Item 10B v
ALAN C. JENSEN
Attorney at Law
AGENDA #lOB
AUGUST 28, 2006
935 North Third Street
Post Office Box 50457
Jacksonville Beach, Florida 32240-0457
Telephone (904) 246-2500
Facsimile (904) 246-9960
E-Mail: AJensenLaw@aol.com
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
August 17, 2006
Mayor and City Commissioners
City of Atlantic Beach
Alan C. Jensen, Esquire, City Attorney
Lot Subdivision Ordinance
Sec. 24-189, Atlantic Beach Code
~i~ i~
You requested at the City Commmission meeting held on August 14, 2006, that I report to you
regarding the status of the lot subdivision ordinance, which is an amendment to Sec. 24-189 of the
Atlantic Beach Code.
The original purpose of the ordinance was to shift approval of two lot subdivisions from
administrative approval by city staff to approval by the Community Development Board ("CDB"),
~'" after conducting a public hearing. Basically, criteria were to be established for the CDB to consider
in its determination of whether to grant or deny a two lot subdivision. If objective criteria are set by
the City Commission in Sec. 24-189, and an applicant who wants to subdivide a lot into two lots
""~ meets all of the objective criteria, then, provided all other applicable City requirements are met, the
application must be granted.
By way of a brief history, I attach the following documents:
,~ 1. April 21, 2006, Staff Report from Sonya Doerr with attached proposed changes to
Sec. 24-189. (2 pages)
„~ 2. June 5, 2006, memorandum opinion that I gave to Jim Hanson regarding draft
changes to Sec. 24-189, which included many new criteria, such as protected trees, 24 month limit,
and the like. (3 pages)
3. June 20, 2006, e-mail that I sent to Mayor Wolfson regarding the criteria and
concerns that I had. (1 page)
~.
Mayor and City Commissioners
August 17, 2006
Page 2
AGENDA # l0E
AUGUST 28, 2006
4. August 9, 2006, memorandum to Jim Hanson with the attached proposed ordinance,
which I prepared after a meeting with Mayor Wolfson on August 9, 2006. This is the latest version
of the proposed ordinance. (3 pages)
5. August 13 and 14, 2006, e-mails that I sent to Jim Hanson regarding concerns
expressed to me by attorney Marcia Tjoflat. (2 pages)
6. August 14, 2006, e-mail from Sonya Doerr to me confirming her concerns, as
expressed by attorney Tjoflat. (1 page)
It is my opinion that proposed paragraph (a)(6) of the latest version of the ordinance would not be
enforceable. That opinion is shared by attorney Tjoflat and Sonya Doerr.
~+• It is my recommendation that you consider the proposed ordinance at the next regularly scheduled
meeting to be held on August 28, 2006, for first reading, with paragraph (6) deleted. I also want to
check the various plats and subdivisions in Atlantic Beach to make sure that paragraph (5) is not
'~ inconsistent with any other regulations of the City. For example, I want to make sure that certain
Selva Marina subdivisions, as originally platted, don't have the smallest lots in the subdivision with
a size greater than 10,000 sq. ft. (100' x 100').
I would suggest that this ordinance needs to be acted on fairly quickly because of the moratorium
that is still in place on lot subdivisions. I would also suggest that you seriously consider whether
~"' you want to place the burden of approving two lot subdivisions on the CDB, after a public hearing,
when you have in fact established objective criteria to determine whether or not such a subdivision
of property should be allowed.
I will be more than happy to discuss any of the above matters further with you at any time.
ACJ/sky
Cc: James R. Hanson (w/enc)
Sonya Doerr (w/enc)
~.
~ AGENDA #lOB
r AUGUST 28, 2006
t
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
CITY COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM: Proposed revision to Chapter 24, Land Development Regulations,
Article IV, Subdivision Regulations, Section 24-189 in accordance with
recommendation of the Community Development Board.
SUBMITTED BY: Sonya Doerr, AICP
Community Development Director
DATE: Apri121, 2006
.BACKGROUND: The Community Development Board was requested to reconsider their
previous recommendation related a revision to the S~ibdivision regulations, which has been
pending since November. This proposed revision would remove the administrative approval for
certain types of lot divisions, and establish a procedure to consider and act upon such requests at a
public hearing.
The Community Development Board has recommended that this provision of the Subdivision
regulations be amended so that such two-lot divisions go to public hearing before the Community
Development Board for consideration and action, and that a process for appeal to the City
Commission of a final decision made by the Community Development Boazd be provided. The
~„ attached proposed draft ordinance incorporates those recommendations.
BUDGET: No budget issues.
RECOMMENDATION: Direction to staff to schedule and notice for first/second reading of
Ordinance 90-06-192, amending Section 24-189 of Land Development Regulations, Article IV,
Subdivision Regulations, in accordance with recommendation of Community Development Boazd.
ATTACHMENTS: Draft minutes of the April 18, 2006 Community Development Boazd
meeting, underlined draft indicating revisions and draft proposed Ordinance.
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
Ma 08 2006 re lar
y gu meeting
I
1
'`~ <! AGENDA #lOB
AUGUST 28, 2006
;~ ~
~'-,~
i -:
~w
• DRAFT
Sec. 24-189. Exemptions from the requirement for approval and recording of a Final Subdivision
Plat or Replat.
(a) Building Permits may be issued following divisions of Land without the need for approval of a Final ,
Subdivision Plat or a Replat only in accordance with each of following provisions (1) through (6).
~"" (1) Approval at a public hearine by the Community Development Board of a Certified Survey
depictma the proposed new lots and upon finding that each of the followin requirements and
conditions are demonstrated.
(2) The division results in no more than two (2) contiguous Lots or Parcels.
(3) The resultant new Lots, comply with the Minimum Lot Area, Width and Depth, and access
• requirements of the applicable Zoning District, the Comprehensive Plan and all other applicable
requirements of these Land Development Regulations, as may be amended.
~.
(4) The division and the resultant new Lots shall not create any Nonconforming Structures or any other
Nonconforming characteristic.
'~ ~5) Such Certified Survey shall be submitted to and approved the Communi Development Board prior
to recordme of a deed for transfer of ownership of Lands and shall be recorded as an addendum to
the deed(s). It shall be the responsibility of the~ropertv owner(s) to provide evidence of the
~"" approved Certified Surve along with any application for Building Permits
j6) Notice of such reouests to divide lots under the terms of this Section shall be provided as set forth in
~* Section 24-52 (c) of this Chapter
(b) Appeals. An Applicant may appeal a decision of the Community Development Board made pursuant to
„~ this Section to the Crtv Commission Such appeal shall be filed in writing with the City Clerk within
thu-ty (30) days after rendition of the final order of the Community Development Board and shall be
heard at public hearing before the City Commission
(bc)Townhouses and residential Dwellings held in Fee-Simple Ownership. Townhouses and Two-family
Dwellings, when divided in ownership, shall not constitute a division of Lands requiring approval of a
Final Subdivision Plat or a Replat, provided that such Dwellings are otherwise in compliance with these
~"' Land Development Regulations and the Comprehensive Plan.
i
~~.
;, ~
~.
' Page 1 of 2
AGENDA #lOB
,,, AUGUST 28, ?006
Subj: Chap.24 changes to administrative approval of 2 lot subdivisions
Date: 6/5/06 6:17:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From: AJensenLaw
~" To: chanson coab.us
CC: sdoerr coab.us
Jim:
You have asked for my opinion regarding the above subject and other possible factors to consider in an
ordinance which would codify any such changes to the administrative approval of 2 lot subdivisions. The matter
was last presented to the city commission in Agenda Item 8B at the commission meeting held on May 22,2006.
A draft of the proposed changes to Sec.24-189 was included in 86, and I have serious concerns regarding
some of those changes, as follows:
(a)(1) The last sentence requiring location of all "private protected trees" seems inappropriate and
unnecessary for the Community Development Board's consideration. Any applicant for a building permit will have
to present the required information and survey to the Tree Board as a prerequisite to obtaining a building permit,
and I believe we should leave all such matters to the Tree Board.
(a)(2) This again brings matters for the Tree Board into play for the Community Development Board, which
should not be done. This also appears to add requirements to a lot resulting from a subdivision that are not
requirements to a standard lot. This section should be limited to the minimum yard requirements, which I assume
means that the proposed new lots can be built on with all setback requirements being met.
(a)(3) I don't know where the 24 months came from, but unless there is some justification for this period of
time, it could be considered an arbitrary amount of time, and we should avoid anything that might be considered
arbitrary.
(a)(4) Omit the last 4 words from this section "...as may be amended." This is unnecessary and may well
lead to other questions that are unnecessary.
(a)(5) This section concerns me greatly. This would allow much discretion with the Community
Development Board, and our goal should be to set guidelines which, if met by an applicant, would result in
approval of the requested subdivision. I would suggest this section be eliminated.
(b) Appeals: if there is already a provision for appeals to the city commission in Chap.24, perhaps that
~'"' could be referenced here. However, if the intent is for the city commission to establish guidelines for the 2 lot
subdivisions and then let the Community Development Board make the decision if the guidelines have been meet,
I don't think an appeal to the city commission would be appropriate. Just as the Community Development Board
is the final word on granting or denying variances in the city, they can certainly be the final word on 2 lot
subdivisions, especially if the commission sets forth clear and unequivocal guidelines in their legislation.
I also understand that other possible factors have been discussed or brought up to consider adding to the
changes to administrative approval of 2 lot subdivisions, such as lot size, neighborhood input, trees, and the like.
The lot size question is simple: if the proposed lots meet the size requirements of the zoning classification, the
subdivision cannot be denied on a lot size basis. Regarding trees, I have addressed that above, and I don't
believe the Community Development Board should be concerned with the trees, nor should the city commission
'"' add conditions to subdivided lots that are not applicable to standard lots (ie., lots NOT resulting from subdivision).
~i
u
The imput of neighbors is always important, but cannot really be considered by the Community Development
Board unless the neighbors are presenting competent, substantial evidence which is pertinent to the factors to be
considered by the Board, Pure opposition of neighbors because they don't like the proposed subdivision or
something like that should not be considered by the Board in making its decision. I would strongly suggest not
including anything in the proposed changes regarding neighborhood input, which could very well lead to
subjective determinations by the Board, which we have to avoid. All decisions by the Board on 2 lot subdivisions
should be based on objective factors established by the city commission in amendments to the ordinance.
I cannot think of anything further to address on this matter,. and hopefully the above information is helpful to
you. If you have any questions at all regarding the above, please let me know and I'll be happy to discuss them
with you. Alan
Monday, June O5, 2006 America Online: AJensenL~y ~~ ~ ~ y ; ,
~+, ,
,,;,
~-
' y:
tS..:
1~ ~~hi'
~^, .
}#;
~,
,~.
K~~
c,~
4~
..
~,
~'.
IP~
~. .
935 North Third Street
P.O. Box 50457
Jacksonville Beach, FL 32240-0457
(904) 246-2500
(904) 246-9960 FAX
AJensenLaw@aol.com
Page 2 of 2
AGENDA #lOB
AUGUST 28, 2006
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information and all attachments contained in this electronic communication are
legally privileged and confidential, subject to the attorney-client privilege and intended only for the use of the
intended recipients. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
review, use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return a-mail and please permanently remove any
copies of this message from your system and do not retain any copies, whether in electronic or physical form or
otherwise. Thank you.
Monday, June O5, 2006 America Online: AJensenLaw
AGENDA #lOB
AUGUST 28, 2006
DRAFT
24-189.
Exemptions from the requirement for approval and recording of a Final Subdivision
Plat or Replat.
Building Permits may be issued following divisions of Land without the need for approval of a Final
Subdivision Plat or a Replat only in accordance with each of following provisions (1) through (8).
(1) Approval at a public hearing by the Community DevelouiYient Board of a Certified Survev
(~') T1ie Certified Survey shall demonstrate that each proposed new lot contains sufficient area to meet
X11 »,:«:«.,,.... V a n ~
(3) The division results in no more than two (2) contiguous Lots or Parcels, aiii
(4) The resultant new Lots, comply with the Minimum Lot Area, Width and Depth, and access
~. requirements of the applicable Zoning District, the Comprehensive Plan and all other applicable
requirements of these Land Development Regulations, as may be amended.
(S) The resultant new lots are eneral(y consistent in size width depth and shape with surrounding
deyelopmentandestablished platting_patterns
(6) The division and the resultant new Lots shall not create any Nonconforming Structures or any other
Nonconforming characteristic.
(7) Such Certified Sun-ey shall be submitted to anal approved the Community Development Board prior
~,,, to recording of a deed. for transfer of ownership of Lands and shall be recorded as an addendum to
the deed(s). It shall be the responsibility of the property owner(s) to provide evidence of the
approved Certified Survev along with any application for Building Permits
8) Notice of such requests to divide lots under the teens of this.. Section shall be provided as set forth in
Section 34-52 (c) of this Chapter.
'~ (b) Appeals. An Ap~~licant may appeal a decision i~f the Community Develi~pment Board made pursuant to
this Section to the Cit~C:ornmission. Such appeal shall be (filed in writinr; ~~-ith the Citt~ Clerk within
thirty (30} days after rendition of the final order of the Conununih~ Development Board and shall be
~"" heard at public hearing before the Cit}~ Commission.
(bc)Townhouses and residential Dwellings held in Fee-Simple Ownership. Townhouses and Two-family
Dwellings, when divided in ownership, shall not constitute a division of Lands requiring approval of a
Final Subdivision Plat or a Replat, provided that such Dwellings are otherwise in compliance with these
Land Development Regulations and the Comprehensive Plan.
'~ Page 1 of 1
AGENDA #lOB
AUGUST 28, 2006
Subj: Chap.24 changes to administrative approval of 2 lot subdivisions
hate: ~ 6/20/p6 12:45:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From: AJensenLaw
*~* To: dwolfson(a~coab.us
CC: jhanson@coab.u_s, sdoerr~a co.ab,.us
~ Don: We need clarification of what exactly you want included in the proposed ordinance on the above. My
notes from the commission meeting on 6/12 reflect that you wanted something to the effect that "...no lots maybe
subdivided in a fully platted subdivision of record... " and Jim has told Sonya you asked for language effectively
prohibiting any replat or future division of platted lots. Questions and concerns:
1. do you want something that would also apply to 3 or more lot subdivisions? ~~~
2. the language from my notes would probably include the entire city and then eliminate subdivisions entirely
~.
3. effectively prohibiting any replat or future division of platted lots would require almost a compete rewrite of
the subdivision regulations to remove any references to replatting procedures
4. there may be conflict with Chap.177 of the Florida Statutes, which addresses replatting
5. there may be some Bert Harris questions if the city passes a law just to prohibit divisions that would
otherwise comply with all other requirements
We are trying to set forth criteria for the CDB (or whomever) to use in determining whether to grant or deny a 2
~" lot subdivision. If you want to prohibit division of certain properties for some legitimate reason, it may be better to
put it in another section of Chap.24, probably a new section which would set forth reasons why certain properties
could not be divided.
Language help is needed if you want to include something in the proposed ordinance Sonya and I are working
on at this time, to make sure we accurately reflect your intent. Thanks. Alan
935 North Third Street
~"' P.O. Box 50457
Jacksonville Beach, FL 32240-0457
~„ (904) 246-2500
(904) 246-9960 FAX
AJensenLaw@aol.com
~. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information and all attachments contained in this electronic communication are
legally privileged and confidential, subject to the attorney-client privilege and intended only for the use of the
intended recipients. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
review, use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received
'~"" this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return a-mail and please permanently remove any
copies of this message from your system and do not retain any copies, whether in electronic or physical form or
otherwise. Thank you.
L
Tuesday, June 20, 2006 America Online: AJensenLaw
~:
sky
~. From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subjec
Jim:
sky
Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:14 PM
'jhanson@coab.us'
•'sdoerr@coab.us'; 'dwolfson@coab.us'
a:.Lot Subdivision Ordinance
Page 1 of 1
AGENDA #1 OB
AUGUST 28, 2006
I met with Mayor Wolfson this morning and we discussed further revisions to the lot subdivision
ordinance. Attached is the new ordinance, which I hope correctly reflects the language and intent as
expressed to me by Mayor Wolfson. I believe he intends to bring it up under his comments at the
~„ meeting on Monday night to discuss with the other Commissioners, and to give us direction so that we
can have the ordinance in final form for first reading at the meeting on 8/28/06. Please contact me with
any questions, comments or suggestions. Thanks
~" Alan C. Jensen
City Attorney
sent by:
Sandra K. Clemons
Legal Assistant to Alan C. Jensen, Esquire
935 North Third Street
P. O. Box 50457
~'"' Jacksonville Beach, FL 32240-0457
(904) 246-2500
(904) 246-9960 FAX
AJensenLaw@aol.com
skclemons@belfsouth.net
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information and all attachments contained in this electronic communication are
~. legally privileged and confidential, subject to the attorney-client privilege and intended only for the use of the
intended recipients. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
review, use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return a-mail and please permanently
~'" remove any copies of this message from your system and do not retain any copies, whether in electronic or
physical form or otherwise. Thank you.
~,.
8/9/06
~.~.._
~.
AGENDA #lOB
AUGUST 28, 2006
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA,
AMENDING SEC. 24-189, EXEMPTIONS FROM THE REQUIREMENT
FOR APPROVAL AND RECORDING OF A FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT
bR REPEAT, OF CHAPTER 24, ZONING, SUBDIVISION AND LAND
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, TO PROVIDE FOR APPROVAL OF
ANY SUCH EXEMPTIONS BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BOARD, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE CITY COMMISSION ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE
OF THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA:
ST;C'TTnN 1. Sec. 24-189 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Atlantic Beach,
Florida, is hereby amended to read as follows:
"Sec. 24-189. Exemptions from requirement for approval and recording of a
final subdivision plat or replat.
(a) Building permits may be issued following divisions of land without the need
for approval of a final subdivision plan or a replat only in accordance with each of
the following provisions (1) thrrn~gh ~Rl:
(1) Annr_,T oval by t he C'nmmimity T~PVelnnment Rnard, after cnndncting a nTs
~.
h .wring, of a
rtifi d ~ilrv v d ni ting~h~r~rnnnCPf~ na.x, lnte anal imnn
finding by the Rnard that ash of th fnllrna~ing r_e~~irements hav h n m t.
(2) The division results in no more than two (2) contiguous lots or parcels.
(3) The resultant new lots comply with the minimum lot area, width and depth,
~„ and access requirements of the applicable zoning district, the
Comprehensive Plan and all other applicable requirements of these land
development regulations.
(4) The division and the resultant new lots shall not create any nonconforming
structures or any other nonconforming characteristic.
($) Anv resultant ne.a, lot shall not hP emallar in lot o ~~ ~1,.,« ~1.,~ ,,.....,,I1__a 1; ;.
within th . subdivision, as originally nlTattPC3
(6) There shall he nn fi~rther division of nri~inally platted lots ~ Shn~=m nn th
original snhdivisinn of r nrd
(7) T]ie certified survey shall be submitted to ancl~nprnved hT the ('nm
T)evel Tnment Rnard prior to recording a deed to transfer ownership of the
~"' lots, and shall be recorded as an addendum to the deed(s). It shall be the
~.
AGENDA #lOB
AUGUST 28, 2006
responsibility of the property owner to provide evidence of the approved
certified survey along with any application for building permits.
(8) Nnt~sic. -nf rn~hlir hPa,-;nrt~ l,o~ ..e ~~.,. n--------- -
T~PVP~n*+mnn4 Rn a
~+ r~i~eetS to c~ivicle lnt~ imc~Pr the terms of this cartinn Shall h ~ rrn~in~n ac c t
forth m S .c 74-5? of this cha tp__er,
~. (b) Townhouses and residential dwellings held in fee simple ownership. Townhouses
and two-family dwellings, when divided in ownership, shall not constitute a division of lands
requiring approval of a final subdivision plat or a replat, provided that such dwellings aze otherwise
~• in compliance with these land development regulations and the comprehensive plan.
SF,CTinN 2 FffP~tivP n~+o, This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its final
passage and adoption.
PASSED by the City Commission on first reading this day of 2006.
PASSED by the City Commission on second and final reading this day of
2006.
ATTEST:
DONNA BUSSEY
City Clerk
Approved as to form and correctness:
ALAN C. JENSEN, ESQUIRE
City Attorney
t
S.
::
4'
1 V.,
2.
DONALD M. WOLFSON
Mayor, Presiding Officer
~" Page 1 of 1
AGENDA #lOB
~ AUGUST 28, 2006
Subj: lot subdivision ordinance
Date: 8/14/06..10:04:32 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From: AJensenLaw
~"" To: jhanson ~coab.us
CC: sdoerr coab.us_, dwolfsonr7acoab_us
Jim: Some further thoughts after I was able to speak with Marcia Tjoflat this morning:
1. The ordinance as drafted may be subject to a consistency challenge, ie., it is not consistent with the Comp
Plan. Sonya can probably expound on this.
2. Bert Harris Act claims would probably be forthcoming if the ordinance is passed as drafted.
3. There is no data analysis to support it (par.(6)), so it could be deemed arbitrary and capricious.
Please let me know if you want to discuss further. Alan
~ct e. ~~'ctC.ect, ~Ql~tcGllL6
935 North Third Street
P.O. Box 50457
Jacksonville Beach, FL 32240-0457
(904) 246-2500
(904) 246-9960 FAX
AJensenLaw@aol.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information and all attachments contained in this electronic communication are
legally privileged and confidential, subject to the attorney-client privilege and intended only for the use of the
,,,, intended recipients. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
review, use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return a-mail and please permanently remove any
copies of this message from your system and do not retain any copies, whether in electronic or physical form or
"* otherwise. Thank you.
~.
Monday, August 14, 2006 America Online: AJensenLaw
"' Page 1 of 1
AGENDA #lOB
AUGUST 28, 2006
Subj: lot subdivision ordinance'
Date: 8/13/06 11:11:12 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From: AJensenLaw
~" To: j_hanson coab.us
CC: sdoerr coab.us, dwolfson@coab.us
Jim: I exchanged several a-mails with Marcia Tjoflat on Friday and her thoughts were as follows:
1. paragraphs (5) and (6) on the first page of the ordinance are inconsistent
2. since there are many houses built on multiple lots, this ordinance would still not get some people what
~,, they want
3. paragraph (6) is probably not enforceable, as is my thought, and Marcia thinks it is a problem from a
po-icy point of view (tying the hands of future commissions)
'"" Hopefully you get this in time for your meeting with Don Monday morning. I have sent a copy of this a-mail
to him as well. Please contact me if you wish to discuss further. Hopefully this commission can sort this out
Monday night and give us direction to finalize this ordinance and proceed with getting it passed and then lifting the
,~ moratorium. Alan
~~ Cis ~~i?KO.etz, Gd~~'~fvze
935 North Third Street
P.O. Box 50457
Jacksonville Beach, FL 32240-0457
(904) 246-2500
(904) 246-9960 FAX
AJensenLaw@aol.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information and all attachments contained in this electronic communication are
legally privileged and confidential, subject to the attorney-client privilege and intended only for the use of the
*!~ intended recipients. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
review, use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return a-mail and please permanently remove any
copies of this message from your system and do not retain any copies, whether in electronic or physical form or
'"~' otherwise. Thank you.
8//~ f-e-~ ra~ .~-v -.~LL~~-c~.~
~.-~--~ ,w , ~%~
~2~
f3~ ~ ~~,~ .~ ~Q~/ •c ~i
~.
Monday, August 14, 2006 America Online: AJensenLaw
~"" Page 1 of 2
AGENDA #lOB
~'" AUGUST 28, 2006
Subj: RE: lot subdivision ordinance
Date: 8!14/06 11:20:19 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From: sdoerr@c,atlantic-beach.fl.us
'"" To: AJensenLaw aol.com, ihanson@coab.us
CC: dwolfson.@coab _us
1. I suppose there could be a consistency question at least raised possibly related to a number of policies,
including the below Policy A.1.5.9. Administrative review (per F.S. 163.3213) with Administrative Hearing before
an ALJ could then be sought by any "Substantially affected person." Consistency challenges can be so broad
and subjective. Generally for every policy that might be claimed to be inconsistent, there are other ones to argue
for consistency, but as we know this process can be costly and time-consuming.
As an example, if a lot division was denied that would result in a lot that met or exceeded all Zoning District
requirements and also met the lowest density range in the COAB, this one might be hard to defend.
Policy A.1.5.9 The City shall permit residential development only in compliance with the residential density
limitations as set forth within the Land Development Regulations, and as designated on the Future Land Use Map
in accordance with the following table.
2. The Bert Harris issue is one I have been concerned about, and there are lots of anxious efforts across the state
to make law on the Bert Harris Act.
*a* From: AJensenLaw@aol.com [mailto:AJensenLaw@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 10:05 AM
To: Hanson, Jim
~„ Cc: Doerr, Sonya; Wolfson, Don
Subject: lot subdivision ordinance
Jim: Some further thoughts after I was able to speak with Marcia Tjoflat this morning:
1. The ordinance as drafted may be subject to a consistency challenge, ie., it is not consistent with the Comp
Plan. Sonya can probably expound on this.
2. Bert Harris Act claims would probably be forthcoming if the ordinance is passed as drafted.
3. There is no data analysis to support it (par.(6)), so it could be deemed arbitrary and capricious.
Please let me know if you want to discuss further. Alan
1 ZGR.~L ~j. ~2P,~tQQoL, G~
~" 935 North Third Street
P.O. Box 50457
Jacksonville Beach, FL 32240-0457
(904) 246-2500
(904) 246-9960 FAX
AJensenLaw@aol.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information and all attachments contained in this electronic communication are
legally privileged and confidential, subject to the attorney-client privilege and intended only for the use of the
intended recipients. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
~'" review, use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return a-mail and please permanently remove any
copies of this message from your system and do not retain any copies, whether in electronic or physical form or
otherwise. Thank you.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or
entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager.
This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the
named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. This email and any files transmitted
with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If
Monday, August 14, 2006 America Online: AJensenLaw