►
From YouTube: Variance Review Board 06112019
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
C
A
C
A
I
will
take
just
a
few
minutes
to
review
tonight's
procedures.
Cases
will
be
called
any
order
that
they
appear
on
the
agenda
when
your
case
number
and
applicants
name
are
called.
Please
stand
in
either
aisle
to
the
side
of
the
room.
To
acknowledge
that
you
are
here,
staff
will
then
give
a
brief
introduction
to
the
board
of
each
application.
A
When
you
approach
the
podium,
please
speak
into
the
microphone
and
state
your
name
address,
and
if
you
have
been
sworn
in,
the
applicant
and/or,
their
agent
will
have
ten
minutes
to
give
testimony
present
witnesses
and
documentation
as
a
part
of
their
presentation.
This
is
your
time
to
present
all
of
your
evidence,
and
you
want
any
audience
wishing
to
speak
in
support
of
or
in
opposition
to.
The
application
will
then
have
three
minutes
each
after
that.
The
board
may
have
an
opportunity
to
ask
questions
regarding
the
application.
A
Finally,
the
applicant
will
have
an
additional
five
minutes
for
a
rebuttal
if
needed.
The
time
periods,
as
stated,
will
be
kept
by
the
chair.
Any
additional
information,
such
as
pictures
or
plans
that
have
not
been
previously
submitted
as
a
part
of
your
petition,
and
you
intend
to
present
at
this
hearing
for
consideration
and
support
of
your
petition,
must
be
individually
presented
and
accepted
by
the
board.
After
acceptance
by
the
board,
you
must
submit
the
item
to
staff
for
it
to
be
entered
in
part
of
a
permanent
record.
A
The
board
bases
its
decision
on
competent
and
substantial
evidence
which
has
presented
this
evening
and
and
which
meets
the
criteria
required
by
the
city's
Code
of
Ordinances.
The
variance
granted
by
the
board
will
be
only
for
what
is
shown
on
the
site
plan
and
will
be
compliant
with
any
terms
and
conditions
stated
in
the
approval
by
the
board.
You
must
have
four
votes
for
the
variance
to
be
approved
if
an
insufficient
vote
is
obtained.
The
case
shall
be
automatically
carried
over
for
consideration
at
the
board's
next
meeting.
A
A
Then
only
three
votes
are
needed
to
deny
an
application
so
to
get
approved
tonight
you
need
four
to
get
denied.
You
only
need
three.
If
your
case
is
continued,
it
will
be
continued
to
either
August
13th
or
July.
Agenda
is
already
full,
so
will
be
continued
to
either
August
13th
public
hearing
or
the
September
10th
public
hearing.
A
If
you
wish
to
appeal
the
variance
review
boards,
the
decision
to
if
you
wish
to
appeal
the
variance
review
Board's
decision
to
the
City
Council,
you
must
file
a
petition
for
review
of
a
board
decision
within
10
business
days
of
the
decision.
If
your
variance
is
granted,
you
will
not
be
able
to
pull
any
permits
until
after
the
10-day
appeal
period
has
passed.
Your
cooperation
will
ensure
that
this
meeting
runs
smoothly
and
will
be
greatly
appreciated
before
we
begin
the
first
case.
Is
there
any
business
regarding
the
agenda
that
staff
would
like
to
address.
D
C
A
D
C
D
C
E
C
C
A
C
A
E
G
D
You
Towanda,
anthem
and
development.
Again
this
is
item
VRB
1918
at
3101
was
Prospect
Road.
This
case
was
heard
in
March
and
it
is
a
continuance.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
rear
yard
from
20
feet,
to
8
feet,
to
construct
a
master,
bedroom
and
bathroom
addition.
The
property
is
owned.
Rs.50
scuse
me
RS
60
and
was
originally
constructed
in
1980,
the
applicant
purchased
the
house
in
2012.
A
tree
consultation
was
conducted
by
staff
in
April
of
2019.
D
A
A
D
D
A
C
C
These
are
the
two
sheds
and
questions
when
they
bought
the
house
in
1960
1976
40
years
ago.
The
shed
to
the
right
was
already
there,
then
approximately
30
years
later,
her
late
husband
while
she
was
at
work,
had
a
company
come
and
build
the
other
shed
and
and
that's
why
there's
two
sheds
and
then
she
did
think
more
about
it
until
the
guy
behind
a
behind
her
got
cited
for
something
and
then
said
well,
she's
got
two
sheds,
and
so
then
she
gets
cited
and
is
going
through
the
process
of
the
paperwork.
C
To
get
everything
done.
She
when
we
did
the
survey.
We
also
found
out
that
the
carport,
which
was
not
part
of
the
violation,
but
it's
part
of
the
variance
needed
some
more
inches
also
and
the
carport
was
there
when
they
bought
the
house
in
1976
and
like
that,
it's
like
we
were
saying
before
it's
nothing
to
do
with
anything.
She
did.
They
bought
the
house
like
that.
They
didn't
know
it
needed
that
variance.
C
C
In
the
last
time
when,
before
we
had
the
continuance
of
this,
there
were
people
that
were
I
just
want
to
address
people,
the
water
people
say
like
the
property
line
and-
and
we
wanted
to
show
that
her
this
is
behind
her
sheds
and
to
try
it
because
we
feel
the
water
comes
into
us
not
out
to
them
and
then
even
behind
those
plants,
there's
there's
dirt
and
stuff
plus
she
runs
pumps
every
time
that
it
rains
and
stuff
like
that
grandma
anything
else.
You
want
to
say.
A
A
C
H
D
C
C
H
F
A
C
A
A
C
A
C
C
A
B
I
think
the
one
that
were
that
they
constructed
there's
an
argument
to
be
made.
Why
is
it
there?
Could
it
be
moved,
but
the
practicality
of
it
is
that
the
one
that
was
already
there
existing
was
there
when
they
bought
it,
and
this
one
matches
that
one
in
the
rear
dimension,
so
to
ask
him
to
move
the
one
that
was
there
when
they
bought.
It
seems
unreasonable
to
ask
him
to
just
to
move
the
one
that
they
built,
which
is
right
next
to
the
other.
B
B
So
when
you
look
at
the
hardships
of
the
site,
then
you
know
maybe
the
there's
an
argument
to
be
made
that
those
sheds
could
be
moved
when
you
look
at
the
practical
difficulty
of
it
and
the
fact
that
they
were
already
you
know
at
least
one
of
them
was
already
there
when
they
purchased
it,
then
I
don't
think
it's
practical
to
ask
them
to
move
it
10
inches
or
to
just
move
one
of
them,
10
inches
or
any
other.
You
know,
scenario
that
we
might
come
up
with
so
I
would
I
would
support
this
variance.
H
To
vest
an
existing
carport
and
accessory
structures
and
I
would
base
that
on
the
fact
that
these
all
three
of
these
structures
have
been
in
place
for
for
30
years
or
more,
two
of
which,
of
course,
were
not
placed
there
by
the
the
applicant
and
therefore
I
would
approve,
or
at
least
I,
submit.
The
motion
for
your
approval.
Thanks.
Okay,.
A
C
D
Anthony
land
development-
this
is
item
V,
RP
1940.
The
property
addresses
3102
north
Woodrow
Avenue.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
rear
yard
from
20
feet
to
14.2
feet
due
to
a
lot
split
reconfiguration
to
allow
for
the
construction
of
a
new
single-family
residence.
The
property
is
owned,
RS
50
and
was
originally
constructed
in
1946,
the
applicant
purchased
the
property
in
2018.
A
tree
consultation
was
conducted
by
staff
in
February
of
2019.
D
D
A
A
I
I
The
idea
so
because
it's
a
quarter
a
lot
actually
both
corners
are
considered
front
according
to
the
department
Department.
So
when
we
split
the
Lots,
then
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
turn
woodrow
into
the
front
right
now.
This
area
right
here
where
we're
trying
to
best
from
20
feet
down
to
14
feet.
It's
considered
the
back,
but
also
the
side
yard,
from
from
what
I
understood
from
the
permitting
board,
so
we're
just
trying
to
vest
it
from
20
feet
down
to
14
feet
to
keep
the
garage.
That's
that's
sitting
there
on
the
house.
I
B
If
this
lot
was
not
split
and
understanding
that
new
construction
makes,
you
bring
things
up
to
come
up
to
code,
but
let's
say
that
the
lot
wasn't
split,
it
would
still
be
non-conforming
as
it
sits.
Is
that
correct?
It's
not
the
split,
that's
causing
the
non-conformance.
The
split
ish
is
causing
it
to
be
reviewed
again.
D
D
D
D
A
B
A
J
A
B
Listen
the
odd
one
but
I
think
mr.
Brown
kind
of
summed
it
up
for
me.
If
you
leave
it
exactly
how
it
is,
and
you
don't
split
the
lot
and
you
leave
the
house,
you've
got
a
huge
front
yard
encroachment.
They
don't
to
do
anything
about
it,
because
it's
existing,
but
it's
much
more
of
an
encroachment
than
what
happens
when
you
split
it.
So
you're,
talking
about
7
feet
needing
to
be
20
versus
14
feet
needing
to
be
20,
doesn't
seem
reasonable
to
tear
down
an
existing
house
when
it's
non-conforming
in
either
state.
B
A
F
Just
I'll
just
say
this
I
never
see
a
reason
to
waste
a
good
structure,
it's
in
good
shape,
and
if
it's
you
know
if
it's
for
the
most
part
in
compliance
and
just
by
changing
the
configuration
of
the
lot
as
to
other
board
members
for
you,
you're
changing
you're,
just
switching
from
one
non-conformance
to
another.
So
it
doesn't
seem
that
problem
assistant
this.
C
Of
bucks,
first
of
all,
the
house
was
built
in
1946,
so
whoever
is
next
to
a
buddy
in
the
backyard,
but
now
backyard
obviously
doesn't
have
a
problem
that
it's
been
there
for
a
long
time.
Second
of
all,
there's
an
alley
on
that
side
which
hasn't
been
vacated
to
my
knowledge.
There's
no,
nobody
has
said
him,
but
that
just
adds
a
buffer
for
this
property
in
the
neighborhood,
so
I
would
approve
it.
B
Move
that
the
variance
request
for
KVR
be
1940.
The
property
located
at
31
at
a
to
Northwood
drove
an
Avenue,
be
granted
as
depicted
on
the
site
plan,
presented
the
public
hearing
for
a
reduction
in
the
rear
yard
from
20
feet
to
14.2
feet
with
the
encroachment
of
views
and
gutters
based
upon
the
applicant
presenting
competent,
substantial
evidence
and
the
record
at
this
public
hearing
of
a
necessary
hardship
or
practical
difficulty.
A
D
Towanda
Anthony
land
development,
missus
item
the
earthy
1963,
the
property
address
this
4902
once
to
Idaho
Street.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce,
decide
the
art
setback
from
seven
feet
to
fifty
nine
inches
to
best
existing
conditions.
The
lot
is
owned
rs.50
and
the
house
was
constructed
in
1967.
The
applicant
purchased
a
property
in
2010.
C
A
K
A
K
They
rehab
the
property
and
did
some
improvements,
modernization
to
the
interior,
but
did
not
change
the
configuration
or
the
orientation
of
the
house
from
the
way
it
currently
exists.
I
first
want
to
address
the
hardship
criteria.
First
of
all,
we
did
some
record
research
and
we
could
not
obtain
from
the
county
any
building
permits.
We
could
not
determine
whether
the
county,
I'm,
sorry,
the
city,
the
city
of
Tampa.
We
could
not
determine
whether
the
city
had
granted
any
variances
at
the
time
of
construction,
because
that
information
is
not
available.
K
However,
historical
property
records
do
show
that
this
property
is
in
a
subdivision
that
was
planted
in
1892
in
1955.
It
was
acquired
by
Mamie,
Holden
and
property.
Appraiser
records
show
that
the
house
again
was
constructed
in
1967
clerk
of
court
records,
show
that
Mamie
Holden
paid
real
estate
taxes
in
1968
and
also
that
records
suggested.
It
was
her
homestead
at
that
time,
so
she
was
living
there.
Then
in
1980,
Mamie
Holden's
husband
convey
the
property
to
himself
and
his
granddaughter,
so
it
was
in
the
same
family
all
that
time.
K
This
is
a
community
that's
rapidly
changing.
There
are
new
homes
being
constructed
and
new
homes
that
have
been
recently
constructed.
This
is
one
of
the
few
homes
in
this
community
that
are
apparently
original
construction
or
close
to
it.
In
this,
in
this
old,
very
old
subdivision,
the
house
was
constructed
facing
Idaho,
even
though
that
was
the
the
widest
part
of
the
lot.
K
Granting
the
variance
would
also
just
vest
the
existing
structure
and
preserve
the
property
rights
of
the
owner
and
the
residents
who
live
there.
Now
the
residents
who
live
there
are
tenants
and
if
the
variance
is
not
granted,
then
the
property
owner
will
be
subject
to
losing
property
rights
and
loss
of
property
value.
K
So
that's
the
front
of
the
property,
the
way
it
looks
today
and
that's
again
facing
Idaho.
This
is
the
side
and
I
should
say
the
front
of
the
house.
This
is
the
side
of
the
house,
and
this
photograph
shows
the
new
construction
to
own
a
lot
to
the
south.
So
there's
a
new
home
that
just
recently
been
built
on
the
south.
These
photographs
show
a
little
closer
view
of
the
property
boundary.
There's
just
a
few
inches
between
this
existing
house
and
the
actual
property
boundary.
K
A
A
J
My
name
is
Rhonda
trust,
Nelson
and
I
come
as
a
friend
to
miss
black
and
to
the
owner
and
I'm.
The
former
owner
of
this
property
I
had
pictures,
but
my
pictures
then
come
up
but
I'm
coming
to
speak
as
goodwill
for
the
property
and
in
1987
when
I
purchased
this
property
I
had
the
properties
you
know,
I
put
that
fence
up
and
I
had
the
property
line.
Everything
made
up.
I
brought
the
rock
behind
the
property.
J
Confusion
came
with
for
consumers,
company
I'm,
still
fighting
this
battle,
not
and
after
we've
come
to
get
my
voice.
Pleasant
free
will
that
everything
respectfully
be
children,
because
when
I
first
brought
the
property,
but
this
much
from
the
back
of
the
house
or
the
property
line
when
I
brought
the
property
behind
there.
That's
how
the
fence
was
extended.
I
wasn't
smart
enough
to
put
the
fence
right
most
of
the
box,
but
still
I'm
still
fighting
that
battle,
that
the
house,
the
back
of
the
house,
don't
be.
J
J
A
J
A
M
C
C
This
is
how
close
the
structure
is
to
our
home,
and
we
feel
that
this
presents
a
significant
hardship
because
of
the
egress.
That's
needed
for
fire
protection
should
something
happen
as
well
as
you
can
see
that
sloped
roof
any
of
the
rain
or
storms
that
come
that
water
is
coming
directly
onto
our
property
as
well.
As
you
can
see,
the
structure
is
dilapidated
and
does
need
repair
regardless.
So
we
don't
feel
that
that
would
be
a
hardship
for
the
owner
of
the
property,
and
it
is
a
rental
property.
A
D
A
E
A
H
We
have
one
question
for
Miss,
Hadley
I'm,
looking
at
the
survey
and
the
diagram
of
the
property,
and
it
appears
that
this
appendage,
which
comes
out
on
the
west
side,
which
they
were
just
showing
the
photos
up,
it
looks
like
that's
five
point:
seven
feet
deep.
So
therefore
it
looks
like
the
entire
structure
falls
within
the
setback,
not
just
the
appendage.
That's
exactly.
L
It
looks
like
it
was
there
when,
when
we,
when
we
bought
the
house,
it
looked
like
it
was
you
know
it's
the
laundry
bathroom
back,
you
know,
I,
don't
know
when
the
previous
owner
had
it
it
looked
like
it'd
been
there,
it
was
a
same
wood
same
stuff
that
was
in
there
from
the
rest,
the
house
so
the
best
of
my
life.
It
was
there.
F
K
F
L
F
B
F
G
L
K
L
And
at
the
time
of
their
construction,
the
Builder
called
me
about
the
fence
that
was
there
and
asked
if
he
could
put
it
right
there
and
I
said
it
was
fine,
whatever
he
needed
a
happy
to
help,
and
so
you
know
he
did
call
me
about
the
fence.
He
said
it
looks
like
it's
close
to
your
your
house
and
I
said
it's
fine
wherever
you
need
to
put
it.
That's
behind.
L
Yeah
there
it's
their
new
fence,
yeah
I
had
a
old
chain-link
fence
that
was
there
and
they
wanted
to
put
up
a
you
know,
a
six
foot,
PVC
fence
and
tear
my
fence
down,
because
there
was
no
room
to
put
both.
So
I
said
that
you
know
that's
fine,
we'll
tear
it
down
and
then
they'll
put
their
new
PVC
fence
up.
A
F
F
C
We
were
under
contract
with
the
Builder
and
the
Builder.
It
was
sort
of
a
I
expect
semis
home.
Yes,
so
they
were.
They
went
to
the
city
to
make
sure
that
they
had
the
proper
sight
lines
and
then,
of
course,
the
where
the
how
our
house
saw
sat
on
our
lot.
So
our
concern
is
that
somebody
approved
for
there
to
be
a
house
sitting
where
our
house
is,
and
so
you
know
that
needs
to
be
taken
into
consideration-
that
there
is
a
structure
impeding
that
property.
When.
C
F
F
C
F
F
C
C
C
F
K
It
was
mentioned
by
the
neighboring
property
owner
that
the
house
is
a
rental
and
that's
true.
It
is,
but
the
house
is
not
cited
for
being
a
rental
property
and
it
is
fine
for
the
house
to
be
a
rental
property.
It
was
also
mentioned
that
the
house
needs
painting.
The
house
was
not
cited
for
needed
painting.
The
house
was
not
cited
for
any
of
those
reasons:
the
city
of
Tampa
Comprehensive,
Plan,
land-use
policy.
K
K
Granting
of
this
variance.
This
house
has
existed
since
1967.
It
hasn't
hurt
anybody,
it
hasn't
encroached
on
anyone's
property.
There
was
a
chain-link
fence,
it's
been
removed
prior
owner
said
she
had
that
put
up,
that's
not
the
problem.
The
problem
seems
to
be
that
the
neighbors,
the
new
home
owners,
don't
like
looking
at
the
old
home
and
well
I,
can
understand
that.
That's
not
the
standard
here.
The
standard
is
hardship
by
this
current
owner
and
we've
addressed
those
hardship
issues.
There
is
a
hardship
and
the
variance
should
be
granted.
Thank
you.
F
Well,
it
took
a
while
for
me
to
figure
out
why
we
were
here
and
why
we
were
hearing
this,
because
normally
we
don't
see
cases
in
which
homes
were
built
in
1967,
so
pushing
50,
60
years
or
50
years
or
putting
on
that
right.
But
you
know
normally
we
don't.
We
don't
encounter
these
things
because
they
they're
either
vested
or
nobody
really
cares
about
it.
F
But
here
we
have
a
situation
or
a
builder
built
a
house
on
the
house
next
on
the
lot
next
door
and
perhaps
put
it
too
close,
but
I'm
reminded
of
instances
where
folks
will
come
in
and
build
houses
next
to
stadiums
or
airports
and
then
complain
about
the
noise
or
complain
about
the
existing
situation.
That's
been
there
for
longer
than
they
I'm,
not
saying
that.
That's
an
analogous
situation,
you're
saying
that
that's
something
that
strikes
me
as
similar.
F
E
E
Economic
hardship
is
not
a
hardship
that
would
justify
a
variance
and
I
think
you
are
hearing
this,
because
it
is
not
a
legal
nonconformity,
and
that
is
why
you
are
hearing
this
application
and
why
they
are
not
going
through
the
formal
determination
that
it
is
illegal
nonconformity.
Sorry,
it's
just
one
of
those
clarifications
on
the
record
and.
F
B
D
E
B
So
that
was
the
point
I
was
driving
towards.
We
don't
know
whether
or
not
the
city
permitted
this,
because
there's
no
record
for
or
against,
and
we
don't
have
a
record
that
the
city
did
permit
another
structure
and
we
don't
have
a
record
that
the
city
did
permit.
This
structure
certainly
is
an
odd
one,
but
at
the
same
time
it
was
the
60s
and
we
don't
have
any
records
from
the
60s.
So
it's
not
legally
non-conforming,
but
we
don't
know
why
that's
my
point.
A
B
F
You
have
to
you
have
to
explain
this
to
us
again
because,
as
we've
always
talked
about
with
the
site
plans,
if
they
go
outside
of
the
footprint
of
this
home,
that's
a
change
in
the
site
plan
right.
So
if
they
build
this
the
same
structure
except
they
double
the
size
of
structure
and
continue
to
run
at
point
five,
nine
inches.
E
A
E
Illustrate
this
so
the
area
that
is
shown
within
the
set
back
so
it
would
be
this
area
here
is
the
stood
for.
If
you
approve
the
variance,
this
area
is
vested,
it
can
be
torn
out.
It
can
be
rebuilt,
however,
keep
in
mind
that
they
can
build
a
structure
that
occupies
all
of
the
setback
area,
plus
this
right.
B
E
A
A
E
A
E
K
A
K
K
A
Since
we're
open
for
public
hearing,
how
many
other
bathrooms
are
in
this
house,
there's
two
total
bathrooms
one
there
and
then
one
other
one.
Okay
and
this
this
protrusion
is,
is
a
full
bath.
Half
bath
with
that
full
bath
with
the
laundry
washer.
A
K
Because
there
was
discussion
about
whether
this
is
a
non-conforming,
we
did
explore
that
we
understand
the
code
was
in
existence.
At
the
time
this
house
was
built,
it's
possible
variants
was
granted.
Then
the
house
was
permitted,
but
those
records
the
city
has
informed
us.
Those
records
are
not
accessible,
they're
in
a
warehouse
somewhere,
but
they're
not
accessible,
so
we
can't
get
to
them
in
either
Kansas
City.
A
B
A
F
F
A
D
D
Me
37
inch
grant
relocated
within
the
seventh
foot
side
yard
setback
to
construct
a
single
family,
residence
per
Section,
13
45,
a
grand
tree
or
protective
trees
shall
be
permitted
to
be
removed
if
the
grand
tree
or
protected
tree
denies
or
precludes
reasonable
use
of
a
parcel
of
property.
Reasonable
use
would
also
include
the
showing
of
alternative
designs
that
were
not
feasible
to
pursue.
The
lot
is
own
Rs
50
and
the
house
was
constructed
in
1953.
The
applicant
purchased
the
property
in
2018
a
tree
consultation.
D
Natural
resources
found
the
request
consistent
and
had
the
following
comments.
A
tree
consultation
was
done
in
January
2019
to
discuss
the
possibility
of
constructing
a
single-family
residence
around
the
37
inch
grand
tree
Live
Oak.
The
live
oak
tree
was
rated
at
the
eighth
and
was
considered
a
grand
tree.
A
two-story
home
built
without
adjustments
would
require
a
large
limb,
estimated
at
16
to
20
inches
to
be
removed.
The
large
cut
would
lead
to
effective
removal
of
the
tree
to
keep
the
tree.
D
D
N
N
The
the
issue
that
Natural
Resources
encountered
when
we
did
the
tree
consultation
was
located
with
this
limb.
Here
this
limb
is
about
16
to
20
inches
of
diameter.
We
we
went
out
to
the
property.
We
made
the
conclusion
that
the
limb
cannot
be
removed
completely
and
the
tree
would
survive.
So
we
considered
that
effective
removal
if
that
limb
was
taken
off.
N
So
we
took
some
measurements
starting
at
16
feet,
and
then
we
spanned
over
18
feet
to
see
how
far
we
could
actually
get
before
we
can
avoid
the
limb
and
we
came
up
with
18
feet
from
the
limbus
from
the
diagram
it's
located
here
and
we
spanned
up
in
the
highest
we
could
go
was
26
feet.
So
that's
how
we
came
to
the
conclusion
of
a
two-story
home
would
be
difficult
to
build
under
these
conditions.
N
B
A
E
A
A
E
F
E
C
G
G
G
It
looks
like
if
the
tree
remains
there
that
it
will
be
very
difficult
to
be
distort
the
two-story
home
and
it
would
be
in
some
areas
very,
very
narrow,
because
I
have
the
seven
feet,
setback
on
both
sides
and
if
I
need
to
stay
away
from
the
tree
about
10
to
15
feet.
That
gives
me
only
like
21
feet
in
some
areas
in
some
areas,
even
less
than
that.
So
this
is
the
hard
shape
that
it's
just
impossible.
G
G
G
One
comment
that
I
would
like
to
make
if
I
wear.
This
is
a
corner
lot,
so
putting
the
garage
can
only
be
either
to
the
left
of
the
property.
I
cannot
do
it
too
close
to
the
arm
corner
over
here
cannot
because
of
the
road
MALDI.
If
I
were
to
put
the
collage
as
an
independent
or
stay
loans
structure
in
the
back,
then
it
will
take
my
entire
backyard
and
then
my
side
yard
will
be
my
supposed
privacy,
but
then
I
will
have
no
privacy
on
the
other
side
of
the
street.
G
G
H
H
G
H
G
G
The
question
I'm
sorry
this:
this
is
considerably
narrowing
my
property
and
over
here
it's
only
twenty
one
and
that's
with
the
garage
indicate,
but
if
I
take
this
one,
for
example,
which
will
be
again
it's
twenty
one
in
here,
it's
only
five
in
here,
maintaining
the
setbacks,
the
garage
and
over
here
I,
don't
even
have
a
flow
to
D
to
this
part
of
the
house.
So
it's
really
hinders
my
ability
to
develop
it
in
the
way
that
creating.
H
A
F
F
G
Is
about
42
feet
from
there
from
the
property
line
in
the
back?
Okay,
so
even
if
I
were
to
assume
over
the
garage
to
the
back,
it
will
fall
on
my
tree
again.
So
I
cannot
built
right
on
the
journey
to
still
have
the
10
or
15
feet
away
so
anyway,
that
I
will
go
around
it
if
I
were
to
preserve
it.
I
just
couldn't
find
any
way
to
to
do
that.
G
F
F
G
I
think
that
originally
what
happened
when
we
discussed
it
when
the
operates
was
there
to
look
at
things?
That
was
the
only
time
they
based
on
25
feet,
but
it's
actually
only
20
feet.
They
said
back
in
the
font,
so
originally
it
was
based
on
the
25
feet,
which
is
incorrect.
But
if
we're
to
move
the
garage,
let's
say
even-
and
they
talked
to
the
phone
I
said
we'll-
have
a
very
narrow
pass
through
it
passage
way
over
here,
and
it
will
still
not
give
me
the
flow
to
our
house
and.
F
F
G
A
A
Any
other
comments
miss
long,
no
I'm,
probably
a
little
more
familiar
with
the
new
code
than
the
rest
of
the
board
members.
That's
not
necessarily
the
case
what
you
just
think
so
yeah!
Well,
no
and
now
it's
not
time
but
but
the
the
new
code
does
take
in
too
small.
Some
small
lots
this
by
square
footage
of
the
size.
A
lot
would
fall
into
the
category,
but
there
are
other
criteria
that
would
come
into
play.
A
Physical
criteria
as
to
whether
or
not
this
tree
would
actually
meet
the
criteria
to
come
out
without
coming
in
front
of
the
vrb.
So
there
gonna
be
some
borderline
cases
like
this
one,
probably
that
we
are
still
coming
here,
okay,
so,
but
there
are
other
things
that
change
in
the
new
code,
which
really
have
nothing
to
do
with
the
vrv.
So
yeah
I
just
concurred
with
what
you
said.
It's
a
small
lot,
it's
an
unfortunate
it's
a
great
tree
in
a
long
wrong
location.
A
They
are
preserving
a
very
large
corner
tree,
which
is
great
to
hear
and
the
mitigation
requirement
on
this.
It's
gonna
be
inch
for
inch,
which
is
you
know,
a
lot
of
trees
and
or
monies
paid
into
the
tree
fund.
That
would
go
back
into
the
neighborhood
and
not
just
help
your
property,
but
help
surrounding
properties
too
so
I
mean
I
could
support
this.
So
emotional.
B
L
B
Got
it
restart
move
that
the
variance
for
quit
request
for
case
vrb
1965
for
the
property
located
at
2901
West
San
Carlos
Street,
be
granted
as
depicted
on
the
site
plan,
presented
the
public
hearing
for
removal
of
a
grand
tree
based
upon
the
petitioner,
meaning
the
burden
of
proof
that
the
tree
denies
or
precludes
reasonable
use
of
a
parcel
of
property.
With
regard
the
ten
factors
for
return
for
determining
reasonable
use,
as
set
forth
in
Section
thirteen.
A
G
D
On
dancing
land
development,
this
is
item
VRB
1966.
The
property
addresses
1309
West
Main
Street.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
remove
five
grand
trees
to
allow
for
a
mid-rise,
mixed-use
multifamily
development
per
Section.
Thirteen,
forty
five,
a
grand
tree
or
protected
tree
shall
be
permitted
to
be
removed
if
the
Grand
tree
or
protected
tree
denies
or
precludes
reasonable
use
of
a
parcel
of
property.
Reasonable
use
would
also
include
the
showing
of
alternative
designs
that
were
not
feasible
to
pursue.
D
The
applicant
is
also
seeking
to
reduce
the
percentage
of
trees
retained
from
fifty
percent
to
forty
two
point:
four
percent
for
property
over
an
acre
to
allow
for
the
redevelopment
of
the
site.
The
property
is
owned
in
MU,
thirty-five
neighborhood
mixed-use,
the
property
has
been
owned
by
the
city
of
Tampa
Housing
Authority.
Since
the
1940s.
D
The
lot
was
demolished
in
2018
and
is
being
developed
in
a
public-private
partnership
with
the
applicant
to
revitalize
the
area.
Natural
resources
found
the
request
consistent,
but
have
the
following
comments.
The
applicant
is
requesting
a
variance
to
remove
five
non-hazardous
grant
trees
out
of
a
total
of
eleven
on
site
to
develop
multifamily
mixed-use
income
housing
and
associated
infrastructure.
C
D
A
A
N
A
N
Much
they're
mostly
live
oaks,
there's
some
palms
on
the
site.
The
the
West
River
project
there
were
trees
that
were
built
around
buildings.
Trees
that
were
planted
around
buildings
I
would
assume
that
that
was
due
to
the
conditions
at
that
time,
where
you
know,
AC
units
were
not
necessarily
available
for
all
of
the
units,
so
instead
the
trees
provided
the
cooling
that
was
needed
on
those
sites.
I'm.
A
A
O
Evening,
Jake
Kramer
with
stern
goober
Miller
for
we
Saxons
redirect
an
applicant
and
I
have
been
sworn
just
wanted
to
give
you
kind
of
a
bird's
eye
view
of
this
project.
This
is
a
massive
redevelopment
that
you've
probably
read
about
on
the
west
bank
here
in
the
city
of
Tampa,
and
we've
got
a
representative
from
Tampa
Housing
Authority
here
tonight,
because
I
want
him
to
give
you
some
some
background
of
of
this
project.
There's
a
couple
of
unusual
things
that
just
want
to
start
off
with
with
this
application.
O
The
first
one
is
that
it's
actually
that
it's
even
before
you,
because,
generally
with
a
large-scale
redevelopment,
especially
an
infill
redevelopment
project,
these
projects
in
the
city
would
normally
go
through
a
PD
process
and
and
and
the
three
issues
would
be
her
for
City
Council.
The
difference
here
is
that
sort
of
the
city
was
proactive
and
and
that
the
rezoning
is
in
place
for
the
mixed-use
development.
So
that's
why
the
tree
issues
on
this
large-scale
redevelopment
are
becoming
coming
here
tonight.
O
O
This
has
also
been
in
been
in
several
news
articles,
but
in
yellow
is
a
plume
plume
of
contaminations
chlorinated
solvents
from
a
former
chemical
manufacturer
near
the
interstate,
and
we
started
working
with
DEP
to
figure
out
how
and
whether
the
site
to
be
redeveloped
back
in
2016.
So
DEP
has
the
oversight
authority
for
how
the
site
gets
redeveloped.
We
worked
with
them
extensively.
O
We
also
worked
with
Southwest
Florida,
Water,
Management
dish
and
part
of
their
approval
process
was
overseeing
where
the
utilities
were
going
to
be
sited,
because
the
the
idea
here
is
that
when
you
have
this
plume
of
contaminants,
it's
it's
it's
safe
for
four
people
to
live
there,
but
you
don't
want
stormwater
ponds
because
you
don't
want
to
affect
the
groundwater,
and
so
we've
had
the
site.
We
have
very
limited
locations
for
where
to
site
our
stormwater
ponds.
So
this
is
one
of
the.
O
This
is
the
second
piece
of
the
development
plan
that
was
shown
so
so
you
can
see
we
cited
the
stormwater
pond
to
stay
out
of
the
plume
and
and
really
that
was
a
requirement
of
working
with
DDP
and
the
Water
Management
District
over
the
past.
You
know
almost
four
years
so
with
that
I'm
gonna
turn
it
over
and
I.
O
J
Evening
leo
more
Tampa
housing
authority,
5301
West,
Cypress
Street
as
the
applicant
and
I
wanted
to
put
the
site
plan
up
just
to
sort
of
give
you
a
better
perspective
as
to
where
the
stormwater
pond
is
here,
as
well
as
there's
three
trees
that
are
located
within
this
area
and
then
the
one
tree
at
t6,
so
T
six
and
parcel
T
three
other
two
parcels
that
are
the
subject
of
this
vo.
This
is
part
of
a
massive
44-acre
redevelopment
of
the
Old
North
Boulevard
homes
site
that
was
built
in
the
early
1940s.
J
Our
developer
partner
related
as
well
as
Stearns
Weaver,
have
worked
Hollis
and
our
initial
instructions
to
them,
as
we
have
for
all
of
our
redevelopment,
is
to
save
that
canopy
to
the
greatest
extent
feasible.
You
see
that
reflective
on
all
three
developments
that
we've
done
crucially
important
to
us,
so
we
come
for
variants
very,
very
rarely
and
we
do
try
to
work
around
those
trees,
but
in
the
interest
of
time
to
stay
within
our
ten
minutes.
I
want
these
guys
to
talk
about
the
technical
aspects
of
this
plan.
M
Thank
you
much
David
Smith
401
East
Jackson,
Street,
Suite
2100
planet
with
stearns,
weaver
miller,
as
indicated
by
the
previous
speakers.
This
is
part
of
a
math
West
River
master
plan.
It's
supposed
to
be
a
mid
rise,
high
density,
mixed
use,
community,
not
the
old
Varrick
style
that
was
there
before,
and
because
of
that
too
presented
some
practical
difficulties.
Infrastructure
had
to
be
put
in.
M
We
have
Brooke
streets,
we
have
tree-lined
canopies,
so
the
developer,
even
though
the
NMU
35
and
NMU
35
zoning
did
not
take
into
account
the
tree
canopy
that
currently
exists
in
when
they
developed
the
regulations.
The
developer
has.
The
developer
is
made
tires
lefferts
to
identify
the
the
prominent
trees
to
route
an
infrastructure
through
the
project
in
order
to
avoid
as
many
trees
as
possible
to
locate
the
stormwater
in
the
most
appropriate
location
in
order
to
provide
for
that
situation,
so
I'll
use
the
site
plan
that
was
discussed
by
staff.
M
M
M
Thank
you,
one
structure,
you
know
precast
to
put
it
in
place,
however,
if
we
did
that,
obviously
would
it
would
ruin
the
core
of
these
grand
trees
that
are
right
in
the
center
of
the
project
and
some
of
the
most
significant
species,
so
the
garages
were
split
into
two
two
pieces:
much
more
expensive
to
do,
but
much
better
for
the
preservation
of
the
trees.
When
you
look
at
the
trees
that
we
have
around
the
perimeter
of
the
property,
these
buildings
cannot
be
pushed
towards
them.
They
had
to
be
pushed
away.
M
As
you
push
the
buildings
away,
you
can
see
the
outline
of
several
of
these
redesigned
structures,
and
these
are
multi-story
structures,
I.
Think
four
to
five.
These
eight
story.
Excuse
me
eight
story,
structures
and
these
eight
story
structures
this
whole
sites,
like
a
Rubik's
Cube.
You
know
you
slide
one
this
way,
then
the
utilities
move.
If
you
slide
it
the
other
way.
This
other
building
gets
impacted,
so
what
we've
done
is
we've
we've
put
the
four
corners
out
here.
M
M
Percent
fifty
percent
of
the
trees,
you
know
over
50
percent
of
the
trees
that
are
being
removed
or
palms,
so
very
small
percentage
of
the
trees
were
actually
having
removed
or
actually
canopy
trees.
So,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
we're
gonna
have
still
that
canopy
throughout
the
community,
we're
gonna
have
tree-lined
streets,
we're
gonna,
have
infrastructure
out
of
the
plane
and
all
those
things
together.
You
know
indicate
the
developer's
interest
in
keeping
the
trees
and
women
and
the
impacts.
M
M
It
has
to
go
into
a
stormwater
system
and
connect
into
the
main
trunk,
that's
running
through
the
site,
so
we
have
utility
impacts
that
will
be
running
underneath
that
root
system,
and
we
just
do
not
believe
the
tree
will
survive
that
type
of
construction
and
also
as
we're
coming
in
here
with
footers
and
foundations.
We
believe
there
will
also
be
root,
root
impacts
that
would
be
negative
to
definitely
impact
the
tree.
M
We
love
to
save
it,
but
we
believe
with
those
impacts,
it's
only
prudent
ask
for
its
removal
and
in
light
of
the
fact
that
we're
only
removing
three
trees
on
this
site
and
maintaining
you
know
essentially
across
the
two
parcels,
like
11
grand
trees,
plus
significant
other
ones.
The
point
that
shouldn't
be
lost
also
is
because
of
the
size
of
the
trees
that
we're
maintaining
in
this
site.
We
have
high
removal,
but
we
have
no
mitigation.
We
actually
have
a
tree
credit
I.
Think
that's
all
my
time,
but
I
believe
you
know.
M
The
development
has
really
gone
to
great
extent
to
try
to
preserve
these
trees,
and
this
won't
be
the
last
time
because
there's
other
developments
you
know
come
on
in
this
this
system
is,
we
know
what
the
the
buildings
are
going
to
look
like
will
likely
have
to
come
back,
but
this
is
the
first
phase.
We
have
funded
buildings
and
we're
really
on
a
time
crunch
to
get
this
approved,
be
glad
to
answer
any
questions
appreciate
your
time.
Thank
you.
A
B
B
M
The
front
would
be
facing
the
street.
The
road-
and
this
is
this
street
by
the
way-
has
a
very
large
canopy
coverage
on
the
front
that
also
there's
a
power
line
running
through
the
center
when
we
looked
at
this
particular
site
because
of
the
the
construction
of
the
storm
water
pipe
and
then,
as
you
come
in
and
actually
start
constructing
pads
and
put
the
utilities
from
the
townhomes,
we
just
thought
did
not
believe
that
this
was
going
to
survive.
All
the
construction
that
was
gonna
have.
B
To
hurt
so
this
is
gonna
sound,
like
a
really
annoying
question
and
I
know
it,
but
I'm
talking
about
the
tree
that
North
I'm
just
picturing,
this
enormous
enormous
retention,
pond
right
next
to
row,
houses
and
I
saw
there's
some
buildings
to
the
north
that
look
on
that
retention.
Pond
and
I.
Don't
know
how
big
of
a
live
oak.
It
is
what
I
was
thinking,
how
nice
it
would
be
to
have
at
least
one
nice
tree
canopy
hanging
over
this
big
expansive
like
a
desert
of
water
and
I'm.
B
An
architect
I
have
some
idea
of
what
it
takes
to
do.
Something
like
that.
You
have
to
build
a
decent
amount
of
land
around
it
to
support
the
root
structure
and
either
determine
if
you
had
enough
water
retention
or
if
you
had
to
make
it.
You
know
four
inches
deeper
to
make
up
the
difference
in
volume
or
whatever.
But
anyway,
that's
the
only
tree.
B
I
was
wondering
about
the
other
ones
makes
sense
to
me
tree
89
I
get
what
you're
saying
about
the
utilities
and
and
the
foundations
and
everything
that
are
gonna
be
immediately
around
it.
It's
not
a
deal
breaker
for
me
either
way.
I
was
just
thinking,
god,
I
would
hate
to
live
there,
get
that
retention
pond
so
barren,
surrounded
with
like
marsh
well.
O
M
Yeah
I
think
the
first
thing
one
point
of
us
on
the
tree
side
is
while
there
will
be
a
large
retention
pond
up
on
this
track,
there,
a
significant
recover
down
what
was
old,
spruce
tree
and
that's
the
schools.
The
school,
those
across
both
the
school
middle
school
elementary
school
are
on
the
other
side
of
that
street.
There's
significant
tree
canopy,
that
is
within
the
right-of-way,
that
yeah
there'll
be
an
expanse
of
water,
but
you're
not
going
to
be
just
looking
straight
across
into
nothing.
M
A
A
M
M
What
you
have
is
you
you,
this
is
the
lowest
part
of
the
site.
We
have
the
DEP
conceptual
permit.
That
basically
says
hey.
This
is
where
can
go
so
lowest
part
of
the
site,
there's
already
outfall
structures
there
from
the
city
stormwater
system,
so
it
is
not
more
than
the
logical
place
for
it
is
it's.
C
M
Well
and
I
have
my
engineer:
I,
don't
know
what
happened
tonight.
He
was
already
here
tonight,
but
that
was
one
of
my
questions.
I
text
them
is
that
you
know
we
had
Phil
on
other.
You
know
there's
a
lot
of
Phil
issues
coming
our
way
with
the
new
FEMA
maps.
We
don't
think
that
that
is
an
issue
here,
but
it
if
it
is,
it
would
just
exacerbate
the
situation.
So.
A
M
We
go
there
yeah
there
we
go.
Thank
you.
So
we
have
t3,
which
is
this
block
right
here.
Then
this
is
t6.
So
as
the
phase
we
come
down
in
the
future
and
again
this
these
master
plans
have
evolved
over
time
or
so.
This
is
where
the
pond
is.
This
is
where
the
townhomes
are.
This
is
t3
the
the
next
Lots
coming
in
this
one's
under
construction
right
now,
the
Renaissance
there's
a
rehab
occurring
right
here
in
the
old
Bethune
towers,
so
they're
on
their
own
block.
M
It's
also
one
of
the
blocks
that
have
probably
the
least
trees
coverage
of
all.
There
was
no
requirements
for
any
variances
or
mitigations
on
it,
so
the
next
ones
come
over.
It's
likely
that
these
blocks
will
be
the
next
activity
that
will
be
occurring
likely,
the
one
to
our
east
and
this
one.
While
it
shows
you
know
open,
open
space
or
recreation
area
associated
with
maybe
the
school
relocating.
Those
are
things
that
have
yet
to
be
negotiated
right,
and
you
know
it's
this.
M
M
What
what
we
have
right
now,
most
all
the
streets,
are
going
to
be
public
streets
once
we
hit
the
master
plan
done
these
all
the
streets
in
here,
except
to
little
holes
in
the
doughnut
have
been
vacated
okay,
so
they
all
belong
to
the
developer.
Okay,
and
so
it's
important
to
the
developer,
while
they
would
normally
be
right
away,
trees,
they're,
actually
part
of
our
property,
so
we're
trying
to
not
only
avoid
impacts
to
what
would
typically
be
our
trees,
but
also
right
away
trees.
M
A
O
J
I
To
modifying
the
footprint
of
the
plan
numerous
times,
we
also
increase
from
seven
stories
to
eight
stories
to
further
shrinks
eyes
of
these
buildings.
We
have
funding
requirements
that
set
forth
the
number
of
units
that
will
required
to
build
so
we're
trying
to
fit
everything
in
here
and
and
as
David
mentioned,
it's
it's
it's
a
it's
a
jigsaw
puzzle
trying
to
fit
everything
in
so
all
right.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
A
B
B
D
F
Feldman
I
would
add
to
that
something
that
was
pointed
out
early
on
by
Natural
Resources
I
made
a
note
that
they
said
that
they
don't
need
with
four
of
the
five
grand
tree
removals
and
only
the
fifth
was
in
question,
but
we
heard
some
testimony
about
that
fifth
tree
and
why
it
would
need
to
be
removed.
It
sounds
like
all
of
the
removals,
though
its
moist
terrible
to
lose
these
trees
all
make
sense.
F
A
Yeah
I,
just
I,
just
want
to
add
that
I'm
very
impressed
by
the
number
of
trees
that
they're
saving
and
the
fact
that
they
actually
have
a
credit,
at
least
in
phase
one.
That's
kind
of
why
I
was
asking
the
questions
about.
How
does
this
relate
the
future
phases,
because
I
Drive
by
this
side
line
I've
often
wondered?
How
are
they
gonna
save
those
trees
because
they
make
other
builders
save
trees,
I'd
like
to
buy
some
credits,
Canada
I.
M
F
E
B
Before
you
get
going,
didn't
miss
Anthony
note
two
conditions:
the
natural
resources
was
requesting.
Now
one
of
them
was
inch
french
replacement
which
might
be
required
anyway.
I
don't
know
if
we
need
to
condition,
but
there
was
a
second
condition
she
mentioned
and
I.
Don't
remember
what
it
was
and
I
don't
know.
If
it's
something
we
should
consider
I.