The city's Planning Advisory Board took no action Wednesday on proposed revisions to the Land Development Code (LDC) that would allow property owners to more easily subdivide their pacels. PAB members voiced concerns that such revisions would negatively increase residential density in the city.
The PAB set a public workshop for Feb. 28 to further delve into the impact of rewriting the LDC.
The city commission has tasked the PAB to review city staff recommendations on revising sections of the LDC. The revisions were first raised by Vice Mayor David Sturges who said the LDC limits were unclear and restricted the property rights of parcel owners.
Commissioner Darron Ayscue has submitted a plan that eliminates property owners from having to obtain a variance from the Board of Adjustment to subdivide their parcel. Instead, Ayscue's plan would permit landowners to go directly to the County Property Appraiser to subdivide their parcel. There would be no public notice of such actions.
"The number of properties that could be, would be affected, I haven't a clue. I'd like to know what that number is," declared PAB member Pete Stevenson.
He got a snippet of an answer 90 minutes later, when resident Jack Imber did the math on 10 city parcels used as examples by Planning and Conservation Director Kelly Gibson. Under the proposed rules revisions, those parcels where10 homes are located each could be subdivided to allow a total of 32 new homes to be built.
"I'd like to see something put in (to these revisions) to where we have no unintended consequences," Stevenson added. "That's where the Board of Adjustment comes in. Should the Board of Adjustment remain a part of this process?"
Board member Richard Doster sought answers to the question "is the city overbuilt or not?"
Doster said he has talked with numerous people and "there is not an answer. I can't find anybody who can say yes it is overbuilt or no it is not overbuilt. So before we add more buildings and before we stress the infrastructure more, I would like to know if it is overbuilt or not. If it's overbuilt, let's not keep building more buildings. Let's find other creative ways to enhance the island, let's not wreck the place."
PAB Chair Victoria Robas said the crucial statistic is how many parcels would be affected by the change in the city by LDC revisions.
"What was alarming (of the examples) was how easy it is to spin off more and more lots. Is this a mouse or a lion? If it's a mouse, maybe we shouldn't be so worried about it. For today and tomorrow and for that five years (in the future), I think it's important at this juncture to understand how many parcels could be affected."
Robas took particular note of the city's Historic Downtown where many single family homes have been demolished and replaced by townhouses.
The city is currently part of an appeal of a court ruling on the Tringali property on third street. A court previously sided with neighbors who filed a lawsuit and said "The result of the Commission’s vote is that 8 parcels were combined into one lot and approved for building a multi-family structure. That action, per the Land Development Code, must be approved by the Board of Adjustment. Deference is not warranted where there is no plausible explanation for the City’s erroneous interpretation."
PAB member Mark Bennett said the LDC proposal was "planning for more building when our job (the PAB) is to create a planning environment that works for the city as it exists and moving forward."
Bennett supported keeping the Board of Adjustment involved in the decision making regarding subdividing lots.
"What's wrong with a variance? The whole purpose of the variance process is it allows the owner of the property to submit their case to the changing in the neighborhood the way they want to change it and now we have a public hearing for that," he said.
Another issue regarding proposed changes would be the elimination of public notice of a property owners' application for subdividing their parcel. The public would only become aware of new building plans when a building permit application was submitted.
Although she agreed with the revised staff revisions presented to the PAB, Planning Director Gibson was adamant that a public notice policy be included in the new language.
"I think it's really important that we incorporate an earlier (public) notice provision," Gibson said. "I am ethically bound to advocate for greater public notice."
During public comment on the issue, Imber told the PAB "there's nothing wrong with the current Land Development Code. The developers want to develop and they don't like (the current) process. They don't want to go to the Board of Adjustment. They want to change the terminology and make it easier to increase density."
Comments