[1. CALL TO ORDER AND CERTIFICATION OF A QUORUM]
[00:00:02]
IT'S 6:00 PM SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED IF EVERYONE'S READY.
THEN WE'LL CALL THE MEETING'S ORDER AT 6:00 PM ANY COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? ALL RIGHT, WE'LL MOVE ON.
DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? NO.
[4. CONSENT AGENDA]
JUMP TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE CONSIDERED ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION.
THERE WILL NOT BE A SEPARATE DISCUSSION ON THESE ITEMS UNLESS A BOARD MEMBER REQUESTS IN WHICH EVENT THE ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND DISCUSSED AFTER THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UH, ITEM FOUR, A CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25TH, 2025.
BE APPROVED AS READ AS PUBLISHED.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, SO WE WILL GO AHEAD AND VOTE.
AND THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.
[6A. Conduct a public hearing concerning a request for a variance from the minimum requirement stating if a rear yard of any premises abuts a lake or waterway or abuts upon a common area that adjoins a lake or waterway, the principal or accessory building shall not be closer than 25 feet to the water's edge of Subsec. 18-7.3. General Residential (GR) of the Unified Development Code (UDC) – with such variance allowing a setback of no closer than 14.0 feet to the water's edge for the property of approx. ± 0.18 acres, located at 4024 FATTA DR and legally described as ABST 19 PERRY & AUSTIN SUR LOT 16 & E 5 FT LOT 15 FOX TRACE SUB. ]
ON TO ITEM SIX A.UNDER NEW BUSINESS, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERING A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT STATING IF A REAR YARD OF ANY PREMISES ABUTS A LAKE OR WATERWAY, OR A BUTTS UPON A COMMON AREA THAT ADJOINS A LAKE OR WATERWAY.
THE PRINCIPLE OR ACCESSORY BUILDING SHALL NOT BE CLOSER THAN 25 FEET TO THE WATER'S EDGE OF SUBSECTION 18 DASH SEVEN THREE.
GENERAL RESIDENTIAL OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.
WITH SUCH VARIANCE ALLOWING A SETBACK OF NO CLOSER THAN 14 FEET TO THE WATER'S EDGE FOR THE PROPERTY OF APPROXIMATELY PLUS OR MINUS 0.18 ACRES, LOCATED AT 4 0 2 8 FADA DRIVE AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS ABSTRACT 19 PERRY AND AUSTIN, SIR.
LOT 16 AND E FIVE FOOT LOT 15 FOX TRACE SUB STAFF PRESENTATION PLEASE.
UH, I DID WANT TO MENTION BEFORE WE GET TOO FAR INTO THE MEETING, THAT THIS IS OUR FIRST LIVE STREAM, UH, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING.
JUST SO EVERYONE'S AWARE, UH, WE'VE TRANSFERRED TO A NEW PLATFORM.
UH, SO LIKE COLIN SAID, THIS IS A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR A REAR SETBACK.
UH, THE APPLICANT HAD ACTUALLY SUBMITTED A BUILDING PERMIT, UH, FOR THIS IS A, A COVERED PORCH, ESSENTIALLY.
UH, AND THEY HAD SUBMITTED THE PERMIT FOR THAT, AND I HAD TO DENY BASED ON NOT MEETING THE SETBACK REQUIREMENT, THIS IS OUR DEVELOPMENT TABLE, UH, FOUR VARIANCES.
IT STATES THAT THE FINAL DECISION IS, UH, VIA U BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND IT HA IT LAYS OUT THE SPECIFIC REVIEW PROCEDURES, UH, AS WELL AS DEFINES THE 50% LIMITATION FOR VARIANCE.
UH, OUR ORDINANCE STATES, UH, THAT YOU CAN REQUEST A VARIANCE FOR UP TO 50% OF THE STANDARD YOU WISH TO VARY FROM.
UH, SO SAY IN THIS CASE IS A 25 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO THE WATER'S EDGE.
UH, SO THEY COULD REQUEST A MAXIMUM OF 12 AND A HALF FEET.
SO THEY ARE ONLY REQUESTING 14 FEET.
UH, THIS IS THE, THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARD.
IT STATES THE 25 FEET TO THE WATER'S EDGE.
UH, I ANTICIPATE THERE MAY BE A QUESTION, UH, BECAUSE THEY DO HAVE AN EXISTING PORCH IN THIS LOCATION.
UH, SO IT'S COMMONLY ASKED, YOU KNOW, HEY, ARE THEY GRANDFATHERS? WHY CAN'T THEY JUST BUILD ANOTHER PORCH? UH, THIS IS OUR SECTION ON NONCONFORMITIES.
THE EXISTING PORCH ALSO ENCROACHES ON THAT, UH, 25 FOOT REAR SETBACK, UH, WHICH IS NOT AN ISSUE IF IT IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO REMAIN AS IS, OR IF THEY WANTED TO REPAIR IT OR MAINTAIN IT OR EVEN ENLARGE IT, AS LONG AS THE ALTERATION DID NOT INCREASE THE NON-CONFORMITY, UH, THEY, THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TO DO THAT.
HOWEVER, IT DOES HAVE A STIPULATION THAT IT'S, UH, IF IT, THE STRUCTURE OR NON-CONFORMITY IS DAMAGED OR DESTROYED BY ANY MEANS, UH, IN EXCESS OF 50%, UH, THEN THE, THE STRUCTURE WOULD HAVE TO COME IN COMPLIANCE WITH COR CURRENT ORDINANCE.
IF IT'S LESS THAN 50%, THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TO REPAIR IT, UH, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION C, UH, ON THE SCREEN AT THIS TIME.
SO IN THIS CASE, THEY WOULD BE TOTALLY REMOVING THE PORTION AND REBUILDING A NEW ONE, UH, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE THIS VARIANCE.
AND SO THIS IS THE ORIGINAL RECORDED PLAT OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, I BELIEVE IT WAS RECORDED IN 1984.
UH, WE WERE LOOKING AT LOT 16 ON THE FAR RIGHT.
[00:05:01]
UH, IS THIS PROPERTY, THE REASON I INCLUDE THIS IS JUST TO SHOW HOW THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS ORIGINALLY LAID OUT.UM, YOU KNOW, THESE LOTS IN A CUL-DE-SAC, THEY CAN BE SHAPED IRREGULARLY SOMETIMES.
UH, SO THIS ONE IS A LITTLE BIT SMALLER THAN, THAN SOME OF THE OTHER ONES ON THIS, UH, END OF THE CUL-DE-SAC.
THIS IS OUR VICINITY MAP SHOWS THE LOCATION AGAIN, UH, SURROUNDING ZONING IS, IS ALL THE SAME.
UH, SO THE PORCH ON THE REAR, UH, IS THE CURRENT PORCH.
UH, THIS IS A PICTURE PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT.
I, I INCLUDED THIS PICTURE TO KIND OF SHOW, UH, THE, THE REST OF THE PROFILE OF THIS AREA.
IF THERE'S ANY OTHER ENCROACHMENTS THAT, THAT SEEM TO BLOCK THE VIEW, YOU KNOW, IF, IF YOU'RE LOOKING DOWN THE COASTLINE THERE, IT, IT ALL SEEMS PRETTY CONSISTENT.
THIS HOUSE IS A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO, UH, THE REAR YARD, JUST LIKE I SAID, DUE TO THE, THE SHAPE OF THE LOT.
AND THIS IS THE PROPOSED SURVEY, UH, THAT SHOWS THE NEW PORCH.
THE NEW PORCH IS APPROXIMATELY ONE FOOT LARGER, UH, THAN THE PREVIOUS.
AND THE APPLICANT, YOU KNOW, STATED THAT THE MEASUREMENT FROM THE PORCH TO THE WATER'S EDGE IS APPROXIMATELY 14 FEET.
UH, SO TO ALLOW FOR A LITTLE BIT OF GRACE, WE PUT IN THE ORDINANCE THAT THEY ARE REQUESTING A 14 FOOT SETBACK.
COULD YOU SHOW THE FIRST SLIDE THAT YOU PUT UP? YEAH, THAT ONE.
WELL, THIS ONE OR THIS ONE? WE MAKE ONE? YEAH.
WE HAVE THIS FOR EVERY, UH, ZONING DISTRICT, BUT IT KIND OF LAYS OUT GRAPHICALLY, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT A CORNER SETBACK OR REAR SETBACK, TRYING TO MAKE THE TWO OF THOSE BE THE SAME.
AND SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE REAR SETBACK, YOU KNOW, IT, IT SAYS 15 FEET IN THAT TABLE.
UH, BUT IT HAS THE EXPONENT AFTER REAR NUMBER TWO.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE BOTTOM AND TABLE NOTES IS WHERE IT ACTUALLY SPECIFIES IF A REAR YARD ABUTS ANY, UH, WATERWAY THAT THE REAR STEP BACK MUST BE 25 FEET.
AND THIS IS A STANDARD THAT WE CARRIED OVER FROM PREVIOUS, UH, ZONING ORDINANCE.
UH, DIDN'T REALLY NAIL DOWN EXACTLY WHEN IT WAS ADOPTED, BUT IT'S BEEN IN EFFECT FOR A LONG TIME.
UM, COULD YOU SPEAK TO SOME OF THE RATIONALE AS TO WHY WE HAVE THAT 25 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE WATER'S EDGE? YEAH, PROBABLY A LOT OF IT IS, UH, IT COULD HAVE TO DO WITH FEMA FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS, UH, IN CERTAIN AREAS, WHAT THEY HAVE, WHAT THEY CALL THE FLOODWAY.
UH, SO THE FLOODWAY IS ACTUALLY NOT ABLE TO BE DEVELOPED IN, YOU CAN'T ENCROACH IN THE FLOODWAY.
UH, YOU CAN'T BUILD NEW STRUCTURES, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
UH, HOWEVER, A LOT OF AREAS THAT, THAT DO ABUT A WATERWAY THAT, UM, I'M SORRY THAT FLOOD WA COULD BE LARGER AND ENCROACHING THAT 25 FEET.
UH, ADDITIONALLY I COULD, YOU KNOW, ANTICIPATE MAYBE PEOPLE WANT TO HAVE A, A VIEW OF THE WATER.
THEY DON'T WANT STRUCTURES BLOCKING THE VIEW, UH, WITHIN A CERTAIN AMOUNT.
AND DID THIS REQUIRE NOTIFICATION TO ANY OF THE NEIGHBORS THAT, THAT HAVE THEIR YARD IN VIEW? AND WAS THERE ANY FEEDBACK FROM THE NEIGHBORS? WE DID NOT RECEIVE FEEDBACK.
UH, THIS TABLE THAT I SHOWED IN THE BEGINNING, UH, DOES STATE THAT PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLISHED NOTICE AND MAILED NOTICE IS REQUIRED FOR THIS.
AND SO ALL THREE OF THOSE WERE, WERE COMPLIED.
THERE'S A SIGN IN THEIR FRONT YARD.
WE SENT MAIL NOTICE TO ALL THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET.
UM, BUT LIKE I SAID, WE, WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY OUTRAGEOUS, UH, CALLS OR ANYTHING.
IF, IF HE HAD TO GO 25 FOOT, WOULD THAT HE WOULD HAVE TO REDESIGN HIS HOUSE AND MAKE A SMALLER HOUSE TO BE ABLE TO BE ABLE TO GO WITH THE FRONT YARD TO THE BACKYARD? NO.
SO THE, THE HOUSE AS IT SITS, UH, IS IN COMPLIANCE.
UH, HOWEVER, THEY, IT'S AN ELEVATED HOUSE AS THE PICTURE I BELIEVE SHOWED.
AND SO THERE IS A REAR DOOR THAT I ASSUME THEY WOULD LIKE TO USE.
AND SO THEY COULD BUILD, YOU KNOW, THE, A MINIMUM SIZE 36 WIDE BY 36, YOU KNOW, LANDING WITH STAIRS FOR THAT ACCESS.
AND THAT WOULD NOT REQUIRE THE VARIANCE, UH, 'CAUSE IT, IT WOULD FIT UP CLOSE ENOUGH TO THE HOUSE.
BUT IF THEY'RE LOOKING TO A, TO DO A LARGER COVER DECK LIKE THIS, THEN IT, IT WOULD REQUIRE THE VARIANCE.
MY ONLY CONCERN IS THAT, THAT IF IT DOES ONE THING, IT MAKE THE SUBDIVISION LOOK LIKE, LOOK OUT, BALANCE AND THING.
EVERYTHING IS BALANCED IN THERE RIGHT NOW.
I MEAN, IN, IN FRONT, IN BACK, UH, I DON'T THINK IT MAKE
[00:10:01]
TOO MUCH DIFFERENCE, IN MY OPINION.WHAT IS THE CITY RECOMMENDATION? I WILL GET TO THAT.
UH, SO STAFF, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE DO, UH, RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
YOU KNOW, THERE IS AN EXISTING STRUCTURE BASICALLY IN THE SAME, UH, LOCATION AS WHAT IS PROPOSED, PLUS OR MINUS A FOOT.
UM, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SPECIFIC REVIEW CRITERIA THAT THIS DID NOT NECESSARILY MEET LETTER FOR LETTER, UH, LIKE THERE'S SUPPOSED TO BE A HARDSHIP.
SO IS, IS THE HARDSHIP SELF-IMPOSED IN THIS SITUATION? MAYBE, YES.
UH, DO THEY NEED THIS SIZE OF A PORCH? NEED IS A STRONG WORD, PROBABLY.
UH, WHAT THEY NEED IS THEY NEED EGRESS OUT THAT REAR DOOR.
COULD THEY ACHIEVE THAT WITH A SMALLER, UH, LANDING AND A REGULAR SET OF STAIRS? YES.
UM, BUT THE REQUEST HERE TODAY IS, IS TO ALLOW A LARGER COVERED PORCH IN THAT AREA.
IT'S AN ELEVATED DECK WITH A ROOF.
SO THE ISSUE MAY BE THE NEIGHBOR'S VIEW.
AND SO THAT'S THE POINT WHERE, NOPE, WE'RE BACK.
IS THAT RECOMMEND WE APPROVE? UH, SO WHAT THE VARIANCE YES MA'AM.
AFTER STAFF, AFTER STAFF PRESENTATION, WE DO LIKE TO, YOU KNOW, GIVE A OPPORTUNITY FOR THE BOARD TO ASK QUESTIONS TO THE APPLICANT OR THE APPLICANT IF THEY, IF THEY HAVE ANY, ANY INPUT.
BUT THAT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AT THIS TIME.
SO THE, THE KIND OF TWO BIG CONCERNS THAT I HEARD WERE POTENTIALLY FLOODPLAIN ISSUES, BUT I THINK WE DECIDED THAT'S PROBABLY NOT THE CASE HERE, RIGHT? THIS IS NOT ENCROACHED IN THE FLOODWAY.
AND THEN THE OTHER ONE WOULD BE VIEWS FROM THE NEIGHBORS.
YARDS, WHICH WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY FEEDBACK FROM ANY OF THE NEIGHBORS, CORRECT? YES.
JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I HAMMERED THAT POINT.
DO WE HAVE ANYTHING FROM THE APPLICANT'S? DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR US? WE'RE WILLING TO ANSWER.
ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? FOR THE APPLICANTS? MM-HMM.
THEN WE WILL GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO ITEM SIX B.
AND IT WILL, WE'RE FIRST WE'LL ADJO ADJOURN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND THEN ON TO ITEM SIX B, CONSIDERATION
[6B. Consideration and possible action concerning a request for a variance from the minimum requirement stating if a rear yard of any premises abuts a lake or waterway or abuts upon a common area that adjoins a lake or waterway, the principal or accessory building shall not be closer than 25 feet to the water's edge of Subsec. 18-7.3. General Residential (GR) of the Unified Development Code (UDC) – with such variance allowing a setback of no closer than 14.0 feet to the water's edge for the property of approx. ± 0.18 acres, located at 4024 FATTA DR and legally described as ABST 19 PERRY & AUSTIN SUR LOT 16 & E 5 FT LOT 15 FOX TRACE SUB. ]
AND POSSIBLE ACTION CONCERNING A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT STATING IF A REAR YARD OF ANY PREMISES, A BUTTS, A LAKE OR WATERWAY, OR A BUTTS UPON A COMMON AREA THAT ADJOINS A LAKE OR WATERWAY, THE PRINCIPLE OR ACCESSORY BUILDING SHALL NOT BE CLOSER THAN 25 FEET TO THE WATER'S EDGE OF SUBSECTION 18 DASH 7.3.GENERAL RESIDENTIAL OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.
WITH SUCH VARIANCE ALLOWING A SETBACK OF NO CLOSER THAN 14 FEET TO THE WATER'S EDGE FOR THE PROPERTY OF APPROXIMATELY PLUS OR MINUS 0.18 ACRES LOCATED AT 4 0 2 4 FOTA DRIVE AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS ABSTRACT 19 PER AND AUSTIN SIR LOT 16 AND E FIVE FEET.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THIS ITEM? YOU GOTTA GO TO SIX C.
UH, WELL, I THINK WE'RE ON SIX B FIRST.
SIX C IS A SEPARATE, EXCUSE ME, SEPARATE.
I MAKE A MOTION WE ACCEPT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND, UH, GRANT THE, UH, UH, UH, VARIANCE.
AND THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.
[6C. Consideration and possible action concerning approval of the 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission application deadline and meeting schedule.]
CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION CONCERNING APPROVAL OF THE 2026 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPLICATION DEADLINE AND MEETING SCHEDULE.IT IS, UH, ESSENTIALLY THE SAME SCHEDULE AS WE HAVE NOW, UH, FOURTH MONDAY AT 6:00 PM UH, THE ONLY NOTE THAT I MAY, UH, MAKE MENTION TO THE BOARD IS THAT THE CURRENT MAYOR HAS EXPRESSED, UM, A DESIRE TO TRY TO HAVE UNIFORMITY WITH ALL MEETINGS.
AND SO AT THIS TIME, CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS START AT 7:00 PM UH, NOT A REQUIREMENT, JUST A SUGGESTION FROM THE MAYOR THAT HE WOULD LIKE THEM FOR, YOU KNOW, THE PUBLIC, UH, TO KNOW, HEY, IF THERE'S A MEETING AT CITY HALL, IT'S GONNA BE AT THE SAME TIME.
UH, IT'S PROBABLY WORTH NOTING THAT P AND Z, UH, THEY CHANGED THEIR TIME TO SIX 30 GETTING THERE.
UM, BUT ANYWAY, THAT'S ALL I GOT FOR THAT.
[00:15:01]
I GOT A QUESTION.APPROVAL OF THE 2026 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPLICATION.
WHAT IS THAT? IT SHOULD BE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
YEAH, THAT WAS JUST SOME CARRY OVER TEXT.
UM, DO I NEED TO REREAD THAT FOR THE PROCEDURAL BOARD OF, IS IS THAT ON THE AGENDA? I'M READING ALL, YEAH, IT'S ON THE AGENDA IS SORRY ABOUT THAT PLANNING ZONING.
SO WE ARE TALKING ABOUT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND WE DO NEED A, UH, APPROVAL.
I THINK WE ARE AT SIX O'CLOCK IF WE CAN.
UH, THAT'S TOTALLY UP TO THE BOARD.
SEVEN O'CLOCK MEETINGS ARE TOO, ARE BAD.
YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE DINNER BEFORE YOU GET UP HERE, YOU GO TO SLEEP.
AND I, I LIKE A SIX O'CLOCK MEETING.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS? I MOVE, WE KEEP OUR MEETINGS AT, UH, SIX O'CLOCK.
AND, AND ARE YOU INCLUDING APPROVAL OF THIS CALENDAR IN THAT MOTION? YES.
ALRIGHT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.
ALRIGHT, EVERYONE HAVE A HAPPY THANKSGIVING.