PUBLIC HEARINGS

[1. Public Hearing to consider Application BOA 0823-0018; Variance to Section 3-6(d)(1) and Section 3-26(B)(2) of the County Land Development Code.]

OPEN IT. I SEE NOBODY RAISING HANDS OR STANDING UP, WITH THAT I WILL CLOSE IT.

NOW WILL GO TO THE NEXT ITEM, WHAT ARE THE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS, THE FIRST ONE IS BE AWAY 823-18 AND WITH THAT I'M GOING TO TURN OVER TO THE LOVELY MS. LAURA.

>> THE APPLICANT IS ASHLEY ESTATES, THE LOCATION IS 7845 STATE ROAD 21 IN KEYSTONE HEIGHTS FLORIDA.

THE REQUEST IS FOR A VARIANCE TO THE CLAY COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ARTICLE THREE SECTION 3 SIX, THREE-6D1 AND SECTION 316.

STUART: TO ALLOW FOR THE PLACEMENT OF A SENSORY STRUCTURE WATERFRONT PARCEL WHICH IS LESS THAN .75-ACRE IN SIZE AND LOCATED IN THE RAA ZONING DISTRICT.

HERE IS AN AERIAL PICTURE OF THE PROPERTY.

IT IS OFF OF STATE ROAD 21 AND THE ADJACENT ROAD IS CLOVER LANE. THE SUBJECT PARCEL IS LOT THREE AND FOUR EXCEPT A PARCEL OF BLOCK 42 IN THE LAKEVIEW HIGHLANDS ADDITION TO KEYSTONE HEIGHTS RECORDED IN 1927 AND PLOT BOOK TO PAGES 69 AND 70. THE PARCEL IS .353 ACRES IN SIZE AND LOCATED IN A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL RA ZONING DISTRICT.

THE PARCEL HAS APPROXIMATELY 81 FEET OF FRONTAGE ON LAKE GENEVA. THE APPLICANT WISHES TO REMOVE AN EXISTING GARAGE AND SHED AND LOCATED A SENSORY STRUCTURE GARAGE MEASURING 20 FEET BY 30 FEET IN THE FRONT YARD OF THE PROPERTY. ACCORDING TO THE SURVEY SUBMITTED WITH THE APPLICATION, THE EXISTING GARAGE IS LOCATED AND WHAT WOULD BE DEFINED AS THE FRONT YARD.

INFORMATION FROM THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S WEBSITE INDICATES THE EXISTING GARAGE WAS BUILT IN 1964 PRIOR TO ANY ZONING WITHIN THE COUNTY. HERE IS A SITE PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED WITH THE APPLICATION. THAT SPECIAL CONDITION FOR A VARIANCE, THE SPECIAL CONDITION AND CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST WHICH ARE PARTICULAR TO THE LAND STRUCTURE AND BUILDING INVOLVED IN WHICH ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO OTHER LAND STRUCTURES OR BUILDINGS IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT.

THIS IS A RELATIVELY SMALL PARCEL, .35 ACRES IN SIZE, THE

[00:05:03]

PARCEL WAS PLOTTED PRIOR TO THE ADOPTION OF THE ZONING REGULATIONS OF THE COUNTY AND NARROWER AND WITH THEN WHICH IS PRESENTLY REQUIRED FOR PARCELS IN THE RA ZONING DISTRICT.

THE EXISTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE GARAGE IS LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD AND IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE EXISTING CODE, HOWEVER, THE STRUCTURE WAS CONSTRUCTED IN THE PRESENT LOCATION PRIOR TO THE COUNTY ZONING REGULATIONS. THE NEW CONSTRUCTION IS REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH REGULATIONS AT THE TIME OF PERMITTING.

THE SPECIAL CONDITION AND CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT RESOLVE AND THE ACTIONS OF THE APPLICANT THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS ARE NOT RESULT OF THE ACTIONS OF THE APPLICANT.

THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE REQUESTED WILL NOT CONFER OF THE APPLICANT OF ANY SPECIAL PRIVILEGE THAT IS DENIED BY THE ORDINANCE OF OTHER LANDS, BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT. THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL BE ALLOWED FOR THE PLACEMENT OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE FRONT YARD, OTHER WATERFRONT PARCELS IN THE RA ZONING DISTRICT THAT ARE LESS THAN .75 ACRES IN SIZE ARE PERMITTED I'M SORRY PROHIBITED FROM PLACING IN A SENSORY STRUCTURE IN THE FRONT YARD. WATERFRONT LOTS AND RA ZONING DISTRICT THAT ARE GREATER THEN .75 ACRES IN SIZE ARE PERMITTED TO BE PLACED AT A SENSORY STRUCTURES IN THE FRONT YARD.

THE LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE PROVISION OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD DEPRIVE THE APPLICANT OF RIGHTS COMMONLY ENJOYED BY OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT UNDER THE TERMS OF THE ORDINANCE AND WOULD WORK OUT NECESSARY TO UNDUE HARDSHIP ON THE APPLICANT. THE LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD REQUIRE THE PLACEMENT OF THE DESIRED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY BETWEEN PRIMARY RESIDENT STRUCTURES IN LAKE GENEVA.

IF THE PARCEL WAS .75 ACRES IN SIZE OR LARGER, THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE PLACED IN THE FRONT YARD.

THE VARIANCE GRANTED IS A MINIMUM VARIANCE THAT WILL MAKE POSSIBLE BENEFICIAL USE OF THE LAND BUILDING FOR STRUCTURES.

THE BENEFICIAL USE OF THE PROPERTY IS NOT AFFECTED BY THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE, NO EVIDENCE HAS BEEN PRESENTED TO INDICATE WHY THE DESIRED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE COULD NOT BE LOCATED IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY.

THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE GENERAL INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THESE ORDI ORDINANCES AND THAT H VARIANCE WILL NOT BE IN THE AREAS INVOLVED OR OTHERWISE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WORKFARE.

THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE INJURIOUS TO THE AREA OR OTHERWISE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE, THE NEW ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WILL BE REQUIRED TO MEET ALL APPLICABLE SETBACK AND FOR CENTURIES STRUCTURES IN RE: ZONING DISTRICT. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE REQUEST FOR THE FOLLOWING TO REQUEST FOR THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE FRONT YARD OF THIS PARTIAL IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THERE ARE NO SPECIAL CONDITIONS PRESENT IN NO REAL HARDSHIP HAS BEEN STATED IN THE APPLICATION MATERIAL TO SUPPORT THE REQUESTED VARIANCES.

STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL FOR THE REQUEST FOR THE VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR THE PLACEMENT OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE FRONT YARD OF THE SUBJECT PARCEL. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR

STAFF? >> I HAVE A QUESTION.

WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE NEW BUILDING COMPARED TO THE OLD

ONE? >> I AM UNAWARE OF THAT AT THIS

TIME. >> I BELIEVE FROM READING THROUGH THE PRESENTATION THEY WOULD BE THE EXACT SAME SIZE 25

BY 30. >> SORRY.

>> THANK YOU LAURA. TO EXPLAIN SOME OF THE THINGS FROM THE NEW MEMBERS. IF THIS WAS A LOT OF ACRES OR LARGER, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME FOR US, IT WOULD BE APPROVED BY STAFF, AND I DON'T HOW IT WORKS IN STAFF OR LEGAL BUT I THINK IF

[00:10:02]

IT WAS .74 THE STAFF WOULD STILL HAVE TO RECOMMEND DENIAL BECAUSE IN THE PAST 20 - 15 YEARS AGO WE WOULD LOOK TO STAFF AND SAY WHAT IS YOUR FEELING BUT NOW STAFF HAS TO FOLLOW THE LETTER OF THE LAW WHICH IS GOOD, THAT'S WHERE WE COME IN THE STATE AND THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DO ALLOW US LEEWAY ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS TO SAY IS IT REALLY THAT BAD OF A THING BECAUSE LIKE I SAID IF I MET EVERYTHING THEY WOULD NOT BE HERE.

WE DO SEE A LOT OF THESE PARCEL PROBLEMS IN THE KEYSTONE AREA THE LOT MIGHT'VE BEEN A ACRE ONE TIME OR HALF-ACRE CUT IN HALF AND PEOPLE BUILD ON THEM YEARS AND YEARS AGO AND OVER TIME PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO REPLACE OR UPGRADE OR ENLARGE OR WHATEVER AND THAT IS WHERE THEY TRIP THE THRESHOLD, THE REASON THEY HAVE TO COME BEFORE US INCOME TO THE COUNTY TO GET A BUILDING PERMIT AND THE COUNTY SAYS YOU CANNOT DO THAT BECAUSE OF ACTS.

JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME BACK BACKGROUND, NOT TRIED TO SPEAK DOING, JUST TRY TO LET YOU KNOW WHAT BRINGS THEM HERE.

DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF BEFORE I

BRING UP THE APPLICANT? >> IN QUESTIONS OF STAFF AT THIS

TIME? >> MS. ESTES?

WHO IS THE APPLICANT? >> PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND

ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> BRADEN DIXON 745.

>> DO YOU SWEAR EVERYTHING YOU'RE ABOUT TO SAY IS TRUE SO

HELP ME GOD. >> YES, SIR.

>> OKAY. >> HOW BIG IS THE BUILDING THAT YOU TORE DOWN AND HOW BIG IS A BUILDING YOU WANT TO BUILD.

>> I HAVEN'T TORE ANYTHING DOWN I'M LOOKING TO TEAR IT DOWN IN MY DRIVEWAY COMES DOWNHILL SO THE GARAGE FLOODS EVERY SINGLE TIME WE GET A RAINSTORM SO I BASICALLY JUST WANT TO ADJUSTED TO THE OTHER CORNER WHERE HE BUILT A RETAINING WALL ACROSS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE SO WHERE IT'S NICE AND LEVEL OVER THERE AND WE WON'T HAVE THE ISSUE AND BASICALLY TRYING TO KEEP FROM HAVING A ROTTEN GARAGE AND RELOCATED OVER THERE AND BUILD AND TEAR THAT ONE DOWN. BASICALLY I HAVE TWO GARAGES IN THE FRONT, THERE'S A DOUBLE CAR GARAGE AND ANOTHER METAL SHED IN THE METAL SHED IS THE ONE WHERE WILL REPLACE THE NEW BUILDING

ENTER BOTH OF THEM DOWN. >> PULL UP THE PICTURES.

>> YOU PROBABLY WON'T BE ABLE TO SEE IT.

>> I BELIEVE THAT IS THE ONE FROM LAST WEEK'S.

>> WE CONTINUE THAT WANTED THIS ONE.

ARE WE CONTINUE? >> THAT IS THE NEXT.

>> NEVERMIND THAT IS THE NEXT ON THE AGENDA.

>> WHEN BRIAN SAID WHAT DID THEY TEAR DOWN, THE GENTLEMAN I THOUGHT HAD TORE DOWN ONE AND WANTED TO REPLACE IT.

OKAY. NEVERMIND.

>> NOT A PROBLEM. >> SAME SITUATION.

>> AS FAR AS PUTTING IN THE BACKYARD I REALLY DON'T WHAT TO

PUT IN THE BACKYARD. >> I HAVE FOUR TREES BACK THERE IS NOT REALLY ROOM SO I DIDN'T WANT TO TAKE THE TREE OUT.

>> NEW MEMBERS ANY PROPERTY ON A LAKE LIKE THAT, YOU BASICALLY HAVE TWO FRONT YARDS AND YOU HAVE TO COMPLY BY THE FRONT YARD

CRITERIA. >> MR. CHAIRMAN ALL SPEAK ON THAT AS WELL I'M A RESIDENT OF KEYSTONE HEIGHTS AS WELL, I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THE SITUATION WITH IT.

THERE'S ANOTHER UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE TO THAT I BELIEVE COMES INTO PLAY THEIR, THAT SPECIFIC AREA AS PART OF A SMALL GROUP OF 30 - 40 HOUSES THAT ARE BOUNDED BY KEYSTONE HEIGHTS CITY LIMITS TO THE EAST. TO THE NORTH IT'S KEYSTONE HEIGHTS HIGH SCHOOL, TO THE WEST IS THE BRADFORD COUNTY LINE AND THE SOUTH IS LAKE GENEVA. I'S A VERY SMALL RECTANGULAR AREA THAT'S ONLY MAYBE ABOUT A HALF SQUARE MILE, IT'S VERY SMALL. WHAT HAPPENED IF YOU LOOK AT THE HISTORICAL MAP OF THE CITY FROM WHEN THE ORIGINAL SUBDIVISION THAT WAS PLANNED TO BE THE CITY WAS PUT IN AND THERE IS MAPS FROM 1924, THE AREA OF WHICH SPECIFIC PROPERTY IS INCLUDED IN WASN'T ORIGINALLY INTENDED TO BE ANNEXED INTO THE CITY UPON COMPLETION OF RESIDENCE ON THE PROPERTY.

THUS THE SMALLER LOT SIZE. ALL OTHER LOTS IN THE CITY OF KEYSTONE HEIGHTS ARE BIT SMALLER IF YOU LOOK THROUGH THEIRS.

WHATEVER REASON IT WAS NOT EVER BROUGHT INTO THE CITY, THAT AREA WAS NOT ANNEXED.% IF YOU LOOK AT THE BUILDING AND ZONING POLICY I THINK THE HOUSES FOR FIVE PARCELS OUTSIDE OF CITY LIMITS, VERY, VERY CLOSE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE POLICIES OF

[00:15:04]

THE CITY RIGHT THERE, IT WOULD BE THE POLICIES OF THE CITY AND THERE ARE A LOT OF HOUSES ON SIMILAR SIZE OF HOUSES ON CITY LIMITS HAVE THE ATTACHED GARAGES AS WELL.

I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING UNIQUE.

AND AS YOU MENTIONED COMING FROM AN AREA WITH LAKES IN AN OLDER SUBDIVISION LIKE THAT WAS INTENDED TO BE THAT SPECIFICALLY LITTLE RECTANGULAR AREA ADDITIONALLY HAS SOME DIFFERENCES BECAUSE IT WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED TO BE ANNEXED INTO THE CITY AND THAT'S WHY A LOT OF THE LOT SIZES ARE TRADITIONALLY SMALLER THAN YOU MIGHT SEE IN OTHER PARTS OF THE

COUNTY. >> I DID NOT KNOW THAT, THAT IS

GOOD TO KNOW. >> IS ONE MORE THING FROM BEING DOWN THERE AND GET A LOT OF THINGS WITH CITY GOVERNMENT STUFF AND I READ SOME OF THOSE DIFFERENT THINGS THERE IS.

>> DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT?

>> THANK YOU, SIR. >> QUESTIONS OF STAFF, CONVERSATIONS AMONGST OURSELVES? MOTION?

>> MR. CHAIRMAN ALL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE

ON THIS PROPERTY. >> I WILL SECOND.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND THE SECOND TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE

OVER 18, AM I ON THE RIGHT PAGE. >> YES, SIR.

>> ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION SAY AYE.

[2. Public Hearing to consider Application BOA 0823-0017; Variance to Section 3-33A.III.5.b.vi of the County Land Development Code. (CONTINUED FROM Sept. 28, 2023)]

ALL OPPOSED, AND PASSES 4 - 0, GOOD LUCK TO YOU SIR.

NOW LAURA ARE WE GOING TO 17? >> YES WE ARE.

>> IS THAT FOR THE TENANTS PUT LANDSCAPE AROUND THE BUILDING.

>> YES, SIR THIS WAS CONTAINED FROM SEPTEMBER 28 MEETING.

>> AHEAD. >> THE APPLICANT'S RARE-EARTH INVESTMENT THAT OBERG FLORIDA LLC.

THE AGENT TIMOTHY ATKINSON, THE LOCATION OF THE PROJECT IS 1735 JEREMIAH STREET MIDDLEBURG FLORIDA, THE REQUEST IS FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR AN ENCROACHMENT INTO THE REQUIRED 10-FOOT WIDE LANDSCAPE STRIP ON THE FRONT OR SIDE OF THE FREESTANDING BUILDING IN THE BRANDON FIELD ACTIVITY CENTER LAND USE. HERE IS AN AERIAL OF THE PROPERTY. THE ROAD FRONTAGE IS JEREMIAH STREET JACOBS CROSSING AND I BELIEVE THAT IS BRANAN FIELD OR CHALLENGER. THE PARCEL LOCATED AT READING FIELD ACTIVITY CENTER BFA SEE LAND USE DESIGNATION, THE PARCEL IS PROPOSED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF MEDICAL RELATED FACILIY WHICH WILL INCLUDE AN MRI MACHINE.

THE BRANAN FIELD MASTER PLAN REQUIRES ALL FREESTANDING BUILDINGS IN THE BRANAN FIELD ACTIVITY CENTER LAND USED TO PROVIDE EITHER A LAND SCAPE STRIP WITH A PARKING LOT OR STREET TREES PLANTED NO MORE THAN 30 FEET ON CENTER THAT IS AT LEAST 10-FOOT IN WIDTH, THE ORIGINAL PLANS WERE TO PLACE THE MRI CHILLER ON THE ROOF, HOWEVER, THE FINAL SPECS REQUIR% THE MRI MANUFACTURE RESULTS IN A LARGER CHILLER THAN THE ROOF WAS DESIGNED TO WITHSTAND. THE RESULT IN THE NEED TO PLACE THE CHILLER ON THE GROUND ON THE BACKSIDE OF THE BUILDING IMPACTING THE REQUIRED 10-FOOT LANDSCAPING STRIP.

ENCROACHMENT OF A 9-FOOT, 8-FOOT 9-INCH BY 12-FOOT 8-INCH INTO THE 10-FOOT LANDSCAPE STRIP IS PROPOSED THE CURRENT APPROVE LANDSCAPE STRIP IS 2974 SQUARE FEET OF GREEN SPACE, THIS VARIANCE IS APPROVED, IF THE VARIANCE IS APPROVED, THE GREEN IT WILL BE ADJACENT 263 SQUARE FEET.

THE ALLOWABLE SURFACE AREA FOR THE SITE IS 85%.

THE CURRENT PROPOSED ISR IS 74.67% AND IF THIS VARIANCE IS APPROVED THE RESULTING ISR WILL BE 74.95%.

NO DECREASE IN THE TOTAL LANDSCAPING OR TREEPLANTING IS PROPOSED. , HERE IS THE SITE PLAN OF THE PROPERTY. THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST WHICH ARE PARTICULAR TO THE LAND STRUCTURE OR BUILDING INVOLVED AND WHICH ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO OTHER LAND STRUCTURES OR BUILDINGS IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT, THE FINAL

[00:20:03]