►
From YouTube: Variance Review Board 02122019
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
D
A
Development
coordination
and
Brian
Knox
of
natural
resource
and
from
transportation
we
have
Brian
Marsh
I'll,
take
just
a
few
minutes
to
review
tonight's
procedures.
Cases
will
be
called
in
the
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're.
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've
been
sworn
in
the
applicant
and
nor
and/or,
their
agent
will
have
ten
minutes
to
give
testimony
present
witnesses
and
documentation
as
a
part
of
their
presentation.
This
is
your
your
time
to
present
all
of
your
evidence.
A
Anyone
in
the
audience
wish
wishing
to
speak
in
support
of
or
in
opposition
to
an
application
will
then
be
given
three
minutes
each
after
that.
The
board
may
have
an
opportunity
to
ask
questions
regarding
the
application.
Finally,
the
applicant
will
have
an
additional
five
minutes
for
rebuttal
if
needed.
The
time
periods,
as
stated
will
be
kept
by
meet
the
chair.
A
Any
information
such
as
pictures
or
plans,
and
have
not
been
previously
submitted
as
a
part
of
your
petition,
and
you
intend
to
present
at
this
hearing
for
consideration
in
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
so
that
it
can
be
entered
and
made
a
part
of
the
permanent
record.
The
board
bases
its
decision
on
competent
and
substantial
evidence
which
has
presented
this
evening
and
which
meets
the
criteria
required
by
the
city's
Code
of
Ordinances.
A
The
variance
granted
by
the
board
will
be
only
for
what
is
shown
on
the
site
plan
and
we'll
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.
For
instance,
you
got
three
out
of
five
of
us.
The
case
you'll
be
automatically
carried
over
for
consideration
of
the
board's
next
meeting.
If
approved,
your
variance
will
expire
two
years
from
today's
date.
All
other
city
codes
will
need
to
be
met.
A
If
your
case
is
continued,
it
will
be
continued
to
either
March
12th
or
April
9th,
which
are
the
next
public
hearing
dates.
If
you
wish
to
appeal
a
variance
review,
Board's
decision
to
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
is
passed.
Your
cooperation
will
help
ensure
that
this
meeting
runs
smoothly
and
we
will
greatly
appreciate
it.
A
A
F
A
H
A
H
E
I
J
I
represent
the
applicant
on
item
19-25
we're
prepared
to
go
forward
this
evening.
The
site
plan
clearly
shows
the
top
of
the
bank,
which
is
the
extent
of
the
wetlands,
and
we
have
a
letter
from
an
environmental
consultant
confirming
the
location
at
the
top
of
the
bank.
So
there's
no
reason
to
postpone
this
hearing
at
this
time.
We
want
to
go
forward.
Okay,.
G
It
is
my
understanding
that
there
was
not
a
recommendation
from
Natural
Resources
staff,
and
this
is
a
reduction
of
wetland
setback
which
our
code
requires
a
recommendation.
A
written
recommendation
from
Natural
Resources
stop.
If
that
is
the
case
and
I,
don't
know
if
if
mr.
Knox
can
address
that,
but
if
that
is
the
case,
the
application
is
insufficient
and
cannot
be
heard
yet
somewhat.
J
J
L
A
A
G
Thank
you.
Mr.
chair
audience,
members
more
specifically,
applicants.
The
variance
review
board
only
has
five
members
tonight,
four
votes
are
required
in
order
for
a
variance
to
be
granted.
If
anyone
would
like
to
request
a
continuance,
it
is
not
a
matter
of
right,
but
someone.
An
applicant
may
request
a
continuance
until
there
is
a
full
board
of
the
VRP,
so
you
could
request
a
continuance
to
another
VRB
date
at
this
time.
If
you
would
like
to
request
it,
if
you
know
that
you
would
like
to
request
a
continuance,
you
may
request
it
now.
G
You
may
also
request
it
at
the
beginning
of
your
application
in
case,
another
board
member
were
to
happen
join
us,
but
you
need
to
make
the
request
at
the
beginning
of
your
hearing
before
evidence
is
presented
in
order
to
be
considered
for
a
continuance
based
on
the
number
of
board
members
that
we
have
tonight
at
this
time.
Is
there
anyone
that
would
like
to
go
ahead
and
request
a
continuance
to
you
until
there
is
a
full
board.
A
Okay,
so
you
know
we
will
move
on
with
no
further
business
to
discuss
as
our
motion
to
approve
last
December's
minutes
without
objection,
all
right,
all
in
favor,
say
aye
all
right.
Okay,
is
there
a
motion
to
approve
last
month's
minutes
without
objection
all
right,
all
right,
I
will
now
ask
Miss
Moore
to
address
the
board
regarding
ex
parte
communications.
Thank.
G
You
at
this
time,
I
would
like
to
ask
members
of
the
board
if
you've
had
any
ex
parte
communications
regarding
into
the
matters
coming
before
you
this
evening.
If
you've
had
any
verbal
communications,
I
would
ask
you
to
disclose
the
sum
and
substance
of
that
communication
when
and
where
it
occurred
and
with
whom
it
occurred,
and
if
you've
received
any
written
communications.
I
would
ask
you
to
close
the
nature
of
it
and
to
file
it
in
the
record.
I
see
none.
Okay,.
A
E
E
Apologize
for
that
for
section
27
156,
the
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
west
side
yard
from
7
feet
to
1
foot,
to
construct
a
roof
enclosure
over
a
permitted
outdoor
kitchen
area
and
there's
currently
a
building
permit
open
for
this.
The
property
is
zoned
rs.75
and
was
purchased
in
2017.
The
house
was
built
in
2012.
The
property
received
a
variance
to
reduce
the
pool
setback
from
5
feet
to
2.9
feet
and
the
pool
enclosure
from
5
feet
to
two
point:
three
feet
on
the
west
side
yard
as
well.
A
N
Curtis
8380
all
Merton
Road
Suite
320,
have
been
sworn
in,
we're
looking
to
put
a
elite
roof
over
the
existing
screen
enclosure.
Like
you
said,
the
setback
was,
you
know,
5
feet
to
2.3
we're
just
looking
to
put
a
cap
on
top
of
the
screen:
roof.
That's
already
there
so
to
make
it
a
screen.
Roof
too.
Of
course,
a
enclosed
roof.
G
You
sorry,
in
order
to
receive
a
variance,
you
will
need
to
demonstrate
what
it
there
is
about
the
property
or
the
structure
that
creates
a
hardship
or
a
practical
difficulty
where
you
could
not
build
the
structure
within
the
setbacks.
So
if
you
could
address
that
for
the
board,
that
would
be
very
helpful,
meaning.
N
N
I
mean
it's
just
pretty
much
one
to
cover
up
the
kitchen,
so
they
can
cook
at
night.
You
know
I
mean
it
doesn't
affect
the
neighbors.
Their
fence
line
is
I'd,
say
approximately
two
and
a
half
feet
from
where
we
want
to
put
this
enclosure
or
the
enclosures
already
there,
but
to
put
the
roof,
so
it
wouldn't
affect
them
with.
O
O
N
We
no
way
out
that's
what
we'd
want
to
do
when
I
went
to
the
Zoning
Department
they're,
the
one
who
told
me
that
I
should
go
from
the
seven
foot
to
the
one
foot
when
I
spoke
to
his
own
department
of
Tampa.
O
P
O
J
A
E
One
Anthony
land
development
that
is
correct.
That's
why
they're
here
before
us
tonight,
it
reduced
to
setback
initially
from
five
feet
to
two
point:
nine
and
five
feet
to
two
point:
three
and
now
they're
before
us
to
reduce
that
side:
setback
from
seven
feet
to
one
because
they're
putting
in
a
hard
rule.
B
Before
we
entertain
that
I
just
will
say
for
me
that
I'm
not
inclined
to
support
this
I,
don't
see
the
hardship,
it's
a
75
foot
wide
lie
which
is
larger
than
normal.
They
already
requested
the
variance
previously.
Why
not
have
just
done
this
at
that
time?
It
does
potentially
affect
the
neighbor,
because
we're
creating
water
runoff
much
closer
to
their
property
line
than
a
screen.
Enclosure
provides
and,
as
always,
I'm
concerned
about
fire
separation.
A
N
I
can
see.
Maybe
if
we
were
to
go
to
the
one
foot
there
may
be
an
issue
with
water
runoff,
but
seeing
how
we're
only
going
to
the
2.3
to
the
original
set
back
of
the
pool
enclosure
there's
so
a
good
foot
and
a
half
to
three
feet
of
space
where
the
neighbors
fence
is
so,
it
wouldn't
affect
the
neighbors.
As
for
fire,
anything
of
that
nature,
I,
don't
think
they
would
a
little
permit
or
put
the
grill
where
we
did.
You
know
within
a
certain
amount
of
feet,.
B
The
purpose
of
a
variance
is
to
allow
you
to
do
things
that
the
code
does
not
permit.
So
by
getting
a
variance,
you
were
allowed
to
put
things
closer
to
the
property
line
than
normally
you
would
be
so
when
you
say
they
wouldn't.
Let
us
do
something
that
maybe
was
detrimental.
This
board
is
the
one.
That's
letting
people
do
those
things,
and
so
it's
up
to
us
to
determine
whether
or
not
something
could
be
detrimental.
B
So
the
kitchen
is
one
issue,
but
the
which
is
not
before
us
now,
because
it's
already
there
and
presumably
was
approved
by
the
building
department,
but
this
roof
structure
is
and
I
haven't,
heard
a
hardship
in
any
regard.
There's
five
criteria
on
the
application
that
are
spelled
out
and
I
haven't
heard
a
response
to
any
of
the
five,
so
we're
bound
to
respond
to
the
hardship
of
the
property
or
the
building
and
I
haven't
heard
anything
that
addresses
that.
P
P
A
N
A
A
A
N
A
A
O
P
P
So,
just
generally
I
would
be
okay
with
them
covering
up
a
grill,
but
that
would
give
them
that
wouldn't
go
deeper
into
a
setback
than
is
already
there.
So
I
would
I
would
have
proved
something
that
would
permit
a
roof
that
would
reach
over
where
the
the
grill
and
countertop
is
but
doesn't
go
any
deeper
than
that
yep.
If
the
applicant
Werder
Bremen
to
that
I
guess
we
could
just
approve
council.
Can
we
just
approve
less,
even
though,
where
that
may
not
apply
their
site
plan
to
something.
G
So
the
applicant
can
make
changes
to
the
site
plan
to
reflect
something.
That's
that
has
changed
and
from
a
notice
perspective
you
would
certainly
be
able
to
approve
a
lesser
variance
than
what
was
requested.
G
B
To
public
hearing
wait,
let's
do
a
little
math.
The
plan
he's
showing
here
says
it's
an
8
foot
overhang
and
he
claims
that's
only
going
to
the
two
point:
nine
two
point:
nine
or
two
point
three,
two
point
three.
So
that
means
that
it
is
five
feet.
The
eight
feet
is
projecting
five
feet
over
the
allowable
setback.
So
to
Brett's
point
you
could
do
three
feet
conceivably
without
any
variance
at
all.
If
the,
if
the
dimensions
on
this
planner
right.
A
M
A
A
rainstorm
and
if
it's
raining
it
kind
of
defeats
the
purpose
so
I
don't
know
that
that
would
achieve
what
what
the
applicant
wants,
or
once
out
of
the
use
so
I
think
that,
because
of
the
size
and
scale
of
this,
it's
either
going
to
be
approved,
or
it's
not
and
yes,
reduced
to
the
2.9
feet
because
it
doesn't
sound.
There
wasn't
any
testimony
that
they
want
to
move
the
screen.
Okay,.
P
A
A
E
On
De'anthony
land
development,
application
number
vrb,
18
115,
the
property
address
is
709
West,
Plymouth
Street,
first
section
27
156.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
east
side
yard
from
7
feet
to
3
feet
the
there
is
also
a
request
for
a
rear
yard
setback,
but
that's
not
before
you
tonight
they
are
going
to
apply
for
a
design
exception
and
that
will
be
approved
administratively
and
renewed
and
by
zoning.
So
in
house
that
will
be
taken
care
of.
So
they
are
here
to
construct
a
single-family
residence
and
preserve
the
37
inch
grand
oak
tree.
E
E
E
E
K
So
we're
requesting
a
Eastside
yard
setback
reduction
from
7
feet
to
3
feet
to
preserve
this
37
inch
oak
tree
I
have
met
with
Natural
Resources
staff
on
a
couple
different
occasions
out.
There
and
I
also
gave
you
the
services
of
a
private
arborist
that
not
only
being
the
treated
the
preservation
quality.
But
in
addition,
we
did
some
error
stating
along
the
east
side
of
the
tree,
and
we
were
able
to
find
out
exactly
where
the
root
system
was
and
so
they're
requesting
to
move
the
home
over.
To
preserve
this
tree.
K
So
this
is
a
thing
it
was,
it's
always
been
a
a
to
lot
parcel
and
we
purchased
this
property
back
in
2018
and
the
tree
in
question.
Is
this
37
inch
oak
here
where
the
original
driveway
for
the
previous
structure
actually
butted
right
up
to
the
tree,
and
we
kind
of
see
it
right
here.
In
fact,
this
van
was
parked
practically
on
the
on
the
tree,
so
we
demoed
this
house
and
we
have
since
constructed
at
home
on
707
West
Plymouth.
This
is
the
tree
in
question
here.
So
we've
moved
the
home
over.
K
A
J
B
J
Allowed
to
provide
any
pictures
on
my
behalf
for
me,
so
I
am
the
adjacent,
neighbor
and
I
guess
what
I?
My
only
concern
is
just
that
it
coming
from
seven
feet
to
three
feet:
would
pretty
much
inhibit
the
side
of
my
yard
as
well
as
privacy.
We
have
our
air
conditioners
right
on
that
side,
which
my
fear
is
that
would
get
swamped
with
enough
water
as
well
as
our
foundation.
It's
something
that
would
be
of
concern
for
me
with
the
extra
water
being
dumped
onto
that
area.
J
J
Going
on
right
there,
so
this
side
is
the
west
side
currently
right
now-
and
this
is
just
a
gun
to
demonstrate
this
little
here,
this
little
PVC
to
would
indicate
where
that
house
would
be
placed
and
right
next
to
my
house,
our
our
air
conditioners
are
right
over
this
fence
line
right
here.
So
my
main
fear
is
just
that
there
would
be
some
off
spray.
J
J
It
is
affected
there.
The
roots
have
affected
their
driveway
at
this
point,
I'm
not
here
to
say
no
to
cut
cutting
down
trees
or
anything
like
that.
I
understand
the
beauty
of
them
and
everything,
and
how
important
is
to
have
that
in
a
neighborhood.
However,
I
would
just
appreciate,
without
considering
our
situation
and.
G
O
You
polish,
my
name,
is
Alan
Dobbs
I
live
at
51,
11,
North
20,
a
veneer
and
I
have
been
sworn
Gulf
Bay.
They
do
a
lot
of
really
nice
homes
in
Seminole,
Heights,
Riverside,
Heights
and
but
I
have
a
couple
questions
about
the
petition.
Typically,
when
you
split
a
lot,
you
have
to
get
a
approval
for
it
because
they
want
to
make
sure
that
you're
not
going
to
create
any
non-conforming
conditions.
So
it
seems
like
this
tree
being
there
and
not
being
able
to
build
around
the
tree.
What
would
be
a
non-conforming
condition?
O
So
you
know
so
that's
one
concern
I
have
and
then
I'm
sorry
I
forgot,
the
other
one.
But
that's
that's.
The
main
thing
is
that
the
the
tree,
like
the
previous
person
said
you
can
it
is
a
grant
train,
there's
procedure
for
taking
it
out.
It
and
I
know
he
had
two
certified
arborist.
You
know,
look
at
it
and
said
it's
preservation,
quality
but
again
I'd
like
to
go
back
to
the
fact
that
there
are
means
to
take
it.
O
A
K
Yes,
it
is
a
one-story
home
and
it's
approximately
just
under
1,800
square
feet
and
to
address
a
couple
of
the
questions
brought
to
you
earlier.
The
property
was
always
planted
as
two
Lots.
It
was
always
a
double
lot.
We
simply
just
had
to
apply
for
a
separate
folio
number.
This
particular
I
believe
is
Lots
but
or
I.
Think
in
the
a
lot
to
the
east.
A
K
A
A
O
A
J
A
A
A
G
J
A
J
J
A
K
K
K
K
I'd
like
to
just
sure
real
quick
than
with
the
board
some
of
our
recent
projects
within
the
Riverside
Heights
neighborhood.
This
was
a
home
that
was
located
at
1,
0,
0,
8,
West
Kentucky,
the
home
events
sitting
vacant
for
about
5
years.
We
purchased
it
and
then
subsequently
Bert
purchaser
built
this
home.
There
was
a
grand
tree
in
the
back
that
we
preserved.
K
K
This
is
at
10
11
at
10:13,
West,
Ohio
and
again
it
was
I,
always
planted
as
two
lots
and
we
purchase
it
and
then
built
two
structures.
This
is
at
10:13,
West
Ohio
and
see
there's
a
tree
in
the
back
that
we
preserved,
and
then
this
is
at
1011
West
Ohio,
and
this
is
the
tree
next
door
that
we
preserved.
K
This
is
at
3500
four
and
3506
North
Ridge
that
were
actually
in
the
process
of
finishing
up
right
now
again,
this
was
always
Lots.
This
is
the
home
in
3506,
North
Ridge
and
we've
taken
a
lot
of
steps
to
preserve
this
tree
out
front.
We've
actually
designed
the
entire
structure
around
this
tree,
and
then
this
was
the
home.
It's
just
another
view
of
the
tree
that
we
preserved,
and
then
this
is
the
home
next
door
at
3504,
North
Ridge,
which
ironically,
is
the
same
home
that
would
be
built
on
set
Nine,
West
Plymouth
very
similar.
A
B
First
want
to
say
it's
nice
to
see
a
series
of
single-story
homes,
it's
very
rare
that
we
ever
see
those
presented
here.
Hardly
ever
really.
But
my
question
is
the
fence
or
proposed
fence
on
the
side,
with
the
setback
reduction?
What's
the
height
of
that
fence,
gonna
be
I'm
sort
of
the
fence
on
the
side
of
the
setback
reduction
mmm-hmm?
What's
the
height
of
the
fence
going
to
be
between
the
neighbor
six
feet,
six
feet,
what
is
the
height
of
the
top
of
window
on
that
side
of
the
house?
Roughly.
K
B
K
B
The
protests
of
the
neighbors
and
and
we're
very
sensitive
to
to
neighbors
that
are
immediately
next
to
properties
that
are
asking
for
variances.
But
at
the
same
time,
the
trees
belong
to
the
whole
neighborhood.
Even
if
they're
in
somebody's
yard
and
a
live
oak
can
live
to
be
hundreds
of
years
old
and
so.
B
This
designer
who
ever
was
went
through
a
lot
of
effort
to
save
this
tree.
They
could
potentially
be
in
this
neighborhood
long
after
this
house
is
gone,
and
it's
very
rare
that
we
see
people
put
that
kind
of
effort
and
are
willing
to
put
that
kind
of
money
into
making
that
happen.
It's
quite
the
opposite.
Usually
we
are
here
with
people
finding
trying
to
take
those
trees
down
so
I,
like
the
effort.
B
Those
put
in
I
think
it's
unfortunate
that
it
does
have
to
push
it
closer
to
a
neighbor,
but
the
issues
that
were
brought
up
for
water
runoff,
which
he
testified,
will
have
a
full
length,
gutter
and
then
privacy
most
times
privacy
is
when
a
two-story
house
is
going
next
to
a
single-story.
This
is
the
reverse,
which
is
interesting,
but
still
a
concern,
and
that's
why
I
asked
about
the
thin
side
at
six
feet.
B
The
windows
are
up
to
nine
feet,
but,
as
we
could
see
on
the
elevation
I
wish
that
the
audience
could
have
seen
as
well.
Those
are
high
windows,
so
there's
not
really
an
opportunity
for
somebody
to
be
standing
at
that
window.
Peering
over
the
fence,
especially
since
average
at
you
it's
around
five
feet,
I
level,
so
I
think
you
know
I'll
support
the
variance
because
it
saves
a
very
nice
tree
that
benefits
that
neighborhood.
A
But
I
would
question
the
common
sense
of
trying
to
keep
a
tree
and
allowed
to
get
that
large
and
that
big,
because
it
doesn't
look
very
big
right
now,
but
if
the
intent
of
saving
a
grand
tree
is
to
allow
it
to
mature
in
canopy
and
get
bigger,
I
would
think
that
at
some
point
a
future
property
owner
might
say
you
know
what
this
is
endangering.
My
investment.
My
house
be
trimming
on
that
tree
to
some
extent
and
I
think
that,
ultimately,
that
trees
going
to
lose.
A
A
When
is
a
tree,
a
hardship
and
when
is
it
not
a
hardship
because
trees
are
everywhere,
you
know,
trees
are
it's
not.
This
is
not
unique
or
singular
to
the
property
at
all,
but
the
tree
code
is
there
to
help
loosen,
preserve
and
protect
large
trees.
So
I
get
that
part
of
the
code.
We
hear
the
phrase
right
tree
right
place
alive,
and
so
my
only
question
and
I
the
builders
done
a
good
job
to
help
that
tree.
L
I
Wanted
to
touch
on
the
tree
specifically,
you
know.
Had
this
not
been
a
live
oak
and
say
a
laurel
oak
or
maybe
a
different
species.
I
think
we'd
be
having
a
different
conversation
here
that
live
oak
is
you
know,
60
to
100
years
old?
It
has
a
lot
of
life
left
in
it.
It
can
take
they've
already
done
some
air
spading.
They
could
do
quite
a
bit
of
work
to
it,
whether
it
be
trimming
or
root
work.
I
G
Board
members
before
we
move
on
to
the
next
item,
going
back
to
the
earlier
continuance
of
therapy
in
1925
I've
had
a
request
to
reconsider,
instead
of
moving
that
to
the
May
hearing
to
move
it
to
the
April
9th
hearing
there
was
someone
available
to
cover
it.
I
would
ask
the
board
to
please
entertain
that
motion.
E
E
That's
a
seven
foot
encroachment
into
the
wetland
setback
for
section,
27,
86,
B,
wetland
protection
and
buffer
buffer
impacts
to
wetlands
associated
with
the
jason
upland
activities
such
as
development
shall
not
be
considered
adverse
if
appropriate,
erosion
control
and
if
buffers
with
a
minimum
with
a
15
feet
in
an
average
with
the
25
feet,
is
provided
so
they're
encroaching
within
that
25
foot
required
setback
and
that's
the
request
before
us.
Natural
resources
found
the
request
consistent,
but
they
did
have
a
condition
to
accompany
the
request.
E
E
What
we
see
here
at
17th,
Peters
to
the
edge
of
the
deck
they're
requesting
18
feet
and
it's
to
the
to
the
pools
edge
and
that's
what's
before
us.
Natural
Resources
is
conditionally
approving
the
deck
encroachment
and
they
have
condition
that
they
have
to
provide
pervious
pavers
in
the
area.
That's
encroaching
into
the
center
and
natural
resources
to
see
what
you're
leveling
on
that.
M
Hello,
my
name
is
Tessa
Shriver
I
live
at
22
and
a
half
units
in
Heath
Drive,
Tampa,
Florida,
33,
604
and
I've
been
sworn
in.
So
we
are
looking
to
reduce
the
wetlands
setback
from
25
feet
to
18
18
feet
at
the
shortest
distance
from
the
wetlands
setback.
First,
when
we
pull
on
the
Hillsborough
River,
our
hardships
are
that
when
we
first
moved
into
the
home,
the
pool
was
so
important
to
us
that
we
had
the
house
actually
pulled
up
to
the
furthest
point
to
the
street.
M
M
It
was
going
to
be
built
right
up
against
the
foundation
of
our
home
and
then
the
the
reason
that
the
pool
looks
so
wonky
is
because
it
was
actually
riding
along
the
line
of
the
wetlands
step
back
as
to
not
encroach
at
all.
We
went
ahead
to
repaid
our
deposit
on
this
drawing
and
about
a
day
later
we
got
a
call
from
the
pool
company.
They
did
not
feel
comfortable
building
up
against
our
foundation,
so
therefore
we
had
to
come
and
get
a
variance
from
y'all.
M
Thirdly,
when
we
came
to
see
Kathy
and
Brian
Kathy
told
me
that
our
survey
that
we
used
to
build
the
home
we've
only
been
been
in
our
home
a
year
in
October
was
was
old,
and
so
we
had
to
get
a
new
one.
We
lost
about
nine
feet
on
our
wetland
setback
between
the
old
one
and
the
new
one
and
I.
Have
that
mean
old
EPC
line.
M
So
you
see
the
top
of
the
bank
there
and
the
old
EPC
line
was
about
nine
feet
over
to
the
side
of
the
bank.
When
we
had
a
tree
done
our
new
APC
line,
it's
right
at
the
top
of
the
bank
and
the
reason
that
we
lost
that
nine
feet
was
because
we
have
these
two
gorgeous
ferns
that
are
growing
that
have
grown
since
we
took
the
first
survey
between
the
second
survey
and
apparently
not
only
are
they
beautiful,
but
they're
also
good
for
erosion
control.
So
that's
why
we
lost
that
nine
feet
there.
M
M
It
is
the
waters
kept
clean
by
silver,
ions
and
natural
minerals,
so
it
just
still
does
use
some
chlorine,
but
it's
about
1/100
of
normal
regular
systems.
We
also
are
going
to
take
care
of
those
ferns
and
we
don't
have
any
grass
or
any
type
of
plants.
We
have
a
zero
scape
yard,
so
we
don't
use
any
water
for
that
and
there
will
be
no
fertilizers
used
anywhere
near
the
river
at
all
or
at
all.
M
M
Here's
the
top
of
the
bank
right
here.
Anyone
here
this
is
the
old
EPC
line
and
then
hit
misses
the
river
here.
So
the
old
EPC
line
came
down
like
this,
and
this
is
approximately
nine
feet
at
the
the
biggest
portion
of
it.
So
when
we
had
the
new
ones
ruined
because
of
those
ferns,
she
wanted
those
to
be
protected.
So
she
just
ran
the
new
the
new
line
right
at
the
top
of
the
bank,
so
actually
at
the
18
feet
that
we're
asking
for
is
that
the
shortest
distance.
M
A
C
A
M
O
M
M
A
A
B
E
A
E
E
J
B
B
A
P
P
P
B
They're
not
crossing
the
already
established
minimum
setback
lines,
so
it
sounds
like
this
is
what
I
could
understand
from
what
was
just
described
to
me.
This
was
set
up
that
if
things
are
closer
than
25
feet,
they
must
be
discussed,
but
if
they're
don't
cross
the
15
feet,
then
they're
presumed
allowable,
if
discussed
and
approved
so
I
guess
that's
the
purpose
of
this
discussion.
Okay,
then.
O
O
Right
I
can
do
that.
Okay,
all
right
I'd
like
to
move
that
the
variance
request
for
case
VR
be
18
116
for
property
located
at
22
and
a
half
and
youth
drive
be
granted
as
depicted
on
the
site
plan
presented
the
public
hearing
for
seeking
a
decrease
in
the
required
wet
line.
Setback
from
25
feet
to
17
feet
for
the
construction
of
a
pool
based
on
the
applicant
presenting
confident,
substantial
evidence.
A
O
J
O
Gonna
go
to
25
to
18,
so
let's
do
we
note
that
as
part
of
this,
so
that
was
based
on
the
applicant
presenting
competent
and
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
and
at
this
public
hearing
of
an
unnecessary
hardship
of
practical
difficulty
when
considering
the
five
hardship
criteria
set
forth
in
section
27,
80
of
the
city
code
and
I.
Think
in
this
case
it's
the
peculiarity
of
the
lot
we
have
wetlands
here
we
had
you
know
yeah.
We
can
also
making
their
best
effort
trying
to
accommodate
the
situation
with
the
wetlands
by
moving
the
pool.
A
M
A
L
E
Anthony
Lanting
development,
this
application
number
of
the
RV
19:11
the
property
address,
is
27
10,
west
Louisiana
Avenue
per
Section,
27,
156
and
27
to
90.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
east
side,
yard
setback
from
7
feet
to
0
feet
and
the
west
side
yard
setback
from
3
feet
to
0
feet
to
allow
existing
carport
and
cover
concrete
area
to
remain.
The
property
is
owned.
Our
is
50
and
was
purchased
in
2012.
E
J
J
Basically,
this
home
was
purchased
in
1998,
you've
been
living
there
for
quite
some
time.
The
actual
roof
itself
was
made
in
2000
and
was
just
a
roof
to
cover,
basically
there
so
really
like
cement
there.
So
it
makes
your
roof
to
cover
that
up
in
2016
we
did
fix
the
roof
because
obviously
was
bad
and
that's
what
we
have
to
you
know
resubmit
permits
and
whatnot.
My
mother
in
2013
started
a
daycare
from
the
house
and
that's
basically
what's
that
is
that's
making.
J
You
know
for
a
roof
for
the
daycare
itself,
so
there's
not
actual
carpet
or
anything
the
garage.
It
works
normal
and
that's
just
you
know
interesting
to
take
her
and
for
the
kids
to
have
protection
to
know
when
they
go
outside
and
play.
We
also
have
a
letter
that
all
bunch
of
the
neighbors
signed
basically
saying
that
you
know
it's
okay
for
half
that
there
and
from
the
actual
end
of
that
roof
too
other
neighbor
you
looking
at
at
least
15
feet.
So
it's
nothing's
gonna
bother
anyone
at
all.
A
A
J
J
J
The
entrance
to
the
daycare
is
where
the
dyani
is
that
they've
had
that
for
years,
we've
never
had
an
issue
of
code
enforcement,
there's
a
new
gentleman
who's,
no
longer
inspector
we've
been
harassed,
and
it's
just
sad
that
we're
here
today,
but
we've
had
meetings
with
the
city,
and
this
is
what
we
were
when
I
say
we
were
trying
to
help
each
other,
we're
a
good
community
and
to
us
this
is
her
hardship
to
her
living
that
an
inspector
it's
the
one.
Who's
personally
went
after
her.
J
We
now
learn
that
it's
a
violation,
it's
a
case,
I
hate
to
be
the
one
to
say
it
like
this,
but
you
you're,
gonna,
see
a
lot
of
people
apply
for
variances
and
they're
all
Hispanics,
okay,
and
it's
sad
but
we're
here
today
to
support
her
and
we
have
many
neighbors
here
and,
and
they
she's
a
working
person
single.
She
raised
her
family
there.
We
have
no
problems
with
the
bucket
there
were
gutters
applied,
the
neighbor
requested
to
be
able
to
collect
the
water.
J
R
My
name
is
Geraldine
mountain-man
jovi
I
live
it.
I
reside
at
2717,
West
Osborn
having
you
I
have
been
sworn
in:
okay,
okay,
we
have
been
in
this
neighborhood
for
48
years,
and
I
am
also
Hispanic.
Okay,
48
years
we've
been
there,
we
have
fought.
We
have
been
for
City
Council
with
many
issues
many
times
this
neighborhood
is
now
I.
Also
have
a
family
member
that
lives
on
Louisiana,
so
we're
on
both
of
those
those
think
those
roots.
Sap
Lacan
asked
for
the
license
for
daycare.
R
R
There's
this
woman
has
you
have
a
an
enormous
backyard?
If
you're
only
allowed
to
have
10
children,
you
can
put
the
covered
roof
in
your
backyard.
There's
no
reason
to
have
to
encroach
on
the
setback
because
what's
happened
on
Louisiana
non
Osborn,
27:15,
Louisiana,
27:14,
Louisiana,
27
to
14
West
Osborn,
they
put
fences
on
the
side
of
the
house,
you
can't
the
inspectors
are
not
allowed
to
go
in
the
backyard
and
they
have
apartment.
Many
of
these
homes
have
apartments
in
the
back
and
they
cannot.
The
code
cannot
go
back
there
into
somebody's
backyard.
R
R
R
They
have
a
structure
on
the
front
setback:
okay
on
the
Front's
2707
Louisiana
on
the
east
side,
2721
that
house
that
the
people
had
to
actually
they
lost
their
home
because
they
had
gotten
one
of
these
loans
and
they
built
a
structure
all
the
way
up
to
the
property
line
concrete
block.
Now
this
house
is
up
for
sale,
so
the
next
owner
of
this
house
is
going
to
have
an
issue
with
that
and
we.
A
R
20
seconds
through
the
other
block,
this
is
West
Osborne.
On
the
east
side,
there
up
to
the
property
line,
I'm,
not
here.
Okay,
on
the
on
the
east
side,
2703
and
2705
has
a
joined
2705
with
23.
All
these
properties
are
joining
each
other,
and
now
we
have
on
2705
West
Osborne.
They
have
a
school
bus
ride.
Is
it
upside
down
2705?
They
also
have
a
daycare
and
on
the
east
side
they
have
a
van
and
of
school
bus
that
are
parked
in
front
of
the
property.
So.
J
A
H
My
name
is
Nelson
Mondovi
I
am
her
spouse
I
live
at
27
17
West
Osborn,
I'm
gonna
read
what
I
wrote
down
to
stay
within
my
allotted
time.
We
are
here
in
opposition
to
the
above
various
requests.
The
applicant
is
requesting
to
reduce
the
east
side
yard
setback
from
seven
to
zero
and
the
rear
setback
from
three
to
zero
to
keep
an
attached,
56
foot
long
by
8,
foot
carport
and
covered
concrete.
This
variance
is
being
requested
or
north
in
order
to
continue
illegal
use
of
this
area.
This
lauda
zone
are
as
50
single-family
residence.
H
This
carport
was
illegally
constructed
without
a
building
permit
or
any
type
of
areas.
Apparently,
the
applicant
asked
for
a
license
for
daycare
for
less
than
ten
children.
The
7th
foot
to
zero
on
the
east
side
is
not
needed,
as
there's
ample
room
in
the
rear
yard
to
put
up
a
roofed
area
for
children's
activities
and
a
play
area
if
desired.
This
should
be
in
compliance
with
the
rear
yard
setback
of
three
feet.
The
7th
foot
side
setbacks,
as
well
as
a
front
and
rear
setback.
H
Words
originally
put
in
place
as
a
code
of
compliance
to
protect
everyone
when
contractors
build
a
home
they're
required
to
maintain
building
code,
setbacks
and
they're
inspected
to
ensure
that
they
do
so,
there
has
to
be
side,
front
and
rear
setbacks.
If
not,
every
constructed
home
would
have
joined
the
one
belonging
to
the
neighbors
and
appearing
like
apartment
complexes
or
army
barracks,
this
buffer
zone
between
home
for
Texas
from
happiness.
H
This
applicant
has
failed
to
demonstrate
to
other
properties
located
that
the
alleged
hardship
is
unique
to
their
property
alone,
when
in
fact,
all
others
must
comply
with
the
setbacks.
This
request
does
not
meet
the
hardship,
criterias
requirements
of
chapter
27
of
the
city
of
Tampa
code
ordinance,
as
you
are
aware,
unfortunately,
in
the
City
and
County
people
illegally
construct
and
make
additions
to
their
homes
detached
and
attached.
These
are
done
on
weekends,
without
legal
permits
being
obtained.
Knowing
full-well
have
they
applied,
they
would
not
have
had
their
application
or
the
site
plans
approved.
H
Many
of
these
illegal
structures
are
put
in
place
later
closed
and
uses
rental
departments
the
examples
of
three
now
in
existence.
There
are
many
other
homes
in
this
twenty
seconds,
many
other
homes
in
this
area
that
have
illegal
structures
on
the
seven
foot
setback
code,
employment
is
code.
Enforcement
is
currently
aware
of
these
and
is
in
the
process
of
having
these
violations
come
into.
Compliance
by
allowing
this
flagrant
violation
to
remain
would
only
serve
the
other
violators
to
ask
for
the
same
treatment,
which
is
unfair
to
other
families.
H
H
P
J
P
Actually
we're
not
interested
in
use,
yes,
is
not
our
issue.
What
we
want
to
look
at
is:
why
does
this
structure
need
to
be
here?
Why
does
it
need
to
encroach
into
into
those
setbacks?
So
just
just
so,
you
follow
what
we
typically
do
in
these
situations.
You
with
me.
Yes,
sir.
Okay,
usually
we'll
look
at
these,
as
if
it
were
a
request
to
build
it
as
new,
in
other
words,
ignore
the
fact
that.
P
We'll
look
at
it,
it's
okay!
Why
should
why?
Should
we
allow
somebody
if
you
were
to
come
in
today
and
say
we
want
to
build
something?
Why
should
we
allow
it
to
go
here?
So
what
we
need
to
understand
from
you
is
why
this
structure
needs
to
go
where
it
is
why
you
can't
do
what
you
want
to
do
with
it
by
putting
covered
area
in
the
backyard
or
something
else
can
you
help
us
understand.
J
Well,
the
daycare
itself
from
what
I'm
understanding
for
my
mother
do
you
need
to
have
an
area
where
the
kids
can
play
under
a
roof
and
then
that's
an
area
where
the
kids
can
play.
You
know
without
a
bridge,
so
there
is
the
backyard
it's
their
playing
area
and
there's
also
a
roof
area.
So
the
Sun
doesn't
hit
the
kids.
You
know,
especially
in
Florida.
The
Sun
gets
pretty
hot
out
here.
So
that's
what
that
is
on
the
left
side.
Do.
P
J
P
J
I
J
A
J
P
A
Any
other
questions,
I
have
a
question
for
legal
I.
Know
that
we're
not
here
to
discuss
the
use,
but
I,
don't
I,
don't
have
a
clear
understanding
in
a
single-family
zoned
in
a
situation
like
this.
What
what
is
allowed
with
daycare
in
terms
of
number
of
kids
and
what
are
the
exact
requirements
for
outdoor
protection,
covering
that
we're
hearing
testimony
on
is
a
written
code
or
rule
that
applies
here.
The.
G
Code,
the
code
and
Miss
Anthony
can
address
us
as
well.
The
code
speaks
to
the
allowance
for
daycares
and
a
maximum
number
of
children.
The
requirement
for
covered
play
areas
does
not
originate
from
our
code.
I
believe
that
that
may
be
a
state
requirement
for
a
covered
play
area
for
for
the
children,
regardless.
G
D
G
G
E
J
B
B
B
A
B
B
A
A
H
A
G
A
A
E
Anthony
land
development-
this
is
application
number
VRB
1920.
The
property
address
is
220
North,
Howard
Avenue
per
Section
27.
To
eighty
three
point:
seven,
the
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
require
parking
spaces
from
19
to
9,
to
allow
for
a
change
of
views
to
the
existing
two-story
building
from
professional
office
to
medical
office.
The
property
is
zoned
CG
and
was
purchased
in
2018.
According
to
Hillsborough
County
property
appraiser,
the
three
thousand
forty
eight
square
foot
commercial
building
was
constructed
in
1934.
B
G
B
G
A
E
E
E
D
Good
evening
may
I
proceed
yep.
You
need
mr.
chairman
board
members,
my
name's
mark
bentley,
401,
East,
Jackson,
Street,
Tampa,
3,
3,
602
and
I
have
been
sworn
just
to
advise
the
board.
Is
that
there's
a
pending
site
plan?
That's
been
a
signed
off
on
by
both
Natural
Resources
and
urban
design.
That
now
has
nine
parking
spaces.
So
that's
on
file
with
the
city.
I've
got
a
copy
here
to
enter
into
the
record,
but
in
any
event,
I
represent
Tampa
rejuvenation
and
this
would
be
their
seventh
location
in
the
Tampa
Bay
area.
D
The
use
of
the
property,
it
will
be
a
Wellness
Center,
weight,
loss,
hormonal
therapy
and
similar
services.
The
in
light
of
the
fact
that
the
client
is
very
familiar
with
parking
codes
and
their
requirements.
They
feel
that
the
nine
parking
spaces
as
proposed
are
sufficient
for
their
needs.
They'd
have
two
to
three
employees
and
they
anticipate
having
about
three
clients
at
any
given
time.
So.
D
This
is
considered
a
change
of
use
because
the
prior
use
this
looked
like
kind
of
a
renegade
operation.
I
guess
you
could
call
it
that
was
characterized
as
professional
office
that
the
parking
ratio
was
three
point
three
four
thousand.
This
is
medical
office
and
at
6
per
thousand.
Therefore,
that
created
the
conflict,
the
need
for
us
to
be
here,
along
with
some
other
reasons
which
I'll
explain
to
the
board.
There
presents
a
significant
hardship
on
the
property
owner
and
in
trying
to
deal
with
this
unique
property
and
unique
situation.
The
building
is
a
converted.
D
So
this
is
very
challenging
to
redevelop
a
project
like
this,
because
in
this
situation,
not
only
the
city's
general
codes
imposed,
but
it's
also
subject
to
the
West
Tampa
overlay
urban
design.
So
there's
multiple
challenges.
So
the
new
code
requires
that
reduced
parking
opportunities
that
the
subject
property
are
a
20
foot.
24
foot
parking
backup
requirement
the
prohibition
from
using
the
existing
parking
spaces
on
the
north
and
south
sides
that
were
used
by
the
predecessor
professional
office.
D
The
buffer
requirements
are
very
significant
and
I'd
analyzed
that
this
afternoon
I
was
pretty
amazed
and
impressed
that
there's
a
10
foot
buffer
required
for
the
west
side
of
the
property
eight
feet
for
the
north
eight
feet
to
the
east.
So
just
these
buffers
alone
consumed
26%
of
the
entire
property
that
are
just
kind
of
sacred
territory
that
you
can't
do
anything
parking
what-have-you,
it's
26%
are
dedicated
to
buffers.
There's
also
requirement
to
provide
protective
radii
for
Oaks
and
palms
on
the
site.
We've
been
working
through
natural
resources
and
mr.
D
D
Here's
the
front
of
the
house
facing
Howard
I,
think
tawanda
shown
you
a
few
here's
looking
South
North
elevation
from
North
B
Street,
here's
how
we
started
out
the
original
site
plan
that
went
through
perma
Dean
and
got
rejected.
We
had
13
parking
spaces
and
we
filed
last
July,
we've
kind
of
worked
our
way
through
the
system.
At
this
point
in
time
the
only
issue
is
parking:
we've
narrowed
it
down
to
that.
So
there's
13.
Now
here's
a
site
plan.
Mr.
D
D
D
Here's
a
shot
of
the
house.
You
could
see
the
condition
I
showed
you
in
the
earlier
photo
and
located
across
the
street.
Here's
an
offsite
parking
opportunity.
If
it
ever
came
up
and
we
don't
anticipate
it
where
you
could
lease
surplus
spaces
from
this
law
office,
another
law
office
down
the
street.
Here's
our
immediate
neighbor
to
the
south,
some
kind
of
commercial
use.
D
So,
in
summary,
the
evidence
shows
that
this
is
a
unique
situation.
The
building
is
already
there
and
is
85
years
old
in
a
building
that
our
client
is
trying
to
redevelop
on
a
heavily
treed
lot.
There
needs
to
be
some
flexibility
in
the
application
of
city
codes
to
encourage
the
city's
redevelopment
preservation
policies,
especially
in
a
situation
like
this,
where
you're
subject
to
an
additional
level
of
regulation
that
West
Tampa
overlay
redevelopment
of
this
85
year
old
structure
is
clearly
in
the
public
interest.
D
The
client
has
six
other
similar
facilities
and
believes
that
six
to
nine
spaces
will
make
this
a
successful
operation.
They
would
not
do
anything
to
inconvenience
decline
or
jeopardizes
the
obviously
significant
investment
they're
making
in
the
property
I
think.
If
you
look
on
the
property
appraisers
website,
they
paid
roughly
seven
hundred
thousand
dollars
just
for
that
building
in
its
present
condition,
the
grannie
of
the
variance
will
not
prejudice
any
owner
or
the
public
interest.
The
property's
unique
must
meet.
The
code
was
Sutton
while
preserving
this
historic
structure,
the
facility
closes
at
7,
3:00
p.m.
D
on
Friday,
and
it's
closed
Saturday
and
Sunday.
If
parking
should
become
an
issue,
as
I
mentioned,
there
are
many
parking
opportunities
off-site
on
adjacent
commercial
properties
and
because
the
client
is
demonstrated
that
has
done
everything
reasonably
possible
to
comply
with
city
codes.
There
is
clearly
unique
situation
here
that
imposes
an
unnecessary
hardship
on
the
client,
so
it
was
rather
quick
and
I
could
have
given
you
the
long
version,
but
you.
A
D
D
A
I
Name
is
John
marsh
transportation.
I'm
here
for
Jonathan
Scott
you
can't
attend
I
was
instructed
that
transportation
objects
to
the
parking
reduction
from
19
to
8
on
the
grounds.
This
is
I
think
it's
about
a
58
percent
decrease
it's
excessive.
That
will
result
in
the
overflow
parking
into
the
neighborhood.
Once
this
is
granted.
There
is
no
mechanism
that
will
require
them
to
lease
additional
parking
and
the
next
tenant
that
won't
be
a
medical
use
may
meet
the
projected
demand
for
that
square
feet.
I
There
are
a
few
other
issues
that
will
we
will
attach
to
any
permit
and
transportation.
One
is
the
alley
we
need
to
examine
the
alley.
It
may
need
to
be
paved
to
city
of
Tampa
stout
standards
from
Howard
to
Armenia.
We
are
not
sure
if
the
parallel
space
that
was
marked
number
nine
on
the
site
plan
meets
our
requirements
for
maneuvering
into
the
parallel
space
totally
out
of
the
right-of-way.
So
we're
not
sure
if
that's
a
viable
space
or
not
staff
was
that
meant
the
24
foot
measurement,
which
includes
the
platted
alley.
I
Width
wasn't
marked
on
the
site
plan.
We
have
we're
not
sure
if
there
really
is
24
feet,
though
I
will
it's
probably
pretty
close
and
the
driveway
apron
on
North
B,
probably
only
muff
do
you
need
to
be
modified,
but
those
are
all
things
that
we'll
deal
with
as
part
of
the
normal
permitting
practice,
but
just
like
this
have
some
other
issues.
P
P
I
Code,
there
is
a
provision
in
the
code
for
leasing
offsite
parking
within
a
thousand
feet.
If
it's,
if
the
donor
site
has
spaces
available
in
excess,
okay
and
typically
I
get
these
all
the
time
where
somebody
requires
twenty,
its
twenty
four
spaces
they
only
have
eighteen,
then
I
will
ask
them
how
what
he
can
do
about
your
parking.
So
that's
traditionally
done
as
part
of
any
standard
review.
All.
P
I
G
Think
I
can
are.
We
have
very
specific
requirements
for
those
leases
they
have
to
be
for
five
years
for
a
new,
your
ball.
We
typically
would
not
allow
a
sort
of
springing
condition.
If
you
will
it's
when
the
use
comes
in
and
we
look
at
the
staff
at
land
development
looks
at
that
parking
requirement.
They
then
state
how
many
spaces
are
left
over
to
be
recovered
through
the
lease
process.
P
I
just
want
to
understand
and
and
I
don't
want
to
get
into
really
hypotheticals,
but
they
need
10
spaces
correct
in
order
to
satisfy
this.
So
if
they
could,
if
they
had
the
ability
to
use
those
10
spaces,
no,
there
they're
saying
there
don't
ever
expect
to
use
them
all
right
if
they
have
the
ability
to
use
those
10
spaces.
Will
that
satisfy
the
requirements
that
they
have
a
five-year
agreement
and
have
the
ability
to
use
those
spaces,
regardless
of
what
they
pay
for
them
or
what?
P
G
P
G
I
To
go
down
the
rabbit
hole
that
the
lease
part
okay,
so
so
all
parking
is
supposed
to
be
entirely
on-site.
We
do
not
allow
offsite
parking
to
count
towards
your
requirement.
So
when
you,
the
the
leasing
issue,
is
a
wave
you're
still
meeting
your
parking
requirement
on
private
property.
If
it
meets
all
these
other
little
requirements,
you
know
it's
accessible,
you're
able
to
cross
over.
You
have
a
police,
so
so
as
far
as
we're
concerned.
In
that
way,
that's
that's
one
of
the
outs
that
we
created
for
people
so.
I
I
A
P
D
D
I
brought
up
the
leasing,
thing
and
I
knew
would
probably
lead
to
a
lot
of
discussion
going
down
that
path,
but
what
we
could
have
done
is
actually
just
go
through
the
design
exception,
with
the
lease
like
Kristin
indicated
with
five
years,
and
you
could
have
multiple
leases
at
least
one
spot
here
three
here
to
satisfy
code.
However,
the
challenge
here
is
that
the
city,
on
the
one
hand,
the
preservationist,
don't
want
us
to
knock
the
building
down.
Okay,
so
we're
trying
to
balance
these
competing
interests.
D
Here
you
heard
testimony
for
me
that
the
client
has
six
other
facilities
and
that
parking
is
sufficient.
I
understand
your
concern
is
hey
Bentley.
That
makes
sense
for
your
guy,
but
when
they're
out
of
there
in
two
years
or
he
sells
the
property,
then
what
are
we
gonna
do,
but
that's
just
a
challenge
in
an
urban
setting
these
redevelopment
projects.
You
guys
sit
up
here
for
a
long
time.
D
What
we
could,
what
we
could
do
is
you
know,
just
withdraw
the
application
and
go
get
a
lease
and
move
on,
but
I
didn't
think
that,
under
this
circumstances
that
it
would
be
problematic
and
like
I
mentioned
before,
we've
been
in
permitting
since
last
July.
We've
had
multiple
meetings
with
all
the
departments
and
no
disrespect
to
mr.
marish,
but
he
told
you
here
after
we've
been
spending
all
these
time
and
effort
with
attorneys
and
architects
and
arborist
etc.
That
he's
not
familiar
with
the
case.
D
He
said
there
were
other
problems
with
the
site
that
he's
a
site
he's
not
familiar
with,
but
he
said,
there's
problems
before
he
got
off
here
at
the
podium.
He
said:
I'm
not
familiar,
but
I'm,
just
winging
it.
Okay,
and
it's
all
come
down
to
this.
We
file
this
application.
We
have
sign
offs,
we've
got
recently
from
urban
design
and
also
they
signed
off
on
parking
to
a
certain
extent
to
go.
O
P
Just
want
to
focus
on
the
issue
that
I'm
that
I
was
try
and
I
appreciate
you.
It
was
a
little
bit
of
an
open-ended
question
and
I
appreciate
that
you
were
trying
to
address
it.
Is
there
something
I
want
you
understand?
My
views
on
these
are
on
these
types
of
requests
are
evolving
to
some
degree.
So
if,
if
maybe
we're
open
to
some
reduction,
but
not
the
magnitude
that
you're
talking
about,
is
there
some
lesser
amount
of
Elise
that
you
would
be
willing
able
to
secure.
D
Instead
of
us,
just
kind
of
you
know,
I
guess
doing
this
thing
on
the
fly.
Why
don't
I?
Just
we've
got
all
these
people
waiting
patiently
patiently
and
you
guys
have
a
long
agenda.
Why
don't
I
just
continue
this
case,
hopefully
till
next
month
and
I
can
address
some
of
these
issues
that
we
weren't
aware
of
raised
by
mr.
Marsh's
Department
can
also
talk
to
the
client
about
alternative
parking
opportunities,
whether
it's
leasing
or
not.
So
we
can
just
move
on.
P
A
G
A
D
G
A
E
Wand
Anthony
land
development,
his
application,
number
vrb
1923,
the
property
address,
it's
49,
11,
West,
San,
Rafael
Street
for
section
27
156.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
side
yard
from
7
feet
to
1
feet
to
keep
an
unpermitted
enclosed
park
back
porch
the
property
is
owned,
are
75
and
rs.100.
There's
a
split
zoning
on
the
property
and
was
purchased
by
the
applicant.
Originally
in
1988,
the
existing
single-family
residence
was
built
in
1960.
The
property
is
currently
under
violation
for
work
without
permits.
A
Q
Good
evening
board
members
Jena
Grimes
with
the
law
firm
of
Hill
Ward,
Henderson,
101,
East,
Kennedy,
Boulevard
and
tonight
I'm
before
you
representing,
marked
uber
Marcos
standing
here
to
my
left.
He
is
the
owner
of
the
of
the
subject.
Property
property
in
the
picture
here
circled
in
red
is
a
West,
a
West
Shore
on
West
San,
Rafael
Street.
Q
Q
The
other
unique
aspect
of
the
property
is
that
it
has
actually
has
a
split
zone.
What
that
means
is
that
the
zoning
line
actually
goes
right
through
the
middle
of
the
property
right
here
in
yellow
property
to
the
north
in
the
North.
Half
of
this
lot
is
zoned
rs.100.
The
south
half
is
zoned
rs.5000,
rs.75
I'm.
Sorry,
the
home
that
currently
exists
on
the
on
the
site
was
built
originally
in
1960.
It's
the
it's
the
same
time.
The
same
footprint,
it's
a
was
a
very
modest
1,700
square
foot
house,
mr.
Q
In
the
late
1990s,
there
was
the
storm,
a
a
waterspout
that
came
down
the
canal
and
actually
ripped
off
that
screen
room
and
it
was
destroyed
for
20
years
about
20
years.
After
that,
mr.
Ober
lived
without
a
screen
room.
He
had
the
deck
in
the
back
and
the
dock
and
the
canal,
and
he
also
had
very
good
neighbors.
He
peacefully
coexisted
with
those
neighbors.
He
didn't
have
a
fence.
They
had
no
walls.
Q
He
tells
me
that
they
were
the
kind
of
neighborhood
where
they
looked
after
one
another
that
all
changed
in
2014
and
that's
when
the
property
immediately
to
the
west,
49:13
West,
San,
Rafael
was
purchased
and
that
began.
The
new
owners
began
construction
of
a
new
home
over
5,000
square
feet,
and
in
this
setting,
I
would
say:
I
would
submit
to
you
that
it
is
a
textbook
definition
of
a
McMansion,
as
you
can
see,
this
home
towers
entirely
over
mr.
overs,
smaller
home
to
the
east.
Q
That
the
the
fries
are
the
current
owners
of
this
property
and,
as
you
can
also
see
from
the
area,
this
is
their
home.
This
is
mr.
Robers
home.
They
built
setback
to
setback
and
that
wasn't
even
enough
for
them.
They
requested
a
design
exception
because
they
wanted
to
exceed
the
setback
requirements,
so
they
applied
to
this
to
the
staff
in
your
packaging
materials
you
can
see.
Here
is
the
setback
lines
and
you
can
see
where
their
home
extends
even
beyond
the
setback
home.
Q
That
was
the
first
variance
that
he
requested
second
variance
or
waiver
that
he
got
was
removal
of
a
42
inch
oak
tree
in
the
front
yard.
Mr.
Ober
didn't
look
after
that.
Nor
did
he
objected
to
the
setback.
Variance
the
design
exception
to
to
have
the
rear
setback
waived
didn't
objected.
Mr.
Ober
didn't
object
to
that.
He
didn't
object
to
the
removal
of
the
brand
tree.
Q
Mr.
Frey
also
requested
a
seawall
extension
that
was
immediately
adjacent
to
mr.
Robers
property.
Mr.
Ober
agreed
to
that
too.
Then
it
was
the
fourth
variance
request
where
the
the
issue
arose
and
that
request
was
for
a
dock
and
a
boat
slip
to
be
constructed.
Perpendicular
to
mr.
phrase
property
and
while
mr.
Ober
was
more
than
willing
to
accommodate
his
earlier
three
variance
requests.
This
request
would
have
affected
mr.
Robers
property
and
prevented
him
from
being
able
to
use
his
boat
slip.
Q
So
he
objected,
as
did
the
neighbors
on
the
other
side
of
mr.
Frey.
At
that
point,
the
neighborhood
relations
soured
and
mr.
Frey
was
very
angry
with
mr.
Ober
for
objecting
to
that
variance
for
the
dock
and
the
boat,
lift
and
could
ended
up
constructing
a
different
dock
and
boat
lifts
and
things
endure
that
way.
The
tension
and
endure
that
way
for
a
couple
years
and
then
mr.
Q
Ober
started
experiencing
finding
rocks
in
his
truck
bed
finding
rocks
in
his
boat
finding
rocks
on
his
desk,
and
at
that
point
he
decided
that
he
needed
to
do
something
to
provide
some
privacy
and
a
buffer
from
the
adjacent
property
and
that's
when
he
hired
a
handyman
in
2018
who
told
him
that
he
could
rebuild
the
this
previously
existing
screen.
Porch
as
long
as
it
was
on
the
same
slab,
and
if
he
did
so,
we
wouldn't
require
a
permit,
so
construction
began
under
those.
Under
that
situation.
Someone
called
code
enforcement.
Mr.
Q
Ober,
then
hired
an
architect
prepared
plans
submitted
them
to
the
building
department.
The
building
department
rejected
the
plans
because
of
the
of
the
setback
violation,
and
so
here
we
are
today
and
mr.
Ober
has
has
you-
can
show
you
some
pictures
of
what
he
has
proposed
to
construct,
because
all
along
his
primary
concern
was
protection
from
the
adjacent
home
and
also
privacy.
Q
You
can
see
just
on
two
sides:
there's
a
hard
structure
and
there's
a
hard
roof.
This
is
a
this.
Is
a
picture
to
show
the
adjacent
property
to
frame
property
and
the
height
of
their
children's
playhouse,
which
actually
exceeds
the
height
of
the
proposed
screen
room.
There's
several
other
other
pictures
in
your
book.
I
didn't
think
I'm
not
going
to
include
all
of
them
here,
but
I
did
want
to
go
through
and
show
you
these
very
quickly
again.
This
is
the
picture
of
the
screen.
Porch
back
here
and
I'll.
Show
you
where
the
screen
is.
Q
It's
just
two
sides
where
it's
hard,
where
it's
immediately
adjacent
to
the
to
the
large
home
next
door.
Again,
you
can
see
the
height
of
the
children's
playhouse
and
on
the
freight
property
is
even
higher.
Here
you
have
the
entry,
the
hard
side
you
can
start
to
see.
Inside
again,
it's
constructed
on
the
existing
slab
and
I
took
a
picture
of
the
slab
itself
so
that
you
can
see
that
it
was
a
old
cement.
Q
Q
Lastly,
from
walked
kind
of
walking
through
it,
you
can
see
the
dock
off
to
the
to
the
north
and
then
here's
a
picture
standing
on
the
dock.
Looking
back
towards
the
screen
room
screen
on
two
sides,
hard
covered
on
that
side
and
then
the
freight
house-
and
you
again,
you
can
see
how
it
towers
over
this
house.
Q
We
have
the
support
of
several
neighbors.
There's
several
people
here
to
speak
tonight.
The
only
objector
we
have
of
all
people
is
mr.
Frey,
and
not
only
is
the
objecting,
but
he's
hired
an
attorney
to
attend
the
hearing
here
tonight
and
to
end
to
fight
it
and
I
spoke
to
the
attorney.
He
gave
me
the
professional
courtesy
of
telling
me
that
he'd
be
here
this
evening
and
what
he
told
me
was
that
mr.
Frey
feels
that
this
variance
is
substantial
and
that
he
objects
to
it.
Q
I
think,
in
my
view,
that's
the
height
of
hypocrisy
when
you've
requested
for
variances
of
your
own,
and
your
house
is
towering
over
another
person's
home
to
say
that
this
variance
is
substantial.
Furthermore,
it's
his
actions
that
are
creating
the
need
for
the
variance
mr.
Ober
didn't
have
a
screen.
Porch,
you
didn't
have
the
need
for
one
for
twenty
years,
and
it
wasn't
until
this
new
home
was
built
that
he
thought
that
he
would
need
to
have
one.
A
Q
Can
I
get
through
those
real
fast
I
did
submit
to
you
in
writing
the
hardship
for
our
responses
to
the
hardship
criteria,
but
it's
an
irregular
lot
split
zoning.
It's
unique
in
that
respect.
There's
a
previous
porch
constructed
in
the
same
location.
We
have
the
need
for
privacy.
Nobody
else
has
shares
those
kinds
of
situations.
As
we
do
the
actions
the
hardship
did
not
result
from
the
actions
of
the
applicant
they've
lit
as
I
said,
lived
without
the
Supreme
Court's
constructed
it
only
for
privacy
and
protection
from
the
neighbor.
Q
The
variance
doesn't
interfere
or
injure
the
rights
of
others.
At
the
height
of
the
porches.
Roof
is
only
eight
feet
slower
than
the
children's
playhouse.
You
can't
see
it
from
the
phrase
side
of
the
property
and
it's
closed
and
won't
interfere
with
their
use
of
their
property
and
then
substantial
justice.
The
variance
will
result
in
substantial
justice
because
it'll
allow
mr.
over
to
build
a
closed-in
porch
and
protect
his
yard
from
the
adjacent
home.
Q
P
I
apologize
and
I
apologize
because
I
didn't
realize
this
until
you
started
your
presentation
I
own,
a
lot
on
49:24
West,
San,
Rafael
Street,
which
is
a
vacant
lot,
but
I
think
technically
puts
me
within
the
notice
area.
I
didn't
get
a
notice
because
it's
a
vacant
lot,
but
because
of
that
I
think
I
have
to
recuse
myself
from
this
hearing,
so
I'm
gonna,
step
out
and
counsel
address
whatever
it
needs
to
get
addressed
for
mr.
Poe
Thank.
G
A
J
J
I
strongly
support
what
Mark's
done.
It
looks
very
nice
in
the
neighborhood
which
are
all
ranch-style
homes,
there's
anything
that
setup
whacked
in
the
neighborhood.
It's
the
mini
mansion
that
was
just
put
up
there,
but
you
can
see
many
more
people
are
talking.
Marc's
favor
he's
been
a
great
neighbor
and.
A
L
L
L
Kate
Lopez
senior
one
two:
oh
four,
Culver
files
drive
here
in
Tampa
three,
three:
six,
two
nine
I've
known
mr.
Ober
for
more
than
40
years,
I've
lived
in
South
Tampa
for
over
35
years,
I'm
very
familiar
with
when
mr.
over
acquired
that
property
I'm
very
familiar
with
the
layout
of
that
property.
I've
been
there
many
many
many
times
through
the
years
of
I've,
been
professionally
engaged
with
mr.
Ober
I've
been
socially
engaged
with
mr.
Ober.
We've
spent
a
lot
of
time.
L
There
had
his
house,
you
saw
the
screen
enclosure,
it's
it's
in
the
exact
same
footprint
that
were
this
now
partial
wood
screen
enclosure,
says
and
if
anything
provides
more
of
a
barrier,
security
or
privacy
than
would
have
otherwise
been.
If
that
structure
hadn't
been
blown
down,
I've
been
there
many
times,
I've
never
seen
the
neighbors
wandering
around
complaining
about
invasion
of
their
privacy
or
anything
of
that
nature.
So
I'm
here
to
verify
what
counsel
has
said
as
a
presentation
of
the
evidence,
because
what
she
says
an
accurate
representation
of
what
the
situation
has
existed.
L
South
Tampa
is
you
all
probably
know
better
than
anybody
has
gone
from
smaller
homes,
on
smaller
Lots,
to
create
much
larger
houses
on
much
larger
Lots,
and
that's
what
happened
here.
They
built
a
very,
very,
very
large
house
on
the
existing
were
locked
with
a
home.
That's
been
it
there
since
the
1960s
and
as
a
result,
someone's
unhappy
that
perhaps
the
structures
are
too
closed,
so
I
would
be
much
in
favor
of
granting
of
liberation.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Next.
J
J
Not
had
any
direct
confrontation
or
conversation
with
him,
I've
just
watched
this
mansion
fortress
go
up
and
I
believe
that
he
is
towering
over
mr.
Oprah's
property
and
I.
Think
mr.
Ober
needs
some
relief
from
this
board
and
from
the
council
city,
whoever
to
be
able
to
continue
to
live
in
his
home
for
many
years
peacefully
and
quietly.
Thank
you.
A
L
G
N
L
A
L
I
said:
I
live
at
49
17,
a
West
San
Raphael,
which
is
two
doors
to
the
west,
and
mr.
over
the
canal
runs
east
and
west.
Most
of
our
homes
face
the
canal,
either
south
or
north.
My
house
happens
to
face
the
south.
The
rear
of
my
house
faces
the
north.
Mr.
Ober
is
on
the
end
of
the
canal.
He
looks
down
the
canal,
so
this
structure
that
he's
proposing
to
replace
is
simply
something
that
had
been
there
for
many
years
again:
I've
lived
there
18
years
and
I've
known
mark
for
probably
40.
L
All
he
wants
to
do
is
get
some
privacy
from
this
house
that,
in
my
opinion,
is
over
built
on
the
law.
It's
a
it's
an
interesting
lot.
It's
pie-shaped!
It's
only
got
45
feet
of
waterfront
where
most
of
us
have
a
hundred,
but
because
of
the
pie
shape,
the
house
was
kind
of
forced
in
there
and
I
guess
that's
what
led
to
this
gentleman
coming
down
and
asking
for
various
types
of
variances
because
he's
dealing
with
something
that
he'll
only
he
has,
which
unfortunately
is
45
feet
instead
of
100
I.
Think
marks.
L
Property
is
probably
roughly
a
hundred.
All
he
wants
to
do
is
replace
something
that
was
already
there.
It's
in
no
way
going
to
impede
anyone's
view
of
anything
anyone's
access
of
anything.
He
just
wants
some
protection
from
this
overbearing
structure
next
door,
where
he
doesn't
have
that
now
he
did
earlier
because
he
says
don't
be
the
attorney
quite
correctly
said
the
former
neighbors.
There
was
never
any
issue,
never
any
need.
L
J
Joey
Lopez,
on
behalf
of
mr.
over
as
well
I've
been
sworn.
My
address
is
48
17,
West,
Bay,
Court,
Avenue,
Tampa
Florida.
There's
a
lot
of
people
here
speaking
I'll.
Keep
it
very
concise.
I
understand
that
the
committee
here
has
an
obligation
to
find
legal
cause
and,
under
certain
bases,
to
make
these
approvals
and
these
and
to
give
this
permission,
I
think
that
the
committee's
obligation
similarly
needs
to
be
to
advance
the
interest
of
the
community
and
the
residents.
J
F
F
J
A
J
A
J
J
It's
huge,
like
I,
can
get
almost
a
mile
away
the
Henderson
and
see
it
there
at
night
when
it
lights
up,
I
can't
help,
but
think
of
the
Amityville
Horror
up
any
of
you
ever
seen
that
the
way
the
configuration
of
the
windows-
it's
a
I,
don't
know,
I,
don't
know
the
man,
mr.
fry,
but
it
just
it
just
seems
like
a
difficult
and
unreasonable
man
of
everything
that
I
hear.
That's
all
I
got
to
say
thank.
J
J
J
J
J
I
live
at
1909,
Southwest,
Shore,
Boulevard,
3,
3
6
to
9
I
have
been
sworn
in.
I've
owned,
my
home
since
1994,
when
I
first
moved
to
Tampa
and
mr.
Ober
has
been
my
neighbor
time.
He
is
a
absolutely
wonderful
human
being
and
he
has
integrity
like
no
other
he's
the
first
one
to
lend
a
hand
and
he's
he's
a
wonderful
wonderful
person.
I
could
see
where
this
other
structure
was
built
right
next
to
him
that
he,
his
privacy
completely
went
away
and
I.
J
Think
all
of
us
have
the
right
to
privacy
and
when
that
privacy
is
taken
from
us,
we
have
to
do
something
to
protect
our
interest
and
to
have
something
built
so
much
higher
to
be
able
to
look
into
your
bedroom
windows
or
your
your.
Your
private
areas.
Is
it's
tough,
it's
a
tough
way
to
live,
and
this
gives
him
just
a
smidge
more
of
privacy,
which
I
think
is
he
more
than
deserves,
and
I
don't
want
to.
J
Hello,
my
name
is
dr.:
amber
Parker,
I
live
at
1909,
Southwest
Shore
Boulevard
I
have
been
sworn
first
I
had
no
idea
what
you
guys
do
for
as
a
board.
We
really
appreciate
it
I've
known
mark
for
well
over
a
decade.
I,
don't
want
to
again
repeat
everything,
but
he
truly
has
no
privacy
without
having
some
kind
of
barrier
there
mark
is
a
simple
man.
He
loves
to
sit
out
on
his
porch
and
enjoy
looking
down
the
canal
he
likes
to
crab.
He
likes
to
fish.
J
He
spends
a
tremendous
amount
of
time
out
there
and
to
have
no
privacy
and
feel
like
you're
constantly
being
watched.
The
children's
play
area
is
right
here,
like
it's
amazingly
close,
so
to
have
a
little
barrier.
There
really
is
only
fair
and
he
does
use
that
area
a
lot
in
the
what
is
being
built
in
no
way
impacts.
Any
other
neighbors
I,
don't
even
think
it
impacts
the
Frye's
I.
Don't
think
they
can
see
because
again,
they're
sort
of
up
here,
I,
don't
think
his
structure
impacts
them
at
all.
J
J
And
wiki
Bochy
Florida,
that's
in
Hernando,
County,
mark
and
I,
have
enjoyed
each
other's
company
and
fished
together
for
over
40
years,
I'm
here
to
attest
to
the
fact
that
what
he
is
attempting
to
do
is
in
the
same
footprint
that
was
already
there
and
if
you
can
imagine,
what's
going
to
take
place.
I
know
you
saw
the
pictures
but
assume
that
this
is
the
canal
here
and
the
monstrosity
house
is
here.
J
He
is
going
to
put
a
solid
wall
here
and
here
was
a
doorway
over
here,
so
that
he
can
still
enjoy
the
canal
without
having
to
look
at
the
play
yard.
The
pool
and
the
house
that
just
towers
but
to
say
it
towers,
the
his
house
is
an
understatement.
It's
three
times
the
height
of
his
house.
Okay,
somebody
said
he's
a
simple
man:
he
is
good
man,
good
person,
good
neighbor,
I'm
sure
he
had
no
objections
to
three
barriers
as
before
he
needs,
but
he
needs
a
little
fairness
back.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
A
J
A
That
mark
sliding
door.
Everything
has
changed,
you
feel,
like
you
feel,
like
you're,
almost
in
a
canyon,
the
pictures
don't
do
it
justice.
As
far
as
the
height
difference,
so
I
think
my
mark
building
the
small
room
compared
to
what
he
has
to
deal
with
next
door.
I
think
he
needs
some
relief
and
your
consideration
I
appreciate
what
you
do
and
I
hope
you
make
the
right
decision.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Next.
R
A
J
We
moved
into
the
neighborhood
in
1992,
and
Mark
has
been
our
neighbor
during
that
entire
time.
It's
been
a
wonderful
neighborhood
to
live
in
another
Street,
and
it
is
true
that
the
new
home
that
was
built
that
is
towering
marks
residence
was
very,
very
large
and
I
think
it
did
infringe
on
his
personal
space,
his
property
space,
and
but
they
had
that
right
to
build
it.
But,
however,
Mark's
privacy
in
his
right
to
his
space
I
think
also
needs
to
be
respected.
J
He
has
tried
and
worked
with
the
people
in
previous
variance
requests,
as
we
have
been
heard
and
I
really
don't
want
to
go
through
all
of
that
again.
But
I
think
that
in
this
particular
case,
since
we're
not
asking
for
something
to
be
totally
newly
constructed,
it
was
a
space
that
was
already
existed
in
a
porch
that
was
there
that
I
hope
that
the
council
will
give
favorable
consideration
to
this
request.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
A
F
Before
I
began
by
May,
I've
been
sworn
Erik
page
I'm
representing
mr.
Frey,
who
is
the
directly
adjacent
neighbor
we've
heard
a
lot
from
neighbors
in
opposition.
I
would
respectfully
request
from
the
chair
and
from
the
board
an
additional
five
minutes
to
address
these
issues.
I'm
not
going
to
address
everything.
That's
in
the
packet
you've
been
provided,
I'm
not
gonna,
go
through
all
the
pictures,
but
I
do
to
address
the
five
criteria
and
to
address
some
of
the
points
have
been
raised.
Need
some
extra
time
to
get
through
these
things.
F
Right
Eric
page
with
Hudson
Bowen
suite
340
301
West
Boy
Scout
Boulevard
Tampa
Florida
3-3
607
I
have
been
sworn.
We
are
opposing
this
request.
You,
this
aerial,
shows
the
red
property
is
mr.
overs
property.
It
does
dead
end
to
the
canal.
Well,
actually,
the
canal
does
not
dead
in
there.
It
wraps
around
that's
an
inaccurate
statement
that
was
made
in
the
variance
request,
my
clients
properties
to
the
southwest
right.
There
one
point
that
I'll
get
to
in
a
little
more
detail.
F
Later,
you
don't
see
extra
overs
property
is
very,
very
similar
to
the
property
that
is
directly
to
the
east
in
terms
of
having
the
canal
eating
up
a
little
bit
of
its
property
and
as
well
being
oddly
shaped,
so
it
is
at
least
similar
in
size
and
type
to
a
directly
adjacent
property.
The
only
person
here
that
is
opposing
this
variance
is
the
only
person
here
that
is
impacted
by
this
variance
and
that's
my
client,
because
this
structure
moves
six
feet
towards
the
shared
property
line.
F
This
structure
would
have
been
built
and
completed
with
no
plans
and
no
permits
had
code
enforcement,
not
stopped
it.
It
must
be
looked
at
as
a
new
request,
as
if
nothing
is
there,
as
the
board
has
already
discussed
earlier
tonight.
Contrary
to
the
presentation,
the
materials,
at
least
my
clients
houses,
two
stories,
not
three.
My
clients
house
is
not
5,000
feet
under
central
heating.
There
it's
about
4,500.
My
clients
house
was
also.
F
F
The
screen
porch
was
not
there
at
the
time,
has
over
there
for
twenty
years
that
my
client
purchased
the
property
may
of
2014,
and
this
is
extremely
important.
There's
been
no
written
determination
that
that
screen
porch
was
a
legal
non-conforming
structure.
There
has
been
no
proof
that
there
was
a
request
for
that
to
have
been
made.
There's
been
no
proof
that
it
was
ever
in
compliance
with
the
code
or
approved
and
as
well
section
27.
F
Two
nine
eight
would
apply
if
it
was
a
legal
non-conforming
structure,
and
that
would
require
that,
since
it's
been
completely
destroyed,
it'd
be
built
in
conformance
with
code,
so
the
law
is
completely
on
the
side
of
denying
this
request.
This
property
is
not
unique
and
singular,
as
I
said,
at
a
prop
a
property
right
next
to
it.
The
B
shares
many
of
the
same
characteristics,
and
these
are
some
other
pictures
of
what
we're
looking
at
the
primary
structure
should
in
where
the
brick
is.
You
can
see
how
far
it
intrudes.
F
This
is
where
the
highlighting
is
at
the
bottom.
That
is
the
property
line,
and
you
can
again
see
how
close
the
structure
intrudes.
This
is,
from
my
clients,
see
wall
again
right
up
next
to
the
property.
Some
folks
said
that,
from
my
clients,
property,
you
could
not
see
this
existing
unpermitted
structure,
not
true.
That's
from
my
clients,
property.
This
is
the
play
house.
That's
been
brought
up,
which
is
a
standard
drive
anywhere
around
Tampa
playoffs
you're
gonna
see
them.
This
is
the
play.
F
Houses
placement
which
code
has
come
and
said
is
in
fact
compliant
where
it
is
in
relation
of
the
property
line.
So
we
do
not
have
an
unique
or
singular
piece
of
property.
We
as
well
do
not
have
a
property
that
was
designed
at
an
angle
which
was
asserted
in
the
variance
application.
The
outside
highlighted
lines
are
the
north-south
property
lines
of
the
lot,
and
the
inside
highlighted
lines
are
the
north-south
lines
of
the
actual
constructed
home.
So
it's
it's.
It's
not
some
weird
pie
shaped
lot,
but
things
had
to
be
jammed
into
some
odd
configuration.
F
It
is
a
lot
that
in
fact,
as
I
believe
I
mentioned
earlier,
has
the
very
best
view
of
the
canal
looks
all
the
way
down
the
canal
to
open
water.
Everybody
else
is
looking
across
the
canal
and
can
see
everybody.
It's
it's
wide
open,
you're,
seeing
into
somebody's
backyard
when
you
live
on
this
canal,
so
nothing
unique
or
singular
here,
there's
also
been
complaints
that
the
privacy
has
been
damaged
because
my
clients,
property,
is
and
I
quote
in
such
close
proximity.
But
my
clients
property
complies
with
a
side
setback.
F
If
the
theory
worked,
the
applicant
is
asserting
in
this
property
at
505,
West
Davis
Boulevard
should
have
a
right
to
a
variance
six
feet
towards
both
of
these
properties.
The
one
that's
already
constructed
is
a
two
foot
property
right
next
to
a
one-story
ranch,
the
one
that
is
under
construction,
2-story
property
right
next
to
a
one-story
ranch.
F
This
is,
in
fact,
a
self-created
hardship,
because
the
property
that
was
bought
was
built.
The
primary
structure
was
built
to
the
setbacks
and
no
more
should
be
permitted.
This
is
not
a
reconstructed
porch.
Again,
it's
been
a
100%
destroyed,
it
must
be
built.
According
to
code,
there's
been
no
carrying
of
the
burden
of
proof
here,
no
competent,
substantial
evidence
to
that
effect.
F
F
Gonna
put
flammable
materials,
one
foot
away
from
my
clients
with
fence,
which
is
three
less
than
three
feet
away
from
the
accessory
structure,
wouldn't
child
play
area,
which
then
puts
it
right
next
to
the
house.
It's
gonna
divert
rainwater
because,
as
you
can
see,
it's
connected
to
the
entire
roof,
it's
going
to
decrease
the
value
of
my
clients,
property
because
no
way
to
properties,
otherwise
identical
the
one
with
this
intrusion
is
not
worth
less.
There
is
a
housing
stock
argument
in
the
application.
F
The
house
is
there
now
grandpa
variance
denied
the
variance
justifiably
the
house
is
there
tomorrow.
There
is
no
impact
on
housing
stock.
Here
again,
it
has
never
been
considered
to
be
an
illegal
or
an
illegal
non-conforming
structure.
There's
been
no
such
determination,
it's
far
from
harmonious
from
what
should
be
allowed
and
as
far
as
mr.
over
shielding
himself
and
privacy,
that's
what
his
home
is
for
his
home
at
the
setback
is
within
code.
F
It's
viable,
it
provides
walls,
it
provides
wolf
roof
and
a
common
solution
in
these
kind
of
situations
is
to
put
up
a
hedge
put
up
bamboo,
but
not
to
intrude
to
the
detriment.
But
my
client,
we
were
there
for
acid
if
we
denied,
as
the
board
needs
to
look
at
this
as
new
and
I
appreciate
the
time
and
the
additional.
H
H
You
know
what
I'm
talking
about
and
builds
a
two-story
house
overlooking
the
ranch
house
next
door
and
I'm
not
here
for
one
side
or
the
other.
All
I'm
here
for
is
to
see.
If
the
variance
board
knows
what
is
right
and
what
is
wrong
does
not
enter
this
or
how
good
of
a
fishing
partner
one
has
been
for
40
years
or
how
good
the
neighbors
are.
H
The
whole
thing
boils
down
to
this
you're
obligated
by
the
code
and
you're
you're
set
to
vote
that
way
and
I'm
just
trying
to
open
up
your
eyes
to
you
can't
let
feelings
enter
into
your
decision.
You
have
bound
to
do
what
your
code
tells
you
to
do.
That's
what
the
various
board
is.
All
about
and
I
just
hope
that
you
do
the
right
thing:
I'd
hate
to
be
in
your
shoes,
but.
H
H
And
get
rid
of
the
problem
construct
going
upward
rather
than
you
cannot.
You
cannot
go
on
the
7-foot
setback
that
was
put
into
place
by
the
code
to
comply
with
the
ordinance
of
the
sea
to
Tampa
that
protects
your
neighbors.
If
you
go
on
that
seven
foot,
all
you're
doing
is
denying
privacy
to
your
adjoining
neighbor.
We
have
to
respect
our
neighbors
and
imagine
what
I
said
earlier.
If
everyone
in
the
city
blocker
county,
built
adjoining
on
the
seven
feet,
all
you'd
have
no
access
to
the
back
for
emergencies.
H
If
you
had
a
fire
or
person
to
medical
need
in
their
backyard,
how
is
emergency
medical
team
going
to
enter
through
there
if
you
set
up
adjoining
property
lines
and
no
access?
So
keep
all
this
in
mind?
When
you
make
your
decision
and
again
I
say
you
are
bound
by
the
code
that
was
put
into
place
and
if
you
can't
vote
that
way,
then
we
need
to
look
to
repeal
the
code.
A
B
Q
B
Q
B
Q
A
B
O
A
A
F
F
A
A
A
F
A
F
C
You
know
this
this
issue
and
it's
miss
Grimes
has
stated:
I
had
neighbors
that
are
deceased,
one
of
them
in
a
house
that
was
like
mine
and,
oddly
enough,
when
this
waterspout
came
through
the
only
thing
that
it
disturbed
in
the
whole
neighborhood
was
my
screened-in.
Porch
and
I
didn't
need
a
barrier,
because
my
neighbors
and
I
were
dear
friends
the
pre,
the
previous
neighbors.
We
did,
we
didn't
have
any
fences.
We
didn't
have
a
wrought
iron
fence
along
the
north
sea
wall
to
mr.
Fry's
house.
We
walked
back
and
forth
as
neighbors.
C
Do
they
had
a
tangerine
tree
key
lime
tree
I
took
them
all
kinds
of
items
and
in
the
tail
the
tape
here
was
really
not
the
house.
Mr.
price,
entitled
to
his
big
house,
the
Playhouse
once
I
rejected
his
request
to
put
his
boat
north
and
south,
and
you
know
The
Playhouse
was
put
over
on
what
this
two
side
of
structure
tries
to
block
and
gives
me
the
privacy
that
I
need
I,
probably
spend
more
time
out
there
than
any
of
these
five
people
and
their
neighbors
and
they're
in
the
back
house.
C
They've
all
been
to
my
house,
and
it's
regretful
that
mr.
fry
he
can
do
whatever
he
wants
and
he's
mad,
because
I
wouldn't
give
him
part
of
my
riparian
rights
to
put
a
dock
and
a
boat
lift
north
and
south,
which
would
have
almost
practically
blocked.
My
doctor,
so
I
asked
you
to
grant
this
one
request
and
I
appreciate
respect
greatly
what
you
do
and
the
difficult
tasks
that
you
have.
The
items,
sir,
that
you
and
mr.
Chairman
were
talking
about,
was
that
tiling
is
a
decorative.
C
If
you
looked
in
my
front
yard,
I
got
two
pelicans
and
a
stone
crab
trap
around
a
flower
bed
and
I've
got
pilings
all
the
way
down
the
west
side
of
my
dock
in
sea
wall
that
aren't
attached,
there's
simply
pilings
that
I
found
floating
in
the
bay
when
other
people
made
dots
and
I
put
them
up
and
to
me
it's
a
aesthetic,
so
I
appreciate
your
opportunity,
my
opportunity
to
speak
with
you
today.
Thank
you
so
kindly
for
your
concern,
edge,
I,
don't
know
if
I
mr.
chairman
answered
your
question
actually
but
okay.
A
C
The
one
thing
if
I
made
one
last
thing
that
was
germane
was
and
I
get
kids
do
things
I
asked
mr.
fry
one
time:
I
had
about
eight
rocks
in
my
boat
in
the
bed
of
my
truck
on
the
seawall,
and
really
this
that
this
Playhouse
kids
are
kids
I,
get
it
I
needed
some
privacy,
so
I
asked
him
to
have
his
children
refrain
from
throwing
rocks
and
they
didn't
one-time-only.
So
I'm
not
here
to
be
the
bad
guy,
but
I've
been
here
31
years
and
I
appreciate.
F
F
A
F
Q
I
won't
need
to
take
that
long,
but
I
do
want
to
note
for
the
record
that,
even
at
this
hearing,
mr.
Ober
didn't
object
to
mr.
Fraser
requests
for
more
more
time.
He
had
60%
of
the
amount
of
time
that
we
had
as
the
applicant.
Just
noting
that
for
the
record
for
some
reason,
he
seems
to
think
that
none
of
the
rules
applied
to
him.
Everybody
else
in
the
audience
gets
three
minutes,
but
somehow
he
gets
double
that
he
gets
six
and
that's
just
it's
just
pervasive
with
him.
Q
It's
just
never
enough,
and
in
this
situation
my
client
is
doing
nothing
but
trying
to
protect
himself
from
the
home
and
from
the
location
of
the
structures
on
the
adjacent
property.
But
this
gentleman
who
I
think
was
unconnected
to
the
case
and
spoke
said
it
shouldn't
be
about
mr.
Ober
and
what
a
great
guy
he
is
and
what
a
good
neighbor
he's
been.
Q
To
make
that
determination,
you
look
at
the
five
hardship
criteria,
but
work
are
not
required
to
meet
each
and
every
one,
although
I
believe
we
do
as
documented
earlier
in
our
testimony,
but
we
do
have
a
hardship
and
the
hardship
is.
We
are
adjacent
to
a
structure
that
towers
over
the
outdoor
area
of
a
home,
that's
built
at
the
end
of
a
canal,
a
unique
situation
and
they
want
to
take
advantage
of
their
outdoor
space
and
they
can't
do
it
because
of
the
home.
That's
constructed
next
door.
Q
So
we're
simply
that's
the
hardship,
the
the
five
variance
criteria-
I'm
not
going
to
go
through
them
again,
but
this
is
a
unique
situation.
When
you
have
a
split
zoning
on
an
irregular
five
sided
lot.
This
was
the
only
way
to
site
the
house
on
the
lot
and
therefore,
the
only
way
to
site
that
screen
porch
the
the
need
for
the
variance
and
the
hardship
was
entirely
created
entirely
created
by
mr.
Frey
as
I
you
earlier.
Mr.
Ober
didn't
need
a
screen
ports
for
the
20
years
until
mr.
Q
Frey
move
next
door
and
build
his
McMansion.
So
we
also
think
that
the
phrase
interests
are
protected
in
that
their
their
their
fence
is
high.
It's
it's
six!
It's
a
six
foot
high!
On
top
of
the
block
wall.
On
top
of
the
concrete
wall,
the
proposed
accessory
structure
of
the
proposed
screen
porch
is
lower
than
his
children's
playhouse.
He
cannot
see
the
top
of
that
roof
over
top
of
that
fence.
Q
It's
completely
invisible
to
him
as
far
as
it
as
far
as
its
concerned,
there
can't
be
any
interference
to
them
that
way
and
that
what
in
that
regard
it
this
ensures
that
the
public
health
safety
and
welfare
is
protected.
So
we've
shown
you
we've
had
a
hardship.
We've
shown
that
we
can
protect
the
public
health
safety
welfare
again,
the
variance
will
result
in
substantial
justice
being
done.
B
The
very
first
hardship
criteria,
whether
or
not
the
issue
is
unique
and
singular
to
the
property
or
the
building
and
I'm.
Looking
at
the
zoning
map,
which
covers
I,
don't
know
roughly
a
mile
radius
around
this
neighborhood
in
this
property
is
the
definition
of
unique
and
singular
I
mean
there's
not
another
property
that
meets
the
shape
size,
location
at
the
engines.
B
Now,
even
on
the
next
canal,
over
the
houses
aren't
situated
this
way
so
I
mean
this
is
exactly
what
variances
exist
for
now,
the
question
of
the
structure
itself
is
a
different
question
and
the
hardship,
I
think
could
not
be
more
clear.
I
think
the
comment
about
when
you
upgrade
a
screen
room
or
whatever
you
have
to
upgrade
to
current
code.
That's
not
my
understanding
of
the
building
code.
My
understanding
is
that
if
you
upgrade
50%
of
the
value
of
the
structure
or
more,
you
have
to
upgrade
to
current
codes.
B
B
Destroyed
in
a
storm,
what's
the
time
limit
on
rebuilding
that
I?
Don't
know
that
there
is
one
I
haven't
heard:
either
side
testify
that
there
is
one
that
says:
no,
you
can't
rebuild
it
20
years
later,
so
I'll
just
assume
that
you
can
the
slab
still
there,
the
roof
may
or
may
not
have
been.
There.
We've
got
surveys
from
more
than
one
from
the
90s
of
this
building
existed,
exact
spot
they're,
not
proposing
to
build
them
enclosed
structures,
still
a
screen
room
would
with
not
even
any
doors
on
it.
B
B
Don't
have
any
way
to
speak
to
that
I.
Don't
know
if
there
was
an
approved
variance
I,
don't
think
that
we
have
it
records
variances
back
that
far
or
would
have
been
in
our
report.
So
I
can't
make
assumptions
for
the
previous
homeowner
did
and
I
see
plenty
of
hardship
criteria
here
and
unenclosed
screen
structure
that
was
there
before
was
torn
down
by
storm
I.
Don't
have
any
reason
to
oppose
those
I.
I
Would
agree
with
everything
you
said:
I
mean
we've.
We
had
these
cases
in
the
past,
where
you
know
we're
not.
We
can't
hold
somebody
else
accountable,
for
maybe
what
was
done
prior
to
them
and
it
seems
like
they're
making
every
effort.
They
have
an
expanded,
the
size
they're
still
keeping
screens,
like
you,
said
no
doors
even
stated
that
they're
willing
to
to
have
conditions
and
they're
stating
that
they
can't
enclose
the
room
so
I
to
support
this.
O
I
think
you
know,
I
could
go
along
with
that.
I
do
and
I
would
like
to
dress
the
gentleman
who
brought
up
the
fact
that
the
code
is
the
code
we're
supposed
to
enforce
the
code.
I
think
that
you
know
part
of
what
we're
doing
here,
of
course,
is
to
find
these
exceptions
and
so
forth,
and
in
the
cases
that
came
up
earlier,
where
you
have
new
construction
or
you
have
things
which
happen
that
are
done
by
the
applicant
originally
that
weren't
there.
O
You
know,
that's
I,
think
that
that's
really
another
issue,
that's
another
area
to
explore.
I
think
in
this
case,
I
can't
help
but
think
about
the
fact
that
there
was
a
room
similar
or
pretty
much
exactly
the
same
as
this
on
this
site.
Decades
ago
and
20
years
ago,
it
was
blown
away.
So
I
really
don't
see
that
there's
a
huge
change
going
on
here,
other
than
the
fact
that
it's
just
really
being
restored
to
its
original
condition.
So,
under
those
circumstances,
I
would
support
this,
but.
A
O
That
said,
variances
conditioned
be
granted
based
upon
the
applicant
presenting
competent
and
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
and
at
this
public
hearing
of
an
unnecessary
hardship
or
practical
difficulty.
When
considering
the
five
hardship
criteria
set
forth
in
section
27
80
of
the
city
code.
Specifically
that
I
believe
in
this
case
said
uniquely
shaped
lot,
and
it
does
place
hardships
as
far
as
where
you
can
place
things
and
so
forth.
And
so.
O
B
Like
to
make
one
amendment
to
your
condition,
maybe
we
should
word
it
that
it
not
be
more
enclosed
than
the
plan
presented
tonight,
because
I
don't
want
to
hit
a
snag
with
the
building
department,
trying
to
guess
what
two
sides
means
they
presented
plans
for
a
certain
amount
of
enclosure.
Maybe
we
tie
it
to
the
plans
presented.