1 Palm Harbor Drive and Ordinance 15-19

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "1 Palm Harbor Drive and Ordinance 15-19"

Clyde Watkins
6 years ago
Views:

1 1 Palm Harbor Drive and Ordinance Contents 1 Palm Harbor Drive aerial photo and subdivision/lot details Page 2 1 Palm Harbor Drive owners profile and intents for the property Page 3 Holmes Beach Ordinance Impact on similar properties Page 4 Holmes Beach Ordinance Adjustment Options for Consideration Page 5 (new slide from previous version) Holmes Beach Zoning maps with similar properties marked Pages 6 and 7 1 Palm Harbor Lot Overview Page 8 1 Palm Harbor Home front elevation Page 9 1 Palm Harbor lot lines, easements, setbacks and impacts Pages Palm Harbor survey Page 15 1

43 rd Street Gulf Drive One Palm Harbor Drive N Palm Harbor Blvd Palm Harbor Dr Catholic Church The Palm Harbor subdivision (outlined in blue) is made up of 12 parcels. The subdivision is zoned R-1.

2 43 rd Street Gulf Drive One Palm Harbor Drive N Palm Harbor Blvd Palm Harbor Dr Catholic Church The Palm Harbor subdivision (outlined in blue) is made up of 12 parcels. The subdivision is zoned R-1. 1 Palm Harbor Drive is the parcel outlined in orange. the subdivision is surrounded on two sides (south and west) by condos, on the east side by the parking lot of the Catholic church and on the north by R-1 homes. The lot is surrounded on three sides by roads (Palm Harbor Dr, Palm Harbor Blvd., 43 rd St.) The fact that we are bounded on three sides by streets is the challenge. All current houses in the subdivision have front yards on Palm Harbor Drive and backyards on the opposite side. The other properties on our side of the street all have backyards on 43 rd St. One of our neighbors just finished a deck and stairs behind it that is at the 10 ft setback line on 43 rd St. Our house design which assumed 10 setbacks on those two sides would have two areas significantly impacted by a requirement that we have 3 front yards with 20 setbacks. They are our dining area and our pool. Both are inside our intended fence line, and over 23 ft from the pavement, due to large drainage easements. The ordinance changed our 70 X 68 buildable lot space to 60 X 58 buildable lot space. Forcing us to build in a small box in the middle of the property and effectively taking away 1280 sq ft of our property. Ordinance does not refer to R-1 anywhere in the entire document. But it has been interpreted by the city as applying to R-1. 2

3 One Palm Harbor Drive Owners/Intent Ron and Peggy Jude bought the property at 1 Palm Harbor Drive in the summer of The lot is surrounded on three sides by roads (Palm Harbor Dr, Palm Harbor Blvd., 43 rd St.) The address is officially 1 Palm Harbor Drive. We were very excited to find an oversized, (88x100) vacant lot on Anna Maria on which to build our dream retirement home. We have been coming to the Island since Peggy s parents started coming down here in the late 80 s. We jointly purchased a condo with them in West Bay Cove in Holmes Beach in Peggy retired in September, and we became permanent Florida residents and we started with the building process. This home is where we intend to live full time, and we have been working on designs and ideas since We want it to be a place where our children and grandchildren can visit and one day inherit. AJ Bernard of Beacon Designs started the plans in October under the regulations in place at the time. The lot is platted to include non-ingress/egress easements on both Palm Harbor Blvd and 43 rd Street. We have interpreted this to mean it is not possible for us to use either side as driveways, or parking. The lot also has drainage easements on both the Palm Harbor Blvd and 43 rd Street sides. The lot line is 14 2 and 13 8 respectfully from the edge of those streets due to these large easements. With a 10 setback our structures would be at a minimum located 24 2 and 23 8 respectively from the other two streets. We finished or house design building a house we thought would fit well on the island and because we had the lot space, building a home that is nicely balanced across the lot, that fits into the neighborhood and not just a rectangular, upright box. A detailed set of slides are attached to illustrate the impact of the ordinance on this property and our design. 3

4 Holmes Beach Ordinance Impact Our circumstances are unique. But we can appreciate that the city needs to look at other impacts of making any change. We did our best to fully review the current zoning map for the city. We believe the council might want to consider R-1 separately, as we understand some of the impetus for changing the zoning focused on R-2. But for this analysis we looked at both R-1 and R-2 There is a vacant lot across the street from ours with the same circumstances. It can be seen on the map on the previous page. Below is an analysis of all the 6 other properties with three streets around the lots 4 in R-1 and 2 in R-2. All are currently developed with existing homes or multi-tenant units. (the 6 properties are identified on maps on the next pages) R-1 there are 2 on Key Royale one has the Key Royale tennis court/pool on it one has an existing irregular shaped property (a triangle with a cut off tip) with two driveways already. It is on the corner of Foxworth and Key Royale Drive. R -1 - On the beach on 1 st Ave, between 45 th and 46 th is a rectangular lot. Of note - 45 th does not really exist west of 1 st Ave it is just a beach access walkway. R-1 - At the corner of 83 rd and 85 th Sts is another triangular/cutoff tip property. It looks to be public property with a memorial on it? There are also 2 properties in R-2 with more than 2 streets both are developed with multi-unit buildings already. one is actually on a lot bounded on 4 sides by streets. It is located between 79 th, 81 st, Palm and Gulf with 4 pink condos on it. The other is located between Gulf Dr, Peacock Lane and 52 nd St. Given the limited number of properties surrounded by more than 2 streets, we feel these unique properties require unique solutions and we hope the council will consider options to mutually agree upon a process for considering these special circumstances. 4

5 Holmes Beach Ordinance Options The sections of ordinance that are at play here are: In the preamble Whereas, said requirement for only one front yard has allowed instances where driveways have been constructed with insufficient depth resulting in parked vehicles extending into the right-of-way and has allowed form more intense development with no compensating beneficial effects upon residential neighborhoods. Section 7, Article VI, Zoning Section 6.8.L Lots fronting on more than one street. Where a residential parcel or lot abuts more than one street, front yard shall be required on each street, and each front yard shall conform to the front yard requirements of the zoning district in which the lot or parcel is located except as otherwise provided in the specific district regulations We believe the language extending front yards to additional frontages is inherently flawed in that it causes other unintended consequences, (setbacks, pools, fences, etc..) and there are better ways to achieve the stated goals of the council and desires of the community. In a review of the ordinance the following amendment options present themselves. We believe that the City Council would need to weigh these options for the entire city, but any of the below would be alternatives worth considering: 1. R-1 Exclusion - Exclude R-1 from Section 7 this would allow control of issues with duplexes and multi-family units and be in line with the changes made to Section 3 Article IV, Paragraph G (Note: This is the water feature section of the ordinance which only applies to R-2, R-3, R-4) 2. Front yard definition/limit on # of driveways Instead of requiring front yards on all streets, require multi-street properties to have a defined front yard and allow only one driveway for that property in the front yard. (The official address of the property?) The other sides would be limited as to disallow ingress and egress. That designated front yard can then exclude water features from that designated front yard. 3. Special Circumstances - Allow for properties bounded by more than two streets to be reviewed individually (by the Building Superintendent?) to ensure they conform to the intent of the ordinance and the surrounding neighborhood. This exception would only apply to 7 properties. 4. Minimum distances Require R-1 properties (and others?) to have a minimum length, as measured from the street, for any driveway. This would ensure that parked vehicles would not extend into the right of way. (In our case the driveway in our proposed front yard is 35 long measured from the edge of the pavement.) Note: while the dead-end change is appropriate for the city, it is not a solution that we believe works for our lot. It would place the front of our home 10 ft closer to the street than all the other homes in the sub-division. We believe this would be disrupt the look and intent of the homes already built there. 5

6 6

7 Peacock Lane Our subdivision Beach property at 45 th/ 46 th St. 7

8 Property as it appears to the eye Address of the property Proposed driveway (35 ft from payment to garage) 8

9 Our Home Design as Submitted to the Building Dept 9

10 Lot Lines Lot line is 14 2 from edge of payment Lot line is 13 8 from edge of payment Blue Square is the platted lot 10

11 Lot Usage with Original Setbacks (one front yard) Setback line is 24 2 from edge of payment Setback line is 23 8 from edge of payment Yellow Square is the lot with easements assuming one front yard 11

12 Lot Usage with New Setbacks (three front yards) Setback line is 33 8 from edge of payment Setback line is 34 2 from edge of payment Orange Square is the lot with setbacks assuming three front yards 12

13 Use of the lot as we designed House footprint (Black line) Pool Dining Area Front Door Deck 13

14 Area of Concern Dining Area Pool Dinin g Area The two areas in red would not be allowed if we were required to have 20 foot setbacks on all three streets Fron t Door Issues: To have a pool we would lose our deck or design a very narrow deck with a pool butting right up to the deck an we would have significant lot just sitting in grass We lose our dining area House would have to be redesigned at great expense Likely will have to go up and design a box House will looked crammed into the middle but there would remain significant land around the footprint 14

15 15

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PUBLIC HEARING APRIL 25, 2017

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PUBLIC HEARING APRIL 25, 2017 The hearing was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Chairman Jones PRESENT: ABSENT: ALSO PRESENT: Board Members Matthew