Skip to main content

Tag: Chad Minor

City staff praised for recovery efforts, flood insurance discounts

City staff praised for recovery efforts, flood insurance discounts

Written by Joe Hendricks on . Posted in Community News, Holmes Beach.

HOLMES BEACH – The city’s hurricane recovery efforts earned praise from FEMA representatives, and property owners will soon be eligible for 25% flood insurance discounts.

Director of Development Services Chad Minor made these announcements during the March 11 city commission meeting. He said as of that day the building department had issued 1,900 building permits since Hurricane Helene struck in late September. The city also conducted 4,344 building permit inspections to date, with Joe Payne Inc. assisting with those efforts.

Minor said permit revenues are only down about $6,600 dollars from last year even though the permit fees have been waived for hurricane-related repairs. Minor said the city’s fee waiver program will remain in effect at least until June 1.

“The building department’s doing an incredible job. There’s a lot of people that still have work to do and the mayor agrees we need to extend the fee waiver program,” Minor said.

He then noted FEMA representatives visited the building department the previ­ous week as part of their post-hurricane auditing process and focused on building permits and the city’s permitting policies and procedures.

Minor said Building Official Neal Schwartz and Building Department Office Manager and Emergency Operations Coordinator Kim Charron did a fantastic job preparing for the FEMA meeting, which he noted can be a daunting task.

“At the end of the meeting, FEMA said, ‘You guys have done everything right,’ ” Minor said.

According to Minor, the FEMA reps said they’d be sharing some of Holmes Beach’s applications and policies with other communities as an example of how to respond and proceed the proper way.

“It was my first experience with FEMA and I was a little nervous going into it, but the way we prepared – our staff, our policies and procedures – made for quite an easy meeting. We had nothing to hide and we received tremendous accolades,” Minor said, which prompted a round of applause from the commissioners and other meeting attendees.

“Don’t forget about the code compliance department as well,” Mayor Judy Titsworth added.

Minor then asked Code Compliance Chief James “JT” Thomas to join Schwartz and Charron at the podium with him.

Schwartz said FEMA was impressed with the code compli­ance department’s efforts and the many violation notices and stop work orders they issued while tracking the repair work to ensure that it was done in compliance with city, state and federal regulations.

Schwartz said the building department is still assisting homeowners and property owners with their permitting processes.

“Come on into city hall and talk to us,” he said. “We’re here for you.”

Flood insurance discounts

Minor then addressed the city’s Community Rating Service (CRS) rating that provides flood insur­ance discounts to any Holmes Beach property owner who carries a flood insurance policy issued through, or in conjunction with, FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program.

Minor announced that on Oct. 1, the city’s current class 6 CRS rating that provides a 20% flood insurance discount is improving to a class 5 CRS rating that provides a 25% discount. This prompted another round of applause.

“The city has acquired enough points to be classified as a class 4 but we have to meet a prerequi­site of a watershed master plan. We are underway on that. Once that is complete, we will submit for reclassification, which, if approved, will result in class 4 (rating) and a 30% discount,” Minor said of the additional CRS rating improvement to be sought next year.

Minor thanked all the city staff members, including the public works department, who helped prepare the reports that led to the improved CRS rating.

“It shows the hard work pays off. This is a huge one for the city and it really should be celebrated,” Minor said, prompt­ing a third round of applause.

“You guys did great,” Titsworth said.

Commissioner Carol Soustek expressed her appreciation for the staff efforts that will provide ad­ditional flood insurance discounts to Holmes Beach property owners and Commissioner Dan Diggins said, “Thank you guys. This is wonderful news.”

Holmes Beach eliminates ‘lookback’ for substantial improvements

Holmes Beach eliminates ‘lookback’ for substantial improvements

Written by Joe Hendricks on . Posted in Community News, Holmes Beach.

HOLMES BEACH – Property own­ers in the city are no longer subject to a one-year lookback requirement regarding the total cumulative cost of repairs, renovations or recon­struction made to their structures.

The lookback period pertains to compliance with FEMA’s 50% substantial improvement/substan­tial damage rule.

According to the Manatee County website, “The 50% Rule is a regula­tion of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) that prohibits improvements or repairs to a struc­ture exceeding 50% of its market value unless the entire structure is brought into full compliance with current flood regulations. This may include elevating the structure, using flood-resistant materials and proper flood venting.”

In a December 2024 memo to city commissioners, Director of Development Services Chad Minor and Building Official Neal Schwartz stated, “This reason for this change is to allow existing structures that need repair, reconstruction, rehabilitation, alteration, addition or other improvements not to have to wait one year from the final inspec­tion date. Due to the hurricanes, several property owners that had made improvements would have to wait to pull a permit due to this one-year lookback.”

The proposed changes to the city’s one-year cumulative calculation requirements were presented to the Holmes Beach City Commission on Dec. 17, reviewed by the planning commission on Jan. 15 and adopted in the form of Ordinance 25-01 by the city commission on second and final reading on Feb. 11.

One of the clauses contained in the new ordinance says, “The city commission, at the recommendation of staff, has determined that rescind­ing the one-year lookback period relative to the accumulation of costs regarding substantial improvements is in the best interest of the health, safety and welfare of the public and is imperative to support the city’s recovery and continued participation in the NFIP.”

The previous city ordinance contained language that referenced repairs, renovations and reconstruc­tion “taking place during a one-year period.” That language does not appear in adopted Ordinance 25-01.

The previous ordinance also contained language that said, “For each building or structure, the one-year period begins on the date of the certificate of completion or the certificate of occupancy of the first improvement or repair of that building or structure subsequent to June 27, 2019.” That language does not appear in Ordinance 25-01.

Ordinance 25-01 now defines substantial improvement as, “Any combination of repair, reconstruc­tion, rehabilitation, alteration, addition or other improvement of a building or structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50% of the market value of the building or structure before the improvement or repair is started. If the structure has incurred ‘substantial damage’ any repairs are considered substantial improvement regardless of the actual repair work performed.”

Staff insights

During the Dec. 17 meeting, Com­missioner Carol Soustek asked staff if the city is allowed to remove the one-year lookback requirement. She was told the city could remove the requirement.

“If we pass this on the second reading (on Feb. 11) it will be effective immediately,” Schwartz said. “In the year period, over the lookback period, we’ve had several homes that have been remodeled up to 49% or under the 50% rule. Based on the damage they have received, they would have to wait one complete year from the completion (of previous repairs and renovations). Some of these weren’t even completed yet, so they’re caught between a rock and hard place so they just have to sit there for a year to start over. I didn’t think that was fair.”

Schwartz said he contacted state floodplain management coordinator Rebecca Quinn about eliminating the one-year lookback and he was told approximately 30 other municipali­ties were in the process of doing the same thing.

Schwartz said removing the one-year lookback requirement would not affect the city’s Community Rating System rating that currently provides Holmes Beach property owners with a 20% discount on flood insurance policies issued through or in conjunc­tion with FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program; and the CRS discount currently experienced in Holmes Beach is expected to increase to 25% on Oct. 1.

“Neal, you’re a genius. You have really altered some lives with this,” Commissioner Carol Soustek said on Dec. 17.

“Everybody knows my house was affected too. I feel for everybody,” Schwartz responded, noting that Soustek, Mayor Judy Titsworth and Commissioner Carol Whitmore were also among those displaced by the hurricanes.

Holmes Beach eliminates ‘lookback’ for substantial improvements
Director of Development Services Chad Minor assisted with the efforts to eliminate the
one-year lookback requirement. – Joe Hendricks | Sun

When presenting the ordinance for final adoption on Feb. 11, Minor said, “Due to the hurricanes, sev­eral property owners that had made improvements would have to wait to pull a permit to address this one-year lookback. This is striking that one-year lookback period.”

Schwartz said one of the goals is to prevent “phasing.”

“At the end of a permit, a permit has to be completed. You can’t go into phasing. Once you get that final (inspection), you get to start over. That is called phasing. FEMA looks very bad upon phasing. We could lose our CRS rating for that,” he said.

Minor course changes possible for city dock provisions

Minor course changes possible for city dock provisions

Written by Joe Hendricks on . Posted in Community News, Holmes Beach.

HOLMES BEACH – The Holmes Beach Planning Commission met on Dec. 4 for the first time since August, with all five members and both alternate members present.

The planning commission consists of Chairperson Gale Tedhams, Vice-Chair Jim McIntire, Lisa Pierce, Steven Oelfke and Richard Brown, with Joseph Ireland serving as the first alternate and James Harrison serving as the second alternate. Tedhams welcomed the members back and expressed her hope that everyone successfully weathered hurricanes Helene and Milton.

Minor course changes possible for city dock provisions
Gale Tedhams chairs the Holmes Beach Planning Commission. – Joe Hendricks | Sun

Development Services Director Chad Minor and City Clerk Stacey Johnston also participated in the meeting. Minor and the commission members continued their previous discussion on amending the dock provisions contained in the city’s municipal code.

DOCK PROVISIONS

Minor proposes adding definitions for the terms “boathouse,” “dock,” “finger dock,” “watercraft,” “mooring area” and “mean high water line,” which he said are mentioned but not defined in the current municipal code.

Minor does not propose changing the existing setback requirements for docks or the distance a dock can extend into the water.

“Everyone seems to be following the mooring rules pretty well,” he said.

Minor referenced the individually-platted mooring areas located on individually-platted submerged lots in various canals throughout the city. The meeting packet included aerial photographs of the 85th Street Canal, the T-end canal between Baronet and Concord lanes on Key Royale, the Marina Court Canal, the 83rd Street Canal, the 77th Street Canal and the 68th Street and 69th Street canals.

Minor said ownership of these individually-platted mooring areas does not necessarily coin­cide with the nearest residential structure and the existing city code doesn’t address these areas, most of which already contain docks.

He said the individually-platted mooring areas are generally about 10 feet wide and about 25 feet long.

“Under our current code, which doesn’t address these, it would be impossible for a 10-foot-wide slip to accommodate a 10-foot setback,” he noted.

Minor said a building permit would be required to install a new dock or lift in one of the individually-platted mooring areas and he proposed that no part of the installation, including the watercraft, extend more than 25 feet into the waterway, as measured from the seawall, or extend beyond the lot lines of the adjacent parcels or boat slips.

Minor said the city clerk wanted to make some com­ments about tweaking the existing code as it pertains to the city-owned boat slips administered by city staff. Johnston said the existing code requires too many steps for evicting a lessee from a city-owned dock space. She also feels the 60-day application period for those on the waiting list results in a city-owned slip sitting vacant for too long.

Minor course changes possible for city dock provisions
The city of Holmes Beach owns several canal-side boat slips. – Google Maps | Submitted
Minor course changes possiblefor city dock provisions
The city leases out the city-owned boat slips in the Sunrise Boat Basin. – Google Maps | Submitted

According to the city website, Holmes Beach residents can rent city-owned boat slips in the following locations: Marina Drive T-ends located between 72nd and 77th streets and the Sunrise Boat Basin located at 28th Street and Avenue B. The an­nual fee is $600 at the Marina Drive T-ends and the fee at the Sunrise Boat Basin is $425.

“Right now, we do not have any open spots for both locations,” the city website notes.

Minor said he would incorporate the changes discussed that evening into the proposed provisions to be reviewed again at the planning commission’s Jan. 15 meeting. Minor also hopes to present the planning commission members with some proposed seawall provisions.

MEETING TIMES

Included in the meeting packet was a memo from Johnston regarding City Commissioner Carol Soustek’s request to start the monthly planning commission meetings at 2 p.m. rather than 5 p.m.

Johnston’s memo noted most city meetings now take place during the day, when city staff is available during normal business hours.

Tedhams noted some planning commission members still hold regular day jobs. Pierce said her work schedule would prevent her from attending 2 p.m. meetings. Oelfke said he leaves work early to attend the 5 p.m. meetings but he could adjust his work schedule to accommodate a 3:30 p.m. start time. The commission agreed to start their Jan. 15 meeting at 3:30 p.m.

Holmes Beach amending sign ordinance

Holmes Beach amending sign ordinance to protect free speech

Written by Joe Hendricks on . Posted in Community News, Featured, Holmes Beach.

HOLMES BEACH – The city is amending its sign ordinance to ensure compliance with a 2015 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that protects free speech, specifically, words on signs.

The City Commission on first reading unanimously voted in favor of the amended sign ordinance drafted by City Attorney Erica Augello and presented by Development Services Director Chad Minor on Nov. 14.

Holmes Beach amending sign ordinance
Development Services Director Chad Minor said the sign ordinance is the culmination of numerous previous city discussions. – Joe Hendricks | Sun

The sign ordinance, last amended in 2007, will be reviewed by the Planning Commission before being brought back to the City Commission for second reading and final adoption.

During the Nov. 14 meeting, Minor said the amended ordinance presented that day represented the culmination of 15 to 20 commission workshops that occurred over the last year to a year and a half.

Holmes Beach amending sign ordinance

City Attorney Erica Augello provided a summary of the freedom of speech protections pertaining to signs. – Joe Hendricks | Sun

He said the amended ordinance pertains in part to political signs placed on residential properties being treated similarly to residential “for sale” or “for rent” signs.

In response to a question posed by The Sun, Augello provided a brief summary of the proposed sign ordinance amendments.

“Several years ago, the Supreme Court of the United States made a decision (in Reed v. Town of Gilbert, Arizona) that had to do with free speech, commercial speech, political speech and regulating signs. The Supreme Court of the United States says you can’t regulate speech on signs, but you can regulate their size, you can regulate where they’re placed, you can regulate the material they’re made of, but you can’t regulate what’s located on them. Cities throughout the country have been amending their sign codes to make them enforceable and to make sure we are not regulating the content of the signs,” she said.

She also noted commercial speech on signs is not as protected as the personal free speech of individuals.

The 45-page ordinance also includes numerous definitions and regulations pertaining to different types of signs, sign allowances and sign prohibitions.

Amendment specifics

The proposed sign ordinance includes several “whereas” clauses pertaining to free speech protections. One clause notes that one intent of the amended ordinance is to reaffirm that the city’s sign standards and regulations are not designed to censor speech or regulate the viewpoint of the sign’s message.

Another clause notes that until 2015, federal court opinions were not clear as to what constituted content-based sign regulations versus content-neutral sign regulations. That question was clarified in Reed v. Town of Gilbert, Arizona case in which the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of a local sign ordinance that had different criteria for different types of temporary, noncommercial signs.

“The city recognizes that in Reed v. Town of Gilbert, the Supreme Court held that content-based regulation is presumptively unconstitutional,” one clause in the Holmes Beach sign ordinance states.

Another clause notes that the case clarified that municipalities still have the authority to enact and enforce reasonable sign regulations that are not content-based, including the regulation of sign size, the locations in which signs may be placed, rules that distinguish between freestanding signs and those attached to buildings, between lighted and unlighted signs, between signs with fixed messages and electronic signs with messages that change, between the placement of signs on private and public property, between the placement of signs on commercial and residential property, between on-premises and off-premises signs, rules restricting the total number of signs allowed per mile of roadway and rules imposing time restrictions on signs advertising a one-time event.

Additional clauses reference several other examples of case law pertaining to sign regulations.

Planning board reviews 105 Elm right of way permit

Planning board reviews 105 Elm right of way permit

Written by Joe Hendricks on . Posted in Anna Maria, Community News, Featured.

ANNA MARIA – The right of way permit application needed to build a beachfront home at 105 Elm Ave. has been reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board and is headed to the  city commission for a final vote.

To build on her undeveloped property, Fedora Campbell needs a city-issued right of way permit to extend the west end of Elm Avenue on city-owned property in an unpaved manner that would provide street access to her driveway.

Elm Avenue currently ends at the driveway of the home at 107 Elm owned by part-time Anna Maria residents Wendy and Robert Jordan. When built for the previous property owner, the home at 107 Elm required a similar city-approved road extension.

Planning board reviews 105 Elm right of way permit
This diagram illustrates in red where the new home would be built and in blue where Elm Avenue would be extended to provide driveway access. – City of Anna Maria | Submitted

The right of way permit sought by Campbell and Gagne Construction was reviewed by the planning board and City Planner Chad Minor on May 16.

After an 80-minute discussion, the board voted 2-2 on board member Bob Carter’s motion to recommend city commission approval of the right of way permit. Board Chairman Dr. Jose Erbella supported Carter’s motion and board members Charlie Salem and Barbara Zdravecky opposed it. Board member David Haddox recused himself from the discussion and vote due to a potential conflict of interest and board member Maureen Cote couldn’t vote because she joined the meeting by phone after Minor gave his staff presentation.

The tie vote means there is no planning board recommendation for the city commission to approve or deny the requested right of way use permit. The permit application is expected to be presented to the commission on Thursday, June 9.

Staff presentation

Minor’s presentation included an overview of the permitting efforts and the pertinent city codes. He also reviewed the zoning and comprehensive plan elements that pertain to Campbell’s property and eight other undeveloped properties on Elm Avenue and elsewhere in the city that share the same Conservation 1 (CON-1) zoning designation.

Minor said the eight remaining undeveloped CON-1 properties could potentially be permitted for development in a similar manner, but each property would have to be evaluated on an individual basis. Those undeveloped CON-1 lots include the 103 Elm property owned by the Jordans and located directly west and seaward of Campbell’s property.

Minor noted outside consultants contracted by the city when the permitting process began several years ago determined 105 Elm to be a buildable area according to city code. He also noted the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) has authorized Campbell to proceed with her plans to construct a beachfront home seaward of state’s Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL).

Minor presented an aerial map that showed the many homes and structures previously built in Anna Maria seaward of the CCCL with FDEP approval.

Planning board reviews 105 Elm right of way permit
The red line in this diagram represents the Coastal Construction Control Line and illustrates the many structures already built seaward of that line. – City of Anna Maria | Submitted

Minor also noted the city previously approved similar road extensions for residential developments at the ends of Maple Street and Park Avenue.

Gagne presentation

When making the applicant’s presentation, Gagne Construction Office Manager Madison Larkin explained how the desired right of way use permit complies with city codes, citing the applicable codes.

Larkin noted Campbell’s property previously received a determination of buildable area from the city, a letter of no objection from the city and an FDEP permit finalized in 2021.

She said 250 mix would be used as the surface material for the street extension and added that the city-approved right of way permit would be submitted to FDEP for final review.

Campbell attended the meeting but did not speak.

Jordan’s comments

During public comment, Wendy Jordan acknowledged the city has a tough decision to make. She said she’s concerned about losing her current view of the Gulf of Mexico but she and her husband will have to live with the commission’s final decision.

Jordan expressed concerns about preserving the existing dune systems, setting a precedent for additional development along the Anna Maria shoreline. She said they have no plans to develop their property at 103 Elm.

Jordan said the Preserve AMI campaign launched in 2021 in opposition to Campbell’s proposed development was never intended to disrespect anyone involved in the permitting process.

Related coverage

 

Permitting efforts continue for 105 Elm Ave.