Proposed Changes to Land Development Code - Parking

[incredible1]

What I heard was Walton COunty says you have to have a certain number of parking spot for every bedroom. And people were building 3 bedroom homes with an office and a den and a sitting area, but after completion its actually becomes a 6br house. Maybe the county is trying to solve a cheating problem.

There certainly are some problems in that area and with parking in general, mostly during tourist season. These proposed ordinances for parking and also even scarier outdoor event ordinance are broad strokes county wide that do not resolve the problems they aim to fix. They do devastate the smaller businesses in areas that don't have exemptions such as Seaside, Alys, etc and that appears to be the goal. If these pass as is, south Walton will not have the artists, musicians, places to eat and stay unless you want resorts and only resorts. Destroying the very thing most people come here to enjoy and get away from a rat race not join one on vacation

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

The parking issue is back.
From a recent email sent by Larry Anchors, President Walton County Small Business Association......


Good morning:

I am writing to share two pieces of important information.

First, I am pleased to report that the Walton County Small Business Association's platform was overwhelmingly adopted by our membership. I will send a separate e-mail with more information about the platform and about our goals and plans.

But today, the WCSBA needs your help once again.

We need you to contact the Walton County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) and the Planning Department, and send a message that you oppose the county's proposed new parking ordinance.

Here's what's going on:

In an attempt to crack down on short term rental homes that do not provide enough parking for tourists (so-called "monster houses"), county staff recently developed a proposed ordinance that would apply to every single house and every single business in Walton County.

You can read the proposed ordinance by opening the attachment.

This proposal goes far beyond just dealing with "monster houses." It impacts virtually every house and every business in Walton County.

Here are just a few examples of what this parking ordinance -- if it is not significantly revised -- could do:

--- If you build a new home that is 2,100 square feet, on a half acre lot or less, you would need to provide four off-street parking spaces at your home. And, at least two of these spots need to be separate from a driveway. It doesn't matter if you only have one car; you need four spots. The larger the house, the more spots you need, even if you don't rent your home out to short-term guests.

--- For existing homeowners, it could be very difficult to sell any home that does not conform to these proposed rules, because any buyer would be significantly limited to what he or she could build on that property.

--- Restaurants, and many other small businesses in Walton County would immediately not conform to this code. That means, that in addition to preventing most businesses from expanding, businesses would be severely restricted in making any alterations to their existing structures and/or be unable to change the design of their structure in the event of a devastating storm.

--- Homeowners and businesses who live North of the Bay would be required to adhere to these rules, too, even though some communities that experience the biggest traffic and parking challenges (like Seaside and Watercolor) would be exempt.

Here's the good news: thanks to efforts by the WCSBA, the commissioners yesterday asked county staff to revise the proposal.

Now, here's what you can do:

First, sign this petition on change.org to let county leaders know that you are deeply concerned about the county's ordinance. Then, post the petition to Facebook (link: http://bit.ly/1RgdQY1) and send it to your employees, family, and friends to sign, as well.

Second, please directly contact the Walton County Planning office, and director Wayne Dyess, at dyewayne@co.walton.fl.us, with this message:

I am writing to encourage you to revise and improve the proposed parking ordinance. As a small business owner in Walton County, and as a resident with employees who also live here, I am seriously concerned about the impact that this proposed ordinance will have on businesses and homes. I encourage you to propose an ordinance that applies narrowly to short term rental homes ONLY, and does not impact our businesses and our families. The existing ordinance, as presented, has the potential to completely upend our local economy. I respectfully urge you to present a narrowly-crafted ordinance to the BCC and to end the uncertainty that has surrounding parking regulations in Walton County for far too long.

* * *

As always, please be respectful and courteous in your e-mails to county staff.

Finally, please know that the WCSBA will lead the fight to defeat this ordinance if it is not dramatically improved.

It is not a time to panic.

It is a time to get engaged (or more engaged!) and get involved. We need your leadership now more than ever.


Sincerely,
Larry Anchors
President

 

[John G]

You bring up some great points about this!

First, you claim that "existing homeowners" will have difficulty selling their home? Because the new rule will limit what they can build? If there's a home, what makes you assume someone will tear it down? Bit of a scare tactic no?

2). The homeowners and businesses North of the Bay will have to follow the rules too. Based on that statement, I'll be looking forward to all homeowners North of the Bay having to follow the Sheriff Departments standard operating procedures for proving private property ownership in the case of trespass violations.

All homeowners up that way better get a new survey, GPS Mark your property lines, etc. All need to play by the rules throughout Walton County.

While it appears some changes may be necessary, the tie in between homeowners and small businesses is not a direct link and is an attempt to generate numbers of panicked homeowners to call / email the BCC.

Parking is one of the largest problems we face here. Restaurants busting at the seems during peak season need to come up with new ways to deal with their "success". Who's going to pay for all the damage to the bike path along 30a, near Stinkys? That's all due to restaurant parking driving back and forth over the pavement there?

As for rental homes, Occupancy Rules will solve that. Why don't we have occupancy rules and does the Small Business group support that?

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

You bring up some great points about this!

First, you claim that "existing homeowners" will have difficulty selling their home? Because the new rule will limit what they can build? If there's a home, what makes you assume someone will tear it down? Bit of a scare tactic no?
.....

I guess when you said "You bring up some great points about this!", that the the word "You" is rhetorical as I am not Larry Anchors, the email author.

I do think that parking is an issue - nobody in their right mind would disagree. But the county should not make a bad situation worse.

I would hope everyone would stay focused on the real problem at hand. And that is the county can force businesses AND homeowners to adhere to the new codes (if adopted) if the property is forced to rebuild. I can certainly understand preventing a business with marginal parking the ability to expand as the expansion would only worsen the situation.

But let's say a fire or hurricane forces the rebuilding of a structure. Then one loses the "grandfather" protection even if you build an identically sized building. In my opinion, the grandfather protection should permanently remain in place in a rebuild situation as well as in the sale of the property.


Actually it must remain in effect.


If a condo association has X existing parking spaces and the building is damaged during a hurricane which requires a rebuild, the new codes could easily require an additional Y parking spaces. That may or may not be possible depending on available land.

It would be difficult for the county to tell the condo owners that they cannot rebuild because they are short 4 spaces. Try explaining that to a mortgage company. And if the county grants an exception in one situation then they would be expected to grant exceptions to others.

Multiply this by many after a financially and emotionally stressful event such as a hurricane, and WE (property owners, mortgage companies, business owners and the county) have a real problem.

Hopefully, the county will realize this, avoid future unnecessary lawsuits and incorporate verbiage to address this very real situation.

 

[John G]

I agree w u 100% on the grandfather issue.

The new requirements should be for future projects.

Local 30a restaurants (most are part of Larry's group), need to solve their own parking problems.

Many "spots" are taken each day by staff. Some park regularly on the R O W. That takes up parking for people wanting to go to the beach, like a mom and her kids from Freeport or DFS.

It's a mess for sure.

Perhaps all the restaurants need to go in and purchase a large off site lot. They can partner up with John Fitch of Sunshine Shuttle and have some transportation. At the cost to the businesses, not the tax payers.

As for rental houses, lets not forget Anchors has a vested interest in that as his business is vacation rentals.

Does anyone know if his group supports occupancy limits on vacation rentals or are they in favor of continuing the "four bedroom, three bath that sleeps 30 and has four parking spots" mentality?

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

So, let's just use One Seagrove Place and Beachcrest Condos as examples. BTW, I have no interest whatsoever in these.

I count approximately 128 2br units at One Seagrove Place. I count less than 165 parking spots based on satellite image. According to the proposed parking rules, they would be required to have 256 spaces (2 x 2br units). That's a shortage of about 91 spaces or 37% .

Beachcrest condos has 60 2br units (I believe) which would require 120 parking places. I count only about 95 parking spaces - a shortage of 25 spaces or about 21%.

It is very evident that MANY MANY existing condos and homes will not be able to meet the new codes. I'm not even thinking about the many existing businesses where people's livelihoods depend on cooperation with the county, not antagonism in the event of a hurricane or other disaster.

So why in the world would the county even think about opening this Pandora's box in regards to "temporary grandfathering"?

 

[Matt J]

Yes the Small Business Association is back without a solution, but plenty of gripes.

As far as grandfathering goes you have to lose everything including a significant portion of the foundation to lose your grandfathering status. If you lose a poured concrete foundation then this county has much bigger problems than parking.

How about instead of just stonewalling any kind of progress the Small Business Association comes up with solutions to parking?

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

Matt, if I didn't know any better, it almost sounds like you're running interference for the county when you said, "How about instead of just stonewalling any kind of progress the Small Business Association comes up with solutions to parking?"

Isn't that the county responsibility? Of course I expect your reply to be that the county is trying to solve the parking and the SBA is "griping" about these so called solutions. But the gest of my comments as well as others is that the county will be royally screwing many property owners AND business owners with the current draft.

You also made a comment that "As far as grandfathering goes you have to lose everything including a significant portion of the foundation to lose your grandfathering status." Are you qualified to make a statement like that? My understanding of "grandfathering" is different than yours when it comes to rebuilding a significantly damaged structure. Are there different types of grandfathering? Matt, these are truly open minded questions.

 

[Bob Wells]

I am going to weigh in here with my 2 cents. I think that if the SBA doesn't like the proposal the county is proposing then realistically they should come up with an alternate proposal that addresses concerns of both sides. It is called compromise, and depending on how you feel about that, it is going to depend on whether you are interested. If that isn't something that can't be worked out and the county proceeds with their plan and the SBA sues, we all lose. If the county prevails then all those small businesses have cut their profit margin, which is already tough in some businesses, and helped pay for a lawyer. My suggestion, and it's only a suggestion, sit down with the county and work something out, because if you lose, based on comments from the SBA those homes and businesses in worst case scenario can't be rebuilt.

 

[Danny Glidewell]

Bob Wells is right on the money. This issue could be worked out by cleaning up language and changing some parts of the proposal. Everyone wins and nobody pays lawyers for something they can work out themselves.