negatively impact any of the you know neighbors around so I'm not having to do that even with that lot width so I shrunk it to a width and depth up in front that fit and um you know it's just that because it's not 60 wide it was 60 wide then I would be within my lot coverage even staying within those things I'm not asking to go outside of the the setbacks that would assume a 125 depth and a 60 width what I'm saying is based on the code the total lot requirement is 6,000 foot to meet the minimum lot requirement which would be 60 foot wide by 100 foot de regardless of what other Lots may look like in the surrounding area and so the coverage exception to say it needs to be 43 instead of 35 I'm just trying to understand that's relationship to width versus using the additional depth that you have that get you beyond the 6,000 square feet um I think I'm following you but uh you know I can't use if I use the additional there I still you know fall within I still go over on on the lock coverage either way I mean I just because of that I mean I can't go wider um there I I I could go deeper front or back but in doing so I still go through the lock coverage if I change the shape at all that sounds like a coverage use to me versus a constraint of lot area that's what I'm trying to to rationalize if the if the constraint is that your lot isn't as wide as you want it to be well you're not asking for any exception around WID you're asking for a total coverage the total coverage of the lot as you're describing it to me doesn't signal a deficit so I'm just trying to wrap like wrap my head around I'm I'm I'm actually following now my what you're saying I wasn't but um like in response to that I think that when I initially discussed this with the city planners and I had my meeting with them um they had indicated to me that you know a hardship of the loot width was indeed a hardship which would Grant um the increase for the lock coverage irrespective of whether it was based on that size or the you know or the lot or the you know whether it's the lot width so either one of those one would be size of the lot one would be the width of the lot and because that that's zoning standarded would be 60 wide either one of those would qualify and that's why I've gone forward with this thing on the pre meetings and you what they've indicated to me so I'm basing it on what I you know what I relied on city planners to tell okay thank you have you uh talked to any of the Neighbors about this yeah I've met the neighbor to the east um it's a the duplex but he owns he lives in one just recently purchased the other side and you know I've spoken to him because the other option would have been to put four tow houses there and um and I just I I feel myself the townhouse kind of thing is oversaturated and um you know and then you'd have four more units there he's the only one with the two family the others are single single single single all the way around me there and so you know then I'm I'm I'm reducing I think I can make it woring from four units to two units um you know he's been he was happy with that that's one neighbor that I yeah I just wanted to know his reaction to your plan okay all right thank you anybody else have any questions okay sir you could step back please uh I will now open the public hearing do we have any speaker cards not for this purpose okay uh is there anyone in the audience who has not yet filled out a speaker card that wishes to uh speak okay seeing none I will now close the public hearing and bring the item back to board for discussion is there a motion I make a motion to approve boa 24-100 z89 based on the testimony and evidence provided the request has met all the standards for a variance as outlined in section 34- 286 of the Land Development code okay it's been moved and second it any discussion substandard V yeah I still don't see it as the minimum use of the the area if I if I'm looking at the criteria we apply I recognize the lot of substandard and WID but it meets the minimum area requirement and the ask is on coverage of the area I think you could use what's there to make the the reasonable use of a lot any more discussion okay uh can we have a roll call please John Morland yes Jennifer Williams yes Matt Mets no Douglas Dell yes Owen Curley yes okay sir your request for variance been approved I call bo- 24-19 applicant all homes agent Oliver property address 419 5th Avenue North Lot 9 motion to consider 34 sections 34-33 a e1f for 43% lot coverage and low 35% for construction of a single family dwelling okay as a reminder to each member of the public will'll be given three minutes to speak when we open the public hearing does any board member have any ex communication I've had none none oh none and I've had none would the applicant please come forward to be sworn in and give their presentation 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 to help you God I do please state your name and address my name's Oliver Crow uh I live at 226 Tallwood Road Jacksonville Beach Florida and should I go through saying all the same things um I'm requesting a variance for 43% and L 35 um my hard ship is that I have a non-conforming laot in with and um I think it' be consistent with other homes in the neighborhood and I don't think it would negatively affect adjacent property owners and um that I'm reducing the density of area from four units to two units okay thank you does any board member have any questions for the applicant okay uh sir goe sit sit down please uh I'll now open the public hearing do we have any speakers cards is there anyone in the audience who's not yet filled out a speaker card that wishes to speak I do okay did you fill out a speaker card sorry did you fill out a speaker card no okay can you be swor in then fill one out and then give it to the clerk please but go ahead get sworn in first please raise your right hand 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 to help you God yes I do please state your name and address my name is Bruce Paul wers I live at 126 12th Avenue South Jack Beach Florida and I'm speaking as a private citizen all I wanted to say was 50 time 125 is 6,250 Fe thank you okay thank you uh anyone else uh sir can you fill out that speaker card please anyone else okay uh seeing known I'll close the public hearing and bring the item back to a board for discussion is there a motion I make a motion to approve boa 24-19 based on the testimony and evidence provided the request has met all the standards for variance as outlined in 34- 246 286 of the Land Development code okay so it's been moved in seconded uh any discussion yeah I still I feel like if we look at item number five that the granting of this VAR would not be the minimum required to make possible use reasonable use of the lot given the request is around coverage the lot size exceeds the minimum outline land okay any uh further discussion okay can we have a roll call vote please Jennifer Williams yes Matt Mets no John Morland yes Douglas D yes urly yes okay sir your request for variance has been approved we call the next item I call BOA 24-100 Z87 applicant Greg Barnett property address 27 32nd Avenue South this is proposed lot a motion to consider sections 34- 336 E1 C1 for front yard setback of 20 ft in L of 20 5 ft minimum 34- 336 E1 C3 for a rear yard setback of 20t in a l of 30t minimum 34- 336 e1e for 50% lock coverage and L of 35% maximum for construction of a single family dwelling okay just a reminder each member of the public we'll be given three minutes to speak when we open the public hearing does any board member have any ex communication I've had none none Noone and I've had none with the applicant Poli forward to be sworn in and give their presentation do you swear or affirm that the testimony about to given this matter is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you got I do please state your name and address Greg Barett 1280 Plantation Drive Jackson Beach um sorry so um we are asking for variance for a front yard setback reduction on Ocean Drive the second front Set Side set back would be the 16 this is the 20% of the total width which is the land use code we want to get uh the rear yard setback reduced um this lot is two and two3 lots of record it's Lots five six and two3 of lot seven and um we were trying to go for a variance for 50% lot coverage uh based upon the substandard lot the irregularity of the L and we are keeping the density to two L houses right the one that's facing Ocean Drive that's correct is any board members have any questions to the just uh it's 50% lot coverage is the request on lot a which lot a is listed by the staff is an actual lot area of 7,714 feet versus the minimum expected in that that zoning of 10,000 is that correct I believe so that's right so the 50% coverage that you're requesting I think on a 10,000 s foot lot if it was a standard lot would still be a 38 6% coverage anything that you wanted to highlight for us of why that would still need to be higher even if it was a standard lot than the 35% I'm not following your math so can you read tell me your math on the 38.6% 50% of 7,714 gets you the lot coverage of 3857 divide that into the 10,000 38% 3. 38% of a standard lot stand corre sorry so 38% kind of a standard lot size of 10,000 yes but since we're substandard it it moves it up to right versus the code being at 35% so even in a standard lot this would be above and beyond what a standard lot would receive so outside of being a substandard lot from lot size is there anything you want to highlight around why you feel the the special needs of this uh certain circumstance Merit greater than that that threshold um you're talking about the 3% yeah getting from the 35 to 38.6 of what a standard lot would would have uh just the fact that it's um just the fact that it is substandard the client has asked me to go for 50% so they could finish the design of the house we do have a angled front yard we do have a Coastal Construction landine that we're dealing with the D we're dealing with a couple um interesting sites conditions so he was trying to keep the options open um obviously stay restricted within the setbacks and the boundaries um I know that the no the new land use code is kind of getting worked on getting adopted and um we were we had this in place and it's not been adopted yet a weird so that's all I can say I guess I'm just going to repeat back maybe the part that that I heard that I'm gonna hold on to is it's an oblong like it's an awkwardly shaped lot Beyond being substandard size the awkward shape shap is correct okay did you look at anything to reduce your lot coverage perhaps in the driveway area maybe using strips or um we we discussed it um they're trying to adopt the new land use code of 35% of house and driveway and trying to keep with the 50% of everything else um when we spoke with Christian it was almost a let's see if we could try and go for this because it was there was the vagueness of of everything that's happening in February right now but we haven't we we're still under the P correct you know it's we're still under not changed it at this point in time we're evaluating it under the current land code um would we would and we could yes look at pervious pavers and other other things if necessary um even around the pool deck you know using uh pervious material as well if we needed to what is the thank you what what is the situation when it rains very much in in that particular intersection uh well it's kind of interesting because um Ocean Drive and 32nd Avenue South is in an 89 this whole property is in a flood zone X can you speak more into the sorry so Ocean Drive in 32nd Avenue South per survey is in an A9 but this whole property is in an X so for flooding I'm in a flood zone X so according to the FEMA it'll never flood for 100 Years it'll never what it shouldn't flood for a 100 years for being in a flood zone X and they're they're they're pretty accurate right yeah because I I I I live in that neighborhood okay and that intersection and another one probably about three of them in a row um seem to be heavily watered and at times we've got dirt mud um and so on in the street mhm so that while I think your request is reasonable it's less reasonable given the the reality of the potential flooding situation so let me address that I guess so we had submitted a wave crust evaluation to Dave creger at the D and he has come back and said that the there is no scour on this property but there's actually a 15.1 foot wave crust and that the Ocean Drive has an elevation point of nine so we have to build this house with the the lowest horizontal structure member at 15.1 feet so we're going to be six feet the the foundation will be six feet above the road so how do you counteract that we're looking at finding ways to tear us around the property to build it up to keep the flooding on the street and can not have the our water enter the street or the water from the street enter the property and we got it's another way to counteract the 15.1 foot that the DP requires how do you do that what's that how do you do that what do you mean that that you're trying to prevent the water from building up how how are you going to prevent the water from building up with how am I going to prevent water from building up you saying with the terracing and retaining of the water so if we if the if Ocean Drive is at 9 ft of elevation and the house has to be at 15 I have to make up 6 feet right M so what I what I want to do is build retaining walls to build up the front of the property so when you were if you were to walk on Ocean Drive you would step up steps onto the yard so we're going to build up the property it'll be a two-story structure and um it this will help is one idea the other idea would be to build on stilts and we could you know kind of like you do down in volano all everything's up in the air and you're down below with piles so we're still in a design development phase with the architect so these are some of the options based upon what the D and femur requires so we intend to retain our water per the Land Development code and what the city requires um and we would retain our water on our property yeah but you be you want to put 80 38% of water on your property rather than um 35 sure but the um Jacksonville Beach building department requires all roof drainage to be hard piped into pipes underground and brought out to the city street so the city storm water can pick it all up so if I have 50% of my Lots covered by a roof then 50% of my lot roof water is ending in the street which should be retained by the city public utility department okay so we have uh six criteria that we we judge all applicants and considering uh whether not to Grant a a variance and number five is Grant a variance that is the minimum variance that will make reasonable use of this parcel of land or building structure uh is this lot coverage that you're asking for the Min minimum variance is this actually the minimum or is there another lower number that uh like I said earlier we're still in the design phase and when we spoke with the was zoning um it was the recommendation to go for this so we did not really explore the um minimum so uh we're not really a uh based on our criteria we're we're not the U to use a football reference we're not the hell Mary pass board we are sure the minimum required board okay and by acknowledging that there is a minimum that is unknown uh if you were to recompute this I mean what what is the minimum that you now are you referring to the lock coverage or the the lock coverage and but you're not referring to the setback uh the lock coverage the lock coverage I guess we could explore the 3500 ft of a standard 10,000 foot at 35% would be 3500 versus 38 and change that's not our definition of minimum just a that that's that's a criteria that we look at as like a reasonability check on things but I don't want to set that out into the record while we're talking about this this isn't just me talking to you like this is for everyone right it's not a if you you can hit the minimum for the lot coverage defined in the LDC then that's that's what you need to hit it's for the lot that you have in the circumstances that it exists in what is the minimum viable use of that lot that you can amend to so that doesn't equal that number but if that that's your number fine if your numberers higher than that if you need 38% we just need that to be an understandable justification that that's the minimum uh and so if I'm looking at this comments that I would probably bring up after we have the public comment anyway uh and and we're saying hey we haven't looked at the driveway to see if we want to do that as strips or as permeable pavers or we could get rid of a covered Leni and not have that option uh that gets rid of some of that coverage so just immediate things that stand out to me is is this the minimum maybe not and knowing um that there's there's an option there looking at criteria 5 I just didn't want to set the expectation that 35% of 10,000 equals minimum so my client uh in told me that he wants to Design This House um the owner is a gentleman that was intending on building two uh and his wife has actually moved into the existing house loves the house wants to remove the house and wants to move into this front lck uh he the reason why we're deferring the next variance is because we don't know what we're going to do there he just wants to keep it as grass right now so under my client's Direction he gave this to me and said this is the minimum requirement for his house so the way that we judge this criteria is based on the parcel of land M and so the client's minimum criteria for the home that they want doesn't influence the minimum reasonable use of the plot of land so just as considering that I wanted to give that criteria of what can be put on this land and be viable as a structure as as it's zoned versus is it good enough for the person that owns the land is those are two different uh so I understand what I just wanted to clarify that as we talk about what points are going to be considered okay does any other board member have any questions have none okay sir you could step back uh I will now open the public hearing do we have any speakers cards we have a good number of speakers cards I'll call Chuck and Paige horn it says that they wish to address the board there's only one copy of each packet is that what this is oh I see these are two please raise your right hand do you swear or affir that the testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth to help you go uh yes I do please state your name and address my name is Charles Horn and I live at 3115 First Street South thank you so basically I'm on the corner of First Street and 32nd after so we are right next to these these two lots if you guys will look at the thicker one the first one has marks on it it's got like lock lock coverages on it it's a basically a view of uh like from the satellite and showing the size of all the Lots it's written in uh in ink so the this whole reason of this top page is showing you that the lot sizes in this area like our lot size itself which is right next to the U to this adjacent property is 75 by 80 and if you look at all these lots that are here now we got 116 by 80 60 by 77 55 by 77 uh 65 by 80 76 x 76 nothing is at 50 uh at 50 fet basically so is what I'm getting at our whole area everybody's taken the lots that were there originally when they were plotted at like 57 ft or 55 ft when they were plotted and have added you know taken pieces of other lots to make them bigger so um if if you flip the page you you'll see that there's a I've got there's 32nd Avenue South and that's the south side of it I just was going to show you what what what the street looks like and then if you flip the page again you'll see uh kind of standing right near Ocean looking back at at the lot a lot B and then my house which is 3115 right there and then if you flip the page again you'll see that this is a view from from my balcony and lot lot B will be S and a half so so Lot B basically that house according to this plot will be 7 and half ft from my from my fence basically all right and uh and it will come in somewhere around there's a there's a little column to the right of that fireplace that's about where that house will be 7 foot off my my fence if you flip the page you'll you'll see my backyard so my backyard will face their sidey yard if you flip the page one more time you'll see that that's that's the rear of of my house now and it's got a fence there and lot lot B is to the right and then I just put a couple pictures of the house I've got it from from 32nd Avenue a couple of those and then I also have it from First Street so why why I showed you this there two reasons one is I want to show you that we don't have any 50 foot wide Lots anywhere around us in in that area we have to go to like 27 and 28 to actually get 50 50 foot wide Lots um they're one of the things they're asking for and B is to make it a 50 foot wide lot because they want to put more they they originally had it at 60 foot lot when they came in on the last uh variances they they had it drawn as 60 foots and then they decided they wanted 10 more foot for lot a so they're shrinking up Lot B so your time's up if you could just wrap up okay um no sorry about that didn't mean take much time um basically I was just trying to show you guys that where for somebody to build on a on a 50 foot lot if you turn to the other flyer that I that I gave you if you turn to that you'll see it's almost it looks like a row home uh on 2728 there's four houses that were built and they're all 50 foot lots and and it looks like basically they're almost attached and so you we have such a good I mean s Jack's Beach is just amazing and so is Jack I mean everything Jack's Beach is so good I just don't think we want to make all of our streets look like 27 28 where it looks like we got Ro homes we've got custom really nice homes going in people put a lot of energy into it and I think that a lot minimal is not is basically uh too small speaker thank you thank you okay our next speaker is Simon rhs I take it your Janet roads okay please raise your right hand 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 yes please each see your name and address of your book speaking okay but she's going to read my voice okay all right so I'll give you both our addresses which is the same so Simon roads and Janette roads at 28 31st Avenue South Jacksonville Beach 32250 um I'm going to read his first my wife is reading this for me because my speech is impaired I live north of this lot we did not attend the prior meeting because we felt that the original request was reasonable when it rains there's already a considerable Flooding at the intersections of Ocean Drive with 31st and 32nd Avenues there are no Street drains on these Corners anywhere on Ocean this loss of drainage will make it worse will the city or the Builder install new Street drains to remedy this dangerous situation this increased request for Lots A and B feels like a bait and switch and will result in loss of drainage in an already affected location I ask the committee to reject this new request for both Lots A and B in the words of the Builder he's going for it as directed by his client I uh thank you for your consideration and then I would like to say the original public notice letter that we received on December 9th asked for what my husband and I deemed appropriate setbacks and a lot coverage of 36% for both Lots A and B and we chose not to attend the January 7th meeting for our to show our approval because it was only 1% more coverage on January 10th there's a letter of approval for the board of B Lot B setbacks but not for coverage then the second public notice letter which came January 22nd for the board meeting today both of the Lots A and B increase their lot coverage requests from 36% lot coverage to 50% with no difference in the site plan and I'd been told by uh people at the board that they can build anything they want once they get their percentage and they don't have to follow the site plan I'm not sure if that's the TR if that's how it works or not but now we have no idea what they're going to build if they get the 50% since the department of Planning and Development has worked diligently for an extended period of time to seek approval for ordinance number 2025 8220 for total lot coverage of 35% to include the house and the driveway and 15 additional for other elements by no means should this application for variance for 50% be approved or even considered since it is the intent and will of the city and its people to fairly regulate drainage and new construction also um drainage should be yard not walls so the whole purpose of the drain system is to leech into grass areas or permeable areas and whatever can't leech into those permeable areas then goes down to the drain system but if you've got walls up on every around everyone's property there isn't any way for that drainage to occur a wall would be tragic in this area because it's very flooded and it's already a dangerous traffic intersection as there's an entrance to the beach there and there's just always children with lawn chairs and people crossing right so now we've got water we've got people we got traffic um I think some other people are going to speak on the danger of that thank you thank you for your time okay Kathleen Lewis we can share please raise your right hand 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 to help you God I do please state your name and my name is Kathleen Lewis I live at 24 31st Avenue South Jacksonville Beach we've owned our property there for over 55 years the land development meeting was last night they were going to vote and they postponed it because they want to do a workshop they are doing the will of the people and I'm going to ask you to do our will will 50% coverage if you look at that lot it's a very nice large lot with a very large house on it it's a perfect rectangle it is not non-conforming there's no disaster or disability for these people to need to build this up my house as you can see is directly behind it their house is directly behind it they want to put the house on it but they also want to put a pool in illai it's going to be basically buted up right to my backyard which is going to mean no permeability it's going to mean that they're going to be basically playing in my backyard with all of the noise the drainage the sewage drainage the rain drainage since everybody's been approving the houses that are up on the on the ocean it has gotten out of control you cannot even see the sky from this one house it's like dark and so therefore now our drainage is even worse we have puddles which we never used to have puddles in the backyard and the windows they're going to be right on top of us if they have that much coverage if you look how far back it goes if you look on the pink and blue lines you can see it's going to be buted right up to our both of our yards the nature of our community and the environment has changed drastically with all of the permissions for all of these huge coverages on the Lots which is why the planning committee is redoing a 40-year-old plan to have restrictions for 36% and additional 15% if you want to put pools but you can't just say here's cart blank for the 50% because they want 50% and if you look at that they still want to put in pools lenai etc etc and completely block up the whole land so I would like you to vote no I would like you all to be the stewards of our environment I'd like you to be the stewards of caring for our homes our people Jacksonville Beach the way it always has been and I would like you to advocate for us in the very least by voting no if you cannot vote no at least postpone it until the Land Development meets and these Builders are a little more concrete and what they're going to do rather than just doing a Hail Mary so that they can put in whatever they darn well please I like to see I know the intentions of all the council members is to make the these changes and they're doing these intentions but what I would like to see from you and from them action by voting no thank you so much thank you um I call now the handwriting is not that great so Ralph bad newu I apologize if I didn't say your name correctly my public speaking is just as bad please raise your right hand do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth or the whole truth and nothing but the truth to help you God I do please state your name and address Ralph badowski 3201 Ocean Drive South Jack Beach 32250 I live directly across the way on the ocean and I can tell you 32nd Avenue every time it rains a quarter of an inch is flooded at by doorstep and at the entrance of the walkway so if you add more water I mean it's delusional what the the guy said and I also know that the people building the house are not planting living there they're moving out after a couple years and selling it I've been told that by him so this is not something that's is not a lifetime dream home I'm going to live there forever it's to you know this is a problem yeah it's uh I'm I'm not saying he's trying to make money but that's basically it plus if you drive down 32nd Avenue into my house there's no stop sign I go right into my driveway it's a one-way street we have bikes we have cars is going the wrong way constantly so if I don't stop at that intersection by myself I can hit people coming the wrong from going the wrong direction on the street so if you add more congestion and if you look at that corner piece and I'm concerned somebody's going to get hit my neighbor also almost hit somebody the other day plus my neighbor he had to go to Australia because his brother's dying of cancer he wrote a letter we write to share our concern with variance whatever we enjoyed living at a 3205 Ocean Drive South for over 30 years Our concern is the safety and public of the intersection at Ocean dive and 32nd Avenue South this is a busy intersection used by motorist skateboarders cyclists and pedestrians the public access to this beach at this intersection is very active with the proposed new setbacks these homes will be closer to the street we are concerned this variance May negatively impact visibility for those on the streets at this intersection and jeopardize safety they again uh don't wish to have this voted for so you know I don't mind them building a house there but I think this is kind of Overkill okay thank you very much thank you and the next three do not wish to speak but they oppose or passing this these variances that is Carla Lewis Norma badowski and Ken Lewis okay is there anyone else in the audience who has not filled out a speaker card that wishes to speak okay uh seeing none I'll invite the applicant back uh to the podium uh and you can address any of the um points raised um by the uh by the public okay um when Chuck horn was talking about the lot sizes we're not talking about the back lot the this variance request is on the front lot and the lot is 103 feet wide not 50 um the flooding with the seeping and the percolation into the land if we have to build the property up a few feet that the sock pipe of a drainage system would almost enact like a septic system in a drain field so wouldn't it be better that you add more soil to the land before the water comes out to the street which would be down at grade to allow the water to seep through to retain more water on the property than any other Lots out there um I would also say that um the third the the 36% issue I guess we would say was because the It Was Written wrong that's why last variance meeting we only voted on the set back so we postponed the lot coverage because it was recorded and written wrong so it got published incorrectly um I think that's everything okay thank you um I will now uh close the public hearing and bring the item back to board for discussion is there a motion I make a motion to approve boa 24-1 0087 based on the testimony and evidence provided the request has met all the standards for variances outline outlined in section 34- 286 of the Land Development code second okay it's been moved in second any discussion I'm not satisfied that this is a minimum that's necessary for this building here I don't think it's met that requirement I agree with you I'm looking at uh number five of our current Land Development code section 34- 286 section five says granting a variance is the minimum variance that will be make possible the reasonable use of the portional land building or structure um I do have a issue with that since we know that this is sort of a get as much as you can request and not this is what we actually need anyone else okay can we have a roll call vote please Jennifer Williams no Matt Mets no John Morin no Douglas D no Owen Carley no your request for variance has been denied can we call the next one the next one was deferred I believe that was a one88 and I believe that was deferred correct okay uh planning department report um um we still don't have any um new uh variance um meetings since the uh LDC got pushed back again um the next Workshop is on February 20th and then after that the next reading will be on February um no on March 3rd and that's it thank you is there an update on post Workshop how many times the code will need to go in front of council again or is it expected to be that the council votes after that Workshop yeah after that Workshop that would technically be the first reading again because they didn't really vote and then they'll have a second one to adopt it okay uh now it's traditionally our courtesy of the floor to any visitors oh no that's not what that's for hold on hold one minute okay uh seeing none uh is there a motion to adjourn second okay all in favor I opposed okay thank you