Planning and Zoning Board - Regular Meeting

Okay. Vice Chairperson April Evans here. Member Dan Harper here. Member Gabbor Kashi here. Member Todd Albert here. Member Jason Judge here. Building admin Steve Freeman here. And deputy clerk Sid Cardwell is also present. Next item is approval of the minutes from February 3rd, 2026. Does anybody have any changes or corrections? Motion to approve the minutes. Second. All in favor say I. I. I. I.

Motion. Next is the new business site plan approval for 3073rd Avenue home and uh go down through all this paperwork. This is this is one that there was lots and lots of communication between the planner, the uh town attorney and such on this one. Um, I personally have an issue with using the um, what is it? the 7A-33F2 uh to allow the continued excess on setbacks. I don't there's nobody here that was around uh years ago, but that ordinance was originally designed for people who were living in the house and and either a storm came in or a fire or something uh to allow them to rebuild. Um and even though it was nonconforming, we had have had houses that people have inherited or they bought, they tore down and the town did not allow them to build back on that same footprint. So, I I I have my concerns about that.

I I look through u how they sort of thread the needle on that situation there. Uh it looked like the um and I think everybody knows what the problem is. I think it's on the east side. The setback is only 9 ft, I believe, instead of 15 ft. And um they did have the uh the town attorney look at that, April, and he uh he blessed uh that they could expand their footprint without mitigating that um that setback. Yeah, I

it's uh I I agree when you read the the ordinance it's sort of like you could almost interpret it uh either way, but having said that I think the lawyer probably has the uh final say and he did agree that um they could expand the footprint without uh addressing that setback. the uh the followup uh drainage plan had to do with the driveway access on the on the west side. So they modified that to u change their swinging a little bit and I guess they have some certain type of gravel that's uh helped with the drainage calculations. So um I guess uh April I I would have a hard time overruling the lawyer on this one, I guess.

Yeah. Well, I I guess part of my thing is knowing that the town has um years ago that I'm personally familiar with. I don't know about anything in the last few years, but that uh and this was we have a town attorney that was not our town attorney back when all this was when we were having it happen more often. Um and and like I said, the the purpose of that ordinance was for people who were actually living in the house. And these folks bought the house after the fire after it was already declared uninhabitable.

So, it's not like there was a hardship of they were living in the house when this happened. And Oh, see, I didn't realize that. I didn't realize that. Yeah. Um I know there's a 5year gap between the fire and this today. Yeah. But the Well, the folks bought the house about uh well, they closed on it about two months after the fire. Okay.

So, it was was declared uninhabitable then. So, I I I just kind of take issue with that and I I think that if this is the case that this can happen that perhaps the commission needs to address this in the code again and tighten it up. Um because there's we have at least one commissioner who was actually on PNZ when these other properties were denied. Um and she happens to be on the commission now, but she was on this board when that was happening. It's uh so that would be something for uh April that you could I guess bring forward. uh at one of our next meetings, I think for this particular approval,

right? Given that the town planner and the lawyer have both uh given the okay on this and I've read through the ordinances and I agree you could interpret them a couple different ways, but I got to defer to the to the lawyer and the storm water was mitigated. So, uh, I think your point's a good one, though, and I think that could be a tweak going forward, but for for right now, I think we should should probably move ahead with approval on this one. Be my thought. Anybody else? I agree with your concerns and uh felt the same way, but uh if it was interpreted that way by the town attorney, then that's kind of the way it is right now. But it is something that we should probably look at and change in the future.

Okay. Well, as I said, there is precedent of former town attorneys. Um, does this variance was not applicable? Does this variance come from 1958 when it was built? It wasn't even No, there we didn't even have a code then. When this house was built, there was no code. So, but it was it became nonconforming when the town decided to start having zoning codes and things like that. Um, I am the chair, please. Okay. I'm sorry. I thought I missed Yes, ma'am. Um, so that's that's my concern because I know that that there is precedent. Yeah.

Uh, for this um and and because we don't have people with historical knowledge, it it makes things are very makes things very confusing. Um, and then as I look at this and it's kind of like if if I go back and look at the dates, I mean the the plans were done on this um back in September. Uh the application wasn't until January of this year. Even the storm water thing was done back in October of of last year. So, it's kind of like everything seems like a a lot of carts were put in front of horses and and it just it's I'm not going. However, if you if someone would uh before we make a motion,

I make a motion to approve. Uh second the motion before before we have our vote. Is there someone who would like to speak to this? U the the family here. I if you'll name and address please.

K7 Beach, Florida. So, just to address your concerns and I understand completely what you're seeing and how it looks. Um, but just to give you some background on to why it has transpired in that way. Um, we did buy the property after the house burned and um when we purchased it, you know, we saw a lot of potential. There's a beautiful pool in the backyard and we were very excited about it. Um it was as we actually dug into looking at the remodel of it, it was very difficult to So that lot is 70 ft wide. The minimum lot size of Melbourne Beach is 90 and because the pool is in the back, we are pinched here and here and there's not a lot of room. And we have drawn that drawn that house over and over. And we've drawn a twotory and we've drawn the footings won't support just going up two stories. And I mean we have we have worked these last five years on trying to figure out how to make a house that can fit our family on that lot. As as we have gone through that then um so that is so that is the five-year gap and that is what we've been dealing with. We have had multiple we've had four building officials in that time. We've met three times different plans and so then to when we finally got okayed to get engineering approved. Um and then um nothing was done out of order with the storm water. She was waiting on the information um and and so it's just it's been a process to try to get all the pieces in place. It looked like we might need a variance. The town attorney and the town planner decided we did not need the

variance because of the disaster in the house. And we're not trying to build a big twotory. We're trying to stay within the confines of the town, within the spirit of the town, but we need that wall for the space because of that narrow lot and because of that pool. So that that is why it is we are committed to being in this town. We've been in this town for 10 years and that is our forever home. And so it's not like we're coming in and buying up and you know it's not that situation.

So my name is Samuel Cox married to Katie again the 70 foot wide issue was and then what we ran up against and we did a lot of iterations was the twocar garage rule right which once you get that 15 ft and fitness that's 30 ft right and then you got this double car garage and we've got on this actually this one was a bit of a whoopsie but we had three kids plus the foster kids. So, we're trying to get as many bedrooms as we could in there and make the house work. And the only way then obviously is the second garage in the back which started those other issues with the water runoff. But I would say we've had a lot of hurdles to come through and I know you take some issue with the interpretation of that and I can see it can be read a few different ways. But I actually feel kind of blessed that I figured it it can benefit our situation. There's been a lot of things that have worked against us with the house. The pool was a blessing. You know, like you said, they they brought it so far up against the back of the house that we can't move that way. It's a first world problem, don't get me wrong. I mean, oh, what do I do with the pool? And there is a thought of just digging it up and then redoing a pool, but that would just make it cost prohibitive for us. So, um, as with the interpretation, I've seen it sort of I understand how people could take issue with it, but I've it's one of the few things that's actually sort of worked in our favor at this point. So, that's all I have to say. Um, while you're up there, are you taking down the walls and leaving the foundation? Is that what or

We are the We're taking down certain walls and then the foundation staying. We are the non-compliant wall, if you will, that's not getting extended beyond what it is. You will see we're jogging back in and then coming and on the other side we're bringing that in to the 15 ft. Knocking down the garage wall. Bringing that in to the 15 ft. Then coming forward then some footage on the front and then a little on the back where we can with the pool. The garage wall. So the west wall is wood and it's rotten wood. So we couldn't keep that if we tried. Even though

that might Yeah. So we're the only wall that's able to stay standing is that east wall and we are keeping it. There was some question about at one point someone I maybe with or without a permit but it looked like it was grandfathered in had enclosed a porch back there and that's how they got it to 13 ft. But we're not you know we're going to move back to the 15 ft compliance on that on the west side of the structure. But the fire was pretty intense but the wall on that side is going to be fine and the foundation's fine.

Yeah, the foundation's fine. We had that looked at um you know and in cases like that and you know most of the heat goes up. You can actually buy burned down homes and you'll find once you cut the PVC down to a certain level quite often it's fine and the slab you know stays insulated but yeah thank you. Um am I missing a landscaping design for this property? Tech technically uh this is not a new construction. It's a remodel of an existing they uh in technically in uh Steve maybe make a note of this too is

technically on the survey they're supposed to show existing trees whether they're planning to remove any or not. I didn't see any trees on this survey. Maybe that's what Todd's thinking about. Right. So for the future make a mental note that technically it's supposed to come with the trees. They uh if they plan on removing some trees, I think they probably have to. Could I ask? Or then they would get the they'd have to get a tree removal permit. What defines a tree? Is it a palm tree a tree or is it usually a hardwood? Palm tree is a tree. Palm tree is a tree. Trees are trees.

So yeah. So we have been asked in the this process to have the survey add all the trees. That was asked very recently. Um it was not part of the original survey. He is six weeks out to come out and get and can you see can you see the survey plotted with trees and numbers and a description? The one we got didn't have the trees on it. Not the survey, not the official survey, but there's another survey copy with numbered. Each tree is numbered and then a paragraph about what we're doing with the trees. Is that in there? I don't think I saw that.

Okay. Because we made we had a we met with a landscaper. He identified every tree we had. We plotted it on the survey. The surveyor didn't do it, but we did. And then we described there is there is all palms and then a carowwood tree which I think is invasive actually. Um but there are no so it was determined that the palms would survive being moved if they needed to. There's three that may need to move and that was all in a description um landscape plan that we had. But as far as the surveyor coming out, he's 250 an hour at um and 6 weeks out to get that done. Um and I we thought the landscape plan would suffice that we made up. So

well, you would if you have to remove some, you have to get a tree removal permit. Steve will probably go over there and look at your trees with you and Yeah. And you're you're you're allowed to move them if they're in the footprint of the new construction. Yeah. So we were hoping to transplant, not remove anything. Yeah. Okay. Did you have any questions? Any input? Um, okay. So, we're still lacking an official landscape plan. Is that uh technically a landscape plan isn't required for a remodel. It would just be to show the trees on the survey.

Yeah. It's just lots and lots of exceptions are being made. um on this. So I I have a motion on the floor. Yeah. Motion to approve site plan. Motion or a second? I need a second. I thought we had a second. Did we have a second? We had a second. Okay. Said we know that. Yep. All in favor? I I I opposed. Opposed? No. Thank you very much. Good luck. Thank you.

Now you got this is the site plan approval for 506 poinsettia uh for an addition. And I think this is Um, I was going through this. This was pretty straightforward. I

It was very straightforward. Yeah. And I didn't uh with the late delivery of the um landscaping plan and all. I had no problems with this. I had one com Go ahead. I'm sorry.

I had just one comment. the U for the land landscaping plan. Uh I think what was utilized was actually uh if you look at that it's sort of confusing but you're into the uh with your 25 with a canopy tree every 25 ft. That's actually for uh multifamily and commercial kind of a barrier between you know like a parking lot and a single family. So you don't have to comply with that. If you look uh back at that landscape ordinance, you'll see you're into the multifamily when you talked about needing a canopy tree for every 25 ft. So, you can go back and revisit that and uh and proceed uh accordingly. It doesn't have those kinds of requirements in it for just a basic remodel. That'd be my only thought on that. I looked at all the setbacks and such. They seem to be in order.

Chairman,

it's Yeah, it it does. It it it meets the code. um in square footage and in setbacks and block coverage um and height obviously you know while we're on the subject here Steve um and uh I like the way the uh the the drafter of these plans has showed the uh height uh measurements. I'd like to see that more often. That was done very nicely. Uh but Steve uh make a mental note that the height ordinance was approved by this body and what I've understood was also approved by the commission but has not been updated yet for the on-site ordinance. So if people are looking up the u the right you know what the ordinance says right now is the old 18 in above the crown of the road that was modified to allow for some uh

18 to 36 some uh stem wall situation. So that has never been updated yet. Probably should make a note to do that. Okay. Do I have a motion? Motion to approve. Second. All in favor? I I

I passes. And now for the last thing, we have to appoint a chairperson. Yeah. See you guys. Thank you. I'd like to make a motion to appoint April as our new chairperson. I will second that if she would be willing to do it. Don't throw me out. I will. All in favor?

I I Congratulations. Let's go get a drink over it. So now that you those don't need to be in the minutes. No. Well, so now that you've appointed April as chair, now you do need to appoint a vice chair. Yeah, we need a vice chair. And I would like to make a motion to appoint Dan Harper as our vice chairperson. Second. All in favor? I. And so you are now our vice chair. I was hoping I wasn't throwing anybody under the chair. Okay. Public comment. So,

sorry, Todd, were you the second on that one? Todd was the second on on appointing Dan. Uh, yes. Right. Okay. Thanks, y'all. And you got got here just in time to give us a report. So, and there is no old business right listed on there. They're still looking for stuff on the landscape.

Yes, Dan, we did not forget about you. Um, we've been in audit and there have been some public records requests that had some urgency to them. So, we will still try to get what you had suggested to Amber and I well in advance of the April meeting so everybody can review it, but we just didn't have it for tonight.

Um, okay. And what we uh we've been uh as you guys know, we've been kind of um struggling getting through this whole rewrite of the landscape ordinance. Typically before us is an ordinance that we change a few words to or some sentences, not the whole uh section. So what I proposed uh to uh to Amber and Sid was that if we could just take maybe three or six of those ordinances at a meeting, go through them one at a time, vote on each one as we go through. I think it would be a a productive way to proceed and otherwise it gets too total agreement.

It gets too wild. It's too unwieldy and too much going on. I think what they're and I also made a suggestion that they put them say I know it cost a little more paper but putting everything on the back side makes it hard to kind of compare before and after too. So I think they've got a better way of presenting the before and afters and then so hopefully perhaps for next meeting depending on the schedule and such. Maybe we'll have an opportunity to to look at half a dozen of those and go one by one and make some decisions and start moving that forward. Yeah. Okay. Um

does anybody remember when when that task happened? Wasn't that about new construction specifically when we had a couple of lots that were clear cut and that's kind of how it happened or was it meant to be a complete rewrite? I really don't remember. The um well I do I was there at the uh the commission uh we passed a revision to go from um we ran into the problem of tree for tree being not uh able to make that work given the too many trees, bigger lots, bigger houses. So, we proposed that at the town commission. At the same time, the environmental um proposed a complete rewrite.

Okay. And so that's sort of how it spun back down here then. And and I remember we had a meeting with them and we kind of discussed all the stuff and then all of a sudden it came back and it was quite a bit changed from what we initially talked about. That's what I thought. That's what I remember. Just started getting very I didn't expect it to be that complicated and that much. No, I I I agree with uh with Dan in that, you know, smaller bites I think will we will be more successful uh in in getting some kind of consensus.

Um I I still would be interested in what other municipalities, local municipalities have on their books. And I know that part of some of the discussions that that were going on had to do with confusion between what is required for commercial multif family as opposed to single family and it was all getting all lumped in together. And so that for me that would help to to kind of see what other communities uh here that that face the same environmental concerns that we do um are doing. And one of the things I've ended up doing a lot of research on oak trees and while while we have been talking about you know requiring like a specimen tree a canopy tree

um apparently best practices with oak trees is to plant smaller ones less than 4 in and plant them two or three in a cluster so that their root structures intertwine and they're less likely to topple over and win. Makes sense.

So, you know, it's that kind of thing that if we if if we're going to require as opposed to suggest uh I think that we need to be cognizant of this kind of thing. Um, you know, why require somebody to plant a tree that the the people who know these kind of things are saying, you know, if 4 in and bigger is not a good idea. They're they're too big. They they can't get sturdy enough before the canopy gets big. Uh, and and the fact of, you know, planting them in clusters like they would grow in in the woods. Um, so it I I think those are the kind of research things that need to happen. Well,

I think that's a good idea. Just we I think initially talked about it because we were concerned with someone taking these big beautiful hundred-y old oaks out and putting in a tiny one in its place and it didn't seem like it was even close to being comparable to what. So, I think maybe what you're saying is having a cluster and having a few clusters as opposed to making them putting in a tree that's not going to necessarily take root the way the other ones. Correct. And and especially if the storm comes through and it's gone and and when you get 4 in and bigger, they're super expensive. um you know and so so anyway um

well and to that point if you look at the trees that they planted along Oak Street you know further south they're still struggling of course everything struggles during this dry period but if there had been probably like you say a couple of smaller ones put together perhaps they would have helped each other to survive this even better. Yeah, that part I don't know. The thing that I that really struck me had to do with the, you know, holding up to the winds when the storms come through here in the back more mature tree is more likely to not develop the the kind of root structure.

Uh that they need so those are the kind of things. Uh okay. And

could I could I make one comment? One thing I did not like in it's on page 27 of the review of 3073 and that was this discussion of the 50% value and um and of course it doesn't pertain in this case um because it's a replacement value but this is probably the third time I've heard issues with this from contract contractors in the last year that they're trying to do this so they escape bringing their ideas here. And I feel that that's wrong. I mean, I think that we are here. One, I think we're responsible. I mean, the thought is that we're evil. One, I think we're responsible. We don't hold things over. We push them along. And we have always approved uh houses in the same meeting where all the information was there. And so, but I do think I'm just wondering, are we missing some that perhaps the community would like us to review because they've escaped under this kind of reading? And the one that comes to mind most is one that's on surf. That is Will, I forget contractor Will's last name off hand, but he's built a beautiful home. There's no question there. But when they said, "Well, this is going to be able to be valued at this and not that, and so therefore it doesn't need to be." I'm going, "Wait a minute. You tore everything down in this old house. and you use most of the

foundation, but I just don't feel that that's a good excuse to go by here. Isn't Isn't the Steve correct me um the 50% rule obviously just applies to the structure X the land obviously agree with that and that requires then if it if it goes over the 50% then you fall into the swinging correct bucket but I think Todd if you maintain the same footprint you don't have to submit any plans or anything really all all you're required to do is Now swale with the drainage plan. Is that correct? Building manager if you maintain the same footprint. The ordinance says

that would be correct. Yes. You don't have to you don't have to submit plans. Correct. So landscape plans or or building or building plans perhaps. Well, building plans. Yes. Not a landscape plan. Yeah. But not a landscaping plan or not. But they do have to swale. So what were you thinking is is deficient if somebody is um well just coming coming to this board for approval. Is that what you're thinking? Absolutely. Nice. Yeah. We've addressed that a few times between me and the building official because I I get the feeling since I've been here. Yeah. That that number, that dollar value is can easily be manipulated. Yes.

Um to not go up in front of the board. Um talking to the building official, there is a state mandated square foot price that we're going to look at and we're looking at it closely. I've got four to six in the next month. I don't allow that to happen. So, everything's going to be showing up here um until decisions are made within the commission to change it and let us have more say. So, I've got two that showed up this week with permits ready to pull for additions. And it's like, no, no, no, no. We're going to go to the P&Z. So, we're going to implement that. Yeah, it seemed like you guys were tightening it up. Um and um

well technically residential is by our code does not have to come in front of this board. I disagree with that. Uh you know it's just that it's just been a matter of the commissions have historically wanted us to look at it so that they didn't have to. They didn't want to take Well, you've been to their meetings. You know how long they last. So, you know, I personally would love to see it codified that that any any type of building, regardless comes in front of of planning and zoning. Um because we've we've actually had some different things around town over the last few years that were done that didn't come in front of this board that would never have passed muster in front of us. Um but you know it did and it was because they were done peace meal and it something that started out they thought well it's a little simple thing I'm not going to take it to the board and then it kept growing. Um, and so, you know, it's just that's I would like to see that. Um, but you just have to, you know, we don't know if this current commission has an appetite for that or not. And and it all does boil down to what they want. Um, so the 50% is the structure,

correct? So, when you get these appraisals, you know, you know what the land values are. You've seen what people are paying to knock the houses down. They're paying 450 to 500 to 550 for a 90 foot by 150 foot lot or more. Yeah. So, um you got to kind of take that into account when you look at that 50. I'm sure you guys are. You're aware of that,

right? I get the breakdown when I get those presented to me. I immediately go to the um property appraisers and get the breakdown of the value of the land, the structure and yard, which is pool, sheds, and everything else. Um at that point in time, I let them know or building official. It's like you're going to need this, you're going to need that based on your submitted cost versus your structure value. May I? Do we have uh any idea of what the state may be proposing as far as a square footage requirement for pre-approval I guess is the right word or

off the top of my head I could not quote the exact dollar figure. I think Jeff was indicating around 235 240 a square foot. Okay. And that's in the works use that as a template to gauge. show if somebody's doing a certain size of an addition and does not and we feel he's being manipulated um we'll look at that and based on that requirement we'll do planning zoning requirements but they're mostly trying to get out of the swinging is that the whole motivation behind that or yeah the landscape everything else they're looking to get the quickest way to get the permit through I see

the quickest and least expensive Makes sense. Okay. Um, Marie, do you want to introduce yourself? Uh, sure. I don't know if everyone's met you or not.

Well, hello. I apologize first of all for my tardiness. I looked up and I'm like, "Oh my gosh, it's almost 7 o'clock. I'm not used to the one hour uh jump ahead as yet." So, I apologize about that. Usually, it's dark by that time. Um, but my name is uh Marie Smith. I am the new town manager. This is my fourth week here and uh every week has been um really wild. It's just you know it started out the first day with the uh manity rescue and it's uh you know it's kind of like that's all folks. Okay. No. Um it's it's really you proved yourself on that one.

Well, thank you. Uh but no, I think it's really been wonderful because I've seen how the community comes together and how people really care about the community. Um you know, maybe the way they express that has been kind of colorful. Um but uh but you know, you do see that passion for for their community and for their homes and you know, I have great respect for that. Um so I here for you. I will uh make sure I set my alarm so that I get here on time or I'll have Sid or Steve come grab me before uh before they walk out of the building. Um but uh so you know uh my last job right before this is I ran I was the executive director for the Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission and they uh are an almost 100-year-old organization um that was created to run all the park uh recreation and all the planning and zoning for Montgomery and Prince George's counties which are the two uh suburban counties that are adjacent to Washington DC. So that organization is a local government organization that was set up so that um you had uh people thinking about the planning and the zoning and not just kind of putting big boxes here and there. Uh so um it's why it's across two it's by county it's across two large counties. Um and uh so that was a you know it was a tremendous uh value in coming over here and uh seeing some of the issues that you all have and recognizing them um and about people who are very passionate about their communities. Um but I also have experience in state government and actually uh working in federal on Capitol Hill too and legislative processes. So, um, you know, I I have my MBA. I have a masters in communications management. Um, you know, and I'm

definitely a budget person. So, I'm going to be looking forward to all that. Um, lastly, I just want to say I greatly appreciate the work you do on planning and zoning because I really know that the character and the culture of any community um starts with their planning and zoning. you know that and their their message that they send out. Um you know and you could see that uh you know I spent my formative years in Satellite Beach and I went to Bvard Community College when it was Bvard Community College and Melbourne Beach was always the jewel of the beaches uh because it was most envious because of the way um this the town kept its uh planning and zoning and made sure you um had that hometown feel. you know that um as you can see over the years uh has changed um the character down A1A. So um I applaud you and especially for the work you do and I'm I am absolutely aware of how important it is uh to to Melbourne Beach and to your community and I I am privileged to be here as your town manager.

Thank you. And do you have any report for us? Um not with respect to planning and zoning. Okay. Um there's a lot of other things going on but not not with respect to planning and zoning. Um all right. We had discussed a couple of things for future meetings. So we're slightly out of order but you have those. I do. All right. Motion to adjurnn. Motion to adjurnn. I have a second. Second. All in favor? Actually, you can't vote against it.