►
From YouTube: Variance Review Board 12102019 part 2
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
C
Morning,
good
evening,
my
name
is
grant
taki
I
have
been
sworn
in.
The
address
were
discussing
is
4935
West,
payWave
Drive,
to
be
very
plain
and
simple,
as
miss
curry
kind
of
showed
you
what
our
exact
plan
is
for
this,
due
to
the
fact
that
the
house
is
built
with
concrete
slab
floors
at
our
post-tension
concrete,
we
have
no
options
of
putting
an
elevator
through
the
floor
without
doing
a
lot
of
interior
structural
work.
We've
also
looked
into
to
bring
a
quick
run
back.
C
My
company
does
accessibility
solutions
and
whatnot
for
families
that
cannot
get
up
and
down
stairs.
Both
of
my
clients
are
older
and
aged
75
to
85
approximately
and
I'm
we're
having
a
hard
time
using
their
stairs
in
any
way
shape
or
form
getting
up
to
their
master
bedroom
is
the
issue
that
we're
facing.
As
stated
multiple
products
on
the
staircases
require
36
inches.
C
We
have,
on
average
32
to
34
inches,
not
leaving
any
room
for
someone
to
be
able
to
walk
up
and
down
those
stairs
with
said
device
to
get
our
client
up
and
down
to
their
bedroom
or
the
rest
of
their
house
upstairs.
As
mentioned,
we
have
other
solutions
that
can
go
through
the
floor
as
for
elevators,
but
with
post-tensioned
concrete.
There
are
cables
inside
the
concrete,
it's
very
hard
to
cut
through
more
so
an
engineering
nightmare
as
most
may
know.
C
The
reason
we've
decided
to
go
outside
is
it
allows
them
to
go
from
one
of
their
formal
sitting.
Rooms
downstairs
up
to
their
master
bedroom,
which
is
what
they
desire,
where
they
spend
most
of
their
time
kind
of
tough,
to
show
you
more
images,
but
I
gladly
can
same
thing
on
the
drawings.
It
shows
exactly
where
the
elevator
is
going
to
be.
This
is
from
the
back
looking
from
the
water
side
in
aesthetically,
it's
going
to
tie
into
the
existing
roof
going
to
be
a
tall
block,
construction.
C
B
B
D
The
first
thing,
I
thought
looking
at
the
site
plan,
is:
why
not
put
this
elevator
on
the
back
of
the
house
in
the
exact
same
corner,
the
little
ears
of
the
roof
overhangs
about
the
depth
of
the
elevator?
So
it
doesn't
seem
like
it
would
be
a
setback
issue,
although
I
don't
know
that
and
you
could
potentially
put
it
in
the
backyard
access
the
same
rooms
without
any
need
for
a
variance.
The.
C
Thing
that
we
noticed
there
is
the
exterior
balcony
is
just
a
kind
of
a
strut
system.
I
don't
have
the
exact
words
for
it,
but
also
it's
going
to
block
their
view
completely
of
where
we're
going
to
be
building
the
structure.
You
know,
I
didn't
have
drawings
done
up
for
that
by
it
means
it
is
a
possibility,
but
once
again
they're
trying
to
maximize
their
property
of
putting
it
on
the
side
of
the
house
where
they
do
have
a
property.
You
know
about
two
feet:
extra
after
this
enclosure.
You
know
that's
why
we're
here.
C
That
was
the
spot,
that
they
had
most
desired
and
you
know
blocking
what
it's
a
big
portion
of
the
back
of
their
house.
If
you
take
a
look
at
where
they
sit,
they
look
directly
at
the
Howard
Franklin.
In
that
elevator
hoist
way,
that's
going
to
roughly
be
sixty
to
seventy
two
inches
wide
is
definitely
going
to
block
a
great
majority
of
their
view.
C
D
C
B
B
B
B
B
C
So,
of
course,
so
in
that
general
aspect,
putting
the
mechanicals
and
whatnot
would
have
to
be
somewhere,
that's
either
going
to
be
out
extending
past
the
property
line.
Again,
I
get
what
you're
saying,
but
looking
at
it
from
just
a
contracting
going
to
be
replacing
two
of
those
sliding
glass
doors
to
make
something
else.
Code
compliant
and
tying
them
in
I
feel
like
it's
gonna,
be
more
of
a
structural
deficit
to
actually
make
happen
and
make
work.
F
B
B
C
B
B
C
Of
course,
if
they
have
groceries
or
anything
like
that,
it
that
they
need
to
bring
inside
or
bring
upstairs
or
laundry
whatever
it
may
be,
they
don't
have
to
go
outside
in
the
rain,
get
inside
an
elevator
go
upstairs
get
out
of
the
elevator
or
without
building
some
type
of
hallway
system
on
their
house.
That
could
be
unnecessary.
C
B
C
H
H
C
C
B
C
You
know
my
only
rebuttal
is
you
know
it's
for
our
client
who's.
You
know
having
a
hard
time
getting
up
and
down
these
stairs.
Of
course
we
drew
these
plans
up,
it's
exactly
where
he
wanted.
It.
I
know
that
doesn't
have
anything
to
do
with
the
hardships
of
it,
but
really
want
to
be
able
to
help
this
client
be
able
to
use
and
live
in
their
house
as
they
used
to
before.
C
You
know
they
have
a
hard
time
even
getting
up
to
their
own
master
bedroom,
to
get
a
good
night's
sleep
at
the
end
of
the
day.
So
you
know,
we've
tried
basically
every
other
accessibility
solution
in
the
house.
That
would
give
them
the
same
features
and
it's
not
going
to
work
due
the
fact
of
the
post-tensioned
concrete
that
the
whole
floor
is
across
the
house.
So
that's
really
all
I
have
to
say
I
appreciate
you
guys
this
time.
H
I
B
I'm,
not
in
favor
of
it
I
think
that
they
could
just
simply
move
it
around.
Could
we
could
have
minimized
the
setback
by
allowing
for
a
part
of
the
shaft
to
go
into
the
setback?
If
it
they
have,
eight
feet
now
had
to
go
a
foot
or
so.
I
could
certainly
live
with
that.
I.
Just
think
that
there
was
room
to
to
move
it
from
around
the
side
and
that's
my
feeling
I.
J
D
B
A
A
The
code
section
in
question
is
27
156.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
front
near
a
setback
from
20
feet
to
14
feet
for
notice
and
I
think
he
has
an
amended
plan
he's
going
to
show
us
this
evening
and
we
have
included
the
amended
plan
in
your
packet,
which
is
going
to
reduce
the
front
yard
setback
from
20
feet
to
18
feet.
Pipe
up
in
is
constructing
additions
and
renovations
to
existing
home
and
preserving
the
grant
tree
in
the
front
yard.
Additional
tax
code
section
is
27
to
90.
A
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
rear
yard
from
3
feet
to
0
feet
for
an
existing
storage
shed
variance.
Would
we
the
best
the
existing
conditions
are
the
shed
properties,
zoned
RS
50,
the
property
appraiser
records
are
included
for
your
reference
right
away,
transportation
and
that's
resources
have
found
it
consistent.
That's
resources.
Doug
does
have
conditions
they
are
here
tonight.
If
you
have
any
questions,
transportation
is
as
well.
Zoning
is
has
found
it
inconsistent.
A
A
B
L
B
G
For
which
one
main
project
is
a1
always
so
you
only
asked
over
there
said
first
and
then
you
can
start
anywhere
you
want.
We
have
a
existing
shed
in
the
property.
It
was
there.
When
we
bought
the
house,
we
purchased
a
house
and
like
October
or
17,
the
shed
was
already
there.
I
did
repair
sent
the
shed
because
it
was
and
had
some
body
so
I
did
some
repairs
to
her
stuff,
didn't
move.
It
didn't
modify
it
anything
that
was
just
there
so
I'm
requesting
that
at
state
just
simply
stay
where
it's.
G
Which
of
the
the
grand
oak
tree
is
right
here,
that's
approximate,
a
60
inch
grand
oak
and
the
existing
this
little
porch
area
is
the
existing
porch
and
the
driveway
runs
right
up
next
to
the
oak
tree
and
we're
trying
to
remove
all
the
concrete
put
in
there,
and
then
it
has
a
circle
driveway
in
the
front
of
the
house.
It's
out
here
that
comes
around
on
this
easement
there's
about
a
20
foot
easement
to
the
edge
of
curb
in
the
front,
and
it
comes
around
this
way
and
circles
here.
G
So
I
want
to
remove
all
that
concrete
and
a
stem
wall
there,
so
that
we
can
stabilize
the
tree
and
basically,
what
we're
trying
to
do
then
the
hardship
and
this
and
that
we're
trying
to
save
a
grinder
and
move
everything
over.
My
current
master
bedroom
is
here
where
the
garage
is
on
and
get
rid
of
the
master
bedroom
and
convert
that
into
a
garage
and
move
it.
The
initial
problem
we
had
last
time
I
was
here,
is
that
I
was
requesting.
The
garage
would
be
a
little
dark.
G
I
was
trying
to
put
a
laundry
room
in
there
also
but
oven
we're
going
to
modify
everything
in
this
abandoned.
The
laundry
room
I
reduced
the
garage
to
18
feet,
so
we
can
get
a
car
in
and
I
spoke
with,
roadway
had
down
in
the
city
and
they
said
that
if
I
needed
at
least
a
18
foot
ramp
here
and
then
the
rest
of
the
drive
coming
out
is
18
feet
wide.
With
the
3
foot
arch,
cutting
in
apron
coming
onto
the
road.
So.
H
G
At
this
point
she
has
it
get
out
and
come
for
me
inside
the
house
and
Parker
Drive
with
car
in
the
driveway
and
then
walk
in
the
house,
so
I'm
trying
to
do
it
to
where
she
can
actually
drive
into
a
garage
have
some
kind
of
life
safety,
things,
she's
not
exposed
to
the
environment
and
or
in
or
anything
else
out
there
might
get
her
and
the
shed
in
the
back
is
like
I
said:
that's
just
her.
She
shed
I
love
that
word.
She
should
anyways.
G
G
B
I
B
A
B
M
A
B
I
H
A
Hey
Roberta
Curie
planning,
design
and
development
coordination
in
the
Arabic
VRB
case,
nineteen
112
addresses
1514
South
Arowana
Avenue
Code
sections
under
consideration
is
27
156.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
north
side
yard
setback
from
17
to
zero
P
applicant
is
seeking
to
construct
an
addition
of
an
open
car
port
/
cortico
share
to
existing
home.
The
property
is
zoned
rs.15
and
the
property
appraiser's
information
is
included
for
your
record
reference.
A
A
L
N
L
This
tree
the
tree
area
right
here
he
has
to
park
out
he
parks
his
primary
car
out
here
on
the
on
the
street.
With
this
truck
over
on
the
side,
he
gets
tree
droppings
bird
droppings,
all
the
droppings
that
come
along
with
South
Tampa
living,
wants
to
put
a
carport
over
on
the
side
of
his
home
over
here,
which
is
similar
to
this.
Basically,
we're
just
gonna
build
a
carport
over
top
of
the
existing
driveway.
The
reason
we're
asking
for
a
zero
setback
on
the
side
yard
is
these
columns
on
the
front
of
his
house.
L
We
want
to
resemble
those
on
the
side
and
to
get
enough
space
to
put
his
primary
vehicle
underneath
that
carport
we
have
to
have
a
right
to
decide
what
the
footers,
so
this
is,
as
staff
said,
prime
previously,
this
is
the
location,
their
carport
yeah,
that's
it!
It's
all.
I
got
I'm
tired.
How
am
I
go
home?
Okay,.
B
M
B
B
B
B
L
G
N
M
B
M
Changed:
okay,
seven
feet
to
six
inches
section:
27
156!
Thank
you
with
an
encroachment,
briefs
and
gutters
based
upon
the
applicant
presenting
competent
and
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
at
this
public
hearing
of
an
unnecessary
hardship
of
practical
difficulty
when
considering
the
five
hardship
criteria
set
forth
in
section
27a
t
of
the
city
code,
specifically
that
there
is
a
large
tree
slightly
off-center
in
the
front
yard
that
dumps
leaves
and
twigs
all
over
the
car.
There
is
no
other
place
to
put
his
car
or
there's
any
protection
for
it.
B
B
A
Okay,
Roberta
means
hurry,
planning,
design
and
development
coordination
case
number
BRB,
19
109
address
2801
north
Nevada
Avenue
Code
sections
in
question
is
27
156.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
front
yard
setback
from
25
feet
to
7
feet.
Applicant
is
seeking
to
construct
an
addition
of
an
open
covered
canopy
to
existing
porch
area
located
in
newly
created
front
yard.
As
a
result
of
a
lot
split
with
the
existing
primary
structure
remaining
in
place,
the
property
is
zoned,
RM
16
and
the
county
record
is
closed
for
your
reference.
A
The
lot
split
was
approved
through
a
formal
decision.
Fdn,
1805
and
I'll
show
you
what
the
ramifications
of
that
in
my
presentation
and
the
formal
decision
letter
is
attached
into
your
packet
and
the
reason
we
attach
that
it
was
because
there
are
several
conditions
that
we
highlighted
and
let
you
be
aware
of
in
that
formal
decision
that
which
the
applicant
would
still
have
to
be
in
compliance
with
right
away
that
the
transportation
now's
resources
has
kind
of
consistent
zoning
has
done
it
in
consistent
property,
appraiser's
record
for
your
reference.
A
A
Let
me
explain
the
lot
split
a
little
bit,
so
the
survey
shows
both
parcels
as
it
formerly
existed
to
the
original
lot
was
here
and
again.
If
you
remember
our
previous
discussions
with
zoning
law
definitions,
this
would
have
been
the
front
yard
corner
yarn,
rear
yard
side
yard.
With
a
lot
split.
That's
all
changed
so
now.
This
is
the
lot
in
question
tonight.
This
is
going
to
be
not
included
and
went
off
for
another
address
so
now,
because
this
is
the
shortest
dimension
facing
the
street.
A
This
is
your
front
front
yard,
corner
yard,
front
opposite
front.
Is
the
rear
yard
side
yard
so
what's
happening?
Is
the
existing
structure
to
remain?
Is
that
remain
in
place
and
the
way
it
sits
today
is
now
now
a
non-conforming
structure,
so
our
m16
requires
at
the
front
setback
the
25
feet,
and
he
doesn't
need
that
already.
A
A
Again,
now
looking
right
into
the
property
at
the
corner.
Again,
this
is
the
front
yard
where
the
140s,
this
looking
back
down,
Gladys
where
there
is
a
fence-
and
that
was
part
of
the
condition-
is
that
fence
be
removed
with
this
lot
is
now
going
to
win
a
lot.
Not
let
look
when
that
lot
is
developed.
Sorry,
okay!
B
A
B
A
B
D
A
H
D
A
H
D
I
I
H
H
O
B
But
specifically,
you
look
at
the
site
plan
where
there's
a
twenty
twenty
point:
five
foot
front
new
front
dimension
already
and
which
is
non-conforming.
That's
mr.
Posterous
question
by
approving
the
7-foot
reduction
in
what's
already
non-conforming
if
the
house
burnt
down
and
they
wanted
to
rebuild
it
as
it's
drawn
on
this
site
plan
that
20
feet,
20
and
a
half
feet
is
not
conforming
to
the
current
code.
So
by
approving
this
little
7
foot,
awning
or
whatever
it
is,
it.
C
I
Don't
know
the
answer
to
that
question:
it's
a
it's.
A
it's
I
mean
I.
My
my
thought
would
be
that
it
would
be
tied
to
the
site
plan,
but
I
think
you
raised
some
issues
there.
That
I
don't
know
the
answer
to.
As
far
as
you
know,
the
note
notice
issues
that
would
come
with
the
fact
that
once
it
comes
down
I
would
I
would
have
to
research
that,
let's.
D
Say,
theoretically,
a
developer
buys
this
in
the
future
they
tear
down
this
house.
They
build
back
a
maximize
the
most
amount
of
square
footage
they
can
put
on
this
property
and
they
decide
they
want
a
one
car
garage
that
happens
to
be
the
width
of
this
porch
out
to
seven
feet
because
that's
vested
for
this
site
plan.
Can
they
do
that
because
we
grant
this
variance
on
this
nonconformity?
It
doesn't
carry
into
the
future
or
we
say
no.
That
was
with
a
non-conforming
house
and
now
you
have
to
meet
car
code.
I
don't
know.
I
What
my
my
inclination
would
be
that
the
variants
that
would
be
granted
tonight
would
only
vast
the
the
variance
that
is
needed
tonight
and
that
the
extent
that
in
the
future
conditions,
changed
and
created
where
they
were.
You
know
news
such
new
conditions
that
would
require
further
encroachment
based
on
a
different
code.
Then
then
they
would
needed
new
new
variants.
At
that
time.
I
but
I'd.
I
I,
don't
know
the
answer
with
confidence,
because
I'm
not
familiar
with
any
case
law
on
that
particular
issue.
I'm.
H
Looking
at
this,
this
letter
that
was
sent
by
Tampa
gov
and
there's
a
line
in
here
that
says
on
page
three
and
it's
highlighted
the
house
is
currently
non-conforming
to
setbacks
and
we'll
need
a
variance
for
the
front
yard,
because
now
that
we've
switched
the
front
yard
the
front
yard,
which
is
a
25
foot
setback.
The
house
sits
at
20.5
yeah.
So.
H
I
D
D
B
B
Agree
or
not,
it
doesn't
matter,
okay,
so
we're
moving
forward
with
the
understanding
that
we
are
in
fact
vesting
the
front
yard
set
in
the
front
yard,
non-conforming
setback
only
because
the
other
setbacks
are
less
than
what
the
house
currently
occupies.
The
side
rear
corner
side
here,
yes,
okay,
I'm
done.
B
M
This
is
the
first
time
for
this.
Thank
you
for
having
us
tonight.
My
name
is
Dominique
2.20
801
North,
devata
Avenue
is
the
house
were
questioning
I
bought
the
house
about
two
years
ago.
Actually
in
December
the
lot
was
already
separated
off
when
I
bought
the
house.
It
was
not
part
of
the
purchase
at
all.
I've
had
a
front
porch
forever.
I've
got
a
ton
of
trees.
I
can't
really
enjoy
my
front
porch
in
the
summertime.
There's
no
cover
over
it.
B
M
Decide
but
you're
the
Boys
and
Girls
Club.
That's
part
of
the
reason
I
want
the
the
awning
is
well
to
give
you
more
privacy
because
they
have
an
elevated
soccer
field
that
literally
faces.
My
firm
we
know
in
my
office
is
right
there,
so
as
part
of
the
other
reason,
I
kind
of
wanted
it
to
just
kind
of
block
myself
from
the
Boys
and
Girls
Club
a
little
bit
more.
B
M
A
M
Until
I
bought
the
house
that
the
front
yard
changed
because
I
had
it
in
about
a
dress,
so
I
thought
the
side.
Setbacks
were
only
gonna,
be
7
feet
and
then,
when
we
pulled
the
permit
is
when
we
found
out
that
they
changed
the
whole
direction
of
the
way.
The
house,
that's
how
we
found
out
to
surprise.
B
B
M
Your
hardship,
it's
honestly,
it's
just
in
the
summer
times
you
cannot
use
the
porch
it's
the
Sun
beats
down
on
you.
It's
also
doing
a
little
bit
of
damage
to
the
interior
of
my
house
from
just
excessive
sun
tons
of
leaves
out
there
and
when
it
rains,
you
can't
I
sit
out
on
my
porch
every
day.
That's
kind
of
just
my
unwinding
place
and
you
can't
use
the
porch
half
of
the
year
when
it's
when
it's
raining
all
the
time
without
a
cover.
Okay,
there
are
other.
M
B
D
Move
the
variance
request,
sir
case
BRB,
nineteen
109
for
property
located
at
2801,
Nevada
Avenue.
The
granite
is
depicted
on
the
site
planner
presented
at
the
public
hearing
for
a
reduction
in
the
front
yard,
setback
from
25
feet
to
seven
feet
when
the
krause
ravines
and
gutters,
based
on
the
Alpha
10%
incompetence,
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
and
its
public
hearing
of
an
unnecessary
hardship
of
practical
difficulty.
D
When
considering
the
five
hardship
criteria
set
forth
in
Section,
27
80
of
the
city
city
code,
specifically
that
there's
a
non-conforming
lot
that
was
split
and
that
what
would
appear
to
be
the
side
yard
is
actually
now
the
front
yard.
The
front
porch
is
existing
and
looking
for
cover
for
the
practical
reasons
of
a
covered
porch
and
that
it
faces
a
non-residential
lot.
M
A
Homestretch,
only
four
more
to
go:
Roberta
made
curry
planning,
design
and
development
coordination.
Crv
19
116
addresses
one
five:
nine
Biscayne
Avenue
Code
sections
in
question:
27
156
the
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
east
side
yard
setback
from
seven
feet
to
5
feet.
Eight
applicant
is
seeking
to
best
existing
conditions
with
side
yard
setback
of
two-story
addition
with
first
level
screen
porch
built
her
permit
number
one,
nine
five
one:
three
nine
point:
zero
zero,
two
in
2000
African,
is
seeking
to
enclose
screened-in
room
and
make
it
an
air-conditioned
sunroom.
A
A
A
A
A
M
A
Staff
has
found
the
historical
permit
for
this
property,
and
this
was
the
sight
line
presented
at
the
permit
and
it
was
approved
with
conditions.
It's
got
the
city
stamp,
however,
the
addition
wasn't
drawn
to
scale
on
the
permit
same
thing
and
therefore
it
was
approved
because
visually
it
looks
like
she
was
fine
setback
was
fine
according
to
this
plan,
as
we
dug
further
into
the
drawings.
A
A
This
one
is
to
scale,
but
you
can
hardly
read
it
and
it's
tucked
up
in
the
time.
You
see
the
difference
right
here
and
you
see
the
dimensions
this
drawing
was
to
scale,
and
it
shows
that
this
corner
of
our
house
sticks
out
four
feet:
four,
which
greatly
reduced
the
setback
here
it
was
approved,
went
through
permit
and
went
through
inspections.
A
A
B
A
A
B
B
A
B
B
B
A
A
D
A
D
A
D
K
I'm
requesting
the
setback,
because
of
exactly
what
miss
Roberta
just
explained,
the
I'm,
trying
to
just
cut
through
my
notes,
as
we
already
covered
most
of
this
stuff-
sorry
well
I'm,
trying
to
make
it
easier
for
everybody.
The
the
second
floor,
we
put
the
second
floor
in,
and
that's
our
that
was
like
that
is
our
living
quarters
and
the
first
floor
on
the
right
was
a
screen
porch.
What
I
thought
was
kind
of
cool,
but
after
I
found
out
that
Florida
humidity
was
like.
K
That
was
a
mistake
and
the
other
side
we
left
open
intentionally,
because
my
husband,
my
late
husband,
had
a
sort
of
woodworking
as
like
as
a
hobby,
and
so
it
was
for
him
to
have
that
available
and
then
for
me
to
do
garden
and
now
I've
come
to
that
was
in
2000
and
now
I've
come
to
realize.
I
need
to
rethink
whether
I
want
to
go
up
and
down
stairs
and
also
I
need
to
make
sure
I
have
space
available
an
event.
I
need
somebody
to
move
in
to
take
care
of
me.
K
K
So
this
is
the
front
of
the
house
looking
the
back
and
that's
the
screen,
the
entrance
to
the
screen
porch
from
the
front
of
the
house,
and
then
this
is
what
it
looks
like
at
the
back.
We
started
this
process
in
April,
so
everything
was
cleared
out.
We
never
expected
a
problem
because
we've
done
lots
of
work
on
the
house
over
the
years.
I
never
go,
I
mean
like
we
were
so
cautious
about
all
of
this,
so
we'd
already
cleared
everything
out
thinking.
K
We
were
going
to
start
construction
well
here
we
are
seven
months
later
still
stuff
piled
in
living
rooms
and
things
like
that.
So
that's
what
the
screen
porch
looked
like
it
looks
like,
and
then
this
is
what
the
back
of
the
house
looks
like,
but
you're
asking
about
a
minute
ago.
So
that's
the
second
floor,
and
then
you
can
see
here
is
where
the
open
areas.
This
is
a
like
a
closet
for
storing
long
stuff
and
things
like
that.
This
is
the
actual
anticipated
use
of
the
space.
K
This
is
going
to
be
converted
to
a
bedroom
and
a
bath.
This
is
the
existing
staircase
to
the
second
level,
and
then
this
we're
trying
to
close
that
to
make
it
more
usable
and
then
she's
already
sort
of
shown
you
this
this
one,
which
is
the
elevation
and
there
is,
it,
is
essentially
all
windows.
It's
all
impact
windows
with
a
three-foot
stucco
base
to
it.
I
sent
out
26
letters
to
my
favorite
friends,
and
that's
me
house
and
this
house.
This
hat
looks
at
house
in
this
house.
K
K
K
B
B
F
K
K
K
B
K
B
B
B
B
D
When
considering
the
five
hardship
criteria
set
forth
in
Section,
27
80
of
the
city
code,
specifically
that
this
project
was
permitted,
built
inspected
and
approved
by
the
city.
Without
this
encroachment
being
discovered
that
the
existing
porch
footprint
will
not
be
changed
by
enclosing
it
and
that
it's
already
enclosed
above
on
the
second
story.
At
this
same
point
on
the
property.
B
A
B
K
You
and
I
really
like
to
say
how
much
I
appreciate
the
support
I've
had
over
the
last
several
months
from
the
staff,
especially
miss
miss
Roberta
who's.
You
know
late
in
the
game
and
I
could
not
have
done
this
and
they
gave
me
such
great
confidence
and
we're
just
always
there
and
supported
them.
I
really
really
appreciate
it.
Everybody.
Thank
you.
Thank.
D
A
All
right,
Roberta
meet
curry
planning,
design
and
development
coordination.
Vrv
case
number.
Nineteen
one
one
seven
address
8506,
El,
Portal,
Drive,
Code
sections
under
review
this
evening
is
27
156.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
front
yard
setback
from
20
feet
to
12
feet,
to
reduce
the
South
yard,
setback
from
17
to
2
feet
for
the
primary
structure
applicant
is
seeking
to,
but
the
best
existing
conditions
of
that
structure.
A
Next
Code
section
is
27
to
90.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
south
side
yard
setback
boy
is
that
a
tongue
twister
from
3
feet
to
two
feet
and
front
yard.
Setback
from
60
feet
to
57
feet
for
the
accessory
structure.
Applicant
is
seeking
to
invest
existing
conditions.
Property
is
own
Rs,
50
and
the
property
appraiser's
records
are
here
for
your
reference
right
away
has
found
a
consistent
transportation
is
consistent
with
the
conditions
zoning
has
found.
It
inconsistent.
A
This
is
the
side.
That's
basically
in
question
here
for
the
reduction.
This
is
the
what
we
call
the
accessory
structure.
It
doesn't
mean
the
fifteen
percent
minimum
square
footage
is
just
under
that
750
square
feet
requirement,
so
it
is
classified
as
an
accessory
structure
and
it
should
be
three
feet
from
the
side
three
feet
from
there,
we're
which
it
needs
and
sixty
feet
from
the
front.
So
it
it's
just
shy
of
that.
60
foot
requirement.
A
A
B
A
B
P
P
P
We
should
have
6
steep
on
the
front
and
only
has
picked
7
and
the
side
like
we're
at
a
stage
you
have
3,
but
he
only
has
2.
What
half
here
is.
This
was
in
2019
I
purchased
this
house
on
April
20
19.
So
only
a
few
months
ago,
I
haven't
make
any
structure
changes
as
I
put
on
my
application.
When
I
purchased
the
house,
the
condition
of
the
house
was
not
the
best
shape.
P
I
had
to
take
care
of
the
most
important
things,
I
mean
as
if
the
station's
roof
leaks,
I
had
to
change
few
parts
of
the
floor.
Few
parts
of
the
walls,
the
roof
but
I
haven't
added
any
part
of
the
structure
just
showing
that
I
have
in
a
number.
Two
of
the
application
is
that
this
is
not
a
hardship
that
I
created
on
myself.
So
I
purchased
this
house
as
it
is,
and
I
win.
I
can
go
back
as
far
as
2006
and
you
can
see
that
the
structure
has
remained
the
same.
P
This
picture
here
is
2018
and,
as
you
can
see,
we
see
the
property
the
same
way
I
mean
of
course,
another
same
way
as
you
can
see.
This
is
all
there,
some
of
the
degrees
that
I
had
to
take
care
of
and
throw
away,
but
you
can
see
the
front
of
the
house
or
so
you
know
same
as
2019
the
side
part
was
there
and
intercessory
same
this
one
is
from
2017.
You
can
see
they're
here
right.
There
2017
house
remains
the
same.
P
P
The
side
of
the
house,
which
is
this
one
in
question,
has
always
been
there
and
then
accessory,
which
is
this
part
here,
has
been
there
for
I,
don't
know
number
of
years.
I
know
for
number
three
of
the
application,
I
believe
is
if
this
will
interfere
with
the
Wellness
safe
field.
My
neighbor's
I
mean
this
has
been
like
this
for
years
as
part
of
the
application.
Of
course,
we
had
to
send
the
letters
to
all
my
neighbors,
my
next
side,
my
next-door
neighbor,
which
would
be
the
house,
the
house
that
would
be
the
most
affected.
P
It's
the
one
right
here.
He
actually
in
your
package.
You
have
a
letter.
His
name
is
Miguel
Laguna.
He
has
no
problem.
He
was
actually
a
prior
owner.
There's
been
a
few
owners
of
this
house
and
the
house
hasn't
changed
structure,
so
he
has
no
issue
to
sign
the
letter,
my
neighbor
from
across
the
road.
It
was
actually
here
tonight
who
or
me,
however,
because
the
session
was
so
long
yeah.
He
live
around
9:00,
but
before
he
left
he
did
sign
his
letter
and
I
would
like
to
enter
this.
If
you
for
me.
P
Wayne
has
been
living
in
the
neighborhood
since
1991.
You
know,
I
wish
he
could
have
saved
himself,
but
he
said
since
1991
the
structure
has
always
been
the
same.
He
knows
that
it
was
built
back
in
1940s,
but
since
1991
the
structure
has
remained
the
same
in
front
of
the
house.
There's
a
surf
in
the
back,
so
this
is
the
main
reason
why
I'm
here
tonight
asking
for
this
bearing
to
be
approved.
It
wasn't
something
I
created
myself.
P
I
do
understand
that
as
a
new
owner
I
do
have,
to
you,
know,
find
a
solution
or
remedy
a
hardship.
This
is
not
a
proof,
of
course,
is
like
I
said.
P
The
condition
that
about
the
house
was
not
the
best,
so
I
did
have
some
there's
a
good
amount
of
money
in
time
fixing
restoring
this
house
and
if
the
bear
is
not
approved,
taking
a
foot
of
the
front
of
the
house,
that's
basically
gonna
leave
me
with
not
even
have
a
house
and
then
I
also,
of
course,
invest
money
in
restoring
that's
so
so
far.
That's
pretty
much.
All
I
have
okay.
B
P
P
B
O
O
B
B
A
A
Okay,
Roberta
I
mean
Currie
planning,
design
and
development
coordination.
Crv
case
number
2001
address
the
6915
North
River
Boulevard
coach
sectioning
question
tonight
is
27
to
86.
Natural
Resources
is
here
to
maybe
elaborate
a
little
bit
on
that
code.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
wetland
setback
from
25
feet
to
7
feet
on
the
north
side.
Yard
applicant
is
seeking
to
best
existing
conditions
of
an
accessory
structure.
Property
is
owned,
SH
RS
and
that
is
Seminole
Heights
and
typically
Seminole
Heights.
A
You
do
a
variance
administratively,
but
this
is
not
a
variance
or
dimension
or
item
we
can
waive
in
an
iterative
process.
That's
why
they're
here
tonight
right
away
transportation,
let's
see
right
away,
has
found
it.
Inconsistent
transportation
is
consistent
at
to
resources.
Consistent
herma
design
is
inconsistent
and
again.
For
that
reason,
I
just
stated
with
Isola
Heights
Zoning
found
it
inconsistent
property.
Appraisers
record
is
here
for
your
reference.
A
A
A
A
A
A
The
remainder
of
the
application
at
the
packet
I
have
included,
for
you
is
approximately
60
pages.
We
won't
go
over
all
that
tonight,
but
there
is
a
member
of
the
audience
that
is
here,
and
he
does
have
a
presentation
that
he's
given
to
the
media
Department
and
it's
brought
a
backup
copy
of
that
presentation
doesn't
work.
So
let
that
person
go
over
that
presentation
for
you.
L
Right
Knox,
Natural
Resources,
the
applicant
is
requesting
a
reduction
to
the
25-foot
setback
and
reducing
this
to
seven
feet
for
a
covered
patio
on
a
shed.
It
was
constructed
back
in
2011,
Natural
Resources
received
all
the
required
and
requested
documents
from
the
applicant
to
have
this
wetland
setback
reduction,
move
forward,
there's
a
24
to
25
inch
oak,
that
is
within
the
wetland
setback,
and
there
was
a
question
of
whether
or
not
that
tree
was
impacted.
Natural
Resources
made
the
determination
that
it
was
not
impacted
other
than
that.
L
There
was
also
information
submitted
to
GPC
the
the
plans
were
submitted
to
EPC
for
review.
They
made
the
determination
that
there
was
no
erosion
or
environmental
concerns
and
the
lineage
was
determined
to
be
at
the
top
of
the
bank.
The
top
of
the
bank
is
vegetated
and
provides
adequate
filtration
and
runoff,
based
on
the
fact
that
this
encroachment
occurred
over
five
years
ago,
with
no
impairment
apparent
environmental
deck,
datian
Natural
Resources
finds
this
application
consistent.
B
E
E
E
The
hardship
here
is
as
unique
and
sealer
to
the
property
in
2011,
as
mentioned,
a
contractor
was
engaged
to
pour
the
patio
and
erect
the
the
patio
cover,
and
at
that
time
he
did
not
pull
a
permit
and
because
of
the
structure
I've
been
reported
by
a
neighbor,
and
so
here
I
am
tonight
the
hardship.
It
was
not
a
function
of
my
knowledge,
it
was
the
contrary,
Turkey's
actually
came
in,
did
the
workers
receive
payment
and
it
was
that
gentleman
I
contracted
who
did
not
pull
the
permit.
E
Let's
see,
how
is
that
read
here
the
hardship
if
it
would
be
surfer
suffer,
but
I
can't
read
it
from
up
here.
I'm
sorry
allowed.
The
restroom
will
result
in
substantial
justice
being
done,
considering
both
the
public
benefit
intended
to
be
secured
by
the
chapter
and
the
individual
hardships
are
practical.
That
is
correct
in
its
statement,
I'm
not
requesting
more
than
any
other.
If
the
neighbors
approved
encroachments
in
the
area,
the
encumbrances
and
removable
removing
of
the
structure
would
significant
affect
the
wetland
habitat.
E
This
is
the
vicinity
map.
The
residents
of
the
parcels
in
black
represent
letters
that
I
have
received
or
emails
that
were
sent
to
the
vrb
that
were
in
support.
I
have
mr.
Travis
Allred
at
4:08
in
the
West
floor
up
giving
his
support
to
the
program
or
to
the
the
improvements.
As
you
can
read,
I
have
Kevin
Allred
at
six,
so
sixty
nine
to
six
North
River
Boulevard.
E
E
As
mentioned,
an
EPC
report
was
indeed
requested,
the
winning
in
chin
report,
and,
if
you
can
see
from
here
the
wetland
line
top
a
bank,
the
25
foot
setback
line
is
actually
inside
doesn't
haunt
the
housing
structure.
Here
the
house
was
actually
built
in
1955
before
wetland
setbacks
were
actually
part
of
the
code.
This
delation
report
was
a
result
of
obtaining
an
after-the-fact
plan
request
with
the
city
of
Tampa.
E
It
should
be
noted
that
I
have
been
to
construction
services.
I
have
gone
through
plan
review,
they
have
accepted
my
application
for
a
permit.
It
has
gone
through
several
departments
and
approved,
and
we
basically
ended
up
in
urban
design
that
we
notice
deed
of
the
wetland
area
and
that
we
need
the
delineation
area
report
and
that
probably
a
variance
would
be
required
here.
You
can
see
the
structure
itself.
It
is
then
the
the
atmosphere.
The
orange
here
represents
the
patio
and
the
covered
part
carport.
E
E
E
With
regard
to
the
life
safety
issue,
here
is
the
fire
hydrant
at
the
end
of
the
street,
the
structure
of
the
patio,
the
patio
itself,
the
cover
sets
29
feet
from
the
property
line
and
approximately
another
36
feet
to
see
fire
hydrant.
So
there's
about
35
feet
to
the
area
where
the
fire
hydrant
would
be.
E
E
As
mentioned
in
the
report,
the
property
sets
at
the
dead-end
street.
This
is
the
end
of
the
street.
You
can
see
across
the
canal
here
that
the
entire
area
is
open,
very
basically
very
little
traffic,
except
for
the
owner
to
the
west
of
the
property
and
our
property.
Here
on
6915
point
out,
we
do
have
two
cars
in
this
household.
The
driveway
is
a
single
car
driveway
and
one
car
parks
out
in
front
of
the
house
by
the
driveway
that
car
I
don't
know.
May
not
I'm
I
have
pictures
later
the
front
of
the
car.
E
E
I'd
like
to
go
over
the
encroachments
here
are
the
other
encroachments.
In
the
area
you
see:
69
16,
North,
River
Boulevard.
There
is
a
35
by
45
foot
patio,
which
is
a
budding
right
up
to
the
wetlands,
a
large
luxury
home,
where
the
entire
north
side
of
the
property
is
built
into
the
wetland
setback.
As
you
can
see
here.
E
These
are
the
encroachments
that
the
house
has
been
approved
for
this
house
was
built
in
2009.
There's
a
five
foot
section
of
fence
here:
there's
a
10
foot
patio
and
the
main
three-car
garage
is
ten
foot
into
ten
feet
into
the
setback.
The
back
here
the
main
house
is
set
another
six
feet
end
to
the
wetlands
and
at
the
rear,
is
18
feet
into
the
wetlands
here
it
is.
This
is
the
rear,
where
it's
18
feet
into
the
wetlands.
E
E
E
B
N
You
can
get
afternoon
board.
My
name
is
Michael
Gonzalez
I
reside
at
69,
16
North,
River,
Boulevard
and
I've
been
sworn
in.
My
family
and
I
own
three
of
the
eight
occupied
houses
on
the
block.
The
house
that
me
and
my
wife
live
in
was
my
grandfather's
are
spending
that
our
family
for
three
generations.
Since
then,
we
bought
two
more
houses
on
the
street
for
our
two
daughters,
so
that
they
can
help
us
with
childcare
for
their
autistic
brother
as
we
get
older,
so
we
have
three
houses.
N
There
we've
been
here
three
generations,
we're
gonna,
be
here
for
a
lot
more
as
such
I
talked
to
city
staff,
and
they
told
me
that
I
could
ask
for
some
additional
time.
Since
this
is
so
important
to
us.
They
recommended
that
I
make
copies
of
the
PowerPoint
presentation
that
I
presented
to
you
and
I'm,
hoping
that
I
can
be
granted
that
additional
time
so
I
can
go
over
this
with.
B
A
B
A
N
Okay,
okay,
this
first
slide
shows
the
reasons
why
we
oppose
the
request.
The
second
slide
I'm
new
to
this
so
I,
went
to
the
city
of
Tampere
website,
so
I
can
identify
the
roles
and
responsibilities
of
the
board
and
it's
those
first
three
I'm
going
to
be
talking
about
the
hardship
is
not
unique
itself
created,
hardship
and,
and
it
creates
a
safety
issue,
and
this
is
what
the
property
looked
like
in
2010
when
it
was
sold.
You
can
clearly
see
the
oak
tree.
N
It's
two
feet
into
the
into
the
property
and
not
hanging
off
the
wetland
when
it
was
sold
here,
you
can
see
the
huge
backyard
there's
plenty
of
space.
There
was
no
reason
to
build
all
this
in
the
encroached
it
in
the
wetlands
area,
because
he's
got
a
huge
backyard.
This
is
the
springfed
creeks
and
some
of
the
aquatic
life.
It's
just
like
the
one.
Next
to
you,
ladies
restaurant,
except
this
one
is
deeper
and
a
lot
longer
it's
spring
fed.
N
This
shows
that
it's
not
unique
because
everybody
under
the
creek
has
the
same
wetland
sets
back
in
the
same
oak,
tree
setbacks.
In
fact,
this
is
our
new
house.
We
saw
pictures
before
the
city
actually
made
us
carve
our
master
bedroom
around
this
oak
tree,
so
we
can
stay
20-foot,
our
house
was
permitted
and
it
is.
It
is
20
foot
from
the
wetland
25
foot
from
the
wetlands
and
20
foot
from
the
oak
trees.
This
shows
how
everybody
else
solved
a
parking
problem.
They
all
added
onto
their
existing
driveway.
N
The
two
violations
clearly
shows
it
was
a
self
created
hardship.
In
fact,
this
is
the
EPA
report
that
shows
all
the
concrete
extends
across
the
yard
and
all
the
way
through
into
the
backyard
there
plenty
of
room
for
him
to
have
utility
storage
and
a
covered
sitting
area
next
slides
of
immature
audio
emissions.
This
one
shows
the
omission
of
the
u-haul
truck
in
the
back,
the
jacuzzi,
the
pool
in
the
second
shed
and
all
the
concrete
in
the
back.
This
slide
shows
the
carport,
and
he
mentioned
it
was
a
carport
in
his
presentation.
N
It's
nine
feet,
high,
not
eight
feet
high
and
it's
got
the
swinging
gate
because
it's
gonna
be
used
for
a
carport,
not
a
fixed
gate.
This
shows
a
city
of
Tampa
picture
when
he
was
sighted,
the
second
time
he
added
side
panels,
so
he
still
performing
work
without
permit,
but
he
lifted
off
his
sight
plane
the
reason
he
left
it
off
the
site
plane
because
here
it
shows
that
it's
not
36
inches
away
from
the
meter
box.
N
Obviously,
it's
not
four
inches,
it's
not
four
inches,
because
it
came
hold
the
weight
of
a
car
in
a
boat.
Actually,
you
can
see
that
it's
framed
by
two
two
by
four
stacked
on
top
of
each
other,
so
there's
five
or
seven
inches,
not
four
inches
intended
to
hold
the
weight
of
vehicles,
so
make
no
mistake
what
it's
gonna
be
used
for.
If
this
is
a
food
now
you
see
the
only
fire
hydrant
and
you
see
how
it's
blocked
whether
the
driveway
is
concrete
or
mulch.
He
uses
it
constantly.
N
Here
you
can
see
behind
their
white
quarters
plenty
room
for
someone
to
park
your
legally,
but
they
continue
to
park
behind
and
blocking
a
fire
hydrant.
Now
I
am
a
retired
firefighter
thirty
years
with
Tampa
a
black
tie
panther
in
the
days
not
a
big
deal,
because
people
here
assignments
are
out
there
and
they
say:
hey
fireman,
here's
the
block
tiger
behind
that
car
at
night.
It's
it.
It
gets
magnified
because
there's
no
one
out
there
to
show
us.
Firemen
gotta
have
water
because
you
got
to
contain
the
fire.
N
N
N
In
fact,
when
you
see
this
slide,
you
can
clearly
see
that
water
diverted
to
the
right
and
away
from
where
the
illegal
construction
is
so
for
someone
say:
there's
no
corrosion
about
to
come
out
here
and
look
through
and
low
tide,
or
to
look
at
before-and-after
pictures
to
see
how
this
trees
like
this
and
notes
like
this,
it's
just
hard
for
me
to
believe
that
occurred
anyway,
the
neighbor
across
the
street.
Now
please
keep
in
mind.
N
This
is
his
backyard,
so
it
is
unique
to
him
because
they
don't
have
a
backyard,
but
the
applicant
encroached
the
wetlands
on
the
side
yard,
not
only
that
this
gentleman
made
a
wood
deck,
so
it
would
protect
the
oak
tree
roots
and
also
allow
the
rainwater
to
be
widely
widely
dispersed
through
the
wood
decking
and
not
cause
erosion.
We
will
also
see
how
his
sheds,
the
roofs,
are,
perpendicular
and
not
parallel
to
the
creek.
Also
minimizing
quick
erosion,
so
I
have
a
couple
solutions
for
you.
N
The
first
one
is
to
just
remove
the
concrete,
that's
around
the
oak
tree,
like
the
guy
who
was
in
here
previously
saying
how
he
did
it
to
protect
his
oak
tree,
remove
it
by
hand
if
you
need
to
and
move
the
metal
carport
that
he
called
the
carport
over
to
the
other
existing
illegal,
concrete,
that's
poured
all
the
way
across
the
backyard
you
can
see,
there's
plenty
of
room
to
have
utility
storage
and
an
a
covered
area
where
they
can
gather
Jay.
Can
you
ramp
up,
please
yep
second
solution?
N
Add
on
to
the
existing
Drive
areas,
like
everybody
else.
Instead,
he
put
an
oak
tree
who
doesn't
want
to
have
a
little
shade
in
the
hot
summer
months
and
lower
your
bill,
but
you
can't
do
that
at
the
expense
of
adding
a
second
driveway
next
to
a
fire
hydrant
and
constantly
pocket
it.
Thank
you
for
the
extra
time,
and
basically
these
are
the
reasons
why
we
are
opposing
this
variance
request
and
asked
you
to
do
the
same.
Okay,.
M
Get
fast,
my
name
is
Terry
Gonzales
I
reside
at
69,
16
north-north,
River,
Boulevard
I
am
three
properties
on
this
block
and
I
had
been
sworn
in.
The
applicant
claims
he
had
a
contractor
which
failed
to
pull
a
permit.
This
is
not
true.
No
one
is
permitted
to
have
two
driveways
without
consent
from
the
board.
The
applicant
put
in
a
second
front
door
in
a
second
back
door
to
the
right
side
of
his
house,
without
any
permits
that
you
can
see
on
this
second
picture.
There's
a
first
they're
super
indoors.
M
M
The
applicant
shortened
the
original
drive
by
adding
a
large
pattern,
a
planner,
so
he
actually
the
original
driver.
He
actually
shortened
it
for
himself.
The
applicant
had
renters
when
in
which
was
a
young
girl
who
had
a
continuous
flow
of
old
men
visiting
the
house
on
the
hour,
saying
20
minutes
and
leaving
more
cards
and
more
cars.
I
mean
there
are
a
lot
of
cars.
M
The
applicant
needed
his
own
driver
to
park
his
two
cars
and
boat
one
weekend
he
poured
a
continuous
massive
slab
that
began
at
the
road
ran
between
the
applicants
house
and
the
creek
around
to
the
backyard
past,
applicants
back
door
and
his
renters
back
there.
He
did
it
a
weekend
if
people
know
why
you
do
stuff
on
the
weekend
to
get
away
with
stuff
on
the
later
date,
the
applicant
failed
to
obtain
a
permit
to
remove
an
oak
tree
between
the
new
driveway
in
Creek
when
he
bought
the
house.
M
There's
another
Oh,
true
that
he
removed
without
a
permit.
On
the
later
day,
the
applicant
had
touched
a
large
metal
carport
along
the
side
of
the
river
over
a
concrete
slab.
Again,
he
didn't
have
a
permit
and
I
was
on
a
seventh
date
he's
trying
to
say
that
he's
do
this
all
at
one
time
for
different
years.
Several
months
ago,
after
his
repeated
threats
against
us
and
the
neighbors,
we
discovered
the
applicant
the
one
crying
the
loudest
never
had
any
permits
when
the
city
paid
him
a
visit.
M
He
busted
a
large
section
of
Congress
from
the
road
to
the
house
through
much
mulch
down
and
threw
up
a
white
metal
fence.
Somehow
the
city
allowed
him
to
keep
this
retro
grade
of
concrete.
The
city
claims
there's
no
erosion
from
his
actions.
This
doesn't
scientifically
make
any
sense.
You
would
have
to
have
a
before
picture
and
an
after
picture
to
say
change
or
no
change
occurs.
Other
ways
you
can
teach
cannot
be
measured.
How
can
you
change?
How
can
you
say
there's
no
changing
you
ever
saw
before
upon
request.
M
The
city
could
not
produce
a
before
picture
and
their
sons
on
this
questions
proof
they
have
not
not
mine.
When
you
asked
for
the
picture
and
they
have
not
answered
us
on
many
things.
My
husband
presented
the
before
picture
previously.
If
he
was
truly
a
victim,
a
bad
contracting
me,
but
then
he
would
have
come
before
this
board
pleaded
his
case
before
you
before
he
altered
his
concrete
slab.
Nobody
in
their
right,
mind
of
innocence,
would
remove
a
large
section
of
concrete.
M
Before
suing
a
contractor
pleading
their
case
in
front
of
this
board,
this
proves
he
knew
he
did
not
have
a
permit.
In
the
first
place
you
see
by
having
renters
renters
friends
and
cars,
his
cars
and
recreational
vehicles,
he
didn't,
he
still
did
not
have
enough
parking
space
even
after
the
second
driveway
he
wanted
to
park
on
our
side
to
have
more
room.
He
wanted
us
to
remove
our
tens
of
thousands
of
dollars
worth
of
pavers.
He
would
remove.
M
He
got
his
son
to
come
under
yard,
to
survey
all
the
property
and
wanted
us
to
remove
it
and
claim
that,
because
he
worked
for
this
city,
he
thought
he
got
favors
when
in
truth
he
was
projecting
because
he
works
with
Tampa
Housing
Authority.
So
he
knows
better
and
he
works
on
the
contract
and
development.
M
N
M
B
K
B
F
M
M
B
F
Name
is
Suzanne
Stennett
that
at
69
15,
North,
River,
Boulevard
and
yes,
I've
been
sworn
okay.
The
video
was
taken
on
October
30th.
If
you
could
see
a
date-time
on
it,
that
was
two
days
prior
to
being
required
to
be
up.
It
has
been
up
every
day
since
then.
If
you
continue
watching
the
video
you
can
actually
see,
we
are
now
that
I've
seen
that
video
I
know
my
house
is
under
constant
surveillance.
I
am
sir
I
am
video
of
every
time
I
walk
in
and
out
of
my
door.
F
There
are
other
pictures
that
show
cars
are
not
sitting
in
front
of
our
yard.
Every
single
moment
that
sign
has
been
shown,
there's
been
no
violation
relating
to
the
sign.
There
are
no.
There
are
two
vehicles
permanently
at
the
house.
The
fire
hydrant
is
not
blocked
on
a
regular
basis.
The
driveway
yes,
was
removed
code
enforcement
said
please
remove
it.
It
does
not
meet
code,
you
need
to
remove
it
because
of
a
violation
and
a
complaint
and
it
was
removed.
F
At
that
time
there
was
no
complaint
about
the
covered
patio
carport
area
that
came
after
the
fact.
The
small
fence
is
not
connected
to
the
building,
it
is,
can
be
a
temporary
situation,
it
is
PBC,
not
metal,
and
it
was
put
up
because
we
do
use
that
area
for
storage
and
would
rather
it
be
covered
with
a
fence.
Then
people
being
able
to
see
where
all
your
lawn
equipment
some
of
your
things
like
that
or
so.
That
is
why
that
else
was
put
up
and
that's
why
the
driveway
was
removed.
So
we
have
a
1.
F
F
M
D
L
L
D
L
D
If
that
covered
area
was
used
for
parking
a
vehicle,
so
you
had
to
drive
through
the
essentially
yard
to
park
in
it.
Would
that
be
considered
a
driveway
or
or
an
inappropriate
use
of
vehicular
traffic
or
anything
I'm
trying
to
determine
if
the
city
has
any
position,
if
that's
actually
being
used
as
a
carport,
and
it's
not
a
driveway,
it's
not
paid.
Does
the
city
have
any
position
on
that?
If
that
were
to
be
occurring,
I
mean.
L
D
B
L
B
L
B
L
B
L
B
H
B
H
B
L
L
B
H
E
To
you,
okay,
thank
you.
Just
this
is
the
site
plan
again
just
to
point
out.
This
is
going
for
an
after-the-fact
permit,
which
includes
the
patio
on
the
north
side,
as
well
as
all
of
the
additions
that
had
taken
place
over
the
last
eight
years.
They're
also
included
in
the
application
of
the
permit
application.
I
think
there
were
two
trees
palm
trees
that
were
requested
to
be
coming
on.
They
were
Queen
palms,
they
were
diseased
trees.
E
As
a
matter
of
fact,
there
were
two
palm
trees
in
the
back
that
died.
This
is
the
the
latest
one
that
died,
the
other
one
actually
suffered,
what's
called
top
drop
and
the
entire
top
of
the
tree
dropped
into
the
the
yard.
I
do
want
to
make
a
point
that
the
the
pictures
that
were
taken
by
mr.
Gonzales,
he
was
standing
on
an
8
foot
ladder
beyond
behind
his
privacy
fence,
which
is
to
the
south
and
there's
no
way
that
he
could
have
gotten
those
pictures
without
being
on
an
8
foot
ladder.
E
Again
all
the
improvements
are
being
in
attempt
to
permit.
After
the
fact
this
is
their
typical
parking.
We
have
one
car
in
the
drive,
we
have
one
far
into
front
and
you
can
barely
see
out
here
to
the
end
the
fire
hydrant
again
from
this
from
this
car
to
the
500,
about
25
to
30,
feet,
I.
Think
the
the
actual
distance
required
from
my
research
is
15
feet
here.
You
can
see
on
the
side
just
as
the
building
the
building
is
a
box
body
that
was
purchased
from
u-haul.
It
sits
directly
on
the
ground.
E
There
are
no
wheels
axles
or
undercarriage,
so
it
basically
is
a
shed
in
front
of
the
shed
here.
You
have
a
four-foot
chain-link
fence,
and
you
have
growth
of
jasmine
here
about
a
foot
high
providing
for
5
foot
coverage
or
obstruction
so
that
a
people
across
the
canal
cannot
see
the
bottom
portion
of
the
the
shed.
E
E
The
ribs
of
the
carport,
as
you
can
see,
run
horizontally
to
the
edge
this
Ruth
line
has
been
designed
as
a
pan
and
rib
structure
so
that
when
rain
comes
down
on
to
the
roof,
it's
actually
channeled
to
the
front
portion
of
the
shed,
which
is
the
front
part
of
the
house
towards
a
river.
This
is
actually
a
download
which
shows
that
this
is
a
railroad
type
of
a
shed
in
here.
E
The
canal
here
is
a
man-made
canal.
Back
in
the
20s
or
the
father
called
Goldstein
Springs.
This
canal
was
basically
dredged
out
after
Goldstein
Springs
was
sold
to
a
developer.
What
happened
is
they
came
in
with
mules
and
Leverett
laborer
built
stacked
walls
along
the
side
and
the
the
project
basically
came
to
a
standstill
when
they
hit
the
limestone.
It
was
very
difficult
to
quarry.
The
canal
was
supposed
to
go
to
local
floral,
but
dead
end
at
Ola.
E
Well,
anyway,
this
picture
here
the
structure
itself
is
set
at
the
eve
of
the
main
house.
There
is
a
1
foot
separation
between
the
main
and
the
rail.
The
structure
itself
is
a
frame
with
the
corrugated
panels
running
horizontally
and
base
rails.
These
base
rails
also
act
as
channeling
the
ability
to
channel
water
off
of
the
patio
into
the
front
of
the
property.
E
There
may
have
been
a
question
as
to
the
slope.
This
is
a
slope
meter
that
was
taken
here.
It's
the
level
that
went
down
on
the
top
of
the
level
there's
a
slope
meter.
This
is
a
slope
meter
showing
the
half
a
percent
hour,
0.5%
sly
slope,
to
the
front
of
the
property
that
basically
equates
to
about
two
inches.
So
there's
a
two
inch
slope
on
the
entire
structure
to
the
front
of
the
property.
E
Again
here,
no
there's
no
erosion
again
in
this
area
in
the
erosion-
and
there
was
a
mention
of
a
big
tree
that
was
at
the
front
of
property
when
I
moved
in
that
is
correct.
The
city
came
in
and
actually
removed
a
diseased
oak
tree,
and
that
was
back
in
2000
I
believe
was
11.
So
to
address
that.
So
that
comment
that
was
made
earlier.
E
E
B
E
Then
I
think
my
my
girlfriend
made
it
clear
that
the
the
sign
has
been
in
the
front
of
the
house
continuously
since
November.
First,
all
of
the
requirements
were
met
by
the
staff
and
the
vrv
to
provide
them
with
the
proper
notices
notices
of
mailing,
as
well
as
copies
of
the
sign
that
was
in
the
yard
since
November
first,
which
is
basically
40
days
when
only
a
30-day
notices
requires,
and
of
course
here
are
the
notices
of
mailing
dated
October
31st.
Okay,
all
right.
Okay,.
B
B
A
A
A
H
B
B
B
B
I
H
J
D
B
B
M
E
M
E
M
I
Stays
any
code
enforcement
action
that
would
be
related
to
that
variance.
Okay,
so
I'm
not
familiar
with
what
exactly
you
were
cited
for
or
what
the
violation
was.
But
if
the
violation
is
is
related
to
this
variance
action,
there
can
be
no
action
on
the
code
enforcement
magistrate
side.
Until
this,
the
variance
review
board
has
concluded.
Okay
now.
E
I
E
E
E
I
E
E
So
I
just
saw
the
aminute
people
staff
and
is
there
a
fee
or
is
it
no
fee?
Just
I
don't
know
it's
amendment.
B
It
is
important
to
ask
some
questions
because
the
alternative
is,
we
just
go
ahead
and
vote
on
what
was
done
and
then
and
then
he
has
to
deal
with
the
other
issue
separately.
So
it's
good
to
ask
the
questions
of
what's
the
difference
between
amending
and
continuing
versus
us
just
voting
okay.
So
if
you
guys
don't
mind,
I
want
to
be
sure
he
understands
what
the
difference
is.
E
B
B
B
B
D
E
N
N
B
B
N
B
D
Like
I
was
trying
to
say
many
many
minutes
ago,
I,
don't
I,
don't
support
this
request.
There's
no
hardship
contractor
not
pulling
permits
is
not
a
hardship.
It's
the
burden
of
the
owner
to
know
what
their
agents
are
doing
for
them.
This
applicant
seems
to
be
extremely
knowledgeable
on
the
building
process
and
so
citing
other
zoning
hearings
and
things
that
he's
witness
and
using
all
sorts
of
construction
language
that
makes
it
the
appearance
he's
very
knowledgeable.
The
the
the
statement
of
hardship
literally
says
yes
contractor
failed
to
pull
permits.
D
That
is
not
a
statement
of
hardship.
The
next
item,
hardship
of
practical
difficulty,
does
not
result
from
the
actions
of
the
applicant
well
by
law.
Yes,
it
does.
It
says
no
by
contractor,
but
the
contractor
is
the
agent
of
the
applicants.
So
yes,
the
the
applicant
built
this
structure
will
not
substantially
interfere.
Health
self
safety,
welfare,
I,
don't
know,
is
in
harmony
with
the
general
intent
and
purpose
of
the
comprehensive
plan.
D
D
What
do
you
call
it
protest
from
immediate
neighbors,
so
out
of
the
five
criteria
I
see
at
least
four
of
them
are
absolutely
not
met
in
the
fifth
one:
health
safety,
welfare
I,
don't
know
I,
guess
it
could
be
made
in
any
number
of
ways.
But
my
point
is
the
building
separation
is
irrelevant
to
me
because
it
does
not
change
exactly
what
we're
looking
at.
It
changes
the
procedure
of
it,
but
if
the
inclination
is
to
deny
it
doesn't
change
that
outcome
at
all
now
what
it
could
do
is
that
it
could.
D
It
could
make
the
setback
issue
worse.
If
you
wanted
to
separate
these
structures
or
you
have
to
prove
that
accessory
structures
literally,
you
know
right
up
against
the
house
either
way.
That's
where
health
safety
and
welfare
gets
involved,
because
that's
when
your
fire
spread
and
things
like
that
come
in
so
my
point
is
that
I
would
like
to
make
a
motion
to
deny
and
if
so
then,
the
rest
of
it's
irrelevant.
Now,
if
that
doesn't
pass,
we
could
certainly
vote
on
a
continuance.
D
Although
it's
City
Hall
a
few
weeks
ago
that
I
sat
many
hours,
that
a
continuance
was
also
denied
because
of
the
same
reasons
made
that
a
lot
of
people
showed
up
and
put
time
and
and
that
there
was
not
grounds
for
a
continuance,
so
that
could
that
occur
could
occur
as
well.
So
I
wouldn't
make
a
motion,
but
I'll,
wait
and
see.
D
H
And
just
to
comment
on
that
I
mean
I'll
differ
a
little
bit
from
what
you
said.
I
agree
with
your
first
two
points:
ship
relating
to
the
contractor.
The
last
two
are
matter
of
fact
that
each
can
determine
individually
as
to
whether
the
testimony
that
they
can
weigh
separately
they
find
in
favor
or
against
the
harmony
or
the
substantial
justice.
So
I
will
differ
with
you
on
that,
because
that's
that's
a
fact-finding
issue
and
clearly
you
have
your
you've
heard
the
way
heard
the
evidence
weigh
the
evidence
and
decide
it
and
that's.
H
Okay,
that's
what
we're
supposed
to
do
as
to
miss
Long's
point:
I
tend
to
agree
with
mr.
Pastore
that
we're
gonna,
what's
gonna
come
back
before
us.
If,
if
the
application
has
changed,
is
actually
going
to
be
a
more
significant
encroachment
into
the
wetland
setback,
because
if
this
thing
has
to
move
five
feet
out,
it's
going
to
be
further
into
into
the
wetland
setback.
H
H
H
O
D
H
To
me,
though,
the
bigger
question
that
that
in
an
hour's
worth
of
testimony
from
multiple
people
wasn't
answered
was,
was
the
hardship
of
why
it's
placed
where
it
is
right.
So
yeah,
you're
right,
it's
existed
in
this
location
for
a
few
years,
and
the
impact
upon
the
wetlands
according
to
EPC
hasn't
been
significant,
but
that
doesn't
that
still
doesn't
change
the
to
me.
The
underlying
question
of
what
did
it?
O
I,
don't
disagree
with
that
and,
unfortunately
I
think
that
probably
a
lot
of
this
was
kind
of
lost
in
the
weeds
of
trying
to
revive
you
know
the
fact
the
facts
of
what
one
party
said
versus
you
know
the
facts
of
another
party
and
how
they
were.
You
know
misstated
or
misconstrued,
and
so
I
don't
disagree
with
you.
D
D
Move
that
request
that
variance
request
for
case
BRB
2001
for
the
property
located
at
69
15
North,
River
Boulevard
for
a
reduction.
The
wetland
setback
from
25
feet
to
7
feet
on
the
north
side
yard,
with
encroachment
of
eaves
and
gutters
be
denied
due
to
the
failure
of
the
petitioner
to
meet
its
burden
of
proof
and
provide
confident,
substantial
evidence
and
the
record
of
this
public
hearing
I'm
a
necessary
hardship
were
practical
difficulty
when
considering
the
five
hardship
criteria.
D
That's
set
forth
in
Section
27
80
of
the
city
code,
specifically
that
contractor
failing
to
pull
permits
is
not
a
hardship
and
that
there
are
safety
concerns
in
relation
to
a
fire,
hydrant
location
and
that
there's
a
significant
opposition
from
neighbors
and
the
dual
driveway
scenario,
whether
being
paved
or
or
not
as
being
used.
Apparently
in
that
that
manner
does
not
meet
the
Comprehensive
Plan.
M
B
I
Mr.
chair
I
would
just
first
ask
that
I'd
be
given
an
opportunity
to
look
up
the
rule
about
the
automatic
continuance.
Oh,
this
has
come
up
before
and
I
believe
when
we
discussed
it
prior.
If
the
only
the
automatic
continuance
only
comes
into
play,
if
the
tie
vote
results
in
there
being
no
other
options
left
for
the
board,
let.
B
E
I
And
this
is
rule
5.1
in
your
rules
of
procedure,
and
it
says
that
a
simple
majority
vote
of
those
board
members
present
shall
be
sufficient
to
conduct
routine
business
denying
application
and
to
deny
an
administrative
official
determinations
appeal.
However,
the
vote
of
at
least
four
members
of
the
board
shall
be
required
to
approve,
so
you
need
four
to
approve
of
it,
a
simple
majority
of
those
present
Canada
nigh.
As
for
the
insufficient
or
tie
vote,
it
says
when
a
matter
is
considered
by
the
board
and
an
insufficient
or
tie
vote
is
obtained.
I
The
board's
action
becomes
a
nullity
and
the
matter
is
autumn
shall
be
automatically
carried
over
for
consideration
at
the
board's.
Next
meeting
is
an
unfinished
business.
We
have
previously
talked
about
that.
That's
rule,
5.2
and-
and
there
was
some
question
when
I
raised
it
before,
and
you
had
suggested
that
that
the
insufficient
or
tie
vote
is
only
obtained
when
all
potential
motions
have
been
put
to
the
floor
and
and
entice
or
insufficient
votes
have
been
achieved
at
that.
So
I
don't
know
if
that's
still
the
chairs
interpretation
of
that
rule
right.
B
N
N
B
B
A
Ready,
okay,
Roberta
meet
curry
planning,
design
and
development
coordination,
BRB
case
number
20,
New,
York
or
I,
dressed
as
eighty-three
Martinique
Avenue
Code
sections
in
question
tonight.
27
156,
the
applicant
is
seeking
to
reduce
the
west
side
yard
setback
from
7
feet
to
3
feet.
Applicant
is
seeking
to
construct
an
addition
to
an
existing
primary
structure.
The
property
is
zoned
rs.75.
A
A
A
This
is
the
site
plan,
and
this
is
the
area
in
question
where
the
addition
is
going
to
take
place.
There
is
a
discrepancy
in
the
end,
the
notice
and
the
ask
so
I
will
need
the
authorized
agent
to
clarify
what
the
ask
is
going
to
be
and
to
clarify
at
that
point
there
is
either
a
three
feet
or
4
feet
and
they
need
to
amend
the
plan
tonight.
Initial
and
data
force
once
they
make
their
participation
front
of
the
house.
J
There,
my
name
is
Patricia
Ortiz,
my
address
is
28
10
North,
Central,
Avenue,
Tampa,
330,
602
and
I
have
been
sworn
in
I'm
the
agent
of
Jorge
Rodriguez,
the
property
owner.
Basically,
the
intent
is
to
square
off
the
building
footprint.
We
are
seeking
a
variance
to
reduce
the
western
side,
setback
from
the
required
7
feet
to
3
feet,
inclusive
of
all,
eaves
and
gutters
and
I'll
quickly
go
over
the
variance
criteria
and
then
stand
for
questions.
J
The
challenges
or
hardships
associated
with
this
property
are
the
irregular
shape
of
the
lot
and
the
location
of
the
existing
home.
The
existing
home
was
built
in
1956
and
is
not
centered
on
the
property.
It's
a
little
closer
to
the
Western
property
line
than
the
Eastern
property
line.
Givat
is
the
irregular
in
shape
it's
slightly
wider
along
the
front
or
southern
property
boundary
and
more
narrow
in
the
rear
or
the
northern
property
line.
The
side
property
lines
angle
inward.
J
So,
when
we're
thinking
about
doing
an
in
line
addition,
the
shape
of
the
lot
and
the
location
of
the
existing
house
create
a
difficulty.
The
hardship
does
not
result
from
the
actions
of
the
applicant.
We're
here
tonight
seeking
variance
approval
prior
to
commencement
of
any
construction,
allowing
the
variance
will
not
substantially
interfere
with
other
or
nearby
property
owners.
The
intent
of
the
variance
is
to
improve
the
property.
J
The
variance
is
in
harmony
with
both
the
land
development
code
and
the
Comprehensive
Plan,
which
worked
together
to,
among
other
things,
promote
public
health
safety
and
welfare
stabilize
and
enhance
property
values
and
aid
in
the
development
and
redevelopment
of
the
city.
This
variance
is
the
minimum
necessary
to
accommodate
the
existing
conditions
the
home
currently
is
set
well.
The
the
leading
wall
exclusive
of
Eve
is
only
6.8
feet
from
the
property
line
where
7
feet
is
required.
J
J
B
J
We're
asking
for
the
variance
prior
to
obtaining
a
development
plan
for
the
addition
we
know
we
can
meet
the
setback
requirement
in
the
rear
and
on
the
opposite
side,
the
east
side.
So
the
addition
that
the
complications
come
along
this
this
particular
boundary
and
it's
necessary
on
this
particular
boundary
because
of
the
age
of
the
house.
The
interior
layout
is
not
not
in
line
with
the
current
real
estate
trends.
The
rooms
are
small,
the
hallways
are
narrow
and
I
believe
it
only
has
one
restroom.
B
J
H
That's
because
I'm
exhausted
move
that
the
variance
request
for
case
vrb
20-0
for
for
property,
located
at
83,
Marketing,
Avenue
and
granted
as
depicted
on
the
site
plan
presented
at
the
public
hearing
to
reduce
the
Westside
yard
setback
from
seven
feet.
Three
feet
with
an
encouragement
for
the
eaves
and
gutters
based
upon
the
applicant
presenting
competent
and
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
and
at
this
public
hearing
of
an
unnecessary
hardship.
H
A
little
practical
difficulty
when
considering
the
five
hardship
criteria
set
forth
in
section
27,
8
SiC
code,
specifically
that
we
have
an
irregular
irregularly
shaped
lot
with
an
existing
home
placed
uncentered
upon.
That
lot
shifted
more
towards
the
western
side
that
the
applicant
is
proposing
to
install
gutters
to
help
minimize
any
of
the
encroachment
and
that
this
is
the
smallest
home
on
the
block
and
is
intended
to
preserve
existing
construction
as
opposed
to
tear
down.
B
So
for
them
to
do
any
significant
addition,
I'm,
not
even
sure
they
could
meet
that
threshold.
I
understand
that's
up
to
the
billing
department,
but
the
lot
itself,
even
though
it's
oddly
shaped,
has
quite
a
bit
of
width
in
the
backyard,
so
I'm
not
going
to
all
right.
So
we
have
a
motion
for
denial
and
a
second
on.