►
From YouTube: Variance Review Board 08132019
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
A
In
attendance
this
evening
are
Jared
Simpson
assistant
city
attorney
to
Wanda
Anthony
and
Eileen
Rosario
Ducksworth
of
land
development
coordination.
Brian,
is
here
of
natural
resources.
This
is
anybody
from
transportation.
I
see
none.
Okay,
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
the
applicants
name
are
called.
Please
stand
in
either
aisle
to
the
side
of
the
room
to
acknowledge
that
you're.
A
Here
staff
will
then
give
a
brief
introduction
to
the
board
of
each
application
when
you're
approach.
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
and/or,
their
agent
will
have
ten
minutes
to
give
testimony
present
witnesses
and
documentation
as
a
part
of
their
presentation.
This
is
your
time
to
present
all
of
your
evidence.
A
Anyone
in
the
audience
wishing
to
speak
in
support
of
or
in
opposition
to
the
application
will
then
have
three
minutes
each
after
that
the
board
will
have
an
opportunity
to
ask
questions
regarding
the
application.
Finally,
the
applicant
will
have
an
additional
five
minutes
for
a
rebuttal
if
needed.
The
time
periods,
as
stated,
will
be
kept
by
the
chair.
A
Any
information
such
as
pictures
plans
that
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
for
it
to
be
entered
and
made
a
part
of
the
permanent
record.
The
board
bases
its
decisions
on
competent
and
substantial
evidence
which
is
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
for
only
what
is
shown
on
the
site
plan
and
will
be
compliant
with
any
terms
and
conditions
stated
in
the
approval
by
the
board.
You
must
have
four
votes
for
the
variance
to
be
approved.
I'm
gonna
say
it
again.
You
must
have
four
votes
for
the
variance
to
be
approved.
A
A
A
If
you
wish
to
appeal
the
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
has
passed.
Your
cooperation
will
help
ensure
that
this
meeting
runs
smoothly
and
will
be
greatly
appreciated
before
we
begin
the
first
case,
is
there
any
business
regarding
the
agenda
that
staff
would
like
to
address.
D
Towanda
Anthony
Land,
Development,
Board
application
number
BRB
1917
as
well
as
application
number
BRB
1918,
are
both
requesting
a
continuance
staff
is
recommending
the
October
8th
as
the
hearing
date.
I'm
being
that
they've
continued
a
couple
of
times
we
feel
like.
If
we
move
it
out
to
October,
they
should
be
prepared
all.
C
A
C
E
You
mr.
chair,
as
the
board
knows,
if
you've
had
any
verbal
communications
regarding
any
of
the
cases
or
you've
received
any
written
communication
regarding
any
of
the
cases
outside
of
the
hearing
tonight,
you
will
need
to
disclose
the
nature
of
those
communications
and
file
them
into
the
record.
So
at
this
time,
I'd
like
to
ask
any
of
the
board
members
if
they
have
had
any
ex
parte
communications
regarding
any
matters
that
are
gonna,
be
coming
before
the
board
this
evening.
Yes,.
F
I
do
have
one
this
is
on
VRB,
1986
I
do
know.
The
proposed
builders
on
this
project
and
I
did
hear
some
discussions
among
them
about
this
a
number
of
months
ago,
I
think,
probably
even
before
the
variance
was
was
filed.
So
I
really
don't
know
anything
about.
It
wasn't
really
part
of
any
conversation.
So
what
I
know
about
it
is
really
what's
in
the
packet
here
tonight,
so
it.
E
H
F
E
A
E
E
E
A
A
Mr.
chairman,
members
of
the
various
review
board,
my
name
is
John
Randolph,
the
I'm,
not
the
attorney
on
this
matter.
However,
my
law,
partner,
Morris
Massey,
is
and
he's
on
the
way.
So,
if
you
could
just
pass
over
for
now,
maybe
renew
your
request
when
he
arrives
I'm
sure
he's
on
the
way
short
okay.
H
D
Anthony
land
development.
Again
this
is
application.
Drb
1874.
The
property
is
located
at
four
thousand
one
West
Mackay
Avenue
the
applicant
is
John
LOM.
The
agent
is
Steven
michaleen
II.
The
request
is
as
follows:
for
section
27
156,
the
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
rear
yard
setback
from
20
feet
to
4
feet,
to
construct
a
new
single-family
residence
and
saved
a
grand
tree
in
the
front
yard.
The
property
is
owned,
are
16
and
was
purchased
in
2007,
the
existing
house
was
constructed
in
1950.
The
property
received
a
tree
consultation
in
April
of
2018.
K
I
stated
earlier,
there
was
a
there's,
a
42
inch
grand
live
oak
on
the
live
we've
seen
this
case
before,
and
we've
gone
through
multiple
iterations
of
designs
for
the
site.
The
applicant
is
worth
diligently
with
us
to
try
to
their
best
to
preserve
the
grand
tree
while
at
the
same
time
building
what
they
proposed
a
bill
and
so
with
that,
the
reduction
of
the
rear
yard
setback
from
20
feet
to
4
I
just
wanted
to
advocate
that
natural
resources
does
support
that
that
setback
reduction
and
it
will
allow
them
to
build
their
two-story
residents.
G
H
H
A
permanent
swearing-in,
okay,
you've
seen
this
project
and
this
proposal
three
times
already.
It
started
in
February
of
2018,
and
at
that
time
we
were
requesting
the
removal
of
the
Grand
tree
in
the
front,
and
we
had
some
site
constrictions
regarding
a
box
culvert
that
runs
across
the
back
of
the
property
and
there's
a
variety
of
different
things.
But
we
worked
very
closely
with
the
staff
and
basically
we're
ending
up
with
about
a
forty
nine
foot.
Setback
in
the
front.
H
But
anyway,
I
think
we've
come
to
a
solution
that
preserves
a
tree,
allows
us
to
build
a
new
residence
it'll
have
to
be
a
custom
design
and
we're
asking
for
relief
from
the
rear
yard
setback
to
accommodate
that
I
believe
in
every
respect
that
meets
with
the
intent
of
the
code.
It
does
not
create
a
hardship
from
anyone
else.
The
city
owns
a
lot
directly
to
the
north.
That's
where
the
box
culvert
runs
diagonally
across
a
lot,
so
there's
no
other
property
over
there.
That
would
be
affected.
H
C
E
E
H
Met
with
transportation
and
there
is
sufficient
vacant
right
away
between
the
property
line
and
the
edge
of
the
of
the
pavement.
Specifically,
we
met
with
Jonathan
Scott
and
gave
him
some
proposed
layouts
and
he'd
indicated
as
long
as
we
maintain
10
feet
from
the
edge
of
the
payment
to
the
property
line
that
we
would
be
fine
and
we've
we've
committed
to
that.
But
we'll
deal
with
it
at
permitting.
Okay,.
H
A
H
A
I
A
J
J
D
Towanda
Anthony
land
development
application,
BRB
1938,
the
property
is
located
at
1505
South
arowana
Avenue,
the
applicant
is
Timothy
Jones.
The
request
is
as
follows:
for
section
27
156,
the
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
north
side
yard
setback
from
7
feet
to
0
feet,
to
construct
a
carport
cover
and
support
columns.
The
property
is
owned,
are
as
50
and
was
purchased.
In
2016,
the
existing
single-family
residence
was
built
in
1925.
The
property
received
a
tree
consultation
in
February
2018.
J
J
So
they're
going
to
add
to
store
a
second
bedroom
to
two
bedrooms
upstairs
so
that
way
they
can
move
upstairs
or
for
their
children,
leaving
their
parents
downstairs,
but
on
the
west
side
of
the
property
we
have
problems
with
grain
trees.
So
Natural
Resources
has
told
us
that
we
can't
build
straight
up.
We
need
to
offset
that
second
story
having
to
do
that
right
here
on
the
edge
of
this
stairwell
right
here
is
the
exterior
of
downstairs
to
which
then
the
engineering
is
engineers
all
have
said
that
we
need
to.
J
We
need
to
put
our
support
columns
here,
because
this
cantilever,
because
of
shear
and
other
big
words
that
they
use,
makes
it
unfeasible
to
build
that
structure.
So
what
we
want
to
do
is
we're
proposing
to
put
support
columns
along
this
side
to
run
floor
trusses
out
to
support
this,
and
they
just
put
a
roof
over
the
top
of
it.
The
reason
that
we
want
to
go
out
this
far
is
because,
on
our
site
plan.
J
J
A
G
J
B
E
A
J
Intention
is
that
the
Khans
themselves
will
be
about
a
foot
from
the
party
line,
but
our
footers
have
to
be
offset
to
that
right
to
the
property
line.
It's
not
our
intention
to
have
this.
This
structure
all
the
way
to
the
property
line.
It's
the
footers
themselves,
okay,
that
will
go
through
Parker
language,
I.
D
A
G
J
E
If
the
Board
finds
that
there
could
be
some
potential
harm
by
that
increased
intensity
of
the
use
than
then
imposing
a
condition
to
limit
that
would
be
lawful,
as
long
as
the
condition
was
reasonable
in
relation
to
the
harm.
I
can't
say
whether
or
not
what
to
do
or
tell
you
what
to
do.
But
hopefully
that
gives
you
enough
guidance.
E
J
J
A
A
A
B
Move
the
variance
request
for
case
VRB
1938,
located
at
1505
south,
are
wanna
Avenue
and
depicted
on
the
site
plan
presented
at
the
public
hearing
for
a
reduction
in
the
side
yard
from
seven
feet
to
one
feet.
One
foot
with
an
encroachment
for
use
and
governors
with
the
following
conditions
that
the
space
that
enclosed
space
never
be
built
within
the
standard
setback
of
seven
feet,
and
that
said,
variance
as
condition
be
granted
based
upon
the
applicant
presenting
competent
and
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
and
at
this
public
hearing
of
an
unnecessary
hardship
of
practical
difficulty.
B
When
considering
the
five
hardship
criteria
set
forth
and
section
27a
T
of
the
specific
of
the
city
code,
specifically
that
the
design
for
this
addition
is
trying
to
respond
to
existing
trees
on
the
site
and
by
shifting
the
second
floor
and
extending
this
structure
into
the
setback.
It
allows
those
trees
to
remain.
A
D
D
The
request
is
as
follows:
the
applicant
is
seeking
to
remove
a
grand
tree
to
construct
a
single-family
residence
first
section,
13
45,
a
grand
tree
or
protective
tree
shall
be
permitted
to
be
removed
if
the
Grand
tree
of
protected
tree
denies
or
precludes
reasonable
use
of
a
parcel
of
property.
Reasonable
use
would
also
include
the
showing
of
alternative
designs
that
were
not
feasible
to
pursue
per
Section
13
45.
The
vacant
lot
is
owned,
Rs
50
and
was
purchased
in
2017.
K
Brian
Knox
city
of
Tampa,
natural
resources,
so,
as
stated
earlier,
sopran
tree
it's
located
at
a
northwest
corner
at
the
time
we
were
going
into
the
old
code,
so
we
measured
it
a
hundred
and
eighty-three
points.
It
is
rated
C
eight
and
it
was
just
under
that
criteria
that
we
would
consider
for
removal.
K
We
also
found
that,
through
several
alternative
designs,
there
was
one
alternative
design
in
particular
that
would
work
for
us
in
terms
of
the
applicant
having
a
driveway
and
also
preserving
the
grand
tree.
It
would
require
the
applicant
to
have
a
reduced
rear
yard,
but
in
order
to
preserve
the
tree
natural
resources
of
the
opinion
that
that
is
something
that
is
possible
for
this
site.
K
We
met
with
the
applicant
in
the
field
once
and
we
also
met
with
the
applicant
again
in
our
office,
and
we
tried
to
come
up
with
several
iterations,
where
we
could
preserve
the
tree,
keep
a
rear
yard
and
have
a
driveway.
And
ultimately,
we
could
not
come
to
that
conclusion
with
the
applicant
overall
Natural
Resources,
based
on
the
last
vrb,
would
suggest
that
the
applicant
moved
forward
with
the
proposed
plan
that
is
shown
here
where
the
grand
jury
is
protected
at
20,
foot
radius
and
the
driveway
is
here
and
there's
a
rear
yard.
K
G
G
K
A
E
This
is
the
first
I've
heard
this,
but
my
my
my
first
thought
is
that
they're
applying
the
old
code
tonight,
because
they
applied
or
at
the
time
that
the
old
code
was
in
effect
right.
We
would
apply
the
mitigation
at
the
time
that
the
tree
was
removed
and
therefore
it
would
be
the
new
mitigation
which
would
be
applied
when
they
remove
the
tree.
Okay
is.
A
A
K
A
L
Well,
pretty
much
the
situation
was
laid
out
exactly
as
it
is
as
far
as
air
spading,
which
is
where
we
left
off
last
time.
That's
where
I
started
I
had
some
are
risks.
Come
out.
We
took
a
look
at
sort
of
splitting
the
difference
between
the
expensive,
not
having
a
backyard
and
getting
as
close
to
the
tree
as
we
can
and
like
mr.
Knox
was
saying
inside
of
15
inside
of
15
feet.
L
We've
pretty
much
determined
was,
if
that's
what
had
to
happen
like
that's
what
we
would
do
that,
if
that,
if
it
came
down
to
being
a
matter
that
needing
to
happen
so
exploration,
they
they,
they
showed
us
that
within
15
feet,
there's
no
way
to
have
a
trench
or
a
traditional
form
stem
wall,
and
so
that's
kind
of
where
air
speeding
left
us.
In
terms
of
my
what
I
thought
was
maybe
the
best
compromise
that
could
make
me
happy
enough
with
something
like
this
and
mr.
L
Knox
and
I
discussed
this
at
the
office
and
the
downside,
of
course,
being
that
moving
the
tree
outside
of
the
predict
protected
root
zone
for
the
most
part
that
that
encroaches,
maybe
two
and
a
half
feet
or
three
feet,
or
so
it's
about
16
feet
from
the
trunk
of
the
tree.
Although
I
measured,
the
tree
is
in
36
inch,
so
it's
really
more
like
16
people,
1
inch
or
whatever,
but
of
course
having
the
driveway
run
through
there.
The
natural
resources
didn't
smile
on
the
prospect
of
that
very
highly.
L
So
then
we
also
explored
an
option
where,
basically,
the
house
would
stay
in
the
same
position
were
possibly
move
back
a
little
and
a
driveway
would
go
here,
but
I
mean
the
average
car
length
being
15
to
16
feet.
Only
one
car
could
fit
there,
and
my
wife,
family
and
guests
would
be
left
to
park
on
the
street.
I
guess
I,
don't
know
if
we
recall,
but
that
there
is
an
alley
on
the
city
plan
but
in
reality
there's
trees
in
it
and
a
cement
wall
and
it's
unusable.
L
The
problem
boils
down
to
having
a
house
on
one
side
and
a
driveway
and
another
and
trying
to
find
a
way
to
make
that
work
and
like
staff
show
it
the
only
way
to
really
make
that
work
is
to
have
the
house
be
here
and
then
you
can
have
a
driveway
of
sufficient
length
or
people
more
than
two
people
to
park
and
then
also
because
we
need
to
be
able
to
get
equipment
during
construction
to
try
to
work
around
these
two
protective
root
zones.
We
once
the
stem
walls
and
the
structural
walls
go
up
there.
L
We
need
to
be
able
to
get
telescoping,
forklifts
trusses
things
into
this
part
of
the
property
that
we
can't
use
the
alley
to
get
there.
So
there's
just
kind
of
like
a
dance
and
trying
to
coordinate
how
that
would
work.
So
basically,
it
seems
like
this
is
really
the
only
option
or
some
variation
of
this,
where
we're
within
fifteen
feet
of
the
root
system.
The
problem
with
that
is
that
the
resulting
yard
looks
like,
like
this.
That's
the
front
yard.
L
L
L
So
that's
my
neighbor's
house,
these
are
the
people
next
door
they're
a
little
bit
closer
because
they
have
this
projection
of
this
front
porch
here,
but
essentially,
ideally
I'd
like
to
stay
kind
of
in
line
with
them,
because
that's
the
only
way
to
have
a
functional
backyard.
So
this
here
this
is.
This
is
11
feet
from
the
underlying
stem
wall.
L
So
if
you
put
ledge
stone
or
whatever
other
cladding
there,
that
shrinks
and
that
a
staircase,
so
this
we'd
be
telling
you
about,
is
maybe
like
eight
and
a
half
feet,
maybe
so
to
have
a
garden
shed
where
I
put
a
lawnmower
or
what
I'd
be
sacrificing.
Here
is
really
no
useful,
enjoyable
backyard,
at
least
not
in
any
commensurate
way
to
my
neighbors,
and
it
would
really
limit
the
potential
and
the
future
of
what
I
could
do
there
if
I
wanted
to
create
a
workshop
or
some
other
kind
of
accessory
structure.
L
Kind
of
acquiescing
to
this
plan
would
sort
of
permanently
essentially
tie
me
to
this
very
limited.
Use
property
so
in
ten
to
fifteen
years
time
or
whenever
the
treaty
expires,
there's
no
really
easy,
a
reasonable
way
to
kind
of
reset
to
what
the
normal
house
position
would
be
for
the
neighborhood
and
so
I
very
much
like
to
avoid
committing
myself
permanently
to
kind
of
a
temporary
solution
and
I
know
the
treaty
is
valuable.
It's
it's
a
grand
tree,
it's
wonderful
and
all
and
I'm
not
trying
to
disparage
the
tree.
L
L
This
as
a
solution
to
me,
taking
into
account
that
the
fact
that
it's
an
rs.50
lot,
it's
only
fifty
feet
wide
to
have
a
house
of
any
reasonable
length
that
you
can
fit
three
bedrooms
and
two
bathrooms
which
that
we
really
did
that.
The
initial
tree
consultation
in
February
2017
and,
as
my
wife
and
structural
engineer,
will
tell
you.
I've
tried
virtually
every
combination
and
permutation
of
rooms
and
layouts.
The
shape
of
the
house
is
really
a
product
of
what's
going
on
inside,
which
is
a
little
difficult
to
see
here,
but
simply
changing
the
shape.
L
It's
not
really
as
simple
as
changing
the
shape
of
the
perimeter,
because
things
are
going
on
with
the
infrastructure
and
the
layout
thing
that
have
much
more
broad,
reaching
effect
so
coming
to
this
kind
of
Tetris
shape.
Design
was
a
long
time,
a
lot
of
effort
and
thought,
and
eventually
coming
at
the
time.
L
To
when
we
first
decided
like
this
tree
is
a
real
problem,
there's
no
way
we
can
have
a
driveway
in
the
house.
It
really
wasn't
an
easy
decision
to
say:
let's
commit
ourselves
to
the
months
and
money
and
time
is
taken
to
try
to
pursue
this,
but
it's
really
kind
of
a
matter
of
necessity
to
kind
of
ensure
that
we
have
some
kind
of
reasonable
use
of
our
backyard
moving
the
house
that
extra
five
feet
forward
only
gains
us
by
feet.
So
in
terms
of
this
probably
a
better
one,
adding
five
feet.
L
So
if
you'd
imagine
I
had
a
shed
that
was
9
by
9
or
10
by
10,
this
would
become
14
and
a
half
feet.
Maybe
so
setbacks
there,
plus
the
clearance,
the
overhangs
of
the
roof,
would
essentially
merge,
and
it's
just
looking
out
the
back
window.
All
you
see
the
side
of
a
shed
and
you
can't
really
build
it
too
close
to
this
tree,
because
there's
a
protective
root
zone,
so
I'd
really
actually
kind
of
like
to
do
the
plan
where
the
the
driveway
does
this.
L
If
we
could
save
the
tree,
I
could
save
the
time
the
expense
and
do
this
I'd
be
very
happy.
I
wouldn't
be
very
happy
if
the
tree
tips
over
I
discovered
that
a
Laurel
Oak
is
the
least
resilient
kind
of
oak
and
high
wind
weather
events,
so
I'd
like
to
stay
away
from
it
and
not
tie
the
foundation
of
my
home
or
the
lives
of
my
family
or
guests
to
the
fate
of
that
tree.
B
A
B
So
we
discussed
this
last
time
and
I
feel
like
the
solution
that
solves
all
these
issues
and
requires
no
variants
and
takes
down
no
trees
and
doesn't
alter
your
house
is
not
shown
here
still
so
I'm
gonna
try
and
elaborate
it
again
and
mr.
Knox.
If
you
could
pay
attention
because
I
think
it's
gonna
have
questions
for
you.
If
you
put
up
the
plan
that
natural
resources
presented
for
a
minute.
B
If
you
took
this
exact
plan-
and
you
just
mirror
the
house-
not
the
driveway,
only
the
house
mm-hmm
that
moves
the
notch
in
the
front
to
the
right
side
right
that
allows
you
to
move
the
house
up
to
at
least
a
15
foot
setback
without
encroaching
on
the
20
foot
radius.
At
all.
You
get
your
building
plan
that
you
want.
You
have
a
driveway,
you
don't
mess
with
the
trees,
but
then,
if
mr.
Knox
is
willing
to
go
a
few
more
feet
with
air
spading,
you
could
move
it.
Maybe
even
another
five
feet.
B
You
could
have
a
19
foot
backyard
with
your
exact
plan
and
your
driveway
and
all
the
trees
and
I'm
guessing
that
mr.
Knox
would
allow
you
to
trim
that
tree
in
certain
areas.
If
you
have
questionable
branches
that
aren't
going
to
compromise
the
health
of
the
tree,
if
you're
worried
about
things
falling
on
your
house,
which
is
certainly
a
legitimate
concern,
so
I
still
feel
like
there's
a
way
that
this
can
be
done
without
a
variance
and
without
you
giving
up
anything
at
all.
B
It
just
didn't
make
it
into
these
set
of
options,
but
it's
it's
close
I
mean
because
when
you
do
show
the
mirrored
house,
it's
moved
over
to
the
left
side
of
the
site
because
you
flip
the
driveway
right.
But
if
you
just
leave
the
driveway
and
mirror
the
house,
you
can
move
it
up.
You
get
closer
to
the
tree
and
I.
Just
don't
see
that
that
it's
an
issue
right.
The
problem.
L
Of
course,
being
that,
essentially
it
would
be
this
more
or
less,
maybe
move
back
a
little
bit
but
moved
maybe
another
seven
feet
this
direction,
yeah
that
a
driveway
can
fit,
and
it's
still
like
right
here
that
the
corner
is
almost
sixteen
feet
from
the
trunk.
It
gets
closer
to
a
point
where
right.
B
So
my
proposed
plan,
it's
19
feet
or
it's
21
feet
or
tell
ever
close.
You
can
get
once
you
airspeed,
so
yeah.
You
would
move
over
and
then
you'd
move
back
a
little
bit,
but
not
back
to
15
feet
and
certainly
not
back
to
11
and
15
feets.
The
legal
rear
yard,
so
you'd
be
getting
more
than
that.
So
so
it's
much
better
than
this
one
you're
showing
here,
because
you
know
the
driveway
and
all
that
would
would
not
be
compromised.
I.
B
G
B
I'm,
not
I'm
I've,
already
designed
more
of
this
than
I
would
want
to
I.
Don't
want
to
direct
you
that
much
the
reason
I'm
doing
that
is
because
I'm
not
inclined
to
support
moving
the
tree,
because
I
see
very
viable
way
to
accomplish
this,
without
really
any
compromise
on
what
you
want
to
do.
So
that's
the
reason,
I'm
being
so
prescriptive
of
my
ideas
to
show
you
why
I'm
not
gonna
approve
this
I'm,
not
the
recipe
they
might,
but
that's
why
I
think
it
can
be
done
without
any
variance
and
without
you
giving
up
anything.
B
L
G
G
H
G
I
L
I
G
L
G
Mean
you
can
make
you
shape
houses,
you
can
have
two-story
houses,
you
can
have
lots
of
different
iterations
and
I.
Understand
you've
thought
through
your
process,
and
you
want
this
one,
but
every
iteration
of
the
plan
I've
seen.
Is
this
box
moved
around
your
lot?
Is
there
any
alternative
plan
that
you
have
that
you've
reviewed
that
you
have
for
us
to
review?
That
is
something
other
than
this
box
moved
in
different
places
at.
L
This
exact
moment,
I,
don't
have
a
drawing
of
it.
We've
explored
two-story
houses
that
just
becomes
more
expensive
and
really
the
shape,
whether
it's
a
Tetris
run
out
or
something
more
or
less,
to
have
to
have
roughly
15
to
16
feet
of
space
on
either
side
where
you
can
have
a
living
space
and
common
space.
It's
kind
of
gonna
have
to
be
some
form
of
this.
L
Only
because
you
can't
really
encroach
or
I
mean
I
wouldn't
like
to
encroach
on
the
means
to
park
the
car
or
get
to
the
backyard
with
a
driveway,
so
everything
more
or
less
has
to
fit
within
a
16
foot
wide
thing,
and
the
only
way
to
do
that
without
sacrificing
more
of
the
backyard
was
ended
up
being
this
Tetris
shape,
which
is
why
I'm
so
averse
abandoning
it
and
why
I
keep
seeing
it.
But
yes,
if
you'd
really
like
to
see
other
ideas,
I
could
send
them
I.
L
G
G
My
concern
and
I'm
laying
it
out
there,
for
you
is
that
and
I
think
I
raised
this
the
last
time
generally
we're
not
when
we're
putting
a
house
on
a
lot
and
I
understand
this
is
a
modest
house.
It
is
not.
It
is
not
being
aggressive
in
size.
I
appreciate
that
I
understand
this
is
a
modestly
sized
a
lot
as
well.
My
concern
is
that
we
are
so
tied
to
this
this
box.
G
If
you
will-
and
that's
not
really
what
the
law,
the
rules
that
we're
following
call
for,
they
call
for
alternative
designs
that
are
intended
to
save
the
tree
and
we've
seen
this
not
not
necessarily
with
you.
But
we've
seen
this
with
other
cases
where
we
just
take
a
box
and
we
go
it
just
doesn't
fit
and
we
throw
up
our
hands
and
say
I
give
up
take
the
treatment,
that's
not
what
the
that's
not
what
our
rules
require
as
I
understand
them.
So
if
you
don't
have
those
to
present
to
us
today,
then
there's
nothing.
L
There
used
to
be
a
house
there
so
like
there
they're
set
back
kind
of
where
I'd
like
to
be
they
just.
They
have
a
funny
little
shape
cut
out
here,
but
to
recover
that
space
they
had
to
block
the
driveway.
So
you
can't
access
the
backyard
I
assume
that
was
a
cardboard
or
something
that
they
filled
in,
but
there's
there's
a
price
to
pay
for
every
cut
out
being
displaced
somewhere
else
and
I
guess.
L
If
I
was
just
trying
to
sell
the
place
and
I
wasn't
planning
on
living
there
to
the
point
that
the
tree
expires
and
beyond
that
I
I'd
agree
with
you,
I'd
say,
but
being
the
person
accountable
and
being
the
most
vested
in
kind
of
what
happens
there
in
a
quality
of
life
that
my
family
and
I
can
have
theirs.
That's
kind
of
why
I'm
stuck
on
this
and
I
really
just
want
to
have
sort
of
what
my
neighbors
have.
A
L
A
K
We
would
have
to
correspond
with
transportation,
sorry,
Brian,
Knox,
Natural
Resources.
We
would
have
to
correspond
with
transportation
to
see
if
there
was
an
acceptable
material
such
as
gravel,
but
in
terms
of
other
items
we've
used,
we've
used,
flexi
pave
we've,
we've
used
other
types
of
material
to
have
a
driveway,
that's
in
close
proximity
of
a
tree.
So.
A
K
K
A
F
K
B
K
A
K
A
A
A
L
J
K
A
G
I'll
start
the
discussion.
I'm
on
the
fence,
I
mean
look,
it's
a
it's
an
older
Laurel
leg
and
from
that
perspective,
it's
not
in
its
mid
mid
level.
Health.
From
that
perspective,
the
rigmarole
that
we're
going
to
require
the
question
becomes.
Is
it
worth
it,
but
at
the
same
time,
I
agree
with
some
of
the
comments
that
mr.
Dores
made
about.
You
can
do
almost
everything
you
want
to
do
and
keep
the
keep
the
existing
plan
with
just
a
few
modifications
and
I
also
raised
concerns
about.
B
A
C
C
L
F
I'm
another
I
don't
know,
but
but
I'll
expand
upon
that
a
little
bit
in
that
following
what
mr.
pastor
said
about,
you
know
the
alternative
plans
and
what
others
have
set
along
that
line.
I
do
agree
with
that
line
of
thought
is
that
there
are
other
plans
that
can
be
used
here,
whether
it's
moving
the
box
around
or
whether
it's
it's
reconfiguring
the
whole
plan,
so
I'm
on
the
fence,
but
kind
of
leaning
to
really
not
supporting
the
barians.
A
C
A
B
Move
that
requests
variance
request
for
case
VRB
1954,
the
property
located
at
1905
East
Ellicott
Street
for
the
removal
of
a
grand
tree
be
denied
due
to
failure
of
the
petitioner
to
meet
the
burden
of
proof
that
the
tree
would
be
rendered
hazardous
by
proposed
construction.
That
cannot
reasonably
reconfigured.
When
considering
the
factors
set
forth
in
section
27,
8
2,
8
4
to
5
from
the
city
code
for
Grand
tree
removal,
specifically
that
it
seems
that
there
are
reasonable
configurations
that
would
allow
this
tree
to
remain.
B
G
E
B
B
Creativity,
you
denied,
is
depicted
on
the
site
plan
presented
the
public
hearing
for
removal
of
a
grand
or
a
protected
tree,
based
upon
the
petitioner,
not
meeting
the
burden
of
proof
that
the
tree
denies
or
precludes
reasonable
use
of
a
parcel
of
property.
With
regard
to
the
ten
factors
for
determining
reasonable
use,
the
set
forth
in
Section
13
45
G
of
the
city
code
for
granting
tree
removal,
specifically
that
the
reason
stated
previously
that
there
are
reasonable
ways
to
reconfigure
the
site
to
allow
reasonable
use
of
the
property
as
a
residential
property.
I
G
A
A
A
D
On
dancing
land
development,
this
is
BRV
19-6.
The
application,
the
property
location
is
41,
11,
West,
Barcelona
Street.
The
applicant
name
is
Robert
bender.
The
request
is
as
follows:
per
Section
27
to
90
the
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
side
yard
setback
from
3
feet
to
0
feet
and
reduced
a
building
separation
from
10
feet
to
0
feet
to
renovate
existing
structure.
The
property
is
owned,
ours
100
and
the
house
was
constructed
in
1946.
The
applicant
purchased
a
property
in
2016
according
to
Hillsborough
County
property
appraiser.
D
A
M
So
the
the
question
you
were
asking
will
work.
What
we're
requesting
to
do
is
increase
the
height
of
this
structure,
which
is
why
we're
required
to
have
this
various
requests.
Currently,
the
slab
in
front
of
the
structure
and
the
pool
deck
are
higher
in
elevation
than
the
floor
in
the
structure,
so
occasionally
water
seeps
in
to
the
structure
which
really
limit
the
use
and
limit
any
improvements
that
we
can
make
to
the
structure.
I
forgot
to
mention
I'm,
the
contractor
on
behalf
of
the
owner.
M
They
purchased
the
home
and
didn't
realize
that
this
was
an
issue
moving
forward.
So
their
intention
is
just
to
relocate
some
drains.
I
did
I
did
have
some.
We
do
have
some
drawings
that
were
submitted.
That's
when
I
realized
I
had
to
do
this
variance.
I,
don't
have
them
with
me,
but
it's
gonna,
be
a
simple
interior,
remodel,
relocate
drains
and
just
clean
it
up.
So
it's
usable
you,
a
functionable
pool
house.
M
Wanted
to
add,
we
are
when
we
add,
when
we
increase
the
height,
we
really
only
need
two
to
go
10
to
12
inches
to
be
at
or
above
the
other
slabs
that
are
in
question,
but
the
eave,
which
you
can
see
right
here
of
the
existing
house-
they
are
basically
one
is
on
top
of
the
other.
So
I'm
gonna
have
to
bring
the
pool
house
up
to
three
courses
of
block
which
will
put
me
right
at
two
feet.
M
This
is
the
proposed
South
elevation.
There's
minor
changes,
but
the
drainage
is
going
to
remain.
The
same,
gutters
will
be
applied,
will
not
be
affecting
any
neighbors.
The
neighbor
to
the
west
is
the
neighbor
that
will
be
affected,
most
I'm,
sorry
to
the
east.
He
will
be
affected
the
most
and
he
has
written
a
letter
which
should
be
in
the
packet.
He
approves
this
alteration
and
supports
this
alteration.
M
A
I
I
I
Okay,
so
my
concern
is
that
if
the
contractor
wanted
to
expand
that
building
to
the
north,
that
that
could
that
could
happen,
and
that's
a
concern
to
me
because
that's
where
my
mom's
house
is
identifying
this
building
has
been
tough
for
me
from
their
very
beginning,
because
I've
never
I,
don't
even
know
what
a
fool
a
pool
pool
pool
house
is
that's
as
its
described
in
the
the
variance
petition.
I,
don't
know
what
a
pool
house
is:
I,
looked
it
up
and
a
couple
sources
to
try
to
get
a
firm
definition.
I
I
couldn't
find
it
I
couldn't
find
anything
in
the
appraisal,
institute,
books
about
a
pool
home
and
then
actually
there
and
down
exactly
what
a
accessory
structure
is.
It's
it's
it's
very
vague
and
that
you
know
at
the
end
of
the
day
that
concerns
me.
Basically,
the
current
situation
with
this
property
is
the
zero
lot
line
to
the
east.
It's
already
zero
right
now
and
then
the
issue
with
the
the
southern
part
of
this
bill,
which
is
next
to
the
primary
building,
is
less
than
10
feet.
Distance.
I
It's
supposed
to
be
10
feet,
it's
probably
2
or
3
feet,
and
so
those
those
are
already
operating
like
that
and
I
can
do
quickly
with
this
home
to
show
you
that
it's
sort
of
different
these
are
pictures
of
it.
This
is
the
northern
elevation
northern
elevation.
This
would
be
the
western
elevation.
I
mean
it
kind
of
looks
more
like
a
dwelling
to
me
that
then
then
an
accessory
structure,
that's
that's!
I
You
know
it
just
looks
like
it
looks
like
a
small.
You
know
the
small
dwelling
unit,
which
would
be
very
popular
to
have
you
know
it's
a
strong
rental
market
and
I
could
see
why.
Maybe
somebody
would
try
that,
but
my
issue
certainly
is
to
you
know
that
there's
no
hardship
with
this
property
and
I
would
reckon
recommend
it
or
not.
You
know
all
this
variance,
that's
that's
about
it.
For
my
end,
I
don't
have
any
more
minutes.
You're.
I
I
J
A
B
So
I
know
we
talked
in
the
past
about
limiting
the
amount
of
encroachment
to
the
footprint
of
the
existing
structure
so
that
they
can't
zero
a
lot
line,
the
whole
property,
but
I
guess.
My
question
is:
is
this
structure
still
going
to
be
considered
an
accessory
structure
or
because
it's
not
meeting
the
separation?
Is
it
suppose,
supposed
to
be
considered
primary
structure?
I.
E
D
B
Then
the
next
question
would
be,
if
you
vested
this
accessory
structure,
that's
in
the
setback
and
it's
tied
to
the
site
plan.
Then
in
the
future
somebody
could
tear
down
and
redevelop
and
they
could
also
build
into
that
same
amount
of
setback.
But
could
they
put
primary
structure
there
or
would
it
would
it
be
limited
to
accessory
structure.
E
D
B
G
There's
gonna
be
a
combinations
for
fire
prevention
and
things
like
that
when
we've
got
a
separation
of
this,
this
small
of
a
nature
is
that
I
don't
know
who
that
question
goes
to.
But
someone
is
gonna.
Look
at
this
and
go
okay.
Well,
we
need
special
dispensation
for
fires,
preventing
fire
spreads,
and
things
like
that.
Is
that
accurate,
correct.
G
B
And
then
to
address
the
neighbor
or
neighbors
sons
concern
they
can't
expand
this
structure.
We're
not.
This
variance
does
not
grant
the
expansion
of
the
square
footage
of
the
structure
and
and
even
if
the
structure
was
permitted
to
be
expanded,
it's
limited
to
I
think
750
square
feet,
but
this
variance
does
not
allow
expansion
of
that
structure.
Correct
because
we're
tying
it
to
the
site.
There's
not
a
question
for
zoning
and
it's
limited
to
15
feet.
G
M
B
A
D
F
Then
so
we're
looking
at
the
Hulman
north
side
of
the
pool
structure.
I
know
that
mr.
Andersen
brought
up
the
point
that
they
didn't
want
to
move
me
back
towards
its
mother's
house
and,
according
to
the
plan
here,
looks
like
it's
well
back
from
even
the
three-foot
setback,
but
I
presume
that
they
could
go
to
3
feet
if
they
wanted
to
at
some
point,
because
that's
so,
but
they
wouldn't
go
to
0
so
to
alleviate
mr.
Henderson's
things.
Does
that
make
sense
that.
M
A
A
A
M
A
You
need
to
determine
that
to
see
if
the
current
Florida
Building
Code
will
even
allow
you
to
go
up
whatever
and
what's
currently
inside
of
this
building
is
going
to
go
away
because
you're
gonna
take
the
roof
off.
Is
that
correct
everything
inside?
Is
that
gonna
be
gutted?
Yes,
so
you're
gonna
gut
the
building?
Yes,
you're
gonna
raise
the
foundation
of
the
floor
up.
Yes,
some
amount.
This.
A
No,
that's
not
true,
because
you
have
room
to
expand
to
the
back
legally,
so
I'm
having
a
hard
time,
understanding
the
hardship
you
have
space
to
have
this
use.
Based
on
what
we've
here
here
in
the
site
plan,
that's
that's
been
submitted,
so
I
I
need
to
understand
why
the
building,
why
one
consideration
of
this
wouldn't
be
to
tear
the
whole
thing
down
and
just
move
it
to
where
it
needs
to
be
persona
and
not
even
be
here
tonight,
assuming.
A
Its
okay,
that's
cost
savings.
Unfortunately,
it's
not
a
hardship
that
we
can
consider,
but
we
do
it.
We
do
have
to
consider
the
life
safety
issues
and
the
zoning
codes
have
minimum
standards
for
setbacks,
not
just
for
the
property
next
door,
but
the
buildings
on
the
same
property.
So
I'm,
looking
at
the
site
plan
wondering
there's
plenty
of
room
behind
the
pool
house
move
the
pool
house.
A
M
M
A
A
A
A
D
A
A
M
A
And
we
it's
a
meeting
point
tonight
because
that
wasn't
explored
that
concept
or
idea
wasn't
explored,
so
you
could
share
it
so
anyway,
those
are
my
questions.
I
was
trying
to
find
out
what
the
hardship
is.
That's
how
we
have
to
make
our
decision
and
the
only
hardship,
I've
heard
tonight
and
board
members
if
you've
heard
another
one,
please
bring
it
forward,
it's
the
cost
of
things.
G
M
G
Moving
this
moving,
this
structure
further
to
the
north
would
require
the
moving
of
the
pool
equipment,
and
it
would
also
require
changing
the
footprint
of
this
home
to
move
it
closer
to
the
north
neighbor,
which
we've
heard
testimony
tonight
would
be
objectionable
to
the
north.
The
neighbor
to
the
north
is
that
correct.
G
That's
correct,
okay,
and
so,
typically,
when
we
refer
to
that,
we
call
it
a
practical
difficulty
when
you've
got
existing
structures
or
existing
things
on
the
site
that
are
impacted
by
how
you
pay
might
move
things,
but
the
neighbor
to
the
east,
the
one
on
on
the
side,
that's
being
most
impacted.
We
have
a
letter
in
here
they're,
not
objectionable
to
you
doing
what
you've
proposed.
That's.
M
I
G
So
well,
mr.
chairman
Brown
has
accurately
stated
that
there
may
be
issues
with
with
hardship
the
existing
structures
and
the
changes
and
the
placement
and
ripping
of
those
things
you're
saying
could
be
a
practical,
difficult
t-too.
That
would
impact
your
moving.
This
thing
further
to
the
north,
correct.
M
Then
I
believe,
as
stated
that
our
neighbor
to
the
north
would
be
unhappy
as
well,
so
I
think
we're
help.
You
know
the
neighbor
to
the
east
is
most
impacted,
is
is
on
board
with
this
I
believe,
if
the
neighbor
to
the
north
hearing
this
suggestion
might
object
to
that
and
and
may
be
in
favor
now
of
what
we
are
proposing
to
do.
M
But
you
know
the
hardship
is
my
client
purchased
this
home?
They
see
this
space
thought
they'd
be
able
to
utilize
it
and
they
realize
that
another
part
I
didn't
mention
the
ceiling
in
this
space.
Now
is
seven
feet,
eight
inches.
So
if
we
were
to
bring
the
slab
up
now,
we've
got
a
six-foot.
Let
me
see
we
have
six
eight
now.
So
if
we
were
to
bring
the
slab
up,
we
would
be
six
feet
or
less.
Is
that
correct?
M
M
I
just
want
to
reiterate
that
we
are.
We
have
no
intention
of
changing
the
use
of
this
structure
where
we
have
no
intention
of
changing
the
footprint
or
increasing
the
square
footage
of
this
structure.
Truth
be
told
if
they.
If
my
client
wanted
to
use
this
as
a
rental,
he
could
do
it
right
now.
There's
these
enhancements
they're
not
going
to
change.
His
use
is
a
young
family
and
they
just
would
like
to
be
able
to
enjoy
their
pool
a
little
more
and
enjoy
the
space
that
they
have.
A
C
Well,
the
main
house:
okay,
whatever
it's
been
there
for
a
long
time,
then
the
current
owner
did
not
put
it
in
was
there
when
he
purchased
that,
so
what
we're
doing
with
the
pool
house
he's
basically
investing
it
I'm
letting
him
raise
the
roof
fix
it.
So
it's
usable,
okay,
the
building
separation
bothers
me,
but
I'm
sure
when
they
go
to
do
anything
the
code
and
the
fire
department
is
going
to
make
sure
they
make
it
sink.
So,
although
I
don't
like
the
zero
building
separation,
I'm
inclined
to
approve
I'll.
G
Say
Brown
raised
cogent,
intelligent
points
to
say
you
know
why
don't
you?
Why
don't
you
move
this
once
you
fix
an
issue
if
you're
gonna
be
doing
some
construction
here
anyway?
Why
don't
you
fix
it
so
that
we
don't
have
these
problems,
but
I
do
see
some
practical
difficulties
as
a
consequence
of
that,
it's
it's
a
great
question.
It's
a
wise
point,
but
there.
G
Become
problematic
when
you
say
well,
let's
start
moving
it
and
it
sounds
like
from
the
concerns
of
the
neighbors.
The
plan
that's
in
place
is
the
most
desirable
to
the
folks
who
live
there
and
the
good
neighbor
situation
that
we
currently
know
might
be
maintained
best
by
not
fixing
the
problem.
As
he's
so
eloquently
stated
what.
J
F
And
I
would
concur
with
that.
I
think
that
the
plan
is
presented
by
the
applicant
is
the
least
invasive
to
the
neighbors.
In
other
words,
doing
these
other
things
you
know
making
moving
the
building.
That
then
requires
moving
the
pool,
equipment
and
so
forth.
He's
a
lot
more
invasive
and
I
would
be
inclined
to
support
it
and
then
I
can
make
a
motion.
F
A
D
D
The
summary
request
for
section
27
156
the
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
corner
yard
setback
from
15
feet,
7
feet
to
construct
a
new
single-family
residence.
The
property
is
owned,
rs.75
and
received
a
demo
permit
in
2019,
as
well
as
the
applicant
purchased
a
property
in
2019.
There
is
currently
an
active
building
permit
request
for
a
new
single-family
residence.
D
H
You,
sir,
and
good
evening,
Steve
Nicolini,
yes,
I've
been
sworn.
This
is
a
non-conforming
lot.
It
is
50
feet
wide
and
it's
zoned
rs.75.
So
we
were
already
at
a
2,500
square
feet,
disadvantage
and,
and
the
width
and
also
being
a
corner
yard
creates
a
another
difficulty
which
you
know,
the
added
eight
feet
of
corner
yard
setback
causes
a
problem
and
it
it
actually
reduces
the
building
footprint
available,
building
footprint
from
28
feet
to
what
normally
would
have
been
36
feet.
But
let
me
show
you
on
the
site
plan
with
what
happens
here.
H
If
you
apply
the
15
foot
setback
this,
this
portion
of
the
house
would
be
completely
eliminated
and
then
you
would
only
have
this
other
portion.
This
sliver
here
left
as
a
building
footprint.
There
is
an
additional
20
feet
between
the
property
line
and
the
edge
of
the
pavement
on
obispo
and
on
also
on
grading.
H
So
in
discussions
with
the
Transportation
Department,
they
agreed
to
just
would
not
create
a
site
obstruction
or
caused
any
problems
with
a
view
triangle
that
Obispo
the
garage
was
being
proposed
on
this
on
the
far
south
and
a
way
from
from
San
Obispo.
So
we're
meeting
that
the
other
setbacks
to
25
in
the
front
of
the
20
in
the
rear
and
the
seven
on
the
inside
corner
here,
so
we're
requesting
relief.
They
obviously
didn't
they
were
not
the
ones
who
plaited
this
lot.
H
This
is
a
lot
of
record
and
we're
respectfully
requesting
the
ability
to
build
a
reasonable
sized
single-family
residence
here
that
would
not
trigger
any
of
the
other
difficulties
normally
associated
with
this
with
a
corner
yard
setback.
So,
as
I
said,
we
have
an
additional
20
feet
from
the
property
line
to
the
edge
of
the
pavement
on
San
Obispo,
an
additional
20
feet
from
the
property
line
on
grady.
This
is
a
not
a
heavily
traveled
residential
street
and
we
are
mitigating
any
corner
yard
view
triangle
issues
by
moving
the
garage
to
the
rear.
H
Again,
it's
zoned
rs.75.
It's
a
50
foot
wide
lot.
We
are
trying
to
do
the
best
that
we
can
on
a
very
small
lot
and
rebuild
a
single-family
residence
I
think
the
code
certainly
would
provide
relief,
and
this
at
the
practical
difficulties
are,
are
fairly
obvious.
That
I
don't
think
anyone
expected
them
to
build
a
25-foot
wide
house
on
a
single-family
lot
and
when
these
were
originally
planted
out
this
the
rs.75
district
didn't
even
exist.
H
So
when
the
when
the
codes
changed,
it
created
a
hardship
as
well,
so
the
relief
that
we're
requesting
is
I
think
anticipated
by
Bosa
code
and
the
Comprehensive
Plan,
there's
no
other
property
owner
that
would
be
adversely
affected
by
this
and
there's
plenty
of
additional
space
between
the
edge
of
the
pavement
and
the
right-of-way
line.
There's
60
feet
of
right
away,
reserved
on
grade,
which
is
unusual
for
a
residential
street.
H
So
we
have
a
lot
of
room
there
to
accommodate
for
and
provide
safety
and
clearance,
so
I
respectfully
requesting
your
approval
to
reduce
a
courtyard
setback
from
15
to
7
feet,
which
would
been
the
normal
development
pattern
in
this
area.
I'll
be
happy
to
answer
any
more
questions
you
might
have,
but
I
think
that
this
does
meet
the
practical
difficulty.
Hardship
criteria
is
contained
in
the
code.
A
J
G
J
J
Really
just
the
normal
things
that
go
on
when
a
new
house
is
being
built,
you
know
parking
and
things
like
that.
I
spoken
to
mr.
John
love
about
those
concerns
and
he's
responded
to
me
in
writing
that,
if
there's
any
problem
with
construction,
he
will
step
in
and
take
care
of
those.
So
I
think
this
is
a
plus
for
the
neighborhood.
It's
an
unusual
situation.
Most
of
our
lots
of
promisee
of
Westar
are
about
65
feet
wide
or
more
or
two
Lots.
J
A
A
C
C
When
considering
the
five
hardship
criteria
set
forth
in
Section,
27
80
of
the
city
code,
specifically
that
this
is
a
50
foot
wide
lot,
that
is
own
Rs
75.
If
it
had
been
zoned
Rs
50,
they
would
only
need
a
seven
foot
setback
but
because
it's
zoned
in
appropriate
for
the
actual
size
of
the
lot
and
then,
additionally,
there
is
20
feet.
Setback
from
the
lock
to
the
road
surface
on
the
two
sides
that
have
roads
so
there's
plenty
clearance
for
safety,
so
based
on
that
I
feel
that
they
should
be
allowed
to
that.
A
D
Wand,
anthem,
land
development-
this
is
case,
vrb
1977,
the
property
location
is
2501.
Mystic
point
way
the
applicant
is
brooks
birds
per
Section,
27
156.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
front
yard
setback
from
25
feet
to
10
feet
and
reduce
the
side
setback
from
7
feet
to
0
feet
to
construct
a
trash
and
mail
facility
for
the
shell
point,
Estates
homeowners
associations,
the
property
is
zoned
rs.60
and
was
purchased
in
2017.
J
D
A
L
N
N
N
N
So
our
garbage
cans
typically
reside
right
here,
and
this
is
the
area
in
question,
and
so
what
we're
really
proposing
today
is
to
build
a
structure
to
beautify
that
a
little
bit
make
it
look
a
little
nicer
and
and
come
up
with
a
solution
that
it
appears
our
neighbors
would
be
in
favor
of
again-
and
this
is
just
a
down
look
at
the
survey.
This
is
the
proposed
trash
facility.
I
guess
I
should
point
out
in
O
seven,
we,
along
with
our
neighbor,
vacated
Gordon
Street.
This
was
a
part
of
Gordon's
Street.
N
It
was
vacated,
it
has
an
easement
on
it.
It's
utility
easement
and
power
easement,
so
those
structures
can
be
built
on
that
vacated
Road.
So
the
area
that
we're
proposing
to
reduce
a
setback
from
is
to
zero
from
three
to
zero
on
this
I'm.
Sorry
from
seven
to
zero
on
this
property
line.
Right
here
is
an
area
that
nothing
can
be
built
on
and
then
the
the
front
setback,
because
we're
looking
at
this.
It's
really
an
association
is
a
road.
Is
an
association
parcel,
but
it
it's
our
sixty.
N
N
This
is
our
parcel,
so
really
the
and
I
think
that
wanted
to
put
something
up
earlier,
but
this
is
this
is
kind
of
the
existing
condition
right
now
and
really
what
we're
just
trying
to
do
is
kind
of
improve
that
condition
in
order
to
do
that,
it's
a
unique
situation
where
this
is
really
a
HOA
parcel
that
was
intended
for
a
road,
but
we
have
to
look
at
it
as
a
primary
structure.
In
the
you
know,
it's
not
an
insular.
A
A
J
E
J
A
very
recent
efforts
to
beautify
and
replace
many
of
the
structures.
This
is
part
of
it.
One
of
the
recurring
new
systems
is
here
is
not
just
animals.
The
mailboxes
have
been
constantly
vandalized
over
the
years,
they've
been
replaced,
and
this
will
be
a
secure
structure.
It
will
have
power
and
it
will
be
nothing
but
beautifying
the
street
and
the
neighborhood,
but
also
kind
of
safety
for
the
male,
as
also
well
as
the
kind
of
unsightly
receptacles,
which
are
just
sort
of
there
and
sort
of
bounced
about
during
the
day,
and
that's
all
thank
you.
J
K
A
K
A
D
A
N
G
When
considering
the
five
hardship
criteria
set
forth
in
section
27
80
of
the
city
codes,
specifically
that
this
is
an
extremely
atypical
situation,
that
the
existing
property
is
a
road
and
that
the
structure
is
being
built
at
the
side
of
the
road
to
contain
trash
and
mail
for
an
association
and
a
neighbor,
and
that
this
is
a
beautification
project.
For
this
association.