e e e e e e e e e Lo is every everybody ready um call the meeting to order but before I read the
directions for today I want to acknowledge two board members that we missed in December and I didn't realize that they were not coming back and serve on the board it was Mary Ratliff and Earl bingi and I didn't know they were leaving or would not be back until after
the meeting in December so I just wanted to acknowledge their service and time spent on this board which was greatly appreciated and we will miss both of them anyway so there I thing for the day okay U before we hear the first case
and the only case today I have to read um the uh rules and regulations that we abide by this is a public hearing and we are the Zoning Board of adjustment for putam County Florida we operate under the authority of Articles 11 and 12 of The Land Development code AS amended the
primary responsibility of the board is to hear and decide appeals challenging final determinations made by the planning and development Vel mment Services Department under the Land Development code and to hear an act upon request for variances special use permits non-conforming use determinations and preliminary
development plans under the Land Development code a variance is a relaxation of the requirements of the zoning code in a particular case where because of unusual circumstances a little enforcement of our zoning code would result in undue or unnecessary
hardship the zoning code permits us to authorize variances only for height size of structure size of yards and Open Spaces if we Grant a variance we may impose reasonable conditions on the use of the property which must be satisfied if the variance is to remain valid the
standards we use in deciding whether or not to Grant a variance are listed in section 545-8334 explain to us the nature of each request we will then take any comments from the applicant or their representative followed by any public comments concerning the request please
direct all comments and statements to the board and not to other people in the audience before speaking we will ask each person to be recognized come forward to the lect and identify his or herself by name and address after all persons wishing to speak have been heard we will entertain a motion from the
board the motion will be voted on by the board members and become our final order any decision made by this board can be appealed to the Circuit Court however any appeal must be filed within 30 days after the board of adjustment has rendered the final order is which is
being appealed are there any questions before the first case is heard all of those wishing to speak need to be sworn in so will the notary please administer the oath okay we have case aa2 24-
00002 before we hear staff report I'd like to ask for uh call roll call for exp parte communication or conflict of interest Mr mahe no Mr fiser no Mr winlan
no Miss Osborne no Mr weer absent and Mr West no okay I guess we're ready thank you madam chair uh for the record Michael
Graves planning and development services this is once again case AA 24002 the application is by Roy Williams at 331 West River Road in Paca Florida on a property that is 1.29 more or less acres in size that is zoned residential
estate with a future land use of rural residential the appeal is for an administrative determination denying an 8ft tall fence on the side property line a 2ft height increase from 6 ft uh the property is in FEMA flood zone
X for the majority with a small portion in AE at the water's edge uh and it is part of the boting and Powers uh recorded subdivision the administrative deviation Committee in their November 19th uh 2024 meeting denied the applicant Roy
Williams his requested variance AV 24- 00000011 uh the stated hardship was that the applicant's home is approximately 3 feet off of the East property line and the bedroom is 9 ft above the adjacent grade
the desire to uh the desire being to in erect a fence for privacy uh from The Neighbors at 3:33 the ADC was unable to recognize the issue in hardship from uh his application that would necessitate the increase in the fence height as without
a permanent residence or structure uh Beyond on a fire pit on 333 there is no indication that the issue is a regular or continuous issue uh Mr Williams was uh absent at the ADC meeting to further explain his request and
hardship uh the administrative uh deviation requirements that are uh are mostly congruous with the development of the desired fence there is a special circumstance with the home it being 3 ft uh off adjacent property line and elevated above grade uh the applicant is
not responsible for these issues as the property has existed since before he owned it uh staff does not believe this development to be a spite fence as the applicant has claimed no issues with the neighbors other than the privacy and lighting issue uh there may be an easier
solution to this issue and the ADC has determined that there is no continuous hardship that would be that would require the proposed fence side increase uh furthermore the proposed development may not uh provide the desired solution and may not be harmonious with the
uniform design requirements of LDC uh staff recognizes both stances on this decision there were concerns after the initial denial where the applicant had stated uh repeatedly to staff about methods that they would attempt to circumvent the regulations however the
applicant is attempting by All rights of measure to now follow the putham county land of development code to the best of their ability there are they are working with staff in good faith in order to create the solution they believe to be best for their property while staff can also recognize the adc's claim for a
lack of a continuous hardship due to the lack of a permanent residency at 333 Wester Road staff recommends approval for the appeal to allow for a twoot height increase from 6 feet to 8 feet on the side of side fence in the residential estate zoning District
subject to all other regulations uh regarding fences within 25 ft of the especially those within 25 ft of the front and Waterfront of the property as outlined in LDC section 45533 here you can see the aial of the
property here is the flood zone the future land use the wetlands and lack thereof and finally the zoning are any questions I just want to verify how long
is this fence going to be uh the applicant has stated that I will only cover a portion of the side uh I believe he said something along the lines of 60 ft in length I would need to defer to the applicant to ensure that is correct okay and the other question I've
already asked but I think it needs to be for the record I was just curious as to what transpired from the time that the administrative review denied until it's coming up now for approval anything uh I'm not able to answer that necessarily
as I was not part of the administrative deviation committee or present in the meeting I would have to defer you to Mr Brian Helms who is a member of the ADC to answer that question okay Madam chair may I summarize I was also present to the administrative
deviation committee um when the request Was Heard essentially the the reason for the denial is um the members of the ADC didn't want to proliferation of 8 foot fences throughout putham County um I don't think it was known to them that prior to
the adoption of the ADC uh administratively by staff and through the Zoning Board of adjustment there have been 8 foot privacy defenses approved throughout the county um so essentially that's I was why it was
denied and then I don't know if that answers your question yeah I was just curious as to what the difference was okay any other questions from staff okay before we hear from the applicant let's do a site visit roll call
please yes yes yes yes yes Mr Williams would you like to come and address the board for the record please state your name and
address Roy Williams 331 Wester Road pler Florida I I didn't understand that yeah okay little horse uh Roy Williams 331 West River Road pla okay um I I couldn't attend the the
original meeting so part of this is my fault I was in Gainesville m meeting with a building official um so my neighbor has no issue with the fence height um and I have I think 1,700 linear feet of property line
I'm asking for 50 feet of that to be a new fence at 8 ft Windows right there off the property line and the house angles facing into my neighbor's property because they that's how they
set the house originally to get a better view of the sunset I think so the house is is at an angle and again the bedroom windows looking directly into their property it's a funny angle and um even though they don't have
a permanent structure there right now which is I think why it was rejected they're over there quite a bit they have two boats and a Truck stored right outside my window view and they have a fire pit so they're over there three
four times a month um they have a fire pit going and they're not they're nice family I know them but you know I look out my window and I'm looking right at the stuff they're storing and the fire pit there's absolutely no privacy if the
shades are up um also the it's offgrade Construction so the top of the window is at 9 ft so I went out and measured a 6ft fence and a n or 8ft tall fence and because the top of window is N 9 ft
above grade a six foot fence does not block The View so I put up a um a beam or a post at 8 feet and that did the trick that blocked the view um so again my neighbor doesn't care I've already talked to him about it he you know he
didn't he wasn't going to to appear or try to deny deny what I was doing um but I really think it was just rejected originally because I wasn't at the meeting and um that there's not an existing structure there but that
doesn't mean there I still don't have a right to privacy because they are using the property and over there with their fire pit going and they have a little storage area going over there with boats and cars so I'm asking for 50 ft on my property line to go from 6ft fence to an
8ft fence I think it's a reasonable request for privacy that's all any questions for Mr Williams okay this time thank you sir all right there's no one else in attendance any questions for me no okay we didn't have any thank you I have a
question from the standpoint of the fence uh if it's only 3 ft from the property line where's the fence going to go is it going to go on the property line or they have to set it back uh fences are allowed by right on the property line according to the Land
Development code uh he could have it right on the property line he could also have it anywhere from directly against his uh bedroom window to the property line it just can't be on his neighbor's property uh further than the property line itself of course
okay M Madam chair I have a question for staff on the ADC what was the uh was that a vote was that a voted thing um and do we know the result of that vote what was it unanimous um it is a vote I cannot
recall whether or not it was unanimous but it was a majority vote um but the motion was to deny that that motion was seconded and then the vote fell um in favor I guess against the applicant um another follow-up question
I have is you stated earlier staff did that we already have 8ot fences approved um are those in recent years and can you recall maybe one instance where they were of similar circumstance where I
guess we've already kind of given another citizen this right previously yeah that's correct so 8 foot fences um the way that the Land Development codee's written and and please bear with me on this but the way that the Land Development Cod is written
is um for a twoot increase on fence height it would be done administratively well prior to the establishment of the administrative deviation committee one member of Staff would would handle that staff report and the justification it wouldn't be you know put in front of any
sort of committee um I myself did a an application uh for a person within my subdivision in the West End of the county and it was for an 8ot tall fence and for good good side facing inward um
that one ended up being approved because of a similar situation the neighboring property uh was a mobile home so it was off-grade construction uh the applicant was a siteb built home um and then of course it slopes down towards a body of
water uh so you know the slope and the offgrade construction and the close property line all of that are hardships for this applicant's request uh and to answer the question I
think that was around 2021 or 22 any other questions staff okay this time we will close it to the public and open it up for board discussion or motion I move that we approve or Grant the appeal as provided under Section 451
s91 the Land Development code and wait a minute what am I doing affirm is it affirming the order oh Jee be reversing it the 8ot Pence
reversing the order I don't know that we've ever done one of these I know I'm I'm lost on this one can we get some uh input from legal on that Poss um Mr fiser if you're moving to Grant the appeal you would be uh
reversing the prior order oh okay and I'll authorize hang on let me start over Okay I move that we Grant appal number aa24 d002
as provided under section 45-19 of the Land Development code reversing the order uh to the order to blank what goes there is that Land Development code go I
mean the zbo goes in there it was a denial by the ABC so they're reversing the denial of the ABC okay what goes in the blank the denial of the administrative deviation committee that's what goes in the blank
I mean I don't have the blank in front of me time out they checking can I just say approve it and yes so madam it would be um it would be reversing
the order to deny the two foot fence increase it's a mouthful and that's in that line area right yeah the where the blank is to because the the administrative deviation
committee decided to deny the applicant's request for a two- foot fence and increase so you all would be reversing that denial so it's say it again so I can say it okay so you want the whole no just
the two what goes in the blank to deny the administrative deviation committee to deny the administration committee Adra it's
administr this is a tricky one can I read what it I mean I understand what they want to do can I read what they would want to do and then them make their motion based off of that or [Laughter]
go right so okay so it seems as though the way that y'all are wanting this to be motioned is um you grant appeal aa24
d002 as provided under section 45 1091 of the Land Development code reversing the order of the the administrative deviation committee which denied the the applicant a two foot fence increase and
you would then authorize the chair to sign the final order reversing what I said can I second his motion let me make sure I get this straight okay we have a motion and second to approve um AA 24-
0000000000 two any other further questions or comments right all in favor please indicate by raising your right hand 1 2 3 4 5 motion carries 5 z u Mr Williams there is a 30-day appeal process so
hopefully you can get your sents and go become good neighbors okay thank you I pick right the next on the agenda is election of officers you got to do the first
one you want to go through the rest of the agenda and come back and do that last or oh sure if you want me to that is new business so I'm a minutes we we'll do that under a new business okay all righty okay then the next thing would be
the old business do we have any okay um the new business and I guess I'll just skip that and we'll go that the last approval of minutes um everybody had a chance chance to read the uh minutes for December 18th
2024 move to be approved as presented second we have a motion and second to approve the minutes for December 18th 2024 all in favor say I I all opposed like sign motion carries 5 Z
okay now back to new business election of officers chairperson and vice chair all right the floor is open for nominations for chair do we hear any nominations for chairperson uh question for legal is
there um any precedence for change as opposed to what we currently uh reside in I'm sorry is there any is there any reason for change from our current chair people the current chair can can run
yeah uh make a mo for our current chair to remain in position as a vice chair as well we are second second okay any other nominations hearing none nominations are closed all in favor please say I I I all
right uh Linda is is remains our chairperson uh nominations are open for vice chair Madam chair I make a motion our uh Vice chair remains in their current position unless they were vacated previously who was our current Vice
chair got me who was the was Ron Ron okay uh Madam chair I make a motion that our current Vice chairperson remain in their capacity if so desired okay any other uh any other nominations hearing none nominations are
closed all in favor of Ron being our vice chairman again need a second oh we didn't get a second I thought second sorry okay that way you're looking at do we have a second second all right nominations are closed all in favor say
I I I I all right well Ron congratulations okay that's it guess we stand adjourn thank you madam chair motion to adjourn thank you e e
e e