DRAFT MINUTES OF MEETING ON February 14, 2004at City Chambers

Present:Lupita McClenning

Sign in sheet:

Ron Machado705 White

Pattie Borns705 White

Rick Boyle919 White

Martha Boyle919 White

Jennifer Harrison820 Someruelus

Mike Harrison820 Someruelus

Charles Wilkes541250 US Hwy. 1

Callahan, FL

George Belz427A N.

Nancy Burke803 White

Pat Gass801 White

Julie Sanford902 Ladies

Bill

Hardee Kavanaugh715 San

Floy Lilley1598 Park Ave.

Meeting started at 11:05 AM.

Lupita:

Announced code section 114-8 states that it is within her realm in duties as City Planner to enforce HDC certificate of appropriate and if necessary issue stop work orders and also review plans, and enforce compliance with the HDC.

Addressed some of the most frequently asked questions. One was the “Sunshine Law”. Lupita explained that because residents discussed with the City Manager, Planning Department, and HDC having a sub-committee for Old Town formed, and were denied, then we as a group are not obliged to follow the Sunshine Law until we formed a non-profit organization or the like. Furthermore, the city had sent a letter to all Old Town land owners by a list provided by James Page’s office (County Appraisers Office) and the addresses shown on the tax roll. Three were returned to City Hall as being undelivered. George Belz, owner of Lot 7, Block 3 on Someruelus said that he did not receive a letter. A list of all property owners in Old Town will be sent to the website.

Lupita opened the discussion about issues with a brief orientation of the previous meetings. (See minutes of previous meetings) Also, mentioning the Old Town guidelines, specifically design elements, density, building height, affordable housing & low-income housing. Also, that we should have respect for the park (plaza) and no dog poop, no parking . . . A wedding perhaps in the works. We could be a non-profit organization & accepts funds for a better community, landscaping, underground utilities, etc.

Floy Lilly announced that she is a lawyer in the firm Shroads & Lilly and that many of us may know her partner, Jim Shroads. She said that she had recently attended the Florida Chamber Seminar in Orlando and discussed new bills that could impact grant monies.

Lupita said that she had discussed with the City Manager and the City attorney and it is understood that the City will count a garage apartment and a primary residence on one building lot is 2 units while counting density and two impact fees will be assessed. She thanked Charles Wilkes for bringing free copies of the ‘Tilson guidelines’ to the meeting - guidelines can be accessed at

Lupita then said that everybody could have 3 minutes of discussion and began with Joan Altman.

Joan Altman said that we could not collect fees for a wedding at the plaza or any use of the plaza, because the plaza is state owned property. She said that we were repeating ourselves and that we should not be meeting until all of the homework has been done. The DCA should be involved to help calculate acreage, before calculating density. She asked if the City would be doing this [addressing density] every 4-5 years because she needed to know how to market her property.

Lupita showed her an aerial photograph by GIS that calculated acreage. Joan said that the wetlands should not be counted as buildable lots and proceeded to show the irregular shape of Block 35 on the same aerial and said that it was wetlands. Lupita said that the map was an accurate calculation of buildable acreage. Martha said that mitigation was possible for wetlands and then building/filling could possibly be allowed. Joan said no. Pat asked if we could get a copy of the map from the City. Lupita said it cost $50. Joan said that the City needs professionally trained person to do these things like address garage apartments and that we need DCA to straighten this out. Joan said that these laws should be researched before going on and said that everybody was wasting their time and she [Joan] left the meeting.

Pat Gass said that density is a dead issue. There are DCA rules that we can’t change. We can’t turn the clock back from 9 to 8. Her comment about low income and/or affordable housing was that Old Town had paid its dues for decades regarding this issue and it is another neighborhood’s turn to have this responsibility(the group enthusiastically agreed). Then she said that there were ordinances that required people to keep their lots clean, no messes, no cars, etc., but that it wasn’t being enforced. She said some of her concerns included parking, code enforcement, density, storm water runoff, minimum primary building square footage. She said we should start at the top with the DCA before we are required to install gutters, etc.

Lupita agreed that yes it was important to address the stormwater issue and that we wouldn’t want to ruin the coquina streets with gutters, etc. The infrastructure of Old Town does not support 10 units per acre. If it is built to this density the city will have to pave streets, install drains etc which will ruin the character of Old Town.

Martha Boyle – said the most important issue is density and that our options are limited and that we must find compromise and reach agreement before presenting to PAB. She said that the garage had once been considered an ancillary building & not counted as an additional unit for density purposes. Now, they are 2 units and we cannot build garage apartments on a first come first serve basis because density would be met with a lot of buildable lots not being built on which would be expensive for the City and probably produce lawsuits that no body wants. She said that one option could be to choose lots where garage apartments could be built. Corner lots & interior lots on in aggregate (one lot would have to remain unbuilt on) would keep the density at about 9.95 units per acre, which is less than the 10.1 But, they would still have to remain single family & not be rented to not be in violation of the single family zoning. Renting would mean multi-family. And it would create traffic & parking problems. Two residences per building lot (a primary & a garage apt. rental) would be about 292 residences, which is a lot of cars. If everyone still retained the right to build both a primary dwelling & a garage apartment, then the congestion would be lessened if the apartment were not rentable i.e. no kitchens, one meter, then it could be considered 1 dwelling unit instead of 2. I don’t think anyone wants a congested multi family neighborhood.

Lupita – zoning is very important and since Old Town is single family, it must be enforced that apartments not be rented. We have a definition of “dwelling unit” and if the room above the garage does not meet the requirements of a “dwelling unit” then it should not be counted in density.

Jennifer Harrison – Martha & I worked on this 2 weeks ago and there are 146 buildable lots some of which are built on. It is not appropriate that all of these lots have a primary dwelling & a garage apartment. One suggestion is that when garage apartments are only built on the corner lots & the interior lots owned in aggregate we will stay below our density – it would be 8.7 units per acre- and we would not become congested. The garage apartments should not be rented because of the increase in number of cars and parking and traffic issues.

Floy – said there is a new leader for the DCA. There was a lawsuit “Caliche” about sidewalks, safety issues – a child was killed.

Lupita – Julie, what do you think about the density issue?

Julie Sanford – She said that as she had missed the first part of the meeting she shouldn’t say anything about that. I think we should have zeroscaping. I would like to see a grant for street trees. I think we should not cut down any more trees than we have to, and I think no trees should be cut down without a permit.

Lupita – native landscaping should be considered.

Pat – maybe we could get a grant for burying utilities.

The group unanimously agreed with this suggestion.

Lupita – we have big property owners in Old Town who are interested in doing this.

Mike Harrison – said that we are all in support of the same thing – to restrain growth to one family dwelling per buildable lot. To make Old Town a nice place to live we must retain open views to the river on the E-W streets. He said had been in touch with City people to put a dumpster in Old Town for a community clean-up and have a get-together afterwards.

Jennifer suggested the dumpster be placed on Block 30 or their lot on Block 11 because it is central to the area where most dumped trash exists.

Jennifer asked the group to consider the amount of green space that will be left in Old Town after extensive development takes place. She said that their house is currently only 13% of the allowed 45% footprint and with the garage apartment approved by the HDC will only be 26%. But because of the porches theystill don’t have much space left. There is room to build within the code and still have overbuilt the lot, with minimal green space remaining. The 70% total coverage is too much and we should consider lowering that. The code should enforce only 1 family per lot. If every lot has a primary dwelling and a garage apartment rented out the situation could exist with a family in the primary home with 2 teenagers - that’s 4 possible cars - then a professional young couple rent the garage apartment – and that’s another 2 cars. That is too many cars for one lot. We must enforce no renting.

We need to show by a straw poll what the agreement is on this so that Lupita can start writing and moving on with what will be presented to the City for approval.

Jennifer then showed 2 drawings that Rick & Martha had prepared to show green space options using their Block as an example and showed that with every lot having a maximum (1950 sq. ft) foot print and a garage apartment, then there is hardly any green space left on a block, but if there were 2 open lots and smaller footprints, then there is a lot more greenspace.

Lupita said it would be impossible to ask owners not to build a primary structure on a vacant lot that they own.

Martha – I don’t have a problem not building on my adjacent lot to maintain/not exceed density.

Ron -- said we shouldn’t be calling it an apartment because that implies rental income. We came to this place because it is unusual, a gem. I don’t think we want to increase density, but everybody won’t build a garage apartment. We have plans to build a house, but we aren’t building a garage apartment. It sounds like you want to re-write the codes, so do that. But if there is no follow-up and enforcement, then why would you do it? Lifestyle is very important and green space is very important. I came here from New York and I am not kidding, there is more green space in New York City than there is here. The house at New St. & San Fernando St. has nowhere visually to go. (V. Jones) The entire lot is all buildings. Where is the greenspace?

Lupita – Until Thursday night, it was unclear as to who has the jurisdiction over enforcement of code. The HDC has teeth and I as the planner can stop work and enforce construction to be torn down if necessary to be in compliance. My heart is in planning and this is a pilot project because this is a unique area. I want the best for future planning and development.

Ron – low income and/or affordable housing is inappropriate. We used to have trailers and it is somebody else’s turn to do it. Let’s not have wooden trailers. We must have environmental controls for this appreciative community.

Patti Borns – announced that she was walking in the cemetery and talked to people (City employees) about replacing the existing chain length fence. They said they had the budget for aluminum. She suggested maybe grant work for a wrought iron. Or we could raise funds for wrought iron. They invited her down to talk about it with them next week.

Lupita – That’s a good idea. The marina wanted to put in an aluminum fence, but I thought it was inappropriate. Rope and wooden posts would be better. A good example is that Fred’s will get a new sign - they worked with The Hoyt house for appropriate new colors. It will be oval with wrought iron.

Jennifer said that simple posts linked by chain would look much better (someone commented that the city might be concerned with vandals getting in but the consensus was that they could easily get in now with the existing fence). Jennifer said the many “no entry” metal signs along 14th Street were visual pollution.

Lupita said we can choose more discreet wooden signs that will look better.

Pat – when the set backs were changed from 25' to 5' there were no fence rules or where porch could encroach the setback like other parts of the City where porch can go into setback 3'. And, we need a minimum building sq. footage.

Martha – you can go into the setback a max of 24" as long as with eave or porch or porch steps. I think it is important to establish a minimum square footage. It could protect the community in many ways.

Jennifer – I agree – we have to have a minimum square footage but what should it be? Our house only has a 600 sq. ft. footprint.

Lupita – Martha and Jennifer need to use these comments and create new language to insert in the LDR. (They agreed to do this.)

Patti – defacto density should be considered.

Lupita – We need to establish & stick with the definition of a dwelling unit and what criteria a building must meet in order to be counted as a dwelling unit. And we need to know the traffic resulting from 2 units / 1 lot. She also said that garage apartments are built with a conditional use permit – they can be turned down.

Martha – is there anyway that the term of the current rented properties be limited – for instance if Topper or Giovanni sells their property, the new owners can’t rent, except 1 rental per building lot or a life estate situation, if Topper dies, then his heirs can’t rent the properties, except 1 rental per building lot? Or would those properties be grandfathered in forever retaining the rights to have 2 dwelling families on 1 lot?

Lupita – they would be grandfathered.

Jennifer – Can we consider a day of reversal for these rental garage apartments, like the year 2010? Or 2015? Or do the life estate?

Floy – it would be best for someone to buy out those properties

Lupita – I think we could ask the city manager and/or city attorney about limiting the terms that the rental units can remained rented at more than 1 family per lot.

George Belz – said he thinks it is critical that the codes are enforced. He said that we only have 1 guy that works ½ time and there is no way he can cover the entire city. I suggest the City hire someone else or swear in volunteers who will accept the job. We need to remove “granny flat” from the language in the code to avoid that in Old Town. Another issue is height restriction. What is the height restriction?

Martha – 35' mean roof height

George – measured from where?

Martha – that remains a mysterious question. I think it should be mean elevation because elevations differ everywhere, especially in Old Town.

Jennifer – said she printed list of names on the code enforcement board (showed list) but that they never seemed to meet.

Lupita – everybody needs to write their commissioners to discuss why the code enforcement board has not met in several months because they don’t have a quorum.

Jennifer – said we should take a straw poll on the dwelling/density in Area 1, 1 single dwelling unit per lot which is 6.25 units per acre & minimum/maximum square footage. We should reduce the maximum and set a minimum. Lupita should be able to say to the boards that after 4 meetings, all of which notices were sent to all property owners (tax roll), 2 of the meetings were held at City Hall, and at the last meeting (today’s meeting) everybody agreed unanimously that only 1 family dwelling unit should be allowed per building lot.

This was unanimously agreed by all present.

Lupita said that area 2 could have multi family.

Martha said no area in Old Town is zoned multi family. All areas are zoned single family, but area 2 has mixed commercial/residential.

Floy said we should consider ways to conserve water. Cisterns are used in Texas on Spanish lots to catch water and perhaps rooftops could be catchment devices. These offset storm drains and grants may be applied for this use.