Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission weighs rezoning to legalize homes at Victoria by the Lakes after setback and CO discrepancies
Summary
City legal staff recommended a city‑initiated rezoning to reduce the planned development setbacks and cure several nonconforming certificates of occupancy; the developer requested flexibility citing design and water‑supply costs; commissioners asked for fire, engineering and utility impact analyses and took no vote.
City legal staff presented a detailed history of the Victoria by the Lakes subdivision and told commissioners that parts of the recorded PD (planned development) rely on a "typical lot layout" rather than a separately attached development standards table. Staff said several certificates of occupancy (COs) issued for homes in the subdivision show front setbacks less than the PD's 20‑ft requirement (examples cited include COs with 15 ft 5 in front setbacks issued March 25, 2024), creating multiple nonconforming homes.
From a legal standpoint, the city attorney recommended a city‑initiated rezoning ordinance that would adjust the PD's development standards to align with the existing constructed lots (for example, reducing the front yard setback from 20 ft to 15 ft and rear yard from 15 ft to 10 ft where applicable). The attorney said that a city‑initiated ordinance would cure nonconformities without requiring each homeowner to pursue individual variances, and estimated the process could take about 45 days including planning board review and two public hearings.
Developer Eric Greenhow spoke in favor of flexibility, saying he is local, intends to build "a beautiful neighborhood" and that requiring smaller footprints to meet larger setbacks would force him to redesign plans and could reduce product quality. He also raised water‑supply concerns, telling commissioners he had been told at one point there was no water available and that securing private water could cost an estimated six‑figure amount, imposing substantial financial burden on the project.
Commissioner questions focused on safety, emergency access, on‑street parking, drainage, engineering and who authorized earlier permits. Staff said an administrative waiver option exists but is limited by code to a 10% reduction (insufficient to cure 20‑ft → 15‑ft differences), and that planning and CFRPC review are underway. Bonnie from staff emphasized that fire and engineering reviews are needed; planning staff confirmed a draft ordinance had been circulated to professional reviewers for technical comment.
No formal action was taken. Commissioners expressed split views — some favored curing existing nonconformities to protect homeowners' ability to finance and sell their houses; others emphasized maintaining standard setbacks for safety and long‑term consistency. The commission asked staff to return with specific technical analyses (fire department review, drainage/engineering impact, utility/water availability) and additional recommendations before any ordinance is scheduled for adoption.
Why it matters: unresolved setbacks and CO discrepancies can prevent buyers from obtaining typical residential financing (underwriting/title insurer requirements such as Florida Form 9). A city‑initiated rezoning would legally regularize the existing homes but requires balancing homeowner/market impacts with public‑safety, drainage and utility considerations.
Next steps: staff will collect technical reviews (fire, engineering, utilities), finalize the draft ordinance as needed, and return to the commission with a recommendation and timeline for public hearings.
