Neighbor urges Design Review Board to block administrative approval after ordinance lets understory homes avoid review

A neighbor asked the City of My Beach Design Review Board on Tuesday to prevent an administratively processed height increase at 4880 Pine Tree Drive, saying the same request had been denied by the board in 2020 and is therefore barred by res judicata.

Beth Colleen Martin, who identified herself as the neighbor north of the property, told the board the house under construction already towers over adjacent homes and that the applicant had removed landscaping, placed a construction fence over her property line and cut a gas line. “This should not be handled administratively,” Martin said.

Martin said the project previously sought a 4-foot height increase in 2020 and was denied all but 1 foot; she told the board the current filing seeks an additional 2–3 feet in places, and that the property now stands about 48 feet at some points compared with neighboring homes of about 24–28 feet. She also said the project’s permit application lists the lot width as 106 feet when she said it is 105 feet, and she said the developer removed more than 55 trees and other landscape on adjacent property without a permit.

Planning staff told the board the city commission enacted an ordinance last week that changes how understory homes are treated: in many single‑family districts the code now allows understory homes to be approved administratively if they meet the revised standards. Planning staff said owners of qualifying RS‑3 properties above the size threshold may seek up to 31 feet with an understory under the amended code, and one path forward for the property at 4880 Pine Tree Drive is to vacate the prior DRB order and apply for a building permit so staff can check compliance with the new rules.

Rogelio, a planning department presenter at the meeting, described the administrative review process and said staff will verify setbacks, design criteria and inspections before issuing final permits. “Staff will review that in for compliance with the code, make sure that everything complies with what’s in the code, including design criteria that staff has to follow,” he said. He also told the board that postings will be required for properties applying under the new administrative pathway and said those notices must include contact information so neighbors may reach the property owner or City Hall staff.

Board members pressed for clarity about the limits of administrative approvals, whether waivers previously denied by the DRB remain binding, and how neighbors can raise enforcement concerns. Rogelio said waivers continue to be routed to the DRB; only projects that meet the administrative checklist can avoid DRB review. He advised neighbors to submit written complaints to planning staff and noted inspectors will verify the site before issuing a certificate of occupancy.

Given the neighbor’s request for further notice, the board voted to continue the agenda item so it would remain on the March calendar while the applicant decides whether to withdraw and pursue an administrative building permit. The motion to continue the item to the March 13 meeting passed by voice vote.

Martin told the board she will file a notice of appearance and asked to be copied on legal filings. Planning staff said the new posting requirements created by the ordinance are still being implemented and that staff will consider adding a City Hall contact phone number to the required posting.

The board did not decide the substantive height question at the meeting; rather, it agreed to continue the matter and to note neighbors’ concerns while staff implements the new administrative review process.