►
From YouTube: Variance Review Board 11122019 part 2
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
C
C
27
to
90
is
also
under
consideration.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
rear
yard
setback
from
3
feet
to
0
feet
for
an
existing
storage
shed
in
the
rear,
variance
whiticus
would
invest
the
existing
conditions
of
the
shed.
The
property
is
owned,
RS
50,
the
house
was
purchased
in
2017
and
the
existing
family
residence.
It
was
constructed
in
1995.
D
B
E
My
name
is
Robert
night
in
my
address:
32:14
West,
Carter,
Street,
Tampa,
Florida,
three,
three,
six,
oh
seven
and
I
have
been
sworn
in.
Thank
you
all
right.
Basically,
what
we're
doing
is
when
we
purchased
the
house
here
and
moved
back
to.
Tampa
is
because
of
the
Grand
Oaks
in
the
front
roof
I
mean
that
was
one
of
the
reason
it
survived
the
last
near-miss
hurricane
we
had
and
we
actually
before
we
purchased
it.
E
I
didn't
think,
that's
with
me,
but
but
there's
a
big
arched
driveway
that
has
about
a
two
foot
knee
wall
that
they
cut
all
in
a
basically
roof
room
about
30%
of
that
tree
sometimes,
and
then
the
existing
driveway
has
damaged
a
root
system
on
it,
and
what
we
would
like
to
do
is
in
this
in
this
area.
E
Here
we're
going
to
remove
this
whole
driveway
here
the
front
porch
area,
this
little
porch
area,
we're
actually
going
to
reduce
that
back
and
we're
going
to
clear
those
and
remove
this
whole
pyramid
area
comes
on
this
area
here,
where
this
circle
driveway
comes
around
we're
gonna,
remove
all
that
and
do
an
apron
up,
and
but
what
I'm
gonna
questing'
is
we're
the
existing
part
here
of
this
house.
That's
the
master,
bedroom
and
master
bath.
E
We're
gonna
work
demo,
all
that
out
of
there
and
make
that
actually
the
garage
and
part
of
a
laundry
room,
that's
all
we're
requesting
and
then
we're
gonna
do
a
two-story
over
that,
but
set
it
further
back
and
the
design
of
the
house
is
basically
we're
designing
the
house
around
the
oak
tree.
So
there's
very
minimal
amount.
E
We
have
to
take
out
one
limb,
that's
affected,
but
it's
already
has
some
a
rotten
damage
to
it,
so
it
needs
to
be
removed,
anyways
and
that's
about
a
six
inch
6
to
8
inch
diameter
Graham,
that's
been
previously
cut
and
the
second-story
to
go
there
and
before
the
second
story
goes,
it's
it's
a
shed
roof
system
and
I'll
talk.
I
apologize.
E
B
C
B
E
It
come
up
this.
This
is
actually
the
area
that
in
it,
because
this
would
be
the
existing
garage
area,
and
this
is
the
second-story
area
and
then
basically,
what
I've
designed
is
a
sloped
roof.
That
goes
all
the
way
up,
so
that
the
tree
it
just
follows
a
tree
and
then
on
the
opposite
side
of
the
house,
which
is
this
section
over
here
to
the
front.
E
This
is
a
like
a
little
mother-in-law
suite
that's
existing
on
the
house,
and
then
this
is
the
front
porch
on
reducing
this.
The
tree
sits
out
in
this
area
here
to
sit
out.
A
tree
sits
approximately
right
out
in
here.
We're
gonna,
reduce
this,
the
existing
roofline
back
and
then
I'm
sorry
and
then
the
trees.
The
tree
comes
across
the
house.
This
way
in
here
and
we're
gonna,
make
this
a
flat
deck
over
here
and
probably
put
something
so
that
we
don't
have
to
cut
off
the
minis
treat
them
there.
E
So
one
essence:
what
we're
asking
is
that
we're
gonna
remove
any
car
traffic
than
anything
else
away
from
the
tree
and
resurface
Andrea
do
the
landscaping
and
everything
in
the
artwork
so
that
the
tree
can
be
healthy
and
try
to
maintain
the
tree
so
that
it
doesn't
continue
to
get
damaged
and
potentially
harm
the
tree
for
long
term
life
of
the
tree
and
the
setback
for
is
the
shed
in
the
back
that
was
existing.
When
we
put
that
and
that's
my
wife,
she
shed,
you
know,
and
you
know,
to
get
it.
E
I'll
have
to
actually
just
remove
this.
Yet
I
did
do
some
work
to
it.
When
we
there
had
some
Al
rolled
up
from
my
experience
in
building
construction,
it
was
probably
built
in
the
seventies
and
stuff
just
from
the
materials
that
they
used,
but
it
is
sitting
on
the
property
line.
I
did
discuss
it
with
my
neighbor
behind
me
and
stuff,
and
they
don't
have
any
any
issues
with
where
it's
at
or
stuff.
E
But
if
need
be,
you
know
I'd
have
to
come
up
and
pay
to
have
somebody
come
in
and
lift
it
and
move
it
and
physically
move
the
whole.
This
looks
like
it's
been
added
on
and
renovated
several
times.
This
is
a
framed
floor
system,
so
potentially
it
probably
could
be
removed
if
that's
required,
but
for
the
main
house
were
mainly
just
looking
to
do
the
garage
in
the
front
so
that
we
can
get
vehicles
away
from
the
tree
and
then
additional
parking
once
again
on
this
side
of
the
this
side.
E
So
we
could
actually
do
something
over
there
accommodate
another
vehicle.
That's
required
due
to
the
fact
that
the
garage
in
tiers
measurements
of
the
garage
is
17
and
a
half
foot.
So
I
was
indicated
me
that
might
be
a
little
tight
for
actually
to
consider
that
a
full
two-car
garage
which
is
Ninan
about
I,
think
meant
mental
about
20
feet
wide
for
a
two-car
garage
typically.
So
that
is
correct
on
that.
But
I
feel
that
putting
out
some
type
of
a.
A
E
B
E
E
E
E
Essence,
it's
more
of
the
tree
that
we're
trying
to
save
the
tree.
Our
hardship
is
the
fact
that,
and
also
that,
if
we
do
a
formal
garage
so
that
my
wife
that
actually
had
me
safe
and
come
in
the
house
and
actually
be
able
to
get
in
the
house
because
I
travel
a
lot
so
I'm,
not
a
town,
a
lot.
So
mainly
this
whole
thing
there.
We
would
have
to
most
likely
request
and
remove
the
tree.
E
You
know
because
there's
a
little
carport
where
the
car
won't
fit
in
there
and
if
I
was
to
come
forward,
the
tree
would
affect
it
and
it
would
actually
hamper
the
tree.
So
we
would
have
to
look
and
try
to
figure
out
how
we
could
do
so.
That's
if
that's
considered
a
hardship,
but
that's
work.
That's
the
main
reason
we're
doing
it
is
is
to
say
the
truth.
Okay,
men.
B
D
Brian,
nice
natural
resources.
Yes,
we
do
believe
that
he's
far
enough
away
from
the
existing
tree
said,
the
minimum
protective
radius
is
20
on
the
on
one
side
he
had
by
the
driveway.
He
doesn't
have
that,
but
if
he's
moving
a
driveway
over
to
the
opposite
side
he's
creating
that
space,
so
we
believe
that
would
be
sufficient
for
this
tree.
Okay,.
E
F
So
you
did
a
great
job,
explaining
what
you're
trying
to
do
and
maybe
I
missed
it.
I
just
I
want
to
understand
where
you're
going,
what
you're,
building
and
on
the
backside.
So
you
got
I
see
the
garage
here
what's
going
in
back
this
side
and
then
the
the
she
shed
can
you
show
me
where
that
is
and
and
awkward
existing,
just
so
I
understand
what's
being
built
and
what's
going
into
that,
Bank.
F
E
G
C
C
Again,
transportation
has
found
the
property
inconsistent,
because
I
believe
the
this
board
cannot
waive
a
transportation
technical
standard.
Is
that
correct?
Okay?
So
what
we
had
hoped
that
the
applicant
would
have
brought
tonight
was
alternative
plans
showing
showing
us
that
he
was
not
violating
the
transportation
technical
standards
so.
C
G
C
G
C
C
H
H
E
C
A
B
I
B
C
B
C
B
C
B
G
G
B
Correct
and
in
fairness
to
the
applicant
I'm
trying
to
see
if
we
can
get
everybody
comfortable
with
testimony
here
that
makes
sense.
So
we
we
can't
rely
on
the
fact
that
this
survey
indicates
a
60-foot
right-of-way
and
it's
30
feet
to
the
center
line
from
the
front
property
line
right.
That's
in
the
record
and
that's
all
good.
B
G
C
E
The
transfer
to
solve
the
transportation
problem
is
I
could
just
say:
well,
we
just
leaving
the
driveway
I
mean
the
driveways
I'm,
not
touching
it,
because
it's
not
in
violation
of
nothing
I
mean
the
only
reason
I
was
removing
the
viola.
Is
it's
killing
my
tree,
but
if
transportation
said
I
have
to
leave
it
to
kill
the
tree,
then
let's
leave
it
and
then
I'm
request
the
very
answers
request.
E
E
But
honestly
I'd
rather
remove
the
driveway,
but
the
grassy
knoll
now,
if
required,
because
I
Drive
a
sprinter,
long
tall
van
and
that
parks
in
the
front
there
there's
at
least
18
feet
to
the
from
the
edge
of
that
existing
2
foot
knee
wall
to
the
edge
of
the
road.
If
I
park,
mine
I
can
park,
two
vehicles
side-by-side,
one
of
them
being
a
sprinter
been
in
that
front,
pull
off
that
was
existing
when
we
bought
the
house,
but.
B
E
Said
anything
right
off
about
me
having
to
remove
anything
or
do
anything
with
it?
Okay,
we
did,
we
simply
agreed
to
move
it.
Could
we
feel
it's
harming
the
tree?
That's
the
only
reason
why
we're
requesting
the
removing
having
all
of
it,
even
to
the
point
where
we're
gonna
hand
demo
it,
so
we
don't
bring
a
heavy
equipment
into
that
tree
and
damage
the
tree.
So
the
just
of
the
whole
thing
is
that
we're
just
trying
to
save
the
tree.
That's
probably
a
200
year
old
tree
that.
B
C
B
B
E
B
D
E
B
E
A
B
Doesn't
require
a
setback
or
or
what
not.
The
issue
is
with
transportation.
Just
like
Natural
Resources
will
tell
us
that
if
we
give
the
for
something,
they
have
issues
and
they
want
to
state
that
what
those
issues
are
and
that
they'll
be
resolved
in
the
process
of
getting
the
permit.
In
my
opinion,
this
is
kind
of
like
that.
It's
just
not
natural
resources,
its
transportation,
so
they
may
have
rules
that
can't
be
bent
or
broken.
We
don't
know
what
those.
F
C
B
So
you're
saying
that
the
standard
is
that
he
can't
have
two
straight
end
drives
without
them
connecting
and
you
don't
know
what
the
definition
of
connection
is.
Do
you
know
you
probably
don't
okay,
all
right
well
and
it,
but
we've
heard
testimony
that
the
trees
in
way?
Yes,
so
it's
a
moot
point
he's.
F
A
What
staff
is
advising
is
that
part
of
the
request
is
not
waivable,
because
it
would
be
a
waiver
from
transportation,
technical
standards
and,
of
course,
I
in
my
packet
of
materials.
I,
don't
see
a
memo
from
transportation
identifying
what
those
standards
are
and
what's
required,
and,
of
course,
they're
not
here
tonight
so
to
if,
if
the
board
is
inclined
to
grant
the
variances
as
requested,
the
concern
is
that
in
granting
that
variance,
there
could
be
an
impact
with
a
technical
standard.
J
F
A
F
A
J
G
B
C
Roberta
Currie
planning
design
development
coordination,
the
in
order
to
have
a
vehicle
sit
in
the
front
yard
from
the
property
line
to
the
garage
entrance.
I
need
at
least
a
minimum
18
feet
to
meet
the
transportation
technical
standard
for
one
vehicle.
I
understand
that
he's
proposing
a
one
car
garage
so
I
need
two
cars
to
meet:
27
283
parking,
full-size
parking
spaces
on
the
property
and.
B
Okay,
well,
it's
it
seems,
like
you
know,
in
these
cases,
there's
I
don't
understand.
Why
transportations
not
here,
it's
kind
of
like
the
requested
interpreter
they
had.
We
have
to
request
or
the
applicant
has
to
request.
Then
a
staff
department
that
has
an
objection
show
up.
They
have
the
right
not
to
show
up.
A
B
And
yes,
II
mean
driveways
are
shown
typically
in
a
proposed
situation.
I
was
having
a
hard
time,
seeing
the
lines
on
destroying
but
he's
again
we're
getting
into
the
technical
standards,
and
we
can't
ask
for
questions
so.
That's
dilemma.
All
right,
I'm
gonna
move
to
close
the
public
hearing
Ford.
We
can
either
vote
on
this
as
it's
been
presented
to
us.
B
B
B
E
A
C
Okay,
we're
ready,
okay,
Roberta
hurry
planning,
design
and
development
coordination.
The
RV
case
number
19
102.
The
address
is
4205
Beach
Way
Drive.
The
code
section
under
consideration
tonight
is
27
290.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
Eve
Eve
separation
from
five
feet
to
20
inches
applicant
is
seeking
to
build
a
new
accessory
structure.
The
property
is
owned,
RS
75
in
which
purchased
in
2017
they
do.
The
C
family
residence
was
constructed
in
1950.
A
K
Evening
variants,
Steve
Nicolini
I've
been
sworn
and
I'm
here,
representing
the
petitioners,
Kelly
and
Roy
and
bridges.
Their
proposal
is
to
remove
a
non-complying
accessory
structure
to
the
rear,
which
is
zero
lot
line
here
and
about
four
inches
on
the
rear
side.
And
then
the
proposal
is
to
remove
that
demolish
it
and
then
build
a
a
new
accessory
structure
which
meets
the
code.
K
K
The
Eve
Eve
separation
that
we're
requesting
going
to
20
inches
is
from
from
this
point
an
extension
of
the
second
floor
here
and
there's
actually
about
a
7
to
8
foot
separation
from
from
the
grave
from
you
know,
from
the
accessory
structure
here
to
the
second-story
there
and
it's
an
internal
separation,
so
it
doesn't
affect
any
outside
property
owners.
I
got
several
phone
calls
and
they
were
very
curious
about
why
you
said
asking
for
a
20
inch
of
separation
between
structures
and
they
thought
it
was
on
the
outside.
It's
not.
K
The
accessory
structure
will
meet
all
of
the
other
codes
in
size
and
scale
and
it'll
be
compatible
with
the
existing
home
in
terms
of
the
hardship
when
you
shift
it
to
meet
that
to
meet
that
setback
on
the
rear
and
the
other
side,
you
have
to
shift
it
toward
the
existing
house
and,
as
I
showed,
you
there's
really
about
a
seven
to
eight
foot
separation
between
Eve's,
the
single-story.
To
the
second
floor,
where
the
extension
occurs,
it
is
consistent
with
the
code
with
respect
to
the
conference.
K
It
planned
that
no
one
anticipated
these
kinds
of
issues
when
you're
trying
to
meet
the
code
when
they
bought
the
home
that
that
existing
condition
was
already
there
for
the
accessory
structure
and
they
wanted
to
to
begin
to
complying
and
make
it
into
a
much
better
condition
than
it
already
is.
I,
don't
know
what
else
I
can
tell
you,
except
that
it
does
not
create
a
hardship
or
does
not
encroach
or
create
you
know
the
kind
of
impact
on
any
other
adjacent
property
owner.
K
This
is
an
internal
separation
and
basically
it's
designed
to
try
to
meet
the
code
as
best
you
can
in
in
terms
of
you
know
the
outside
setbacks,
which
are
there
to
protect
the
neighbors
I'll,
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
You
might
have
I
believe
that
there
is
a
a
hardship,
that's
created
here,
and
it's
not
self-imposed
when
they're
actually
trying
to
to
meet
the
code
on
the
on
the
exterior
setbacks
and
they
have
an
existing
home
they're.
K
Not
the
kid,
hardly
moved
home
to
meet
that
that
Eve
Eve
separation
and
they
can't
move
it
into
the
area
where
the
pool
is.
They
would
also
be
able
to
help
them
meet
that
Eve
to
you
separation.
So
they
have
existing
conditions
and
they're
trying
to
do
the
best
they
can
with
respect
to
reconstructing
an
accessory
structure
and
are
going
to
demolish
it.
So
I
respectfully
request
your
approval,
we'll
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
B
B
I
Yes,
I
have
had
some
confusion,
so
I'm
glad
I'm
here
tonight.
So
thank
you
if
I
may.
Thank
you.
This
is
what
we
got.
It's
a
10
feet
to
20
inches,
so
I'm
a
little
confused
now
hearing
the
5
just
just
kind
of
want:
I,
don't
certification
on
that
and
then
also
so
since
we
are
north
of
the
property,
so
we're
directly
behind
them.
I
How
many
currently
it's
the
structure?
That's
existing
is
20
inches
from
our
fence
and
there's
a
power
line
there
and
there's
been
dead
rodents
that
kind
of
lodged
in
that
20
inch
area
that
I
have
had
the
luxury
of
smelling
and
then
getting
rid
of
so
I'm.
Just
trying
to
I
guess
learn
a
little
bit
more
and
just
hoping
that
that
current
structure
is
pushed
away
since
it's
old
and
it
it's
decaying
I.
If
you
may
have
a
few
more
yeah.
I
Okay,
I'll
make
it
quick,
it's
kind
of
hard
to
tell
from
my
picture,
but
I
did
the
best
I
could
so
here
is
where
there's
like
a
shed,
and
then
here
is
there
looks
like
a
pergola
area,
but
this
is
in
then
here's
the
power
line,
and
then
this
neighbor
here
there's
a
fence
there
too.
So
there's
this
cute
little
corner
for
the
rodents
to
kind
of
fall
and
hang
out
so
I'm,
hoping
and
I'm
just
clarifying
also
that
this
can
be
pushed
away
from
there
and
away
from
the
power
line.
I
I
B
G
G
A
B
G
K
The
existing
structure
is
actually,
it
probably
encroaches
on
the
on
the
west
property
line
it.
The
survey
shows
that
at
zero
zero
you
know-
and
it
says,
on
property
line,
but
it
doesn't
include
the
eaves
and
the
roof
overhang
which
is
probably
extending
over
on
the
west
property
line
and
then
on
her
side.
If
she's
on
the
rear,
it's
very
very
close,
it
may
actually
be
zero
lot
line
on
the
VIN,
the
rear,
as
well.
K
It's
extremely
close
and
what
the
the
applicants
are
proposing
is
to
tear
that
down,
get
rid
of
all
of
the
garbage
in
the
trashy
defense
and
clean
that
whole
corner
up,
move
it
three
feet
away,
so
that
meets
the
code
in
the
rear
and
also
on
the
west
property
line,
so
that
the
post
condition
will
be
much
better
than
the
current
condition.
So.
K
Right
they
change
that
this
is
the
interior
of
the
property
and
the
eaves
that
they're
measuring
from
is
the
eve
of
that
new
roof
for
the
for
the
accessory
structure
to
the
to
the
second-story
Eve.
That's
the
20
inch
separation,
but
but
from
there
going
vertical
is
7
to
8
feet
so
that
wouldn't
affect
anybody
on
the
on
the
outside.
K
C
C
Before
I
have
says,
5
feet
to
20
inches,
okay,
however,
their
notice
request
does
say:
10
feet
to
20
inches,
that's
the
same.
One
I
have
and
again
I
guess
we
had
this
same
situation.
People
he's
asking
for
less
of
an
impact.
In
other
words,
it's
really
the
easy
separation
he's
asking
for
not
the
building
to
my.
B
K
That,
if
I
could
address
that
briefly
this
year,
there
was
some
confusion
when
we
first
started
this
notice
process
and
we
we
actually
petitioned
for
the
building
to
building
separation
and
then
in
the
middle
of
that
process,
the
staff
advised
me
that
we
needed
to
notice
for
Eve
Eve
separation.
So
we
changed
it
so
that
you
know
it
was.
It
met
the
code
requirements,
but
it
was
a
little
more
difficult
to
understand.
I.
You
know
for
the
lay
public,
because
they're
trying
to
figure
out
what
are
you
talking
about?
Oh.
K
B
B
K
B
K
B
J
F
A
F
A
J
B
B
F
J
J
K
It
aligns
with
what
you
know.
There
are
other
side
of
the
pool
you
mean
moving
flipping
it
over
flipping
it
over
in
here.
Yes,
exactly
their
walkway
and
their
pool
deck,
and
all
that
align
with
with
this
side,
so
I
mean
if
they're
meeting
the
code
on
the
the
on
the
setbacks.
It
was
the
more
convenient
there's
a
slab
here
that
they're
planning
to
reuse
there's.
You
know
a
variety
of
other
things
that
they're
all
of
their
electrical
stuff
and
their
connections
occur
back
here.
I
I
I
I
B
I
B
J
K
B
B
K
F
When
considering
the
five
hardship
criteria
set
forth
in
section
27
80
of
the
city
code,
specifically
that
they
are
removing
a
non-complying
structure
and
building
a
new
structure
that
meets
property
line
setbacks.
But
the
existing
pool
and
existing
utilities
dictate
the
placement
of
this
accessory
structure
closer
to
the
property
than
permissible.
A
F
B
C
Roberto
Curie
planning
design
development
coordination,
only
three
more
cases
to
go.
Okay,
BRB
nineteen
103
address
is
24:08,
went
Sunset,
Drive
Code
section
in
question
tonight
is
27
156.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
front
yard
setbacks
from
25
feet
to
20
the
west
side
yard
setback
from
7
feet
to
three
and
a
half
applicant
is
seeking
to
add
on
an
existing
front.
Porch,
the
property
is
rezone.
Sorry,
the
property
is
zoned
rs.75
and
was
purchased
in
2017.
K
C
C
K
Evening
again,
Steve
McIlhenny
representing
the
sessions
who
are
proposing
to
add
a
porch
and
they
want
to
add
a
second
story
to
an
existing
single-story
rear
portion
of
their
home,
I've
I've
marked
out
and
in
red
here,
which
was
the
by
plat
allowable
front,
porch
encroachment
and
then,
as
you
probably
know,
some
of
the
new
members
on
the
on
the
board
may
not
know
this.
But
in
other
zoning
districts
with
RS
50,
you
are
allowed
to
have
a
porch
by
right
and
in
this
case
and
the
RS
60
zoning
classification
you're.
K
Not
you
have
to
seek
a
variance.
So
this
is
where
the
25
feet
would
be,
and
they're
asking
to
go
out
to
20
feet
from
the
front
yard.
To
add
a
porch
tend
to
be
a
10-foot
wide
porch
across
the
front
of
their
house,
and
it's
it's
fairly
typical
for
new
somewhere
beautiful
to
have
those
porches
the
older
homes.
Most
of
them
have
them,
and
then
the
second
part
is
and
I
think
this
is
where
part
of
the
confusion
is.
K
This
is
what's
called
a
traditional
American
for
on
square
design,
which
lends
itself
to
you
know
an
easy,
easy
type
of
addition.
This
this
is
a
photograph
of
the
rear
of
the
house,
and
you
can
see
this
is
cinder
block.
This
is
being
proposed
to
be
removed
and
then
the
second-story
addition,
a
two-story
addition
being
added
here
that
would
match
the
lap
board
siding
that
is
fairly
traditional
again
in
this
in
this
area.
K
Here's
a
a
different
photograph,
just
looking
straight
on
and
we're
planning
to
match
the
existing
side
yard
constructed
the
you
know
the
side
of
the
building
along
along
the
west
side
of
the
property,
and
then
that
would
be
a
full
extension,
not
an
encroachment
and
not
an
enlargement.
Beyond
that
side,
I
have
one
letter
of
support
from
the
adjacent
property
owner
to
the
west,
indicating
that
they
would
be
happy
with
the
addition,
as
long
as
it
didn't
go
beyond
what
was
already
existing.
K
So
we
have
and
I
marked
on
this
plan.
We
have
a
40
inch
oak
here,
20
inch
and
another
20
inch
Oaks
here,
which
kind
of
restrict
their
ability
to
to
move
onto
an
addition
on
the
other
side,
and
since
we
already
had
a
single-story
on
this
side
of
the
property,
it
seemed
like
it
was
most
logical
to
reconstruct
this
side
instead
of
creating
a
whole
new
floor
plan
and
trying
to
make
the
house
fit
into
something
else,
on
the
other
side
of
the
property.
K
Indicating
that
they
they
were
satisfied
with
the
existing
development
on
that
side
on
the
west
side
of
the
property.
With
respect
to
the
comprehensive
plan,
it
is
consistent
with
the
redevelopment
of
homes
in
the
in
a
traditional
neighborhood,
and
it
maintains
that
same
tradition
with
size,
scale
and
design
with
respect
to
creating
a
self
self
created
hardship
when
they
bought
the
property.
These
conditions
existed
and
they're
they're,
not
in
making
that
hardship
to
anybody
else.
K
K
So,
as
you
know,
as
families
grow
and
and
they're
in
their
what
they
called
their
forever
neighborhood,
and
we
sent
out
about
fifty
five
letters
to
all
the
surrounding
property
owners
and
to
the
adjacent
registered
associations
and
we
did
not
receive
any
Comeau
calls
or
any
other
indication
that
there
were
objections
to
this
again.
We
work
very
closely
with
the
staff
in
determining
what
the
setback
should
be,
and
the
three
and
a
half
feet
is
the
closest
point
on
the
western
side
of
the
property
and,
like
other
properties,
a
new
summer
beautiful.
It's
it's
skewed.
K
So
it
angles
back
as
you
get
further
back
on
the
property.
The
separation
becomes
larger,
but
it's
a
narrowest
point.
It's
three
and
a
half
feet.
They
are
not
planning
to
build
the
building
at
three
and
a
half
feet
in
in
the
rear
they're
going
to
follow
the
same
building
line
that
currently
exists
and
simply
use
that
as
an
extension
going
vertical
and
with
respect
to
the
porch.
That's
a
new
amenity
that
helps
to
save
energy,
it
provides
an
indoor/outdoor
space.
K
It
also
enables
people
to
get
out
on
the
front
porch
for
safety
and
security
reasons,
and
it
puts
people
and
eyes
on
the
street
and
it
helps
to
reduce
crime.
So
we
do
have
some
site
constrictions,
so
these
are
very
large
limb,
spreads
and,
and
these
location
of
these
trees
are
confining
us
to
a
building
pad
that
we
thought
was
far
more
acceptable
to
use
the
existing
footprint
and
go
vertical
than
it
was
to
create
a
new
new
floor
plan
and
a
new
I'll
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
C
Everybody
meet
Kareem
playing
design,
urban
design
and
coordination.
I
do
have
to
correct
the
record.
The
property
is
zoned
rs.60,
so
strike
RS
75,
the
property
was
purchased
in
2010
strike
2017
and
the
structure
was
built
according
to
the
Hillsborough
County
property
appraisers
record
1930,
so
strike
1950
and
apologize
for
the
miscommunication.
B
K
B
B
K
B
B
K
B
B
B
C
C
Code
section
in
question
under
consideration
tonight
in
just
27
156,
the
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
front
yard
setback
from
25
feet
to
16
feet.
Applicant
is
seeking
to
construct
a
new
garage,
the
property
is
owned
or
at
sixty
and
was
purchased
in
2013.
The
existing
single-family
residence
was
built
in
1974.
C
C
D
D
So
currently
we
took
measurements
off
of
that
tree.
That's
a
grand,
that's
a
grand
Live
Oak,
it's
39
inches
and
it's
off-site.
We
took
measurements
off
the
tree
from
the
edge
of
the
trunk
to
the
beginning
of
the
driveway,
the
concrete
part
of
the
driveway.
Here
we
measured
that
at
nine
and
a
half
feet.
D
We
think
that
any
encroachment
into
further
into
the
the
trees
protect
the
radius
would
be
harmful
to
the
tree.
So
we
recommend
that
they
reduce
the
driveway
and
keep
it
at
the
nine
and
a
half
to
ten
feet
and
natural
resources
would
be
okay
with
the
driveway.
That
was
a
little
bit
smaller
and
best.
That's
our
comment.
B
L
L
L
L
You
800
1836
square
feet:
young
family,
one
and
a
half
year
old,
already
we're
having
another
child.
Doesn't
that
mean
it's
my
client?
And
so
they
love
their
neighborhood.
I've
got
letters
from
the
neighbors.
They
want
to
stay
where
they
are.
L
They
bought
the
house
that
they
can
afford
and
they're
just
trying
to
stay
where
they
are
and
to
build
a
garage
here
rather
than
on
this
side
because
of
the
existing
32
inch
oak.
I
have
pictures
of
this
structure
here,
which
actually
sticks
out
quite
far
from
the
the
25
foot
front,
yard
setback.
Of
course
that's
an
older
structure,
so
it's
kind
of
if
we
were
doing
like
neighborhood
averaging
we'd,
be
great
but
we're
at
Rs
60.
So
with
this
structure
here
this
is
where
we're
proposing
our
structure.
L
This
is
a
16
foot
garage
door
with
minimal
clearance.
You
know
so
you
don't
run
into
the
house,
but
the
overall
structure
is
20
feet
from
the
existing
front
of
the
house
to
the
proposed
front
and
then
I'm
going
to
the
7
foot
setback
on
this
side.
That
leaves
16
foot
2
to
the
property
line
and
then
another,
not
10,
foot
9
out
to
the
curb.
L
So
your
your
natural
resources
with
the
nine
and
a
half
foot
radius
would
be
great
as
long
as
building
would
allow
us
to
narrow
that
driveway,
where
it
crosses
the
because
there's
there's
a
minimum
width
for
a
two-car
garage.
Even
though
that's
not
the
approach,
they
still
have
this
18-foot
minimum
width.
So
that's
where
that's
why
it's
at
18
now
we
can
shift
it
over
and
try
to
make
the
radius
work,
so
you
can
actually
get
in
the
garage.
L
L
L
Believe
this
with
staff,
this
is
the
letters
from
3207
and
3210.
They
did
a
joint
blessing
written
on
the
on
the
notice,
and
they
said
congratulations
on
that.
The
second
piece
of
heaven
on
the
way.
So
they
are,
they
are
part
of
the
neighborhood.
They
want
to
stand
any
it's
like
they're,
just
trying
to
adapt
their
house,
so
they
can't
stay.
That's
all
I
have
for
now.
B
F
F
B
B
C
F
G
C
C
L
Yeah
I
would
say
at
that
point
meet
with
them
again
and
kind
of
challenge.
The
fact
there's
this
geometry
is
this
way
it's
likely.
There
doesn't
really
help
us
to
have
18
3
feet
where
the
threat
of
the
driveway
is
okay.
I
still
have
to
get
around
and
into
the
into
the
garage
I
think.
At
this
point,
it's
sort
of
like
a
technicality
with
18
feet
and
again,
there's
no
one
here
to
to
tell
us
why
why.
L
L
J
J
B
I
mean
you
leave
what's
what's
asked
for
right,
it's
stated
that
it's
consistent,
so
they're,
ok
with
the
garage
concept,
I
believe
so
anyways
everything
else.
Any
other
questions,
if
not
will
allow
the
applicant
is
five
minutes.
You
have
five
minutes
for
by
a
yield
to
the
board.
Okay.
Thank
you
very
much.
Without
objection,
I'm
gonna
close
the
public
hearing
board
somebody
like
to
make
a
motion,
and
or
do
we
need
a
discussion.
B
F
You
know,
traditionally
we
have
done
this
in
the
past
and
our
theory
as
we
approve
this,
and
these
things
get
worked
out
with
permitting.
They
need
to
move
things
around
or
adjust
to
to
do
a
cut
out
of
the
driveway
they
do
it.
I
was
just
I
was
thrown
from
the
earlier
case
and
the
sense
that
others
are
experiencing
some
of
the
same
concerns,
but
the.
F
When
considering
the
five
hardship
criteria
set
forth
in
section
27
80
of
the
C
code,
specifically
that
the
property
is
seeking
to
build
a
reasonable
two-car
garage
and
is
trying
to
adjust
the
based
upon
existing
structures
on
the
site
and
an
off-site
grand
oak
tree.
And
this
is
the
that
this
is
the
means
by
which
they
are
trying
to
avoid
those
existing
conditions.
B
C
Yeah
we're
ready
all
right,
Roberta,
Curie
planning,
design
and
development
coordination.
Vrv
case
number
19
105
address
is
11
304
north
Pam,
there
Avenue
Code
section
can
under
consideration,
is
27
156.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
front
nerd
setback
from
25
feet
to
8
feet.
Applicant
is
seeking
to
construct
a
new
garage
and
driveway.
The
property
is
owned
or
a
60.
I
was
purchased
in
2005.
B
H
H
We
want
to
add
one
car
garage
so
that
we
have
better
access
more
parking
because,
as
you
can
see
in
the
photos
before
I
have
to
park
in
the
grass
I'm,
also
I'm
a
fireman
and
so
I'm
going
every
third
day,
and
my
wife
and
kids
have
to
get
in
out
of
the
car
in
the
rain.
And
you
know
for
safety
purposes.
It'd
be
nice
if
they
had
a
nice
enclosure
that
they
can
come
in
and
park
at.
H
It
would
just
off
it
would
offer
us
a
lot
more
space
for
vehicle
and
just
we
want
to
stay
in
this
house,
and
we
really
like
the
neighborhood,
and
we
just
need
more
more
more
space
or
area
to
more
storage.
I
think
they
make
the
neighborhood
look
better
because
I'm
having
to
park
on
the
grass,
hence
destroying
my
grass
and
there's
really.
No.
We
have
no
other
areas
to
park
other
than
the
bad
driveway,
that's
there.
So
it
would
offer
us
a
lot
more.
H
H
H
So
the
driver
wouldn't
go
down
that
far
when,
even
so,
it
won't
impede
anybody's
vision
on
the
street,
because
I
have
a
big
foot.
Carpets
that
to
drive
I
won't
even
go
out
as
far
as
to
Podocarpus
on
on
the
one
side
for
my
neighbor
and
on
the
other
side
there's
another
hedge,
which
my
driver
that
this
garage
went
there,
it
wouldn't
make
you
wouldn't
be
able
to
see
it
through
the
court
carpets
anyway,.
H
H
H
H
H
We
had
great
plans
of
doing
all
these
things
to
this
house
and
stuff
has
happened
to
where
it
gets,
pushed
back
and
push
button
which
back
and
now
we
filing
do
these
things
and
we
drew
out
these
plans
and
then
to
find
out
that
we
had
to
have.
You
know,
I
didn't
know
all
this
stuff
to
set
backs,
and
all
that-
and
we
want
to
just
we
just
want
to
you-
know,
stay
there
and
make
it
our
forever
home
and
get
it
fixed.
The
way
we
need
for
my
family.
B
M
A
A
One
of
the
things
that
he
didn't
mention
at
mr.
cotton
had
told
us
about
I'm,
letting
you
guys
know
is
that
we
are
side
access
to
our
property
on
one
side,
it's
like
seven
and
on
the
other,
it's
nine
on
the
side
where
it's
actually,
where
it
says
it's
nine,
we
don't.
Actually
we
don't
have
that
much
space
and
then
on
the
like,
based
off
of
the
survey
itself
and
then
also
on
the
like
from
just
like
living
in
the
house.
A
Okay,
so
it
says
that
we
actually
have
more
space
on
this
side,
but
based
off
of
this
side.
This
is
where,
like
our
neighbor
has
I,
don't
know
their
existing
fences.
We
we
can't
go
this
way
and
then
on
the
left
side
on
on
this
site
over
here,
it's
only
seven
and
a
half
and
it
looks
like
we
actually
have
more
if
you're
looking
at
property
wise.
But
it's
not
our
property,
it's
technically
our
neighbors,
so
it
wouldn't
be.
A
So
we
don't
have
the
ability
to
even
go
through
our
side
yard
to
the
back
with
any
type
of
vehicle.
So
that
only
allows
us
to
do
this
front
space.
But
you
see
like
there.
Instead,
we
currently
do
have
a
carport,
but
it's
made
on
the
standards
of
like
the
nineteen
fifty,
so
it's
very
small,
so
even
with
like
I,
have
a
floor,
runner
so
parking
in
there.
You
don't
really
have
a
lot
of
room
to
the
open
or
do
anything.
So
we
were
just
kind
of
counting
on.
A
If
we
could
go
forward,
we
would
be
allowed
to
use
that
as
a
living
space
in
a
house,
that's
only
like
1200
square
foot
with
four
family
members,
so
two
growing
boys
and
for
us.
So
that
was
it
that
I
just
kind
of
wanted
to
add
because
I
know
he
had
said
he
mentioned
on
where
there's
a
hardship
on
why
we
had
to
go
forward
versus
back
so
I
just
wanted
to
mention
that
and
then
I
think.
That's
it
points.
A
B
G
C
Roberta
Currie
of
when
develop
sorry,
Roberta
Currie
planning,
design
and
development
coordination
again
transportations
comments.
Transportation
found
the
project
consistent
with
conditions
in
place.
The
conditions,
as
mentioned
in
the
staff
report,
to
be
corrected
at
time
of
permitting
so
they've
asked
for
the
that
fini.
I.
C
So
what
transportation
is
asking
is
the
apron
to
be
continued
to
the
right-of-way?
Okay,
that
the
two
spaces
are
going
to
be
shown
so
we're
assuming
that
it's
a
two-car
garage,
okay,
so
they'll
meet
that
two-car
parking
requirement
and
then
and
then
yes,
the
existing
driveway
apron
would
have
to
be
removed
and
I'm
gonna
steam
the
whole
driveway,
because
that's
what
the
new
garage
is
going
to
be.
B
Roberta
I'm,
sorry
again
just
to
clarify
the
two-car
parking
requirement,
because
we
heard
testimony
it's
a
one
and
a
half
car
garage,
so
one
car
could
go
in
the
garage
and
one
car
could
be
in
the
driveway
as
long
as
it's
a
hundred
percent
on
the
property,
correct.
Okay,
that's
the
clarification
things.
H
G
A
That
the
variance
request
for
case
BRB,
19
105
for
property,
located
at
1
1
3
0
for
north
Hamner
avenue
be
granted
as
depicted
on
the
site
plan
presented
at
the
public
hearing
for
a
reduction
in
the
front
yard.
Setback
from
25
feet
to
8
feet,
with
an
encouragement
for
eaves
and
gutters,
based
on
the
applicant
presenting
competent
and
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
at
this
public
hearing
of
the
unnecessary
hardship
or
practical
difficulty.
A
When
considering
the
5
hardship
criteria
set
forth
in
section
27
80
of
the
city
code
and
specifically
that,
given
the
current
left
and
right
side
yard
setbacks,
there
is
really
no
option
to
construct.
The
garage
in
the
back
of
the
house
or
in
another
location
on
the
property.
As
cars
would
be
unable
to
access
said
garage.
B
C
C
A
meet
three
planning
design
and
development
for
nation
yarby
case
number
19
101
one
address
3818,
West,
State
Street
code,
section
27
156,
is
under
consideration.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
rear
yard
setback
from
20
feet
to
5
feet.
Applicant
is
seeking
to
add
to
existing
commercial
structure.
Rear
yard
is
reduced
due
to
the
existing
drainage
area,
to
the
rear
of
the
property.
Property
is
owned,
our
o
residential
office
and
was
purchased
in
2016.
The
existing
structure
was
constructed
in
1960
aerial
of
the
property.
C
B
M
B
M
So
something
quick
not
really
correct,
but
to
clarify
I
owned
this
property
since
2014
in
2016
I
made
the
quick,
the
claim,
I
guess
to
put
it
under
my
my
corporation
West
date.
So
technically,
I
have
owned
it
for
five
years
in
2016,
I
changed
the
I
applied
for
rezoning
to
have
it
from
residential
to
residential
office.
To
move
my
office
of
instruction,
engineer
and
I
wanted
to
have
my
office
in
this
area,
and
everything
was
fine
even
when
I
bought
the
property.
This
is
this
is
the
survey
that
I
have
and
give
huge
Jim.
M
If
you
can
see
even
on
the
survey,
the
black
line
was
my
property
line.
This
is
how
I
bought
the
property
all
the
way
here
and
in
the
back
there
is
lot
24
and
25
and
again,
when
I
did
the
rezoning.
Everything
was
like
that
I
did
I
develop
the
full
set
of
drawings
applied
for
permit
and
suddenly
I
discovered
I
mean
the
city
discovered
that,
instead
of
having
22
feet,
sent
back
to
my
property
line,
which
was
assumed
to
be
here
that
no
I
don't
own.
M
This
whole
property
turns
out
that
I
have
your
t
owns
this
ditch
part
of
I
mean
all
like
three
blocks
and
it
extend
like
like
set
three
blocks.
It
takes
like
17
feet
from
my
property
and
something
similar
to
the
back
and
all
of
that.
So,
if
I'm
left
now
the
property,
the
new
property
line
is
at
those
two
points.
M
M
I
was
in
close
communication
with
a
beer
beauty
and
even
went
to
their
McKinley
office,
and
they
are
the
one
provided
me
with
do
it
with
the
drawings
and
the
DS,
because
apparently
today
on
this
property,
since
the
1940s
and
and
nobody
discovered
that
until
like
last
year-
and
we
even
the
city
was
helpful
to
search
for
deeds,
they
went
back.
The
the
the
folders
that
they
could
go
back
is
like
five
deeds
to
the
1970s,
and
it
was
all
like
that.
M
M
That's
it
I
mean
we
have
developed
all
the
drawings
for
death
and,
like
said
you're
in
the
pyramid,
and
everything
is
good,
and
we
didn't
know,
of
course,
about
this
structure
that
was
removed
and,
of
course,
once
we
granted,
hopefully,
the
the
variance,
we're
gonna
slope.
Every
I
mean
away
from
the
ditch
I
mean
all
the
damage
that
the
condition
that
the
stuff
was
mentioned.
B
F
M
Did
they
did
an
investigation
and
they
admitted
they
were
wrong?
Yes,
the
city.
Actually,
mr.
cotton
was
very
helpful.
They
met
with
him,
they
met
with
everyone
and
yes
and
I,
even
I,
even
supplied
them
with
a
copy
of
a
deep
book
dated
1943
or
something
I,
don't
know
where's
what
was
missed,
but
just
the
fact
I
mean
it's
really.
It's
really
annoying
to
wake
up
one
day
and
you
found
that
key
big
chunk
of
your
land.
F
B
M
J
B
J
J
When
considering
the
5
hardship
criteria
set
forth
and
section
27
80
of
the
Tampa
city
code,
specifically
that
the
rear
yard
is
effectively
reduced
due
to
a
pre-existing
drainage
area
to
the
rear
of
the
property
which
was
not
identified
in
city
records
was
not
reflected
in
the
legal
title.
Description
and
survey
of
the
property.