![youtube image](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/-t-aCMolY7Q/mqdefault.jpg)
►
From YouTube: Board of Adjustments December 16, 2020
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
A
B
F
G
This
is
a
quasi-judicial
proceeding
where
the
board
of
adjustment
acts
in
a
quasi-judicial
rather
than
a
legislative
capacity
at
a
quasi-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
upon
the
evidence
presented
at
the
hearing
and
apply
those
findings
of
fact
to
previously
established
criteria
contained
in
the
code
of
ordinances
in
order
to
make
a
legal
decision
regarding
the
application
before
it.
G
The
board
may
only
consider
evidence
at
this
hearing
that
the
law
considers
competent,
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
commission
is
required
by
law
to
fight.
Excuse
me,
then
the
board
is
required
by
law
defined
in
favor
of
the
applicant.
G
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.
Are
there
any
members
of
the
board
wishing
to
disclose
any
ex
parte
communications
or
conflicts
of
interest
this
evening.
G
E
H
H
The
minimum
size
setback
requirements
for
the
r-100
zoning
district
are
a
minimum
of
10
feet
for
each
side
and
a
minimum
of
25
feet
for
a
total,
combined
side
yard.
The
proposed
layout
of
the
home
does
meet
the
minimum
10
feet
on
both
the
north
and
south
side
property
lines.
However,
it
does
not
meet
the
total
combined
25
foot
minimum.
Therefore,
the
applicants
are
here
today
to
request
a
reduced
side,
yard
total
combined
side
yard
to
22
feet
7
inches.
H
H
One
thing
to
note
about
this
property
is:
it
was
originally
platted
back
in
1925
as
part
of
the
sunset
hills
subdivision,
with
a
lot
width
of
only
65
feet.
The
current
lot
width
for
the
r100
zoning
district
is
75
ft,
making
this
lot
a
legally
non-conforming
lot
of
record
and
it's
10
feet
narrower
than
what
would
be
required
today.
H
This
is
an
overview
of
your
review
standards.
Staff
has
indicated
that
four
of
the
five
have
been
met
with
number
three
not
being
met.
However,
it
is
of
staff's
opinion.
That
is
a
the
variance.
That's
requested
is
minimal
in
order
to
construct
a
home
on
a
legally
non-conforming
lot
of
record.
That
is
10
feet.
Narrower
than
is
required.
So,
based
upon
this
staff
would
recommend
approval
of
this
request,
and
I
will
go
ahead
and
turn
it
back
over
to
the
board.
A
We're
I
think,
we're
doing
that
afterwards.
Didn't
we
talk
about
this,
where
we
would
start
asking
questions
of
the
opportunity.
Yeah
no
worries,
it's
a
new
order,
sir.
Yes,
you
rise
to
the
podium
and
oh
that
one
and
please
state
your
name
and
your
address
for
the
record
and
we're
happy
to
hear
what
you
have
to
say.
Okay,.
A
I
She
spelled
it
out
and
as
long
as
you
are,
I
want
to
approve
it.
I
don't
have
much
to
say,
but
I'd
live
across
the
street
from
where
they
just
developed
that
whole
50
or
60
homes
that
so
I
live
off
the
loquat
right
now
and
that
in
that
two
blocks
from
where
I'm
asking
to
build
a
house
right
now,
okay-
and
I
know
that
they
changed
all
those
lots
to
to
meet
the
old
requirements.
So
I
didn't
think
it
was
not
a
question
to
ask
for
the
same
thing.
B
Staff,
how
did
we
come
up
with
the
approval
or
the
recommended
approval,
because
in
it
it
states
that
you
feel
that
it
should
be
approved.
So
I'm
curious
what
evidence
was
provided
that
makes
that
happen.
H
So
staff
is
of
the
opinion
that,
based
on
this
being
a
legally
non-conforming
lot
of
record
it's
narrower
than
what
you
would
be
required
today
in
the
r
100
district,
so
that
takes
away
10
feet
from
a
lot
where
the
side
setbacks
that
are
required.
A
total
combined
under
25
feet
is
taken
into
consideration,
so
with
it
being
as
narrow
or
a
lot.
It
is
a
legal
lot
of
record.
H
Well,
what
I
can
say
along
wide
view
avenue
all
those
lots
are
65
feet
so
they're
also
legally
non-conforming.
I
did
a
brief
analysis
of
those
properties
to
see
if
they
were
able
to
meet
the
the
setback
requirements
when
looking
at
all
the
homes
that
are
constructed
on
that
road.
Not
every
lot
is
developed.
H
There
is
an
average
looks
like
total,
combined
side
yard
of
23.4
feet,
so
it
is
less
than
25
minimum
and
then
the
home
on
the
adjacent
property
to
the
south.
Their
combined
side
yard
is
only
20
feet,
so
it
looks
like
most
homes
that
are
constructed
on
the
on
that
neighborhood
have
had
reduced
setbacks.
B
Okay,
because
I'm
one
of
the
things
that
I
like
to
look
at,
is
that
the
need
for
the
size
and
on
the
comment
here.
It
says
that
to
so
that
we
may
add
two
and
a
half
feet
that
allows
for
a
double
car
garage
and,
honestly,
that
is
not
in,
in
my
opinion,
a
necessity
for
building
a
house.
So
that's
why
I'm
asking
the
question.
B
So
you
know
it's
like
the
old
saying
and
I
don't
mean
it
to
be
in
any
way
disrespectful,
but
you
can't
buy
something
and
expect
to
build
a
mansion
on
it,
and
I
mean
I'm
over
dramatizing
it
a
little
bit,
but
so
I'm
really
looking
for
the
applicant
to
explain
to
us
why
this
is
so
much
a
necessity,
because,
honestly,
the
rule,
whether
I
agree
with
the
rule
or
not
and
most
of
the
time,
I
don't
it's
hard
for
me
to
vote
for
something
when
I'm
looking
at
it
and
it
clearly
states
that
if
it
doesn't
meet
three,
it's
a
no-go
and
this
really
doesn't
meet
number
three
at
all
and
should
be
a
no-go.
B
I
No,
that
was
the
basis
of
design,
but
so
that
too,
making
a
lot
of
difference
for
me
for
the
appearance
and
the
function
of
the
house
and
the
space.
But
when
I
purchased
the
property
they
were
already
developing
across
the
street,
I
talked
to
other
people
and
they
had
they
had
non-conforming
lots
and
got
to
get
the
variance
for
the
side
setbacks.
I
So
if
it
wasn't
ever
granted,
I
don't
think
I
would
have
bought
the
property
I
agree,
but
since
it
was
already
happening
across
the
street
to
my
from
my
house
50
times,
I
didn't
think
it
was
out
of
question.
And
now,
when
I
came
down,
they
knew
it
was
a
non-conforming
lot
and
I
walked
in
there
and
they
said
you
know,
I
don't
see
why
you
shouldn't
get
it.
You
know
that
you
know
so
that
I
based
all
that
information
on
and
purchased
the
property.
I
So
I
didn't
think
it
would
be
not
a
question
to
ask
for
it.
B
I
The
double
garage
and
then
but
I'm
not
going
to
do
the
big
stair
tower
coming
up.
I
got
I
want
to
make
the
because
the
flood
elevation
is
about
three
feet
above
the
floor
of
the
elevation.
That's
there.
So
I
want
to
have
three
steps
and
then
my
front
door.
So
it
doesn't
look
like
a
typical
stilt
home
where
you
have
the
big
stairs
coming
away
from
the
home.
E
I
B
I
No,
I
don't
think
so.
Yeah
further
down
the
street
yeah
yeah.
B
I
Yeah
I
mean
you
would
have
to
have
to
re-engineer
redraw
it
and
do
ever
you
know,
but
I
I
did
not
think
this
would
be
an
issue
and
even
I
even
talked
to
there's
a
neighbor
that
did
built
and
he
had
two
single
garages
and
he
had
his
house
originally
drawn
two
feet
bigger
and
he
then
he
didn't
come
to
get
a
variance
and
he
said
he
goes.
If
I
would
have
done
it
again.
I
would
come
down
and
get
a
variant
and
that's
the
neighbor
right
right,
adjacent
to
my
property.
I
B
Yeah
go
ahead,
I
was
gonna.
Let
me
explain
something
to
you:
we're
we
sit
on
a
board
here
and
again.
No
disrespect
staff
can
make
any
recommendation
that
they
want,
but
in
in
the
carrying
out
of
what
we
do,
we're
kind
of
held
to
the
five
criteria,
unless
you
can
just
give
us
some
reason
that
it's
more
than
I'd
like
to
have
a
three-car
garage
versus
a
two-car
garage
and
believe
me,
when
I
tell
you,
I'm
not
honestly
trying
to
pick
at
all
on
this,
it's
just
when
I
looked
at
it.
B
That
was
the
first
thing
I
said,
that's
why
I
have
to
ask
you
the
question,
because
it
really
wasn't
specific
whether
you
know
you
said
you
wanted
a
double
garage
and
you
could
have
a
double
garage
if
you
were
to
shift
things
over
and
not
have
a
garage
on
one
side.
So
I'm
trying
to
be
able
to
give
you
what
you
are
looking
for,
but
I
need
a
real
reason
to
be
able
to
override
the
criteria.
That's
in
front
of
me.
I
I
I
was
at
every
meeting
that
happened
with
that
that
subdivision
across
the
street
from
me,
so
whenever
they
set
up
here-
and
we
had
even
the
old
mayor
that
was
coming
in
here
and
saying
you
can't
spot
zone
either,
you
can't
pick
where
you
want
to
do
it
and
where
you
don't
want
to
do
it
so
once
you
allow
it,
you
have
to
allow
other
people
to
do
it.
That's.
B
Not
how
we
operate,
we,
we,
you
can
have
right
next
door
to
you,
the
exact
same
lien
on
site
on
side
yard,
like
that,
and
you
could
come
in
front
of
this
board,
whether
I'm
here
anybody
else
and
not
get
the
same
thing
that
somebody
else
had
and
we've
had
that
numerous
times
we're
not
allowed
to
look
at
other
properties.
I'm
allowed
to
ask
you
if
there
are
other
properties
like
yours,
but
I'm
not
honestly.
B
If
somebody
has
a
six-foot
fence
and
somebody
wants
to
make
a
six-foot
fence
where
it's
only
allowed
to
for
you,
they
don't
get
it
unless
they
can
prove
why
they
need
it.
That's
what
I'm
asking
you
I'm
trying
to
find
out
why
you
would
need
to
have
a
two-car
garage
at
the
same
time
as
have
a
single
garage.
B
A
C
Making
that
point
to
go
to
the
next
point,
the
required
side,
yard
setback
is
10
feet.
How
do
we
come
up
with
22.7
to
25?
If
the
side
yard
setback
is
10
feet,
10
and
10
is
20..
Where
is
the
25
comes
from,
and
the
gentleman
has
a
problem
at
22.7.
H
Yes,
I
can
provide
a
little
clarification
for
the
r100
zoning
district.
There
is
a
minimum
side
setback
of
10
feet
on
each
side,
but
there's
also
a
minimum
combined
side
yard
setback
of
25
feet.
So,
whatever
setbacks
you
propose
on
the
two
sides:
they
need
to
at
least
equal
25
feet.
In
this
case
they
don't
meet
that
25
foot
they're
at
22,
feet,
7,
inches,
okay,.
H
Well,
not
necessarily
illegal,
but
this
property
was
provided
back
in
1925,
so
it
had
different
standards
in
place
at
that
time.
So
as
times
change
and
rules
change,
the
current
zoning
has
different
standards.
C
Okay,
then,
in
that
case,
this
setback
of
two
feet
and
three
inches,
it's
not
a
major
point
and
the
city
is
recommending
to
approve
it.
So
what
is
the.
A
G
Can
I
speak
to
that
briefly,
and
it's
been
mentioned
a
couple
times
both
by
the
applicant
here
tonight
and
for
your
edification,
and
the
board
is
well
aware
that
whatever
happens
with
this
particular
application
does
not
set
a
precedent
for
any
future
application
applications
and
just
as
mr
eisner
was
pointing
out
what
happened
on
past
applications
does
not
inform
what's
happening
on
this
application.
G
The
criteria
that
are
set
forth
in
your
code,
the
applicant,
is
responsible
for
providing
evidence
to
prove
that
their
individual
property
meets
those
criteria,
so
it
is
per
application
every
time
they
come
forward.
The
applicant
has
the
burden
of
providing
that
information
and
showing
that
based
on
their
individual
property,
that
they
meet
those
criteria.
So
no
precedent
will
be
set
whatsoever.
D
Thank
you.
So
if
I
may
ask
the
applicant,
it
sounds
like
when
you
were
addressing
it
earlier
that
when
you
were
looking
to
buy
the
property,
you
you
did
your
homework
you're
asking
the
neighbors
and
did
you
go
to
the
city?
Did
you
talk
to
planning
and
zoning
yes
and
and
and
what
was
the
counsel
that
they
provided?
You.
I
I
I
left,
I
said
well,
I
feel
comfortable
doing
that,
and
I
know
they
just
did
it
across
the
street,
and
I
know
so.
You
know
what,
if,
if
I
was
the
first
one
to
ask,
I
don't
even
think
I
would
have
bought
the
property
when
I,
when
I
looked
around
and
didn't
see
it
happening,
so
I
would
have
tried
to
buy
the
lot
next
door
and
try
to
get
too
lot.
So
I
could
do
what
I
wanted
all
right.
You
did
your
homework
yeah,
okay,.
D
And
in
addition-
and
this
might
be
a
question
combined
for
the
staff
as
well-
are
there
any
other
needs
for
any
other
variances
things
like
you
know,
sidewalk
the
height?
I
know
those
are
common
things
that
come
up
sometimes,
when
we're
talking
about
new
construction.
H
J
A
C
Were
there
any
letter
sent,
do
I
ask,
were
any
letter
sent
out
to
the
community?
Did
any
letters
come
back.
B
I
did
want
to
make
a
little
clarification.
The
whole
reason
for
a
25
foot
while
having
10
on
each
side
is
for
the
ability
to
place
the
home
if
you
want
either
five
feet
from
yeah
10
feet
from
one
side
and
15
from
the
other,
or
vice
versa.
A
Understood
so
now
we
call
for
the
applicant
rebuttal
and
board
questions
to
applicant.
A
A
Thank
you,
sir.
You
can
have
a
seat
and
I
guess
we're
going
to
go
for
a
motion.
D
J
E
J
J
C
E
C
E
H
The
only
comment
that
I
have
is
you
may
have
seen
on
the
desk
that
we
have
the
2021
meeting
schedule.
It
has
all
of
the
boards
schedule
on
there,
but
I
highlighted
the
board
of
adjustments
for
you
and
we
can
also
send
this
out
in
an
email
to
you
guys
as
well,
but
other
than
that.
That's
all.
I
have
thank.
A
D
I
believe
that
this
was
a
good
exercise
we
had
tonight.
I
really
appreciated
mr
eisner's
comments
and
you
know
perspective,
which
is
why
we
have
this
board
to
where
we
all
come
at
things
with
different
eyes,
which
is
what
makes
the
board
a
what
I
think
of
value
to
the
city.
So
I
do
have
a
question
thinking
of
our
applicant
here,
putting
myself
in
his
shoes
like
we
said
he
did
his
homework
and
he
did
what
he
thought.
You
know
he
talks
to
the
neighbors.
D
D
I
understand
this
so
then,
because
it's
oh,
it's
going
to
come
on
our
board
and
our
board,
which
asks
very
good
and
valid
questions.
So
here
is
a
thought
for
our
city
staff,
who
y'all
know
I
have
the
utmost
respect
for
because
we're
just
here,
volunteering.
You
are
the
professionals.
This
is
your
career
path.
You
have
the
education
and
training
and
commitment
to
this.
D
H
The
owner
so
correct
me
if
I'm
I'm
wrong
erica,
but
the
they
can
apply
for
a
variance,
but
the
owner
would
have
to
sign
off
on
the
application
that
they
are
okay
moving
forward
with
that,
the
variance
would
lie
with
the
property,
not
the
ownership,
so
they
could
potentially
go
through
that
avenue.
D
Okay,
correct
and
I've
got
clarification
because,
as
we
know,
which
is
why
it's
so
important,
which
you
know
mr
eisner
again
wisely
pointing
out
the
need
for
the
minimum
10
minimum
10
combined
25,
because
it
gives
you
the
padding
for
what's
happening
on
either
side.
We
can
appreciate
that
as
homeowners,
so
I'm
wondering
not
to
micromanage
the
staff
if
we
could
have
some
sort
of
guideline
documentation
procedure
that
when
a
homeowner
or
property
owner
or
a
prospective
property
owner,
approaches
the
city
and
says
I'm
looking
to
buy
this,
what
what
can
I
do?
D
What
are
my
options
instead
of
just
that
verbal
yeah?
You
should
be
cool,
the
other
guys
did
it.
I
don't
see
a
problem.
It's
a
couple
feet,
roll
the
dice,
that's
a
big
dice
roll!
He
bought
the
property.
He
you
know
got
with
an
architect.
He's
got
thousands
and
thousands
of
dollars
invested
in
this,
and
we
very
well
could
have
voted
no
and
it
would
break
my
heart
that
someone
who's
done
something
did
his
homework
would
lose
tens
of
thousands
of
dollars
on
this.
D
D
The
current
property
owner
has
to
sign
off
on
it,
because
I'm
thinking,
if
I
was
in
his
shoes
and
was
counseled
in
such
a
manner
by
the
city,
I
would
go
to
you
know
the
property
owner
or
my
attorney
or
real
estate
agent,
whomever
and
say
I
want
to
put
that
the
sale
is
contingent
upon
this
variance
being
approved
and
he
needs
to
sign
off
on
this
timeline,
etc.
Again,
I
didn't
go
to
law
school,
deferring
to
our
fantastic
council
on
that.
D
H
Sure,
no,
I
I
appreciate
those
comments.
I
can't
necessarily
speak
to
this
specific
instance,
but
I
know
in
our
office.
You
know
we
do
try
to
guide
applicants
with
the
options
they
have
to
to
move
forward.
You
know
it's
pretty
clear
that
when
there
is
a
set
of
criteria
for
these
variances
that
you
need
to
meet,
you
have
to
provide.
You
know
your
answer
and
your
hardship
on
your
application.
H
D
A
B
Eyes,
I'm
gonna
use
the
word
we
again
and
but
I'm
speaking
only
for
myself,
as
I
always
do,
because
I
speak
usually
for
no
one
else
but
myself,
but
there
was
no
hardship
in
this
and
that's
the
issue
of
why
I
voted.
No
a
hardship
is
a
situation
where
I
don't
know
a
tree
is
with
a
eagle,
isn't
it
is
can't
be
moved
or
the
the
person
needs
to
widen
the
doorway
because
he's
got
a
a
handicapped
type
person.
That's
a
hardship.
B
A
hardship
to
me
is
not
to
make
it
a
three-car
garage
on
a
on
a
non-conforming
lot
and
I
don't
agree
with
the
vote
the
other
way,
but
I
knew
which
way
the
vote
was
going
to
go.
So
I
was
happy
to
vote
my
way
because
I'm
not
breaking
the
rules
of
the
criteria
and
that's
simple
cut
and
dry.
This
was
not
a
hardship,
he
didn't
prove.
It
was
a
hardship
and
that's
why
I
originally
asked
why
staff
agreed
to
make
this
an
approval.
B
We
have
to
have
all
five
criteria
unless
it's
truly
a
hardship.
We
can't
acknowledge
if
it's
money,
you
know
we.
We
have
situations
that
come
across
the
board
where
somebody
needs
to
lean
on
a
setback
because
there's
a
pool
blocking
they
don't
want
to
have
to
take
the
pool
out
and
move
the
pool,
but
we
could
actually
say
no.
You
have
to
take
the
pool
out
and
move.
You
know
you
can't
move
closer
to
the
street,
so
that's
a
hardship
that
I
could
see
this
one.
B
You
know
I
was
hoping
that
he
would
tell
me
he's
got
a,
I
don't
know
a
mechanical
degree
and
he
needs
one
of
the
garages
for
his.
You
know
to
make
a
living
and
the
other
two
to
put
him
and
his
wife's
car
in
there
would
have
been
more
of
an
explanation
than
hey.
I
asked,
and
they
said
it
was
no
big
deal
that
to
me
was
not
sufficient
to
give
a
variance,
because
the
variance
is
not
just
for
him.
It
stays
with
the
property.
B
So
I
I
that's
why
I
ask
you,
know
staff
to
really
be
careful
about
giving
a
approval
prior
to
somebody
giving
you
evidence.
If
you
know
evidence
is
not
non-conforming
a
lot.
You
know
we're
going
to
be
dealing
with
a
lot
of
non-conforming
lots.
We
really
need
evidence
that
it
says
that
a
normal
house
cannot
be
built,
that's
what
it
is
and
a
normal
house
can
be
built.
It's
just.
It
would
be
a
two-car
garage
one
on
each
side.
The
fact
that
he
doesn't
want
it
to
look
a
certain
way
with
a
certain
staircase.
B
I
feel
for
him.
You
know,
but
that's
not
what
we
have
to
consider
so.
C
I
will
say
this
if
we
believe
everyone
that
comes
in
here,
what
they
say
happened
a
month
ago,
three
months
ago,
before
the
body
lots.
We
have
to
stay
away
from
that
and
stay
within
the
guidelines.
But
when
you
go
from
25
feet
to
22.7,
that's
not
a
disaster
for
the
city,
because
we
have
so
many
non-conforming
lots
and
if
we
start
excluding
and
applying
hundred
percent
all
the
five
criteria,
half
of
the
city
won't
build.
G
G
And
I've
said
that
before
that
the
city
staff
recommendation
is,
is
just
that
it's
a
recommendation.
Ultimately
you
guys,
you
don't
have
to
go
the
way
that
the
city
goes.
You
know
the
the
applicant
has
the
burden
of
providing
the
evidence
to
you
and
you
are
required
to
take
that
evidence
and
to
take
into
account
what
the
city
says
you
can
use.
You
know
them
for
expertise
as
well
and
use
that
to
make
your
own
decision.
G
So
you
know
we've
had
that
conversation
too,
where
just
because
the
city
says
yes
doesn't
mean
that
you
have
to
say.
Yes,
if
you,
if
you
find
that
the
evidence
doesn't
meet
those
criteria
period,
then
you
say
no,
I
mean
you're
legally
bound
to
do
that,
based
on
the
competent
substantial
evidence
presented.
C
G
Well,
the
staff
is
providing
you
with
information
so
that
you
can
make
an
informed
decision
they're,
making
a
recommendation
one
way
based
on
their
expertise.
The
applicant
is
has
the
burden
of
providing
information,
and
then
you
know,
then
you
get
to
take
that
information
and
apply
it
to
the
criteria
and
determine
if
it's
been
sufficient
or
not.
But
this
the
staff
is,
is
there,
for
you
know
to
provide
you
a
recommendation?
You
don't
have
to
go
after
what
that
recommendation
is.
If
you
feel
that
the
applicant
hasn't
provided
sufficient
information.