[Call meeting to order]
[00:00:09]
>>> MONDAY, MAY 5ST, 2025 ZONESZONES ADJUSTMENT BOARD.
START WITH THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
NEXT, WE'LL HAVE THE READING OF THE PUBLIC NOTICE STATEMENT.
>> THIS IS A HEARING HELD IN REQUIREMENTS WITH FLORIDA LAW.
THE PUBLIC WILL BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT AND OFFER COMMENT AT A DESIGNATED TIME DURING THE HEARING. ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC DESIRING TO SPEAK MAY DO SO BY FILLING OUT A SIGN- IN SHEET. THE PUBLIC SHALL SPEAK AT A TIME DURING THE MEETING ON EACH ITEM AND FOR A LENGTH OF TIME DESIGNATED BY THE CHAIRMAN WHICH SHALL BE THREE MINUTES.
SPEAKERS SHOULD'VE THEMSELVES, WHO THEY REPRESENT THEN STATE THEIR ADDRESS.
THEY MAY OFFER SWORN TESTIMONY. IF THEY DO NOT, THE FACT IT IS NOT SWORN MAY BE CONSIDERED BY THE AGENCY IN CONSIDERING THE WEIGHT OF THE TESTIMONY.
IF A PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE WITH RESPECT TO A MATTER, SUCH PERSONS WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ANY PHYSICAL OR DOCK MEN TEAR EVIDENCE PRESENTED AT THE HEARING SUCH AS DIAGRAMS, CHARTS, PHOTOGRAPHS, SHALL BE PROVIDED TO THE CLERK.
THE RECORD WILL THEN BE AVAILABLE FOR ANY BOARD, AGENCY, COMMITTEE, OR COUNTY IN REVIEW.
AGENCY MEMBERS ARE REMINDED AT THE BEGINNING OF EACH MEETING WHETHER THEY'VE HAD COMMUNICATION WITH THE APPLICANT OR SUBSTANCE OF THE ITEM OUTSIDE THE FORMAL HEARING. IF SUCH COMMUNICATION HAS OCCURRED, THE AGENCY MEMBER SHALL IDENTIFY THE PERSONS INVOLVED IN THE MATERIAL CONTENT OF THE COMMUNICATION. WE WILL BE RESPECTFUL OF ONE ANOTHER EVEN WHEN WE DISAGREE.
WE WILL DIRECT ALL COMMENTS TO THE ISSUE AND AVOID PERSONAL
I'M GOING TO OPEN THE FLOOR TO PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ANY ITEMS THAT ARE NOT ON TODAY'S AGENDA. IF WE HAVE ANY, THIS IS THE
[1. PVZVAR 2025-01 Demetriou Residence. Request for a Zoning Variance to Section III.B.1 of the Ponte Vedra Zoning District Regulations (PVZDR) to allow for a second Front Yard setback of 27 feet in lieu of the 40-foot requirement in R-1-B zoning to accommodate construction of a single-family home, located specifically at 348 Pablo Road.]
TIME TO COME FORWARD. SEEING NONE, I'M GOING TO CLOSE IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. FIRST ITEM WILL BE PVZVAR 2025-01 AS BRAD COMES UP, I'LL START ON MY RIGHT.IF YOU HAVE SPOKEN WITH ANYBODY.
>> I HAVE VISITED THE SITE. I DID SPEAK BRIEFLY THIS MORNING WITH BRAD WESTER. MORE ABOUT AM I STILL ON THE BOARD. AND HE HAD MENTIONED THIS ITEM.
>> I DID VISIT THE SITE. I SPOKE TO BRAD WESTER LATE LAST WEEK FOR ABOUT ONE MINUTE.
IT WAS A REALLY POOR TIMING OF A CALL. I APOLOGIZE VERY MUCH.
>> I HAVE NOT HAD ANY COMMUNICATION.
>> SAME HERE. NO COMMUNICATION.
>> I VISITED THE SITE AND SPOKE WITH BRAD WESTER THIS MORNING.
>> BRAD, YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
>> BRAD WESTER, 1 INDEPENDENT DRIVE SUITE 1200, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA. I'M HERE TO REPRESENT THE PROPERTY OWNER. DEMETRIOU.
IF THERE ARE QUESTION, WE CAN CALL THE OWNER UP.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, JOHN, FOR BEING HERE.
I KNOW YOUR TERM EXPIRED ON SUNDAY AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR CONTINUITY ON THIS BOARD. THIS IS A ZONING VARIANCE FOR RELIEF FOR SECTION 3B 1 FOR THE ZONING CODE TO ALLOW FOR A SECOND FRONT YARD SETBACK IN LIEU OF THE 40 FOOT REQUIREMNT TO ACCOMMODATE A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME.
I'LL GO OVER THERE. IT'S WEIRD TO HEAR A SECOND FRONT YARD SETBACK, BUT I'LL GO INTO THAT IN A SECOND. HERE'S THE PROPERTY.
348 PABLO. THE SECOND FRONT YARD IS ACTUALLY IN THIS CASE HAS BEEN THE SECONDARY REAR YARD. AS THE LOT WAS PLATTED BETWEEN PUBLIC RIGHTS.
IT'S A THROUGH LOT. THE REQUEST IS TO REDUCE THE SETBACK FROM 40 TO 27 FEET. TO ACCOMMODATE ONLY A PORTION OF THE NEW HOME AS ORIENTED. THE PREVIOUS HOME
[00:05:02]
RECENTLY DEMOLISHED HAD A SETBACK OF 13.8 FEET FROM THE SUBJECT LOT LINE AND PROPERTY WAS PLATTED IN 1966. IT'S A VERY UNUSUAL SHAPE.TRIANGUILAR SHAPE. SO BASED ON THE EXTRAORDINARY SHALLOW AND NARROWNESS OF THE CONDITIONS, WE'RE ASKING FOR THIS RELIEF IN THE FRONT YARD IN THIS PLAT IS 25 FEET.
HERE'S A IMAGE OF THE PLAT AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HIGHLIGHTED THERE. AND YOU CAN SEE THE VARIOUS PLAT DEMARCATIONS IN THERE THAT SET DIFFERENT VRLS.
IT IS VARYING ON THE CONDITIONS. THIS ONE BEING A THROUGH LOT, YOU CAN SEE FRANKLIN HERE. THAT'S FRANKLIN AVENUE THEN PAP LOW. HERE'S THE ZONING MAP.
R1B. THAT'S VERY INDICATIVE OF THE PLAT FROM 1966. THIS GREENISH AREA WAS ALL PLATTED IN 1966. AND THIS PARK HERE WAS PLATTED PRIOR TO THAT. HERE'S A PICTURE OF THE PROPERTY WITH THE PREVIOUS HOME ON IT.
PREVIOUS HOME WAS BUILT IN 1966. THAT'S AN IMAGE OF THE HOME, BASICALLY 13.8 FEET OF THE REAR PROPERTY LINE OR THE SECOND FRONT YARD. THIS WAS PART OF THE PERMIT SET TO DEMO THE BUILDING A FEW YEARS AGO AND YOU CAN SEE THE 25- FOOT FRONT YARD THEN THE OTHER PLAT NOTES ON THERE. REALLY INDICATING THAT THE ZONING CODE THEN CARRIED FOR THE SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS.
HERE IS THE ACTUALLY DEVELOPABLE AREA BASED ON THE PLAT AND CURRENT MODERN DAY ZONING CODE AND HERE IS THE EXISTING 13.8 FOOT WITH THE PREVIOUS BUILDING.
I'LL DESCRIBE WHY THAT IS IMPORTANT IN THIS CASE.
HERE IS THE PROPERTY AS CLEARED. HERE'S AN IMAGE FROM THE PABLO, THIS WOULD BE SERVING AS THE DRIVEWAY ACCESS.
PABLO ROAD. THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS IS FRANKLIN. THIS IS THE OTHER RIGHT OF WAY. THIS IS BEHIND THE PROPERTY, IF YOU WILL. BUT THIS IS FRANKLIN AVENUE AND YOU CAN SEE THIS WALL OF TREES THAT WILL REMAIN.
REALLY MATURE VEGETATION ALONG THIS ROADWAY.
AND AS IT'S CUSTOMARILY BEEN GROWN OVER THE YEARS AND DECADES AND INCLUDING THE CV PARK NEIGHBORHOOD HAS REALLY ADORNED THAT THAT HAS BECOME THEIR GREENING BUFFER, IF YOU WILL.
THOSE TREES WILL PROPOSE TO REMAIN AND THERE'S A FENCE THERE THAT'S EXISTING. HERE IS THE PROPERTY.
I'VE HIGHLIGHTED THE FOOTPRINT OF THE HOME.
IT SHOWS EXACTLY THE PORTION OF THE HOME THAT'S IN THE REQUEST AND RELIEF AREA. HERE IS OUR REQUEST.
27- FOOT SETBACK AND HERE IS THE PORTION IN THAT 27, THAT IS SUBJECT TO THAT SETBACK. YOU CAN SEE HERE THE 40- FOOT LINE WOULD BE IN THIS AREA RIGHT HERE AND I'LL SHOW IT HIGHLIGHTED IN A MINUTE. YOU CAN SEE THE VARIOUS SETBACKS AND HOW THIS SHAPE REALLY PINCHES THE PROPERTY.
THEY'VE TRIED TO BUILD THIS THE FOOTPRINT OF THE HOUSE IN CONTEXT TO THIS TRIANGLE, IF YOU WILL, BUT STILL NEED A LITTLE BIT OF RELIEF FOR THAT PORTION.
HERE'S THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED. SO, THE EXISTING PLAT THAT WAS ON THE PROPERTY WITH THE FORMER HOUSE IS OUTLINED IN RED AND THE FOOTPRINT OF THE PROPERTY, PROPOSED HOUSE, IS UNDERNEATH THAT. HERE IS OUR REQUEST, WHICH IS A 27-FOOT SETBACK AND HERE IS THE PREVIOUS SETBACK AS CUSTOMARILY SITUATED ON THE PROPERTY OF 13.8 FEET. THEN HERE IS THE CLIP OF THE PREVIOUS HOME.
PABLO ROAD WILL CONTINUE TO SERVE AS A CUSTOMARY FRONTAGE. THE FRONT YARD AREA AND ACCESS TO THE LOT IN KEEPING WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT FEATURE.
FRANKLIN AVENUE WILL SERVE AS THE CUSTOMARY REAR LOT LINE OR SECOND FRONT YARD WITH A FENCE AND MATURE AND VEGETATIVE PRIVATE SCREEN AND BUFFER IN KEEPING WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE HOME REMOVED HAD A SETBACK OF 13.8 FEET FROM THE YEAR SUBJECT LINE. THE REQUESTED 27- FOOT NEW SETBACK LINE IS APPROXIMATELY DOUBLE THE SETBACK OF THE PREVIOUS ONE AND NO HOMES ABUT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY BECAUSE IT'S ON A 50-FOOT RIGHT OF WAY AND THE OTHER EDGE IS A GOLF COURSE. THE ONLY HOMES ABUTTED TO THE WEST IMMEDIATELY. THE REQUEST IS A RESULT OF THE USUAL SHAPE OF THE LOT WHICH CREATES EXTRAORDINARY CONDITIONS SUBJECT TO THIS LOT SPECIFICALLY. THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE CODE WOULD CAUSE A HARDSHIP TO THE BUILDABLE AREA.
SO THAT BRINGS THE 32,000 ROUGHLY SQUARE FOOT LOT DOWN TO 10,000 SQUARE FEET.
THE REQUEST DOES NOT CAUSE ANY NEGATIVE IMPACTS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, PROPERTIES OR OTHER FAMILIES' HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE. I DO RECOGNIZE THAT THE CONFORMING STATUS HAS SUNSET ON THE PREVIOUS HOME THAT WAS THERE PER THE DEMOLITION OF THAT ORIGINAL HOME AND IS
[00:10:02]
IMPORTANT TO STILL ACCOUNT FOR THAT CHARACTER AND CONTINUITY OF THE PAST WITH REGARD TO THE BETTERMENT AS PROPOSED WITH THE NEW HOME IN REQUEST FOR THE VARIANCE.THAT INCLUDES THE CONTEXT OF THE SUBJECT AREA'S USE.
WHAT I'VE DONE, HERE'S THE EXISTING, THIS WAS THE PAST HOME THAT WAS RECENTLY DEMOLISHED AND WHAT I'VE DONE IS OVERLAYED WHAT THE NEW HOME WOULD LOOK LIKE. THAT'S IN CONTEXT WITH THE SETBACK REQUEST AND EVERYTHING. IT'S VERY MODEST.
IT'S WITHIN CONTEXT OF THE SIZE AND ORIENTATION OF MANY HOMES IN THE AREA. I HAVE A COLORED RENDERED IMAGERY OF THE ELEVATION IF NEEDED, BUT THIS ISN'T ABOUT THAT. IT'S NOT A HEIGHT MATTER BUT IT IS IN CHARACTER WITH THE OTHER HOMES IN THE AREA.
TO DATE, WE DON'T HAVE ANY OPPOSITION ON THIS ONE.
WE'VE DONE SOME OUTREACH ON THE PROPERTIES AND THEY'RE VERY SUPPORTIVE. I BELIEVE STAFF HAS RECEIVED E- MAILS IN SUPPORT. THEY'VE TRIED TO ORIENT THE HOUSE AS BEST THEY COULD WITHIN THAT TRIANGLE SHAPE, BUT THE BULL NOSE OVER HERE TO THE EAST IS NOT INDICATIVE OF THE BUILDABLE AREA BECAUSE IT'S REALLY A SHARP, TRIANGLE, IRREGULAR SHAPED PROPERTY.
SO WE ASK FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL ON THIS. A REQUEST AND AGAIN, THE OWNER IS HERE IF WE NEED AS WELL.
WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD?
>> QUESTION. HOW BIG IS THIS HOUSE COMPARED WITH THE HOUSES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD?
>> IT IS, IT'S DEFINITELY NOT BIGGER THAN MANY OF THEM.
I WOULD ASK BECKIE DEMETRIOU IF SHE WOULD COME UP.
SHE'S AN INTERIOR DESIGNER. SHE CAN, IF YOU GO TO THAT MICROPHONE. STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
>> BECKY DEMETRIOU, PONTE VEDRA BEACH. THE HOME, I BELIEVE, IS 5500 SQUARE FEET OF YOU KNOW COVERED AIR-CONDITIONED SPACE.
>> TWO STORIES. TWO STORIES THE UPSTAIRS CONSISTS OF THROW GUEST BEDROOMS. IN THE AREA, SOME OF THE OLDER HOMES WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT SMALLER, CLOSER TO 3500 SQUARE FEET FOR THE ONE- STORY HOMES THAT WERE BUILT A LONG TIME AGO. MOST OF THE HOMES THAT HAVE GONE UP, I WOULD SAY ARE OVER 6,000. I KNOW WE HAVE, WE KNOW OF SOMEONE BUILDING ON THE SAME ROAD ON PABLO RIGHT NOW AND I BELIEVE IT'S ABOUT 7500 SQUARE FEET. SO THERE'S A BIG RANGE BUT I WOULD SAY MOST OF THEM ARE CERTAINLY
INDULGE ME FOR A MINUTE. THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE HOUSE TORN DOWN?
>> I DON'T KNOW. A FRIEND RENTED IT RECENTLY AND IT WAS KIND OF A SPLIT LEVEL BUILT IN THE '70S OR '80S. HARD TO TELL WITH THAT WHOLE SPLIT LEVEL SITUATION BECAUSE IT WAS ALMOST THREE STORIES. FELT LIKE THERE WAS A BASEMENT.
SO I WOULD GUESS 3,000, BUT I DON'T KNOW.
>> AND HOW MANY SQUARE FEET DO YOU HAVE ON THE FIRST FLOOR?
>> YOU KNOW, I DON'T HAVE THAT SPLIT. I'M SORRY. I HAVE TO PULL IT UP POTENTIALLY.
>> STAFF, JUST REALLY QUICK. I KNOW THE SUNSET PROVISION APPLIES WHEN THE HOUSE IS COMPLETELY DEMOLISHED.
WHAT, IS THERE A PERCENTAGE OF THE HOUSE THAT HAS TO REMAIN FOR EXISTING TO GET GRANDFATHERED
THROUGH THE JACOB SMITH FOR THE RECORD.
TO THE CHAIR'S QUESTION REGARDING WHAT WE WOULD CALL NONCONFORMING USES. TYPICALLY, THE SUNSET PERIOD IS ONE YEAR. SO ONCE THE USE HAS BEEN DISCONTINUED, ONE YEAR PASSES, IT'S SORT OF A NON ISSUE FROM THE STANDPOINT IT'S NO LONGER ALLOWED. OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAS NOT ENCOURAGED THE CONTINUED USE OF NONCONFORMITIES.
>> SO, JUST FOR MY UNDERSTANDING.
IF, IN THIS CASE, I HAD A HOUSE AND I DEMOLISHED IT AND TOOK TWO YEARS TO BUILD THE NEW HOME ON THE SITE, I WOULD ACTUALLY STILL NOT GET THIS PROVISION? IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT'S RIGHT. THERE WOULD BE THE POSSIBILITY FOR A HOMEOWNER TO REQUEST A VESTING TO WHATEVER NONCONFORMITY MIGHT BE OUT THERE AND IF IT WAS APPROVED BY THE COUNTY, IT COULD CARRY PAST THAT TIME PERIOD, BUT WITHOUT SUCH A VESTING, THE ONE YEAR IS THE TIME PERIOD.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? MARK, GO AHEAD.
>> THANKS. I'M THE NEW GUY SO THESE QUESTIONS, JUST HAVE THIS CHECK ON THIS.
[00:15:05]
SO, DOES ANYONE KNOW IF THAT GOLF VIEW, FRANKLIN CORNER, IS GOING TO BE STRAIGHTENED OUT TO PABLO ROAD? HASN'T BEEN IN 50 YEARS.WOULD THERE BE ANY REASON FOR THE COUNTY? MAYBE THAT'S A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
>> TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THERE IS NO PLANNED UPGRADE OF THAT RIGHT
AND THEN WHEN I SEE PLATTED 1966, HOW DOES THAT SUPPORT OR WHAT IS THE BENEFIT OR IMPACT THAT THAT HAS? THE YEAR?
>> NOT SURE. MAYBE PERHAPS THE APPLICANT WANTS TO SPEAK TO IT. I THINK IT GIVES HISTORICAL CONTEXT TO HOW THIS PROPERTY WAS LAID OUT.
AGAIN, REALLY WHAT YOU'RE HERE FOR IS A ZONING VARIANCE AND SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY AND MAKING THE DETERMINATION IS THIS PROPERTY UNIQUE COMPARED TO THE PROPERTIES AROUND IT. THE TIME OF PLATTING.
SOME OF THESE PROPERTIES HISTORICALLY HAD PLATTED BUILDING RESTRICTION LINES ON THEM. THIS ONE DOES NOT HAPPEN TO SO THERE'S MORE FLEXIBILITY THAN IF IT DID.
>> THIS IS BRAD WESTER. I CAN FURTHER THAT A LITTLE BIT.
SOMETIMES WHEN YOU HAVE A LOT OF RECORD THAT'S A PLATTED LOT OF RECORD, YOU WILL PROBABLY SEE THIS QUITE A BIT, ACTUALLY, AS YOU MOVE FORWARD ON THE BOARD. WHERE THERE'S SOME IRREGULAR SHAPES, YOU STILL HAVE TO ADHERE TO CERTAIN STANDARDS BUT THERE IS RELIEF ALLOWED BASED ON IT BEING THE ALLOTTED RECORD. IN THIS CASE BEING 1966, THE CODE STILL APPLIES FOR YOU HAVE TO HAVE A CERTAIN SIZE PROPERTY WHEN YOU REDEVELOP IT. I THINK THIS WAS 17,000 SQUARE FEET. WE'RE DOWN TO TEN OF USABLE AREA. AND SO BUT IT'S NOT SO MUCH THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IN THIS CASE, IT'S THE IRREGULAR SHAPE.
THE CODE SPECIFICALLY SAYS IF IT'S AN EXTRAORDINARY OR UNUSUAL SHAPE THAT IS A HINDRANCE ON YOUR ABILITY TO USE THE DEVELOPABLE AREA.
WE WENT TO TEN BUT THAT'S IN CONTEXT TO THE TRIANGLE SHAPE.
IT'S REALLY HARD TO BUILD SOMETHING IN THOSE SLIVERS, IF YOU WILL.
IT'S THE BEST WAY I CAN DESCRIBE IT.
SO WE FELT THAT THIS MEANT THE LETTER OF THE LAW FOR THAT HARDSHIP REQUIREMENT BUT WE STILL DON'T GET THE GRANDFATHERED ABILITY. EVEN THOUGH IT'S A PLATTED LOT FROM 1966 TO GO AWAY FROM ON CODE UNLESS IT WAS DESCRIBE- THE PLAT.
>> IN LOOKING AT THE PICTURE, THAT'S AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF LAND ON THE BACKSIDE.
WHOEVER DESIGNED THIS, I SAW AN ARCHITECT DESIGNATION, BUT THEY DID A GREAT JOB, I THINK, TO BE ABLE TO FIT IT SO CLOSE TO THE 40- FOOT LINE. I WAS ALSO CURIOUS ABOUT THE PERCENTAGE OF WHAT THEY CALL IT, THE NONPERMEABLE PERCENTAGE THAT EVERYONE TALKS ABOUT.
>> YEAH, THE IMPERVIOUS RATIO. THIS IS WELL UNDER THAT.
>> BY FAR. >> BECAUSE WE HAVE A FOOTPRINT AND THE REQUIREMENT'S 40%. I THINK WE'RE IN THE RANGE OF 28 TO 30 RIGHT NOW.
>> SO YOU GUYS ARE NOT ASKING FOR A VARIANCE.
>> THE ONLY VARIANCE IS THE SETBACK.
>> YES, SIR, IN THAT YELLOW AREA THAT'S KIND OF CLIPPED OVER. WHY I SHOWED THE PREVIOUS CONSTRUCTION OF THE PREVIOUS HOME WAS THAT THE FABRIC AND CUSTOMARY USE THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN THERE IS VERY TELLING AND VERY IMPORTANT TO THE CONTINUATION OF THIS TYPE OF USE.
WHEREAS WE'RE ACTUALLY DOUBLING THE SETBACK THAT USED TO BE THERE.
I REALIZE LEGALLY IT DOESN'T GIVE US A PRECEDENT TO ALLOW A CARTE BLANCHE APPROVAL, BUT I THINK THE CHARACTER AN CONTINUITY OF WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT IN THIS CASE. SO WE'RE DOUBLING THAT, BUT WE STILL HAVE A SMALL AREA WE REALLY FEEL IS AN ISSUE.
I THINK YOU'LL LEARN, TOO, THAT POOLS ARE ALLOWED IN SETBACK AREAS, BUT THEY STILL HAVE TO BE BOUND BY THE ISR RATIO BECAUSE WE'RE STILL OUTSIDE OF THAT SETBACK AREA FOR THE POOL. IT STILL IS CALCULATED WE MEET THE ISR REQUIREMENT.
>> THANKS. >> I HAVE NO MORE QUESTIONS EXCEPT TO COMMEND THE FOLKS WHO PUT THIS PACKET TOGETHER. I LEARNED A LOT.
>> BECKY CAN ATTEST TO THIS. WE WENT THROUGH A COUPLE OF ARCHITECTS. SAYING THIS ON THE RECORD NOW, AND A LOT OF DIFFERENT DRAWINGS TO FIGURE THIS OUT AND TO MAKE IT THE BEST IT COULD BE. SO IT WAS REALLY AWKWARD AT THE BEGINNING TO TRY TO FIND A HOUSE THAT WAS TO THEIR LIKENESS. IT HAD TO LOOK ULTRAMODERN.
[00:20:01]
IT WOULD HAVE REALLY STUCK OUT REALLY KIND OF STRANGE.THIS WAS WAY MORE TRADITIONAL. BLENDS IN WITH ALL THE ELEVATIONS IN THE AREA, SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> MARK, YOUR QUESTION ABOUT CONNECTING FROM FRANKLIN ROAD TO PABLO ROAD.
IN THE 2006 TIME PERIOD, THERE WAS A TEMPORARY ACCESS THERE WHEN THEY'RE DOING THE SUER PROJECT AND REPAVING ALL THOSE ROADS. AT THE TIME, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THEY WOULD ALLOW THAT ON A VERY TEMPORARY BASES AND THAT IT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN.
>> THAT'S RIGHT. I'LL ONE UP YOU, JOHN. ON FRANKLIN AVENUE, THE OWNERS AREN'T STOPPING THE ACCESS. THERE'S A, YOU CAN GO THROUGH AND TRAVERSE THAT.
YOU CAN GO THROUGH THERE. THE OWNERS AREN'T TAKING THAT AWAY, BUT THERE IS THE GOLF COURSE NEXT DOOR AND THEY OWN ALL THAT PROPERTY THEN YOU HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY RIGHT OF WAY AND THE ONLY THREE OWNERS ARE ON THE WEST SIDE OF THIS PROPERTY LINE. SO WE'RE LUCKY. WE'VE GOT GREAT NEIGHBORS AND THEY REALLY UNDERSTAND THE PREDICAMENT WE'RE IN EVEN THOUGH THEY GET SOMETHING LIKE A ZONING LETTER THAT SAYS HEY, WE'VE GOT A VARIANCE NEXT DOOR.
WE HAD TO TELL THE STORY OF WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.
A LOT OF THEM THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO TEAR DOWN EVERYTHING AND BUILD AN ACCESS DRIVEWAY TO FRANKLIN. THAT'S NOT THE POINT.
WE WANT IT CUSTOMARY IN EXISTING
CONDITION. >> I GUESS THE ONE THING THAT I WOULD POINT OUT AS WELL IS ALL ON FRANKLIN, THERE'S NOT ONE HOUSE THAT SITS ON THAT SIDE OF FRANKLIN, SO, WE WERE VERY SURPRISED TO FIND OUT THAT IT WAS CONSIDERED A SECOND FRONTAGE BECAUSE THERE'S NEVER BEEN ACCESS TO FRANKLIN. THERE IS NOT ONE HOUSE ON PABLO THAT HAS ACCESS TO. THERE'S NOT A HOUSE ON FRANKLIN ON THAT SIDE. SO IT'S ALMOST THAT IT'S A SECOND FRONTAGE IN NAME ONLY BECAUSE THERE'S NEVER BEEN ACCESS FROM THAT PROPERTY TO THAT ROAD IN ANY WAY.
IN FACT, THE FENCE THAT SITS ALONG, I BELIEVE IS THE CITY'S FENCE AND ALL THE VEGETATION IS FROM THE FENCE TO THE ROAD. WE WERE JUST SURPRISED TO SEE IT BECAUSE WE'VE TRAVERSED THAT AREA FOREVER AND HAD NO CLUE THEY WOULD HAVE CONSIDERED THAT SOMEONE'S FRONT YARD. THAT WAS JUST AS A POINT OF REFERENCE. I DON'T KNOW THAT ANYONE WHEN THEY SAW THE SIGN TALKING ABOUT A VARIANCE FOR A SECOND FRONT YARD HAD ANY IDEA WHAT IT WAS TALKING ABOUT BECAUSE OF THAT.
>> IT'S A BIT CONFUSING BECAUSE WHEN YOU PUT SIGNS ON EACH RIGHT OF WAY, IT'S CONFUSING TO THE NEIGHBORS.
SO WE HAD TO TELL TO STORY AND DO SOME OUTREACH, BUT THEY ARE NEIGHBORS AND UNDERSTAND WE'RE KEEPING THE WALL OF VEGETATION ON FRANKLIN.
>> YES, MR. CHAIR. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE PVZVAR BASE SUBJECT TO THE FIVE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
>> FORGIVE ME. I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF REQUESTS TO SPEAK. CAN WE HOLD THAT MOTION FOR A MOMENT? NEVER MIND. ALL RIGHT.
>> SO YOU DID NOT HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THAT.
I REALIZE THERE IS NO ONE IN THE AUDIENCE, BUT IT MIGHT BE GOOD JUST TO CALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
>> THAT'S FINE. WE CAN DO A ROLL CALL VOTE.
>> WE CAN DO THIS BY VOICE VOTE OR WANT TECHNOLOGY TO TRY ONE MORE TIME?
I DON'T KNOW IF TOM'S RESETTING IT.
>> THERE WE GO. IT WORKED THAT TIME.
ASSUMING THIS IS FINAL WITH 5- 0 THE VOTE.
THE MOTION CARRIES. VARIANCE IS APPROVED.
[2. PVZVAR 2025-02 Piltin Residence. Request for a Zoning Variance, pursuant to Section III.B of the Ponte Vedra Zoning District Regulations (PVZDR), to allow for a six (6) foot Rear Yard setback in lieu of the required forty (40) feet in R-1-B zoning to accommodate the placement of a detached, screened pavilion, located specifically at 153 Broken Pottery Drive.]
ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER TWO OF THE NIGHT. PVZVAR 2025-02.I'LL START ON MY LEFT THIS TIME.
[00:25:02]
IF YOU'LL DISCLOSE IF YOU'VE HAD ANY COMMUNICATION OR WALKED THE SITE.>> I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE BUT HAVE HAD NO COMMUNICATION.
>> I DID NOT VISIT THE SITE. I BRIEFLY SPOKE WITH BRAD EARLIER. IF YOU'LL INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND GIVE YOUR ADDRESS.
>> CHRIS PILTIN, 153 BROKEN POTTERY DRIVE IN PONTE VEDRA BEACH. WE ARE REQUESTING THE REDUCTION OF A 40- FOOT REAR EASEMENT TO SIX FEET.
I STARTED WITH A PROJECT SUMMARY HERE.
WE ARE SEEKING THE APPROVAL OF THIS VARIANCE IN ORDER TO BUILD A SCREENED POOL SIDE PAVILION IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY HAS NO REAR NEIGHBORS. THIS DOES IN THE CHANGE ANY OF THE SETBACKS FROM THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS ON EITHER SIDE. PROBABLY MORE PERSONAL THAN NEEDED, BUT WE HAVE BEEN BATTLING A MOSQUITO ISSUE IN THE VICINITY.
WE DO NOT BACK UP TO IT. WE'VE TRIED MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS TO MITIGATE.
THE PROPOSED PAVILION WOULD PROVIDE US WITH A SCREENED IN AREA TO UTILIZE THE BACKYARD THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.
THE STRUCTURE DOES NOT BORDER ANY NEIGHBORING HOMES AND OR PROTECTED AREAS. THE GOAL OF THE VARIANCE IS TO AVOID CUTTING DOWN ANY PROTECTED TREES, OAKS, OR VEGETATION AREAS WHATSOEVER.
SO THE CURRENT PROPERTY IS ZONED R1B WHICH HAS A 40- FEET EASEMENT WHICH GOES TO THE REAR FOUNDATION OF THE HOME.
THIS IS THE LOT. WE DID, WE ARE UNDER THE ISR.
THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIO AT 34%.
YOU CAN SEE THE PROPOSED LOCATION FOR THE PAVILION BEHIND THE POOL.
ANYTHING SOUTH WOULD BE ENCROACHING ON THE SOUTHERN NEIGHBOR'S SETBACK AND NORTH WOULD BE AND I WILL GET INTO IT, WITHIN THE DRIP LINE OF EXISTING PROTECTED OAKS.
THIS IS AN ILLUSTRATION OF THE SOUTH REAR SETBACK WITH A SOUTH NEIGHBORHOOD SETBACK. THE QUESTION TO REDUCE THE SETBACK TO SIX FEET TO ALLOW FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPERTY. THIS IS THE DRIP LINE OF THE PROTECTED OAKS IN THE BACKYARD WHICH WERE NOT PLANNED BY US. HAVE BEE THERE FOR A LONG TIME AND THEY ARE AN ADDITIVE TO THE VALUE OF THE HOME AND UNIQUENESS OF THE PROPERTY.
SO WE WOULD LIKE TO RETAIN THEM GIVEN THE ONLY REAL VIABLE SPACE TO BUILD SOMETHING LIKE THIS IN THE SUGGESTED LOCATION. THERE IS VEGETATION ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY LINE WHICH ADDS MORE VEGETATION BARRIER WHEN THE HOME AND A1A. SO PROTECTING ALL VISIBILITY FROM THE STREET. IT STEMS FROM THE PROPERTY'S UNIQUE LOCATION WITH THE PROTECTED OAKS SCATTERED THROUGHOUT THE BACKYARD AND 40- FEET EASEMENT.
THE REAR PROPERTY LINE IS 130 FEET FROM A1A, NO REAR NEIGHBOR. WE SPOKE TO F DOT AND THEY CONFIRMED THEY HAVE NO PLANS AND THERE IS AMPLE VEGETATION IN PLACE TO PREVENT VISIBILITY FROM THE EAST SIDE.
THE REMAINING SIX- FOOT BUFFER WAS INTENDED TO GIVE THE HOA ADEQUATE ACCESS TO THE VEGETATION AND THE REAR OF THE COMMUNITY'S WALL IN CASE ANY REPAIRS WERE NEEDED. AND THERE ARE NO UTILITIES IN THE REAR PROPERTY.
WE CALLED AND HAD THAT VERIFIED. WE ADDED THE DRIP LINE AND PALM TREES TO SHOW WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO AVOID.
HERE'S SATELLITE IMAGERY SHOWING THE NEIGHBORS SOUTH AND NORTH OF US AND THE VEGETATION THAT BORDERS EAST AND SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY BLOCKING THE VIEW AND THE SIGNIFICANT MATURE VEGETATION BUFFER ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY THAT WE DON'T MAINTAIN THAT ARE MORE OAK TREES AND OTHER NATURAL CANOPIES. THIS IS IMAGING OF THE BACKYARD.
[00:30:01]
WE MAINTAIN OURSELVES, WHICH IS THE 15- 20 FEET VIBURNUM HEDGE AND ABOVE IT, THE ADDITIONAL VEGETATION BEHIND THE PROPERTY.THIS IS THE PROPOSED OUTLINE OF THE PAVILION IN THE SPACE WE'RE SEEKING VARIANCE ON.
AND THE HEIGHT. SO, FOR REFERENCE, THE STRUCTURE GOES RIGHT UP TO THE TOP OF THE VEGETATION BUFFER WITH AMPLE COVERAGE COMING FROM THE EAST SIDE. SIDE.
YOU CAN SEE WITH THE TILT AND LEAN OF THE OAKS, THEY COVER THE MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY IN THE BACKYARD AND THIS IS THE PROJECT PROPOSED AND THIS WILL HAVE SCREENS ON ALL SIDES.
TO ALLOW FOR THE PROTECTION OF BUGS WITH SOME SEATING AREA INSIDE FOR US TO ENJOY. IT WILL MATCH THE COLOR OF THE HOUSE. MATCH THE ROOF.
TO BLEND IN WITH PROPERTY. SO JUST SOME MORE IMAGES OF THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION. WE DID GET HOA APPROVAL ALREADY AS EVIDENT HERE. WE ALSO, AS I SAID, GOT E- MAIL VALIDATING FROM F DOT THAT THEY HAVE NO OBJECTIONS OR CONCERNS THEN GOT PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FROM NEIGHBORS WITHIN 300 FEET OF OUR PROPERTY SO WE COULD TALK TO THEM AND EXPLAIN IT.
I BELIEVE WE HAD NEIGHBORS WRITE E-MAILS IN FAVOR OF DOING THIS. THANK
>> QUESTION FOR STAFF. IF THIS WERE JUST A SCREENED CLOSURE, IT DID NOT HAVE A ROOF ON IT, WOULD WE NEED A VARIANCE?
>> YES, SIR, YOU WOULD. ESSENTIALLY ANY STRUCTURE OVER THREE FEET IN HEIGHT WOULD NECESSITATE A VARIANCE.
>> YEAH, REALLY DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
I WOULD TELL YOU THAT I, TOO, AM INFESTED WITH MOSQUITOS.
I FEEL YOUR PAIN. I KNOW YOUR PROBLEMS AND I APPLAUD YOU FOR DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
>> THANK YOU. TRYING TO KEEP THE KIDS AT THE HOUSE AS THEY AGE, YOU KNOW.
>> DO WE HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD?
>> YES, NOT, NOT AN ISSUE AS FAR AS APPROVAL OR DENIAL, BUT HAVE YOU LOOKED AT THE POTENTIAL RISK OF THE TREES AND PIZZA OVEN AS FAR AS A SAFETY, FIRE SAFETY?
>> WE SPOKE TO THE ARCHITECT AND THE ENGINEERS.
THERE'S NO VEGETATION OVERHEAD OF THAT PAVILION, WHICH WAS THE PRIMARY CONCERN WAS ANY SPARKS COMING THROUGH THE CHIMNEY, BUT BECAUSE THERE'S NO VEGETATION AND AS LONG AS YOU'RE BUILDING THE CHIMNEY WITHIN THE SPECKS OF THE MANUFACTURER, WE WERE TOLD IT WOULDN'T BE A CONCERN.
>> BACK IN BOY SCOUT, WE ALWAYS SAID HAVE A BUCKET OF SAND AND A BUCKET OF WATER.
IN THE WINTERTIME, YOU PROBABLY OUGHT TO KIND OF KEEP AN EYE ON THINGS.
>> NOBODY WANTS ANY SURPRISES.
>> JUST MAKE SURE THAT I'M CLEAR.
A SIMILAR STRUCTURE, YOUR DIMENSIONS WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE SLIGHTLY. COULD BE BUILT BEHIND THE HOUSE.
BUT IT WOULD AFFECT THE OAK TREES IN A NEGATIVE WAY AND PROBABLY IF I'M LOOKING AT YOURS, SOME TREES WOULD HAVE TO COME OUT TO BE ABLE TO BUILD A SIMILAR STRUCTURE.
>> THERE'S AN OAK IN THE CENTER IMAGE THAT LEANS OVER THE VIABLE SPACE AND THE DRIP LINE WOULD BE IMPACTED AND THE WHAT'S NOT PICTURES TO THE RIGHT OF THAT IS JUST THE BACK OF HOME.
WINDOWS THERE. YOU WOULD JUST BE LOOKING AT THE SIDE OF THE PAVILION, BUT YOU COULDN'T BUILD IT BECAUSE THE ACTUAL CLEARANCE FOR THAT OAK IS PRETTY LOW AT THAT ARC. THAT KNUCKLE OF THE OAK.
>> IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS, OPEN IT UP FOR COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC FOR THIS ITEM.
SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION AND OPEN IT UP TO BOARD FOR COMMENTS.
>> I WILL SAY PERSONALLY, WE HAVE HAD SIMILAR PROPOSALS, I CAN REMEMBER ONE AT THE BEACH WHERE IT WAS EFFECTIVELY A WALL
[00:35:06]
BETWEEN THE HOUSES. I DIDN'T SEE A HARDSHIP.THE HARDSHIP I SEE IS CERTAINLY THE TREES.
SAVING THOSE GOOD SIZED OAKS IS ALWAYS WORTHWHILE.
BUT ALSO, HE'S GOT 300, 400 FEET TO THE ROAD. HE'S GOT A REAR BACKYARD THAT EXTENDED BEYOND THIS, SO I DON'T SEE THE VALUE IN THIS PARTICULAR SETBACK ON THIS PARTICULAR LOT.
>> MR. GREENE? >> MR. CHAIR, I AGREE WHOLEHEARTEDLY. I BELIEVE THE TREES IS THE BIGGEST HURDLE TO PUTTING THIS CABANA, IF YOU WILL, OR STRUCTURE IN PARTS OF THE YARD AND PRESERVING THE TREES IS SOMETHING I WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND.
>> I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE IS NO INTENT FOR THIS TO BE, CALL IT CONDITIONED.
I DON'T WANT -- I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT APPROVING A HOUSE BEHIND YOUR HOUSE.
>> NO. THERE'S NOT EVEN WALLS.
NO PLUMBING. IT WOULD BE PRETTY TOUGH THE LIVE IN.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> YOU'RE WELCOME.
>> MR. CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE PVZVAR 2025-10 AND CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
THAT'S OFFICIAL WITH 5- 0, YOUR REQUEST CARRIES. VARIANCE IS APPROVED.
>> THANK YOU, ALL. APPRECIATE IT.
[Staff Report]
>> WE BEAT YOU TO IT. WE HAVE ANY STAFF REPORT?
>> YES, SIR, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
JUST A FEW THINGS THAT I WANTED TO GO OVER REAL QUICK.
AT OUR LAST HEARING ON APRIL 7TH, ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT WE HAD HEARD WAS IN REGARDS TO PASSENGER VANS BEING PARKED ININ PONTE VEDRA ZONING DISTRICT. I WANTED TO LET THE BOARD KNOW WHILE WE HAD PREPARED TO GO TO THE MSD AND HOLD A MEETING, WE WERE DIRECTED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS TO NO LONGER PURSUE ANY CHANGES TO THE PASSENGER VAN REGULATIONS, SO WE WILL NOT BE GOING ANY FARTHER WITH THAT. RELATED TO THAT, DURING THAT MEETING, BOARD MEMBER GREENE HAD REQUESTED STAFF, IF YOU BEAR WITH ME A SECOND. I HAD SOME NOTES ON IT.
TO LOOK INTO SORT OF THE AESTHETIC REQUIREMENTS.
SOME OF THE THINGS I WROTE DOWN WAS LIKE KNICKKNACKS AND MAINTENANCE AND PARKING OF VEHICLES. AND AS FAR AS WHAT DOES THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING REGULATION HAVE THAT SPEAKS TO THAT, RIGHT, SO OBVIOUSLY, WE KNOW THAT PASSENGER VANS OR SIMILAR VEHICLES, COMMERCIAL VEHICLES, AREN'T ALLOWED TO BE PARKED ON RESIDENTS AND I BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT MR. GREENE WAS LEADING TOWARDS. I WILL TELL YOU, I HAD STAFF LOOK THROUGH THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING CODE PRETTY EXTENSIVELY AND HIGHLIGHTING THE SORT OF THINGS I BELIEVED YOU WERE LOOKING FOR. IT'S EXTREMELY MINIMAL.
SO I'LL SAY SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE SEE SPECIFICALLY WITHIN SINGLE FAMILY ZONING WITHIN THE PONTE VEDRA DISTRICT JUST TALKS ABOUT MAINTAINING BUFFERS PROPERLY. SO A WELL MAINTAINED LAWN COUNTS AS MAINTAINING YOUR BUFFER PROPERLY. KEEPING THINGS LIKE BASKETBALL GOALS OR SPORTS COURTS PROPERLY SCREENED. WE REQUIRE STORAGE BUILDINGS TO BE OUT OF SIGHT EITHER THROUGH SCREENING OR BEHIND THE MAIN HOME.
THERE'S A HANDFUL OF OTHER THINGS SORT OF IN THAT VEIN. THERE'S SOME SIGN REGULATIONS ABOUT WHAT YOU CAN HAVE ON THE PROPERTY BUT THERE'S NOT REGULATIONS FOR HOW MANY CARS YOU CAN PARK OR ANY SPECIFICS ABOUT WHAT A WELL KEPT LAWN IS. I DID LOOK THROUGH THERE, NOT REALLY SURE THERE WAS A LOT TO GO ON.
AGAIN, MOST OF OUR DESIGN STANDARDS THAT THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING DISTRICT HAS IS RELATED TO THE COMMERCIAL
[00:40:02]
DISTRICT. NOT SO SPECIFIC TO THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN IF THAT LEFT ANYTHING OPEN OR YOU HAD FURTHER DIRECTION.>> NO, I APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH.
I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION GOING BACK TO THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER. JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR.
THEY HAVE ASKED STAFF TO HOLD ANY TYPE OF CHANGING TO THE RECREATIONAL VEHICLE DEFINITION. IS THAT CORRECT? SO, ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS NOW, HANDICAP VAN OR A TRANSIT VAN WOULD STILL BE NOT IN COMPLIANCE. CORRECT?
>> WE WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT THAT AND HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS. WE UNDERSTAND THE DIFFICULTY WITH THAT DEFINITION. UPON FURTHER REVIEW, WE THINK THERE'S WAYS WE CAN ENFORCE AND STILL HAVE ROOM IN THERE.
I THINK THERE'S SOME GOOD POINTS MADE AND I THINK HANDICAP VANS ARE DIFFERENT. IF THEY'RE A PLACARD, THERE'S NOT MUCH WE CAN DO ABOUT.
THAT'S AN ADA ACCOMMODATION. WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT CHANGING THAT DEFINITION. WE ARE LOOKING AT HOW WE ENFORCE IT AND SOME OTHER THINGS THAT HAPPEN. THERE ARE SOME CONFLICTS. WE REALIZE YOU CAN'T HAVE A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE.
IT COULD VERY WELL, IF IT'S IN THE COMMERCIAL, IT COULD VERY WELL BE A SPRINTER VAN, BUT IF THEY HAVEN'T MADE MODIFICATIONS OR TAKEN THE EFFORTS TO HAVE IT REGISTERED AS REQUIRED AS A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE, OUR ENFORCEMENT WILL BE LIMITED.
WE'RE LOOKING MORE IN DEPTH AT HOW TO GO ABOUT THAT BECAUSE WE DO RECOGNIZE THAT THEY ARE BECOMING COMMON USE IN SOME AREAS. NOT AS RECREATIONAL, BUT APPARENTLY FAMILIES HAVE LOT OF CHILDREN AND NEED TO GET THEM AROUND. WE'RE LOOKING AT IT FROM AN ENFORCEMENT POINT OF VIEW.
>> MORE PLEASURE THAN ANYTHING ELSE.
>> MR. CHAIR, JUST ONE MORE COMPONENT OF THE STAFF REPORT. SOME OF THE AGENCY MEMBERS HAVE INQUIRED ABOUT APPOINTMENTS TO THE OPEN POSITIONS ON THISTHIS BOARD.
THERE IS NO UPDATE TO THAT RIGHT NOW.
BUT AS SOON AS WE HAVE APPLICANTS FOR THIS BOARD, IT WILL BE ON THE AGENDA AND YOU GUYS WILL SEE IT. THAT'S ALL, SIR.
>> IT DOES NOT VIOLATE SUNSHINE LAW IF YOU REACH OUT TO PEOPLE YOU KNOW AND ASK THEM IF THEY WANT TO SERVE ON THE BOARD. JUST TO BE CLEAR.
SO REACH OUT TO DIFFERENT PEOPLE. WE DO NOT WANT THAT.
>> JACOB, I AM FOLLOWING TALLAHASSEE AND THERE'S A NEW ADU BILL THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING PASSED.
ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. I AM AWARE OF OF COURSE DO NOT AS IN PONTE VEDRA, HAVE OUR OWN ACCESSORY BILL UNIT LANGUAGE. WE WOULD FOLLOW ST. JOHNS.
>> PONTE VEDRA'S KIND OF INTERESTING. THERE IS WHAT I BELIEVE IS TERMED A GUEST HOUSE STANDARD FOR THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING DISTRICT.
THE LIMITATIONS ON IT TO NOT KIND OF KICK OVER INTO THE INTENSITY OF AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT TYPICALLY LIMITS THE INTENSITY OF THE KITCHEN. YOU CAN HAVE A KITCHEN AND GUEST SUITE. FULL SIZE REFRIGERATOR AND OVEN AND STOVE COMBINATION. BROADLY SPEAKING, THE ST. JOHNS LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE DOESN'T HAVE A LOT OF ADU SORT OF CURRENT STANDARDS.
MORE OF WHAT WE FIND IS FOR AN AFFIDAVIT SAYING THE PERSON LIVING THERE IS A FAMILY MEMBER. THAT BEING SAID, IF THE STATE OF FLORIDA PASSES THIS SORT OF LEGISLATION, ONE OR BOTH OF THESE CODES WOULD LIKELY BE UPDATED. YOU MIGHT SEE THAT COMING FORWARD IF SUCCESSFUL.
>> I'LL TACK ON TO THAT. WE HAVE BEEN TRACKING THAT LEGISLATION. UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S BEEN QUITE THE ROLLER COASTER RIDE THROUGH TALLAHASSEE THIS YEAR. SO WE THINK WE KNOW WHAT THE REQUIRED ORDNANCE HAS TO SAY, BUT THEN IT'S ALL CHANGED.
SO THAT IS PASSING AND THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS WE PASS
[00:45:02]
ORDNANCES THAT HAVE CERTAIN FEATURES BUT WE'LL BRIEF YOU WHEN WE CAN DO A FULL ANALYSIS ON THE FINAL BILLTHAT COMES OUT OF TALLAHASSEE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> DO WE HAVE ANYTHING FROM THE BOARD?
>> WASN'T THERE SOME SORT OF EXEMPTION FOR A CARE KEEPER'S COTTAGE?
>> YOU COULD HAVE A CARE KEEPER HAVE A SEPARATE COTTAGE ON YOUR PROPERTY?
>> OFFHAND, I'M NOT SURE THAT'S THE PHRASING FOR IT.
BUT WE CERTAINLY HAVE HAD SITUATIONS CERTAINLY ON THE ESTATE LOTS ALONG THE BEACH AND THINGS LIKE THAT. THEY ARE DEVELOPED WITH GUEST COTTAGES WHETHER OR NOT THE CARETAKER'S IN THERE OR NOT. THE STANDARD STILL DOESN'T ALLOW FOR US TO APPROVE AGAIN A SEPARATE BEDROOM SET AND SEPARATE KITCHEN OFF OF THE MAIN HOUSE.
BUT AGAIN, LIMITED KITCHEN FACILITIES ARE ALLOWED.
SO THEY'RE CERTAINLY SIMILAR FACILITIES AS TO WHAT YOU DESCRIBED.
>> ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT, I GUESS WE HAVE ANYTHING FURTHER FROM ANY OF THE BOARD MEMBERS, MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE BOARD MEETING?
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.