[00:00:03]
WE'LL CALL TO ORDER THIS MEETING, RECOGNIZING THAT WE ARE GOING TO STALL FOR THE STAFF REPORT AND RECESS BETWEEN NOW AND 530 AS SOON AS WE GET DONE WITH THE NORMAL BOARD BUSINESS.
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND STAND RIGHT NOW AND STATE THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, PLEASE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
SO GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLL.
WE RECOGNIZE THAT JOHNNY IS ON HIS WAY, JOHNNY MILLER.
WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEE HIM SHORTLY.
AND MR. CHAIRMAN, WOULD YOU MIND IF I INTERJECT A LITTLE INFORMATION ON THE NATURE OF THIS MEETING TONIGHT AS FAR AS WHY WE'RE STARTING AT 5 AND GOING TO 530 AT THIS TIME BEFORE WE GO TO MINUTES? ABSOLUTELY.
SO THIS EVENING'S MEETING WAS PUBLISHED FOR AN AGENDA AT 5 P.M.
THE NOTICE AND THE POSTING OF THE PROPERTY THAT FULLY COMPLIES WITH CHAPTER 11 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WAS ADVERTISED FOR 5.30 P.M.
SO WE ARE OPENING, AS YOU'VE SEEN, WE'VE OPENED THE MEETING FOR 5 P.M.
WE ARE GOING TO HANDLE THE ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS THAT WE ARE ALLOWED TO BECAUSE THAT HAS BEEN PROPERLY NOTICED FOR A BOARD MEETING.
AND AS THE CHAIR HAS ALREADY STATED, YOU IF WE GET THROUGH OUR ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS AND IT IS NOT 530 YET, THIS BOARD WILL RECESS AND RECONVENE FOR 530 SO THAT THE POSTING ON THE PROPERTY AND THE ADVERTISEMENT IS STILL ACCURATE.
IT WAS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND EVERYONE WILL BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE WHEN WE GET STARTED AT 530.
SO THANK YOU FOR THAT, MR. CHAIRMAN, AND I'M GOING TO PUSH THE FLOOR TO YOU AT THIS TIME.
[3. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES]
ALL RIGHT.WE'LL GO THROUGH THE OLD MINUTES.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND BEGIN WITH THE OLD BUSINESS IN THE MINUTES.
DOES EVERYBODY HAVE A CHANCE TO GO THROUGH THE MINUTES THAT WERE PROVIDED TO US? YES, I RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
WE HAVE THE FIRST AND THE SECOND.
CAN WE GO AHEAD AND CALL THE VOTE? MEMBER BARRY HERTZLEIT? YES.
ALL RIGHT, SO WE ACTUALLY HAVE...
TWO MEETING MINUTES ACTUALLY THE 20TH OF MAY AND THEN THE MARCH OF MARCH 18TH SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND WE'LL GO AHEAD AND DO WHAT SPECIFICALLY WERE YOU GUYS APPROVING THAT MAYBE WE'RE LATE LATE 20TH MAY 20TH ALL RIGHT LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO THE MARCH 18TH ONE WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE MARCH 18TH MEETING MINUTES RECOMMEND APPROVAL MARCH 18 BINS DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.
ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A FIRST AND A SECOND.
CAN WE GET A VOTE? MEMBER BARRY HERTZLEIN? YES.
ALL RIGHT, AND PLEASE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT JOHNNY IS NOW HERE IN THE RECORD.
WE JUST GOT DONE APPROVING THE MINUTES.
I CAN'T GO ON SO YOU DON'T MISS
[4. OLD BUSINESS]
ANYTHING.RECOGNIZING THAT WE'VE GOT ALL THE OLD BUSINESS OUT OF THE WAY, LET ME SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING I NEED TO ADDRESS.
I THINK THAT'S IT FOR RIGHT NOW.
IS THERE ANYTHING THE BOARD WANTS TO DISCUSS OUTSIDE OF THIS CASE? ALL RIGHT THEN WE WILL GO TO RECESS TILL 5 30.
MR OKAY WE WERE GOING TO TAKE CARE OF SOME OTHER HOUSEKEEPING MATTERS WOULD YOU LIKE TO CALL THAT MEETING BACK INTO ORDER I'LL CALL THEM MEETING BACK INTO ORDER THAT QUICKLY APOLOGIES FOR THAT THAT'S OKAY UM YES YOU CAN AT THE BOARD'S PLEASURE WE UM
[6. BOARD BUSINESS]
REARRANGE THE AGENDA AND UM ADDRESS ITEMS SIX AND SEVEN ON THE AGENDA SOME BOARD BUSINESS AND STAFF REPORT I UNDERSTAND THAT STAFF HAS SOME HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS TO SPEAK WITH YOU ABOUT.AND IF WE HAVE TIME, I WAS GOING TO UPDATE YOU ON A FEW PIECES OF LEGISLATION.
BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I MISS PEARSON. YES.
MARGARET PEARSON, PLANNING MANAGER HERE AT THE CITY OF FERNANDINA.
[7. STAFF REPORT]
UPDATE ON THE 2050 VISION PLAN THAT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON.WE'VE HAD SEVERAL WORKSHOPS THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY AND SOME POP-UP.
EVENTS THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY WE WERE AT THE SHRIMP BUS.
WE WERE AT THE MEDIA WILD FEST WE'RE GONNA BE AT THE PUBLIX WHEN THEY OPEN JULY 2ND.
THAT'S MY BIRTHDAY, SO I'LL BE WHERE I'M SPENDING IT OUT THAT DAY AND SO WE'RE HOPING WE'LL GET A LOT OF FEEDBACK.
WE DIDN'T GET AS MUCH FEEDBACK
[00:05:01]
FROM THE SHRIMP FEST FROM LOCAL RESIDENTS.IT WAS MORE OUTSIDE BUT AMELIA WILD FEST WE HAD A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT CAME BY THAT WERE LOCAL SO THAT WAS EXCITING.
OUR NUMBERS FOR OUR SURVEY KEEP GOING UP.
WE WANT TO AT LEAST SURPASS WHAT WAS DONE IN THE 20 WHEN THEY DID THE 2045 VISION PLAN SO WE'RE CONTINUING TO HAVE OUTREACH.
AND THEN WE'RE ALSO WORKING ON A VIRTUAL PRESENTATION THAT PEOPLE CAN SIGN UP ON, YOU KNOW, AND BE PART OF THE WORKSHOP WITH THAT FORMAT.
THE OTHER THING IS WE'RE WORKING ON A WORKSHOP WITH OUR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, OUR PAB BOARD, AND WE WANTED TO INVITE THIS BOARD.
AND SO IF YOU COULD LET US KNOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND IT, WE COULD HAVE A JOINT ONE, AND IT'S GOING TO BE A PRESENTATION AS WELL.
AS WELL BY THE NORTHEAST REGIONAL COUNCIL.
DID YOU WANT TO CONTRIBUTE ANYTHING? AS FAR AS WHAT MS. PEARSON IS SPEAKING ABOUT, YES, IT WOULD BE A JOINT MEETING TO ALLOW THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.
WHILE YOU DON'T HANDLE THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD MATTERS, YOU DO HAVE ITEMS COME TO YOU FOR A VARIANCE, SO YOUR INTEREST IN JOINING IN THE JOINT MEETING THAT MS. PEARSON SPEAKS ABOUT, IT WOULD BE PROPERLY NOTICED SO THAT YOU COULD ALL DISCUSS, HEAR, AND INTERACT.
AND THEN AS FAR AS LEGISLATION MR CHAIRMAN AS YOU ALL MAY KNOW THE LEGISLATURE HAS ADOPTED SOME AD VALOREM TAX REFORM THAT HAS COME INTO LAW EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY BASED ON HOW THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE PASSED IT, AND THAT WOULD BE TO REDUCE AD MALORUM TAXES IN THE FIRST YEAR BY 100,000 FEET.
THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION COULD BE INCREASED IN THE FIRST YEAR WOULD BE THE CORRECT STATEMENT.
AND THEN IT INCREASES THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS.
THERE ARE SOME REQUIREMENTS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
THIS PARTICULAR LEGISLATION WOULD REQUIRE A VOTE OF THE PEOPLE, AND IT WOULD TAKE 60% OF THE CITIZENS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA TO PASS ANY OF THIS REFORM THAT WAS JUST APPROVED YESTERDAY AND I BELIEVE CAME INTO LAW TODAY, MIGHT HAVE BEEN APPROVED MONDAY.
SO THAT WAS ONE PIECE OF LEGISLATION.
IT WILL IMPACT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND MONEY.
PROVIDED TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS BY INCREASING THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION IT WILL REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF FUNDS THAT A MUNICIPALITY CAN RECEIVE FROM YOU KNOW FROM TAXATION UM SOME OF THE OTHER LEGISLATION AGAIN I KNOW YOU'RE NOT THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD BUT THE THERE'S THAT SENATE BILL 180 WHICH HAS ALL THE RESTRICTIONS ON WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO AS FAR AS PASSING NEW LAWS WHICH WHICH CAN BE OVERLY AND UNDULY BURDENSOME ON LANDOWNERS.
THERE WAS MOVEMENT IN THE SENATE TO CURB THAT BILL TO WHAT MOST BELIEVE MAKE IT COMPLY WITH THE INTENT, WHICH WAS TO AID HURRICANE VICTIMS. AND THE RECOVERY FROM THAT, WE ALL KNOW THAT IT HAD A MUCH BROADER IMPACT AND IMPLICATION.
THE HOUSE BILL HAD A BILL THAT WAS ACTUALLY MORE RESTRICTIVE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
SO WE ARE GOING TO THROUGH UNLESS SOMETHING ELSE HAPPENS LATER THIS YEAR, WE DO STILL HAVE SENATE BILL 180 GOVERNING HOW THE CITY CAN AMEND ITS CODE, ITS LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THERE WERE SOME AMENDMENTS TO THE LIVE LOCAL ACT, CLARIFICATIONS.
THERE WAS SOME BROADENING FOR SOME PERMISSIVE THINGS THAT LOCAL GOVERNMENT COULD DO.
BELIEVE THE CITY IS GOING TO BE MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION.
BUT AGAIN, THAT LEGISLATION HAS ALSO NOT HAD ANY AMENDMENTS TO IT THAT WOULD KIND OF PULL BACK THE IMPACTS ON CITIES AND COUNTIES.
I FIGURED THE AD VALOREM TAXATION, IF YOU KNEW ABOUT IT, YOU MIGHT WANT AN UPDATE ON IT.
SO THOSE WERE THE THREE I THOUGHT YOU MIGHT FIND OF INTEREST.
ANY QUESTIONS? THAT WILL BE ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT? YES, IT WILL BE ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT.
I'LL ASK AROUND THE ROOM ONE MORE TIME.
ANYTHING ON THE BOARD? ALL RIGHT.
THIS TIME WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO RECESS FOR 15, 16 MINUTES UNTIL 5.30.
MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALL ACTING ON BEHALF OF GOOD CONDUCT.
[00:10:02]
I APPRECIATE THAT.WE WILL GO AHEAD AND I'M GOING TO START WITH ALLOWING TERESA TO GO THROUGH THE QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEDURES OF THIS.
HEARING THIS EVENING AND THEN WE'LL GO AHEAD AND LET STAFF GO DO THEIR REPORT AND THEN WE WILL LET THE APPLICANT SPEAK WE WILL LET THE APPLICANT WITNESSES SPEAK AND THEN WE WILL LET THE PUBLIC SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THESE FORMS THAT Y'ALL PROVIDED US APPRECIATE THAT SO THAT'LL BE HOW WE GO GO FORWARD AND TERESA WILL YOU GO AHEAD AND KICK US OFF OKAY THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN FIRST I'D LIKE TO START WITH THIS BEING A QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING WAIT WAIT HOW'S THAT THIS IS A QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING THIS EVENING AND SO THE BOARD DOES HAVE TO DISCLOSE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS THAT THEY HAVE HAD AND AN EX PARTE COMMUNICATION WOULD BE ONE HAD WITH STAFF ABOUT THE APPLICATION, ANY CONVERSATIONS HAD WITH NEIGHBORS.
OR WITH THE APPLICANT OUTSIDE OF THIS MEETING.
AND SO AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE THE BOARD MEMBERS TO DISCLOSE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS THAT THEY MAY HAVE HAD WITH STAFF, THE APPLICANT, ANY INTERESTED PARTIES, NEIGHBORS, OR ANYONE TESTIFYING TONIGHT.
I SPOKE TO ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS ABOUT HIS QUESTIONS ABOUT THE VARIANCES, THE SIX DIFFERENT WAYS THAT WAS IT.
I SAID I SPOKE TO ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS ABOUT HOW TO EXPLAIN TO HIM THE VARIANCES, THE SIX ONES THAT WE TALK ABOUT HERE.
I'VE SPOKEN TO THE STAFF, NEIGHBORS FROM BOTH NEIGHBORHOODS.
I KNOW THE AFRICAN, HE'S A FRIEND OF MINE, BUT I HAVEN'T SPOKE TO HIM ABOUT IT.
CONVERSATIONAL STAFF AND PUSH YOUR BUTTON OH IT'S NOT TURNING THE VARIANTS AND I WAS ALSO AT THE PROPERTY APPROXIMATELY POINT OF ORDER YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO COME BEHIND THE DAIS PLEASE THANK YOU I WAS AT THE PROPERTY APPROXIMATELY TWO WEEKS AGO, AND I PULLED UP.
I WAS LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY.
BARRY PULLED UP AND WAS SPEAKING TO ANOTHER GENTLEMAN.
ALL I DID WAS SPOKE TO THE GENTLEMAN AND TOLD HIM, RECOMMENDED, IF YOU HAD ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO DO, YOU SHOULD COME TO THE MEETING.
JOHN? I HAVE NO CONVERSATIONS WHATSOEVER.
AT THIS TIME, THAT WAS A GREAT SEGUE.
INTO HOW YOU SHOULD CONDUCT YOURSELVES THIS EVENING WE DO HAVE BECAUSE THIS IS A RECORDED MEETING EVERYBODY ATTENDING THE MEETING WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO REFRAIN FROM PRIVATE CONVERSATIONS WHILE YOU'RE IN THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS AND JUST SO YOU KNOW THESE ARE ALSO THE GUIDELINES THAT WE HAVE FOR THE CITY COMMISSION MEETINGS AS WELL SO CITIZENS AND OTHER VISITORS ATTENDING THIS MEETING CAN OBSERVE AND WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO OBSERVE THE RULES OF PROPRIETY DECORUM AND GOOD CONDUCT.
ANY PERSON MAKING PERSONAL, IMPERTINENT, PROFANE, OR SLANDEROUS REMARKS OR WHO BECOMES BOISTEROUS WHILE ADDRESSING THE BOARD OR WHILE ATTENDING THE MEETING WILL BE REMOVED FROM THIS MEETING.
AND THE PERSONS CAN BE BARRED FROM FURTHER ATTENDANCE.
UNAUTHORIZED REMARKS FROM THE AUDIENCE, STAMPING OF FEET, WHISTLES, YELLS, AND SIMILAR DEMONSTRATIONS WILL NOT BE PERMITTED.
NO PLACARDS, BANNERS, OR SIGNS WILL BE PERMITTED IN THE CHAMBERS OR IN ANY OTHER ROOM IN WHICH WE'RE MEETING, BUT WE'RE HERE TONIGHT.
EXHIBITS, DISPLAYS, AND VISUALS USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY PRESENTATIONS ARE PERMITTED.
[5. NEW BUSINESS]
AND WITH THAT, I'LL GO INTO THE QUASI-JUDICIAL REQUIREMENTS.SO THIS IS A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING TONIGHT.
ITEM 5.1 BOA 2026-0002 IS A QUASI-JUDICIAL.
IT BY STATE AND CASE LAW IS DIFFERENT THAN A REGULAR HEARING CONDUCTED BY A BOARD.
A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING IS LESS THAN A FORMAL COURT HEARING BUT SIMILAR IN PROCEDURES AND EVIDENTIARY MATTERS.
STAFF HAS THE BURDEN OF DEMONSTRATING THROUGH COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT THE RESPONDENT THAT THE APPLICANT HAS MET THE VARIANCE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THE RESPONDENT AND THE APPLICANT MUST DEMONSTRATE THROUGH COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT THEY HAVE MET THE CRITERIA OF THE VARIANCE.
WHILE THE BOARD WELCOMES COMMENTS FROM ALL WHO HAVE INTEREST IN THIS PROCEEDING, FLORIDA LAW REQUIRES THAT THIS BOARD'S DECISION BE SUPPORTED BY COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.
EVIDENCE PRESENTED TO THE BOARD DURING THE HEARING IN THIS CASE COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IS SUCH EVIDENCE AS A REASONABLE MIND WOULD ACCEPT AS ADEQUATE
[00:15:02]
TO SUPPORT A CONCLUSION.THERE MUST BE A FACTUAL BASIS THAT THE RECORD TO SUPPORT OPINION TESTIMONY FROM BOTH EXPERT AND NON-EXPERT WITNESSES.
GENERAL OBJECTIONS WITHOUT SPECIFIC EVIDENCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE SUBSTANTIAL COMPETENT EVIDENCE.
AND IN THIS CASE, ALL TESTIMONY THAT IS COMPETENT MUST BE...
MUST APPLY TO THE VARIANCE CRITERIA.
GENERAL OBJECTIONS WITHOUT SPECIFIC EVIDENCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE SUBSTANTIAL COMPETENCE EVIDENCE, COMPETENT EVIDENCE.
THE ONLY MATERIAL OR RELEVANT EVIDENCE IS THAT WHICH ADDRESSES THE VARIANCE REQUIREMENTS.
EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVED AT THE TIME OF THIS MEETING ARE PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR THE HEARING BUT ARE NOT WITHOUT MORE COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.
THE APPLICANT IS ENTITLED TO BE REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL I HAVE BEEN ADVISED THAT THE APPLICANT DOES HAVE COUNSEL AT THIS TIME.
AND THEN THE HEARING PROCEDURES WILL BE AS FOLLOWS.
AS THE CHAIR HAS ALREADY STATED, STAFF WILL, EVERYBODY WILL BE SWORN IN WHO MAY GIVE TESTIMONY.
STAFF WILL MAKE A PRESENTATION.
THEN THE APPLICANT CAN EITHER ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF.
THEN THE APPLICANT CAN MAKE A PRESENTATION.
THE APPLICANT CAN PRESENT WITNESSES.
AND AT ANY TIME THE BOARD MEMBERS CAN QUESTION STAFF OR THE APPLICANT OR THE APPLICANT'S WITNESSES ONCE THE APPLICANT AND STAFF HAVE SPOKEN THEN WE CAN GIVE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION TO THE SWORN PARTICIPANTS THERE WILL BE THREE MINUTES EACH TO PROVIDE TESTIMONY AND PRESENT EVIDENCE TO THE BOARD ANY EXTENSIONS OF TIME MAY BE GRANTED THROUGH THE CHAIR SHARING OR TRANSFERRING OF OF YOUR TIME IS NOT ALLOWED.
PUBLIC PARTICIPANTS PRESENTING EVIDENCE FOR OR AGAINST THE APPLICATION WILL ADDRESS THE BOARD AT THE PODIUM.
YOU WILL HAVE TO STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
ANY DOCUMENTATION OR PHOTOGRAPHS MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE RECORDING SECRETARY SITTING HERE TO MY LEFT WHEN THE INDIVIDUAL IS TESTIFYING.
THE DOCUMENTS WILL NOT BE RETURNED AS THEY BECOME PART OF THE OFFICIAL RECORD IN MINUTES.
PARTICIPANTS AND PUBLIC SPEAKERS ARE NOT TO APPROACH THE DAIS WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE CHAIR.
YOU CAN RECORD OR DO ANYTHING, BUT YOU HAVE TO STAY IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM AND STAY OUT OF THE WAY OF PEOPLE GIVING TESTIMONY.
AND THEN AFTER THE PUBLIC HAS SPOKEN, THE RESPONDENT MAY CROSS-EXAMINE OR PROVIDE REBUTTAL EVIDENCE.
STAFF MAY PROVIDE FINAL COMMENTS TO THE BOARD.
THEN THE BOARD WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND DISCUSS THE CASE.
THE MEETING IS BEING RECORDED.
RECORDED AS WE'VE DISCUSSED, THEREFORE THERE CAN BE NO APPLAUSE, OUTBURSTS, TALKING OR COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE AS IT COULD DISTORT THE RECORDING.
AS THE CHAIR HAS ALREADY INDICATED, PLEASE TAKE TIME TO TURN YOUR CELL PHONES OFF OR MUTE THEM.
MY OFFICE REPRESENTS THE BOARD AND PROVIDES COUNSEL, INCLUDING ADVICE AS TO THE HEARING PROCEDURES AND THE RELEVANCY OF EVIDENCE AS APPLIED TO THE VARIANCE CRITERIA.
WHILE THE STRICT RULES OF EVIDENCE APPLICABLE TO A COURT PROCEEDING WILL NOT BE UTILIZED THE BOARD WITH ASSISTANCE FROM ME THE CITY ATTORNEY MAY EXCLUDE EVIDENCE THAT IS NOT RELEVANT TO THE VARIANCE CRITERIA AS SET FORTH IN THE APPLICATION OR IS REPETITIVE IN NATURE IF ANYONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING PROCEDURES PLEASE COME FORWARD AT THIS TIME OKAY SEEING NONE MR. CHAIRMAN, I TURN IT OVER TO YOU.
BEFORE WE GO TO THE STAFF REPORT, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND HAVE ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO SPEAK, I WOULD LIKE YOU TO PLEASE STAND.
AND DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ORAL AND OR WRITTEN TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE WILL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? I DO.
GOOD EVENING, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
SO THIS IS OUR JUNE 4TH MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
THIS CASE WAS SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD AT THE MAY MEETING, BUT THE CASE WAS CONTINUED BY THE APPLICANT.
THIS IS OUR ONLY CASE FOR THE EVENING.
IT'S CONCERNING A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 409 STANLEY DRIVE, OWNED BY MR. ERIC CORBETT.
I HAVE IT HIGHLIGHTED ON THE SCREEN HERE.
IT'S ON THE CORNER OF HIGHLAND DUNES WAY AND STANLEY DRIVE ON THE KIND OF TOWARDS THE NORTH END OF THE ISLAND.
IT IS ZONED R1 WHICH TRANSLATES TO A FUTURE LAND USE CODE OF LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
THE VARIANCE REQUESTED TONIGHT IS FROM AN ELEMENT A SECTION OF THE CODE 10305.
I'LL BE READING THAT CODE IN ENTIRETY AS WE KIND OF GET INTO IT.
THIS PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY VACANT.
THERE WERE DEMOLITION APPLICATIONS FOR A SINGLE FAMILY HOME AND A POLE BARN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THAT WERE
[00:20:01]
APPROVED IN THE FALL.SO NOW THE PROPERTY IS VACANT.
HERE IS THE ZONING MAP, WHICH SHOWS THAT IT'S COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY OTHER R1 ZONING OR LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
IT IS ON LOT FIVE OF THE FOREST HILLS SUBDIVISION, WHICH WAS PLOTTED ORIGINALLY IN 1950.
AND THEN DIRECTLY TO THE WEST IS THE HIGHLAND DUNES SUBDIVISION.
WE'LL TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT THOSE PLOTS AS WE GET INTO THE PRESENTATION.
JUST A LITTLE SUMMARY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THE LOT IS TYPICALLY LARGER THAN NEWLY PLOTTED R1 ZONE PARCELS.
THE SITE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR R1 PROPERTIES ARE A MINIMUM WIDTH OF 75 FEET.
SO TYPICALLY THE NEW R1 LOTS THAT WE'RE SEEING COME IN TODAY FOR NEW FLATS IS 75 FEET.
SO SINCE THE LOT IS 203 FEET DEEP AND 100 FEET WIDE, IT IS TYPICALLY LARGER THAN R1 LOTS TODAY.
THERE IS SIGNIFICANT TOPOGRAPHICAL VARIATION ACROSS THE LOT, RANGING FROM 18 FEET TO 25 FEET ACROSS THE PROPERTY.
IT IS NOT LOCATED IN A FLOOD ZONE.
SO THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND WHY YOU GUYS ARE HEARING IT TONIGHT, IS TO DIVIDE THE LOT INTO TWO STANDARD R1 LOTS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF ONE SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON EACH LOT.
THESE WOULD BE ZONED R1 LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL PLOTS.
SO THE VARIANCE IS FROM, THE REQUEST IS FOR SECTION 10305, AND I'M JUST GOING TO READ THAT WHOLE ELEMENT OF THE CODE FOR THE BOARD.
SO 10305, THE TITLE OF THAT CODE IS CONSTRUCTION OR DEMOLITION OF STRUCTURES ON COMBINED LOTS.
IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN OPEN SPACE, VISUAL CORRIDORS, NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER, PROPERTY VALUES, AND VISUAL ATTRACTIVENESS OF RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
WHEREVER THERE MAY EXIST A SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL UNIT OR A DUPLEX STRUCTURE OR AUXILIARY BUILDING OR STRUCTURE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO SWIMMING POOLS OR ANY OTHER IMPROVEMENT WHICH WAS HERETOFORE CONSTRUCTED ON A PROPERTY CONTAINING ONE OR MORE PLATTED OR PORTIONS THEREOF, EXCLUDING WALLS OR FENCES.
SUCH LOTS THEREAFTER CONSTITUTE ONE BUILDING SITE AND MUST BE CONSIDERED THE LOT OF RECORD, AND NO PERMIT WILL BE ISSUED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF MORE THAN ONE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT ON THE SITE.
ALL CONSTRUCTION ON THE BUILDING SITE MUST COMPLY WITH ALL EXISTING ZONING AND DENSITY REQUIREMENTS.
THE DEMOLITION OR REMOVAL OF A RESIDENCE OR STRUCTURE, WHETHER VOLUNTARY OR INVOLUNTARY, DOES NOT HAVE AN EFFECT OF CHANGING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE BUILDING SITE.
A CHANGE FROM THE FOREGOING PROVISIONS.
FOR THE PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING BUILDING SITES OR SEPARATION OF BUILDING SITES REQUIRES A SUPER MAJORITY APPROVAL BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE VARIANCE APPROVAL PROCESS CONTAINED IN SECTION 10-02-00 IN A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING AT WHICH ALL INTERESTED PERSONS WILL BE AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD SO THAT'S A LOT OF WORDS TO BASICALLY SAY THE IF A HOUSE IS CONSTRUCTED ON ONE OR MORE PLOTTED LOTS OF RECORD IT THEREFORE CONSTITUTES ONE BUILDING SITE.
SO THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A VARIANCE FROM THAT ELEMENT OF THE CODE TO BE ABLE TO SPLIT A LOT INTO TWO SINCE THERE WAS ALREADY A HOUSE THERE.
I DID A LITTLE BIT OF SUMMARY WITH CONSISTENCY AND INTENT WITH THE CODE.
CONSISTENCY, A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME IS A PERMISSIBLE USE IN R1 ZONING DISTRICT.
THE PROPOSED LOTS, SO THE TWO DIVISIONS OF THE LOTS, MEETS R1 ZONING DISTRICT STANDARDS FOR SITES.
THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE COMPARABLE TO THOSE BOTH IN FOREST HILLS AND THE HIGHLAND DUNES SUBDIVISIONS.
THAT LENDS ITSELF TO CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN THAT EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AREA.
AND ANY PROPERTY OWNER WITH A SIMILAR REQUEST COULD APPLY THROUGH A VARIANCE THROUGH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, WHICH IS THE PROCESS THAT WE FOLLOW HERE TODAY.
SO THE INTENT OF THIS REQUEST IS TO BE ABLE TO CONSTRUCT SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ON THE EASTERLY LOT AND SELL THE WESTERLY LOT.
THIS IS THROUGH CONVERSATIONS WITH THE APPLICANT.
AND I'VE I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU DO TAKE YOUR TIME TO CROSS-EXAMINE HIM ABOUT THIS PART OF THE INTENT OF APPLYING FOR THE VARIANCE.
ALL DEVELOPMENTS ON THE LOT WOULD BE COMPLIANT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS FOR LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL OR THE R1 ZONING DISTRICT, INCLUDING SETBACKS, IMPERVIOUS LOT COVERAGE, BUILDING HEIGHT, TREE PROTECTION, AND ALL OTHER REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THAT ZONING DISTRICT.
I PULLED A COUPLE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES THAT SUPPORT THIS VARIANCE REQUEST AND ARE APPLICABLE TO THIS CASE.
POLICY 10205 REFERENCES THE SUBDIVISION OF LAND THAT LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS SHALL PROVIDE FOR THE DIVISION OF LAND AND THE DESIGN OF PLANTED DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS.
7 THE CITY SHALL ACKNOWLEDGE PROPERTY RIGHTS AND I WILL STATE FOR THE RECORD THAT THESE
[00:25:02]
ARE ABBREVIATED THESE ARE NOT THE FULL POLICIES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SO I JUST KIND OF SUMMARIZED THEM EVEN THOUGH IT LOOKS LIKE A LOT STILL THIS CITY SHALL PROTECT PRIVACY AND ACCESS TO LIGHT AIR AND OPEN SPACE OBJECTIVE 106 COMMUNITY CHARACTER THIS IS REFERENCING LOT SIZES HOUSE SIZES SITE PLACEMENT HEIGHT EXISTING VEGETATION THE CITY SHALL STRIVE TO STABILIZE AND PRESERVE NEIGHBORHOODS AND ESTABLISH URBAN DESIGN STANDARDS POLICY 107.04 COVERS THE INTENT AND GOALS OF THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONING I MEAN AS I STATED THE ZONING IS NOT PROPOSED TO BE CHANGED BUT IT KIND OF CENTERS AROUND PROTECTING QUALITY AND CHARACTER OF LOW DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS PRESERVING OPEN SPACE PREVENTING ENCROACHMENT OF COMMERCIAL USES AND OTHER THINGS OF THAT NATURE AND THEN GOAL NINE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS CENTERED AROUND PROPERTY RIGHTS, THE RIGHT OF A PROPERTY OWNER TO PHYSICALLY POSSESS AND CONTROL HIS OR HER INTERESTED IN THE PROPERTY INCLUDING EASEMENTS, LEVIES, AND MINERAL RIGHTS, THE RIGHT TO A PROPERTY OWNER TO USE, MAINTAIN, DEVELOP, AND IMPROVE HIS OR HER OWN PROPERTY FOR PERSONAL USE OR FOR THE USE OF ANY OTHER PERSON SUBJECT TO STATE LAW AND LOCAL ORDINANCES.SO MOVING AWAY FROM THE WORDS, WE'RE GOING TO GET INTO THE PLOTS THAT ARE EXISTING AND IMPACTING THIS PROPERTY.
SO THIS IS THE FOREST HILLS SUBDIVISION.
SO YOU CAN SEE LOT FIVE IS HIGHLIGHTED IN RED THERE.
THIS MAP IS A LITTLE BIT DECEIVING.
NORTH IS ACTUALLY TO THE LEFT.
SO THAT IS MR. CORBETT'S LOT TODAY.
IT'S 203 FEET DEEP AND 100 FOOT WIDE.
IN THE FOREST HILL SUBDIVISION, THERE ARE A VARIETY OF LOT SIZES.
YOU HAVE LOTS THAT ARE ALONG THE CREEK AND THEN LOTS THAT ARE MORE TOWARDS THE HILL PART IN THE FOREST.
THERE'S NO STANDARD LOT SIZE OF THIS SUBDIVISION.
AND THIS IS THE HIGHLAND DUNE SUBDIVISION.
THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WAS PLATTED IN 2007.
HERE IN RED, I'VE ALSO HIGHLIGHTED THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, LOT 5.
IN 2007, WHEN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WAS PLOTTED, THE...
OWNER BOUGHT LOT 4, SO DIRECTLY SOUTH FROM MR. CORBETT'S PROPERTY, AND USED THAT AS AN ENTRYWAY TO THE HIGHLAND DUNES SUBDIVISION, SO IT BECAME HIGHLAND DUNES WAY.
ON THIS SLIDE, I'VE KIND OF ZOOMED INTO THE ADOPTION AND DEDICATION SECTION OF THE HIGHLAND DUNES PLATTE, AND I'VE HIGHLIGHTED THE FACT THAT STREETS SHOWN HEREON ARE HEREBY DEDICATED TO THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH AND ITS SUCCESSORS AND OR ASSIGNS.
THIS IS THE EXISTING LOT 5 SURVEY THAT WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR AGENDA PACKET.
YOU CAN SEE IT'S 203 FEET OF FRONTAGE ALONG HIGHLAND DUNES WAY AND 100 FEET OF FRONTAGE ON STANLEY DRIVE.
THESE ARE THE PROPOSED LOTS, SO YOU WOULD ESSENTIALLY SPLIT THE LOTS DOWN THE MIDDLE.
THE EASTERLY LOT WOULD BE 103 FEET DEEP AND 100 FOOT WIDE, AND THE WESTERLY LOT WOULD BE 100 BY 100.
SO AFTER LOOKING INTO THIS A LITTLE MORE AND REALLY STUDYING THE FOREST HILLS SUBDIVISION, AS I SAID THERE ARE A VARIETY OF LOT SIZES WITHIN FOREST HILLS.
I HIGHLIGHTED ON THAT CORNER LOTS 35 AND 36 WERE ORIGINALLY PLOTTED TO BE 100 BY 100 LOTS AND THAT'S CADDY CORNER TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
SO THAT CORNER LOT TO 100 BY 100S IS HIGHLIGHTED IN GREEN AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS HIGHLIGHTED THERE IN ORANGE.
I'LL ALSO POINT OUT IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFICULT TO SEE MAYBE IF IF YOU TURN AROUND.
LOTS 14, LOTS 9, LOTS 8, AND LOTS 18 THROUGH 20, I NOTED, ARE SIMILAR IN SIZE TO THE PROPOSED LOTS ON MR. CORBETT'S PROPERTY.
I TOOK A VISIT TO THE SITE A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, AND I TOOK SOME PICTURES OF THE VIEW FROM THE CORNER OF STANLEY DRIVE AND HIGHLAND DUNES WAY, LOOKING WEST DOWN HIGHLAND DUNES WAY, AND THEN THE VIEW FROM STANLEY DRIVE.
IT'S CURRENTLY A VACANT PROPERTY SINCE THE...
DEMOLITION OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND PRIMARY STRUCTURE WAS AUTHORIZED THIS FALL.
SO GETTING INTO THE SIX CRITERIA THAT MUST BE EVALUATED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WHEN GRANTING A VARIANCE, WE'LL START WITH SPECIAL CONDITIONS.
I'LL JUST READ THE CRITERIA AND THEN THE STAFF ANALYSIS SO EVERYTHING'S CLEAR.
FOR SPECIAL CONDITIONS, SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST WHICH ARE PECULIAR TO THE LAND, STRUCTURE, OR BUILDING INVOLVED AND ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO OTHER LANDS, STRUCTURES, OR BUILDINGS IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS OR CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT RESULT FROM ACTIONS OF THE APPLICANT AND ARE NOT BASED ON A DESIRE TO REDUCE DEVELOPMENT COSTS.
APPLICANT WAS REQUIRED TO RESPOND TO EACH OF THESE CRITERIA AND STAFF ALSO DID ITS
[00:30:01]
OWN ANALYSIS WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT.SO STAFF'S ANALYSIS FINDS, YES, THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE CORNER OF STANLEY DRIVE AND HIGHLAND DUNES WAY.
THE PROPERTY IS PART OF A 1950S PLOT, FOREST HILLS, IN WHICH MOST LOT SIZES WERE GREATER THAN 200 FEET IN DEPTH, WHICH IS UNCOMMON FOR MORE RECENTLY PLOTTED LOTS.
THE LOT DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH WAS DEVELOPED INTO A ROAD ACCESS IN THE 2007 DEVELOPMENT, HIGHLAND DUNES.
THE LOT SIZES WITHIN THE NEWER DEVELOPMENT WITH R1 ZONING ARE SMALLER WITH DIMENSIONS OF 75 BY 100, ROUGHLY.
SO THIS CREATES A SPECIAL CONDITION SINCE THERE WAS A ROAD CREATED RIGHT TO THE SOUTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
GRANTING THE VARIANCE DOES NOT CONFER UPON THE APPLICANT A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE THAT IS DENIED BY THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO OTHER LANDS, STRUCTURES, OR BUILDINGS IN THAT ZONING DISTRICT.
YES, ANY PROPERTY OWNER IN THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH MAY APPLY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR A VARIANCE I AS LONG AS THE REQUEST DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY OF THE LIMITATIONS OF SECTION 10.02.01.
FOR THE AUDIENCE, THERE'S 12 LIMITATIONS LAID OUT IN OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT YOU CAN'T ASK FOR A VARIANCE FROM.
THIS CASE DOES NOT MEET ANY OF THOSE LIMITATIONS.
SIMILAR CASES IN WHICH A PROPERTY OWNER HAVE REQUESTED TO DIVIDE A LOT THAT PREVIOUSLY WERE DEVELOPED AS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME HAVE BEEN DIRECTED TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WOULD DEPRIVE THE APPLICANT OF RIGHTS COMMONLY ENJOYED BY OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT.
YES, THE LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE LDC WOULD DEPRIVE THE APPLICANT OF RIGHTS COMMONLY ENJOYED BY OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE ZONING DISTRICT.
OWNERS OF RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTIES IN THE R1 ZONING DISTRICT ARE PERMITTED TO CREATE LOTS WITH 75 FEET OF WIDTH PER THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 40201J. THAT IS OUR TABLE THAT OUTLINES DESIGN STANDARDS FOR EACH ZONING DISTRICT.
THE REQUESTED LOTS HAVE A WIDTH OF 100 AND 103 FEET WITH 100 DEPTH FOR EACH.
R1 DENSITY ALLOWS FOR FOUR DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, WITH EACH LOT PROPOSED TO BE 0.229 ACRES PLUS THE INCLUSION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF LOTS WOULD MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING DISTRICT.
FOR MINIMUM VARIANCE, THE VARIANCE REQUESTED IS THE MINIMUM VARIANCE NEEDED THAT WILL MAKE POSSIBLE THE REASONABLE USE OF LAND STRUCTURE AND BUILDING.
STAFF FOUND THAT YES THIS CRITERIA IS MET THE VARIANCE REQUESTED TO SPLIT THE LOT INTO TWO PARCELS THE APPLICANT IS NOT REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM ANY OTHER ELEMENT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BASED ON THE INTERPRETATION OF THIS ELEMENT OF THE CODE THE PROPERTY OWNER IS REQUIRED TO APPLY FOR A VARIANCE TO FULFILL THEIR REQUEST FIVE GENERAL HARMONY GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE GENERAL INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN STAFF FOUND THAT YES SPLITTING THE LOT THE LARGE LOT INTO TWO WOULD CREATE LOT SIZES THAT ARE SIMILAR TO THE LOT SIZES IN FOREST HILLS PLATTE AND THE HIGHLAND DUNES PLATTE.
THIS WOULD CREATE A GRADUAL TRANSITION BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORHOODS AS THE ROAD SERVES THE ENTRANCE TO THE HIGHLAND DUNES SUBDIVISION.
AND I'LL NOTE HERE, I FORGOT TO MENTION ON THE HIGHLAND DUNES PLATTE SLIDE, THOSE LOTS ARE TYPICALLY 100 BY 75, MEETING THE STANDARDS FOR THE R1 ZONING DISTRICT.
FURTHER, THE PROPOSED LOT SIZES WOULD MEET THE CITY'S REQUIREMENTS FOR LOT SIZES IN THAT ZONE.
AND THEN FINALLY, PUBLIC INTEREST.
GRANTING THE VARIANCE IS COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, WILL NOT CAUSE INJURY TO THE AREA INVOLVED, OR OTHERWISE BE DETRIMENTAL TO PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE, OR ENVIRONMENT.
STAFF FOUND YES, GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT INFRINGE ON THE PUBLIC INTEREST, AS THE FORMER STRUCTURE AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE HAD A LARGER FOOTPRINT THAN THE FOOTPRINTS THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE IN THE PROPOSED LOTS.
THE FOREST HILLS PLOT ALLOWS FOR A VARIETY OF SETBACK LISTS DEPENDING ON LOT SIZE.
THE APPROPRIATE SETBACK FOR THE LOT SIZE WILL BE APPLIED TO THE NEWLY CREATED LOTS IF APPROVED.
AND THEN I HAVE A MATRIX HERE OUTLINING THOSE SIX CRITERIA.
ALL WERE FOUND TO BE CONSISTENT.
STAFF HAS REVIEWED THEIR REQUESTS AND FIND THAT THE REQUEST TO BE THE MINIMUM VARIANCE NEEDED TO ALLOW LOT FIVE OF THE FOREST HILL SUBDIVISION TO BE SPLIT INTO TWO LOTS.
THAT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS FOR LOT SIZES IN R1.
THIS CREATES A GRADUAL TRANSITION BETWEEN THE LARGE LOTS OF FOREST HILLS AND THE SMALLER LOTS OF HIGHLAND DUNES AND ALLOWS FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER TO IMPROVE HIS OWN PROPERTY FOR HIS FOR PERSONAL USE IF THE VARIANCE IS GRANTED, THE APPLICANT WILL CONTINUE WITH THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL OF SPLITTING THE LOTS.
THE LOTS WILL THEN BE RECORDED BY NASSAU COUNTY.
THEN BUILDING PERMITS MAY BE APPLIED FOR FOR EACH PARCEL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF ONE SINGLE FAMILY HOME AND ANY PERMISSIBLE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES.
PERMITS WILL BE GRANTED BASED ON THE PLAN'S ADHERENCE TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
SO WE'RE NOT APPROVING ANY HOMES TODAY.
THAT'S GOING TO BE UP TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IF THIS VARIANCE IS APPROVED.
WE ARE ONLY EVALUATING THE SPLIT OF THE LOT.
AND THEN I JUST PULLED THE R1 SITE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS.
SO THESE ARE THE REQUIREMENTS THAT THE NEW DEVELOPMENT WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY WITH.
SO FOR IMPERVIOUS LOT COVERAGE, THERE IS A MAXIMUM 60% LOT COVERAGE.
SO WITH ONE LOT, IF IT WAS TO REMAIN AS ONE LOT, 60%
[00:35:02]
OF THAT LOT COULD BE COVERED.IF IT WAS TWO LOTS, 60% OF EACH OF THOSE WOULD BE COVERED, WHICH IS EQUIVALENT.
BUILDING HEIGHT IS LIMITED TO 35 FEET FOR EVERY FOOT OVER 25 FEET.
THE SIDE SETBACKS WILL BE INCREASED BY HALF A FOOT.
I CAN GO BACK TO THAT IF WE'RE INTERESTED, BUT SETBACKS.
THERE'S 25 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE FRONT, 10% OF THE LOT WIDTH ON THE SIDE, 25 FEET IN THE REAR, AND 15 FEET FOR A CORNER LOT.
FOR THE TREE MITIGATION, 50% TREE MITIGATION FOR TREE REMOVAL IS REQUIRED.
ONLY TREES WITHIN THE BONING FOOTPRINT OR FIVE FEET AWAY MAY BE REMOVED WITH AN APPROVED PERMIT.
IN TERMS OF STORMWATER, ALL PROJECTS MUST PROVIDE FOR RETENTION AND DETENTION OF STORMWATER WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PROJECT.
THE DRAINAGE DESIGN PLANS FOR THE PROJECT MUST BE PREPARED, SIGNED, AND SEALED BY A FLORIDA REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER.
AND THEN FOR DRIVEWAYS, DRIVEWAYS MAY BE BETWEEN 10 AND 20 FEET WITH THE WITH THREE FOOT FLARES ON EACH SIDE ONE DRIVEWAY IS PERMITTED PER 100 FEET OF FRONTAGE PERMANENT PAVING MATERIAL MUST BE USED ON THE DRIVEWAY WITH PORTIONS IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND DRIVERS REQUIRE A RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT AND WILL BE REVIEWED BY THE STREETS DEPARTMENT I HAVE A SAMPLE MOTION FOR YOU TO CONSIDER TONIGHT AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD RIGHT OFF THE BAT? NOT THIS TIME.
THE LOT HAD A PREVIOUS HOUSE THAT WAS DEMOED.
DID THAT LOT, DID THAT HOUSE SPAN THE DIVIDING LOT LINE THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO TO CREATE TO RIGHT NOW? IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IT DID.
AT THIS POINT, THE CITY DOES NOT REQUIRE A SURVEY AT THE TIME OF DEMOLITION.
SO THE ONLY WAY WE KNOW IS BY LOOKING AT AERIALS AND PERHAPS THE PROPERTY OWNER KNOWS.
WITH NO FURTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD, I'LL GO AHEAD AND ASK THE APPLICANT TO COME UP AND SPEAK.
PLEASE, WHEN YOU GET TO THE PODIUM, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS.
Y'ALL CAN HEAR ME, RIGHT? MY VOICE DOES CARRY, BUT PLEASE LET ME KNOW IF YOU CAN'T HEAR ME.
I'M AN ATTORNEY WITH ROGERS TOWERS LAW FIRM, AND I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER, ERIC CORBETT.
I'M GOING TO SPEAK FOR JUST A FEW MINUTES ON SOME OF THE LEGAL ASPECTS THAT HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED A LITTLE BIT BY STAFF AND BY YOUR ATTORNEY.
THEN I AM GOING TO ASK MR. CORBETT AND HIS FATHER TO COME SPEAK AND JUST KIND OF SIMPLY EXPLAIN TO YOU FACTUALLY WHAT HE'D LIKE TO DO WHEN HE SPLITS THE LOT.
AND THEN THE LAST SPEAKER WE HAVE IS A PROFESSIONAL PLANNER.
HIS NAME IS FOLKS HUXFORD I THINK YOUR STAFF HAS DONE A FANTASTIC JOB WITH THEIR STAFF REPORT AND I HIGHLY COMMEND THEM FOR THEIR THOROUGHNESS AND PROVIDING THE REPORT MR. FOLKS HUXFORD ALSO HAS REVIEWED INFORMATION AND REVIEWED THE SITE AND HE IS JUST GOING TO SPEAK GENERALLY TO SOME OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS OF THE VARIANCE AND HE CAN ALSO RESPOND TO OTHER QUESTIONS INVOLVING THE PLANNING EXPERTISE SO LIKE I SAID, I'M NOT GOING TO TALK TOO LONG.
MUMBO-JUMBO IS NOT GOOD FOR ANYONE.
AND FRANKLY, THE REASON WE ARE HERE IS A LITTLE BIT RELATED TO THE MUMBO-JUMBO OF THE CODE.
SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY AT THE OUTSET THAT, AS STAFF HAS EXPLAINED, THE REASON THAT MR. CORBETT HAS TO SEEK THIS VARIANCE FOR HIS LOT SPLIT IS THAT THERE IS A PROVISION WITHIN THE CODE, YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 1.3 1.0305, AND IT APPEARS THAT THE INTENT OF THIS CODE SECTION WOULD BE TO REFER TO COMBINED LOTS.
THERE'S NOT A DEFINITION FOR COMBINED LOTS IN YOUR CODE, SO YOU WOULD JUST LOOK AT THE ORDINARY DICTIONARY READING MEANING OF COMBINED LOTS.
TO ME, WHEN I HEAR COMBINED LOTS, I THINK OF ONE OR MORE LOTS, BUT IT'S MORE THAN JUST ONE LOT.
FIVE AND PART OF LOT SIX OR LOT FIVE, LOT SIX, LOT SEVEN, THAT WOULD BE MORE THAN ONE LOTS COMBINED INTO ONE.
THE CONFUSION IS THAT YOUR LANGUAGE AS WRITTEN, AND I DON'T THINK ANYONE IN THE ROOM PROBABLY HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE LANGUAGE AS WRITTEN, SO I DON'T WANT TO OFFEND ANYONE, BUT I THINK THE LANGUAGE IS UNCLEAR.
AND THE IMPACT OF WHAT THE LANGUAGE HAS BEEN INTERPRETED TO SAY BY YOUR CITY ATTORNEY AND BY YOUR PLANNING STAFF IS THAT ANY LOT THAT HAS ONE HOUSE ON IT OR OTHER PERTINENCES THAT ARE LISTED HERE IN YOUR CODE PROVISIONS CAN NEVER BE SPLIT
[00:40:02]
REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE ZONING OR OTHER REGULATIONS WOULD PERMIT YOU TO DO THAT.SO THIS IS NOT A CASE THAT WOULD JUST APPLY TO MR. CORBETT AS WRITTEN.
THERE ARE OTHER LOTS WITHIN THE EXISTING SUBDIVISION, AS STAFF HAS POINTED OUT, THAT COULD BE POSSIBLY SPLIT.
THOSE INDIVIDUALS WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO.
THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME AND ASK FOR A VARIANCE.
THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY, BECAUSE YOUR CODE DOES SAY THAT IF YOU FALL WITHIN THIS PROVISION, THEN YOU CAN SEEK A VARIANCE.
AND IF YOU MEET THE CRITERIA FOR THE VARIANCE, THEN THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN GRANT IT.
BUT I DID WANT TO POINT OUT JUST INITIALLY THAT THE REASON WE'RE HERE TODAY IS BECAUSE OF A CODE PROVISION THAT CERTAINLY IMPACTS MR. CORBETT, BUT ALSO IMPACTS OTHER PEOPLE WITHIN THE CITY OF FERNANDINA.
AND SO AS A RESULT, YOU MAY SEE MORE PEOPLE COMING BEFORE YOU WITH SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE THEY WOULD LIKE TO SPLIT A LOT.
I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT SUBDIVIDING WHERE SOMEONE'S TRYING TO PLAT A DEVELOPMENT.
I'M JUST SAYING THEY'RE SPLITTING THEIR LOT.
THAT THEY CAN SPLIT AND MAYBE DEED OVER TO A FAMILY MEMBER OR MAYBE THEY WANT TO SELL IT, THEY'D BE PREVENTED FROM DOING THAT UNDER THIS PROVISION.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.
AND THEN IN TERMS OF YOUR STAFF REPORT, LIKE I SAID, STAFF HAS DONE A FANTASTIC JOB OF REALLY ANALYZING THE VARIANCE CRITERIA.
THEY'VE FOUND THAT ALL THE CRITERIA FOR THE ISSUANCE OF THE THE VARIANCE IS MET, YOUR STAFF AS PLANNING PROFESSIONALS ARE COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE OF CONSISTENCY WITH YOUR CODE PROVISIONS.
SO JUST BY VIRTUE OF THEM TELLING YOU AND GIVING YOU THIS ANALYSIS AND THE STAFF REPORT, IT IS EVIDENCE YOU CAN RELY ON IN YOUR DECISION TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE TONIGHT.
IN ADDITION, AS MS. PRINCE SAID, YOU CAN CONSIDER OUTSIDE INFORMATION FROM THE PUBLIC, BUT YOU ARE LIMITED AS TO WHAT TYPE OF INFORMATION YOU CAN HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC.
ANY TYPE OF OPINIONS OR SPECULATION, WHAT IFS, IS NOT EVIDENCE.
SO I URGE YOU WHEN YOU LISTEN TO OUR INFORMATION THAT YOU ASK QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT AND THE PEOPLE ARE HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT ASK US ANY QUESTIONS YOU WOULD LIKE EITHER WHEN WE GET COMPLETED, OR IF YOU WOULD RATHER WAIT UNTIL AFTER YOU'VE HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC AND BRING US BACK.
BUT I WOULD ASK THAT WE HAVE A REBUTTAL, AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC IN ANY EVENT.
BUT RATHER, IF YOU WANT TO TALK TO US NOW OR LATER, WE'LL LEAVE THAT OPEN TO YOU.
BUT LIKE I SAID, YOU CAN RELY ON YOUR STAFF'S ANALYSIS, AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO IN TERMS OF GRANTING THIS APPLICATION.
AND, UM, I WILL LEAVE MY COMMENTS AT THAT FOR RIGHT NOW.
AND NEXT UP IS GOING TO BE MR. CORBETT AND THEN FOLLOWED BY HIS FATHER.
AND THEN WE'LL COMPLETE WITH MR. HUXFORD.
AND WE HOPE NOT TO TAKE UP TOO MUCH OF YOUR TIME, BUT WE DO WANT TO BE RESPONSIVE TO QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR INTEREST IN MY PROJECT.
I NEVER DREAMED I HAD THIS MANY FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS THAT WERE SO KEENLY INTERESTED IN MY RETIREMENT PLANS, BUT HERE WE ARE.
I LIVE AT 412 ESCAMBIA STREET.
I'M THE OWNER OF 409 STANLEY DRIVE.
PAIGE ASKED ME TO DESCRIBE A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW I CAME TO THIS DECISION TO TO PURSUE THIS.
PARTICULAR PLAN SO I GUESS I'LL START AT THE BEGINNING WHICH WAS FOR ME IN FOREST HILLS SUBDIVISION 1977 WHEN MY DAD BOUGHT HIS FIRST HOUSE AT 611 STANLEY DRIVE THAT'S WHERE I LIVED FROM THE TIME I WAS 7 UNTIL THE TIME I WAS 10 AND THEN DAD MOVED UP THE STREET AND I MOVED WITH HIM UP TO 1803 HIGHLAND DRIVE WHERE HE STILL LIVES SO 1803 HIGHLAND DRIVE IS ON THE CORNER OF STANLEY AND HIGHLAND SO I I LIVED THERE UNTIL 88.
ONE OF THOSE 18-YEAR-OLD KIDS THAT COULDN'T WAIT TO LEAVE FERNANDINO WHEN I WAS 18, AND BY THE TIME I WAS 28, I COULDN'T WAIT TO GET BACK.
SO I CAME BACK WITH MY WIFE, MARIE, AND WE'VE BEEN BACK SINCE 1998 AND INTEND TO SPEND THE REST OF OUR RETIREMENT HERE.
SO I GUESS A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AGO, WE DECIDED TO START GETTING READY FOR RETIREMENT.
WE HAD A HOUSE ON THE NORTH END AT THE BEACH, THAT WE WANTED TO DOWNSIZE.
SIZE SO WE HAD THAT ON THE MARKET AND THEN THIS OPPORTUNITY CAME UP LAST MAY JUST JUST OVER A YEAR AGO A
[00:45:03]
HOUSE THAT'S RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM MY DAD'S BACKYARD SO TO SPEAK A LITTLE CATTY CORNER TO IT IF YOU WILL AND SO I IMMEDIATELY MADE AN OFFER ON THE HOUSE AND YOU KNOW WE GOT IT UNDER CONTRACT AND BEGAN THE PROCESS OF THAT PURCHASE.IN I WANT TO SAY MAY LATE MAY AND ALMOST IMMEDIATELY I WENT AND HAD A MEETING WITH KELLY GIBSON WHO WAS THE CITY PLANNER AT THE TIME I DISCUSSED WITH HER THE POTENTIAL FOR SPLITTING THE LOT BECAUSE A COUPLE PEOPLE HAD TOLD ME WHEN I WAS UNDER CONTRACT THAT THAT POTENTIAL EXISTED BUT DUE TO THE SIZE OF THE LOT AND DUE TO THE NOW PRESENCE OF HIGHLAND DUNES WAY SO I STARTED THINKING ABOUT IT THOSE TERMS. WE CLOSED ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THEN I WENT AND HAD A MEETING WITH KELLY WE DISCUSSED THE PROPERTY DISCUSSED SPLITTING IT INTO ESSENTIALLY 100 BY 100 LOTS KELLY INDICATED THAT THAT WOULD NOT BE A PROBLEM THAT IT WAS A SINGULAR LOT AND THEREFORE IT COULD BE DIVIDED SHE ACTUALLY BROUGHT UP MY FATHER'S LOTS AT THE CORNER OF HIGHLAND DRIVE AND STANLEY DRIVE AS A LOT THAT COULDN'T BE SPLIT HE HAS TWO LOTS I DON'T KNOW THE NUMBERS BUT UM HE HAS TWO 100 BY 100 LOTS AND KELLY BROUGHT THAT UP AS AN EXAMPLE OF A YOU KNOW LIKE IF YOU WERE TO TEAR YOUR FATHER'S HOUSE DOWN WE COULDN'T BUILD BACK TWO HOUSES BUT BECAUSE YOU HAVE A SINGULAR LOT YOU CAN I SAID OKAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING LEFT THE MEETING FOLLOWED IT UP WITH AN EMAIL A COUPLE DAYS LATER KELLY THEN RESPONDED BACK ALL OF THIS HAS BEEN I THINK SUBMITTED TO YOUR PACKAGE AND YOU KNOW SO WE STARTED GOING DOWN THAT PATH AT THAT POINT TO EVENTUALLY SPLIT THE LOT WE APPLIED FOR A DEMOLITION PERMIT IN OCTOBER I BELIEVE OR MAYBE SEPTEMBER AND WE TORE THE HOUSE DOWN AND THE POLE BARN THE THE HOUSE AND THE POLE BARN WERE PRETTY UNSIGHTLY AND QUITE HONESTLY DIDN'T REALLY KIND OF BLEND INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD BUT WE THOUGHT WE WOULD BE WE WOULD BE APPRECIATED BY THE NEIGHBORS FOR COMING IN AND IMPROVING THE PROPERTY, BUT IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THAT'S BEEN THE CASE.
AGAIN, WE DEMOLISHED THE PROPERTY AND THEN SOMETIME AFTER THAT, I TRIED TO START THE PROCESS OF SPLITTING THE LOT AND I WAS TOLD THAT THERE WAS A LITTLE DIFFERENT INTERPRETATION NOW OF THIS CODE 1.03.05 OR WHATEVER IT IS.
SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE ARE.
PLANS JUST SO YOU KNOW I DON'T KNOW THAT IT MATTERS BUT AT FIRST AND THAT'S WHY I THINK THE ORIGINAL INTENT THAT WAS IN MIA'S PRESENTATION INDICATED THAT I WAS GOING TO KEEP ONE LOT AND SELL THE OTHER AND THAT WAS MAYBE THE ORIGINAL INTENT THEN MY BROTHER AND I MY BROTHER GRADUATED HIGH SCHOOL SEVEN YEARS AFTER ME 1995 MOVED AWAY AND NEVER CAME BACK MY BROTHER APPROACHED ME ABOUT HEY WHAT IF I BUY THAT LOT WHAT IF I BUY YOUR LOT AND WHAT IF I BUILD A SECOND HOME, AND THEN I WOULD HAVE A SECOND HOME HERE IN FLORIDA WHENEVER I COME TO VISIT FAMILY.
AND THEN WE TALKED ABOUT IT A LITTLE BIT MORE, AND WE KIND OF CONNIVED A LITTLE BIT BEHIND MY FATHER'S BACK ABOUT MAYBE HE SHOULD BUILD A HOUSE THAT WAS SINGLE-STORY AND A LITTLE MORE APPROPRIATE FOR MY FATHER AS HE ADVANCES IN AGE.
AND SO THAT WAS KIND OF OUR PLAN, LET MY BROTHER BUILD A SECOND HOME THERE.
AND EVENTUALLY WE WOULD HAVE A PLACE TO WHERE MY FATHER COULD LIVE BECAUSE RIGHT NOW HE LIVES IN A SPLIT LEVEL AT 1803 HIGHLAND DRIVE AT SOME POINT RECENTLY NOT THAT RECENTLY MAYBE A COUPLE MONTHS AGO MY MY MY BROTHER LET THE CAT OUT OF THE BAG AND MY FATHER SEIZED A UPON IT AND SAID, LET'S NOT WAIT.
CAUSE, HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A SMALLER YARD.
HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A SINGLE STORY HOUSE.
SO, AND MY BROTHER HAS ALWAYS TOLD ME THAT ASSUMING WE BOTH OUTLIVE MY DAD, THAT HE WOULD LIKE.
THE FAMILY HOME BECAUSE HE'S NOT BEEN HERE FOR THE LAST YOU KNOW ALL THESE YEARS SO I'D ALWAYS AGREED TO THAT AND YOU KNOW WE WERE GOING TO WORK THAT OUT AS A FAMILY SO NOW THE PLAN IS IS FOR MY WIFE AND I TO BUILD ON THE WESTERLY HALF OF THE LOT THE BACK HALF IF YOU WILL AND THEN MY BROTHER WILL BUY THE LOT NEXT TO ME AND HE'LL BUILD A HOUSE A SINGLE STORY HOUSE FOR MY FATHER EXCUSE ME AND UH THEN UH MY FATHER WILL MOVE IN INTO IT AND THEN MY DAD MY BROTHER WILL TAKE OVER MY DAD'S HOUSE NOW HE'LL PROBABLY MY GUESS HE'S NOT QUITE READY TO RETIRE UM SO HE'LL PROBABLY RENT IT I WOULD GUESS FOR A LITTLE BIT AND THEN EVENTUALLY HE'LL RENOVATE IT AND THEN MOVE
[00:50:01]
THERE AND IN A PERFECT WORLD THERE'LL BE YOU KNOW SON A THEN DAD AND THEN ACROSS THE STREET SON B AND WE THOUGHT THAT WAS A GREAT PLAN AND UH WE DO THINK IT'S A GREAT PLAN AND THAT'S UH I THINK THAT'S WHAT I MEAN THAT'S WHY I'M HERE SO ALL RIGHT ANY QUESTIONS UM ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME BEFORE MY DAD'S GOING TO SPEAK REAL BRIEFLY SO YES SIR YOU DID STATE THAT ORIGINALLY WHEN YOU BOUGHT THIS IT WAS NOT YOUR INTENTION TO SPLIT THE LOT DID I UNDERSTAND THAT HONESTLY I DIDN'T HAVE ANY INTENTIONS I I DIDN'T KNOW IF I I WAS GOING TO RENOVATE IT.KNOW IF I WAS GOING TO TEAR IT DOWN AND BUILD NEW I DIDN'T REALLY KNOW WHAT I DID KNOW IS IT WAS LOCATED ACROSS THE STREET FROM MY FATHER OKAY AND SO I PRETTY MUCH RUSHED TO CONTRACT IT WAS A BIDDING WAR THERE YOU KNOW I HAD IT WAS LISTED THROUGH FOR $300,000, I ENDED UP PAYING $305,000 FOR IT BECAUSE I GOT IN A LITTLE BIT OF A BIDDING WAR WITH SOMEBODY ELSE.
I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT MY INTENTIONS WERE.
WHEN I HAD IT UNDER CONTRACT, I THINK IT WAS A CASH DEAL, SO WE CLOSED PRETTY QUICKLY.
BUT DURING THAT PROCESS, SOMEBODY MENTIONED TO ME THAT I COULD SPLIT IT, AND I STARTED THINKING IN THOSE TERMS. BUT I DID NOT MEET WITH KELLY UNTIL AFTER I CLOSED, BUT LONG BEFORE I APPLIED FOR THE DEMOLITION PERMIT.
YOU KNOW, AND LIKE I SAID, YOU KNOW, WHAT WAS MOST IMPORTANT TO ME WAS THE LOCATION.
ANYTHING ELSE? THANK YOU, SIR.
I LIVE AT 1803 HIGHLAND DRIVE HERE IN FERNANDINA BEACH AND I'M HERE TO CONFIRM WHAT MY SON JUST SAID.
I APPRECIATE WHAT THEY'RE DOING FOR ME AND I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.
MAY I CONFIRM HE CALLED YOU ELDERLY? YES.
SO IS HE YOUR GOOD SON OR THE OTHER SON? I LOVE THEM BOTH.
I'M FOLKS OXFORD 102 30 MANORVILLE DRIVE JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA.
THIS IS MY FIRST TIME SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE AN INITIATION ROUTINE BUT HAVE AT IT.
I'VE KNOWN PAIGE FOR ABOUT 25 YEARS.
BOTH OF US WORKED FOR THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE FOR A LONG TIME.
I'M THE RETIRED PLANNING DIRECTOR AND ZONE CHIEF FOR THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE.
I SPENT THE LAST, FROM 2011 TO 2023, WHEN I RETIRED, AS EITHER THE CHIEF OR THE DIRECTOR, SERVING AS LEAD STAFF TO ALL THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS AT THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE.
HAS SO I'VE SEEN HUNDREDS OF STAFF REPORTS AND I HAVE LOOKED AT STAFF REPORT HERE AT PAGES REQUEST AND I'M QUITE IMPRESSED WITH THE JOB THAT THEY DID IT'S VERY THOROUGH REVIEW AND JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT SO THE VARIANCE IS GOING TO BE BASED ON CRITERIA THAT'S IN THE CODE.
IT IS NOT A POPULARITY CONTEST, EVEN THOUGH SOME PEOPLE MAY BE OPPOSED TO IT.
THE DECISION SHOULD BE RENDERED BASED ON THE COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE ENTERED INTO THE RECORD THAT ARE APPLICABLE TO THE SITUATION AND TO THE REQUEST.
THE STAFF DID FIND THAT IT MEETS ALL THE CRITERIA, AND I CONCUR WITH THEIR CONCLUSIONS.
I THINK IT'S A VERY SOUND STAFF REPORT.
I WISH I HAD FOLKS LIKE THAT ON MY STAFF WHEN I WAS STILL THERE.
I WOULD ALSO POINT OUT THEY'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY OTHER KIND OF RELIEF, SO THE SITE WILL BE BUILT TO CODE SHOULD THIS VARIANCE BE GRANTED.
THAT INCLUDES SETBACKS, BUILDING HEIGHTS, AND ALL OTHER TYPES OF THINGS.
THE HIGHLAND DRIVE WAY IS A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY.
PROVIDED THE CITY CODE ALLOWS FOR IT THE PROPERTY OWNER DOES HAVE THE RIGHT TO ASK FOR ACCESS DRIVE THERE THROUGH THE PROPER PERMITTING SO WITH THAT JUST WE ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT AND I STAND BY FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE I DON'T HEAR ANY QUESTIONS, SIR.
PAIGE, WOULD YOU BE THE ONE THAT WOULD BE IDENTIFYING THE WITNESSES FOR THE APPLICANT, OR WOULD THAT BE ANYBODY ELSE? THAT IS ACTUALLY OUR PRESENTATION FOR YOU UNLESS AGAIN IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS WE'LL TAKE THEM NOW OR LATER WHATEVER YOUR PREFERENCE IS.
THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THEY ARE THE CORNER LOT, HOW MANY FEET OFF THE MAIN ROAD IS A DRIVE PERMITTED OFF THAT CORNER?
[00:55:02]
HOW MANY FEET OFF THE CORNER? LET ME ADDRESS ONE THING, PLEASE.ONE DRIVEWAY WILL FACE STANLEY DRIVE.
THERE'S ALREADY A DRIVEWAY THERE FOR THE PREVIOUS HOUSE.
AND THEN THERE'LL BE ONE DRIVEWAY ON HIGHLAND DUNES WAY.
WHICH WOULD BE THE WESTERLY PROPERTY THAT WOULD BE THE WESTLEY PROPERTY YES SIR OKAY YEAH THERE IS A REGULATION FROM DISTANCE FROM AN INTERSECTION THAT'LL BE COVERED IN PLANAR VIEW THAT WOULD APPLY TO THE EASTERLY LOT UM THE WESTERLY LAW THERE ARE NO SETBACKS ON DRIVEWAYS EXCEPT FOR THE FLARES CAN'T ENCROACH ONTO THE OTHER LIKE RIGHT-OF-WAY AREAS SO IT'D AT LEAST BE THREE FEET IN SO THE FLARES COULD STAY ON THE RIGHT AWAY IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY SO THE OLD DRIVEWAY MEETS CURRENT CODE OR NOT? I'M NOT SURE.
AND, MR. CHAIRMAN, I'LL PROBABLY BE SAYING THIS QUITE A BIT TONIGHT, BUT ANY SITE DEVELOPMENT IS NOT COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.
I MEAN, YOU CERTAINLY CAN ASK THOSE QUESTIONS, BUT YOU SHOULD NOT BASE YOUR DECISION ON THE SITE DEVELOPMENT.
IT IS ON THE SIX CRITERIA IN THE VARIANCE.
[8. PUBLIC COMMENT]
ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.ALL RIGHT, SO WE WILL GO AHEAD AND OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC TO ALLOW SPEAKING, AND AT THIS TIME, SINCE I HAVE A PRETTY GOOD LIST OF REQUESTS TO SPEAK FOR THEM, I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH THE NAMES ONE AT A TIME.
I'LL CALL YOU UP, AND AGAIN, AS YOU COME UP, EVEN THOUGH I'VE CALLED YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS SO I'LL START WITH JACK EMBER WELL MR. EMBER IS COMING TO THE PODIUM MISS MCKENNA WILL BE KEEPING THE TIME OF THREE MINUTES MANY OF YOU ARE FAMILIAR TO THAT SO WHEN THE TIMER GOES OFF THAT WOULD BE THE END BUT THANK YOU WE HAVE AN APPLET WE HAVE SOMEONE IN THE AUDIENCE STATING THAT THE THREE-MINUTE RULE DOES NOT APPLY BECAUSE IT IS QUASI JUDICIAL THE BOARD CAN SET TIME LIMITS ON WITNESS TESTIMONY AND SO THIS EVENING THEY HAVE SET THE THREE MINUTES THE CHAIRMAN CAN GIVE ADDITIONAL TIME IF IF NEEDED.
SO IF THE PRESENTATION IS GOING LONG, THAN THEY CAN REQUEST ADDITIONAL TIME I WAS GIVING YOU AN INDICATION THAT WHEN YOU HEAR THE BEEP WE SHOULD REQUEST ADDITIONAL TIME IF YOU THINK YOU NEED IT AND THE CHAIR CAN PROVIDE IT AND THAT WAS A REQUEST FROM THE AUDIENCE BUT AT THIS TIME I THINK WE JUST NEED TO CONTINUE TO DO AGREE AND THAT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED AT THE START OF THE MEETING OR THAT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED AT THE START OF THE MEETING.
JACK EMBER, 1003 BROOM STREET, FERNANDINA BEACH.
I REQUEST ADDITIONAL TIME BECAUSE YOU ALL ARE EATING INTO MY TIME HERE.
WELL, WE HAVEN'T EVEN STARTED IT YET.
BUT SERIOUSLY, FOLKS, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY.
I BASE MY SURVIVAL AND MY CURRENT AGE TODAY.
AS THE RESULT OF LOGIC, GOOD PLANNING, AND THE FACTS.
SO JUST IN CASE THAT QUESTION COMES UP LATER, I'M NOT GOING TO TRY.
I THINK THIS IS AN ILLEGAL MEETING BASED ON THE FACT THAT IT DOESN'T FOLLOW DUE PROCESS.
WHAT I'M SAYING IS THE MEETING ON THE 20TH AND YOUR MINUTES THAT YOU APPROVED STATE THAT THE NEXT MEETING WILL BE ON THE 17TH.
NOW THERE'S BEEN NO CHANGES OFFICIALLY, SO ALL OF A SUDDEN, WITHOUT ADEQUATE NOTICE, HERE IT IS ON THE 4TH.
BESIDES BEING OUT OF ORDER, IT'S SUSPICIOUS.
SO, YEAH, BEYOND ALL THAT, THIS IS CLEARLY A VIOLATION OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
AND WHY DO I SAY THAT? BECAUSE WE WENT THROUGH OVER THREE YEARS OF TRINGALI.
IF YOU APPROVE THIS, YOU HAVE TO GO BACK AND FIGHT WITH THE PEOPLE AT TRINGALI AGAIN.
I HEARD A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH AND A LOT OF GIBBERISH ABOUT YOU KNOW WE DON'T REALLY KNOW BUT WE CAN GO BY AERIALS AND NO A LOT OF RECORD CLEARLY SHOWS THIS WAS ONE LOT OF RECORD.
SO LET'S JUST BE CLEAR ON THAT.
THE CORBETT'S CAN STILL BUILD A NICE HOUSE AND AN ACCESSORY BUILDING UNDER THE LAW ALLOWING YOU TO BUILD GRANNY HOUSES FOR ONE OF A BETTER TERM OR THE MOTHER-IN-LAW HOUSE WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT THAT COULD STILL BE DONE BUT CLEARLY SPLITTING THIS LOT WOULD PUT AN
[01:00:01]
UNREASONABLE DENSITY INCREASE ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN PARTICULAR AND THE ISLAND OF AMELIA IN GENERAL.IT ALSO SETS A PRECEDENCE THAT WOULD BE DESTRUCTIVE IN THE LONG RUN.
ANY REBUTTAL FROM THE BOARD? I KIND OF WANT TO TALK BRIEFLY.
10305 ACTUALLY, THE TRINGALI THING, AND THIS KIND OF RESPONDS TO WHAT THE LAWYER SAID.
10305 WAS SUPPORTED IN COURT TWICE WITH TRINGALI.
BUT WHAT'S INTERESTING, AND I THINK YOU ALL SHOULD KNOW, THERE HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN TWO PREVIOUS CASES ON THIS.
ONE WAS PART OF THE TRINGALI ON, I BELIEVE IT WAS THE 4TH STREET, REQUESTED VARIANCE AND WAS REJECTED.
ANOTHER WAS ON GREEN PROPERTY.
I THINK IT WAS 9TH OR 10TH STREET, WHICH WAS ONE HOUSE ON TWO PROPERTIES, TWO 100-FOOT LOTS, AND THEY WANTED TO SPLIT THAT AND BUILD FOUR HOUSES, AND THAT VARIANCE WAS ACCEPTED.
SO, YOU KNOW, THE PRECEDENCE THING IS NOT TOO RELEVANT HERE BECAUSE IT'S AN INDIVIDUAL CASE.
BUT I WANTED TO MAKE THE POINT FOR THE LAWYER THAT THIS CODE HAS BEEN, YOU KNOW, CONFIRMED GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS, WHICH WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW IS GOING TO THROUGH THE PROCESS YOU KNOW THE COURTS HAVE BASICALLY SUBSTANTIATED TWICE SO MY POINT IS THIS IT'S INTERESTING WE HAD TWO CASES SIMILAR AND ONE WAS APPROVED AND ONE WAS NOT APPROVED VARIANCE SO JUST SHOW THERE'S NO PREFERENCE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS INDEPENDENTLY THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO PRECEDENCE IN THIS BOARD ALL RIGHT UH I'D SAY ONE THING ABOUT YOUR ABOUT YOUR COMMENT ABOUT THE DATE, THE JUNE 17TH DATE.
THAT WAS IN THE DRAFT THAT WE APPROVED A WHILE AGO, THE MINUTES, BUT IF YOU READ THE REST OF IT, IT ALSO SAID THAT WE'RE GOING TO FIND A DIFFERENT DATE BECAUSE JOHNNY COULDN'T MAKE THAT DATE IS THE WAY I READ IT.
I DIDN'T READ IT THAT EVERYONE'S EXPECTED TO BE HERE ON THE 17TH.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I WAS GOING TO ADDRESS IT WHEN YOU GOT IN YOUR BOARD DELIBERATIONS, BUT THIS WAS PROPERLY NOTICED UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE CODE.
THERE WAS MORE THAN 10 DAYS NOTICE POSTING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THERE WAS MAILERS SENDING OUT MORE THAN 10 DAYS PRIOR, WHICH ARE THE TWO REQUIREMENTS, AND THE AGENDA WAS POSTED MORE THAN FIVE DAYS.
WE POSTED IT SEVEN DAYS PRIOR.
SO THERE HAS BEEN PROPER NOTICE OF THIS MEETING.
NOT EVERYBODY GOT THAT NOTICE, BY THE WAY.
POINT OF ORDER, MR. CHAIRMAN, IF YOU COULD ASK PEOPLE TO STOP SPEAKING FROM THE AUDIENCE, I WILL SUPPORT THAT.
I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON.
MS. KRISHNER, CAN YOU COME UP AND SPEAK, PLEASE? HI BOARD, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.
TYNA KRISNER, 406 BEACH STREET OR AS I LIKE TO CALL IT THE PARKING LOT FORMERLY KNOWN AS THANK YOU, PAID PARKING.
ANYWAY, I JUST WANTED TO SAY I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED WHY WE ARE HERE THIS EVENING.
THE SECTION OF THE CODE THAT STAFF IS QUOTING IS 10305 THAT SPECIFICALLY SAYS IN THE TITLE COMBINED LOTS.
I DON'T THINK THIS REALLY APPLIES.
IT SEEMS LIKE THEY'RE DOING THIS AS A FIRST STEP AND THEN THEY'RE GOING TO DO THE NORMAL PROCESS OF GOING AHEAD AND SPLITTING THE LOT IF YOU DO SUPPLY THE VARIANCE.
BUT TO ME, THIS IS AN UNNECESSARY STEP.
I THINK CITY ATTORNEY IS RELYING ON THE LANGUAGE IN 103.05 WHERE IT SAYS ONE OR MORE LOTS IN IT, BUT THE TITLE CLEARLY SAYS IT'S FOR COMBINED LOTS.
I ALSO WANTED TO GO THROUGH THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT STAFF IDENTIFIED AND I THINK STAFF DID A GREAT JOB ON THE ARE THE CRITERIA BUT I DISAGREE ON SOME OF THEM SORRY MIA SO FIRST IS SPECIAL CONDITIONS STAFF IDENTIFIES THAT THIS IS A DEEP LOT A CORNER LOT FOREST HILLS PLAT HIGHLAND DUNES WAY THOSE FACTS MAKE THIS VARIANCE POSSIBLE AND ATTRACTIVE FOR THE HOMEOWNER HOWEVER IT DOESN'T SHOW WHY THE PROPERTY SHOULD BE GRANTED A VARIANCE THAT THERE ARE REALLY NO SPECIAL CONDITIONS.
STAFF SAY THE PROPOSED LOTS MEET OUR R1 STANDARD, SO DENIAL DEPRIVES THEM OF RIGHTS.
BUT R1 COMPLIANCE DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT HAS TO BE 75 BY 100 OR 100 BY 100.
[01:05:02]
THERE'S PLENTY OF R1 LOTS, AND THERE'S PROBABLY A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THIS AUDIENCE WHO OWN THEM.WHO ARE 200 BY 100 LOTS AND WOULD APPRECIATE KEEPING THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD THE SAME.
GENERAL HARMONY, I THINK THAT THE LOTS THAT ARE ALL NEAREST TO THIS PROPERTY, PARTICULARLY THE LOTS THAT ARE FACING STANLEY DRIVE, IT'S NO LONGER GOING TO BE GENERAL HARMONY BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL WOULD LIKE IT IF YOU HAD HOUSE, HOUSE, HOUSE, AND YOU LIVE NEXT DOOR, AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU HAD A HOUSE IN THE BACKYARD OF YOUR NEXT-DOOR NEIGHBOR, ANOTHER HOUSE.
SO I DON'T THINK THIS ADDRESSES THE GENERAL HARMONY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND AS WELL AS PUBLIC INTEREST AND COMPATIBILITY, I JUST DON'T SEE IT.
I HAVE TO SAY I AM SO SYMPATHETIC TO THE APPLICANT BECAUSE THEY WERE TOLD BY STAFF THAT THIS WAS POSSIBLE.
BUT HONESTLY, IF YOU GRANTED VARIANCES BASED ON SYMPATHY, THIS WHOLE ISLAND WOULD BE SUBDIVIDED BY SUNDOWN.
ANY REBUTTAL TO THAT? ALL RIGHT.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL THE NEXT ONE.
DANIEL NOEL? DANIELLE? DANIELLE? HEY, I'M DANIEL NOW 606 STANLEY DRIVE.
I'VE KNOWN THE CORBETT'S AND ERIC SINCE I WAS PROBABLY SIX YEARS OLD.
GREW UP IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD AND KNOW THAT THAT PHYSICAL FOR THAT NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD KEEP HIM FROM DOING ANYTHING THAT WOULD BE HARMFUL TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I MEAN, HE WANTS TO, YOU KNOW, SEE TO A BETTER PLACE.
I MEAN, I'VE GOT SOME GOOD IDEAS ON WHY WE'RE HERE.
YOU KNOW, IT WAS A SHAME WHEN I SAW.
THE WOODS THERE GOT TAKEN AWAY FOR THIS YOU KNOW DEVELOPMENT BUT I DIDN'T COME TO Y'ALL AND COMPLAIN AND I CAN UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT WHY MAYBE YOU KNOW THERE'S SOME PEOPLE THAT THINK THAT THEY WANT TO KEEP IT UH YOU KNOW HOW THEY'VE HAD IT SINCE THEY'VE BEEN THERE BUT I MEAN WE'VE ALL BEEN SUSCEPTIBLE TO CHANGE SINCE WE'VE BEEN HERE AND I DO THINK THAT YOU KNOW ERIC MOVING FORWARD WITH HIS FAMILY WOULD BE AN AWESOME ADDITION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD MUCH ALL I GOT APPRECIATE IT ANYBODY ALL RIGHT THANK YOU SIR OKAY BETH THORNTON APOLOGIZE IF I MESS UP ANYBODY'S NAMES I'LL JUST TELL YOU SORRY UP FRONT I AGREE WITH DANIEL.
I'VE BEEN A NEIGHBOR OF ERIC'S FOR THE LAST, BETH THORNTON, 1813 HIGHLAND DRIVE, TWO DOORS DOWN FROM THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION.
SO I THINK THEY WOULD BE A FINE ASSET TO LARGER LOTS AND PEOPLE THAT ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT.
SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEM.
ANYBODY ELSE? ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
I CAN'T EVEN PRONOUNCE MY NAME.
I AM A RESIDENT AND PROPERTY OWNER IN HIGHLAND DUNES NEIGHBORHOOD AND I'M DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THE APPLICATION.
I DO RESPECTFULLY ASK THE BOARD TO DENY THIS VARIANCE, OR AT LEAST AT A MINIMUM, TO DEFER IT UNTIL PUBLIC SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS I'M ABOUT TO DESCRIBE HAVE BEEN FORMALLY REVIEWED BY THE CITY'S FIRE DEPARTMENT AND TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE.
I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT WAS MET EARLIER.
THERE WAS A NOTE IN THERE ABOUT THIS LOT IS UNUSUALLY DEEP AT 203 FEET.
I DID WANT TO POINT OUT TO THE RECORD, TAKING A LOOK AT EXHIBIT 9, WHICH IS THE FOREST HILLS PLATTE, I REVIEWED IT AND IF I COUNTED CORRECTLY THERE ARE 35 LOTS IN THAT DIVISION THAT HAVE LOTS THAT ARE 200 FEET OR MORE IN DEPTH SO THAT 203 FEET IS NOT UNUSUALLY DEEP.
A CONDITION SHARED BY HALF THE LOTS IN PLATTE IS NOT PECULIAR TO THIS PARCEL AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES SPECIAL CONDITIONS BE UNIQUE TO THE LAND.
I ASKED THE BOARD TO REVIEW EXHIBIT 9 AND MAKE ITS OWN FINDING BEFORE MAKING THE DECISION.
ANY HARDSHIPS HERE? I BELIEVE THAT THEY WERE SELF-CREATED.
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT SPECIAL
[01:10:02]
CONDITIONS NOT RESULT FROM THE APPLICANT'S OWN ACTIONS.DEMOLISHING A STRUCTURE DOES NOT CHANGE THE LOT OF RECORD STATUS, WHICH WE'VE DISCUSSED HERE EARLIER.
THE APPLICANT DEMOLISHED THIS HOME VOLUNTARILY BASED ON INFORMAL VERBAL GUIDANCE AND NOT A WRITTEN DEVELOPMENT ORDER.
THE SITUATION HE SEEKS RELIEF FROM IS A DIRECT RESULT OF HIS CHOICE.
IT'S A SELF-CREATED HARDSHIP AND IS NOT A VALID BASIS FOR A VARIANCE UNDER THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
AND BASED ON HIS OWN COMMENTS TODAY, WHEN HE PURCHASED THE LOT, HE HAD NO PLANS AT ALL FOR IT.
SO DENYING THE VARIANCE IS NOT CREATING ANY HARDSHIP AT ALL FOR THIS GENTLEMAN.
MY THIRD POINT IS ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS IS INCOMPLETE.
AND THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PART.
STAFF'S ENTIRE PUBLIC INTEREST ANALYSIS SAYS NEW HOMES WILL HAVE SMALLER FOOTPRINTS.
IT SAYS NOTHING ABOUT THE EMERGENCY ACCESS OR THE ENVIRONMENT.
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES SUBDIVISIONS OF 25 OR MORE LOTS TO HAVE TWO POINTS OF ACCESS.
THAT SUBDIVISION HAS A LITTLE MORE THAN 30 LOTS WITH A SINGLE POINT OF ACCESS ALREADY EXISTING.
THE HIGHLAND DUNES WAY, STANLEY DRIVE, BY ADDING THAT HOME THERE, WE'VE ALREADY GOT A PLATTE THAT'S EXCEEDING THE CURRENT CODE, OR THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT WAS ACTUALLY IN PLACE AT THE TIME THE HIGHLAND DUNES WAS PLATTED.
WAS THAT THE THREE MINUTES ALREADY? YES, SIR.
CAN I JUST GET LIKE ANOTHER 30 SECONDS? YOU'RE GOOD, SIR.
SO THAT HAS NOT BEEN ADDRESSED AT ALL.
SO WE'RE ASKING TO ADD A NOTE, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT IN THE VARIANCE REQUEST, BECAUSE IT'S JUST THE VARIANCE, BUT THE CONCLUSION IS A DRIVEWAY, TO A PLAT THAT'S ALREADY AT ODDS WITH THE CODE ALREADY.
SO THERE MUST BE SOME SPECIAL...
EXCEPTION MADE AT THE POINT HIGHLAND DUNES WAS PUT IN THERE TO ALLOW THAT, WHICH ACTUALLY MAY LIMIT EVEN YOUR ACTIONS HERE TODAY.
IT MAY PROHIBIT ADDING ANOTHER DRIVEWAY.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT YOUR OWN RECORDS TO SEE WHAT THEY SAY ON THAT POINT.
SO, AND IT DOESN'T TALK ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THE TREES.
YOU CANNOT GRADE THAT GRADE A DRIVEWAY INTO THAT LAND THERE WITHOUT DAMAGING THE TREE ROOT SYSTEMS FOR ALL OF THOSE TREES.
WE KNOW HOW TREES ARE HERE IN FERNANDINA BEACH.
AND I THINK IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO SITE A DRIVEWAY WITHOUT ACTUALLY DAMAGING THE ROOT SYSTEMS ON THOSE VERY LARGE OAK TREES THAT PROVIDE THE CANOPY THAT WE ALL LOVE HERE ON THIS ISLAND.
I'M ASKING YOU TO EITHER DENY THE REQUEST OR, AT A MINIMUM, PLEASE DO A MORE COMPLETE REVIEW ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ACCESS AND THE PLATTING REQUIREMENTS, THE SAFETY CONCERNS, GET A REVIEW BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND THE TECHNICAL REVIEW BOARD REVIEW COMMITTEE.
ANY REBUTTALS? WE'RE GOING TO HEAR A LOT ABOUT THE DRIVEWAY, BUT THE DRIVEWAY IS IRRELEVANT TO THIS VARIANCE.
IT'S JUST THAT THEY ARE LINKED.
AGAIN, WE'LL TRY TO STOP THE COMMENTS COMING BACK TO US, PLEASE.
IT'S JIM SAUNDERSON, 1806 HIGHLAND DRIVE.
EVERYBODY, IT SAYS SAUNDERSON.
IT'S SAUNDERS WITH AN O AND SAUNDERSON.
BEEN IN RESIDENCE AT 1806 HIGHLAND DRIVE SINCE MARCH OF 1956.
THE CONSTRUCTION TOOK ABOUT EIGHT MONTHS, SO WE STARTED BEFORE THEN.
SO WE'VE SEEN THAT DEVELOPMENT, FOREST HILLS, STANLEY DRIVE, REALLY GROW FROM THE BEGINNING.
AND MY LOT IS ABOUT THREE LOTS AWAY OR FOUR LOTS AWAY, DEPENDING ON HOW YOU CROSS STANLEY DRIVE.
DRIVING THROUGH FOREST HILLS AND STANLEY DRIVE USED TO BE LIKE DRIVING THROUGH A PARKLAND.
HOUSES COVERED 10% TO 20% OF THE AREA, AND THAT WAS FOR TWO REASONS.
AND SECONDLY, YOU HAD TO HAVE A SEPTIC TANK CONSIDERATION AREA, AND, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS PARTLY DUE.
OUR HIDDEN DUNES WAS THE PLACE WHERE, FOR 60 YEARS, KIDS DUG
[01:15:03]
FOR PIRATE TREASURE, MADE FORTS, HUNTED FOR INDIAN POTTERY.CLIMB TREES AND PLAY AND PLAYED ENDLESSLY.
WE HAVE SMALL EXECUTIVE LOTS 75 BY 100 BECAUSE FERNANDINA WAS SO ATTRACTIVE TO EVERYBODY COMING IN NEW.
HOMES COULD COVER UP TO 60% OF THE LOT NOW AND THERE WAS PLENTY OF MONEY TO DO THAT WITH.
THEN CAME HIGHLAND DUNES CUTTING MOST OF THE TREES DOWN.
FOR THOSE 30 HOMES, THE DENSITY OF TRAFFIC, NOT DRIVEWAYS, TRAFFIC GOING OVER THE HILL WITH THAT REALLY BAD INTERSECTION WITH HIGHLAND DRIVE COMING OUT OVER THE HILL, PUT EVERYBODY AT RISK WITH 30 NEW HOMES, MOST WITH TWO CARS, SOME THREE, GOING OVER THE HILL.
SO WHEN YOU DRIVE THROUGH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, WHAT YOU SEE IS STREET, DRIVEWAYS, GARAGES, AND HOUSES AND CHILDREN OF ALL AGES PLAYING IN THE STREET BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH ROOM ON THEIR LOT THROW AND PLAY CATCH SO THAT PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD REALLY CHANGED OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND YET WITHOUT THIS HISTORY.
THIS IS A STUNNINGLY BEAUTIFUL COMMUNITY POCKET COMMUNITY I REALLY THINK IF IT HAD TO BE DEVELOPED FOR NADINE IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED.
IT WAS A GOOD WAY TO DO DO IT.
BUT I AM AMAZED, I AM DISAPPOINTED, AND I AM EMBARRASSED THAT INSTEAD OF WELCOMING HIM TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THESE NEIGHBORS ARE HERE TODAY TO SPEAK UP, TO DENY HIM THE VERY SAME BUILDING CHARACTERISTICS, LOT SIZES, AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS THAT THEY THEMSELVES ENJOY.
IT'S LIKE, ANOTHER MINUTE? YOU'RE GOOD, SIR.
EVEN ON A PROPERTY THAT IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT, NOT A BLOCK AWAY OR THREE BLOCKS AWAY, BUT ADJACENT TO THEIR EXACT THINGS.
HE HAS ALREADY IMPROVED THEIR ENTRANCE.
THERE'S A HOUSE THAT WASN'T PAINTED FOR OVER 30 YEARS.
I KNOW, I'VE BEEN THERE, SEEN IT.
THREE DERELICT CARS AND SHRUBS THAT I DON'T KNOW THE LAST TIME THEY WERE TRIMMED.
SO ANYWAY, IT FEELS A LITTLE HYPOCRITICAL.
IT FEELS LIKE SHAMEFUL BEHAVIOR TO ME TO BE PROTESTING THE VERY THINGS THAT THEY HAVE IN THEIR OWN COMMUNITY.
AS RECOMMENDED TO YOU BY YOUR BOARD, YOU HAVE A POLICY.
I STRONGLY URGE YOU AND SUPPORT YOU RULING IN FAVOR OF THIS VARIANCE.
THANK YOU FOR HEARING MY VERY LONG-TERM PERSPECTIVE AS A LOCAL LIVING IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY.
ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU, SIR.
I'M NOT GOING TO GET THIS ONE RIGHT.
ROBERT DOHENY? DONNIE? TAKE TWO SHOTS.
ROBERT DOHENY, 901 STANLEY DRIVE.
I JUST WANT TO SAY I DIDN'T REALLY GET INVOLVED IN THIS UNTIL JUST A WEEK AGO WHEN I HEARD ABOUT IT AND I THOUGHT NO MAKES SENSE BUT THE PROBLEM I HAD IS WHEN ERIC SAID THAT HE DIDN'T HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT HE WAS GOING TO DO WITH THE PROPERTY.
THE PROPERTY REALTOR PUT RIGHT ON THE LISTING, THE HOUSE MUST BE TORN DOWN.
SO HE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THE HOUSE HAD TO BE TORN DOWN.
THE HOUSE WAS IN TREMENDOUSLY BAD CONDITION.
THE BARN WAS IN TREMENDOUSLY BAD CONDITION.
I ONLY KNOW I BOUGHT MY HOUSE AT 901 IN 2018.
AND SAY HE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT.
THE SECOND PART OF IT IS TREES.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO REMOVE THE TREES FROM TWO HOUSING AREAS, IT'S GOING TO BE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF TREES.
I TRIED TO REMOVE ONE TREE AND IT TOOK ME A LONG TIME TO GET A PERMIT TO REMOVE ONE TREE WHERE THE SQUIRRELS ATE SIX FEET OF THE INSIDE OF IT AND WERE NESTING IN IT.
SO I'M CURIOUS AS WHAT THE CITY WAS GOING TO DO TO ENSURE THAT THAT THOSE TREES ARE NOT DESTROYED AND TAKEN DOWN.
IT'S A TREMENDOUSLY BEAUTIFUL NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THE TRANQUILITY OF WHERE I LIVE DOWN ON 901 IS AMAZING.
BUT I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING WRONG WITH HIM WANTING TO PUT IN TWO LOTS PERSONALLY, BUT I THINK HE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN HE
[01:20:01]
HAD TO TAKE THAT HOUSE DOWN.HI EVERYBODY, MY NAME IS MATT STEINLIN.
I'M HERE SINCE EXACTLY 10 DAYS.
I WOULD NEVER HAVE THOUGHT I WOULD ACTUALLY...
YOUR ADDRESS PLEASE, FOR THE RECORD.
THIS WILL BE THE LOT RIGHT TO THE NORTH OF THAT PROPERTY.
SO I WOULD NEVER HAVE THOUGHT OF THAT I MEET SO MANY OF MY NEIGHBORS IN 10 DAYS, BUT HERE WE ARE.
SO I THINK WE HAVE HEARD A LOT OF OPTIONS, FEELINGS, HOW PEOPLE THINK THEY SHOULD GO.
I CAN JUST TELL YOU, I'VE MET ERIC, I'VE MET JIM, I'VE MET MARIE.
I THOUGHT LIKE THEY COMMUNICATED WITH ME, THEY CAME TO MY PROPERTY, EXPLAINED WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.
THE PROBLEM WHAT I HAVE RIGHT NOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT POSSIBILITIES.
BUILDING WHAT IS BUILT IN THE FUTURE THERE.
THAT'S NOT WHAT'S IN FRONT OF THIS BOARD RIGHT NOW.
WE ARE ASKED ESSENTIALLY TO APPROVE OR TO SUPPORT THE SPLITTING OF THE PROPERTY.
AND THEN BY THE WAY, WHAT WILL BE BUILT AFTERWARDS IS A COMPLETE DIFFERENT SCENARIO.
THAT TAKES MY RIGHT AWAY TO HAVE ANY INFLUENCE ON IT.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CORNER UNITS WHEN YOU BUILD.
WE SAW 15 FEET, I THINK WAS IT, THAT THE SETBACK NEEDS TO BE.
I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, LIKE THE PREVIOUS BUILDING WAS THE SAME SETBACK AS MINE.
AND THE SAME SETBACK AS LOT NUMBER 7.
AND THE SAME SETBACK AS LOT NUMBER 8.
THAT WOULD CHANGE THE BEHAVIOR.
NOW, I FULLY WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THIS.
ERIC HAS BEEN VERY FORTHCOMING, DIRECT, AND I TRULY BELIEVE THAT.
HE SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO WHAT HE WANTS TO DO.
HOWEVER, THERE'S SEVERAL ASPECTS THAT I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT HERE.
ONE IS, WE HEARD ABOUT THE SLOPE THAT THIS PROPERTY HAS.
IF WE'RE BUILDING THE WESTERLY PROPERTY ON THE HEIGHT OF ISLAND DUNES, I HAVE, AND I HAVE EXPRESSED THAT TO ERIC, I HAVE DRAINAGE CONCERNS, I HAVE STORMWATER CONCERNS, BECAUSE MY PROPERTY IS SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER.
SO TO PUT THAT IN PERSPECTIVE, MY ROOF, IS AT THE BASE WHERE THE BARN WAS.
SO IF WE'RE BUILDING A HOUSE THERE ON TOP OF THAT AND LIFT IT UP TO HIGHLAND DUNES, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THIS IS LIKE THE SAME AS A THREE-STORY HOUSE RIGHT THERE, OVERLOOKING MY BACKYARD.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I DIDN'T HAVE BEFORE.
I BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY AND INVESTED A LOT OF MONEY.
I FELL IN LOVE WITH FERNANDINA BECAUSE I WAS PART OF THE OCEAN ROWING COMMUNITY HERE.
I WAS WITH THE FAR FROM HOME TEAM AND THEN LATER ON WITH PAUL LOHR, TEAM OHANA, CROSS PACIFIC.
THAT'S WHY I FELL IN LOVE HERE AND THAT'S WHY I REALLY, REALLY WOULD LOVE THAT THIS, JUST ONE MORE MINUTE, WOULD LOVE THAT WE JUST CONSIDER, WE CANNOT CONSIDER THIS AS IT IS RIGHT NOW.
JUST SAYING LIKE WE'RE HOLDING THESE TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, THE SEPARATIONS, THE VARIANTS, AND WHAT WAS BUILT IN THE FUTURE IS FOR ME NOT COMPATIBLE.
BECAUSE WHO SAYS THAT ERIC DOESN'T GO AND SELL THE PROPERTY TOMORROW? ONCE THE VARIANCE IS GRANTED AND THE NEW OWNER COMES IN AND BUILDS SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT BLOCKS MY VIEWS BY PUTTING IT ALL THE WAY IN FRONT OF STANLEY WHICH WOULD LOOK DIFFERENTLY AND THEN SECONDLY IN REGARDS TO WHAT THE WHAT THE PRIVACY ASPECT IS OF MY PROPERTY HAVING A HAVING A PROPERTY OVERLOOKING MY PROPERTY FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I CURRENTLY DON'T HAVE THIS IS NOT WHAT I BOUGHT INTO I APPRECIATE THE TIME ANY QUESTIONS YEAH SO PULL THIS UP AND SHOW ME EXACTLY WHERE HE'S SHOWING HIS HOME IS COMPARED TO THIS LOT, PLEASE.
YEAH, WE HAD A REALLY GOOD PICTURE.
AND AGAIN, WHILE YOU'RE BRINGING THAT UP, THE SITE DESIGN IS NOT PART OF THE SIX CRITERIA.
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE UNDER CHAPTER 10 DOES REQUIRE THAT YOU BASE YOUR DECISION.
ON THE SIX CRITERIA JUST AS A REMINDER SO THIS IS THE HOUSE THAT WAS DEMOLISHED AT 409 STANLEY DRIVE I BELIEVE YOUR PROPERTY IS RIGHT HERE SIR YEAH THAT'S MINE COULD I ASK YOU HAD A BETTER PROPERTY WHERE THE OTHER PROPERTY WAS ACTUALLY ERASED ALREADY YOU CAN SEE THE LEVELS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT
[01:25:03]
YES GIVE ME ONE SECOND I'M SORRY FOR HOGGING THE TIME.OH, THIS IS THE WRONG PRESENTATION.
YOU KNOW, PEOPLE COME UP HERE AND SAY, WELL, I LIVE HERE NEAR IT.
IT'S HARD FOR ME TO PICTURE WHERE EVERYBODY'S COMING FROM HERE.
IS THIS WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? YEAH, SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS, AND IF I MAY GO OVER HERE, HERE'S MY ROOF.
HERE'S THE PROPERTY, HERE'S WHERE THE BARN WAS BACK HERE.
SO IF THIS, IF HERE WILL BE BUILT, THIS WILL BE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER.
AND THIS IS MY BACKYARD RIGHT HERE.
AND THIS WEST END OF THE BUILDING WILL LOOK DIRECTLY DOWN INTO MY ENTIRE BACKYARD.
SO I WOULD HAVE DEFINITELY SOME PRIVACY CONCERNS IN REGARDS TO THAT.
BUT THEN ALSO, SINCE IT WAS EXPLICITLY MENTIONED AGAIN, BUILDING IS NOT PART OF IT.
WELL, FOR ME IT IS, BECAUSE I CANNOT SUPPORT A VARIANCE.
AND THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH NOT SUPPORTING ERIC RIGHT NOW.
I'M REALLY ACTUALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO HAVE YOU AS MY NEIGHBOR.
BUT YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND I JUST MADE A SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENT.
I NEED TO TALK ABOUT WHAT IS IMPORTANT FOR ME.
WELL, WE HAVE THIS PRIVACY WITH PARALLEL BUILDINGS NEXT TO EACH OTHER.
NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HAVING A HOUSE IN FRONT THAT IS OFFSET, AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A HOUSE THAT OVERLOOKS MY BACKYARD.
MORNING BOARD, SCOTT LITTLE, 412 STANLEY DRIVE.
I OWN THE PROPERTY DIRECTLY ACROSS STANLEY DRIVE FROM ERIC.
I'VE LIVED HERE MY WHOLE LIFE.
MY GRANDDAD WAS ONE OF THE SHRIMPERS OUT OF THE PORT.
BACK IN THE DAY MY DAD WORKED ON THE SHRIMP BOAT HE WENT TO HIGH SCHOOL WITH MR. TYSON MR. JIMMY WE'VE BEEN HERE A LONG TIME I'VE KNOWN ERIC ALMOST MY WHOLE LIFE I ADMIRE WHAT HE'S DOING RIGHT NOW MY DAD'S GOT DEMENTIA AND IT'S I'M STRUGGLING TO TRY AND DRIVE OUT AND NOW SO I'M GOING TO TRY AND TAKE CARE OF HIM SO BEING ABLE TO HAVE YOUR DAD DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET OR IN YOUR BACKYARD MAN THAT IS AMAZING AND ERIC'S BEEN HERE HIS WHOLE LIFE HE'S BEEN AN UPSTANDING BUSINESSMAN IN THIS COMMUNITY FOR YEARS HE SERVED THIS COMMUNITY FOR A LONG TIME TO ADD ONE MORE HOME TO THE 30 SOMETHING THAT ARE IN HIGHLAND DUNES, I MEAN, THAT'S AN INCONVENIENCE FOR ALL OF US THAT WERE HERE BEFORE THEM.
NOW THEY'RE UPSET THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE ONE MORE.
ONE MORE HOUSE, NOT A GOOD THING.
BUT ERIC'S ALWAYS DONE RIGHT BY THIS COMMUNITY HE WOULDN'T MADE IT AS LONG IN HIS LINE OF BUSINESS IF HE HADN'T AND I'M SUPER EXCITED TO HAVE HIM IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICIALLY MY BEST FRIEND LOOKED AT THAT HOME SITE WAS THE ONE THAT WAS IN THE BIDDING WAR WITH ERIC I'VE BEEN IF I CAN MY BEST FRIEND ACROSS THE STREET I DON'T MIND HAVING ERIC AND MR. JIMMY I RESPECT THIS BOARD.
I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU GUYS DO.
YOU DON'T HAVE AN EASY DECISION, BUT JUST KNOW THAT THERE'S PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN HERE, AND ALL YOU GUYS, YOU'RE WELCOME TO BE HERE TOO.
FERNANDINA IS A SPECIAL PLACE, AND A LOT OF PEOPLE WANT TO LIVE HERE.
APPRECIATE YOU GUYS LOOKING OUT FOR US.
ANY QUESTIONS? ALRIGHT, LEE PALMER.
I THINK IT'S NUMBER 12 IN FOREST HILLS.
SO I'M DIRECTLY AROUND THE CORNER AND DOWN THE WAY.
AND I HAVE TO SAY I DIDN'T BRING ANY NOTES.
I ACTUALLY CAME, I'VE LEARNED A LOT MORE ABOUT EXACTLY WHAT YOU ALL ARE LOOKING AT HERE.
I CAME LIKE A A LOT OF PEOPLE ERIC'S SUPER NICE FOUND MY CREDIT CARD ON THE SIDE OF THE SIDEWALK A COUPLE WEEKS AGO AND IT WAS REALLY NICE OF THEM SO ALL OF THAT ASIDE I THINK I'M LISTENING TO WHAT EVERYONE IS SAYING AND HOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SPLITTING THE LOTS AND AND WHAT OUR NEW NEIGHBOR NICE TO MEET YOU NEIGHBOR HAD TO SAY WE ALL DO FEEL THE IMPACT WHEN THERE IS THIS NEW GROWTH BECAUSE I AM DOWN THE SLOPE YOU ALL SPENT A LOT OF MONEY CLEANING UP MY FRONT YARD LAST YEAR WHEN YOU LET A NEW BUILDING GO UP IN THE OTHER AMELIA CIRCLE UM HOWEVER I THINK THE COMMUNITY COMMUNITY CHARACTER AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU ALL CAN ADDRESS HERE TODAY.
THAT LOT, THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, OUR FOREST HILLS, IS BUILT ON, IT IS SOLD ON, THAT IS WHAT IT IS PITCHED ON, 200 YARDS, BIG LOTS.
I LIVE IN A 1951 VERY TINY HOME ON ONE OF THOSE STRANGELY PIE-SHAPED LOTS.
BASED ON HOW EVERYTHING IS WRITTEN RIGHT NOW.
I CAN'T DO ALL THESE OTHER THINGS.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, I'M REALLY CONFLICTED, Y'ALL, BECAUSE I REALLY DO FEEL LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF CHARACTER THAT HAPPENS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND WHEN YOU DO ONE, AND WHAT YOU SAID EARLIER REALLY SAT WITH ME, NOW YOU'RE BRIDGING THAT DIVIDE FROM THE HIGHLAND DUNES
[01:30:01]
NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS VERY CROWDED.AND WHEN YOU LET ONE COME IN, NOW WHAT HAPPENS TO THE NEXT ONE? AND I KNOW YOU SAID THERE'S NO PRECEDENCE, BUT WE'RE ALL HUMAN.
WE'VE SEEN THIS HAPPEN YEARS, AND WE'VE SEEN YOU ALL ON THESE COMMITTEES FOR A LONG TIME.
I DON'T KNOW IF I'VE MADE ANYTHING COMPELLING OR LEGAL OR WHAT IT IS, BUT MAN, THAT'S A HARD DECISION.
SHEILA, I CANNOT READ YOUR LAST NAME.
PETE STEVENSON 1627 HIGHLAND DUNES WAY, BERNARDINA BEACH.
THIS KIND OF POINTS SOMETHING.
THAT'S THE ENTRANCEWAY COMING INTO HIGHLAND DUNES RIGHT THERE.
ON THE RIGHT IS THE PROPERTY THAT'S UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR REPACKAGE.
NOW, THAT STREET DOWN THERE, I JUST HEARD THE COMMENT MADE.
THAT STREET RIGHT THERE, THAT SECTION, WHICH IS WHAT? IT'S 200 AND IT'S ALMOST 300 FEET LONG.
THAT CURB STARTS AT STANLEY, PICKS UP SOME WASTE FROM STANLEY AND TURNS INTO STORM WATER, RUNS IT ALL THE WAY DOWN THAT CURB, MAKES A SHARP RIGHT TURN, GOES INTO A SEWER RIGHT INTO A RETENTION POND, WHICH IS PART OF HIGHLAND DUNES.
NOW, THIS PROPERTY, LOT NUMBER 05, BUTTS UP TO LOT NUMBER 6 AND LOT NUMBER 26 IN HIGHLAND DUNES.
WHATEVER WATER STARTS ON THAT LOT AND DOESN'T GET CAUGHT IN THE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM, IS GOING TO GO ACROSS THOSE TWO LOTS.
NOW THAT WAS LAID OUT, THAT RETENTION POND STAYS RELATIVELY DRY RIGHT NOW.
IT'S NOT A PARTICULARLY WET POND SO IT STAYS DRY, GETS MOWED, BUT IT WAS THERE AND WAS DESIGNED AROUND THE HOUSING STRUCTURE THAT WAS THERE AT THE TIME.
IF YOU DIVIDE THIS PROPERTY, YOU ARE GOING TO, IN ONE SHAPE OR FORM OR WHATEVER, ALTER THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THAT LAND, WHICH CAN CHANGE THE FLOW.
AND RIGHT NOW, THEY DON'T HAVE ANY EASEMENT TO GET IT TO THAT RETENTION POND, WHICH MEANS IT'S GOING TO GO ACROSS ONE PROPERTY IN HIGHLAND DUNES, ONE PROPERTY IN, WHAT IS IT, FOREST HILLS, WHATEVER THE SUBDIVISION IS.
AND I THINK THE PEOPLE INVOLVED, THE WOMAN THAT'S HERE TONIGHT THAT WOULD BE MOST IMPACTED, SHE OWNS LOT 26.
AND NO ONE'S TALKED TO HER ABOUT WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.
IS SHE GOING TO GET A LOT OF WATER ACROSS HER PROPERTY? BECAUSE SHE BUTTS RIGHT UP IN THAT CORNER.
THE SECOND THING IS, IN FACT, YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE A CURB CUT THERE.
AND THAT CURB CUT IS NOT GOING TO NECESSARILY IMPROVE THE FLOW OF THE WATER.
SOME OF THAT WATER WILL SPILL OVER AND GO DOWN THAT DRIVEWAY INTO THAT HOUSE.
AND BY THE WAY, FROM THE CENTER LINE OF THIS LOT, LOT NUMBER FIVE, IT'S 200 FEET DEEP.
OKAY, IF YOU LOOK FROM STANLEY, SO YOU'RE LOOKING BACK 200 FEET.
IF YOU GO TO THE CENTER LINE OF THAT LOT, IT IS, BEST I COULD ESTIMATE IT, OVER FIVE FEET BELOW THE STREET LEVEL FOR HIGHLAND DUNES.
SO THAT MEANS THAT EVERYTHING SLOPES DOWN.
SO WHAT YOU SEE RIGHT HERE, THAT CURVE ON THE RIGHT SIDE IS FIVE FEET HIGHER THAN THE MIDLINE OF THAT LOT BELOW IT.
THERE ARE GOING TO BE CHARACTERISTICS THAT CHANGE WITH THE TOPOGRAPHY.
I DON'T CARE IF YOU ONLY ADD...
OR PUT TWO STRUCTURES IN, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CHANGE THE TOPOGRAPHY TO SOME EXTENT.
THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED, AND PARTICULARLY THE RESIDENTS NEED TO KNOW WHAT THE HELL IT IS, NEED TO HEAR THAT BEFORE THE DECISION'S EVER MADE TO SPLIT THE PROPERTY.
NOW, I'M GOING TO REVERT BACK TO ONE OR TWO.
I WILL MAKE, LET ME, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'LL MAKE A COUPLE COMMENTS.
WAS A VERY, VERY GOOD CASE OF VERY POOR COMMUNICATIONS BY THE CITY TO THE RESIDENTS INVOLVED.
THE HIGHLAND DUDES HOA WAS NEVER MADE AWARE OF THIS GOING ON.
THE MANAGEMENT COMPANY WAS NEVER MADE AWARE OF WHAT WAS GOING ON.
THE POSTCARD WAS THE FIRST THING THAT WENT OUT.
AND LESS THAN 90% OF THE PEOPLE AFFECTED WITHIN THE 500-FOOT RANGE GOT THE FIRST POSTCARD.
THE WOMAN MOST AFFECTED IN LOT 26 DID NOT GET THE SECOND POSTCARD.
POOR, I'M GOING TO CALL IT JUST POOR, WAY OF MAKING SURE THAT PEOPLE ARE GETTING THEIR LEGAL NOTICES.
THE FACT THAT THEY DON'T GET THOSE LEGAL NOTICES, I STILL QUESTION WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS A LEGAL MEETING.
ANY COMMENTS ON THAT? SO I'LL JUST GO ON AND STATE THAT...
[01:35:03]
SORRY.I'VE BEEN HITTING THAT EXTRA MINUTE WHEN YOU EXTEND TIME AND I FORGOT TO TURN IT OFF.
EVERY PROPERTY HAS TO GO THROUGH STORMWATER MANAGEMENT THAT GOES THROUGH APPROVAL.
THIS IS COMPLETELY SEPARATE FROM THIS TOPIC.
HOWEVER, EVERY PROPERTY THAT GETS DEVELOPED HAS TO GO THROUGH STORMWATER APPROVAL.
YOU CANNOT GAIN A PERMIT WITHOUT STORMWATER APPROVAL.
WHETHER THE DRAINAGE, I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU.
BE CHALLENGING BUT IT WILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PERMANENT REVIEW AND IT'S A COMPLETELY SEPARATE PROCESS THAN THIS AND IT DOESN'T BY CODE YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO DRAIN YOUR WATER TO OTHER PEOPLE'S PROPERTY SO THEY HAVE TO MITIGATE THAT IN IT THE PROPERTY OWNER WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR KEEPING THAT WATER JUST BECAUSE THIS KIND OF AFFECTS YOU GUYS ALSO IN THE PAST.
WHEN THIS CAME FORWARD, IT WOULD ULTIMATELY GO TO THE TECHNICAL REVIEW BOARD AND BE APPROVED.
IT WOULD THEN COME TO THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD FOR REVIEW, NOT NECESSARILY TOĀ POINT OF ORDER, FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME, DOES IT GO TO TRC? THAT'S INCORRECT.
FOR A LOT DIVIDED INTO TWO LOTS, THAT'S A MINOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT, AND IT WOULD TYPICALLY BE AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU WERE GOING WITH THAT.
WELL, THE POINT IS THE PUBLIC IS NEVER GOING TO HAVE A WAY OF COMMUNICATING THEIR THOUGHTS, EXCEPT MAYBE, AND I THINK THE FIRST TECHNICAL REVIEW BOARD IS NOT AN OPEN MEETING FOR THE PEOPLE TO PROVIDE THEIR INPUTS.
WHICH IS IT? NEITHER TRC MEETING HAS PUBLIC COMMENT.
SO THE PUBLIC NEVER GETS TO MAKE A COMMENT.
IS THAT RIGHT? FOR A MINOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT THAT SPLITS ONE LOT INTO TWO LOTS, THERE IS TYPICALLY NOT A PUBLIC HEARING UNLESS A VARIANCE HAS BEEN REQUESTED.
I'LL REST MY CASE SO THE PEOPLE NEVER GET REPRESENTED.
LET THE RECORD SHOW THAT THE CITY DOES NOT, IF I'M CORRECT, HAS NO RESPONSIBILITY TO NOTIFY A HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
COMPANY WHO IS NOT A LOT LOT OR LIEN DONOR WITHIN SO MANY FEET OF THAT PROPERTY THAT IS CORRECT THAT IS CORRECT AND I YEAH I DO HAVE THAT IN MY NOTES TO MAKE ONE OR MORE COMMENT I WOULD SINCE WE HAVE SO MANY SPEAKERS MR. CHAIRMAN YEAH I RESERVE IT TO THE END IF I'M GONNA GO AHEAD I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND PASS FOR THIS TIME AND I'LL COME BACK TO YOU SIR LET ME GET I'VE GOT A LOT LEFT ERIC SCHWARTZ THANK YOU.
THANK YOU FOR THE TIME TONIGHT.
I'LL KEEP IT SHORT BECAUSE THERE'S SO MANY PEOPLE WAITING HERE.
AND I'M SURE YOU ALL WANT TO GET HOME FOR DINNER.
PER THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, CHAPTER 10, REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR GRANTED VARIANCE.
IN ORDER FOR AN APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE TO BE APPROVED OR APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS, BOA OR HDC SHALL FIND THAT ALL THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA APPLY.
I HAVE A DIFFERENT BENT ON IT.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST.
WHICH ARE PECULIAR TO THE LAND STRUCTURE OR BUILDING INVOLVED AND WHICH ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO OTHER LAND STRUCTURES OR BUILDINGS IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT OKAY THE SPECIAL CONDITION CITED BY THE APPLICANT IS THAT PREVIOUS CONSTRUCTION AND CURRENT I'M QUOTING THIS FROM THE REPORT CURRENT EXISTENCE OF THE ROADWAY HIGHLAND DUNE WAY IS THE SPECIAL CONDITION HE ALSO SAYS THAT THE ROADWAY PROVIDES ACCESS NEED TO CREATE TWO LOTS WHERE ONLY ONE EXISTED BEFORE THOSE ARE FACTS.
IT'S PRETTY EASY TO UNDERSTAND.
THERE'S A ROAD THERE THAT DIDN'T EXIST BEFORE BECAUSE IT WAS THE PREVIOUS LOT THERE.
THERE WAS A HOUSE THERE THAT WAS DEMOLISHED AND MADE PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT.
BUT IN THE R1 ZONE AREA, BORDERED BY ATLANTIC ON THE SOUTH, 14TH STREET NORTH TO THE WEST, AND EGAN'S CREEK ON THE EAST, THERE ARE AT LEAST 40 SIMILAR LOTS THAT ABUT ONTO A CITY STREET THAT COULD, IN A SIMILAR FASHION, BE APPLIED FOR UNDER THIS PROVISION TO SPLIT A LOT.
IF THE BUILDING WAS LOST BECAUSE OF FIRE, FLOOD, HURRICANE, CHARTER OAK FALLS DOWN ON IT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THEN THIS COULD APPLY TO THAT.
THIS IS NOT A SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE.
THERE'S NOTHING SPECIAL ABOUT IT.
I'VE GOT A LIST OF PROPERTIES.
I'M NOT THAT GREAT WITH GIS, BUT THIS IS ABOUT AN HOUR'S WORK OF FINDING ALL THESE DIFFERENT PROPERTIES.
I CAN SUBMIT THAT FOR THE RECORD IF YOU WANT.
ACCORDING TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE INTENT OF THE CODE IS THAT THE...
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS IN FRONT OF THAT BEACH BE EFFICIENT IN TERMS OF TIME AND EXPENSE EFFECTIVE ALMOST GET THE REST OF THE EFFECTIVE PART AND EQUITABLE IN TERMS OF PROVIDING CONSISTENCY WITH ESTABLISHED REGULATIONS PROCEDURES RESPECT FOR THE RIGHTS OF PROPERTY OWNERS AND CONSIDERATION OF THE INTEREST OF THE CITIZENS OF FERNANDINA
[01:40:02]
BEACH THIS REQUEST IS AN EFFICIENT.I THINK WE HAD A LOT OF PEOPLE TO TALK ABOUT THAT AND AS A RESIDENT OF FERNANDINA BEACH, I SPECIFICALLY OBJECT TO THE SPECIAL TREATMENT OF ONE OWNER OVER OTHER OWNERS, THAT HE GETS THE RIGHT TO SPLIT THIS LOT WHEN OTHER PEOPLE HAVE BEEN DENIED IN THE PAST AND MAY BE DENIED IN THE FUTURE.
CHAPTER 10 OF THE LDC STATES THE PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER IS TO PROVIDE MECHANISMS FOR OBTAINING RELIEF.
OBTAINING RELIEF, AND THEN IT SPECIFIES THAT THE RELIEF IS BECAUSE OF HARDSHIP.
THERE'S JUST AN INITIAL MISUNDERSTANDING WITH THE CITY, AND NOW WE'VE GOT A CREATIVE EFFORT TO MAKE THIS.
FINALLY, I WANT TO EXPRESS GRATITUDE TO MR. CORBETT AND HIS FAMILY BECAUSE HE'S BEEN WILLING TO TAKE ON THIS PROJECT.
I LOOKED AT THAT PROPERTY TOO.
I THOUGHT ABOUT BUYING IT AND IT WOULD BE AN IMMENSE EFFORT TO LEVEL THAT HOUSE, TAKE DOWN THAT POLE BARN AND ALL THE ASSOCIATE STUFF THAT WAS ON THAT LOT AND CLEAN IT UP.
FOR RIGHT NOW, WE'VE GOT AN EMPTY SANDPIT.
WE'VE GOT AN EMPTY SANDPIT WHERE IT WAS.
AND THAT'S MONTHS AFTER DEMOLITION.
THERE'S EROSION ISSUES ALREADY HAPPENING ON THAT SITE.
REDEVELOPMENT LAND IS INEVITABLE.
YOU HAVE TO DO IT IN A WAY IT DOESN'T IMPACT EVERYBODY DISPROPORTIONATELY.
AND JUST BECAUSE IT CAN BE DONE DOESN'T MEAN IT SHOULD BE.
REQUEST FOR VARIANCE IS NECESSARY BECAUSE THE DESIRE TO SUBDIVIDE THE LOT IN QUESTION CONTRADICTS THE LDC, SPECIFICALLY THE INTENT OF THE LDC TO KEEP ONE HOUSE ON ONE LOT AS THIS PROPERTY WAS ORIGINALLY BUILT.
PLEASE KEEP FOREST SELLS LOT 5 AS LOT 5 ON THE SINGLE PARCEL LOT OF RECORD WITH THE DRIVEWAY FACING STANLEY DRIVE AND MAINTAIN THE 409 STANLEY DRIVE ADDRESS.
THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN AND BOARD MEMBERS.
MR. CHAIRMAN, PLEASE ADDRESS PLEASE.
CAN YOU SUBMIT THAT PLEASE? THANK YOU.
THOSE ARE PROPERTIES THAT HE FOUND THAT ARE ON GIS.
WHILE WE'RE REVIEWING THAT, I'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL RACHEL KARESTIS.
MR. CHAIRMAN, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'M GOING TO STAND FOR A LITTLE BIT.
THAT'S WHY FANDY'S GONE NUMB SITTING HERE FOR TWO HOURS.
DO YOU WANT TO DO SOME EXERCISES? NO, I DON'T.
I JUST NEED TO STAND UP FOR A WHILE.
CAN YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE? YES, SIR.
MY NAME IS RACHEL CRESTIS AND MY ADDRESS IS 1609 HIGHLAND.
I HAVE SOME PREPARED REMARKS THAT DEAL WITH THE EVIDENCE AS PER THE REQUEST OF THE CITY ATTORNEY, BUT IF I COULD HAVE A FEW EXTRA SECONDS, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A BROADER STATEMENT.
I KNOW MR. CORBETT, HIS FAMILY, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF FOLKS ARE HERE AND THEY'RE SPEAKING OUT OF EMOTION.
ONE THING IS VERY TRUE ABOUT THE PEOPLE OF FERNANDINA BEACH IS THAT WE CARE DEEPLY ABOUT OUR CITIES.
WHETHER YOU'VE BEEN HERE FOR 100 YEARS OR ONE YEAR OR 10 DAYS AS OUR NEW NEIGHBORS, HAVE BEEN, WE ALL CARE VERY PASSIONATELY ABOUT THIS.
BUT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVEN'T BEEN HERE FOR 100 YEARS.
MY HUSBAND SERVED OVER 20 YEARS OF ACTIVE DUTY IN THE UNITED STATES NAVY.
SO WE NEVER HAD THE LUXURY OF LIVING IN ONE PLACE FOR LONGER THAN A COUPLE YEARS AT THE TIME.
BUT I DON'T TELL YOU THAT BECAUSE I WANT TO SWAY YOUR OPINION TOWARDS SYMPATHY OF A MILITARY FAMILY, BUT BECAUSE THIS REALLY ISN'T A QUESTION ABOUT INDIVIDUALS.
AND AS OUR NEW NEIGHBORS JUST SAID, THIS ISN'T JUST ABOUT TODAY.
MR. CORBETT HAS HAD MANY PLANS FOR THIS PROPERTY.
HE MAY DECIDE TO DO SOMETHING ELSE.
I UNDERSTAND THAT'S QUESTIONS OF BUILDING CODES AND ALL OF THE REST, BUT ONCE YOU GRANT THE VARIANCE, THAT IS LOCKED IN.
ONCE YOU SUBDIVIDE THIS LOT, THAT'S NO LONGER ABOUT ANY OF THE INDIVIDUALS IN THE ROOM.
THAT WILL BE THAT WAY UNTIL SOMEONE ELSE SEEKS A VARIANCE OR SOME OTHER CHANGE.
TO THE CODE, SO I WANT YOU TO CONSIDER THAT AS WELL.
I MAY BE A NAVY WIFE, BUT I ALSO HAVE A MASTER'S DEGREE IN PUBLIC POLICY, SO I'M NOT A LAWYER, BUT I'M VERY GOOD AT READING CODE.
I SEE NO AMBIGUITY IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AS IT IS WRITTEN.
SECTION 103.05 IS VERY CLEAR TO ME.
IN LAYMAN'S TERMS, IT VERY CLEARLY STATES ONE HOUSE, ONE LOT.
THAT IS CLEARLY THE INTENTION.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY IS OFTEN LAWYERS LIKE TO INTERPRET THINGS AND ARGUE THEM BEFORE COURTS.
POLICY ANALYSTS LIKE MYSELF ASK WHAT'S THE IMPACT OF THIS? WHAT IS THE INTENTION OF THE PUBLIC POLICY? I THINK THE INTENTION OF THIS PUBLIC POLICY IS TO MAINTAIN THE CHARACTER OF THAT FOREST HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD BUT ALSO OF ANY OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD THAT EXISTS
[01:45:01]
HERE IN THE CITY.THERE IS A LOOK, THERE IS A FEEL TO ALL OF THIS AND SO I THINK THAT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IS VERY CLEAR.
I THINK I THINK DIVIDING THIS LOT IS NOT IN SPIRIT.
WITH THAT, AND I THINK YOU SHOULD REVOKE THE VARIANCE APPLICATION FOR THAT REASON.
BUT I ALSO WANT TO RAISE ANOTHER QUESTION.
THERE ARE SEVERAL CONSIDERATIONS THAT YOU DO HAVE.
THE SIX CRITERIA INCLUDES PUBLIC SAFETY.
THERE HAS BEEN, AS IT WAS NOTED, NO PUBLIC SAFETY ANALYSIS.
AND IF I MAY, POINT TO THIS PHOTO HERE.
HIGHLAND DUNES WAY IS ONLY 30 FEET WIDE.
THAT MAKES IT THE EQUIVALENT OF AN ALLEY IN THE CITY.
MAY I HAVE ANOTHER MINUTE, PLEASE? IT IS THE ONLY ENTRANCE INTO THE HIGHLAND DUNES SUBDIVISION.
IT HAS, AS YOU CAN SEE, ONE LANE WESTBOUND IN, ONE LANE EASTBOUND OUT.
THIS PROPERTY HERE IS OWNED BY THE HIGHLAND DUNES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, THAT IS PRIVATE PROPERTY.
THERE'S A CAR PARKED THERE, BUT THAT IS BECAUSE IT'S PARKING FOR RESIDENTS OF HIGHLAND DUNES WAY.
IF THIS LOT IS SUBDIVIDED AND A DRIVEWAY IS PLACED, I KNOW THE DRIVEWAY IS NOT GERMANE TO THE VARIANCE, BUT IF A DRIVEWAY IS PLACED THERE, THE QUESTION OF PUBLIC SAFETY DOES COME ON.
AND YOU DO HAVE TO CONSIDER WHETHER GRANTING THIS VARIANCE CREATES A PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT.
SO IF A DRIVEWAY IS THERE, AS NOTED, THIS PROPERTY SLOPES DOWNHILL.
SO IMAGINE SOMEBODY BACKING UP OUT OF A LONG DRIVEWAY UP A HILL DIRECTLY INTO THE LANE OF ONCOMING TRAFFIC.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S NO SIDEWALK THERE.
THERE'S NOWHERE FOR PEDESTRIANS.
THERE'S NOWHERE FOR THE KIDS WHO RIDE THEIR BIKES TO GET OUT OF THE WAY OF THAT DRIVEWAY.
BUT ALSO, IMAGINE WHERE THE GARBAGE CANS ARE GOING TO GO.
AGAIN, I KNOW THE VARIANCE ISN'T BASED ON THE GARBAGE CANS, BUT THOSE WOULD HAVE TO BE IN THE STREET.
NO ONE REALLY DOES NOW BECAUSE THERE'S NO REASON FOR IT.
BUT A PUBLIC SAFETY AND TRAFFIC STUDY WOULD TELL YOU WHETHER GRANTING THIS VARIANCE WOULD ACTUALLY IMPACT THE TRAFFIC ON THAT STREET.
CLOSING ONE LANE OF A TWO-LANE ROAD THAT IS THE ONLY ACCESS POINT TO THAT SUBDIVISION CLEARLY IS A QUESTION, A PUBLIC SAFETY QUESTION, THAT NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED.
THAT IS GERMANE FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF THE VARIANCE.
THE APPLICATION AND THE STAFF PROVIDE NO RECOMMENDATION ON THE PUBLIC SAFETY OR TRAFFIC IMPACT.
I THINK FOR THAT REASON, YOU MUST REJECT THIS VARIANCE REQUEST.
MIKE HARBISON, 1629 HIGHLAND DUNES WAY, CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH.
MOST OF MY COMMENTS WERE JUST COVERED, SO I'M GOING TO BE BRIEF ON A COUPLE, JUST A COUPLE POINTS.
AS YOUR VICE CHAIRMAN POINTED OUT, THE ISSUE OF THE ROAD AND THE DRIVEWAY ON THE ROAD IS UNRELATED TO THE SUBJECT OF THE VARIANCE.
I DISAGREE 100% ON THAT BECAUSE THE CITY DOESN'T ALLOW FLAG LOTS, SO YOU HAVE TO PUT THE DRIVEWAY ON HIGHLAND DUNES.
IN OTHER WORDS, YOU COULDN'T HAVE TWO DRIVEWAYS COMING ALL THE WAY OUT TO STANLEY DRIVE.
SO, ANYWAY, SO THEY'RE CONNECTED.
PLEASE DO NOT APPROVE THIS VARIANCE.
ALL MY OTHER COMMENTS WERE COVERED.
REBECCA RAYMOND? REBECCA RAYMOND, I LIVE AT 1703 HIGHLAND DUNES WAY, AND I'M GOING TO SPEAK TO CRITERIA.
REGARDING BEING DETRIMENTAL TO PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE, OR ENVIRONMENT.
I'VE LIVED AT 1703 HIGHLAND DUNES WAY FOR THE PAST 10 YEARS.
MY PROPERTY IS ON THE NORTHWEST
[01:50:02]
CORNER WHERE I ABUT THE PROPERTY OF 409 STANLEY DRIVE.I RECEIVED A NOTICE ABOUT THE FIRST HEARING ON MAY 20TH.
OF COURSE, IT WAS CANCELED, AND I STILL HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY NOTICE ABOUT TODAY.
I HOPE EACH ONE OF YOU HAVE PHYSICALLY VISITED THE SITE AND I THINK YOU WOULD NOTICE THAT THERE IS A NOTICEABLE DROP IN ELEVATION FROM HIGHLAND DUNES THE ROAD TO THIS STANLEY DRIVE PROPERTY AND THE PROPERTY ITSELF HAS SUBSTANTIAL SLOPING.
PER THE NASSAU COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER SITE MAP, THE ELEVATION AT HIGHLAND DUNES WAY IS 29 FEET.
THE PROPERTY DROPS TO 26 FEET AND DROPS ANOTHER 8 TO 18 FEET IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER, AN OVERALL DROP OF 11 FEET IN ELEVATION.
THE ORIGINAL HOUSE ON STANLEY WAS BUILT 70 YEARS AGO.
I HAVE NEVER EXPERIENCED ANY WATER ISSUES ON MY PROPERTY.
NOW THERE'S A PROPOSED PLAN OF TWO BRAND NEW STRUCTURES WITH DRIVEWAYS ENTERING ONTO HIGHLAND DUNES ROAD AS PER THE DRAWINGS.
OR MAYBE ONE DRIVEWAY ENTERING HIGHLAND DUNES AND ONE DRIVEWAY ENTERING STANLEY.
WHICH IS IT? IF THERE ARE TWO DRIVEWAYS, THERE WILL NEED TO BE ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF FILL TO MITIGATE THAT GAP IN ELEVATION.
BUT I WAS RECENTLY TOLD BY THE APPLICANT HIMSELF, NO, THERE WILL BE ONE DRIVEWAY ON HIGHLAND DUNES WAY, AND THE GARAGE WOULD BE UNDER THE HOUSE.
SO ADDITIONAL FILL OR EXCAVATION, EITHER ACTIVITY, WILL CHANGE THE PARCELS PRESENT.
ELEVATION FIGURES I'M HERE TO GO ON THE RECORD TO SAY THAT I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF WATER RUNOFF AND DAMAGE TO MY PROPERTY IF THIS VARIANCE IS GRANTED AND THE ENGINEERING AND THE CONTOURING OF THAT PARCEL IS NOT PROPERLY DONE THANK YOU ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT, WE'LL CALL DAN ROACH.
I'M GOING TO MAKE UP SOME TIME FOR YOU.
I OWN A LOT IN HIGHLAND DUNES ADJACENT TO MY HOUSE.
I BASICALLY BOUGHT THE LOT NEXT TO MY HOUSE SO I WOULDN'T BE THAT CLOSE TO MY NEIGHBORS.
FIRST THING I WANT TO DO IS I SPENT 12 YEARS OF MY LIFE ON VOLUNTEER GOVERNMENT BOARDS LIKE THIS.
I KNOW HOW MUCH TIME YOU PUT INTO IT.
JUST GENERALLY SPEAKING, I GET A 75 BY 100 FOOT LOT.
I CAN'T STAND ON MY 75 BY 100 FOOT LOT AND LOOK AT MY NEIGHBOR AND SAY, YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE A 100 BY 100 FOOT LOT.
VICTORIA ROBUS, 2161 SOUTH FLETCHER AVENUE, FERNANDINA BEACH, FLORIDA, 32034.
I'M CURRENTLY ON THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH'S PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD, BUT TO BE VERY CLEAR, I AM NOT REPRESENTING THE BOARD AT THIS TIME, NOR AM I AUTHORIZED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD.
ALL MY COMMENTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL COMMENTS.
THE FIRST THING THAT IN MY ANALYSIS OF THIS CASE WAS TO READ THE STAFF'S REPORT UNDER THE APPLICABLE POLICY GUIDANCE OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION.
WHICH WAS PREPARED BY STAFF ON MAY THE 20TH, 2026.
AND THERE'S REFERENCE TO THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHERE STAFF STATES THAT AFTER REVIEW OF THE SUBJECT APPLICATION, THAT THERE WAS NOT A SUBJECT TO, IT WAS NOT SUBJECT TO ANY
[01:55:01]
OF THE 12 LIMITATIONS OF SECTION 10.0201.I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT THE SPECIFIC PARAGRAPH THAT SHOULD BE REFERENCED IS PARAGRAPH D.
LIMITATIONS ON THE GRANTING OF VARIANCES.
STAFF FURTHER STATES THAT THIS SUBJECT APPLICATION IS THEREFORE CONSIDERED TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
IN MY REVIEW OF THE 12 LIMITATIONS STATED IN THIS SECTION, ITEM 6 SAYS THAT A VARIANCE SHALL NOT BE GRANTED IF THE EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT IS SOLELY A DEMONSTRATION OF FINANCIAL HARDSHIP OR ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS.
AND ITEM SEVEN, A VARIANT SHALL NOT BE GRANTED FOR A PROCEDURAL OR PROCESS COMPONENTS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
IT IS MY READING OF THESE LIMITATIONS THAT THIS CASE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT BEFORE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS FOR CONSIDERATION.
HOWEVER, WE ARE HERE TODAY AND MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED WITH MY ANALYSIS OF THE CRITERIA.
CRITERIA ONE, SPECIAL CONDITIONS.
THE APPLICANT HAS RELIED ON THIS SECTION OR HAS REPLIED IN THIS SECTION AS THE PROCESS IN MY OPINION AND HAS NOT ADDRESSED WHAT THE SPECIAL CONDITION AS SPECIFIED IN THIS SECTION NOR HAS STAFF IN THE RESPONSE ADDRESSED ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS.
THIS IS MERELY A RECITAL OF OF THE HISTORY OF THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL.
SO TO REPEAT IN THIS SECTION, SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH HAVE TO EXIST, WHICH ARE PARTICULAR TO THE LAND, STRUCTURE, OR BUILDING INVOLVED, AND WHICH ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO OTHER LANDS, STRUCTURES, BUILDINGS IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS ARE NOT A RESULT FROM ACTIONS OF THE APPLICANT AND ARE NOT BASED ON THE DESIRE TO REDUCE.
THEREFORE, IN MY OPINION, THE CRITERIA NUMBER ONE HAS NOT BEEN SATISFIED.
CRITERIA NUMBER TWO, SPECIAL PRIVILEGE.
GRANTING THE VARIANCE DOES NOT CONFER UPON THE APPLICANT A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE THAT IS DENIED BY THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO OTHER LANDS, STRUCTURES, OR BUILDINGS IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT.
I COULD READ TO YOU UM, 10305, CONSTRUCTION OR DEMOLITION OF STRUCTURES ON COMBINED LOTS, WHICH HAS ALREADY BEEN READ TO US BY STAFF.
I WOULD ALSO, AS SOMEONE HAS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, THAT THIS SECTION OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SHOULD NOT BE PART OF OUR DISCUSSION BECAUSE IT WASN'T A COMBINED LOT.
WE'RE TALKING NOW ABOUT DIVIDING IT.
SO IN MY OPINION, I DON'T THINK THAT 103.05 RELATES TO THIS CONVERSATION.
BUT IF THIS IS APPROVED, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS SHOULD ESTABLISH ANY PRECEDENT THAT WOULD WEAKEN.
CRITERIA NUMBER FOUR, MINIMUM VARIANCE.
MINIMUM VARIANCE IS NEEDED THAT WILL MAKE POSSIBLE THE REASONABLE USE OF LAND, STRUCTURE, OR BUILDING.
BASED ON THE SIZE OF NEIGHBORING LOTS, AND WE'VE SEEN THOSE LOTS THAT ARE ADJACENT TO THIS ONE, THE REASONABLE USE OF THIS LOT IS STILL ONE UNIT.
SO WHY DO WE NEED A VARIANCE TO CHANGE THE PAST USE OF THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL? TO ME, THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION THAT I'VE SEEN IN ANY OF THE DOCUMENTATION UNDER THE CRITERIA THAT WOULD JUSTIFY THE SPLITTING OF THIS LOT.
AND THEN CRITERIA NUMBER FIVE, GENERAL HARMONY.
TO BE IN HARMONY WITH THE GENERAL INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AGAIN, I BRING YOUR ATTENTION TO THE SIZE OF NEIGHBORING LOTS IN THE HIDDEN HILLS SUBDIVISION.
THESE ARE APPROXIMATELY HALF ACRE LOTS.
TO SUBDIVIDE THESE LOTS WOULD DISRUPT THE GENERAL HARMONY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND AS IF THIS IS APPROVED, FUTURE LOTS IN THIS WELL-ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD TURN OVER AS THEIR TURNOVER THE INCENTIVE TO SUBDIVIDE THESE LOTS WILL INCREASE.
BUT I WOULD ALSO ADD IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO BE IN OPPOSITION
[02:00:01]
OF THIS PROJECT BECAUSE SO MANY OF US IN A SMALL TOWN KNOW THE CORBETT'S.JIM, AIMA, THEIR BROTHER, WE WERE IN HIGH SCHOOL TOGETHER, AND IT'S DIFFICULT TO CRITICIZE A PROJECT THAT, AS IT IS PRESENTED TO US TODAY, IS SEEMINGLY A LOVING OPPORTUNITY FOR FAMILIES TO STAY TOGETHER.
SO IT IS DIFFICULT TO BRING AN OPPOSING, PERHAPS, DISCUSSION TO A PROJECT THAT...
ONE OF YOUR GOOD FRIENDS AND FAMILY MEMBERS WOULD LIKE TO SEE HAPPEN.
SO I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD THAT.
ANY REBUTTAL? QUESTION FOR STAFF AND LEGAL.
IS THERE ANYTHING YOU'VE SEEN HERE THAT CHANGES YOUR OPINION ON WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS A PROPER MEETING THAT WE FOLLOW? IS THERE ANY NEW INFORMATION HERE THAT YOU SEE THAT? AS FAR AS A PROPER MEETING, WE HAVE MET.
MET THE REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 11.0201B WITH THE REQUIRED NOTICE FOR THE VARIANTS, POSTING THE SIGN, POSTING THE AGENDA, MAILING.
THE MAILING HAS TO BE 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED HEARING.
THE POSTING HAS TO BE FIVE DAYS PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED HEARING.
AND THE AGENDA HAS TO BE POSTED.
AGAIN, THE INTERPRETATION HAS BEEN THAT THE LANGUAGE IN 103.05 REFERS TO ONE OR MORE PLATTED LOTS.
IT IS PARTICULARLY IN ARTFUL LANGUAGE.
THERE'S BEEN CONCERN ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE TITLE, RATHER THAN THE SUBSTANCE OF A PARAGRAPH, SHOULD DICTATE YOUR DECISION.
THE CODE DOES NOT PROVIDE CLARITY.
MANY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODES WILL STATE THAT TITLES DO NOT DICTATE.
IT IS THE SUBSTANCE OF THE PARAGRAPH THAT DOES DICTATE.
SINCE STAFF HAS FOUND THAT 103.05 APPLIES, UNDER THAT SECTION C OF 103.05 OF VARIANCE IS THE APPROPRIATE WAY TO PROCEED TO SPLIT A LOT.
SO ON THAT BASIS, I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING TONIGHT.
I THINK MS. SADLER HAS SOMETHING TO ADD AS FAR AS THE ABILITY IF THERE WAS NO VARIANCE REQUIREMENT.
I HAVE A COUPLE THINGS TO ADD BASED ON WHAT WE'VE HEARD ON THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION.
SO THE WAY THAT THE CODE IS WRITTEN IN TERMS OF DRIVEWAYS, ONE DRIVEWAY IS PERMITTED PER 100 FEET OF FRONTAGE.
SO EVEN IF THIS WAS ONE LOT, THERE COULD BE A DIFFERENCE IN THE AMOUNT OF SPACE.
IT WOULD STILL BE A DRIVEWAY ONTO HIGHLAND DUNESWAY AND A DRIVEWAY ONTO STANLEY DRIVE, SINCE THERE'S 300 FEET OF FRONTAGE ON THAT SINGLE LOT.
SO SPLITTING THE LOT DOES NOT IMPACT TWO DRIVEWAYS, NOT TWO DRIVEWAYS.
STORMWATER WILL BE CONSIDERED DURING THE DEVELOPMENT.
OUR STORMWATER DEPARTMENT HAS TO REVIEW AND APPROVE ALL STORMWATER PLANS.
AS CHAIR PAPKE STATED, ALL STORMWATER WILL NEED TO BE RETAINED ON THE LOT.
OUR STORMWATER DEPARTMENT IS AWARE OF EXISTING STORMWATER SYSTEMS, INCLUDING ONES THAT SUPPORT THE HIGHLAND DUNES PLATTE, AND THAT WILL BE CONSIDERED IN THE STORMWATER CALCULATION THAT HAS TO BE PREPARED BY A FLORIDA ENGINEER.
A FLORIDA LICENSED ENGINEER HAS TO BE STAMPED AND SEALED TO THEIR NAME.
I HEARD A LOT TONIGHT THAT IF THIS VARIANCE WAS GRANTED, THEN ALL THE LOTS AND FOREST HILLS WOULD BE ABLE TO BE SPLIT.
AS AT THE REQUEST OF THE PLANNING MANAGER, I DID DO A LITTLE LOOK AT THE FOREST HILL SUBDIVISION.
SO I PULLED OUT THAT ONE CORNER LOT THAT WAS ORIGINALLY PLANTED WITH TWO 100 BY 100 LOTS.
AND AS A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC STATED, NO FLAG LOTS ARE PERMITTED.
THAT MEANS THERE CAN'T JUST BE A DRIVEWAY TO A LOT IN THE BACK.
THEREFORE, ONLY CORNER LOTS COULD REALLY BE DIVIDED ON THIS PROPERTY.
AND THE ONLY TWO THAT ARE LARGE ENOUGH AND HAVE TWO ROADS OF FRONTAGE ARE THE ONES THAT I'VE HIGHLIGHTED ON THE BOTTOM LEFT HERE.
THOSE FOUR BLUE BOXES ARE CONTAINED TWO LOTS.
SO THOSE LOTS ARE 178 FEET DEEP.
AND IF THEY WERE DIVIDED IN TWO, THEY WOULD BE 89 FEET WIDE AND 100 FEET DEEP OR KIND OF THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
BUT THOSE SQUARE LOTS, THAT'S THE ONLY LOTS IN FOREST HILLS THAT COULD BE DIVIDED IN THIS WAY.
AND THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO COME AND APPLY FOR A VARIANCE IN THE SAME WAY.
THE SPECIAL CONDITION THAT STAFF FOUND WAS THE CREATION OF HIGHLAND DUNES WAY USING LOT FOUR.
THAT WAS A SCENARIO THAT WAS OUT OF THE HANDS OF THE PROPERTY OWNER.
THAT HAPPENED IN 2007, APPROVED BY CITY STAFF AT THAT TIME.
THAT CHANGES THE DYNAMIC OF THE LOT.
THAT IS A SPECIAL CONDITION THAT EXISTS ON THE PROPERTY, AND THAT'S WHAT STAFF HAS FOUND THROUGH THEIR ANALYSIS.
[02:05:01]
AND THEN TO SPEAK ON THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND THE TRAFFIC STUDY, OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE STATES THAT ONLY TRIPS THAT GENERATE MORE THAN 400 TRIPS PER DAY REQUIRE A TRAFFIC STUDY.I THINK THOSE WERE THE FOUR THINGS THAT I MEANT TO MENTION.
YEAH, MY QUESTION IS MAINLY DIRECTED, THE LAST SPEAKER HAD SOME LEGAL SPEAK IN THERE THAT I WAS KIND OF.
EVERY UNIT IS TO ME BUT YOU DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING THAT CHANGES YOUR OPINION NO I DO NOT OKAY I DIDN'T MEAN TO PREEMPT ANYBODY'S FUTURE SPEAKING IF THEY SAID SOMETHING ELSE BUT YEAH SORRY I THOUGHT THAT WAS THE END OF TODAY BUT IF SOMEBODY ELSE DOES COME OUT AND SPEAK AFTERWARDS IF YOU DO HEAR SOMETHING THAT MAY YEAH OKAY THANK YOU YES YES SO I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S TIME I KNOW EVERYBODY'S A LITTLE TIRED WE'RE DOWN TO THE LAST FOUR UH I APPRECIATE IT AND I'M TRYING TO BE VERY CONSIDER IT OF EVERYBODY'S OPINIONS.
SO I RESPECT EVERYBODY'S TIME.
I'M TRYING TO GIVE YOU GUYS AS MUCH TIME TO SPEAK AS POSSIBLE.
GOOD EVENING, WARD-BEMMERS, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY.
MY NAME IS KIM WOLFORD, AND I LIVE AT 1315 BROOM STREET.
250 YEARS AGO, WE FOUGHT A WAR FOR THE RIGHT OF SELF-DETERMINATION AND THE RIGHT TO SELF-GOVERN.
FOR THE CENTURIES FOLLOWING, A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE MADE THE ULTIMATE SACRIFICE SO THAT WE MAY RETAIN THAT RIGHT TO SELF-GOVERN.
WITH THAT RIGHT COMES THE RESPONSIBILITY TO FOLLOW OUR LAWS.
THIS BOARD IS CHARGED WITH FOLLOWING OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND NO OTHER CONSIDERATIONS ARE TO BE ALLOWED.
THIS IS MANDATED BY OUR CITY CHARTER SECTION 90403, MEANING YOU CAN ONLY CONSIDER THE VARIANCE BEFORE YOU AND THE LDC UPON WHICH THE APPLICANT IS RELYING.
I AM NOT GOING TO READ YOU SECTION 1 OR 305 BECAUSE I'M BETTING A FEW OF YOU PROBABLY HAVE IT MEMORIZED AT THIS POINT.
I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT IN THIS APPLICATION, MR. CORBETT, AND AS HE SPOKE EARLIER, CORBETT SAYS UNDER SPECIAL CONDITIONS HE RECEIVED VERBAL AND EMAIL CONFIRMATION OF APPROVAL.
I AM TAKING AN EDUCATED GUESS HERE THAT THIS WAS HIS PRE-APPROVAL, PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE, I'M GUESSING.
SO I'M GOING TO REFER THE BOARD TO SECTION 1101-02 FOR PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE.
IT IS THE CITY'S INTENT THAT ALL REQUIREMENTS BE IDENTIFIED DURING THE PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE.
HOWEVER, NO PERSON MAY RELY UPON ANY COMMENT CONCERNING A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OR ANY EXPRESSION OF ANY NATURE ABOUT THE PROPOSAL MADE BY A PARTICIPANT AT THE PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE AS A REPRESENTATION OR IMPLICATION THAT THE PROPOSAL WILL BE ULTIMATELY APPROVED OR REJECTED IN ANY FORM.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE THE BOARD TO CONSIDER THE LDC CHAPTER 10700 SUBSECTION B, THE GLOSSARY TERMS THAT DEFINE GROSS SITE AREA TO MEAN THE TOTAL AREA OF A LOT PARCEL, LESS ANY PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY.
I BELIEVE THE STAFF REPORT CAUSES CONFUSION BY STATING IN ONE PORTION OF CRITERIA 3 THAT A RIGHT-OF-WAY IS TO BE CONSIDERED.
SECTION 4.0101J OF THE LDC DENSITY AND HOUSING TYPES STATE IN THE CHART THAT AN R1 SHALL BE FOUR UNITS PER ACRE, MEANING A QUARTER ACRE.
IF THIS LOT IS SUBDIVIDED, IT WOULD BE BY STAFF ADMISSION ONLY 2.29 PER UNIT.
THIS IS IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH OUR LDC.
THE AVERAGE LOT SIZE IN THE FOREST HILLS SECTION OF THE CITY IS 0.62, ALMOST TRIPLE THE SIZE TO WHICH THESE LOTS WOULD BE REDUCED.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
ROBIN, NOEL, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR YOU TWO GETTING SPLIT UP.
GREW UP HERE, MOVED AWAY FOR ABOUT 20 YEARS OR SO, AND CAME BACK HOME.
I KNOW A LOT OF NEW PEOPLE, A LOT OF SAME PEOPLE.
SOME PEOPLE LOVE IT, SOME PEOPLE HATE IT.
I THINK THAT THAT'S PART OF WHAT MAKES FERNANDINA WHAT IT IS FROM THE TIME THAT I, YOU KNOW, WHEN I WAS GROWING UP HERE.
[02:10:02]
YOU KNOW, YOU COULD BE ON EITHER SIDE OF IT, BUT IT'S STILL A COMMUNITY.AND SO KIND OF I HAD NO IDEA THAT EVEN THIS WAS AN ISSUE.
I GRADUATED WITH BRETT CORBETT, THE YOUNGEST BROTHER, KNEW HIS PARENTS.
I DIDN'T REALIZE THIS WAS EVEN AN ISSUE BECAUSE I'VE BEEN SO BUSY DOING STUFF ON OUR HOUSE THAT WE BOUGHT DOWN THE STREET.
I KNEW THAT THEY BOUGHT THE LOT AND ALL OF THAT.
SO I'M NOT REALLY PREPARED AS FAR AS ALL OF THE LEGALS AND FACTS.
BUT WHAT I DO KNOW IS THAT YOU GUYS DO HAVE GUIDELINES.
YOU HAVE ALL THE RULES THAT YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW.
AND YOU HAVE PAID PEOPLE AND VOLUNTEERS AND EXPERTS.
AND I KIND OF THINK YOU DON'T REALLY NEED US TO TELL YOU WHAT THOSE ARE.
BUT EXPLANATIONS AND BRINGING UP THINGS THAT MAYBE YOU WOULDN'T, I DON'T KNOW, THINK OF.
BUT I FEEL LIKE STUFF THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP, YOU COULD ARGUE EITHER SIDE BASED ON HOW IT AFFECTS YOU.
SO, I DON'T LOVE PEOPLE BEING UP ON THE SECOND FLOOR, LOOKING DOWN INTO MY YARD WHEN I'M LAYING OUT OR WHATEVER.
NO, I DON'T DO THAT HERE, BUT A LONG TIME AGO.
AND I'M NOT NOTHING AT ALL ABOUT ANYONE.
I USED TO TEACH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, AND THIS IS HARD, TALKING IN FRONT OF A BUNCH OF ADULTS THAT HAVE REALLY HARD OPINIONS ABOUT SOMETHING THAT MAYBE MY NEIGHBORS AREN'T GOING TO LIKE ME AFTER THIS.
BUT I JUST, I THINK, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS THE DRIVEWAY, LIKE THEY SAID, THERE'S DEFINITELY, THERE'S RULES, THERE'S CODES, THINGS HAVE TO, DRAINAGE, ALL OF THAT HAS TO PLAY IN.
YOU DON'T JUST COME IN AND JUST LIKE DESTROY EVERYTHING.
IF THAT WAS THE CASE, THEY WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO BUILD IT.
SO MY THOUGHT IS, YOU KNOW, THERE'S PARKING RIGHT ACROSS FROM WHERE THAT DRIVEWAY.
IS, WHICH I REALLY ONLY EVER SEE THAT ONE CAR.
WELL, THERE'S A FEW PARKING SPOTS.
I'M JUST SAYING THERE'S A FEW SPOTS AND THERE'S A CAR THAT'S THERE.
AND WE ALL HAVE TO BE CAREFUL.
YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY AS A CITIZEN TO JUST KIND OF PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT'S GOING ON.
SO IF THE VARIANCE, IF LEGAL, IF ALL OF THESE THINGS CAN BE APPROVED BECAUSE IT'S WRITTEN.
IT'S SO LENGTHY FOR YOU ALL TO DETERMINE THAT IT'S OKAY FOR IT TO BE.
THEN WHETHER I AGREE OR DISAGREE OR DON'T OR I LOVE THEM AND THINK THAT THEY'RE DOING THE BEST THING FOR THEIR FAMILY AND THE COMMUNITY, WHICH I DO, BUT THAT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER FOR THIS.
I JUST THINK IF IT CAN BE APPROVED, THEN IT SHOULD BE.
THAT'S PART OF WHAT THIS COMMUNITY AND THIS TOWN AND THIS ISLAND IS.
IT'S ABOUT ALLOWING ALL THE CHANGES THAT MAKE US KIND OF BE FORCED TO LIVE TOGETHER.
WHICH PROBABLY DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE OR MAYBE.
IT DOESN'T EVEN HELP, BUT I JUST WANTED TO COME AND SUPPORT THEM.
IF THERE'S ANYTHING IN ALL OF THAT LEGALITY THAT IT CAN BE APPROVED, I THINK THAT THAT'S MY OPINION, WHICH I KNOW DOESN'T GO FAR.
ON THE NON-CITY RESIDENTS, DO THEY COUNT FOR HAVING TESTIMONY? SINCE THEY'RE NOT IN THE CITY.
I CAN SEE PETE STEVENS WOULD LOVE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, BUT GIVE ME A SECOND.
THE WAY THE CODE IS WRITTEN IS AFFECTED PARTIES, WHICH IS VERY BROAD.
TECHNICALLY, I THINK AFFECTED PARTIES WOULD BE CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH, BUT I WASN'T PREPARED TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
I MEAN, I WOULD ALLOW THEM TO GIVE TESTIMONY BECAUSE IT'S.
IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING, SO THEY CAN GET UP AND SPEAK.
THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING TO GO WITH IT.
YEAH, THEY CAN ABSOLUTELY GET UP AND SPEAK.
AND I'M GOING TO BE READING HERE FOR A SECOND WHILE THEY SPEAK.
ALL RIGHT, I'LL CALL LYNN PANNONE.
PANNONE. MAN, I'M JUST 0 FOR 100 TONIGHT.
LYNN PANNONE, 9 MARSH HAWK ROAD.
I'M HERE SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF AMELIA TREE CONSERVANCY.
A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH.
I'M READING DIRECTLY FROM THE APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE FORM, THE STAFF ANALYSIS.
THE INSTRUCTIONS SAY, FOR AN APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE TO BE APPROVED OR APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS SHALL MAKE A POSITIVE FINDING REGARDING EACH, EACH OF THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS.
ALL QUESTIONS MUST BE ANSWERED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE IN ORDER FOR STAFF TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE.
I'M REFERRING SPECIFICALLY TO CRITERIA SIX, WHICH IS PUBLIC INTEREST.
CRITERIA SIX STATES, GRANTING THE VARIANCE IS COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING PROPERTIES WILL NOT
[02:15:02]
CAUSE INJURY TO THE AREA INVOLVED OR OTHERWISE BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE, OR ENVIRONMENT.IT CLEARLY WILL BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE ENVIRONMENT.
TREES WILL BE DESTROYED IN ORDER TO CUT TWO DRIVEWAYS AS INDICATED IN YOU ONE OF THE DRAWINGS IN THE APPLICATION.
REMAINING TREES ON THE PROPERTY WILL BE THREATENED BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF FILL DIRT THAT WILL HAVE TO BE BROUGHT IN TO LEVEL THE LAND OUT FOR CONSTRUCTION.
WE TALKED ABOUT HOW MUCH LOWER THAT LAND IS.
THE LIVE OAK AT 413 STANLEY IS OF HERITAGE TREE SIZE, MEANING IT'S HUNDREDS OF YEARS OLD AND IRREPLACEABLE.
IT WILL LIKELY HAVE TO HAVE LIMBS REMOVED AND ITS ROOTS COULD BE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION.
BECAUSE THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT DROP-OFF FROM THE STREET, THE STREET BEING HIGHLAND DUNES WAY, TO THE CENTER OF THE PROPERTY, WHERE WILL THE STORMWATER GO ONCE THE LAND IS FILLED IN? IT'S A HAZARDOUS THREAT TO THE TWO EXISTING ADJACENT HOMES.
THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS KNOWN FOR ITS PLENTIFUL TREE CANOPY.
MANY OF THE CITY'S DESIGNATED HERITAGE TREES ARE NEARBY.
AND NUMEROUS OTHER TREES THAT QUALIFY FOR HERITAGE STATUS ARE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
CURRENTLY, THE SHORT STRETCH OF HIGHLAND DUNES WAY ADJACENT TO THIS PARCEL HAS OVERHANGING CANOPY FROM THE TREES ON THIS PROPERTY THAT WOULD BE DESTROYED.
FROM DRAWINGS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT, IT APPEARS BOTH HOUSES WILL FACE HIGHLAND DUNES WAY AS THE DRAWINGS SHOW A 25-FOOT SETBACK ON HIGHLAND DUNES AND A 15-FOOT SETBACK ON STANLEY.
CONSEQUENTLY, THE NEW STRUCTURE THE NEW CONSTRUCTION WILL NOT BE COMPATIBLE TO SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ON STANLEY.
THOSE HAVE GENEROUS SETBACKS OF 40 FEET.
I ASK THAT YOU NOT GRANT THIS VARIANCE BECAUSE IT DOES NOT MEET ALL OF THE REQUIRED CRITERIA AND IT WILL SET A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT OF TEARING DOWN OLD HOMES TO BUILD TWO HOUSES ON THE SAME LOT, WHICH WILL ULTIMATELY RESULT IN SIGNIFICANT TREE LOSS FOR FERNANDINA.
AND MR. CHAIRMAN, WHILE MS. PANNONE WAS SPEAKING, UNDER SECTION 1.0700 OF OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AN AFFECTED PARTY FOR PURPOSES OF A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING IS ANY PROPERTY OWNER, RESIDENT, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
SO MS. PANNONE'S COMMENT WOULD BE JUST PUBLIC COMMENT AND NOT TESTIMONY.
I THOUGHT I RECOGNIZED THAT FROM BEFORE.
AND WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO USE THE LADIES' ROOM.
THE NON-AFFECTED PARTIES ARE TESTIFYING.
LYNN 1377 PLANTATION POINT DRIVE.
LIKE LYNN, I AM SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF CONSERVE NASSAU, WHICH OVER 50% OF OUR MEMBERSHIP LIVES WITHIN THE CITY.
I'M GOING TO CUT THIS SHORT, CUT IT DOWN TO ONE POINT, AND THAT RELATES TO CRITERION SIX, AND LYNN JUST FINISHED READING THAT.
WHICH INCLUDES PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE, AND THE ENVIRONMENT.
YET WE'VE BEEN TOLD THAT THERE IS NOTHING RELATED TO THE ENVIRONMENT OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT CAN BE DEALT WITH AT THIS POINT.
YOU NEED TO DEAL WITH THESE THINGS NOW.
OTHERWISE, IT'S NOT JUST A PROBLEM FOR THE CITY.
IT'S A PROBLEM FOR MR. CORBETT, BECAUSE IF HE FINDS THERE ARE GOING TO BE SERIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES, TREE ISSUE.
FILL ISSUES, FLOODING ISSUES IN THE CITY AND IN THE COUNTY ON THE ISLAND.
WE HAVE CREATED TONS OF FLOODING IN NEIGHBORING YARDS AND NEIGHBORING SUBDIVISIONS.
THERE'S LOTS OF EVIDENCE OF THAT AND WE NEED TO KNOW THESE THINGS BEFORE WE APPROVE THEM, NOT AFTERWARD.
IT'S A DISSERVICE TO THE APPLICANT TO TO APPROVE IT FIRST AND THEN GET INTO THAT INFORMATION.
SO THERE ARE LOTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES HERE THAT NEED TO BE INVESTIGATED AND WRITTEN ABOUT AND THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE IN CRITERION SIX, THANK YOU.
THAT IS ALL THE PUBLIC SPEAKING FORM REQUESTS THAT I HAVE.
IS THERE ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WANTS TO SPEAK THAT WASN'T SWORN IN? I'LL HAVE TO HAVE YOU SWORN IN.
[02:20:01]
DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK? ALL RIGHT HEARING NONE I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC SECTION OF THAT.IS THERE ANY REBUTTAL FROM PAIGE, FROM THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
THERE ARE, I THINK, A FEW COMMENTS THAT MR. CORBETT HAS TO CLARIFY THE RECORD, MAYBE ON FACTUAL STATEMENTS THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO CORRECT IN TERMS OF HIS INTENT.
AND HIS KNOWLEDGE OF HAPPENINGS.
AND THEN AFTER HE SPEAKS, I WILL JUST BRIEFLY GIVE A FEW LEGAL COMMENTS.
SO I DIDN'T COME UP HERE WITH ANY NOTES.
NOTES EARLIER AND I GET A LITTLE NERVOUS SPEAKING IN FRONT OF PEOPLE SO I ADMITTED A FEW THINGS THAT MAYBE I SHOULD HAVE SAID THAT MIGHT HAVE ALLAYED SOME OF THEIR CONCERNS FIRST OF ALL REGARDS TO THE HOMES NOTHING HAS BEEN DESIGNED LIKE I CAN'T DESIGN A HOUSE IF I DON'T KNOW THE BOUNDARIES OF THE LOT OKAY SO NOTHING HAS BEEN DESIGNED THE SETBACKS THAT ARE SHOWN I'M GLAD THAT THAT'S UP.
THE SETBACKS THAT ARE THERE, THAT WAS DONE BY MY SURVEYOR.
AND THEY DID THAT JUST BECAUSE THEY DID THE SURVEY AND THEY JUST PUT WHERE THE SETBACKS WOULD BE.
AND I WILL SAY THAT ORIGINALLY I DID INTEND TO FACE BOTH HOMES TO HIGHLAND DUNES WAY.
THE REASON FOR THAT WAS I THOUGHT IT WOULD LOOK AESTHETICALLY BETTER RATHER THAN HAVING WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE.
THE RANCH STYLE HOME THAT WAS THERE BEFORE KIND OF WAS ON A SLAB ON ONE END, BUT IT WAS ON A CROSS.
CRAWL SPACE ON THE OTHER END BECAUSE OF THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE LAND AND I THOUGHT IT WOULD JUST LOOK BETTER IF YOU JUST KIND OF LOOK DOWN THE HILL AT THE TWO HOMES BUT A LONG TIME AGO CITY ASKED ME NOT TO NOT TO FACE THEM BOTH TOWARDS HIGHLAND DUNES WAY ASKED ME TO FACE ONE TOWARDS STANLEY DRIVE AND ONE TOWARDS HIGHLAND DUNES WAY WHICH I AGREED TO DO A LONG TIME AGO SO ONLY ONE DRIVEWAY ON HIGHLAND DUNES WAY EVEN IF I'M PERMITTED MORE THAN THAT AND THEN THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY OR SOMEWHERE AROUND THERE FOR THE ONE THAT WOULD FACE ON STANLEY DRIVE THE HOMES ARE GOING TO BE SMALL IN NATURE AND THE THE THE YOU KNOW EVERYBODY'S TALKING ABOUT THIS DAMAGE TO TREES AND ALL THIS OTHER SORT OF THING WELL WHAT WAS THERE PREVIOUSLY DIDN'T KILL THE TREES, RIGHT? IT WAS A 1900 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE, RANCH STYLE HOME, WITH APPROXIMATELY 200 SQUARE FOOT CARPORT, RIGHT? THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHERE...
THE NEXT HOUSE WILL GO, THE ONE THAT FACES STANLEY.
THEN THERE WAS A POLE BARN IN THE BACK.
I DON'T KNOW THE DIMENSIONS OF IT.
THAT WAS ALSO IMPERVIOUS AREA AND IT WAS THERE AND THE TREES MANAGED TO LIVE JUST FINE.
SO I DON'T ANTICIPATE THAT BEING A PROBLEM.
I AM AN ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER.
I HAVEN'T WORKED AS ONE IN A VERY LONG TIME, BUT I DO HAVE A DEGREE IN THAT.
I KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT ABOUT DRAINAGE AND THAT SORT OF THING.
I DID STUDY IT IN COLLEGE AND HAVE A BACHELOR'S OF SCIENCE.
BUT THE TWO HOMES THAT WILL BE THERE WILL BE SMALLER THAN THE TWO STRUCTURES THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY THERE.
SECONDLY, REGARDS TO THE DRIVEWAY, I'LL THANK PENNY.
I THINK SHE'S IN THE ROOM RIGHT NOW.
WHEN I MET WITH HER PREVIOUSLY, SHE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE SAFETY OF PULLING OUT ONTO HIGHLAND DUNES WAY.
BECAUSE IT IS GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT OF A STEEP DRIVEWAY.
AS YOU PULL UP OUT OF THE WESTERLY LOT THAT'S COMING UP ONTO HIGHLAND DUNES WAY, IT IS GOING TO BE A LITTLE STEEP.
PENNY HAD A GREAT IDEA, WHICH I'M 100% IN FAVOR OF, AND I CAN COMMIT TO GOING ALONG WITH, WHICH IS THE HOUSE ITSELF IN MY MIND AND THE DESIGN THAT I HAVE IN MY HEAD IS IT'LL BE A RANCH STYLE.
IT'LL LOOK LIKE A RANCH STYLE HOME FROM HIGHLAND DUNES WAY.
IT'LL BE DOWN THE HILL A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE THAT'S THE TOPOGRAPHY THAT I CAN'T CHANGE OR WON'T CHANGE.
AND THEN I WAS GOING TO KIND OF SNUG IT UP A LITTLE BIT TO THE WEST SIDE OF THE LOT.
I WAS GOING TO RUN THE DRIVEWAY DOWN THE EAST SIDE OF THE LOT AND THEN TURN 90 DEGREES INTO THE SIDE FACING GARAGE THAT WILL BE UNDER THE HOUSE.
SO SOME PEOPLE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT STREET PARKING.
I DON'T I DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERN FOR STREET PARKING.
WE HAVE ONE CHILD, AND HE'S OUT OF THE HOME NOW, RIGHT? SO I WILL HAVE A THREE-CAR GARAGE UNDERNEATH THE HOUSE.
THE DRIVEWAY WILL BE WIDE ENOUGH.
[02:25:02]
SO IT'LL BE SOMEWHAT PERVIOUS.AND THEN THERE'LL BE ROOM FOR MORE PARKING OUTSIDE OF THE GARAGE.
AND THEN, OF COURSE, THE DRIVEWAY ITSELF THAT GOES DOWN THE HILL.
SO WHAT PENNY SUGGESTED, AND WHICH I LOVE THE IDEA OF, IS TO CREATE A LITTLE SPUR, IF YOU WILL, SO THAT WHENEVER YOU PULL DOWN AND YOU PULL INTO THE DRIVEWAY, WHEN YOU GO TO PULL OUT YOU CAN BACK INTO THAT SPUR AND THEN DRIVE FORWARD UP THE DRIVEWAY AND ONTO HIGHLAND DUNES WAY YOU KNOW WE ALL HAVE BACKUP CAMERAS ON OUR CARS WE ALL HAVE ALARMS ABOUT ALL THAT SORT OF THING WE'LL WE'RE NOTIFIED IF THERE'S A KID ON A BICYCLE OR WHATEVER ELSE BUT NO MATTER WHAT IT'S DEFINITELY BETTER TO PULL OUT FORWARD THAN BACKWARD SO I MEAN I'M GONNA GO ALONG WITH THAT I THINK WAS A GREAT SUGGESTION REGARDS TO SOME OF MY NEW MINUTE NEIGHBOR MATT'S CONCERNS I MEAN YOU KNOW WE THE WHAT IF THING WAS BROUGHT UP LIKE WHAT IF THIS HAPPENS OR WHAT IF THAT HAPPENS THE REALITY IS IS AND I'M YOU KNOW GOSH THE TIMING IS JUST TERRIBLE FOR Y'ALL I GET IT AND YOU MOVED IN ON MEMORIAL DAY AND YOU KNOW WHILE YOU KNOW WHEN WE WHEN WE WE MET YESTERDAY YOU SAID YOU WERE A LITTLE BIT BLINDSIDED BY ALL OF THIS I CAN ABSOLUTELY YOU KNOW UNDERSTAND THAT I KNOW YOU HAVE A LOT GOING ON YOU'RE BUYING A HOUSE YOU'RE MOVING ALL THAT SORT OF THING BUT THERE WAS THE WHOLE TIME THERE WAS A SIGN IN MY YARD THAT WAS YOU KNOW LETTING PEOPLE KNOW ABOUT THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT WAS UPCOMING AND THERE WAS A PHONE NUMBER ON THERE AND THERE WAS A WEBSITE AND YOU COULD HAVE LOOKED AT THAT UP AND WHETHER YOU DID OR DIDN'T I I UNDERSTAND.
BUT BECAUSE YOU'VE ONLY BEEN HERE 10 DAYS YOU SHOULD KNOW THE OTHER WHAT-IFS YOU KNOW AND THIS ISN'T A THREAT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT NOTHING LIKE THAT BUT WHAT COULD HAPPEN THERE WOULD BE A HOME THAT WAS BUILT WITH A 40-FOOT SETBACK THAT'S 35 FEET TALL FROM THE FOUR CORNER AVERAGE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG MIA MCKENNA ANYBODY YOU TAKE THE FOUR CORNER AVERAGE YOU CAN GO UP 35 FEET IN OUR CITY OKAY.
SUBJECT TO SOME SIDE SETBACKS AND THAT SORT OF THING.
SO YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, NOW THERE'S GOING TO BE SOMEONE LOOKING DOWN INTO YOUR BACKYARD.
WELL, THE REALITY IS, IS THERE'S GOING TO BE A HOUSE THERE AND IT'S GOING TO LOOK DOWN INTO YOUR BACKYARD, WHETHER IT'S TWO SMALL HOUSES LIKE I INTEND TO BUILD OR WHETHER IT'S ONE LARGE HOUSE THAT SOMEBODY ELSE BUILDS IF I SELL THE LOT.
ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, THERE'S GOING TO BE THAT.
I'VE ALREADY TOLD YOU THAT I PLAN ON BUILDING A SIX-FOOT PRIVACY FENCE, WHICH WILL GIVE US SOME YOU KNOW PRIVACY I HAVE A FRIEND THAT OWNS A MR. CHAIRMAN I APPRECIATE I APPRECIATE WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE, BUT YOUR PRESENTATION IS FOR THE BOARD.
OKAY, WELL, I MEAN, HIS CONCERN ABOUT PRIVACY, YOU KNOW, WE CAN PLANT SOME BAMBOO.
WE CAN DO THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
YOU KNOW, SO I GUESS I JUST WANTED TO TALK REALLY ABOUT THE DRIVEWAY DESIGN AND HOW I INTEND TO MAKE THAT AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE, RIGHT? ARE THERE GOING TO BE SOME TREES REMOVED FROM MY DRIVEWAY? YES.
WE HAVE A MITIGATION PROCESS FOR THAT.
I'M NOT GOING TO HARM ANY OF THE MAJOR TREES.
THERE'S A MAGNIFICENT MAGNOLIA THAT'S THERE ON THE PROPERTY.
I CAN ASSURE YOU A MILLION PERCENT THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE HARMED.
THERE ARE MULTIPLE LIVE OAKS THAT ARE ON THE PROPERTY.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO TOUCH THEM.
THAT'S WHY I'M THERE, RIGHT? THAT'S WHAT WE LOVE ABOUT THE PLACE.
BUT THAT'S ALL ANOTHER HURDLE FOR ANOTHER DAY.
BUT I THINK THOSE WERE ALL THE THINGS THAT I WANTED TO SAY ABOUT THAT.
SO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR TIME.
AND BRIEFLY, I DON'T WANT TO BELABOR ANY POINTS BECAUSE I KNOW YOUR STAFF ACTUALLY HAD RESPONDED TO SOME OF THE COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC AND WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF THEIR STATEMENTS, IN SUPPORT OF MEETING THE CRITERIA AND THEIR FINDINGS OF FACT THAT THEY MADE IN THE STAFF REPORT AND WHAT THEY ARE PRESENTING HERE TONIGHT IN TERMS OF...
IN TERMS OF PROFESSIONAL EXPERTISE AND EVIDENCE.
I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE TWO THINGS.
IT SEEMS AS THOUGH THE MAIN CRITERIA THAT PEOPLE SEEM TO THINK OR TAKE ISSUE WITH WOULD BE THE FIRST AND THE SIXTH CRITERIA.
SO I DO WANT TO ADDRESS JUST GENERALLY, AND ACTUALLY MIA HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD JUST A MOMENT AGO.
SO AGAIN, JUST WANT TO REITERATE.
BUT THE SPECIAL CONDITION REALLY IN THIS SITUATION IS THE CREATION OF THE ROAD, THE HIGHLAND DUNES ROAD, AND THEN THE ADJACENT SUBDIVISION OF HIGHLAND DUNES BEING DEVELOPED VERY CLOSE IN PROXIMITY TO FOREST HILLS, ABUTTING SOME
[02:30:01]
OF THE LOTS ON FOREST HILLS.SO BASICALLY, WHEN YOU HAD THE SITUATION WHERE LOT 4 OF FOREST HILLS BECAME HIGHLANDS DUNE WAY, YOU BASICALLY CREATED A SITUATION WHERE...
AND THEN THE PLATTING OF HIGHLAND DUNES ITSELF PROVIDED FOR 75 BY 100 FEET LOTS.
YOU'VE ACTUALLY CREATED A MIXTURE OF DENSITIES BETWEEN THE TWO UNITS.
THE FOREST HILLS SUBDIVISION ARE LARGER LOTS ON LARGER SIZE LOTS.
THE FOREST DUNES, WHILE THEY ARE VERY NICE HOMES AND THEY ARE WORTH A LOT OF MONEY AND VALUE, THEY ARE ON SMALLER LOTS.
YOU HAVE LOT FIVE IN THE PARTICULAR SITUATION WHERE IT IS ACTUALLY ADJACENT TO HIGHLAND DUNES.
IT'S ADJACENT TO A ROAD THAT LEADS INTO HIGHLAND DUNES.
AND THE SPLIT OF THE LOT INTO TWO SMALLER LOTS IS CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH BOTH THE GRADUAL TRANSITION FROM FOREST HILLS INTO HIGHLAND DUNES.
AND SO ACTUALLY THE SPECIAL CONDITION HAS BEEN MET.
THE PUBLIC COMMENT HAS ACTUALLY CONFIRMED AND SUPPORTED THAT THIS ROAD COMING IN SOMEWHAT CHANGED THE CONDITIONS AND PUT THIS ALL IN MOTION.
IT CERTAINLY PUT IN MOTION SMALLER LOTS THAT ARE ADJACENT TO FOREST HILLS.
AND I WOULD ARGUE, AND I THINK YOUR PLANNING STAFF AND OUR PLANNING EXPERT WOULD ARGUE, THAT THE LOT SPLIT TO TWO LOTS IS VERY MUCH COMPATIBLE WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES, BOTH FOREST HILLS AND WITH HIGHLAND DUNES.
I ALSO HEARD A LOT OF COMMENTS AND CONCERNS ABOUT TRAFFIC AND EMERGENCY ACCESS OF HIGHLAND DUNES.
AND AGAIN, THE INTERESTING PART OF LISTENING TO EVERYONE SPEAK IS THAT, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE HAVE THROWN AROUND WHETHER MR. CORBETT HAS CREATED A HARDSHIP ON HIMSELF BY WANTING TO SPLIT HIS LOT.
IT ALMOST SOUNDS TO ME LIKE THE DEVELOPER OF HIGHLAND DUNES PUT THE HOMEOWNERS IN A SELF-CREATED IMPOSITION BY NOT PROVIDING REALLY TWO TRUE ACCESS POINTS IN AND OUT OF THEIR PROPERTY.
AND SO IT'S ALMOST LIKE THEY'RE SAYING, WELL, BECAUSE WE ARE LIMITED AND WE ONLY HAVE ONE ACCESS IN AND OUT, HE SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO SPLIT HIS LOT AND ADD ONE MORE LOT TO THE MIX.
AND TO ME, I DON'T THINK THAT'S A FAIR STATEMENT.
IT SOUNDS LIKE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROAD, THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE HOUSES, HAVE TIED INTO THE CREATION OF THAT ISSUE OF ACCESS THAT THEY HAVE.
AND SO IN TERMS OF THE SPECIAL CONDITION, I THINK IT'S BEEN PROVEN THAT THAT HAS BEEN MET.
AND FOR SPECIAL CONDITION, OR I'M SORRY, FOR THE CRITERIA SIX, WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PUBLIC INTEREST, I THINK REALLY WHAT MOST OF THE PEOPLE ARE SAYING IS COMPATIBILITY, THAT THEY DON'T THINK IT'S COMPATIBLE.
COMPATIBLE WITH THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.
EITHER IT'S TOO SMALL FOR FOREST HILLS OR IT'S TOO DIFFERENT THAN THE HIGHLAND DUNES.
AND AGAIN, THIS LOT SPLIT IN TWO WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH ALL OF THE HOUSES WITHIN THE TWO SUBDIVISIONS FROM A PLANNING PERSPECTIVE AND A GRADUAL TRANSITION OF DENSITIES.
AND AGAIN, SOME OF THESE COMMENTS THAT THEY HAD, LIKE THE ACCESS AND STORMWATER, DRAINAGE, TREES, ALL OF THAT ARE THINGS THAT ARE NOT TO BE CONSIDERED DURING THE VARIANCE.
IT'S THE CRITERIA THAT'S BEFORE YOU.
AND SO, AGAIN, WE SUPPORT THE STAFF REPORT.
WE SUPPORT THE STAFF EVIDENCE THAT THEY'VE PRESENTED, AND WE'VE PROVIDED EVIDENCE AS WELL.
I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY OF THE PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WOULD RISE TO THE LEVEL OF ANY TESTIMONY THAT HAS.
REFUTED ANY OF THE CRITERIA AND I LEAVE IT WITH THAT AND WE STAND BY FOR QUESTIONS ALL RIGHT THANK YOU ANY QUESTIONS ALL RIGHT WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC SECTION UM MR CHAIRMAN DID DID YOU WANT TO GIVE STAFF THE REBUTTAL OR HAVE YOU DONE YOUR YOUR BUTT YOUR WHAT WAS UM THERE'S TWO OH HE WAS GONNA GET THERE I'M PRETTY GOOD THANK YOU OKAY THERE WAS JUST TWO OTHER THINGS FROM THOSE LAST UM PUBLIC COMMENT ITEMS. THE FOREST HILLS SUBDIVISION, IT WAS MENTIONED MANY TIMES THAT THERE'S A 40-FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK ON MANY OF THE LOTS.
IF YOU ZOOM IN ON THE PLOT OF FOREST HILLS, THERE'S A PROVISION THAT SAYS LOTS OVER 100 FEET IN DEPTH WILL HAVE A 40-FOOT SETBACK OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
THE SETBACK IS DETERMINED BY THE LOT DEPTH.
SO NOT ALL LOTS IN FOREST HILLS HAVE A 40-FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK.
AND THEN THE OTHER COMMENT I WANTED TO ADDRESS WAS GROSS DENSITY VERSUS NET DENSITY.
GROSS DENSITY ADDRESSES THE LAW ITSELF.
NET DENSITY, OF WHICH THE DENSITY CALCULATION IS WRONG, INCLUDES THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
[02:35:02]
AND THESE PROPOSED LAWS DO MEET THE DENSITY REQUIREMENT FOR R1.AND THAT WAS ALL I HAD, UNLESS THERE ARE MORE QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD.
SO WE WILL CLOSE ALL COMMENT, BOARD DISCUSSION.
HOW ARE WE THINKING? WE CAN STILL TALK THERE, RIGHT? YES.
FIRST THING I'D LIKE TO SAY IS I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT WHETHER YOU AGREE WITH THE COMBINED LOTS AND ALL THE DEFINITION, THE FACT THAT THE CITY BROUGHT THIS FOR A VARIANCE IS A VERY CREDITABLE THING BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T DO THIS BEFORE AND THERE WERE LAWSUITS.
IS OBVIOUSLY, IT GIVES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR EVERYBODY IN THE PUBLIC.
SO I JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE CITY FOR WHATEVER HAPPENED AND WHATEVER MR. CORBETT SAID, THIS WAS THE RIGHT APPROACH TO BRING IT TO US.
WITH THAT, YOU KNOW, I'LL WAIT FOR OTHER COMMENTS.
I HAVE SOME ISSUES THAT I'LL DISCUSS LATER.
DO YOU WANT A MOTION TO CONTINUE OR DO YOU WANT TO? YEAH, GENERALLY A MOTION TO OPEN.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION.
AT THIS TIME, I MOVE TO APPROVE BOA CASE NUMBER 26002, AND I MOVE THAT THE BOA MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS A FACT AND CONDITIONS AS PART OF THE RECORD.
THAT BOA CASE 26002 PRESENTED DOES ADEQUATELY DEMONSTRATE THE...
REQUEST IS COMPLIANT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO WARRANT APPROVAL AT THIS TIME.
AND THAT THE BOA CASE NUMBER 2026-002 DOES MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA FOR THE GRANTING OF VARIANCE.
NUMBER ONE, SPECIAL CONDITIONS DO EXIST THAT ARE PARTICULAR TO THE LAND.
NUMBER TWO, GRANTING THE VARIANCE WOULD.
CONFER A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE AND THAT THE APPLICANT AS THE LDC ALLOWS FOR THE PROPERTY AND APPLY FOR THE VARIANCE.
THREE, A LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE CODE WOULD DEPRIVE THE APPLICANT OF THE RIGHT TO A REASONABLE USE OF THEIR PROPERTY, A RIGHT COMMONLY ENJOYED BY OTHERS.
REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY IS LIMITED IN TERMS AND PRIVACY AND SAFETY.
FOUR, THE VARIANCE REQUESTED IS NOT. IS A MINIMUM VARIANCE NEEDED TO MAKE THE POSSIBLE REASONABLE USE OF THE LAND? FIVE, THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WOULD BE IN HARMONY WITH THE GENERAL INTENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. AND SIX, THE VARIANCE WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. SO WE HAVE A MOTION? SECOND. WE HAVE A SECOND. YES, I'M NOT SURE THAT IN MY PERSONAL OPINION THAT IT MEETS ALL THE REQUIREMENTS. I'M A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED ABOUT PUBLIC INTEREST. AND PUBLIC INTEREST IS, YOU KNOW, THE WAY 103.05 DEFINES IT, IT'S REALLY SUBJECTIVE STUFF, BUT IT TALKS ABOUT OPEN SPACES, VISUAL CORRIDORS, NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER, AND VISUAL ATTRACTIVENESS. AND THOSE ARE QUESTIONS THAT THE PUBLIC HAS BROUGHT UP. BECAUSE IT'S SUBJECTIVE, YOU KNOW, I PERSONALLY DON'T THINK THIS IS A VERY GOOD LDC, AND I THINK MANY HAVE AGREED, BUT THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS. SO, YOU KNOW, I WOULD NOT SUPPORT THIS. WE HAVE A MOTION. WE HAVE A SECOND. WE CAN CALL THE VOTE.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE I CALL THE VOTE? YEAH, I THINK WHAT I'D LIKE TO SAY ABOUT IT IS THE CONCERNS OF THE PEOPLE HERE ARE MOSTLY CONCERNS THAT NEED TO BE HANDLED ONCE AGAIN. THIS ISSUE IS CLOSED AND THEY HAVE TO GO BEFORE THE CITY ALL WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS WHETHER THIS LOT SHOULD BE DIVIDED OR NOT AND IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IT IS IT IS ONE LOT AND KIND OF DIFFERS FROM THE INTERPRETATION OF DIVIDING LOTS SO YOU KNOW I WOULD I WOULD APPROVE TERESA, BEFORE WE GO TO CALL THE VOTE, I'D LIKE YOU TO STATE FOR THE RECORD WHAT THE VOTE MEANS, WHAT THE COUNTS ARE, AND WHAT IT MEANS TO APPROVE AND WHAT IT MEANS TO DENY. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
YES, IN ORDER TO APPROVE THIS VARIANCE TONIGHT, IT WILL REQUIRE THE AFFIRMATIVE VOTE.
VOTE OF FOUR MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD. IF FOUR MEMBERS DO NOT VOTE FOR APPROVAL, THEN THE MOTION WOULD FAIL. A MOTION TO DENY THE APPLICATION WOULD ONLY TAKE, IF YOU WERE GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE APPLICATION, IT WOULD TAKE THREE VOTES. BUT IF FOUR VOTES ARE NOT GIVEN, THEN IT FAILS. MOTION FAILS.
[02:40:04]
GOING TO LET YOU GUYS KNOW? YEAH, SINCE YOU'VE ALREADY MADE YOUR MOTION, YOU'RE SECOND, WE'RE GOOD. YES. MCKENNA, WILL YOU CALL THE VOTE? MEMBER BARRY HERTZLIT? YES. MEMBER JOHNNY MILLER? YES. MEMBER FRED JOHNSON? YES. VICE CHAIR LYNN KRIEGER? NO. CHAIR STEVEN PAPKE? I'M GOING TO GO WITH YES. THAT WILL VOTE TO APPROVE. THE VARIANCE THAT IS REQUESTED ON THE CONDITIONS THAT JOHNNY HAS STATED IN THE MOTION. ALL RIGHT, THAT CLOSES THE CONTENT OF THIS MEETING. IS THERE ANYTHING IN THE BOARD FROM THE OLD BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE WE NEED TO COVER? ANY NEW BUSINESS? DO WE HAVE A MEETING DATE FOR THE NEXT MEETING? DO WE HAVE ONE SCHEDULED YET? I'LL BE REACHING OUT TO THE BOARD TO SCHEDULE THAT, AND THEN WE'LL MAKE THE PUBLIC NOTICES AS NEEDED. WE DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER VARIANCES IN THE QUEUE RIGHT NOW. SO THE JULY MEETING IS WHAT I'M HEARING. AT THIS TIME.AT THIS TIME. WE'LL BE IN TOUCH. WE'LL BE IN TOUCH.
THANKS FOR JOINING.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.