[CALL TO ORDER]
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
[1. Public Hearing to consider Application BOA 0323-0006; Variance to Section 3-33A.II.2.f.ii.F of the County Land Development Code]
[00:01:34]
> MR. CHAIRMAN AND THE BOARD. IS THE APPLICANT IS THE CLAY COUNTY CHURCH OF THE BROTHEREN, AGENT IS JANICE FLEET. THE PARCEL IS LOCATED AT 1811 HENLY ROAD. FUTURE LAND USE IS BRANNEN FIELD MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY. THE REQUEST IS TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM FRONT SETBACK FROM AS I INDICATED THE PARCEL IS LOCATED IN THE VILLAGE ZONE IN THE BRANNEN FIELD MASTER
CLAN COMMUNITY LAND USE. >> THE COUNTY IS IMPROVING COUNTY ROAD THE INTERSECTION OF COUNT ROAD 220 AND HENLY, THIS IS REQUIRING FOR THE COUNTY TO TAKE SOME OF THE PROPERTY FROM THE CHURCH THERE'S ALSO A 25-FOOT CUA EASEMENT ALONG HENLY AND COUNTY ROAD 220, WHICH WOULD HAVE TO BE MOVED INTERIOR INTO THE CHURCH PROPERTY WITH THE RESULTING ACQUISITION OF THE NEW RIGHT-OF-WAY FROM THE COUNTY, OR, BY THE COUNTY. ALL OF THESE CIRCUMSTANCES SOMEWHAT LIMIT THE LOCATION OR THE ABILITY TO LOCATE THE NEW SANCTUARY BUILDING. STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE HOWEVER THE GRANTS OF THE VEINS IS NOT CON TRAER TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, THEREFORE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE INCREASING THE FRONT SET BOOK FROM 25 FEET TO 105-FEET. THERE ARE SIX CRITERIA FOR REVIEWING AND MAKING A DECISION ON A VARIANCE, I'LL BRIEFLY TOUCH ON EACH ONE OF THOSE. AS I INDICATED, THAT THE CHURCH HAS AN EXISTING STRUCTURE, WHICH THEY DESIRE TO KEEP IN THE PRESENT LOCATION.
THE COUNTY IS WIDENING COUNTY ROAD 220 AND HENLY INTERSECTION AND MAKING IMPROVEMENTS. AND THOSE, AS I STATED EARLIER DO
[00:05:01]
MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO MEET THE REQUIRED MAXIMUM 25-FOOT SETBACK. THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS RELATED TO THE TAKING OF THE CHURCH PROPERTY AND THE REMOVAL OF THE CCU EASEMENT FOR THE INTERIOR OF THE PROPERTY ARE NOT A RESULT OF ANY ACT BY THE APPLICANT THE DESIRE TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IN THAT'S CURRENT POSITION IS THE DECISION OF THE APPLICANT. THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL CONFER ON THE APPLICANT A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE THAT IS DENIED OTHER LANDS WITHIN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT BY ALLOWING AN, A DEEPER MAXIMUM SETBACK. THE LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD REQUIRE TO THE REMOVAL OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE WHICH WOULD BE ACCORDING TO THE APPLICATION, A HARDSHIP TO APPLICANT. THE REQUEST TO INCREASE THE FRONT SETBACK TO 105 FEET IS THE MINIMUM TO MAKE POSSIBLE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NEW SANCTUARY BUILDING BASED ON THE PLANS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT. THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WOULD APPLICANT IN OTHER WORDS TO THE WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF?>> HAVE WE RECEIVED I KNOW THIS BORDERS AN EXISTING SUBDIVISION.
HAVE WE RECEIVED ANYTHING FROM THEM?
>> THERE ARE NO COMMENTS REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL.
>> WHAT'S THE REASON FOR MAXIMUM SETBACK, ESPECIALLY ON A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY WHERE TYPICALLY YOU HAVE A PARKING LOT IN FRONT AND BUILDINGS FURTHER BACK.
SETBACK IS TO TRY TO FORCE MUM - THINGS UP CLOSE TO THE ROAD AND MAKE THEM MORE PEDESTRIAN-FRIENDLY AND WALKABLE. I MEAN, THAT WAS THE REAL REASON BEHIND IT.
>> CHAIR: OKAY. IF THE APPLICANT OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVE WOULD COME FORWARD, PLEASE. AND JANUARY MISS, YOU HAVE TO STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
>> JANICE FLOOET, 11557 HIDDEN HARBOR WAY. JACKSONVILLE.
>> DO YOU SWEAR THAT EVERYTHING THAT YOU ARE GOING TO SAY IS GOING TO BE THE TRUTH SO HELP YOU GOD?
>> CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE AERIAL. IF YOU NOTICE, IT'S NOT ONLY DO WE HAVE THE EXISTING TWO, BUT, THE SITE ITSELF IS IRREGULAR. BECAUSE, OF THAT INTERSECTION OF HENLY AND 220 IS NOT A PERPETRNDICULAR DESIGN. , THE ADDRESS IS HENLEY, IF YOUR GPS TOOK YOU THERE, YOU WOULD PASS IT. SO, THAT'S A SAFETY ISSUE, YOU KNOW, BY BEING ABLE TO RELOCATE THE CHURCH BUILDING TO OFF OF 220 WILL BE AN IMPROVEMENT, AND I AGREE WITH YOU, MR. KRAUT THAT USUALLY YOU DO PUT THE PARKING IN THE FRONT.
BUT, THAT IS NOT THE INTENT OF THE BRANAN FIELD MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY. I UNDERSTAND FROM THE PLANNING CONCEPT THE REASON BUT SOMETIMES IT JUST DOESN'T ALWAYS WORK. AND INITIALLY WHEN THE ENGINEER CAME TO ME WITH THE SITE PLAN IT SHOWED THE PARKING IN THE FRONT AND I HAD NO, I CAN DEAL WITH ASKING FOR THE SETBACK BECAUSE OF THE TOMB BUT WE HAVE OTHER PLACES TO PUT THE PARKING.
AND IF YOU'RE NOT FAMILIAR WITH, I DO HAVE A COUPLE. (INAUDIBLE) O THE TOMB, IT'S A GOOD SIZED STRUCTURE THAT THEY'VE HAD FOR YEARS. THE ONLY COMMENT THE PASTOR GOT FROM THE COMMUNITY WITH THE SIGNS IS THAT THEY WERE AFRAID THAT THE CHURCH WAS LEAVING. AND THEY HAD, NO, NO, NO, WE'RE MAKING AN INVESTMENT IN THE COMMUNITY. AND THAT MADE THEM HAPPY. BUT, WE FEEL THIS IS GOING TO BE AN IMPROVEMENT, YOU COULD SEE ON THE SITE PLAN WE'RE TRYING TO MEET THE INTENT OF THE BRANAN FIELD REQUIREMENT.
BUT, WITH THE SHAPE OF THE LOT AND THE PARCEL BECAUSE OF THE INTERSECTION OF 220 AND HENLEY, MAKE IT IS DIFFICULT, AND WE WANTED TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING SANCTUARY. AND SO, FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS WE ARE ASKING FOR YOUR APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE.
>> CHAIR: I ASSUME WITH THE FOUR LANES OR 5 LANES OF 220,
[00:10:03]
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GIVE AWE LEFT-TURN ACCESS INTO THEDRIVEWAY? >> PROBABLY. AND IT WILL PROBABLY BE MOVED FAR ENOUGH BACK. BUT, YES, THOSE REQUIREMENTS WILL COME. AND AS WE GO THROUGH DRC, BUT, WE CAN'T GO THROUGH DRC, BECAUSE, THE FIRST COMMENT IS THAT YOU NEED TO GET 25 FOOT BACK. AND YOU HAVE TO GET THIS VARIANCE. AND I THINK THIS IS HOW IT ORIGINALLY CAME UP, THEY HAD A PRE-APP, THE ENGINEER DID AND THEY WERE TOLD THEY COULDN'T PUT IT THERE. THEY WEREN'T EVEN AWARE OF SOME OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS, BUT, I TOLD THE CHURCH THAT THEY HAD TO REQUIRE WITH THOSE. THEY'RE GOING TO AGREE WITH EVERYTHING ELSE IN THE BRANAN FIELD REQUIREMENTS. THIS IS THE ONLY
ONE. >> CHAIR: DO ANY OF THE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NO. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU. >> CHAIR: IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS APPLICATION? SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THAT PART OF THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD. QUESTIONS?
>> HE MOVES FOR APPROVAL. AND I GOT TO SECOND. I MEAN, THE MAXIMUM SETBACK IS STUPID. ESPECIALLY IN THIS CASE, IT'S NOT LIKE THE CHURCH PEOPLE ARE WALKING ALONG THE STREET AND THEY'RE GOING TO STOP IN A 7-DAY A WEEK BUILDING, AND THERE'S ALREADY PRIVACY FENCES ALONG THOSE HOUSES.
>> CHAIR: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL. ALL IN FAVOR AAYE. (CHORUS OF AYES).
>> ALL OPPOSED? >> CHAIR: OKAY. GOOD LUCK TO
[2. Public Hearing to consider Application BOA 0323-0005; Variance to Section 3-16(b)(2) of the County Land Development Code.]
YOU. WITH THAT, I'LL GO TO OUR SECOND WHICH IS HEARING TO CONSIDER APPLICATION BOA 0323-005; VARIANCE TO SECTION 3-16(B),(2) OF THE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.>> BOA 0323-0005 IS A REQUEST BY NEAL AND MELISSA ALEX AND THE PARCEL'S LOCATED AT 14489 MOHAMA BLUFF ROAD AND THE ZONING IS RESIDENTIAL AND THE LAND IS THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW FOR THE APLACEMENT OF AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT IN THE SIDE YARD.
HERE IS THE PARCEL OUTLINED, AS YOU COULD SEE IT HAS FRONTAGE ON MUHAMMAD BLUFF BUT ALSO FRONTAGE ON 2309. AND IT'S GOT A TRAINING -- TRIANGLE SHAPE. THE PARCEL IS 2.5 ACRES IN SIZE AND LOCATED IN THE ART WIN SUBDIVISION. THE PARCEL IS PARTIALLY SHAPED WITH A 403 FRONTAGE IT AT MUHAMMAD BLUFF.
AND THE REAR END IS 87 FEET. AND THE PARCEL HAS 545 FEET OF FRONTAGE ALONG COUNTY ROAD 209. THE RA ZONING DISTRICT PROHIBITS ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE SIDE YARD. THE EXISTING PRIMARY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE WAS CONSTRUCTED ABOUT 100 FEET BACK FROM MUHAMMAD BLUFF BECAUSE OF THAT, THAT REAR YARD, WHICH IS DESIGNED THAT AREA SIDE PROPERTY LINE BEHIND THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE ON THE PARCEL. THAT 100-FOOT SETBACK REDUCES THAT REAR YARD WHERE NORMALLY THE ADU, SPECIAL DWELLING UNIT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BE PLACED. THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT IS AN ALLOWABLE CONDITIONAL USE IN THE RA ZONING DISTRICT. ACCORDING TO THE APPLICATION, THE LOCATION OF THE PRIMARY RESIDENT'S DWELLING IN THE GARAGE ALONG WITH THE LIMITED YARD IN THE REAR, DUE TO THE TRIANGLE SHAPE, RESULTS IN THE NEED TO RELOCATE THE ADU IN THE SIDE YARD OF THE PARCEL. STAFF FINDS THAT THE
[00:15:04]
REQUESTED VARIANCE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, HOWEVER, STAFF BELIEVES THERE ARE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES IN PLACE THAT GRANTING THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND THEREFORE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST TO LOCATE THE ADU IN THE SIDE YARD. AGAIN, JUST BRIEFLY GOING OVER EACH OF THE CRITERIA FOR A VARIANCE. THE TRIANGLE SHAPE OF THE PARCEL IS SOMEWHAT UNIQUE FOR PARCELS IN THIS COUNTY. THE PARCEL SHAPE IS DICTATED BY THE ROADWAY LAYOUT OF MUHAMMAD BLUFF AND 209. AND THE LOCATION OF THE PRIMARY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING LIMITS THE AREA AS DEFINED AS A REAR YARD TO LOCATE THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS RELATED TO SHAPE THE PARCEL ARE NOT A RESULT OF THE APPLICANT. THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE TO PLACE AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE SIDE YARD WILL CONFER ON THE APPLICANT A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE DENIED BY OTHER LANDS IN RA ZONING DISTRICTS. A LITTLE INTERPRETATION OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD NOT DEPRIVE THE APPLICANT RIGHTS COMMONLY ENJOYED BY OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE RA ZONING DISTRICT, IT WOULD JUST, UM, GREATLY INHIBIT OR PREVENT THE UTILIZATION OF THE ABILITY TO PLACE THE ADU ON THAT PARCEL. THE BENEFICIAL USE OF THE PROPERTY IS NOT DEPENDENT ON THE ABILITY TO PLACE THE ADU ON THE SIDE YARD. THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE INJURIOUS TO THE AREA OR OTHERWISE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE. THE SIDE YARD WHERE THE ADU IS PROPOSED IS ADJACENT TO THE FRONTAGE COUNT ROAD 209, SO, THERE ARE NO NEIGHBORS ON THE SIDE OF THAT PARCEL. THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL BE ON THE GENERAL INTENT OF THE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.AND HERE, I PROVIDE YOU WITH UM, THE SITE PLAN WHICH WAS PROVIDED IN THE APPLICATION, AND AS YOU COULD SEE, IN THIS INSTANCE, MUHAMMAD BLUFF IS ON THE BOTTOM AND COUNTY ROAD 209 IS TO THE LEFT AND YOU COULD SEE WHERE THEY DESIRE TO PLACE OR ARE REQUESTING TO PLACE THE ADU WHICH WOULD BE BETWEEN THE HOUSE AND THE FRONTAGE WITH COUNTY ROAD 209, IF YOU HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS OF STAFF? >> ISN'T THE ADU ACTUALLY A
HOUSE? >> IT'S AN ACCESSORY DWELLING.
YES. THAT'S WHAT IT MEANS. ACCESSORY DWELLING.
>> SO, WE'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE TWO HOMES ON THIS PROPERTY?
>> RIGHT. BUT, THEY'RE ALLOWED TO, AS AN ADU, THERE ARE CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS THAT HAVE TO BE MET SUCH AS IT CAN ONLY BE A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF THE PRIMARY RESIDENTIAL UNIT, IT HAS TO LOOK THE SAME ON THE OUTSIDE, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.
>> IT'S A FREE-STANDING? >> YEAH, THERE ARE A LOT OF ADUS, WELL, I DON'T WANT TO SAY A LOT, BUT, THERE ARE ADUS AROUND THE COUNTY AND IT'S ALOWED AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE RA ZONING DISTRICT. SO, IT HAS MET ALL OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS. THE ZONING WHICH PROHIBITS ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
IN THE SIDE IS THE ONLY HURDLE. >> CHAIR: ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS? >> OKAY. I'LL ASK THE APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD AND TALK ABOUT WHAT YOU WANT TO DO.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
>> HI, MAY NAME IS DOROTHY GILLARD, AND I'M THE MOTHER OF THE PERSON THAT LIVES ON THE MUHAMMAD BLUFF.
>> DO YOU SWEAR THAT EVERYTHING THAT YOU ARE ABOUT TO SAY IS THE
TRUTH SO HELP YOU GOD? >> YES, I DO.
>> CHAIR: GO RIGHT AHEAD. >> WE ARE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE LOCATION OF MY NEW HOME ON THEIR PROPERTY. AFTER MY HUSBAND DIED IN 2021, I FOUND IT HARDER TO LIVE BY MYSELF. I
[00:20:01]
HAVE A COUPLE OF PETS TO HELP KEEP ME COMPANY, BUT, I FIND THAT I NEED TO BE CLOSER TO MY KIDS AND MY DAUGHTER HAD OFFERED TO, UM, LET ME BUILD ON HER PROPERTY SO THAT I COULD BE CLOSE TO HER AND SHE CAN TAKE CARE OF ME THE REST OF MY LIFE.AND, I'M NOT READING EVERYTHING SHE PUT DOWN HERE, I'M SORRY. I FEEL THAT HAVING THIS HOME WILL HELP ME, BECAUSE I'M GOING TO BUILD IT TO BE HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE, BECAUSE, I FEEL LIKE MY BALANCE ISN'T THAT GOOD ANYMORE AND I FEEL THAT'S GOING TO BE AN ISSUE FOR ME. AND IT'S A SMALLER HOME THAN WHAT I LIVE IN RIGHT NOW. THE REASON FOR THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS THAT OUR PROPERTY, THEIR PROPERTY IS TRIANGLED IN SHAPE WITH THE LARGER PART OF THE LAND BEING IN THE FRONT WHERE THE MAIN HOME IS AS YOU COULD SEE ON THE SITE. THERE'S NO ROOM FOR ADU TO BE PLACED BEHIND THE HOUSE BECAUSE OF THE NATURAL BARRIERS AND PLACEMENT OF A BIG RV GARAGE AND THE SEPTIC FILL. IN ADDITION, THE MAIN HOUSE ONLY HAS A LOCKABLE ACCESS THROUGH THE FRONT DOOR, THEREFORE, FOR MOBILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY REASONS, WE ARE REQUESTING THAT WE ARE ALLOWED TO PLACE THE ADU ON THE SIDE OF THE MAIN HOUSE OPPOSITE, AND GOES ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY. ALL OF THE NEIGHBORS HAVE SIGNED A LETTER WAIVERING, BECAUSE, THAT WAS A REQUEST WE HAD TO DO WITH ANY OBJECTIONS TO PLACE THE ADU ON THE SIDE OF THE MAIN HOUSE. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WE HAVE MAINTAIN A NATURAL BARRIER OF TREES AND BUSHES AROUND THE PROPERTY FOR SECURITY AND PRIVACY REASONS.
JUST WITHIN A YEAR OF LIVING THERE, THERE WAS TWO MAJOR AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENTS ON COUNTY ROAD 209 BORDERING OUR PROPERTY, ONE THAT CRASHED INTO THE PROPERTY HITTING A TREE. COUNTY ROAD 209 HAS A SPEED LIMIT OF 45 AND IS BEING USED AS A RACE TRACK FOR MOTORISTS, THEY GO PRETTY FAST THERE. SO, IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE THAT BARRIER TO MAIN TAIN A PROTECTIVE BARRIER, WHICH IS ANOTHER REASON WE'RE ASKING FOR THE VARIANCE.
WE HOPE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND OUR REASONING FOR THIS VARIANCE AND
GRANT OUR REQUEST. >> CHAIR: THANK YOU, MA'AM.
YOU ARE MR. ALEX? >> I'M MR. ALEX, YES.
>> CHAIR: DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD?
>> I JUST HAVE BETTER PICTURES OF THE NATURAL BARRIER, AND
HIGHLIGHTED, IT'S UP TO Y'ALL. >> CHAIR: IT'S PRETTY THICK
ALONG THERE, ISN'T IT? >> WHAT'S THAT?
>> CHAIR: THE BARRIER IS THICK?
>> WE MAINTAIN A 30-FOOT BARRIER.
>> CHAIR: THEY CAN'T HEAR YOU.
>> DO YOU NEED TO GET OVER HERE.
>> LIKE I SAID, I'VE GOT PICTURES OF THE DWELLING AND I'VE GOT COPIES OF THE LETTERS FROM THE NEIGHBORS, WE TALKED TO ALL THE NEIGHBORS AND I HAVE PICTURES OF THE NATURAL BARRIER, WITH THE ACCIDENT AT THE CORNER OF 209 AND MUHAMMAD BLUFF, THAT CAR WRECKED AND IF IT WEREN'T FOR THE PINE TREES, THEY WOULD HAVE COME THROUGH THE FRONT YARD AND AS FAST AS THEY WERE COMING, THEY WOULD HAVE COME THROUGH THE HOUSE. THAT'S WHY WE WANT TO MAINTAIN THIS BARRIER. YOU COME ONTO 209 AND THEY FLOOR IT AND TRUCK ON DOWN UNTIL THEY GET TO THE CORNER. THE MAIN THING IS THE SHAPE AND THE PROPERY LIMITS ANYTHING IN THE BACK.
>> CHAIR: RIGHT. EXACTLY. OKAY.
>> CHAIR: DO ANY OF Y'ALL HAVE QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT
OR HIS MOTHER-IN-LAW? >> WOULD YOU HAVE AN OBJECTION IF WE ADDED TO THE VARIANCE REQUEST THAT THE BUFFER REMAINED IF WE PUT IT IN THERE THAT THE BUFFER MUST REMAIN.
>> OH, THE BUFFER WILL REMAIN. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IT A PART OF THE REQUEST. PART OF THE VARIANCE.
>> IT'S PROBABLY 50-FEET DEEP. >> I'VE PICTURES OF IT IF YOU
WANT TO SEE IT. >> THE OTHER THING IS I HAVE A
[00:25:02]
QUESTION, HAVE YOU CHECKED IN, AS FAR AS ARE YOU ON SEPTIC OR>> WELL, YOU'RE ADDING ANOTHER STRUCTURE AND THAT CAN BE A PROBLEM FOR YOU JUST GETTING A PERMIT AS FAR AS THE HEALTH
DEPARTMENT. >> WE INITIALLY BUILT A BIGGER SEPTIC IN TO ALLOW FOR THE RV ALSO, THEY SAID THERE SHOULD BE NO ISSUE OF TIEING IT TO THE EXISTING.
>> OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW.
>> PART OF THE PERMITTING PROCESS FOR THAT ADU WILL BE
>> I THOUGHT THE SAME THING, THE PUMP TO GET IT OVER TO THE DRAIN FIELD. BUT, THAT'S NOT OUR'S.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION, AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE, THIS
PARCEL, COULD IT BE SPLIT OFF IN >> THAT'S ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS IN THE CODE. WELL, TODAY, IN THE CODE IT SAYS THAT, ADU COULD NOT BE SEPARATED OUT IF THEY DID THAT, YOU WOULD HAVE BOTH THOSE UNITS AND PARCELS WOULD BE NON-CONFORMING. SO, WHOEVER DID THAT WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DO ANYTHING ELSE.
>> THAT WAS MY QUESTION, IF IT WAS SPLIT, THE FORM HAS TWO
SEPARATE... >> TECHNICALLY, THEY WOULD, BUT, THEY WOULD BE NON-CONFORMING SO, THEY COULDN'T DO ANY IMPROVEMENTS TO EITHER ONE.
>> OKAY. >> I CAN'T KEEP THEM FROM SPLITTING IT. I CAN MAKE THEM NON-CONFORMING.
>> OKAY. >> THERE'S NO PLAN OF SPLITTING, THIS IS OUR LAST HOUSE, WE'VE BUILT FOUR SINCE BEING HERE FOR 20 YEARS, AND THE NIGHTMARE WE WENT THROUGH BUILDING THIS ONE. BASICALLY, THE BUILDER WALKED OFF IN THE MIDFUL BUILD AND WE FINISHED IT. IT WAS IN THE ESTATE TO GO TO MY DAUGHTER AND GRANDCHILDREN AND ET CETERA, ET CETERA. AND SO THERE'S NO PLAN FOR THE ALEX ESTATE GOING ANYWHERE.
>> CHAIR: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. >> CHAIR: IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE HERE THAT HAS ANYTHING TO SAY FOR OR AGAINST THIS
APPLICATION? >> YES, MA'AM. GO RIGHT AHEAD, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
>> I WAS WONDERING ABOUT THE SAME THING, ABOUT SEPARATING IT.
I AM HAPPY WHERE I LIVE, AND WE'VE GOT ALL FAMILY AROUND US, BUT, SOMETIME I'M GOING TO DIE, AND SOMETIME MY KIDS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT PROPERTY. AND, UM, I WAS INTERESTED IN THE ANSWER ABOUT BEING ABLE TO DIVIDE IT UP, AND, UNDER CURRENT RULES, I GUESS YOU CAN'T? IS
>> RIGHT. >> BUT, UM, THAT'S WHY PEOPLE COME FOR VARIANCES AND I WAS JUST WONDERING ABOUT THE EXPLANATION. THE AIR YELL VIEW THAT YOU HAD WAS BEFORE THEIR BUILDING WAS BUILT. SO, IT DOESN'T REALLY GIVE YOU A GOOD PERSPECTIVE. ANYWAY, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO IT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. MY QUESTION WAS, FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS, UM, WHAT MY
KIDS WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH. >> WELL, LEGALLY, THEY COULD BUILD AN ACCESSORY DWELLING IN THE BACKYARD RIGHT NOW. WHAT THEY'RE HERE BEFORE THIS BODY IS BECAUSE THEY WANT TO PLACE IT ON THE SIDE OF THEIR HOME AS OPPOSED TO THE BACK. SO, THE USE IS ALLOWED, IT'S JUST THE LOCATION THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE A
RULING ON. >> CHAIR: OKAY. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. >> CHAIR: THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE, SEEING NONE I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK
TO THE BOARD. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE BOA 0323-0005 WITH AN ADDITION THAT THE 30-FOOT NATURAL BUFFER ALONG 209 REMAIN.
>> AND MUHAMMAD BLUFF. >> BOTH.
>> (INAUDIBLE) >> OKAY. (INAUDIBLE).
>> CHAIR: OKAY. THAT'S WHERE THE.
>> MAY BE CALL IT THE EXISTING BUFFER.
>> THAT'S WHAT I HAD, THE EXISTING BUFFER.
>> THE EXISTING, WHAT'S CLEAR NOW STAYS CLEAR, AND IF YOU WANTED TO ADD TREES, THAT'S FINE. BUT, WHAT'S CLEAR STAYS
CLEAR, WHAT'S TREED STAYS TREED. >> OKAY.
>> I MADE THAT MOTION. >> SECOND?
>> I'LL SECOND. >> CHAIR: OKAY, I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND SO APPROVE BOA 0323-0005 AS AMENDED. ALL
[00:30:03]
(CHORUS OF AYES) >> ALL OPPOSED?
>> PASSED 4-0. GOOD LUCK TO YOU.
[3. Public Hearing to consider Application BOA 0323-0004; Variance to Section 3-33 B.B.3.e.vii of the County Land Development Code.]
>> THANK YOU. >> CHAIR: AND THE FINAL ONE THAT WE HAVE TONIGHT IS BOA 0323-0004.
>>> AND WITHOUT FURTHER ADIEU, MR. BROWN AGAIN.
>> MR. CHAIRMAN THIS IS AN APPLICATION BY SETH WITH, THE PARCEL IS LOCATED AT 1853 COUNTY ROAD 209 B. THE ZONING IS LAKE AS BURY, RURAL COMMUNITY. THIS IS TO ALLOW THE PLACEMENT OF AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE NEAR TO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE TO THE FRONT OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING. TO THE LEFT IS BLACK CREEK, IT'S A WATERFRONT PARCEL. THIS IS 0.71-ACRE PARCEL WITH APPROXIMATELY 100 FEET OF FRONTAGE ON BLACK CREEK, ACCESS TO THE PARCEL IS VIA A 15-FOOT INGRESS, EGRESS EASEMENT FROM COUNTY ROAD 209 B. THE REAR YARD IS THE AREA BETWEEN THE RESIDENTIAL UNIT AND BLACK CREEK AND THE FRONT YARD IS IN THE RESIDENTIAL UNIT. OPPOSITE OF BLACK CREEK. THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO PLACE AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN WHAT IS DEFINED AS THE FRONT YARD. AS AT THE SET FORT IN THE APPLICATION, THE DESIRED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WILL MEET THE REQUIRED SETBACKS FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. WITHIN THAT ZONING DISTRICT, UM, IT DOES NOT ALLOW FOR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE PLACED IN THE FRONT YARD.
GOING OVER AND STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT, THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS NOT CONSISTENT OR FINDS THAT IT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND STAFF RECOMMEND THE DENIAL OF THE REQUESTED VARIANCE. THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE WAS ORIGINALLY BUILT IN '65 ACCORDING NOT PROPERTY APPRAISER INFORMATION. THE FRONT YARD IS DEEMED TO BE THAT PORTION OF LOT BETWEEN THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE AND THE PROPERTY LINE CLOSEST TO 209 B. THE LOCATION OF THE PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE DEFINES THE FRONT YARD OF THE PARCEL. THE PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE WAS CONSTRUCTED AT IT'S PRESENT LOCATION PRIOR TO THE APPLICANT OWNING THE PROPERTY. THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL ALLOW THE APPLICANT A PRIVILEGE THAT IS DENIED BY OTHER LANDS IN THE LLAKE ASBURY, COMMUNITY DISTRICT. BY ALLOWING THE PLACEMENT OF AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE BETWEEN THE FRONT OF THE PRINCIPLE BUILDING AND THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. THE LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD NOT DEPRIVE THE APPLICANT RIGHTS COMMONLY ENJOYED BY OTHERS IN THE LARC ZONING DISTRICT. THE INGRESS, EGRESS EASEMENT PROVIDES ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY AND ENDS AT THE PROPERTY LINE CLOSEST TO OR ACCESSES THE PROPERTY AT THE PROPERTY LINE CLOSEST TO COUNTY ROAD 209 B. THE PLACEMENT OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WHICH, AGAIN AS INDICATED BY THE APPLICATION TO BE A GARAGE WOULD BE MORE CONVENIENT FOR THE PROPERTY ENOHER RATHER THAN REQUIRING THE TRAVERSING OF THE LENGTH OF THE PROPERTY IN THAT AREA BETWEEN THE PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE AND BLACK CRCREEK. .
THE OFFICIAL USE OF THE PROPERTY IS NOT DEPENDENT ON THE ABILITY TO PLACE THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE FRONT YARD. THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE INJURIOUS TO THE AREA OR DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND, THE REQUIRED MINIMUM SIDE, FRONT-YARD SETBACKS WILL BE MET ACCORDING TO THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE APPLICATION, SHOULD THE APPROVAL BE GRANTED TO ALLOW FOR THE PLACEMENT OF THIS STRUCTURE IN THE FRONT YARD. ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF?
[00:35:03]
>> WHY DOESN'T THIS PROPERTY ABUT A PUBLIC?
>> THERE'S A NUMEROUS AREAS, BUT, THIS AREA, THEY'RE, A LOT OF THE PARCELS, ESPECIALLY ALONG THE RIVER, IF THEY WERE LONG VIEW PARCELS AT ONE TIME AND CHOPPED UP OVER THE YEARS AND THE ACCESS VIA AN EASEMENT IS BASICALLY A DRIVEWAY USED BY ALL OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS IN LINE. I THINK THERE ARE TWO OR THREE PARCELS. ONE OR TWO PARCELS BETWEEN THIS PROPERTY AND 209.
>> BECAUSE ON THE AIR -- AERIAL ON THE SURVEY, I CAN'T
SEE 209. >> I APOLOGIZE, THAT'S THE AREA THERE. JUST, AND, ADDED IT AND PROBABLY THE APPLICANT WILL POINT THIS OUT, THE WAY THAT THE HOUSE IS, THE FRONT, I BELIEVE THE FRONT WHAT'S CONSIDERED THE FRONT DOOR OF THE HOUSE BASICALLY FACES WHERE THAT EASEMENT IS.
>> THERE'S ALREADY ONE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE FRONT YARD, IT'S QUITE SMALL IS THAT A PUMP HOUSE OR SOMETHING?
>> YOU WOULD HAVE TO ASK THE APPLICANT, I'M NOT SURE WITH A
>> OBVIOUSLY, YOU'RE THE APPLICANT, YOU'RE THE ONLY PERSON HERE, IF YOU WOULD COME FORWARD AND GET ON THE MIC SO THAT WE COULD ASK YOU A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. PLEASE STATE YOUR
NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> SETH WHITE, 1843 COUNTY ROAD
THREE. >> EVERYTHING THAT YOU ARE ABOUT TO SAY THE TRUTH SO HELP YOU GOD?
>> YES. >> CHAIR: OKAY. I HAD THE SAME QUESTION THAT BILL HAS, WHAT ARE WE SEEING ON THE
SURVEY, WHAT IS THAT THERE? >> YES, THAT'S A PRE-BUILT, HOME DEPOT STYLE SHED THERE WERE THE PREVIOUS OWNER. I HAVE SOMEONE THAT IS GOING TO REMOVE THAT AND REPLACE THAT WITH THE METAL GARAGE. THE ACCESS TO BLACK CREEK WOULD BE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY IS WHERE THE CURRENT DRAIN FIELD IS. SO, MY ACCESS TO THE, WHAT, WE CALL THE BACKYARD, BLACK CREEK SIDE OF THE YARD IS LIMITED BECAUSE OF THE DRAIN FIELD. SO, BASICALLY, IT'S THE ONLY SPOT THAT I HAVE TO BUILD A STRUCTURE FOR YOU KNOW, TO KEEP THE CAR.
>> IT'S A PRETTY BIG STRUCTURE, I MEAN, 1400-SQUARE FEET?
>> YES. SO, MY ORIGINAL IDEA WAS, I DID SQUARE FOOTAGE OF COVERED, I WANTED TO DO A 35 X 28 ENCLOSURE WITH A 15-FOOT LEAN TOMB STYLE ON THE EAST SIDE TOWARDS BLACK CREEK TO PARK A VEHICLE OR JUST TO HAVE A COVERED AREA. BUT, THE ACTUAL ENCLOSED WOULD BE 28 X 35. ALSO YOUR APPLICATION SAYS THAT YOU WANT TO PUT THE SHED IN THE BACKYARD?
>> WELL, SEE, THE CONFUSION IS, WHEN I APPLIED, I WAS TOLD THAT MY SETUP THAT THE RIVER WAS THE FRONT YARD. AND THAT THE ROADSIDE WAS THE BACKYARD. SO, IF THE APPLICATION IS SAYING THAT, THAT'S A CONFUSION ON MY PART OF WHICH WAS CONSIDERED
>> AND THAT IS OFTEN A CONFUSION THAT WE SEE A LOT.
ONE OF THE ISSUES WE HAVE IS IN THE CODE FOR WATERFRONT PROPERTIES, THERE WAS AN OPPORTUNITY WHEN THE ORIGINAL PERMIT CAME IN FOR THE HOUSE, TO DESIGNATE WHERE THE FRONT AND REAR YARD WOULD BE. WHAT HAPPENS IS PEOPLE, OFTENTIMES THAT WAS NEVER OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED. AND PEOPLE THEN PURCHASE IT, AND, THEY DON'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE TAT DETERMINATION BECAUSE THE CODE SAYS IT WAS TO BE MADE WHEN THE ORIGINAL PERMIT WAS APPLIED FOR.
[00:40:05]
>> RIGHT. SO, IF SOMEBODY WERE TO ASK FOR THAT, WE WOULDN'T BE
HERE. >> RIGHT, WHEN THIS HOUSE GOT ORIGINALLY PERMITTED IN THE MID-60S, HAD IT BEEN OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED AS THE FRONT YARD BEING BLACK CREEK, WE WOULD NOT
>> HOW BIG IS THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY?
>> I BELIEVE IT'S .72? >> YES. ALMOST THREE QUARTERS
OF AN ACRE. >> FOR ME, I WOULD BE WILLING TO MAKE A DECISION IN FAVOR, I WOULD WANT TO SEE A DRAWING OF WHERE THAT ACTUAL DRAIN FIELD IS. BECAUSE, THAT'S A BIG PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT LOOKS LIKE IT HAS PLENTY OF ROOM FOR YOUR HUGE GARAGE UNLESS YOU HAVE THE BIGGEST DRAIN FIELD IN THE WORLD. AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I WOULD NEED BEFORE I WOULD SAY YES. TO KNOW EXACTLY WHERE IT'S AT. NOT A HAND-DRAWN.
>> I UNDERSTAND. AND THE OTHER THING THAT I WOULD LIKE YOU GUYS TO CONSIDER IS THAT THE FRONT OF THE BLACK CREEK IS ON QUITE AN ELEVATION CHANGE AND ALSO, THAT'S THE BEAUTY OF THE PROPERTY. SO, I WOULD REALLY I WOULDN'T EVEN CONSIDER BUILDING THERE, THAT WOULD JUST, THAT'S THE WHOLE REASON FOR THAT PROPERTY IS THERE ON BLACK CREEK. IT'S BEAUTIFUL FROM THE WATER AND THE LAND. A BIT MORE COMPLICATED AS A BUILDING SITE
AS YOU KNOW. >> CAN MR. WHITE AS THE PROPERTY OWNER, CAN HE DESIGNATE THE WATERSIDE AS HIS FRONT YARD?
>> NOT NOW. >> THE OPTION WAS TO BE MADE WHEN THE PERMIT FOR THE ORIGINAL FOR THE ORIGINAL PERMIT FOR THE, UM, RESIDENTIAL UNIT WAS APPLIED FOR. THAT'S WHAT THE CODE SAYS,
UNFORTUNATELY. >> ARE THERE OTHER PROPERTIES CLOSE TO THERE WITH THE FRONT YARD THE OTHER WAY WITH
STRUCTURES ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE? >> I DON'T KNOW, I DIDN'T CHECK
THAT. >> MY NEIGHBORS HAVE GARAGE STRUCTURES IN FRONT OF THEIR HOMES, BUT, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, THEY'RE OKAY BECAUSE THEY'RE PROPERTIES ARE LARGER. SO, THEY HAVE ONE TO TWO ACRE PARCELS, SO, MY NEIGHBOR, DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH, I BELIEVE IS A TWO-ACRE OR ABOUTS SIZE, THEY HAVE, I THINK THREE METAL BUILDINGS WHICH WERE ALL PERMITTED LEGAL. SHE WAS ACTUALLY THE ONE THAT SAID, NO, NO, THE ROADSIDE IS YOUR BACKYARD. AND THAT'S WHAT GOT ME THE IDEA THAT I COULD APPLY WITH THAT AS THE BACKYARD.
>> IS THAT CORRECT THAT LARGER PROPERTIES WILL ALLOW THEM IN
THE FRONT YARD VERSUS THE BACK? >> ONE OF THE UM UNIQUENESSES OF OUR CODE IS THAT UM, IN LARGER LOTS, WE IT ALLOWS WATERFRONT LOTS, IT DOES ALLOW FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES TO BE PLACED IN THE FRONT YARD. SMALLER LOTS, IT DOES NOT. UM, IT'S UNLOGICAL TO ME, IF I WERE UPDATING THE CODE, THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WOULD WANT YOU TO LOOK AT.
>> MY UNDERSTANDING IS .75, I'M GOOD OR LARGER.
>> THAT'S WHAT IT IS. >> AND I COULD BE WRONG ON THAT. BUT, THAT'S WHAT I WAS TOLD.
>> OVER THE YEARS WE'VE HAD A FEW OF THESE, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THEM FROM IN THE KEYSTONE AREA WHERE THEY'RE ON THE WATER.
>> YEAH, WE DO HAVE THAT SIZE FOR SOME REASON WHEN THEY ADOPTED THIS, THEY THOUGHT THE SMALLER ONES WOULD BE SHOULD BE MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN THE, I WOULD SAY MORE RESTRICTIVE, BUT, LIMITED TO WHERE YOU COULD PLACE IT OVER THE LARGER ONES.
>>> UM, DO YOU Y'ALL HAVE QUESTIONS OF MR. WHITE?
>> I DON'T. >> CHAIR: UM, I HAD THE SAME CONCERNS THAT BILL HAS AS TO WHERE THE DRAIN FIELD IS AND
WHERE YOUR WELL IS. UM.... >> WE GOT A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT
[00:45:02]
WANT VERSUS NEED. AND WANT'S NOT GOOD, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S A NEED, IT'S DIFFERENT. SO, WE NEED TO SEE WHERE THAT FIELD IS, AND CAN IT BE SCOOTED BACK SOME? YOU KNOW? WE TRY TO WORK WITH PEOPLE, BUT, WE ALSO HAVE TO PROTECT THE REST OF THE COUNTYAND THEIR INTEREST. >> I UNDERSTAND, YOU'RE ASKING IF THE FIELD COULD BE SCOOTED BACK OR THE STRUCTURE?
>> WHERE IS THE FIELD? >> THE SURVEY'S PRETTY SMALL, IT'S HARD FOR ME TO READ IT AT LEAST. AND I DIDN'T SEE THE DRAIN FIELD, BUT, ON YOUR SKETCH, IF YOU COULD SHOW, YOU KNOW, THE DRAIN FIELD IS 40 X 80 FEET OR WHATEVER IT IS, YOU
KNOW. >> I CAN'T DO IT. HE'S GOT TO
TO IT. >> CHAIR: THE SURVEY DOESN'T
SHOW. >> IT DOESN'T SHOW THE DRAIN
>> I HAD TO DIG IT UP TO FIND IT, BECAUSE, I WAS NOT SURE WHERE IT WAS EITHER, BUT, A LOT OF DIGGING AND I FOUND IT.
>> FOR ME, THAT'S WHAT I WOULD NEED TO SEE. AND YOU DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO CONTINUE TO THIS TO ANOTHER MONTH SO THAT YOU HAVE TIME TO GET THAT TOGETHER TO LOOK AT IT. IT DEPENDS ON THESE GENTLEMEN WHETHER THEY WANT TO SAY YES OR NO RIGHT NOW.
>> AND WOULD YOU WANT A SURVEYOR TO GIVE YOU THAT, OR,
WOULD YOU GO BY MY MEASUREMENTS? >> WELL, YOU WOULD BE UNDER OATH. SO, IF YOU WANTED TO MEASURE IT.
>> I WOULD BE OKAY IF YOU TOOK THAT SURVEY THAT YOU'VE GOT, BLEW IT UP AND SKETCHED IN THERE WITH SOME DIMENSIONS AS BEST AS YOU COULD TELL WHERE YOUR DRAIN FIELD IS.
>> OKAY. >> SOMETIMES YOU COULD TELL THE
GRASS IS GREENER, YOU KNOW. >> LIKE I HAD, I'VE LOCATED IT.
I HAVEN'T LOCATED ALL FOUR CORNERS BUT I'VE FOUND WHERE IT BEGAN. BUT, I'LL GET YOU THE EXACT DIMENSIONS. BUT, IT'S DEFINITELY ON THAT SIDE AND, AGAIN, IF I JUST BUILDING IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND IN FRONT OF THE RIVER YOU KNOW, I REALLY DO NEED A GARAGE, I'M IN THE CONSTRUCTION AND TREE REMOVAL BUSINESS, I HAVE A LOT OF EXPENSIVE TOOLS, I WOULD LIKE TO KEEP MY WIFE'S CAR OUT OF THE ELEMENTS AND I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO KEEP MY TOOLS AND WORKSHOP TO WORK ON MY EQUIPMENT AND ALL OF THAT, BUT, I DON'T WANT TO PUT IT IN FRONT OF THE
RIVER, IT'S JUST, WHAT. >> AND AGAIN IT'S ON QUITE AN ELEVATION CHANGE. IT WOULD BE QUITE A BIT MORE DIFFICULT FOR
ME TO BUILD THERE. >> YEAH. YEAH BECAUSE YOU GOT, UM, FLOOD ZONES AND STUFF BACK THERE. AND, ON THE SURVEY, THEY HAVE A TRAVERSE LINE AND THEY DIDN'T EVEN GO DOWN THE SLOPE TO
LOCATE STUFF. SO, UM... >> DO YOU WANT TO MAKE A
>> WHY DON'T WE DISCUSS IT SOME.
>> OKAY. LET US TALK ABOUT THIS FOR A FEW MINUTES.
>> I TRIED LOOKING AT THAT PLAN SHOWING THAT SHED IS THE ONE
THAT'S THERE NOW? >> NO, THE LITTLE ONE UP FRONT IS. THE 4 X 4. THAT'S THE ONE HE WANTS TO PUT IN.
>> SO, HE'S GOT TWO SHEDS. >> THIS ONE WOULD BE REMOVED.
>> YOU SEE THE FENCE THERE? >> THAT'S A ONE-STORY FRAMED HOUSE THERE. SEE HOW THE FENCE GOES?
>> BUT, THERE'S THE PROPERTY LINE.
>> YOU'RE RIGHT, BUT, THE FENCE LINE IS THERE. I THINK THAT HOUSE HAS BEEN BUILT TO THE PROPERTY LINE AND I THINK THAT SHED IS ENCROACHING INTO MR. WHITE'S PROPERTY.
>> THIS ONE NEED TO GO AWAY. >> SO, WHAT WE REALLY NEED IF HE COMES BACK NEXT MONTH AND YOU GUYS GO IN THAT DIRECTION, HE NEEDS TO SHOW US WHERE THE SHED'S GOING TO BE AS WELL.
>> WELL, THAT ONE'S GOING TO BE GONE.
>> BUT, WHERE IS THE NEW ONE GOING TO BE? IN THE SAME SPOT?
>> ON THE SURVEY? >> ON THE SKETCH THAT HE
SHOWED. >> HE SHOWED IT 30 FEET OUT OF
PROPERTY LINE. >> MY POINT WHEN I LOOKED AT THE EXISTING ONE, KNOWING WHAT HE WANTS TO BUILD, OKAY, WHICH IS BIGGER THAN THAT, THEN LOOKING IF WE SAID, OH, NO, YOU
[00:50:01]
GOT TO BE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HOUSE DOWN TOWARDS THE CREEK, AND THEN, IT CLOPS MORE, IT JUST DOESN'T WORK.>> WITH THE EXISTING. >> IT'S 12 FEET DEEP AND HE WANTS TO GO 28. SO, HE WANTS IT TWICE AS DEEP. SO, IT'S 24.
THAT SIZE, HE'S TRYING TO MAKE THAT SIZE GO OVER. TAKE THAT AND PUT IT OVER HERE. TRYING TO PUT THAT THERE. IT'S A SLOPEN.
>> IF YOU COULD PUT ON A DRAWING, I WOULD BE HAPPY. BUT, BASICALLY, UM, WHAT IT WOULD DO IS, BECAUSE, THIS IS A SURVEY, SO, THESE DEPICTIONS, SO, YOU'RE GOING TO KEEP, IF YOU KEEP THAT SAME SETBACK WHICH WAS SHOWING EIGHT FEET OFF THE PROPERTY LINE. AND THIS ONE'S FIVE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. SO, HE WOULD COME FROM HERE, AND MOVE OVER TO THERE, AND THEN THERE.
>> JUST. SO, THINK OF FOUR OF THOSE
>> SHIFTING IT ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT AND IF HE HAD TO BUILD IT ON THE WATER SIDE, I DON'T THINK HE WOULD BUILD.
>> RIGHT. >> YOU KNOW, BECAUSE, LIKE, HE SAID, HE BOUGHT IT FOR THAT VIEW.
>> AND I ALSO FEEL THERE'S CIRCUMSTANCES REGARDING THE COUNTY'S RULES AT THE TIME. SO IT'S HARD TO EVEN UNDERSTAND
THEM SOMETIMES. >> SO, MR. WHITE, YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT LIKE A LEAN-TO OR SOMETHING, PART OF IT?
>> ARE YOU ACTUALLY HAVING THE 50 X 28 ENCLOSURE THAT'S LOCKABLE OR IS PART OF THAT THE LEAN-TO?
>> PART OF THAT WOULD BE THE LEAN-TO. I WOULD LIKE TO DO 28 DEEP, 35, THAT'S THE ENCLOSURE, SO THAT I COULD LOCK IT UP, OUR
WORKSHOP CAR STORAGE. >> THE LEAN-TO WOULD BE ON THE
RIVERSIDE? >> THE RIVERSIDE, JUST A LEAN-TO FOR A LAWN EQUIPMENT, JUST, ANYTHING.
>> SOMETHING THAT THE WEATHER WOULD NOT SECURE.
>> RIGHT, IT WOULD BE OPENED WALLS. SO, THAT DRAWING IS
TOTAL ROOF COVERAGE. >> HOW TALL IS THIS OTHER?
>> THE LEGS WOULD BE 12'. >> IT'S ENOUGH FOR A 10 FOOT, I THINK THEY SAID THE PEAK OF THE ROOF WOULD BE AT 14-FEET. IT'S
>> AND YOU'RE RIGHT, THE PROPERTY LINE YOU WERE DISCUSSING, APPARENTLY WHEN THEY CUT THAT BIG PARCEL IN, THAT HOUSE, YOU'RE RIGHT, THAT IS THE PROPERTY LINE, THE LITTLE STRUCTURE THERE, MY NEIGHBOR, MY FRONT NEIGHBOR, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD REACH OUT AND TOUCH FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.
>> RIGHT. OKAY. QUESTIONS? COMMENTS?
>> I HAVE A COMMENT. IF THIS COULD HAVE BEEN DESIGNATED WHICH SIDE IS FRONT WHICH SIDE IS BACK AND OTHERS ALONG THE SAME ROUTE HAVE DONE THE SAME THING, WHICH IS FRONT AND BACK, SOME ARE ONE SIDE AND SOME ARE THE OH, THIS IS CLOSE TO THE LOT SIZE WHERE IT COULD BE EITHER. THE NEIGHBORS DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IT AND I DON'T THINK I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IT EITHER.
>> BASED ON A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT BRIAN SAID, THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, WE COULD WAIT AND SEE WHERE THE DRAIN FIELD IS, BUT, IF IT'S SUCH THAT, OH, WAIT, YOU COULD FIT IT BACK THERE, HE'S NOT GOING TO BUILD IT. AND I THINK TRYING TO FIT THAT STRUCTURE BACK THERE IT WOULDN'T, I MEAN, WITH THAT SLOPE AND THAT IT KIND OF LOSES IT'S USEFULNESS. I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS NOT A REASON, BUT, I DID LOOK AT THE AERIAL BEFORE HE CAME AND THERE'S STUFF ALL ALONG IN OTHER YARDS. SO, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE BOA 0323-0004 AS IS.
>> OKAY. >> DO WE WANT TO TAKE A POLL
>> I DON'T SEE WHY WE COULDN'T, BECAUSE, IF WE DENY, HE COULDN'T
COME BACK FOR A YEAR. >> I DIDN'T KNOW THAT WE COULD
TAKE A POLL. >> THERE'S NO REASON WE
[00:55:01]
COULDN'T. >> DO YOU TRUST POLLS?
>> WITH YOU, I'M NOT SURE. >> UM, AND JUST SO THAT YOU KNOW, MOST OF THESE GENTLEMEN HAVE BROUGHT UP GOOD POINTS. I DO KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH THE SEPTIC TANK. IF THE SEPTIC TANK, UM, IF HE WAS ON CITY SEWER AND THERE WAS NO SEPTIC TANK, I DON'T THINK HE WOULD WANT TO BUILD IT ON THE SIDE THERE OR HE WOULDN'T BE HERE. AND, I WOULD BE INCLINED TO APPROVE TO VOTE FOR APPROVAL OF THIS.
>> THEN, I CONTINUE MY MOTION. >> AND I'LL SECOND.
>> SO, I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE BOA 0323-0004?
(CHORUS OF AYES) >> ALL OPPOSED?
>> GOOD LUCK TO YOU. OKAY. >> OKAY. THANK YOU.
>> CHAIR: WHAT DO WE HAVE FOR NEXT MONTH?
>> WE HAVE TWO ITEMS FOR NEXT MONTH.
>> PUBLIC COMMENT? >> DO ANY OF YOU FINE OFFICERS OR OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY HAVE ANYTHING THEY WOULD LIKE TO STATE? WHO GETS THESE? MIKE OR? NO, THEY HAVE TO GO INTO
>> THEY HAD TO BE ENTERED INTO THE FILE.
>> I DON'T
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.