►
From YouTube: Board of Adjustment July 24, 2019
Description
Description
C
A
D
D
E
Is
where
the
Board
of
Adjustment
acts
in
a
quasi
judicial
rather
than
a
legislative
capacity?
I,
don't
cause
a
judicial
hearing.
It
is
not
the
board's
function
to
make
law,
but
rather
to
apply
law
that
has
already
been
established
in
a
quasi
judicial
hearing.
The
board
is
required
by
law
to
make
findings
of
fact,
based
on
the
evidence
presented
at
the
hearing
and
apply
those
findings
of
fact
to
previously
establish
criteria
containing
the
Code
of
Ordinances
in
order
to
make
a
legal
decision
regarding
the
application
before
it.
E
The
board
may
only
consider
evidence
at
this
hearing
that
the
law
considers
confident
substantial
and
relevant
to
the
issues.
If
the
competent,
substantial
and
relevant
evidence
at
the
hearing
demonstrates
that
the
applicant
has
met
the
criteria
established
in
the
code
of
ordinance,
then
the
board
is
required
by
law
to
find
in
favor
of
the
applicant.
By
the
same
token,
if
the
competent,
substantial
and
relevant
evidence
at
the
hearing
demonstrates
that
the
applicant
has
failed
to
meet
the
criteria
established
in
the
code
of
ordinance,
then
the
board
is
required
by
law
to
find
against
the
applicant.
E
A
You
that's
all
silence
our
gadgets,
please,
and
when
you
get
up
to
the
podium,
if
you
would
state
your
name
and
your
address,
we
have
two
items
on
the
agenda.
One
is
a
sidewalk
waiver
request
and
sea
breeze
Drive
in
Riverside.
The
other
one
is
a
rear
yard
setback
request
on
Hamilton
Avenue,
just
off
Riverside
Drive
as
well.
Are
we
okay
with
proceeding
in
the
order
on
the
agenda?
Anybody
have
to
leave
early
to.
F
This
is
a
request
for
waiver
of
the
requirement
to
build
a
sidewalk
in
conjunction
with
a
single-family
residence
that
has
been
the
building.
Permit,
has
been
applied
forward
and
the
applicant
is
required
to
install
sidewalks
along
all
abutting
Street
rights-of-way
Riverside
Drive
has
a
sidewalk
Seabreeze
Drive
on
the
north
side
does
not
have
a
sidewalk,
and
the
applicant
is
requesting
a
waiver
of
the
requirement
to
build
that
Seabreeze
Drive
sidewalk.
F
With
respect
to
your
criteria,
the
first
one
under
Section
130,
201
B.
Basically,
there
is
a
drainage
ditch
in
in
the
area
where
the
sidewalk
would
be
would
have
to
go.
This
ditch
basically
starts
on
the
applicants
property,
as
you
can
see
on
the
survey
and
continues
on
all
the
way
down
the
length
of
that
side
into
the
right-of-way,
and
there
is
a
retaining
wall
on
the
adjacent
property
to
the
west.
That
is
basically
a
retaining
wall
for
the
adjacent
subdivision
and
the
drainage
infrastructure
continues
along
there.
F
This
drainage
area
would
make
the
the
installation
of
a
sidewalk
very,
very
difficult.
So
there
are
physical
conditions
associated
with
this
right-of-way,
especially
on
the
south
side
of
Seabreeze
Drive
that
make
this
sidewalk
installation
difficult
with
respect
to
number
two.
These
special
circumstances
have
not
been
so
created
or
resulted
from
an
action
by
the
applicant
with
respect
to
the
four
criteria,
one
or
more
of
which
you
may
consider.
F
We
would
note
that
there
is
a
sidewalk
on
the
north
side
with
a
more
of
a
typical
right-of-way
layout
in
room
for
a
sidewalk
in
this
area,
but
the
respect
to
number
two
Seabreeze
Drive
is
improved
and
paved
with
respect
to
number
three.
The
drainage
ditch
would
make
the
sidewalk
installation
difficult,
especially
given
the
need
to
maintain
the
drainage
infrastructure
over
time
and
with
respect
to
item
four.
There
is
an
existing
sidewalk
on
the
north
side
of
Seabreeze
Drive.
F
There
was
no
sidewalk
on
the
south
side
and
the
homes
that
abut
the
south
side
of
Seabreeze
Drive
west
of
this
home,
all
orient
away
from
Seabreeze
Drive.
So
this
is
their
backyard
when
they
were
built,
they
were
not
required
to
put
that
improvement
in,
so
they
would
not
really
be
served
by
the
sidewalk.
So
that's
just
just
the
condition
of
the
area.
F
This
was
publicly
noticed
and
staff
did
not
receive
and
he
responses
to
the
notices
and
the
findings
of
fact
kind
of
reiterate
the
analysis
I
just
went
through
and
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
the
requested
waiver
from
the
sidewalk
requirements
of
section
130
2.0
or
the
land
development
code
for
Seabreeze
Drive.
Thank.
A
G
E
G
Name
is
Peggy,
Kern
I
live
at
10:28,
Marsh
view
Lane
top
and
Springs
I
really
have
no
opinion
either
way,
but
before
consideration,
I'm
familiar
with
that
drainage
dish
that
runs
parallel
on
sea
breeze.
There's
a
similar
drainage,
ditch
on
Riverside
I'm
in
front
of
the
sunset
apartments
which
the
city
maintains
and
improved.
So
the
drainage
ditch
on
the
south
on
the
Seabreeze
size
that
we're
discussing
really
hasn't
had
any
improvement
and
I.
G
Don't
think
anyone
has
ever
looked
it
added
for
improvement,
the
same
as
they
did
on
Sunset
Drive,
so
that
area
is
has
a
lot
more
water,
usually
in
it
than
the
other
ones.
The
other
issue
about
not
you
know
you
can
use
the
sidewalk
it's
true
on
the
other
side
of
the
street,
but
there
are
a
lot
still
left
to
be
built.
One
light
I
think
that
would
face
Seabreeze
in
point
Alexis
and
the
homeowners
association.
G
F
H
F
F
F
That,
as
far
as
the
need
for
a
sidewalk,
that
is
one
criteria
you
know,
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
this
waiver
based
on
the
topographic
conditions,
the
drainage
in
the
the
right-of-way.
So
the
physical
limitations
that
are
there
for
building
a
sidewalk,
not
really
the
need.
We
do
have
lots
of
streets
with
sidewalks
on
both
sides.
I
I
A
A
Of
all
a
favor
of
sidewalks
myself,
but
one
is
enough
in
many
instances
and
there's
already
one
there
and
it's
silly
to
build
one
house
with
a
sidewalk
like
George
mentioned
that
goes
nowhere.
The
city
wants
sidewalks.
They
can
build
of
the
entire
length
of
the
block
at
one
time.
I
live
on.
Riverside
Drive
has
got
one
sidewalk
on
one
side,
a
lot
of
pedestrians
and
it's
wonderful
and
nothing
on
the
other
side
and
we're
happy
with
that.
So
I
think
that
the
I
agree
with
the
motion
I
so
ready
for
boat,
then
miss.
H
A
A
F
This
is
a
variance
to
reduce
the
required
rear.
It
setback
to
allow
for
the
addition
of
a
screened
porch
on
to
an
existing
single-family
residence,
the
required
rear
yard
setback.
This
is
an
ER
100
zoning
district,
single-family
residential,
the
required
setback
is
30
feet.
The
applicant
would
like
to
add.
The
applicant
has
an
existing
enclosed
porch
on
the
back
of
the
residence
that
has
setback
almost
32
feet
from
the
rear
property
line
and
the
applicant
wishes
to
add
a
screened
porch.
F
F
With
respect
to
the
criteria,
the
home
is
set
back,
25
feet,
which
is
basically
25
feet.
The
district
minimum
and
the
applicant
already
has
an
existing
enclosed,
porch
others
as
well.
Within
the
limits
of
the
rear
yard
setback,
it
appears
that
the
property
could
accommodate
an
expansion
or
extension
of
that
existing
porch
to
the
north,
without
violating
any
of
the
required
minimum
district
setbacks.
The
applicant
has
not
presented
thus
far
any
physical
conditions
and
staff
did
not
note
any
physical
conditions.
F
You
need
unique
to
the
lot
that
would
limit
the
applicants,
ability
to
add
a
screen
porch,
that
is
in
compliance
with
the
code.
So
it's
concluded
under
number
2.
There
are
no
special
circumstances
or
conditions
associated
with
the
lot
number
3.
Littoral
enforcement
would
not
deny
the
applicant
reasonable
use
of
the
property
they.
They
do
have
an
existing
porch
and
could
add
to
that,
so
the
use
of
a
porch
is
there
without
violating
the
minimum
setbacks
number
for
this.
F
Granting
this
variance
would
confer
special
privilege
privileges
to
the
applicant
by
allowing
that
encroachment
into
the
rear
yard
that
is
not
available
to
other
residents
in
the
r100
district
and
with
respect
to
number
5,
it's
not
concluded
that
this
would
this
poor
tradition
would
substantially
diminish.
Property
values
may
have
a
modest
impact
on
the
real
neighbor,
but
that
Carter
is
is
actually
met.
This
application
was
I
noticed
and
staff
has
not
received
any
responses
to
the
notices
and
the
findings
reiterate
the
analysis.
J
K
F
Yes,
mr.
Odone,
yes
and
I
sat
down
and
discussed
this
and
I
wanted
to
be
sure
that
he
asked
for
the
variance
that
he
needed
to
build
the
porch
that
he
wanted.
When
we
measured
everything
out
with
the
8
foot
wide
porch
27
feet
was,
was
not
going
to
be
enough,
it
ends
up
being.
It
would
end
up
being
20
3.75
feet
from
the
rear
property
line.
He's
asking
for
23,
just
in
case
he's
a
little
off,
but
the
house
is
not
exactly
square
with
a
lot.
F
J
Not
priced
that
out
the
whole
talk
the
the
outside
unit
would
have,
which
is
basically,
the
compressor
would
have
to
be
changed,
so
you
would
have
to
add
the
line
the
freon
lines
to
wherever
is
that
I
move
it?
You
would
have
to
our
have
to
open
up
the
ceiling
in
that
room
to
accommodate
those
lines
right
now,
it's
a
way
it's
on
that
picture.
They
go
up
the
wall
through
the
wall
and
the
unit,
which
is
a
European
unit.
It's
right.
On
the
other
side,
the.
I
J
H
H
H
So
in
order
for
at
least
for
myself
to
agree
with
you,
I'd
love,
to
give
you
just
say
yes,
but
we
are
held
by
law
of,
but
of
doing,
a
findings
of
fact
and
I.
Just
from
what
you're
explaining
to
me,
the
changing
of
the
air
conditioner
would
not
be
a
good
enough
reason
to
change
any
one
of
those
four.
So
is
there
anything
else
that
you
can
add
that
would
at
least
persuade
me
I
can't
speak
for
the
other
four
members
we'll
take
a
vote
separately,
but
that's
at
least
what
I'm
looking
at
right.
J
I
I
I
K
I
I
I
I
K
I
A
B
A
H
A
D
Did
look
at
it
and,
just
as
you
said,
it
was
probably
written
prior
to
the
email
additions
it
might
have
been
also
written
prior
to
when
you
had
alternates.
So
you
might
want
to
say,
we've
been
operating
under
the
practice
that
if
an
alternate
is
here
not
seated
that
they
would
still
have
voice
just
not
boat,
and
you
might
want
to
put
that
in
there
just
for
clarity
for
future
alternates
tonight,
I'm
seated
so
I
have
boat,
but
just
one
of
those
things
for
records
it
might
be
covered
elsewhere
and
others
Siti
something.
A
A
C
C
E
An
inspection
is
something
that
you
do
when
you've
been
advised
against
doing,
but
obviously
it
is
a
laughing,
but
that
you
would
do
on
your
own,
not
as
a
bore,
because
you
can't
go
inspect
as
they
board
and
so
I
just
I
guess
I
would
like
a
clarification
for
legal
reasons.
Are
you
talking
about?
You
know
like
the
surveys
and
stuff
that
we
get?
Are
the
overhead
that
you
just
like
to
see
it
bigger
and
like
on
a
projector
or
if
you
right.
G
E
E
Independent
research
is
not
to
be
done
at
all,
and
that's
that's
there's
case
law
on
that
so
for
purposes
of
looking
at
the
packet
materials
and
making
it
bigger
so
that
you
can
see
it
I.
Don't
think
that
there's
a
problem
with
you
coming
in
with
you
know,
like
I,
have
my
laptop
and
zooming
in
on
the
agenda
packet
materials
to
see
better
but
doing
independent
research
through
Google,
Maps
or
you
know,
some
sort
of
interactive
map
that
hasn't
otherwise
been
provided
by
staff
or
the
applicant
I
would
discourage
that.
E
E
Don't
think
that
you
can
sit
there
and
say:
oh
you
stipulate
that
we're
just
gonna
pull
it
up
right
now,
because
you're
still
doing
the
you're
still
doing
the
research
and
the
evidence
it's
their
burden
to
present
that
now,
if
you
want
to
say
to
the
staff,
you
know
we'd
really
like
a
printout
of
the
Google
Earth,
you
know
put
in
the
staff
report
and
they
want
to
do
that
because
they
they're
the
ones
that
are
presenting
the
staff
report.
They
can
do
that
and
then
you
can
zoom
in
on
it.
E
I
A
That's
up
to
the
applicants,
but
I
would
like
to
see
what
it's
going
to
look
like.
If
it's
done
the
way
they
were
proposing
it
to
be
done
and
as
the
City
Attorney's
Office
has
said,
it's
their
burden
to
do
that,
but
I
think
mr.
Burris
and
I
concur
that
it'd
be
nice
to
notify
the
applicants
in
the
application
process.
Try
to
present
something
visual
that
we
can
see
what
it
looks
like
now
or
what
it
will
look
like
and.
E
I
F
And
and
I
will
say:
if
staff
may
be
recognized,
we
have
all
do
it
runs
the
gamut,
so
we
have
people
that
I'm
just
submitted
an
application
and
we've
never
met
with
them.
Sometimes
I'll
follow
up
with
them
and
we
have
other
applicants.
We've
had
actually
both
of
these
tonight
where
we've
talked
with
them,
sat
with
them
a
couple
of
times,
and
we
explained
here
are
the
standards?
Is
there
any
physical
condition
now
mister
that
this
last
one
I
I
did
not
know
about
the
air
conditioner?
F
What
we
can
do
is
reverse
our
applications,
so
it
says
a
site
plan.
We
could
say,
in
addition
to,
please
provide
a
narrative
of
your
hardship.
Please
provide
any
evidence,
for
example,
pictures
if
pictures
will
help
they
may
not
always
you
know
we
can.
We
could
revise
the
the
list
and
try
to
guide
them
better,
but
it's
difficult,
I
think
for
some
applicants
to
understand
the
hardship.
So
we
do
our
best
explain
and.
I
I
F
C
A
E
A
H
H
He
show
you
his
evidence
before,
because
what
I
feel
bad
is
here's
a
person
coming
in.
He
has
no
evidence,
he
has
no
case
and
he's
just
taken
$250
and
donated
at
the
tarpon
springs
and
wasted
everyone's
time,
including
his
own,
so
I'm
just
curious
at
what
point
do
you
sit
there
and
say
this
is
a
you
know?
Do
you
tell
them
that
it's
a
denial,
we.
F
We
will
tell
them
that
staff
can
or
cannot
support
the
application,
usually
when
they
come
in
sometimes
I
have
to
go
through
the
application.
Look,
you
know,
do
the
research
to
write
the
staff
report
and,
and
sometimes
I
notify
him
at
that
point,
so
he
he
knew
that
he
was
going
to
get
a
staff
report,
but
that
did
not
support
his
request,
but
I
mean
I'm,
not
sure
we
should
be
talking
back
about
this
case,
but
my
feeling
I'll
just
tell
you
when
he
was
there
was
he
wanted
to
give
it
a
shot?
F
That's
kind
of
my
feeling
with
him.
He
actually
we
talked
through
a
redesign
of
it
that
would
comply
with
the
code,
but
he
wanted
to
try
this
first
and
at
some
point
I
have
to
stop.
He
is,
is
you
know
due
process
is
available
to
him
and
I
have
to
let
him
go
through
the
process
if
he
wants
to
do
it?
Okay,.
I
I
D
A
question
sir
chair
on
page
three,
the
order
of
hearings-
that's
printed
here
is
this.
It
seems
similar
to
what
we
have
been
I
know.
You
mentioned
at
a
previous
meeting
that
you
were,
you
know,
hoping
for
a
certain
flow
is
what
in
here
is
not
in
the
order,
or
is
this
the
order
that
we're
going
to
continue.
A
On
the
board,
what
they
would
do
is
have
cross-examination
and
questions
intermittently
between
the
staff
report
and
the
applicant,
and
we
all
agree
we
better
to
have
the
staff
report,
then
the
applicant.
Then
we
open
it
up
to
a
free-for-all
and
have
question
first
of
the
staff.
So
that's
gonna
be
clarified
in
the
final
review.
I
think:
okay,.