►
From YouTube: Special Board of Adjustment Meeting (7/12/2022)
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
A
C
A
Thank
you.
I
don't
believe
we
have
any
minutes
to
approve
this
meeting
onto
correspondence.
C
Yesterday,
with
correspondence
from
one
of
the
condo
associations
and
then
on
the
dice
tonight
is
another
letter
that
we
received
today.
B
B
B
A
Sorry
sandy,
I'm
so
sorry
one
moment
do
we
need
to
just
close
export
before
this.
The
vice
chair
just
brought
that
to
my.
C
E
E
How
about
now,
all
right
so,
broadly
speaking,
a
section
7051
proceeding,
is
a
procedural
opportunity
for
an
owner
who
believes
that
a
development
order
is
unreasonable
or
unfairly
burdens,
his
or
her
property
to
pursue
a
mediated
resolution
with
the
governmental
entity
that
issued
the
order
in
order
to
initiate
the
1751
process
in
jacksonville
beach.
The
owner
sends
a
request
for
relief
to
the
mayor
and
within
a
defined
period
of
time.
After
receiving
that
request,
the
city
has
a
number
of
actions
it
has
to
undertake.
E
The
city
next
has
to
prepare
a
response
to
that
request
for
warning,
and,
lastly,
with
the
owner
choose
a
special
magistrate
to
reside
over
the
mediation
conduct,
a
hearing
and
eventually
prepare
a
recommendation
relative
to
that
request
or
relief,
and
in
the
case
before
you
tonight,
with
the
exception
of
actually
conducting
a
hearing,
all
of
those
steps
have
been
taken.
E
It
bears
emphasizing
that
the
special
magistrates
recommendation
is
just
that
a
recommendation.
It
is
not
an
order,
nor
does
it
carry
the
weight
of
law
by
statute.
It
can
be
expressly
accepted
or
rejected
if
no
action
is
taken
with
respect
to
that
recommendation
by
statute,
it
is
deemed
rejected
and
as
the
body
that
issued
the
development
order,
that's
subject
to
the
recommendation.
E
E
E
E
These
proceedings,
often
we
do
have
a
suggested
order
for
tonight's
meeting
and
it's
just
a
suggestion.
We
start
with
a
brief,
summary
and
overview
of
the
magistrate's
recommendation.
E
A
E
With
respect
to
the
time
that's
allotted
to
each
side,
I
think
we'll
kind
of
follow
the
lead
of
the
board
in
previous
applications
where
the
parties
are
given
as
much
time
as
they
need
to
present,
and
then
only
the
members
of
the
public
would
have
their
comments
limited
by
to
a
specific
time
frame.
But
ms
durden
is
well
aware
of
the
order
that
I
was
going
to
suggest
and
I'm
here
to
aid
her
as
she's
as
she
seems
to
need
it.
Thank
you.
A
And,
given
that
this
was
a
slightly
different
meeting
format
than
our
our
usual
twice
monthly
meetings,
I
didn't
open
with
our
typical
sort
of
statement
of
procedures,
and
I
know
that
this
is
a
little
different,
but
I
think
it
would
still
be
appropriate
to
let
the
audience
know
the
sort
of
opening
salvo
that
we
usually
give
at
our
regular
meetings.
Yes,
ma'am.
A
The
board
of
adjustment
meetings
are
quasi-judicial
in
nature.
All
decisions
at
the
board
will
be
based
on
competent,
substantial
evidence,
including
testimony
provided
in
this
meeting.
Any
person
who
is
not
an
applicant
or
agent
who
wishes
to
speak
will
need
to
fill
out
a
speaker's
card
located
on
the
side
table
by
the
door
and
turn
them
into
the
clerk.
Each
member
of
the
public
will
be
given
three
minutes
to
speak
on
their
item.
Please
refrain
from
speaking
from
the
audience
and
applause.
A
C
G
I
received
a
similar
phone
call
and
my
response
was:
I
would
not
speak
about
this
matter
with
the
applicant
and
that
we
would
wait
for
the
hearing.
H
As
far
as
procedure
tonight
and
so
forth,
I
mean
I'm
lee
callison,
I'm
here
representing
the
applicant
oceanfront
attempt.
I
just
want
to
check
the
format,
the
public,
you
know
just
what
to
expect
tonight.
I
mean
first
of
all,
we
were
told
by
the
city
that
we
did
not
need
to
submit
anything.
For
this
evening.
Then
city
submitted
an
11-page
report.
Basically
saying
you
should
not
follow
the
recommendation
of
the
special
enhancement.
We
were
never
given
an
opportunity
to
submit.
We
received
their
submittals.
H
I
believe,
thursday
evening
friday
morning
is
when
I
saw
them
for
the
first
time,
and
I
was
out
of
town
last
weekend,
so
I
guess
I'm
just
here
I
mean.
Are
we
having
this?
Is
this
going
to
be
consistent
like
in
the
public
argument,
if
you're
going
to
have
them
you're
going
to
have
us?
You
know,
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I
understand
what
the
procedure
is
tonight.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we're
on
the
same
footing
here
as
the
city
and
as
far
as
the
public.
H
I
have
no
objection
to
the
public
speaking,
but
I
would
appreciate
the
comments
be
limited
to
the
report
of
the
special
master,
which
is
what
we're
here
to
decide
tonight.
This
event
tonight,
there's
three
things
you
can
do.
You
can
accept
the
report
of
the
special
master.
You
can
modify
the
report
of
the
special
master
or
you
can
reject
the
report
of
the
special
master.
We're
not
here
to
redo
the
variance
here
that
that's
not
what
this
whole
thing's
about.
H
So
I
just
want
to
clarify
what
are
we
doing?
When
do
we
get
to
go?
Why
are
they
going?
First,
where
the
applicant,
I
mean
who's,
making
these
rules
up.
You
know
what
what
statutory
authority
do
you
have
for
how
we're
going
to
proceed
tonight
and
who's
going
to
speak,
because
I
haven't
been
provided
anything
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we're
going
to
run
this
meeting
and
we're
going
to
get
the
same
opportunity.
H
The
city
has
which
I
already
feel
like
we've
already
been
underhanded
because
they
told
us
we
were
not
allowed
to
speak
to
you.
I
don't
know
if
anyone
in
the
city
spoke
to
you,
but
we
weren't
allowed
to
speak
to
you.
You
were
told
not
to
speak
to
us
and
we
were
told
not
to
submit
anything
and
then
here
we
walk
in
tonight
and
we've
already
gotten
a
13-page
report
saying
you
should
reject
everything
that
a
special
massacre
who
was
picked
by
the
city.
H
That's
right
said:
you
know
we
don't
want
to
follow
that
now.
So
I
guess
just
before
we
start.
I
want
to
know
what
the
ground
rules
are
for
my
client
and
the
applicant
in
this
case.
D
I
would
defer
to
you
as
the
board
that
I
am
an
applicant,
it's
between
the
quasi-judicial
board
and
the
applicant
candidly.
I
don't
know
what
the
city
has
to
present
beyond
the
scope
of
the
staff
report
and
the
reports
have
been
filed,
the
special
magistrates
report's
been
filed
and
in
terms
of
a
variance.
This
is
special
because
they
call
the
special
hearing
to
give
us
both
adequate
time
to
present
listen
to
one
another.
To
try
to
resolve
this.
It's
not
special.
Let's
incorporate
another
set
of
rules.
D
I've
never
been
to
a
variance
hearing
where
the
city
presented
pleaded
and
then
opened
it
up
to
the
applicant
it
just
the
process.
Doesn't
it
seems
skewed
and
multiple
events,
and
I
was
just
on
a
fair
and
impartial
process.
I
I
don't
know,
is
it
next
party
when
the
city
officials
talk
to
you
guys,
but
we
can't
talk
to
you.
So
those
are
questions
that
go
in
our
minds:
let's
just
be
totally
open,
kimono
and
let's
talk
about
it
and.
H
I
mean
it
had
the
special
at
the
hearing
we
asked
to
have
members
of
you
speak,
we
asked
have
city
officials
speak,
they
refused
to
provide.
They
said
that
you're
all
government
officials
and
we
have
no
right
to
subpoena
and
they're
right.
We
didn't
have
a
righteous
opinion.
We
asked
the
special
master,
they
objected,
so
we've
been
cut
off
from
all
communication
and
it
cut
you
off
from
any
communication
with
a
special
master
and
I'm
just
concerned
about.
You
know
the
way
this
process
is
being
controlled.
All
we
want
is
a.
H
G
Was
it
your
intention
to
submit
something
in
writing?
My
intention.
H
Tonight
is
really
just
to
go
over
the
special
masters
report
and
the
statute
that
issue
in
this
case
and
make
sure
or
try
to
educate
or
make
sure
you
all
understand
what
it
is
we're
here
to
do.
I
mean
the
city's
already
giving
you
their.
You
know,
report
and
recommendation.
I
guess
they're
going
to
get
up
and
argue
it
on
top
of
a
supply.
A
I
know
every
every
case
that
comes
before
us,
and
this
is,
I
know
the
first
time
that
I
think
most
people
on
the
board
have
experienced
this
specific
type
of
hearing.
But
every
time
that
we
hear
variants,
the
city
prepares
a
staff
report
outlining
just
all
of
the
criteria
that,
by
which
we're
supposed
to
judge
each
application-
and
we
are
always
provided
with
those
prior
to
the
meeting
and
then
the
applicant
is
always
permitted
to
you-
know,
give
their
testimony
on
their
item.
A
A
Is
then,
usually
given
an
opportunity
to
address
any
of
the
public
comments
made
and
then
the
board's
also
given
typically
the
board
asks
questions.
If
the
board
has
any
questions
of
the
applicant,
they
take
that
time
to
ask
those
questions.
Now
I
would
defer
to
our
city
attorney
on
the
item
of
whether
this
very
I
mean,
I
think,
really.
What
we're
supposed
to
be
doing
here
is
deciding
on
the
special
magistrates
decision
not
having
the
variance
yeah.
I
don't.
H
Want
to
read
here
the
variance
the
special
master.
If
you've
read
his
report,
he
went
through
and
piece
by
piece
went
through
that
staff
report
that
they,
they
submitted
a
78-page
report
to
the
special
magistrate
of
everything
in
this
case,
and
especially
considered
it
and
made
his
decision,
and
he
made
his
ruling,
and
I
think
we're
here
today,
basically
to
re-hear
this
special
master
report.
We've
already
had
the
special
masters
report
we're
here
tonight
to
determine
whether
to
accept
it,
modify
it
or
reject
it.
So
what
is
the
city
argument.
B
E
E
We've
been
upfront
with
what
our
our
process
is,
what
our
recommendation
will
be
and
we
are
prepared
to
be
limited
to
that
discussion,
but
you
should
be
afforded
the
opportunity
to
have
that
information
presented
to
you
in
a
way
that
aids
you
in
your
decision
as
that,
whether
you
will
take
some
type
of
action.
Thank
you.
I
do
one.
C
But
we're
here
to
provide
support
to
the
board
and
just
a
quick
point.
Technically
speaking
in
the
code,
we
are
required
by
the
code
to
present
both
written
and
oral
reports
to
this
board.
We
haven't
typically
done
oral
reports,
but
the
code
does
specify
that
we
have
the
opportunity
to
speak
as
well
on
these
items,
so
that
is
procedure.
E
B
I
Good
evening
I'm
greg
durden,
I'm
with
the
law
firm
of
louis
lombard,.
A
I
I
I
do
want
to
correct
a
statement
that
was
made
by
mr
kellison.
I
actually
have
the
email
that
I
wrote
to
joe
on
june,
the
2nd,
and
in
that
I
I'm
going
to
read
you
the
whole
thing
and
says
hi
joe.
It
is
my
understanding
that
the
boa
will
take
up
the
reconsideration
of
the
variants
request
at
a
special
meeting
on
july,
the
12th
at
5
30
pm,
subject
only
to
the
quorum
requirement.
I
I
The
boa
may
make
a
determination
to
accept
the
sf,
the
special
magistrate's
recommendation
and
approve
the
variance
they
can
reject
the
recommendation
and
confirm
the
denial
of
the
variance
or
they
could
choose
to
approve
the
variance
with
conditions,
and
then
I
close
so
it's
I
want
to
tell
you
that
at
no
time
did
I
tell
them
that
they
could
not
submit
anything
for
this
hearing,
and
I
take
issue
that
that
would
be
represented
to
this
board
improperly
and
incorrectly.
A
B
H
H
As
you're
all
aware,
we're
here
to
address
a
report
of
a
special
master
that
was
issued
pursuant
to
section
7
70.51
of
the
florida
statutes.
As
you're
also
aware,
there
was
previously
an
application
that
was
considered
by
the
board.
There
was
a
lot
of
debate
about
it.
A
lot
of
people
from
the
public
came,
there
was
a
3-2
decision
against
the
applicant,
they
exercised
their
rights
under
the
statute
for
a
dispute
resolution
and
we
have
special
hearing
before
our
special
needs
and
you
all
have
a
copy
of
that
special
master's
report.
H
A
H
H
We're
probably
talking
a
lot
tonight
about
this
statute,
I'm
going
to
make
reference
to
it,
so
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
you
all
have
a
copy
of
it.
The
other
item
that
I
provided
to
you
is
just
a
cv
of
the
special
master.
Terry
schmidt,
terry
schmidt,
has
done
multiple
hearings
as
a
special
master
for
the
city
of
jacksonville
beach.
The
city
recommended
terry
schmidt.
H
H
He
has
been
best.
Lawyers
in
america
he's
been
super
lawyers.
He
indicated
to
me
that,
in
addition
to
the
being
a
special
master
for
the
city
of
jacksonville
beach,
he
is
quite
frequently-
or
I
say
four
or
five
times
has
been
a
special
master
in
hearings
for
the
city
of
saint
augustine
and
he's
also
performed
a
couple.
Other
hearings
around
the
state
as
a
special
master,
so
he
has
substantial
experience
as
a
special
master
he's
also
an
arbitrator
and
he's
he's
probably
one
of
the
top
five
mediators
in
jacksonville.
H
H
H
H
H
H
He
heard
from
everyone
at
the
at
the
hearing
we
kind
of
broke
up
and
did
it
informally
in
mediation
and
breakout
rooms,
but
he
spent
at
least
three
hours,
if
not
longer
with
each
of
us.
We
all
had
a
chance
to
to
tell
them
our
positions
in
the
case
and
after
he
hears
from
all
parties.
H
If
you
look
at
paragraph
18
of
section
70.51,
it
talks
about
the
circumstances
that
the
special
master
is
supposed
to
determine,
and
it
includes
the
history
of
the
property,
the
history,
the
development
or
use
of
the
property,
the
history
of
environmental
protections,
the
present
nature,
the
reasonable
expectations
of
the
owner
and
then
specifically
in
f
under
18f.
It
talks
about
he's
supposed
to
decide
what
the
public
purpose
sought
to
be
achieved
by
the
development
order
or
enforcement
action
is
and
then
lastly,
he
is
instructed
to
consider,
uses
authorized
for,
and
restrictions
placed
on
similar
properties.
H
So
this
is
what
the
statute
required,
mr
schmidt,
to
do
and
that's
exactly
what
he
did
and
then,
if
you
go
down
to
paragraph
21
of
the
statutes
it
talks
about
what
the
board
here
tonight
can
do
and
21a
is,
you
can
accept.
The
recommendation
of
this
special
magistrate
has
submitted
and
pro
proceed
to
implement
and
that's
what
we're
going
to
ask
you
to
do
at
the
end
of
this
hearing
tonight.
H
Secondly,
you
can
modify
the
recommendation
or,
thirdly,
you
can
reject
the
multiplication,
and
then
it
says
in
paragraph
25,
regardless
of
the
action
the
government
entity
takes
on
the
special
net
magistrates
recommendation,
a
recommendation
that
the
development
order
or
enforcement
action
or
the
development
order
or
enforcement
action
in
combination
with
other
regulatory
actions
is
unreasonable
or
unfairly
burdens.
The
use
of
the
elders
real
property
may
serve
as
an
indication
of
sufficient
hardship
to
support
modification
or
variances.
H
It
was
an
informal
hearing,
as
I
stated
we
all
got
together,
we
broke
out,
we
had
mediation,
I
don't
know
if
any
of
you
ever
participated
in
the
mediation,
but
the
way
mr
schmidt
works,
and
he
takes
a
lot
of
time
with
the
parties
breaks
you
out
in
the
room.
He'll
go
sit
with
you
for
that.
First
meeting,
probably
an
hour
goes
over
everything.
H
In
the
case,
what
your
position
is,
and
then
he
goes
to
the
other
side.
He
presents
it
to
them.
He
listens
to
their
position
and
they
present
probably
for
a
good
hour
or
so,
and
he
brings
them
back.
He
tries
to
find
middle
ground,
but
in
the
process
he
learns
exactly
what
each
party's
position
is
on
issues
and
that's
exactly
what
he
did
in
this
case.
He
went
back
and
forth
multiple
times
over
at
least
six
hours.
If
not
longer
we
got
here
that
morning.
H
H
H
H
After
the
hearing
he
corresponded
with
ms
durden
myself,
joe
van
roy
one
of
the
owners
of
the
applicant
he's
also
an
attorney
and
miss
robinson
he's
corresponding
with
all
of
us.
He
had
numerous
questions.
Both
parties
tried
to
answer
his
questions
submitted
more
documentation.
H
Is
not
the
city's
opinion?
It's
an
independent
person.
Who's
done
this
multiple
times,
who
has
multiple?
Who
has
a
ton
of
experience
who
gave
his
review
of
whether
the
varian
is
unreasonably
burdened
unfairly
and
a
reasonably
burdened
property,
and
he
said
that
he
did,
and
so
I
just
want
to
highlight
for
you
just
a
few
of
the
things
in
the
special
masters
report.
H
Some
of
the
pertinent
findings
of
fact
number
eight
in
the
report.
The
various
requests
did
not
change
anything
about
the
property
or
the
building
being
constructed
number
nine.
The
building
will
have
the
exact
same
footprint,
the
exact
same
design
and
the
exact
same
construction,
whether
it's
built
as
a
condo
or
a
townhouse,
and
then
he
number
10.
H
H
The
legal
effect
of
the
board
having
granted
similar
variances
to
town
homes
and
individual
homes
across
the
street,
from
where
this
ocean
front
is,
was
troubling
to
special
master.
He
specifically
concluded
that
the
city
of
jacksonville
beach
and
this
board
should
have
given
considerations
to
these
variances
that
were
previously
granted.
H
H
Essentially,
the
special
master
decided
that
a
variance
is
appropriate
in
this
case.
Now
I
don't
know
if
we're
going
to
come
back
up,
but
I'm
just
going
to
make
a
couple
quick
points.
The
city
did
submit
a
report
and
recommended
that
you
not
that
you
reject
the
special
masters
report.
First
of
all,
they
they
said
that
it
doesn't
carry
any
presidential
value
or
weight.
Well,
I
guess
that's
again
a
matter
of
interpretation
because,
as
I
stated.
C
H
That,
if
you
all
don't
say
a
recommendation
under
the
number
25
a
recommendation
that
development
order
is
unreasonable
and
unfairly
burdens
use,
it
may
serve
as
an
indication
of
sufficient
hardship.
So
I
would
submit
to
you
that
it
does
have
presidential
weight
in
the
value
the
city
of
jacksonville.
Beach
also
says
that
the
special
master
disregarded
section
70.51
and
the
code.
As
I
stated,
you
can
read
his
report.
H
Then
they
take
issue
that
he
considered
variances
of
property
across
the
street.
They
claim
that
they're,
there's
too
old
to
consider
there
was
also
a
2009
variance.
The
city
failed
to
mention
in
their
reports,
but
regardless,
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
section
7
8.51,
18
f,
explicitly
requires
the
special
master
to
consider
uses,
authorized
sport
and
restrictions
placed
on
similar
property.
He
is
required
by
statute
to
look
at
other
variances
on
similar
properties.
That's
exactly
what
he
did
they're
taking
issue
with
them
following
the
statutes.
H
Another
thing
that
the
city
disagreed
with
in
his
report
is
that
they
are
saying
the
shape
of
the
law
can't
be
a
special
condition.
This
special
master
found
that
the
fact
that
it's
a
narrow
lot
constitute
a
special
condition.
I
would
just
remind
this
board
that
at
that
meeting
on
the
january
19th,
there
was
four
variants
requested,
variance
requests
that
were
all
approved
by
the
board.
H
One
of
them
was
by
the
band
meters.
In
the
specific
minutes
it
says
the
hardship
was
a
non-conforming
lot
size
variance
approved.
If
you
look
at
ba
21-100
186
colin
spence
hardship
was
a
non-conforming
law
variance
approved.
If
you
look
at
the
grams
application
for
variance
100
187
hardship
was
a
non-conforming
lot
variance
of
proof
and
the
last
one.
If
you
look
at
the
los
ganos
21-100
190,
the
heart,
the
hardship
was
the
odd-shaped
lot
variance
approved.
We
had
a
narrow
lot
for
some
reason.
H
H
One
of
the
other
things
that
they
argued
to
the
special
master
was
that
we
shouldn't
be
granted
a
variance
because
we
could
build
three
town
homes
on
that
existing
site.
Well,
if
we
had
to
build
three
town
homes
on
that
site,
they
would
be
15
feet
wide,
lined
up
really
long
units,
the
middle
one
wouldn't
even
have
windows
and
the
special
master.
I'm
just
going
to
read
exactly
what
he
said.
D
H
H
So,
as
I
stated
already,
the
special
masters
report
is
a
well-reasoned
opinion
based
on
a
yet
an
objective
review
of
the
evidence.
Every
issue,
as
in
the
staff
report
from
january,
was
considered
and
rejected
by
the
special
investor.
The
city
today
is
asking
you
to
reconsider
a
staff
report
from
january
19th
that
staff
report,
I
might
add,
that
they
acknowledged
at
the
hearing,
had
an
airplane,
and
they
were
here
in
their
report
asking
you
to
reconsider
that,
because
the
error
was
that,
even
if
they
granted
the
bearings
to
be
a
non-conforming
line,
that's
false.
H
H
B
D
Johnson,
I'm
the
applicant.
D
Thank
you
for
your
time
this
evening.
I
appreciate
you
guys
taking
time
out
of
your
schedule.
I
found
myself
in
a
very
unique
position
with
this
particular
variance
having
come
before
this
board
on
numerous
occasions
and
executed
several
successful
projects
and
variances,
so
I'm
somewhat
befuddled
with
the
process,
and
you
know
really
hope
that
we
can
find
some
even
footing
and
yeah.
Personally,
I
can't
help
but
think
that
there's
been
a
lot
of
influence
as
it
relates
to
this
variance.
D
D
We
went
through
an
extensive
variance
process.
We
applied
to
the
special
magistrate
through
the
city.
It
seems
like
at
every
turn,
we've
been
not
able
to
to
get
where
we
wanted
to.
It
was
my
intent
to
establish
that's
part
of
communication
with
each
one
of
you.
I
wanted
to
get
this
report
in
your
hand,
because
I
felt
like
we
were
getting
shaded
and
a
couple
issues
that
we'd
like
to
go
back
to
the
staff
report
that
came
out
before
the
initial
variance
hearing.
D
It
was
issued
out
on
a
friday
before
martin
luther
king
day,
and
then
it
was
the
variance
it
was
also
the
first
time
in
forever.
As
far
back
as
I
could
see
where
the
staff
reports
included
recommendations
of
approval
and
denial,
I
know
the
subsequent
hearings
have
included
that,
but
that
was
the
first
one.
So
I
went
back
and
looked.
D
There
were
some
erroneous
facts
that
were
contained
in
it.
Mr
kellerson
alluded
to
the
staff
reporter
included
reference
that
the
lot
would
be
immediately
non-conforming
christian,
based
on
questioning
by
you,
ms
gonzalez.
He
did
some
figuring
and
he
spoke
up.
It
was
kind
of
towards
the
end
of
the
hearing
and
candidly
that
was
a
fatigue
hearing.
A
lot
of
you
know
public
comment.
It
was
late.
He
spent
a
lot
of
time
on
it,
so
watching
those
things
transpire
and
then
on
the
heels
of
you
know,
maybe
maybe
miss
durden
didn't
say.
No.
D
D
Then
we
talked
amongst
ourselves
came
said:
okay,
yeah,
let's
get
the
report
in
your
hands
because
I
don't
know
when
you
guys
got
the
report
from
the
special
magistrate
we
never
got
to
follow
up
on
who's
had
x-party
communication
with
sandra
or
bretta,
or
you
know.
Where
do
you
draw
the
line
when
mr
moreland
are
respecting
your
position
and
having
the
opportunity
to
be
able
to
call
you
from
time
to
time
for
advice
regarding
this
process?
D
When
you
informed
me
that
you
know
you
were
told
by
senator
robinson,
not
to
speak
to
me,
that
was
troubling.
You
know
so
much
so
that
I
asked
mr
van
roy
to
send
an
email
to
santa
to
verify.
Did
you
in
fact
tell
the
word
not
to
speak
that
she
said?
Yes,
I
did,
and
I
think
the
concerning
thing
is
is
that
we
seem
to
be
coming
from
behind
the
eight
ball.
I
C
D
Times
and
we're
trying
to
put
our
best
foot
forward
and
give
you
the
information,
but
we're
not
being
able
to
do
so,
and
I
can
only
assume
that
mr
robinson
used
this
term
when
she
spoke
to,
mr
that
you
know,
my
mischaracterization
of
the
word
award
was
why
she
instructed
you
to
not
speak
with
me
and
that's
just
weird.
D
If
that
we
can't
you
know,
do
we
email
you?
How
do
we
contact
you?
How
do
we
give
you
information
prior
to
when
they're
controlling
the
speaking
of
how
you
receive
the
information,
how
it's
disseminated
and
how
it's
presented?
Those
are
real.
Those
are
real
time
questions
and
based
on
the
sequence
of
events
and
how
things
that
went
down,
I
feel,
like
you
know
I
wanted.
I
want
to
get
back
on
level
flooding
where
everybody
knows
what's
happening.
We
don't
know
they're,
not
a
communication.
D
We
don't
know
what's
been
doing
bad,
but
he
responded
to
miss
robinson
and
he
sent
out
this
email,
which
was
robinson,
has
copied
on
as
well
as
everybody
else
from
terry
smith,
where
he
refers
to
a
final
award,
though
you
know
no
less
than
six
times
in
one
paragraph,
so
it
was
called
the
word
the
whole
way
through,
because
that's
what
the
man
who
administered
the
process
called
it.
D
So,
if
that's
the
the
issue
is,
it
was
the
variance
and
then
now
the
issue
is
the
special
magistrate
support
a
ton
of
effort
when
it
went
into
it.
When
mr
kelson
says
that
the
special
magistrate
did
more
work
afterwards,
he
did.
I
mean
he
a
couple
weeks
from
the
time
the
hearing
went
down
until
he
issued
a
report
and
he
asked
the
parties.
Questions
building
size
footprint
talk
about
your
alternate
scenario.
D
D
D
We'd
like
to
have
this
variance
approved.
We've
met
all
the
conditions
it's
found
on
the
special
knives
trade.
D
D
It
makes
no
sense,
like
I
said,
never
had
to
work
so
hard
to
not
accomplish
any
movement
or
coverage
or
anything
so
with
that
being
said
again,
I
appreciate
your
time
and
I
would
ask
you,
consider
the
special
magistrates
report
and
look
to
approve
it
this
evening.
Thank.
I
I
thought
I'd
ask
for
it
ahead
of
time
before
I
started
croaking.
Thank
you
so
much
brenda
durden
louis
longman,
walker.
My
address
is
245
riverside
avenue,
suite
510,
jacksonville
florida
and
I'm
here
tonight
as
special
counsel
on
behalf
of
the
city
of
jacksonville
beach
and
I'm
honored
to
be
allowed
to
do
that
as
you've
heard.
We
are
here
tonight
to
decide
whether
to
accept
or
reject
the
special
magistrate's
report
and
recommendation.
I
As
you
know,
oceanfront
submitted
its
building
plans
for
a
five-unit
condominium
project.
The
city
issued
a
building
permit
for
that
project
and
that
project
met
all
of
the
land
development
code
requirements,
including
all
of
the
setback
requirements.
Construction,
as
you
likely
know,
is
certainly
underway
at
this
point.
I
I
Townhouse
development
is
different,
is
a
different
use
from
condominium
development
and
it's
treated
differently
in
our
land
development
code.
This
is
not
an
unusual
in
any
sense.
In
fact,
it's
universally
recognized
that
different
types
of
uses
will
be
and
are
regulated
differently,
for
example,
and
relevant
to
today's
hearing.
In
the
context
of
residential
uses,
it's
not
uncommon
to
find
single
families.
I
Duplexes,
quadraplexes,
townhouses,
multi-family
and
condominium
uses
can
be
regulated
differently.
Sometimes
a
regulate
regulations
may
differ
based
on
the
density.
They
may
differ
based
on
the
height
they
may
even
be
based
on
a
differences
in
location
in
our
our
land.
Development
codes
are
no
different
than
these
other
common
practices,
not
only
throughout
the
state
of
florida,
but
throughout
the
united
states.
I
Ocean's
front's
desire
to
change
the
use
from
a
condominium
development
to
a
townhouse
development
ended
up
triggering
a
different
set
of
regulations
that
would
apply
to
the
project.
Why
does
our
code
do
that?
The
reason
is
that
the
proposed
townhouses
is
that
the
lot
size
for
a
proposed
townhouse
is
different
than
the
lot
size
for
a
condominium
project
in
a
condominium
project.
The
lot
size
is
the
entire
area
of
the
condominium
project.
That
is
the
lot
size.
That
is
the
parcel.
There
is
no
breaking
up
blood
that
ocean
front
owns
it.
I
What
is
under
the
condominium
project
the
lot,
but
in
a
townhouse
development,
each
townhouse
unit
carries
its
own
separate
plot
and,
as
as
you
might
expect,
that
is
going
to
be
a
much
smaller
lot.
I
There
was
a
need
for
these.
E
I
What
direction
the
front
of
the
building
faces
of
a
residence
may
face
under
under
our
code
for
multi-family?
The
ocean
side
is
always
going
to
be
the
rear
yard.
That's
not
the
case
for
townhouse
development
for
the
condominium
project.
This
aspect
did
not
create
a
compliance
issue,
but
for
the
townhouse
project
it
does
and
it
did
in
in
our
city
the
provisions
and
criteria
on
which
a
decision
by
you
for
or
against
the
variance
are
set
forth
very
clearly
in
section
34
uh-286.
I
That
prospective
purchasers
may
experience
members
of
the
public
pose
for
excuse
me,
members
of
the
public
spoke
for
both
for
and
against
the
variance
request.
You
voted
to
deny
the
two
requests.
Basing
your
decision
on
criteria
number
two,
that
the
applicants
that
the
applicant's
failure
to
show
that
the
need
for
the
variances
was
not
the
result
of
the
applicant's
own
passions,
in
other
words,
that
the
need
that
arose
for
the
variances
were
the
result
of
the
applicant's
own
actions.
I
F
I
I
I've
noticed
that
earlier
there
was
a
reference
to
a
2009
variant.
The
reason
that
I
believe,
as
as
I
recall,
that
the
reason
that
that
was
not
mentioned
in
the
special
magistrates
report
is
that
there
was
conclusive
evidence
that
that
was
not
even
a
relevant
variance
to
the
topic
at
hand.
I
see
maybe
quite
frankly
me
not
that
I
worked
for
the
city,
but
I
did
counsel
with
the
city
quite
a
bit
1999.
I
I
believe
that
your
code
has
probably
been
modified-
two,
maybe
three,
maybe
five
times
since
1999
in
some
respect
and,
moreover,
the
criterion
when
you
actually
look
at
the
criterion-
and
this
is
why
I
think
that
the
decision
that
or
the
basis
for
the
decision
by
mr
schmidt
was
not
reasonable
in
this
instance-
is
because
when
you
actually
look
at
that
criterion,
it
is
whether
it
is
not
whether
any
similar
variances
would
have
ever
been
granted,
but
rather
whether
without
the
variance
the
owner
would
be
deprived
of
rights
commonly
enjoyed
by
others
in
the
same
zoning
district.
I
It's
inconceivable
to
me,
as
a
land
use
lawyer,
to
believe
that
two
great
two
variances
granted
22
years
ago,
in
one
instance
and
17
years
ago
in
another
instance,
equate
to
rights
that
will
come
that
are
commonly
enjoyed
by
others
in
the
same
zoning
district.
I
You
know
to
say
that,
because
both
uses
are
permitted
that
any
restriction
against
both
those
uses
that
he
should
be
allowed
to
do
both,
regardless
of
whether
a
variance
is
necessary
or
not.
By
the
way,
I.
F
I
The
test
is
not
whether
an
owner
can
practically
or
reasonably
build
any
permitted
uses
that
are
listed
in
each
of
the
zoning
districts
ignore
as
many
as
somebody
might
desire,
but
rather
whether
some
special
condition
or
circumstance
that
exists,
which
is
peculiar
to
this
particular
property
and
not
applicable
to
others.
In
that
zoning
district.
I
I
I
I
will
say
right
now
that,
on
the
record
in
january,
the
mistake
that
was
in
the
staff
report
was
corrected
during
that
hearing
and
again
it
was
noted
during
the
proceeding
the
mediation
with
mr
schmidt
nor
did
nor
on
january
19th
did
the
applicant
provide
any
testimony
at
the
hearing
to
establish
that
it
met
any
of
those
criteria.
I
In
fact,
the
testimony
further
emphasized
that
the
request
had
only
to
do
the
convenience
and
the
cost
to
the
applicant
all
the
result
of
the
applicant's
own
actions
and
nothing
to
do
with
the
special
circumstances
or
conditions
that
would
be
peculiar
to
that
particular
land.
The
building
for
the
structure.
I
It
is
at
all
times
reasonable
for
a
public
body
like
this
board
in
a
quasi-judicial,
proceeding
to
hear
testimony
and
weigh
that
testimony
in
light
of
the
specific
criteria
that
is
set
forth
in
your
governing
documents.
Indeed,
in
a
quasi-judicial
setting.
That
is
the
very
essence
of
your
function,
and
it's
in
that
regards
the
basis
for
your
decision
was
not
unreasonable.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The
cost
to
prepare
and
file
condo
documents
required
by
florida
law
do
not
create
an
ongoing
burden
on
the
use
of
his
land.
The
request
for
a
development
plan
and
building
permit
approval
for
the
condo
project
were
voluntarily
submitted,
with
an
understanding
that
the
project
could
not
comply
with
the
setbacks
for
townhouses.
I
Knowing
that
the
condo
project
setbacks
would
not
and
did
not
comply
with
the
setbacks
for
townhalls
his
reason
because
of
the
administrative
costs
to
comply
with
florida,
condominium
law
was
too
high,
yet
in
florida,
hundreds
probably
realistically,
thousands
of
projects
in
florida
all
abide
by
these
same
requirements,
insurance,
financing,
statutory
and
lbc
regulations.
B
I
That
is
the
main
reason
that
we
believe
that
you
should
reject
that
report
because
of
his
reasoning
is,
is,
in
our
opinion,
improper
and
that
he
misconstrued
several
of
the
criterion
when
he
was
speaking
directly
to
to
those
criteria.
I
I
So
from
that
perspective,
I
do
think
that
it's
important
for
the
record
that
you
know
that
we
believe
that
it
was
improper
on
his
part
to
go
that
far.
Finally,
I
do
want
to
say
that
we
recommend
that
you
reject.
H
I
A
And,
based
on
mr
robinson's
recommendation
at
the
beginning
of
the
meeting,
since
we've
now
heard
the
applicant's
testimony
as
well
as
the
cities,
would
it
now
be
appropriate
to
open
for
public
comment,
or
would
you
recommend
that
we
ask
questions
first?
What
of
course.
I
A
A
I
A
A
A
And
he
will
we'll
be
using
this
clock,
so
please
keep
an
eye
on
the
clock,
so
you
know
where
your
time
is
at
and
you
will
also
politely
interject
once
you
hit
that
three
minute.
B
C
C
C
High-End
construction,
business,
high-rise
apartment
buildings,
office,
buildings,
ritz-carlton
hotels,
etc,
etc.
So
I
understand
the
construction,
business
and
I've
been
involved
in
mediation,
arbitration,
domestic
lawsuits
and
federal
lawsuits
without
my
years
of
construction
experience.
So
I'm
not
speaking
off
the
cuff
here.
C
By
the
assistant
city
attorney
or
whatever
representative
of
the
city-
and
she
was
right
on
spot
with
much
of
what
she
said.
C
The
magistrates
report,
first
of
all
the
magistrate:
it's
not
a
judge,
it's
not
a
jury,
it
is
just
he's
a
lawyer
and
he
was
elevated
to
the
position
of
a
magistrate
to
be
a
mediator.
This
was
mediation.
Mediation
is
not
binding.
His
job
was
to
get
the
parties
to
come
together
to
make
a
decision
to
end
the
dispute.
He
failed
to
do
that
so
for
him
to
then
create
a
report
of
his
opinion
of
what
happened
is
not
really.
C
Pertinent
to
this
issue,
it
was
only
his
opinion
of
the
facts
and
his
deliberation,
which
he
failed
to
perform
his
job
of
the
intermediate.
So
I
think
a
lot
of
credit
and
illegal
mumbo
jumbo
statements
and
talking
about
meetings
and
how
long
it
lasted.
That
is
immaterial.
The
material
fact
is
that
this
developer
misrepresented
and
basically
lied
about
his
intent,
ultimate
intent
for
the
use
of
the
property.
C
C
He
started
construction,
then
what
did
he
do?
He
totally
misrepresented
his
intent
and
immediately
filed
for
a
townhouse
variance,
that's
under
it's
without
dispute,
and
then
it
was
repeatedly
denied
deny
denied
according
to
the
wall
and
according
to
the
ruling
by
the
city,
committees
and
so
forth.
This
is
manipulation
of
the
city,
it
is
bait
and
switch,
it
is
ill-founded
and
it
is
misrepresented
and
the
city
should
not
fall
for
this
attempt
to
circumvent
the
laws.
C
B
F
F
I
am
objecting
to
this
request
for
a
bearing
on
behalf
of
the
100
owners,
whose
property
lies
immediately
adjacent
to
2020,
22,
22,
10th
avenue,
south
100
owners,
whose
combined
property
values
are
approximately
150
million
dollars,
making
us
the
largest
tax,
one
of
the
largest
taxpayers
in
jacksonville
beach.
In
your
wisdom
on
january
19,
your
board
denied
the
request.
We
are
only
here
today,
because
the
professional
magistrate
has
concluded
that
you
were
in
error
and
should
now
approve
it.
That
is
opinion.
You
are
the
decided
body.
F
We
understand
that
your
decision
was
a
deliberate
one,
a
decision
that
was
based
on
information
you
had
before
you
and
the
numerous
objections
stated
by
the
neighbors
surrounding
22
10th
avenue
south.
We
have
many
reasons
to
object,
but
since
you
should
have
in
your
file
a
letter
of
objection
written
by
our
report,
president
in
the
interest
of
time,
that
will
discover
what
we
feel
is
most
important
number
one.
Changing
the
classification
of
the
property
from
condominiums
to
townhome
presents
a
huge
public
safety
risk.
Why?
F
Because
townhome
developments
are
not
subject
to
the
recently
enacted
legislation,
which
requires
condominiums
of
at
least
three
stories
near
the
ocean,
to
have
periodical
structural
inspections
and
to
fund
reserves
for
structural
repairs
and
other
major
required
maintenance.
We
don't
want
a
surfside
type
catastrophe
in
the
jacksonville
beach
number.
Two
condominium
statutes
in
general,
provide
for
more
uniformity
and
a
higher
maintenance
standard
by
requiring
the
association
to
ensure
the
building
and
maintain
common
elements
of
the
entire
development
in
a
single
family.
F
Townhome
developments,
each
owner
is
responsible
for
ensuring
and
maintaining
their
own
individual
countless
number
three.
The
development
is
situated
between
two
of
the
highest
priced
condominiums
in
jacksonville
beach,
costa,
rano
and
marbella
reselling.
The
development
as
a
town
owned
could
negatively
affect
property
values
to
owners
of
both
associations.
F
Number
four
approval
of
the
application
will
lead
to
other
developers
requesting
similar
variances
in
a
similar
manner.
Number
five.
In
our
opinion,
the
variance
application
does
not
meet
the
required
standards
under
the
land
development
code,
section
34-286,
because
the
developer
did
not
show
that
there
were
special
or
unique
circumstances
or.
C
F
In
his
report,
the
special
magistrate
states-
I
quote.
Frankly,
the
special
magistrate
was
initially
put
off
by
the
owner's
decision
to
do
a
hybrid
development
by
applying
for
a
building
permit
only
to
change
and
then
file
for
the
variants.
The
special
manager
state
viewed
this
as
a
form
of
better
to
ask
forgiveness
than
permission
development
approach.
F
C
A
So
if
you.
F
Could
I'll
just
photoshop,
okay,
the
special
manuscript
makes
the
assumption
that
the
because
you
paid
three
million
dollars
that
they'll
take
care
of
the
property
we
as
the
board
of
directors
say:
that's
an
assumption
as
well.
Why
are
you
assuming
that
they
will
take
care
of
their
property?
If
I
could
just
conclude,
is
this
how
the
board
of
adjustments
wants
to
make
decisions
anyway,
an
assumption
that
people
will
do
the
right
thing,
or
do
you
want
to
make
decisions
based
on
actual
facts,
facts
that
have
not
changed
facts
that
have
helped?
F
You
come
to
your
initial
conclusion:
facts
that
have
been
laid
out
before
you
today
found
in
your
file
and
hacks
that
you
are
learning
tonight.
What
was
through
before
is
still
true.
Now
the
facts
have
not
changed
on
behalf
of
all
the
100
owners
of
katja
verlano.
We
reiterate
our
stolen
objections
to
the
request
for
belief
and
we
appreciate
their
consideration
thanks.
B
F
Name
is
leah
tahiri.
I
think
I
live
at
10
30,
one
first
street
south
number,
907
jacksonville
beach,
three,
two,
two
five
zero
so
good
evening,
members
of
the
board
of
planning
and
development
and
the
attorney's
varsity
and
mr
members
of
the
audience
that
come
here
today
to
oppose
the
grand
americans
proposed
by
dave,
carr
investment
cell
update
this
property
was
purchased
and
when
he
decided
to
begin
development
planning
the
appropriate
paperwork
for
the
city,
the
developer
was
informed
that
he
could
not.
F
F
His
assumption
was
that
it
would
be
approved
of
little
concern
for
the
variance
as
requests
are
approved
by
the
staff
and
take
time
and
research
and
make
the
recommendation
to
the
board
for
approval.
I
am
puzzled
by
his
failure
to
originally
file
in
line
with
his
intent
to
build
upon
to
build
townhouses,
not
toddlers.
F
F
F
F
He
knew
this
was
a
piece
when
he
did
it
generally.
These
functions
are
hidden
and
he
also
seemed
to
think
that
he
would
be
on
the
hook
forever
and
that's
not
true.
Generally,
these
functions
are
handed
over
to
the
owners
after
a
majority
of
the
units
have
been
sold,
while
the
fairies
in
his
that
his
building
would
be
in
the
same
footprint
was
parroted
monotonously
throughout
the
last
meeting.
That
is
not
what
concerns
me.
It
is
the
form
of
ownership
that
is
pivotal
for
my
concern.
F
A
I
should
also
I'd
like
to
mention
that
the
board
was
given
a
copy
of
your
letter,
so
even
though
you
were
not
able
to
read
it
in
the
full
three
minutes,
we
do
have
a
copy
of.
I
believe
the
letter
that
you
were
speaking
from,
and
I
think
the
same
can
be
said
of
the
speaker
prior.
I
believe
that
was
included.
A
It
like
you've
got
one
other
individual
card,
but
if
there
are
any
other
items
that
the
members
of
the
public
wish
to
share
with
the
board,
they
should
be
submitted
through
the
clerk
to
me
unless
you,
but
if
you
submit
them
to
the
clerk,
we'll
have
to
keep
them.
You
won't
get
those
back,
but
you're
welcome
to
submit
them
to
the
court.
Now.
A
A
To
limit
public
speakers
to
the
three
minutes:
that's
that's
our
board
policy.
After
we've
heard
everybody
speak
if
the
board
has
a
consensus
that
we'd
like
to
have
people
speak
for
a
second
time.
We
can
discuss
that.
Then,
let's
read
them
just
one.
B
Quickly,
sorry,
please
raise
your
right
hand.
Do
you
swear
or
affirm
that
the
testimony
about
to
give
in
this
matter
is
the
truth
of
all
truth
and
nothing,
but
the
truth
set
up
in
god.
I
did.
Please
get
your
name
in
your
address
for
the
record:
yeah
ella,
carlton,
2912,
african
lane,
jack
speech,
florida,
3,
2,
2,
5,
0..
B
B
B
In
my
opinion,
the
original
parents
request
itself
was
confusing.
It
seemed
that
the
opposing
citizens
thought
that
the
outcome
of
the
meeting
would
modify
the
building
structure
by
either
halting
the
project
itself
or
changing
the
footprint
of
the
structure,
and
I
I
don't
believe
that
was
what
was
really
being
asked
for
the
results.
B
I'm
aware
that
it's
important
to
you
that
the
neighbors
do
have
sometimes
give
their
impression
of
the
variance
requests,
but
they
seemed
misinformed
in
the
last
meeting,
misused
the
vocabulary
of
the
zoning
land,
use,
etc,
and
the
decisions
seemed
to
be
made
quickly,
and
maybe
there
wasn't
a
complete
understanding
of
really
what
was
requested.
B
It
seemed
that
the
poison
group
was
more
upset
about
the
fact
that
it
was
built
blocking
whatever
moving
it
had
nor
haven't
and
it
and
did
not
understand
the
difference
between
the
multi-family
housing
versus
a
townhouse
versus
a
condo
and
just
seemed
to
just
oppose
it
all.
There
must
be
an
undo
hardship
for
the
applicant,
otherwise
we
wouldn't
be
here
and
there
doesn't
seem
to
be
from
one
understanding
any
undue
hardship
with
the
city
or
its
neighbors.
B
If
the
property
is
owned
as
a
townhouse,
the
request
is
not
the
first
of
its
kind.
There
doesn't
seem
to
be
a
true
reason,
other
than
reading
that
has
become
more
personal.
The
way
in
which
your
variance
is
filed
should
have
no
bearings
on
whether
a
variance
is
actually
approved
or
not.
In
my
opinion-
and
I
believe
that
what
is
being
judged
is
not
really
the
true
request,
so
thank
you
for
listening.
G
Yes,
there's
one
letter:
it's
on
costa
varano,
condominium
association
date
of
july,
8th
to
2022..
G
G
The
vista
verano
condominium
association,
christopher
objects
to
the
request
for
relief
and
variance
request
filed
by
oceanfront
10th
llc.
The
developer
for
the
following
reasons:
one
changing
the
clarification
of
the
property
from
condominium
to
town
homes,
because
there's
a
huge
public
safety
risk
that
a
surfside
catastrophe
could
occur
in
the
future.
This
is
because
townhouse
development
would
not
be
subject
to
the
requirements
of
recently
enacted
legislation
which
require
condominiums
of
at
least
three
stories
near
the
ocean
to
have
periodic
structural
inspections
and
to
fund
reserves
for
structural
repairs
and
other
major
required
maintenance
in.
G
The
developer
initially
applied
for
a
building
permit
for
the
condominiums.
This
supported
the
developer,
a
much
more
lenient,
narrow
setback
of
10
feet
on
the
rear
side
of
the
building,
which
is
adjacent
to
the
costa,
ronda
murano
property,
rather
than
a
30-foot
setback.
They
have
applied
for
a
permit
for
townhouses
and
a
13-foot
front
setback
as
compared
to
20
feet
for
a
town,
one
development.
G
G
This
diminishes
many
of
our
owners,
property
values.
Six,
the
development
of
22
10th
avenue
south
is
between
two
of
the
highest
price
condominiums
in
jacksonville
beach,
costa,
verano
and
maribella
rezoning.
The
development
as
a
townhouse
could
negatively
affect
property
values
of
customers
100
homeowners.
G
A
condominium
is
more
appropriate
for
the
development
at
22
10th
avenue
south,
because
the
condominium
statutes
provide
for
more
uniform
and
a
high
a
higher
maintenance
standard
by
requiring
the
association
to
ensure
the
building
and
maintain
the
common
elements
for
the
entire
development
in
single-family
townhouse
single-family
townhouse
developments,
each
owner
is
responsible
for
ensuring
and
maintaining
their
own
individual
townhouse,
including
the
exterior
and
common
elements.
That
would
be
the
responsibility
of
the
condominium
association.
G
The
developer
sites
that
the
developer
cites
an
additional
legal
spends
required
to
establish
the
development
as
a
condominium
association,
as
opposed
to
a
townhouse
development.
However,
based
on
the
estimates
from
an
attorney
who
specializes
in
hoa
and
cognitive
association
law,
the
cost
differential
is
only
about
five
thousand
dollars,
which
is
negative
rule
now
for
a
project
that
is
advertised
at
a
market
value
of
over
15
million.
G
We
believe
that
the
real
reason
developers
requesting
a
change
in
classification
from
a
condominium
to
a
townhouse
development
is
so
he
can
keep
the
homeowner's
assessments
as
low
as
possible
in
order
to
maximize
the
sales
price
of
the
units
eight.
Finally,
in
our
opinion,
the
variance
application
does
not
meet
the
required
standards
underlying
development
code
34-286,
because
the
developer
did
not
show
that
they
were
special
or
unique
circumstances,
or
that
the
developer
would
suffer
an
unnecessary
and
undo
hardship.
It
could
not
otherwise
enjoy
any
reasonable
use
of
property.
G
As
a
condominium,
we
appreciate
the
board
of
adjustments,
consideration
in
these
factors
and
strongly
inject
the
request
for
elite
on
behalf
of
the
100
adjacent
property
owners
at
custom.
Toronto
respectfully
submitted
costa
verano
condominium
association's
board
of
directors
signed
our
travis
story.
President.
C
C
A
C
A
Hearing
no
new
speakers
from
the
audience
I
will
now
close
the
public
hearing
or
I
apologize
we'll
allow
the
applicant
to
respond
to
any
of
the
comments
made
in
public.
H
H
H
I
also
note
that,
on
page
18
of
the
report
that
special
masters
specifically
said,
as
noted
above
and
by
the
chair
at
the
original
hearing,
the
timing
of
the
applicant
for
change
as
she
described,
it
is
irrelevant
irrelevant
to
whether
the
variant
should
have
been
granted,
because
the
timing
of
the
application
is
not
a
factor
under
that
land
development
code,
section
34-286,
it
simply
is
not
it's
not
a
factor.
It's
nothing
to
consider
a
heap
argument
about
the
same
thing
about
misrepresented
deceit,
as
this
board
has
recognized
to
release
the
chair
and
special
master.
H
Now
the
city
gets
up
here
and
and
basically
argues
the
same
thing
and
like
this
was
a
foregone
conclusion.
None
of
the
criteria
meant,
I
just
remind
the
board
at
the
original
hearing.
It
was
a
hotly
contested
3-2
decision.
H
Then
we
have
special
master,
who
spent
50
hours
reviewing
this,
who
had
special
expertise,
who's
done
many
of
these
things
and
the
special
masters
sided
with
the
applicant.
So
at
best
we
have
a
3-3
at
this
point
and
what
the
city
is
asking
you
to
do
is
substitute
your
judgments
for
the
special
master,
who
has
the
training
the
experience
and
spent
countless
hours
going
over
every
one
of
these
arguments
in
detail,
comparing
it
to
the
statute,
comparing
it
to
the
code
and
he
rejected
these
arguments
by
the
city
and
now.
H
Doesn't
like
so
they're
up
here
telling
you
no,
you
should
listen
to
that.
He
doesn't
know
what
he's
talking
about.
Well,
I
submit
that.
Mr
mr
schmidt,
does
he
he
knows
exactly
what
he's
talking
about
and
I'm
not
going
to
go
through
all
the
detail
with
you,
but
you
I
would
appreciate
if
you
would
look
at
page,
20
and
21
of
mr
schmidt's
report.
H
He
goes
through
every
single
criteria
that
was
necessary
under
the
code
to
establish
a
variance
and
in
detail
states
why
the
applicant
has
met
each
one
of
those
considerations
and
then
the
last
thing
I
will
say
the
other
argument
in
here
that
condominiums
are
somehow
so
much
more
protected
and
have
so
much
better
laws.
We
offered
to
the
city
to
put
deeds
and
restrictions
in
the
records
that
would
govern
these
units
just
as
strict
as
any
condo
association,
and
they
regenerate
that.
H
So
we
have
offered
to
make
these
just
as
stringently
regulated
as
condominiums
and
the
city
doesn't
want
that,
and
just
the
final
as
noted
in
this
report,
this
condo,
whether
they
build
it
as
a
condo
or
a
town
home.
It
has
zero
effect
on
the
city,
the
neighboring
properties
and
there's
another
quote
in
here
from
the
from
the
special
master.
If
I
can
find
it
real
quick.
I
I
wanted
to
put
in
here
about
the
fact
that
you
know
it's
a
condo.
H
It
faces
one
direction
or
if
it
is
a
a
town
home,
it
faces
another
direction,
but
he
says
as
a
practical
matter
the
way
they're
built
they're
all
going
to
be
facing
as
if
they
were
town
homes,
because
that's
the
way
they're
being
built
and
it's
silly
to
make
it
take
an
issue
that
is
essentially
what
the
special
master
said.
So
as.
C
H
D
Okay
know
just
real
quick
to
ms
durden's
point.
She
talked
about.
You
know
that
we
would
be.
You
know
basically
going
against
the
codes,
the
lbc
lynn
development.
This
is
a
page
506
from
rm2
and
it
includes
downtown
towns.
It's
an
absolute
allowable
use
contained
in
that
underneath
that
zoning
designation
and
that
overlay
we're
just
trying
to
access
those
entitlements.
D
She
you
know,
ironically
many
times
have
been
before
the
sport
and
people
have
raised
the
economic
issue
and
you
know
quickly
got
that
gets
slotted
down,
but
the
city
presents
it
as
almost
a
club
to
mitigate
what
our
request
is
to
hold
us
down.
So
I
would
say
the
economic
relevancy
of
how
the
project
turns
out
really
isn't
applicable.
The
you
know,
candor
the
market's
changing.
D
I've
got
a
stigma
on
my
project
right
now,
as
we
continue,
you
know
continue
to
engage
in
this
contentious
back
and
forth,
but
what's
it
going
to
be
so,
you
know
there
is
no.
There
is
no
surety
of
economic
gain
and
I
don't
think
that
should
have
be
considered
in
one
way,
shape
or
form
the
sole
relevancy
before
you
in
the
war,
and
I
think
mr
kelson
spoke
to
your
point.
Mr
says
the
application
initial
application
came
before
you
and
what
the
special
management
support
is.
Obviously
me
as
a
developer.
D
I
know
that
you
know,
should
I
be
parent
of
experience.
It's
incumbent
upon
me
to
still
go
through
the
planning
process
through
city
council
to
make
whatever
fire
code
or
or
building
modifications
by
the
jurisdictional
authorities
should
be
required.
But
what's
before
you
today
is
country
or
canada,
and
where
you
support
that
request.
D
The
to
costco
verano
I've
completed
a
10-hour
project
in
jacksonville
beach,
channel
side
of
town
homes.
We
did
covenants
and
restrictions,
they're
managed,
they're
maintained,
there's
a
continuity
of
paint,
color
et
cetera
and
miss
sturgeon.
Cicassie
is
a
city
attorney
for
the
city
of
atlantic
beach.
I
developed
and
completed
the
atlantic
beach
townhomes
ragtime
painter
12
units.
Ms
durden
successfully
negotiated
with
mr
van
roy
covenants
and
restrictions
that
he
was
out
of.
D
Of
longevity
to
the
end
user,
termite
on
underneath
the
whole
building
exterior
maintenance
by
the
association
exterior
insurance
by
the
association,
and
so
we
can
do
this
since
you
covered
the
restrictions
to
shore
up
whatever
concerns
any
of
the
neighbors
may
have
we
offered
that
early
on
in
the
process,
and
we
we
would
do
that
regardless,
because
we
would
want
to
protect
the
asset.
We
would
incorporate
those
covenants
and
restrictions
on
our
own.
We
don't
need
to
to
do
it
as
a
negotiating
tactic
or
as
a
concession.
D
If
these
are
counted,
we're
going
to
incorporate.
You
know,
strengthen
the
covenants
and
restrictions
because
we
have
a
responsibility
to
our
end
user
and
we
want
you
know
the
project
to
represent
quality
for
years
to
come,
that's
the
type
of
project
that's
being
developed.
Never
was
it
a
ask
for
forgiveness.
For
me,
I
communicated
to
the
head
building
official
I
communicated
with
the
fire
marshal.
I
communicated
the
director
of
public
works,
all
priors,
building
permanent
issuance.
D
They
knew
that
I
was
going
to
submit,
for
I
want
to
get
this
permit
and
then
I
want
to
submit
for
a
variance
during
the
mediation
we
requested
that
those
three
for
the
special
editor
hearing.
I
requested
those
three
people
be
available
to
come
in
and
make
a
representation
yeah.
We
were
aware
of
it.
It
wasn't
a
bait
and
switch.
There
was
no
any
of
that
and
we
were
denied
access
to
those
people,
even
though
they
were
here
in
the
building.
D
During
that
day,
those
things
are
so
much
troubling
to
me
the
the
the
thing
for
me:
it's
a
pure
form
of
ownership.
These
are
five
units,
they're,
not
200,
that
are
stacked.
D
Initial
hearing
we
heard
testimony
about
higher
financing
costs,
there's
absolutely
higher
insurance
costs.
People
talked
about
surfside
that
building
sits
on
it's
been
designed
by
professional
engineers.
It's
been
reviewed
by
city
officials,
we've
hired
private
inspectors.
Assuring
me
as
a
developer.
When
I
could
have
built
a
wood
structure,
I
didn't
I
elected
to
make
it
all
concrete
and
steel
with
interior
frame.
It
sits
on
87
piles
that
are
18
inches
around
30
feet
in
the
ground,
and
it's
got
a
solid,
concrete
structure
with
solid
core
cmd
walls.
I
don't
you
know.
D
Risk
mitigation
and
construction
means
the
methods
there's
no
shortcuts
being
taken
there.
Everything
is,
you
know
high
as
you
invest
and
what's
our
best
needs
in
application
so
to
for
any
of
those
folks
that
have
concerns
about
that.
I
I
would
you
know
I
wouldn't
give
those
a
lot
of
weight
and
provide
them
surety
that
you
know
we're
working
hard
to
address
those
things.
D
The
cost
of
running
homes
are
again
economic.
It's
not
a
surf
site
thing.
We
can
absolutely
address
whatever
concerns
they
have
regarding
an
hoa
through
our
own
cup
of
center
restriction.
And
again
we
would
do
that
on
our
own
anyway,
just
to
make
sure
that
the
project
was
was
successful.
D
They've
mentioned
timing:
this
is
a
late
thing.
Permit
was
issued,
maybe
college
28th
of
october.
I
submitted
my
various
package
on
the
second
november
or
you
know,
within
a
couple
days
thereafter
we're
in
july.
You
know
it
took
me
multiple
attempts
to
get
past
city
staff
to
even
come
before
the
board
to
review
this
application.
D
Everything
we've
been
told
out
on
time
and
kicked
down
the
road
and
kicked
out
and
kicked
on
the
road
to
now.
We're
kind
of
at
this
point
where
we're
before
you
we've
exercised
our
rights
under
70
51.
D
You
know
that
it
fell
how
it
fell
so
based
on
those
factors
that
are
before
you.
Currently,
I
would
submit
to
you
to
approve
it
in
support
of
the
special
registry.
This
is
just
happening
in
my
file.
This
is
a
survey.
That's
received
city
attachment
beach
of
the
building
directly
across
the
street,
and
it's
at
the
setbacks,
which
are
all
greater
than
what
I'm
requesting.
D
I
I
just
don't
I
don't
candidly,
you
know
understand
it.
You
know
I
stand
before
you
today.
You
know
I
read
the
land
development
code,
I
look
at
the
zoning
maps
and
overlays
and
these
are
allowable
uses,
and
I
think
that
you
know
there's
steps
and
there's
processes
and
there's
times
to
make
those
steps
and
those
this
scenario
has
gotten
way
outside
of
scope
way
out
of
bounds
and
the
request
before
you
is
very
simply
put
it's
front,
remembered
setbacks.
D
The
building
doesn't
modify
and
then
I
would
ask
that
you
support
the
specialized
recommendation.
So
if
that
being
said,
any
questions,
let's
joe,
do
you
want
to
okay.
G
I
do
have
one
question:
yes,
sir,
and
this
regards
criteria
number
two,
so
criteria,
number
two
was
the
criteria
mentioned
in
the
motion
to
deny
your
variance
request.
That
was
that's
the
subject
of
this.
This
hearing
today,
right.
A
G
Page
20
the
bottom
line:
yes,
sir
okay,
so
the
city
argues
that
so,
as
you
can
see,
the
special
magistrate
says
that
the
condition
the
the
lots,
narrow
width
is
not
a
special
condition
that
you
created
right,
correct.
G
The
city
argues
that,
when
it
was
being
developed
as
a
condominium
that
you
didn't
need
americans
for
that,
the
setbacks
were
all
correct,
but
that
when
you
requested
the
variance
to
construct
the
townhouse
that
you
created
the
condition,
and
so
what
I
would
like
you
to
do,
if
you
can
is
address
the
city's
arguments
on
this
criteria,
number
two:
does
that
make
sense.
B
D
C
I'm
joe
van
roy,
my
address
is
nine
four
seven
one
big
island
road,
103,
texas,
all
right.
We
belong
to
the
60
60
line
when
you,
if
you
go
to
newtown
homes
slide
when
you
apply
the
front
right
here,
attack
bags,
the
the
30
foot,
rear
setback,
20,
foot,
front
yard,
set
back
and
the
way
they're
measured.
C
C
There's
really
no
way
to
do
town
homes
other
than
that
and
and
have
them
have
any
functional
footprint
that
that
complies
with
code.
C
And
I
do
think
that
a
requirement
in
different
ownership
style.
C
When
we're
not
looking
to
stack
units-
and
I
think
this
is
maybe
not
everyone-
remember
this
journey-
but
training
and
experience-
and
but
not
everybody-
you
do
condos
and
business
there's
units
on
top
of
each
other.
If
you
can't
have
a
legal
description,
that's
measured
by
surveyor
right
their
box,
created
by
the
state
of
florida
suspended
in
the
year
here.
This
project
is
designed
that
it
can
be
a
there
is
nothing
on
top
of
one
another
they're
in
in
all
we're
talking
about
is
the
way
that.
C
But
it's
on
the
future
owners
going
forward,
and
that
was
the
you
know
this.
Isn't
this
isn't
about
the
money
to
us?
This
has
not
been
an
inexpensive
process
to
get
here
today,
with
the.
C
To
us
this
is
this
is
an
expense
because
it
ought
to
be
townhomes
because
it
looks
like
town
homes.
It
operates
like
towns,
and
I
don't
want
to
do
the
the
ultimate
citizens
in
there
wrong
by
taking
an
easy
path
to
make
any
condos,
because
if
you
don't,
if
you're,
not
stacking
any
unit,
there's
no
reason,
there's
no
protections,
it's
a
misnomer,
but
that
people
are
think
they're
going
to
be
a
higher
quality.
They're
better
cared
for
it's
five
minutes,
they're
going
to
be
cared
and
they
explore
exactly
like
the.
C
Been
511
run,
town
condos,
I've
been
well
run,
town
homes
and
vice
versa.
You
know,
and
my
and
it's
up
to
the
owners,
ultimately
the
pro
once
once
we're
out
of
it.
We
can
create
structure.
I
don't
I
I'll
draft.
I
will,
and
I
have
I've
done
many
talentable
projects
with
very
aggressive.
You
know
the
associations
responsible
for
the
colors,
the
beautiful
paint
colors
a
window
glazings.
You
know
you
name
it.
It's
gonna,
look
just
as
good
as
it.
C
You
know
any
condo
ever
would
and
it's
a,
but
ultimately
when
we're
out
of
it,
whether
it's
a
townhome
or
a
condo,
it's
gonna
be
up
to
the
five
owners
and
how
they
want
their
property
maintained.
Again,
there's
there's
poorly
run
condominiums
and
there's
one
around
town
homes
and
it's
it's
up
to
the
borders
at
the
end
of
the
day.
C
A
On
that
same
note,
I
I
have
a
question
as
well
about
some
of
the
findings
in
the
master's
report,
also
on
page
20.,
so
to
owen's
point.
The
city
is
arguing
that,
when
the
variance
application
was
made
to
change
it
to
townhomes
from
condos
that
the
applicant
thereby
created
their
own
hardship,
let's
say
I
were
to
differ
from
that
opinion
or
not
different
from
that
opinion,
but
just
focus
on
the
actual
application
for
townhomes.
C
I
think
that's
an
unreasonable
concept
to
run
with
that
middle
unit.
Okay,
by
the
time
you
build
up,
build
the
walls,
thicker
wall
and
normal
because
they're
there
and
then
a
single
family
home,
or
what
have
you
because
of
the
the
noise,
the
mitigation
that
you
need
and
fire
codes
yeah
with
less
than
14
foot
interior
space
100,
you
know,
use
this
site
reasonably.
C
You
know,
walk
through
bedrooms
and
as
you
put
into
that,
you
know,
you
can't
do
that.
You
can't
have
a
linear
product
like
that
in
the
firefighter,
for
instance,
for
indoor
city
dresser
bedrooms,
it's
just
not
reasonable.
It's
like
he
found
it's,
not
a
reasonable
use.
It's
that
that
would
that's
all
could
be
a
it's
a.
A
Could
I
ask
the
city
to
address
that
because
I
do
want
to
make
sure
if
I'm
considering
this
finding
a
special
magistrate,
I
I
want
to
know
is
the
less
than
15
foot
wide
unit
more
of
a
you
know
we
prefer
not
to
because
what
buyers
don't
want
that
or
is
it
truly
a
code
minimum
situation
where
they
legally
would
not
be
allowed
to
put
into
you
know,
for
example,
in
rs1
there's
a
minimum
square
footage
that
home
must
be?
C
Is
15
feet
and
there
are
developers
building
these
in
the
city
right
now.
They
clearly
need
fire
code
building
codes.
That
would
be
permanent,
so
you
could
legally
do
a
15-foot
wide
unit.
The
minimum
unit
size
for
townhomes
is
700
square
feet
for
a
one
bedroom.
900
is
working
for
a
two
bedroom
or
1100
square
feet
for
a
three
bedroom.
So
as
long
as
they
can
meet
those
minimum
sizes
for
the
number
of
bedrooms,
they
can
legally
build
a
15
foot
wide
townhome
without
being
released
from
us.
I
Thank
you
very
much
me.
Yes,
okay,
good,
a
couple
things.
I
First,
we
can
do
the
townhouses
without
the
bearings
we
went
through
an
extensive
exercise
to
describe
and
show
how
the
three
townhouses
could
be
built
on
this
property.
I
hear
in
the
background
people
saying
yeah,
but
it's
151
feet
long.
The
the
townhouse
doesn't
have
to
be
151
feet.
Yes,
the
lot.
I
I
But
quite
frankly,
if
I
might
say
people
might
enjoy
being
able
to
look
directly
on
their
property
out
at
the
ocean
as
opposed
to
you
know,
looking
at
a
street,
for
instance,
so
in
other
words,
just
because
the
lot
is
151
feet,
long
doesn't
mean
that
the
townhouse
itself
has
to
be
152.
I
I
was
shocked
to
see
that
in
the
report,
considering
that
he
makes
a
big
deal
about
well,
that
wouldn't
be
very
good,
except
that
we
have
five
condos
that
are
being
that
have
currently
under
construction,
three
of
which
clearly
have
no
side
windows
or
doors.
It's
only
the
end
unit.
I
Similarly,
if
the
narrow
lot
is
a
special
conviction
that
did
not
result
from
the
applicants,
the
actions
of
the
applicant,
then
the
granting
of
the
variance
would
not
have
conferred
upon
the
applicant
any
special
privilege.
I
think
the
key
word
in
those
two
sentences
is
the
word.
If
and
when
you
look
back
to
the
rationale
that
is
used
here
to
to
justify
you
know
the
width
being
the
special
condition,
it's
based
on
the
idea
that
he
has
an
absolute
right
to
do,
townhouses
and
that's
not
the
case,
it
doesn't
have
an
absolute
right.
I
You
hear
I
even
heard
mr
van
roy
say
you
know
it's
not
reasonable
for
us
to
have
to
you
know
we
should
it's
not
reasonable
for
us
not
to
be
able
to
do
town
houses
well
number
one.
He
can
do
ten
houses,
it's
just
not
as
many
as
he
wants
to
do
and
number
two.
It's
not
that
he
has
an
absolute
right
just
because
townhouses
are
listed
in
the
list
of
permitted
uses,
you
still
have
to
comply
with
the
code.
I
B
I
That
there
was
no
movement,
no
opportunity
because
he
chose
to
lay
the
foundation
where
it
was,
and
he
and
it
goes
to
the
undue
burden
argument
here-
was
there
an
undue
burden
on
the
owner's
use
of
the
property
and
clearly
not
in
the
sense
that
this
is
what
he
chose,
and
you
can
see
that
he
has
now
many
uses,
but
he
chose
this
particular
use
and
he
chose
this
particular
footprint.
I
It
comes
back
to
the
issue
of.
Why
do
we
need
this
particular
variant
because
he
chose
to
build
the
footprint
where
it's
located
and
it
comes
back
to
your
criteria
and
why
your
criteria
is
the
main
thing
and
the
main
reason
that
we
don't
believe
that
this
special
magistrate's
report
is
correct,
and
it
also
goes
to
the
issue
of
why
you
should
object
and
stick
with
your
collegiate.
Let
your
original
decision
remain
unchanged.
A
I
have
a
question
regarding
criteria:
five
parameter
variance
is
the
minimum
variance
that
will
make
the
reasonable
use
of
the
parcel
of
land
building
or
structure,
and
I
suppose
it
also
somewhat
addresses
criteria
for
literal
interpretation,
enforcement
of
the
terms
and
provisions
of
this
code,
which
deprive
the
applicant
of
rights
commonly
enjoyed
by
other
proposals
of
land
and
work
in
a
necessary
early
hardship.
A
I
guess
it
really
addresses
criteria.
Five
more
so
so.
My
question
is
again
referencing
what
the
vice
chair
initially
brought
up.
A
A
Trying
to
figure
out
how
to
raise
this,
so
I
guess
your
argument
is.
The
city's
argument
is
that
he
can
build
what
he
wants
to
build.
Literal
interpretation
of
the
code
doesn't
deprive
him
of
those
rights
because
he
can
build
a
condo.
He
doesn't
have
to
go
to
town
home.
He
can
build
a
condo
to
the
same
specs
that
he's
building
on
right
now,
however,
is
that
code
applicable
based
on
the
fact
that
there's
other
uses
for
the
property,
or
can
it
be
applied
more
narrowly
to
the
use
that
the
applicant
has
chosen.
A
A
B
I
To
do
the
development
as
a
town
home,
there's
there's
no
denying
that
he
had
a
right
to
come
in
and
that's
where
variance,
but
if
he
doesn't
get
the
variance,
then
he
can't
do
that
particular
development
that
particular
footprint
as
a
town,
health,
development.
Okay,
in
other
words,
going
to
your,
I
think
your
question
is,
you
know:
do
we
when
I
said
he
doesn't
have
an
absolute
right
to
do
these
townhouses
in
the
within
the
footprint
that
he's
chosen
and
he's
put
in
stone,
literally
put
in
stomach?
I
He
has
to
get
the
variance
and
the
variance
has
to
meet
the
criteria.
That's
this
board's
responsibility
and
obligation
is
to
determine
based
upon
the
evidence,
that's
presented
to
you
whether
or
not
he
meets
their
criteria.
So
that's
when
I
say
he
doesn't
have
an
absolute
right
unless
his
property
meets
the
coach.
Just
like
he
came
in
with
the
condo
project,
he
had
a
right
to
do
that.
I
If,
if
you
don't
need
all
the
code,
requirements
nobody's
ever
said
to
ocean,
but
you
can't
come
in
and
ask
for
a
variance
that
he
has
that
right,
but
he
doesn't
have
an
absolute
right
to
to
obtain
that
variance
if,
if,
if
he
doesn't
have,
if
he
doesn't
meet
the
criteria,
I.
C
E
C
I
I
Is
not
guaranteed
at
all,
so
you
could
have
20
different
uses
listed
under
rm2
and
we
probably
do
right
and
if
you
are
on
a
on
a
you
know
you
come
in
and
you
say
I
want
five
right.
He
wants
five
ten
minutes.
Well,
the
piece
of
property
doesn't
qualify
for
five
unless
you
come
in
and
ask
for
a
variance-
and
you
may
not
get
your
minutes,
but
in
that
our
case,
we
know
that
he
could
have
three
even
townhouses.
I
So
you
know
the
the
whole
focus
on
whether
it's
reasonable
to
have
three
or
whether
it's
unreasonable
to
say
you
can't
count.
Five
is
not
really
the
test.
The
test
is,
does
your
property
do
that
you
know?
Is
there
something
particularly
peculiar
about
your
property,
a
parcel,
that's
65
feet
wide
and
100.
I
There's
nothing
peculiar
about
it.
So
from
that
perspective
I
would
say
that
I,
I
hope
I
answered
your
question.
You
know
not.
Every
single
use
necessarily
will
result
in
a
right
to
develop
a
particular
use.
That's
listed
in
that
it
all
depends
upon
the
piece
of
property
where
you
want
to
put
it.
It
depends
upon
the
zoning,
but
on
that
piece
of
property
it
depends
upon.
I
C
C
C
A
Does
anybody
have
any
other
questions?
It
appears
that
the
applicant
would
like
to
address
some
other
comments.
Questions.
D
Thank
you
again,
comparable
products.
The
sturgeon
speaks
about
the
city
and
15-foot
product.
During
the
special
united
states
procedure
and
they're
promoting
the
three
townhomes
homes.
They
made
their
presentation.
It
was
currently
15
foot
platted
lots
of
the
city
of
jacksonville
beach.
We
asked
for
copies
of
those
class
and
we
asked
if
there
were
any
variances
that
have
been
applied
forward
to
before.
D
D
This
is
you
presented
issue
the
this
is
not
low
income
housing.
This
is
ocean
front,
as
the
resident
says,
between
two
of
the
highest
income
properties
in
jacksonville
beach,
highest
and
best
use
which
the
city
speaks
to,
as
it
relates
to
a
condo
or
it
could
be
increased
density.
One
important
distinction.
We
keep
talking
as
a
condo
as
a
condo,
it's
a
condo.
It
could
also
be
a
multi-family
building.
It
could
be
a
four
lamp
product.
I
could
you
know
we
could
do
different
things
with
the
existing
footprint.
D
The
boot
is
on
the
ground
the
boot
is
set,
but
for
a
practical
matter
the
project
was
designed
duplicatively
contemplating
this
request
for
variance
at
a
later
date.
From
a
practical
standpoint,
the
four
front
doors
are
on
tent.
The
address
for
this
project
is
on
tap
one
unit
jumps
on
first
and
that's
the
western
unit.
Another
kind
of
example
would
be
when
somebody
builds
a
mixed
use.
D
Building,
they
don't
know
what
the
tenant
mix
is
going
to
be,
and
the
tenant
mix
for
an
esthetician
is
gonna
in
the
permanent
environment
going
to
be
somewhat
different
than
the
permanent
requirement
for
a
restaurant
or
a
small
retail
shop.
So
those
distinctions-
I
don't
know
it's,
I
think
it's
it's
got
some
relevancy.
D
This
plant
was
done
in
1909
and
since
1909
the
city
has
adopted
a
comprehensive
plan.
Amendments
landis
code
development
code
changes
that
the
land
is
older
than
those
and
so
they're
overlaying.
These
amendments
on
top
of
the
land,
it's
no
different
than
a
the
land
of
overcoat
says:
rs1
mod
is
10
000
square
feet.
There's
not
a
lot
of
those
in
the
city
of
jacksonville.
Did
you
say
1909
1909?
Yes,
sir?
D
Yes,
sir
110
years
ago,
yes,
sir,
so
that
in
itself-
and
you
know,
let's
talk
about
unnecessary
and
undo
the
mere
representation
designation
by
parties
other
than
me,
the
owner
of
the
property.
What
I
want
to
do
with
it
is
an
unnecessary
and
undue
hardship
to
put
it
in
a
box
and
say
this
is
all
it
can
be
because
we
said
so:
that's
not
necessary
and
undo
and
itself
is
improper.
D
A
Questions
I
will
now
close
the
public
hearing
and
bring
the
item
back
to
the
board
for
discussion
and
before
an
emotion
is
made.
I
guess
christian
point
of
order.
Do
we
do
we
make
a
motion
in
this
case
whether
to
approve,
modify
or
reject
the
special
magistrates
findings?
That's
the.
I
I
A
And
would
that
would
that
address
the
initial
variance
request
itself,
or
does
it
not
does
it
just?
It
would
become
a.
I
Condition
it
would
be
if
you
had
a
condition
in
mind,
then
it
would
be
to
basically
you'd
be
adding
a
condition.
You'd
be
voting
to
approve
the
variance
with
some
kind
of
condition
or
modification
and
then
number
four,
of
course,
by
statute.
This
board
doesn't
have
to
take
any
action
at
all
and
if
you
choose
to
not
take
any
action
at
all,
it
constitutes
a
rejection
of
the
special
magistrates
report
and
your
again,
your
decision
of
january
19th
would
remain
unchanged.
I
H
H
I
In
order
for
me
to
accept
to
rule
on
it,
you
have
to
make
a
motion,
so
I
don't
understand
how
this
board
could
act
without
making
a
motion
voting.
G
H
G
C
On
this
board
changes
everything
has
an
effect
and
then,
in
the
case
brought
forward.
This
has
passed
the
president
or
into
the
subject
matter
of
best
present
activity.
So
you
can
start
myself
with
that
and
that's
that
kind
of
is
it
doesn't
change
anything
there's
still
a
mailbox
or
still
a
driveway,
there's
still
some
buildings,
it's
not
changing
anything
and
that
aspect
of
denying
rights.
C
G
G
G
So
my
question
to
both
sides,
which
got
answered
somewhat
crap
out,
goes
back
to
what
I
think
was
the
basis
of
our
original
decision,
which
is
that.
A
Actually,
I
came
to
the
same
conclusion,
but
I
think,
by
a
different
route,
I
wouldn't
necessarily
say
that,
just
by
nature
of
him
asking
for
the
variance,
he
created
the
hardship,
and
that
is
what
my
very
awkwardly
worded
question
was
getting
at
and,
as
I
stated
in
the
january
meeting,
and
as
is
in
the
special
magistrates
report,
I
don't
think
it's
you
know.
It
was
not
up
for
this
board
to
decide
whether
the
actions
of
the
applicant
were
duplicitous
in
any
way.
The
fact
of
the
matter
was,
it
was
a
variance
request
that
came
before.
B
A
A
Have
been
if
the
variance
requests
were
reasonable
based
on
the
the
the
specifications
of
the
property,
but
I
think
that
mr
who
made
a
really
compelling
point
in
saying
that,
once
that
foundation
was
laid-
and
this
was
the
only
building
that
the
developer
was
willing
or
able
to
build
on
his
property,
then
that
did
result.
Then
the
hardship
does
now
results
in
his
own
actions.
G
G
So
it's
a
signing,
it's
a
signing,
it's
assigning
an
adverse
judgment
that
we
didn't
render,
and
likewise
we
didn't
consider
the
value
or
use
and
those
arguments
which
are
expounded
on
a
separate.
You
know.
Well,
I
think.
A
That
was
probably
to
address
a
very
impassioned
public
comment,
because
that
was
what
most
of
the
public
comment
addressed.
So.
B
A
You
know
public
comment.
Obviously
does
we
factor
that
in
as
well,
but
in
in
that
specific
case,
I
don't.
A
I
don't
think
that
at
least
I
personally
didn't
factor
that
in
when
I
made
my
decision
and
in
fact,
when
I
initially
made
my
decision,
I
was
in
the
minority
that
voted
in
the
applicant's
favor,
but
in
light
of
the
arguments
made
tonight,
I
just
can't
get
past
the
fact
of
criteria
number
two
and
that
he
he
can't
do
anything
else
with
the
property
at
this
point,
because
he'd
be
in
construction
on
these
certain
specs
that
did
not
meet
the
lean
development
code
and
are
frankly
unreasonable
to
ask
for
variance
or,
in
my
opinion.
C
And
I
will
move
along,
I
was
the
other
guest
originally
and
in
retrospect,
given
how
many
hours
I
spent
on
this.