►
From YouTube: Variance Review Board 3-9-21 part 2
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
E
E
This
is
the
subject:
zoning
aerial
this
is
off:
el
prado
and
south
rinelli.
This
is
the
south
of
el
prado
and
east
to
west
shore,
west
of
dale.
E
E
E
A
E
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
It's
a
corner
yards
three
feet
for
the
pool
right
here.
Thank
you,
dustin.
That
was
another
world.
This
is
the
property.
It's
on
a
corner
yard
right
here,
pool's
going
right
here
where
noli
nelly
per
curves
into
kensington,
and
this
is
where
they
need
this
set
back
from
seven
feet
with
rs-6p
the
corner
yard
set
back
to
seven
feet,
but
also
for
that
for
pools
and
pools
and
closures.
C
F
So
I've
lived
in
tampa
for
about
15
years
and
I
only
recently
moved
to
south
tampa
over
the
last
two
years,
and
I
there
were
two
things
I
wasn't
ready
for.
When
I
moved
to
south
tampa,
one
is
the
flooding
and
then
the
other
is
the
mosquitoes
that
come
with
the
flooding.
When
we
brought
this
property.
Two
years
ago
we
wrote
we're
told
that
you
know
there
was
a
pool
that
was
actually
already
built,
and
I
actually
can
show
you
a
picture
of
that.
If
that's
okay.
F
This
is
the
actual
pool,
that's
that
was
actually
built
on
the
property
before
we
purchased
it
and,
as
you
can
see,
you
know
it
sits
very
close
to
the
property
line,
and
you
know
when
we
discussed
it
with
the
with
the
builder.
They
had
told
us
that
you
know
if
it
ever
comes
to
it.
You
know,
there's
a
problem.
It
would
be
very
easy
to
build
a
pool
enclosure
on
it.
F
You
know
at
first
we
weren't
gonna,
we
didn't
think
about
building
a
pool
enclosure
until
you
know,
obviously
we
ran
into
the
mosquito
issues
when
we
were
confronted
with
that
problem.
We
spoke
to
our
neighbors.
You
know
we
have
very
nice
neighbors
that
one
pizzatowski
who
has
lived
there
for
10
years
lives
directly.
North
of
us
and
mr
ortho
morgan
lives
directly
to
the
west
of
us,
and
you
know
we
they
had
tried.
F
This
is
the
neighbor
right
to
the
back
of
us,
and
you
can
see
this
af
closure
and
you
know
most
of
the
houses
around
there
do
have
pool
enclosures,
because
I
think
that
mosquito
problem
has
been
there
for
quite
some
time
and
you
know
so.
We
started
to
look
into
building
a
pool
enclosure
and
then
you
know
six
months
later
here
I
stand
before
you.
You
know
what
we
when
we
first
talked
to
the
builder.
F
They
had
told
us
that
you
know
the
requirement
is
five
feet
from
the
from
the
property
line,
but
I
think
for
a
corner
lot.
It's
actually
seven
feet
and
you
know
because
of
the
corner
line,
and
you
know
I
think
the
uniqueness
of
the
property
is
that
you
know,
because
it
was
so
narrow
they
couldn't
build
the
house.
You
know
obviously,
that
close
to
the
property
I'll
show
you
the
picture
again.
F
And
and
so
they
ended
up
having
to
build
the
the
pool
on
the
side
facing
the
corner,
and
you
know,
unfortunately,
you
know
this
is
what
we
were
left
with
and
so
that
that's
the
reason
I'm
here
today
to
request
that
we
change
the
the
corner
lot
from
three
feet
to
seven
feet
and
just.
C
F
Will
sit
right
around
there,
so
it
will
only
go
on
the
actual
pull
enclosure
of
where
the
the
tab
routine
is
as
it
stands.
It
won't
go
anywhere
beyond
the
fencing
which
again
we
had
discussed
that
with
some
of
our
neighbors,
and
they
just
wanted
us
to
clarify
that
we
weren't
going
beyond
the
fencing
at
all
and
that's
it.
Thank
you.
A
D
D
F
B
A
B
F
And
then
this
is
just
looking
from
if
you're
standing
looking
at
us
at
the
if
you're
looking
south
from
the
north
end
of
the
house.
This
is
how.
G
I
have
a
question
for
legal
again:
miss
pettis,
michael
apologies.
I
seem
particularly
heavy
on
the
questions
tonight,
but
this
goes
back
to
one
of
the
questions.
I
asked
during
our
workshop
that
I
never
felt
like.
I
got
an
answer
to.
G
When
a
builder
builds
a
house
and
you
acquire
a
home
from
the
builder
and
the
builder
builds
it
without
a
screen
enclosure,
do
we
have
a
self-created
hardship
situation?
Can
you
can
you
acquire
it?
You
can't
acquire
this
output.
What
about
when
you
have
knowledge
of
an
existing
just
say?
No.
If
the
answer
is
no
because.
C
H
Existing
a
self-imposed
hardship,
that's
that
exists.
G
H
But
they
buy
the
property
and
that
property
has
that
violation
or
would
that
be
that
condition
condition
on
the
property,
so
that
follows
the
property.
So
that's.
H
F
I
I
will
say
I
I
I
was
listening
to
you
guys
earlier
discussing
you
that,
and
I
do
understand
that
concept
when
I
did
buy
that
so
the
house
is
a,
it
was
a
spec
build,
so
we
didn't
have
any
say
in
how
it
was
designed
and
we
bought
it
after
it
had
already
been
been
pretty
much
completed,
and
so
the
we
didn't.
We
had
no
idea
that
we
would
need
a
variance
for
it.
They
actually
the
builder
had
suggested
that
they
actually
already
put
in
the
footers
for
it.
F
So
that's
why
we're
kind
of
caught
off
guard
when
the
when
the
pool
company
came
back
because
they
we
paid
them
to
to
do
all
the
all
the
obtain
all
the
permits,
and
then
I
guess
the
variance
was
the
only
one
thing
that
they
could
not
do,
and
so
they
they
were.
They
were
surprised
too
that
there
there
had
not
been
a
radio
variants.
If
you
look
at
the
actual
pool
itself,
so
they
did
something
sneaky.
F
What
they
did
was
the
you
know
to
build.
A
pool
itself
requires
seven
feet,
and,
and
so,
if
you
actually
look
the
the
pool
itself,
it
sits
at
seven
feet
so
the
only
way
that
we
could
have
built
a
enclosure
within
their
own
guidelines
without
the
variants
was
to
actually
pull
build,
the
enclosure
physically
in
the
pool,
and
so
you
know
again
that's
I
think
that
goes
back
to
whether
or
not
the
hardship
was
like
it's
self-inflicted
or
not.
F
If
we
had
known
that,
we
could
not
build
an
enclosure,
you
know
that
we
would
not
bought
that
house.
Our
house.
C
B
A
A
I
I
will
make
a
comment
and
then
I
will
make
a
message.
I
In
fact,
the
applicant
purchased
the
property
with
the
pool
already
constructed
on
the
property
line
and
there's
no
reasonable
way
to
construct
a
lanai
except
to
encroach
into
the
setbacks.
The
property
is
on
a
corner
yard,
which
makes
it
a
bit
of
a
unique
property,
and
the
variance
will
result
in
substantial
justice
being
done
when
sorry
will
not
substantially
interfere
with
the
health,
safety
or
welfare
of
others
and,
in
fact,
will
provide
some
protection
from
hurricanes.
B
A
C
D
C
H
E
Mr
joel
souza
development
coordination,
zoning
district
is
rm16
residential
multifamily
property
owners.
Laura
matthew,
hurd
agent
is
julie,
perrot
parrot
and
ramon
perez
their.
The
request
is
to
add
a
second
story,
accessory
structure,
garage
element
with
living
areas,
to
increase
the
excess
and
to
increase
the
accessory
structure
height
from
15
to
25
feet.
E
E
H
E
Ma'am,
joel
development
coordination,
the
applicant
was
interested
in
a
tico
power
line
setback,
but
that
is
nothing
that
the
board
can
grant.
So
that
is
not
in
in
play
today,
you'll
see
in
the
application.
They
did
put
it
on
the
application,
but
it's
it's.
It's
not
a
setback
that
the
board
can
and
make
a
make
a
judgment
on
it.
So
you're
only
going
to
be
reviewing
the
height
of
the
accessory
structure
from
15
feet
to
25.
J
A
J
J
It's
basically
that
simple,
the
the
house,
the
the
homeowner
is,
is
here
and,
and
he
can
speak
as
well-
obviously
to
that,
but
the
house
they
they
have
children.
They
have
in-laws,
they're,
elderly
and
they're,
starting
to
forget
things,
so
the
concept
is
to
get
them
living
closer
to
their
family.
J
J
The
hardship
is
that
the
in-laws
live,
don't
live
with
them
so
and
they'd
like
to
be
close
with
them.
They
basically
like
to
live
with
them.
There's
no
way
to
to
basically
do
it
other
than
then
this
way
to
have
an
accessory
structure.
A
J
Okay,
okay,
so
right
correct,
so
so
the
hardship
is
that,
with
the
height
being
15
feet.
J
A
A
C
Yeah
evening
again,
thank
you
for
hearing
my
request,
just
a
small
background.
I
know
it's
been
a
long
night
for
everyone.
My
wife
and
I
moved
to
tampa.
Six
years
ago,
we
bounced
around
a
little
bit
with
our
jobs.
F
C
C
D
I
had
a
question:
this
is
a
multi-family
zoned
correct,
that's
an
rm
yeah!
So.
D
E
Yes
ma'am,
but
generally
yes,
the
the
kitchen
will
be
the
kick
of
the
kicker
on
this.
If
a
kitchen
goes
in
to
this
dwelling
unit,
then
the
regular
setbacks
will
start
to
be
implemented.
C
H
And
kamaria
pettis
mackel
from
the
city
attorney's
office
and
I'm
sorry,
mr
valverde.
You
are
the
architect
correct.
H
Okay,
and
just
just
for
clarification,
the
authorized
agent
is
ramon,
perez
and
you're,
stating
that
you're
within
that
same
office.
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
that,
for
the
record
that
ramon
perez
is
the
is
the
authorized
agent,
but
the
property
owner
is
present.
C
J
Is
it
good?
Oh
there
you
go
hear
myself
in
stereo,
okay,
what
I
was
saying
is
the
way
that
it
stands
right
now
is
that
the
existing
one-story
garage?
That's
there
is
simply
built
too
close
to
the
main
house.
J
So,
as
you
can
just
kind
of
eyeball
it,
you
can
see
how
hard
it
is
to
get
a
car.
You
know
to
maneuver
a
car,
I
mean
a
minimum.
You
know
distance
that
you
want
is
24
feet,
that's
like
bare
minimum,
and
this
is
less
than
that-
not
to
mention
you're
dealing
with
a
hard
corner
of
a
house.
J
We'll
talk
about
that
in
another
point,
another
time
another
place
with
that,
but
the
the
whole
concept
with
that
was
that,
as
you
can
see,
the
existing
drive,
if
that
was
a
garage
and
what
we,
what
we
were
even
tossing
around
was
that
if
we
can
do
the
second
story,
because
obviously
the
second
story
is
what
this
is
all
about,
you
know
and
the
hardship
is
just
the
height.
J
So
if
we
can
do
that,
that's
that's
the
biggest
win,
but
what
we
might
also
be
able
to
do
is
possibly
you
know
either
put
columns.
You
know
the
point
loads
of
where
we're
making
that
second
story
or
we
could
put
a
wall
or
something
to
basically
create
a
carport
like
an
open
air
situation
where
a
car
can
easily
pull
in
and
then
make
a
three-point
turn
and
pull
out
so
they're,
not
compromising.
You
know
to
get
into
that
garage
and
the
garage
might
turn
into
more
of
like
golf
cart,
parking
or
more
storage.
C
J
No,
so,
okay,
so
since
there
were
two
original
variances,
the
cross
hatch,
don't
even
look
at
that
crosshatch,
because
we're
not
talking
about
that
now.
What
we
are
talking
about
is
a
diagonal
hatch,
okay,
which
is
diagrammatic.
Of
course
I
mean
we're
not
in
elevation
and
we're
not.
You
know
doing
that
at
this
point,
because
we
just
want
to
see
if
we're
able
to
break
the
height
limit,
but
the
concept
is
that
whatever
we
do
create,
there
will
be
in
harmony
with
what's
existing
in
the
main
house
architecturally.
J
J
J
J
A
C
A
Any
other
questions,
miss
walker.
You
have
your
microphone
on.
Seeing
none
all
right
got
three
minutes
for
rebuttal.
If
you
like.
A
A
For
the
record,
all
right,
we
will
close
the
public
hearing
and
open
it
up
for
motion
or
board
discussion.
A
It's
funny
because
I
felt
the
same
way
until
you
asked
your
question
about
my
family
and
then
I
thought,
oh
well.
It
is
allowed
to
have
multi-family,
but
the
building
was
already
built
in
the
spot
that
it's
at.
So
if
you
wanted
to
exercise
the
multi-family
and
you've
already
got
the
building,
then
this
might
be
a
practical
way
to
do
it.
So
you
changed
my
mind.
D
B
That,
but
also,
I
think,
it's
in
my
opinion-
it's
reasonably
used
to
expect
on
a
city
on
a
street
like
arts
and
that
you're
going
to
have
a
functioning
garage,
and
that's
to
me
that's
what
what
this
is
really
about.
It's
just
you
know
it
it's
turning
it
into
a
functional
garage.
They
have
the
belly
ability
to
do
it
via
the
zoning
and
they're
not
asking
for
anything
as
far
as
a
variance
when
it
comes
to
actual
square
footage
and
as
a
as
a
secondary
unit
for
in-laws.
B
I
Here's
here's
my
issue
or
concert
thought
process
is
that
I
would
have
a
really
easy
time
approving
this,
for
a
variance
in
the
setbacks
if
they
wanted
to
make
this
a
full
like
second
residence,
because
the
garage
is
already
there
and
it
already
encroaches
into
the
setbacks
and
that's
like
definitely
not
self-created,
and
it's
like
that's
the
kind
of
thing
that
we
like
pretty
consistently
find
on
warrants
of
variance.
I
My
concern
is
that
we
get
to
the
same
place.
You
know
if
we
approve
this
variance.
The
the
problem
is
that
I
don't.
I
agree
with
you
that
necessarily
see
a
hardship
for
the
second
story,
but
the
end
result
is
the
same.
In
fact
to
david
to
mr
farrell's
point.
The
end
result
is
actually
like,
probably
more
palatable
to
the
neighbors
if
they
care
at
all,
because
that
means
that
a
second
family
won't
be
moving
in
because
it
can't
be
separately
metered.
B
All
right
motion
to
approve-
and
this
is
approval
without
conditions
or
am
I-
is
that
what
this
is
whatever.
B
Never
wish
it
to
be.
Thank
you,
sir.
Okay.
I
move
that
for
approval
for
variance
request
case
vrb
2128,
located
at
2313,
south
ardson
place,
be
granted
as
depicted
on
the
site
plan
at
a
public
hearing,
for
a
variance.
A
A
E
Souza
proctor's
project
is
zoned,
rs-75
residential
single
family
property
owner
is
george
and
pamela.
Alvarez
asian
name
is
stephen
miccellini.
The
proposed
work
is
to
construct
a
pool
within
the
front
yard,
with
a
pergola.
A
project
is
to
reduce
the
front
yard
setbacks
from
20
feet
to
5.5
feet
and
25
feet
to
15
feet.
E
Drc
reviewed
this
and
found
it
consistent
transportation
right
away.
Transportation
wanted
them
to
show
two
legal
parking
spaces
on
the
site,
but
this
is
an
existing
house
with
a
garage
transportation.
Let
me
right
away
also
says:
there's
an
easement
in
the
back
of
the
property,
but
it's
not
applicable
to
this
development.
Let
me
show
you.
E
E
E
E
K
K
K
K
K
Here
is
a
highlighted
version
of
what
we're
requesting.
We
also
as
part
of
this,
have
to
vest
the
existing
house,
because
the
house
encroaches
on
that
25-foot
setback
as
well
through
a
separate
process,
we're
going
to
request
that
we
replace
the
mace,
the
wooden
fence
with
a
masonry
wall,
but
that's
that's
not
before
you
tonight,
but
that's
what
that
is
showing
you
is
that
we
have
a
portion
of
that
as
a
is
a
masonry
wall
and
the
remainder
like
95
percent
of
it
is
a
wooden
fence.
K
We
have
severe
traffic
issues
along
a
zeal,
and
this
came
from
the
city,
transportation,
service
level
of
service
report
that
was
provided
to
me
by
the
city
staff,
jonathan
scott,
it's
a
two-lane
road.
It's
classified
for
25
miles
an
hour,
although
there
are
speed
bumps,
there's
speed,
yeah,
there
are
speed
tables
here
and
they
there
are
signs
and
I'll
show
you
in
a
second
reducing
the
speed
limit
to
15
miles
an
hour.
K
C
K
This
is
a
view.
Looking
down,
a
zeal
is
looking
east
and
you
see
the
existing
fence,
the
wood
fences.
That's
there,
the
proposed
pool
and
the
pergola
would
be
at
the
far
extreme
end
of
this
near
the
cul-de-sac
and
the
end
of
the
property
right
down
here.
There
are
no
other
properties
that
would
be
adversely
affected
by
this.
There
aren't
any
properties
or
residences
there.
We
only
have
the
the
street
and
the
cul-de-sac
from
west
shore.
K
That's
the
cul-de-sac,
the
subject
property
is
here
and
then
this
is
at
the
end
of
the
cul-de-sac.
You
see
how
close
that
is
to
west
shore
and
the
stop
light.
There
is
directing
the
traffic
and
controlling
the
traffic
as
best
you
can.
In
addition
to
that,
we
have
this
warning:
sign.
That's
right
in
front
of
the
property
on
a
zeal
showing
their
speed
tables
there
and
there's
a
15
mile
an
hour,
speed
limit.
K
This
is
not
a
recent
change,
so
we
have
to
deal
with
that
and
figure
out
how
how
best
to
accommodate
the
home,
which
has
some
encroachments
into
that
setback,
as
well
as
a
proposal
to
construct
a
pool
and
a
pergola
at
the
far
west
end
of
the
property
and
again
I'll
show
you
I'll
show
you
this,
and
you
can
see
that
this
is
the.
This
is
the
edge
of
the
cul-de-sac.
K
K
It
does
not
create
a
hardship
for
anyone
else
if
you,
if,
for
example,
if
the
city
didn't
allow
us
to
replace
the
wood
fence
with
a
with
a
masonry
wall,
it
still
is
at
the
far
end
where,
where
you
have
no
traffic
whatsoever,
no
other
property
owner
that
would
be
even
potentially
affected
by
this.
I've
shown
you
the
pictures
that
demonstrated
the
proximity
of
that.
It
would
be
immediately
to
the
left
here
where
your,
where
you're
adjacent
to
a
very
busy
heavily
traveled
intersection.
K
As
I
said,
you
already
have
heavy
traffic
there,
and
this
is
evidenced
by
the
city's
interest
in
placing
the
speed
tables
and
the
15
mile
an
hour
speed
limit.
So
we
would
not
adversely
affect
any
other
property
owner.
It
is
consistent
with
the
code.
A
D
I
have
one
question
from
mr
mcleaney:
would
the
property
owner
be
okay
with
us
putting
conditions
on
not
enclosing
the
pergola?
Yes,
okay,.
K
D
I
was
wondering
mr
mcelini
mentioned
that
he
also
wanted
the
property
vested,
but
that's
not
part
of
the
the
request.
I'm
sorry
the
house
to
be
there.
You
may
know,
but
you
mentioned
wanting
the
house
vested.
A
G
D
G
I'll
make
it
without
and
we'll
see
what
happens.
I
moved
at
the
variance
request
for
case
vrb.
G
21-31
for
property,
located
at
302,
south
royal
palm
way
be
granted
as
depicted
on
site
plan
presented
at
the
public
hearing
to
reduce
the
front
yard.
Setback
for
25
feet
to
5.5
feet,
introduce
the
front
yard
setback
from
25
feet
to
15
feet
based
upon
the
applicant,
presenting
competent
and
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
at
the
public
hearing
of
an
unnecessary
hardship
or
practical
difficulty.
G
G
The
property
sits
on
azeal
street,
as
well
as
a
cul-de-sac
at
the
end
of
royal
palm,
and
that
this
is
not
a
a
self-created
hardship
that
the
property
owner
has
a
right
to
a
rare
yard
which,
under
the
current
situation
of
property,
doesn't
seem
to
have
and
that
they
are
simply
vesting
some
of
the
existing
home
again,
which
is
not
an
owner-created
problem.
E
Please
they
been
have
they
been
sworn
in:
yes,
okay,
sorry,
zoning,
district,
rs50,
residential
single
family
property
owners,
charles
and
marine
funk
agent
is
leslie
van
trump.
The
proposed
work
is
for
construct
an
addition
to
single-family
residents.
The
variance
request
is
to
reduce
the
rear
yard
setback
from
20
to
15
feet.
E
E
Here's
the
site
plan:
let
me
blow
it
up
a
little
bit
for
you,
okay.
So
when
we
first
reviewed
this
project,
the
applicant
was
requesting
a
rear
yard
setback
and
a
front
yard
setback
and
ascended
since
been
discovered
that
this
is
rs50.
They
get
a
front
porch
by
right.
So
in
essence,
she
can
have
an
eight
foot.
Apple
gonna
have
an
eight
foot
open
front
porch
all
along
the
front
of
the
property
staff,
believes
that
is
not
applicable.
E
L
C
A
L
L
L
It's
a
very
small
house,
there's
no
room
to
put
a
laundry
room
in
the
house,
so
they
want
that's
why
they
want
the
rear
addition,
among
other,
they
want
to
add
a
little
bit
more
space
to
the
house,
creating
a
master
bedroom,
and
so
they
can
put
a
laundry
room
in
the
house
and
then
that
will
remove
that
detached
structure
completely
and
make
them
have
a
nice
rear
yard.
I
do
have
two
letters,
one
from
each
side
of
them
on
the
same
side
of
the
street,
stating
that
they
have
no
objection,
and
I
they
just.
L
L
C
L
Okay,
this
is
not
a
self-imposed
hardship.
The
detached
structure
was
already
there
and
the
house
is
very
old,
I'm
not
sure
when
zoning
went
in
there,
but
it
was
definitely
after
26
and
39
when
the
structure
was
built.
We
do
have
the
owner
here.
Mr
funk
is
here
to
speak.
If
you'd
like
to
hear
from
him,
are
there
any
questions.
A
L
I
was
so
impressed
when
I
drove
down
this
street.
Looking
at
this
neighborhood,
the
lots
are
small.
The
houses
are
small,
one
of
the
quaintest
streets.
I've
ever
seen.
You
would
never
guess
it's
right
directly
across
from
the
palmaci
golf
and
country
club,
but
it's
a
beautiful
street
and
they're
just
trying
to
make
their
house
better
for
the
neighborhood,
keep
it
in
line
with
the
rest
of
the
neighborhood,
and
this
is
definitely
going
to
enhance
it.
C
M
A
Have
six
and
a
half
minutes
left
yeah.
M
So
I
would
say
probably
what
I
would
like
to
share
is
the
structure
in
the
rear
of
the
house.
Our
desire
is
to
remove
that
structure
it
does.
It
does
sit
right
on
the
property
line
of
both
my
neighbor
to
ma
to
the
west,
and
it
sits
on
the
property
line
with
the
neighbor
directly
behind
us
and
that's
it's
a
it's
a
block
and
screen
structure.
M
A
C
L
Yes,
ma'am:
the
hardship
is
that
the
house
was
built
a
long
time
ago,
a
very
small
house
they're
getting
older
and
they
need
primarily
the
laundry
room
in
the
house.
They
have
this
business
in
the
city
of
tampa
and
they
so
they
have
to
do
their
laundry
late
at
night
after
they
get
home
from
work,
it's
a
retail
store
and
it
they.
L
C
C
D
L
L
The
hardship
is
that
the
detached
structure
in
the
back
that
was
already
there
when
they
built
it,
that
that
really
needs
to
be
moved.
It
is
sitting
right
on
those
property
lines.
I
mean
I
I
they
didn't
make
that
hardship.
That's
not
a
self-imposed
hardship
but
they're
going
to
get
rid
of
that
which
is
going
to,
I
believe,
strongly
improve
the
property
overall
by
far
and
that's
not
even
including
the
front
porch,
which
is
another
issue.
A
L
C
G
I
move
that
variant's
request
for
case
brb
21-33
for
property
located
at
2811
west
san
rafael
street,
be
granted
as
depicted
on
the
side
plan
presented
at
the
public
hearing
to
reduce
the
rear
yard
setback
from
20
feet
to
15
feet
with
the
encroachment
of
eaves
and
gutters,
based
upon
the
applicant,
presenting
competent
and
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
and
at
the
public
hearing
of
an
unnecessary
hardship
or
practical
difficulty.
G
On
a
with
a
small
house,
a
1300
square
foot
house
that
the
lot
dimensions
are
standard
but
on
the
smaller
side
that
they
are,
the
owner
is
removing
an
existing
detached
accessory
structure
that
has
existed
since
before
they
acquired
the
property
that
the
removal
of
this
accessory
structure,
which
sits
on
the
property
line,
would
also
remove
the
homeowner's
laundry
room
and
that
the
only
place
on
this
relatively
small
lot.
With
the
existing
1300
square
foot
home
to
place.
B
A
E
Single
family
property
owner
is
george
and
pamela.
Alvarez
agent
name
is
steve
michellini.
The
request
is
to
reduce
a
side
yard
setback
from
seven
feet
to
four
feet.
To
allow.
E
E
H
E
K
E
K
C
E
E
A
E
C
E
E
E
That's
what
the
house
looks
like
there's
the
there's,
the
carport
that's
existing
now
and
the
tree
next
to
it.
There's
a
closer
look
at
the
tree
and
the
carport
right
here.
That's
provided
by
the
applicant
there's
a
better
shot
of
it
right
there
and
there's
a
site
plan
they're
trying
to
close
it
match
it
all
up.
The
existing
side,
yard
setback.
E
Airport
zoning
calls
existing
structures
like
that
existing
non-conformity
with
regards
and
we
don't
penalize
necessarily
for
the
enclosure
of
it
because
it's
existing,
but
we
will
require
them
to
get
the
side
yard
set
back
on
this
thing.
Very
nice,
okay,
owen
williams,
reviewed
this
and
found
it
consistent,
and
he
has
his
report
in
here
regarding
the
tree.
E
The
petitioner
also
provided
a
previous
variance
setback
for
the
existing
side
yard
back
in
1983.
E
With
that
being
said,
and
a
horrible
report
before
you
you're
going
for
the
side
yard
setback
which
he
with
the
petitioner
notified,
noticed
for
for
seven
feet
to
four
feet,
to
enclose
the
the
carport.
K
K
Joel,
which
one
am
I
supposed
to
push
here,
well
I'll,
learn
this
I'll
learn
which
buttons
this
is
an
existing
carport
and,
as
joel
mentioned,
it
was
approved
by
the
board
of
adjustment
in
1983,
and
we
had
petitioned
administratively
with
the
city
staff
to
see
if,
if
that
old
petition
would
vest
the
ability
to
enclose
this.
This
carport
and
the
the
language
and
the
records
that
were
available
from
53
were
not
clear.
So
it
was
the
recommendation
of
the
staff
that
we
go
forward
with
a
new
variance
requesting
to
enclose
this.
E
K
K
We've
discussed
various
construction
methods
of
how
to
protect
that
tree
with
the
city
staff
and,
at
this
point,
going
forward
with
the
permitting
and
things
like
that
that
we
may
have
to
put
in
gray
beams,
but
those
will
be
handled
at
permitting
itself.
We
don't
think
there
will
have
to
be
a
new
foundation
just
for
the
enclosure,
but
just
for
safety's
sake.
We
we
may
have
to
do
that.
K
We
talked
to
the
adjacent
neighbor
to
the
east,
who
would
be
the
most
affected
by
this,
and
I'd
like
to
read
his
letter
into
the
record.
He
is
supporting
the
enclosure
of
this
carport.
I'm
the
next
door,
neighbor
east
side
closest
to
the
proposed
variants
to
enclose
existing
semi-enclosed
garage.
The
proximity
of
the
existing
garage
and
the
petition
to
complete
the
enclosure
does
not
concern
me.
My
property
is
located
at
3009
west
lawn
immediately
adjacent
to
the
property,
seeking
the
variance.
K
My
property
is
the
one
most
directly
affected
by
the
granting
of
the
variance,
and
I
have
no
objection
and
wholeheartedly
support
the
variance
request.
The
existing
garage
is
already
in
place
and
enclosing.
It
is
a
logical
and
is
logical
and
will
assist
by
reducing
visual
and
noise
associated
with
garage
activities.
It
is
reasonable
to
allow
the
enclosure
of
the
existing
carport,
which
already
has
two
walls.
The
ability
to
complete
the
enclosure
will
improve
the
overall
functionality
and
aesthetics
of
the
home
and
will
not
negatively
impact
impact
me.
K
K
I
believe
that
you
know
this
the
pipe
the
pipers
bought
this
in
2001
and
they
thought
it
would
be
a
simple
permitting
issue
to
enclose
the
garage
they
have
little
children
and
the
mother
is
frequently
transporting
the
children
and
wanted
a
safe
garage
to
load
and
unload
and
out
of
the
elements
for
her
children.
K
K
So
that's
why
we're
before
you
to
clarify
that
omission
of
information
with
respect
to
affecting
any
other
property
owner,
and
you
have
the
most
affected
property
owner,
testifying
by
letter
that
they
would
not
be
affected
and
that
they
was
a
logical
process
to
enclose
it
and
that
they
were
in
support
of
that
with
respect
to
justice
being
done,
we
believe
that
that
would
be
done
it.
The
concept
would
be
to
make
the
enclosure
match
the
house
and
not
to
further
extend
or
expand
the
existing
carport.
K
A
G
Mr
mclean,
I
apologize,
you
may
have
said
this,
but
and
I
can't
tell
if
it's
in
the
application,
because
I
can't
really
trust.
What's.
G
G
D
And
I
had
a
question
about
the
blue
image
in
our
packet
site
plan.
K
That
petition
was
not
finished,
it
was
withdrawn,
okay,
and
so
it
it
doesn't
reflect
what's
what's
being
requested
now,
what's
being
requested,
now
is
for
the
existing
carport
only
with
no
expansion,
as
shown
on
the
in
the
photographs,
and
also
there
is
a
site
plan
in
there.
I
just
I'm
not
sure
where
exactly
where
it
is
right
now.
Thank.
D
G
I
move
the
variance
request
for
case
vrb,
which
is
a
case.
I'm
sorry
for
case
vrb
21-34
for
property
located
at
3011
west
lawn
avenue
be
granted
as
depicted
on
the
site
plan
presented
at
the
public
hearing
to
reduce
the
side
yard
from
seven
feet
to
four
feet:
to
enclose
an
existing
carport
based
upon
the
applicant
presenting
competent
and
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
at
this
public
hearing
of
an
unnecessary
hardship
or
practical
difficulty.