![youtube image](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/x_eGo27BXmo/mqdefault.jpg)
►
From YouTube: Board of Adjustments February 24, 2021
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
B
C
This
is
a
quasi-judicial
proceeding
where
the
board
of
adjustment
acts
in
a
quasi-judicial
rather
than
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.
C
The
board
may
only
consider
evidence
at
this
hearing
that
the
law
considers
competence,
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
defined
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.
C
D
A
B
E
E
E
This
is
a
look
at
the
proposed
site
plan.
There's
an
existing
single
family
residence
on
the
home
as
well
on
the
property,
as
well
as
an
existing
patio.
The
shed
is
proposed
here
in
the
general
location
shown
in
blue.
The
land
development
code
has
special
standards
for
storage
structures
in
terms
of
setbacks,
as
well
as
size
limitations.
E
Although
the
structure
will
not
meet
the
side
and
rear
setbacks,
it
will
meet
the
size
limitation,
they
are
proposing
a
200
square
foot
shed,
and
that
is
the
maximum
size
that
is
allowed.
The
applicants
indicate
that
the
reduced
setback
is
for
the
purpose
of
preserving
a
mature
oak
tree.
That's
in
this
general
location-
and
I
haven't
shown
here
generally
in
the
green
circle-
this
is
an
image
provided
by
the
applicant
of
the
proposed
location
of
the
new
shed.
F
I
get
a
clarification,
please
could
just
be
a
typo
or
semantics
on
the
three-page
staff
report.
Yes,
the
on
page
one
in
the
development
standards
sentence.
It
says
you
know
the
minimum
five
yard
setback
from
a
side
or
rear
lot
line,
so
I'm
questioning
the
use
of
the
word
or
there
because
then
we
flip
to
page
two
and
in
item
number,
two
under
the
planning
considerations.
F
It
says
a
minimum
five
foot
side
and
rear
yard
setback.
E
G
E
This
is
so
when
we've
been
doing
staff
recommendations.
This
has
been
kind
of
customary
when
we
review
an
application
that
criteria
three
of
strictly
enforced.
They
could
potentially
have
a
smaller
shed
and
meet
the
side
setbacks,
but
we
wanted
to
provide
some
additional
staff
feedback
and
based
on
you
know,
this
is
the
typical
size
of
a
shed
for
other
properties.
There
are
some
limitations
with
topography,
as
well
as
mature
landscaping,
that
kind
of
limits
the
location
of
the
shed.
So
that
was
some
considerations
that
staff
is
providing.
G
My
only
question
is
because
we've
gone
through
this
before
it
gives
a
false
sense
of
security
for
the
person.
That's
applying
that
we
have
flexibility
to
not
strictly
enforce
the
criteria
when
it's
truly
up
to
the
applicant
to
provide
evidence
to
to
change
the
criteria
or
for
us
to
you
know,
have
evidence,
and
when
this
is
written
like
this,
if
I
was
an
app
you
know
the
applicant,
I
would
sit
there
and
be
encouraged
by
what
you're
giving.
E
So
this
is,
I
understand
where
you're
coming
from,
but
when
we
talk
with
applicants
and
we
send
applicant
staff
reports
and
they
are
explained
about
the
process,
they
are
made
aware
that
the
board
of
adjustments
are
the
ones
that
determine
whether
or
not
criteria
is
met
staff.
It
is
customary
for
planning
staff
to
provide
considerations,
some
planning
considerations
for
these
type
of
applications
and
that's
what
we
do.
G
I
hear
what
you're
saying,
because
we
have
gone
through
this
before
I
just
don't
agree
with
it,
and
I
would
like
to
see
if
it's
not
meeting
a
criteria
that
we
have
to
follow.
It
should
be
in
a
denial
and
we
should
be
in
the
position
as
a
board
to
make
that
decision
and
vote
accordingly,
because
this
is
just
not
correct
in
my
opinion.
Now.
You
also
have
another
comment
in
here
that
it
mates
other
sheds
in
the
area.
G
Is
there
beside
the
fact
that
we're
not
supposed
to
be
looking
at
other
sheds
in
the
area?
There's
these
sheds
that
we're
speaking
of
are.
They
also
have
a
a
smaller
setback,
or
are
we
just
talking
about
size
because
to
just
can
make
a
comparison
to
sheds
without
speaking
about
whether
they've
had
variances
or
not?
Is
I
don't
understand
the
comparison.
E
So
when
looking
at
this
application
and
any
application,
we
do
look
at
general
area
just
for
consideration
of
what
they're
asking
for
also
you
know
within
a
residential
zoning,
district
storage
sheds
are
allowed
to
be
up
to
200
square
feet
in
size.
So
when
we
say
this
is
similar
to
other
structures
that
could
be
permitted
within
the
area,
that's
a
consideration
that
we
take
into
account
when
we're
looking
at
these
applications.
E
G
But
those
sheds
could
be
five
foot
setback
and
done
correctly
correct,
correct.
G
E
I
said
we
were
looking
at
you
know
within
a
residential
zoning
district.
The
size
limitation
for
these
types
of
structures
is
200
square
feet,
so
that
was
a
consideration
with
the
application
just
because
they
were
proposing
a
200
square
foot
shed.
You
know
they
weren't
trying
to
exceed
what
was
allowed
elsewhere
in
the
district.
G
A
C
And
you
we've
discussed
this
before
you
know
you
guys
are
sitting
in
a
position
as
acting
as
a
pseudo
judge,
so
the
staff
recommendations
and
the
report
that
comes
to
you
is
going
to
be
from
the
planning
department
based
on
one
like
was
said.
The
evidence
that
was
presented
at
the
time,
but
also
based
on
a
planning
perspective
and
a
planning
background.
So
ultimately-
and
we've
said
this
before,
because
the
the
thing
came
up
about.
Are
we
just
supposed
to
rubber
stamp
the
staff
report?
C
So
to
my
my
point
from
a
legal
perspective
is
those
are
the
type
of
things
that
you're
probably
going
to
want
to
inquire
about
the
applicant
about
and
to
get
some
clarification
so
that,
ultimately,
you
can
make
a
decision
based
on
all
of
the
evidence
that
you
can
gather
so
the
staff
report
in
in
every
community
that
I've
worked
in
in
many
communities
that
I
don't
staff
makes
a
report
and
makes
a
recommendation
and
a
lot
of
times.
It's
not
accepted
by
the
board
because
you
are
bound
by
the
criteria.
C
Staff
is
not
necessarily
bound
by
the
criteria
they're
just
comparing
what
they
have
against
the
criteria
and
saying
why
they
think
it
does
or
doesn't
fit.
Ultimately,
that's
your
decision,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
you
know
we've
made
that
clarification
before
and
so
you
know
staff
is
staff
they're,
a
rep
they're,
a
party
right.
I
represent
you
guys
they're
a
party
to
this,
the
applicant's
a
party
to
this,
and
ultimately
you
make
the
decision
so.
G
A
Emphasis
on
the
pseudo
judge
so
along
the
lines
of
what
mr
eisner
just
said,
even
though
it
may
not
be
applicable
directly.
I'm
looking
at
the
photograph
proposed
location
of
new
shed
and
I
see
the
large
elder
tree
so
my
question
for
the
city
staff.
Is
that
a
shed
that
looks
like
it's
about
a
foot
from
the
fence.
E
H
A
I
My
name
is
jeff
knuckles,
643
bay,
shore
drive
and
tarpon
springs,
and
actually
the
shed's
going
to
be
1600
square
feet
because
I
still
don't
have
enough
room
to
build
a
10
by
20..
So
I
just
put
that
in
there
as
because
I
wasn't
quite
sure
how
big
I
could
make
it,
like.
I
You
said:
there's
a
shed
right
next
to
this
one,
that's
about
eight
inches
from
the
fence
from
the
property
line
and
as
I
drive
around
the
neighborhood,
I
look
at
several
different
sheds
that
are
built
on
or
near
the
property
line.
I
So
a
lot
of
them
are
probably
before
this
ordinance
was
taking
effect,
I'm
not
sure,
but
we've
lived
in
the
house
for
about
a
year
and
I'm
moving
from
colorado
where
I've
got
about
a
4,
000
square
foot,
barn
and
I'm
trying
to
bring
as
much
of
my
tools
and
stuff
as
I
can
and
that's
one
reason.
The
other
reason
is
my
wife
said:
if
I
don't
build
something
and
get
out
of
the
house
we're
in
trouble.
So
that's
why
the
shed's
going
to
be
hopefully
built
and
I'll
answer
any
questions
you
have.
F
I
have
a
question
so
thank
you
very
much
for
coming
tonight,
sir.
Oh
thank.
I
F
So
could
you
clarify
for
me
because,
as
was
noted
in
the
application,
the
application
is
for
a
10
foot
by
20
foot
shed,
but
then
you,
just
you
verbally
said
something
a
little
different
like
your
plans
are,
have
been
modified.
Since
can
you
clarify
that
please
well.
I
F
Okay,
and
with
that
10
foot
by
16
foot,
are
you
still
going
to
be
in
need
of
the
two
and
a
half
foot
variants
on
both
the
front
and
the
side,
even
with
the
reduction
in
the
size
of
the
shed.
I
Yeah,
that's
the
problem
like
without
the
without
the
reduction
in
the
very
on
the
setback.
I
couldn't
even
it'd
be
a
seven
and
a
half
foot
by
that
14
and
a
half
feet
or
13
and
a
half
feet
so.
I
Which
limits
the
use
of
it
and
and
the
other
thing
is,
if
you
look
at
those
photographs,
my
neighbor
to
the
rear
has
a
huge
hedge
of
fishtail
palms
that
completely
hide
the
property
in
the
shed
and
the
next
next
door.
Neighbor
has
a
shed
that
will
hide
mine
and,
across
the
front,
I'm
going
to
put
a
gate
on
the
existing
fence
there.
So
it
won't
be
visible
from
pretty
much
anywhere.
F
All
right,
thank
you
for
the
size
clarification,
and
can
you
maybe
elaborate
on
why
the
shed
could
not
be
located
on
the?
What
would
that
be
the
north
west
corner
of
the
property?
This
you
know
when
we're
looking
at
the
drawing.
What
what's
the
topographical
challenges
that
you
were
facing
on
that
side.
I
I
G
Yes,
thank
you
also
for
coming
in.
I
have
to
follow
up
with
a
question,
I'm
looking
at
the
photographs
and
you
have
the
proposed
location
of
the
new
shed,
so
I
presume
that's
up
against
a
pvc
fence
with
another
shed.
That's
up
close
as
well.
Yes,.
G
It
kind
of
looks
like
your
neighbor's.
Roof
is
overhanging
the
fence.
G
G
So
miss
turner
asked
about
the
other
side
of
the
property,
and
you
said
you
had
trees
that
were
blocking
it.
Was
it
possible?
You
could
let
us
know
where
these
trees
were
and
what
the
open
area
is,
because
I
understand
the
fact
that
you
prefer
to
have
it
where
it's
out
of
out
of
the
way,
but
you
might
be
able
to
build
something
larger
on
the
other
side,.
I
And
it's
also
has
like
five
mature
pine
trees
that
are
in
that
corner
back
there.
G
I
Well,
visual
and
being
a
good
neighbor
and
and
the
in
the
trees
I
mean,
I
have
to
take
out
four
large
pine
trees.
G
I
G
I
There's
we're
not
setting
a
precedent
because,
as
I
drive
around
the
neighborhood,
like
I
said,
there's
several
sheds
that
are
either
built
on
the
property
line
or
really
close
to
it.
So
I
don't
know
if
they
were
done
before
this
ordinance
came
into
effect.
I
don't
know
it's
something.
That's
pretty
prevalent
in
the
neighborhood.
G
No,
no,
I
didn't
say
you
did
believe
me,
I'm
just
saying
when
you're
making
a
comparison
of
that
yep
people
do
things
that
measure
the
city
doesn't
see,
but
when
they
do
find
it
out,
they
make
you
remove
it
and
bring
it
into
code.
I
J
D
Just
a
clarifying
question-
and
I
think
this
will
help
mr
eisner-
maybe
this
picture
that
we
were
given.
Where
is
your
property
line
on
this
picture?
Is
it
at
the
tree,
because
you
know
you
had
said
that
it
was
open,
so
I'm
assuming
some
of
that
open
space
that
we're
looking
at
is
your
neighbor's
property.
Is
that
correct.
F
And
sir,
I
don't
know
if
you
which
that's
a
good
point,
miss
rich.
If
you
see
that
picture
gosh,
the
best
way
for
me
to
describe
it
is,
it
looks
like
there's
almost
like
a
little,
what
two
three
foot
little
scrub,
something
or
other
in
that
picture,
I'm
just
trying
to
find
out
like
where
roundabout
your
property
line
might
be.
F
I
F
G
Side
of
it,
then
I
have
another
question:
please
we
have
this
drawing
and
on
as
I'm
looking
at
it.
G
I
There's
a
15
foot,
patio
behind
the
house
and
then
there's
a
hot
tub,
that's
behind
the
house,
and
so
if
I
were
to
build
a
shed
in
the
backyard
well,
first
of
all,
be
I
wouldn't
do
that
anyway,
because
it
obstruct
our
our
view
from
the
patio
and
then
the
second
part
is,
if
I
did,
the
five
foot
setback
in
a
10
foot
shed,
there
would
be
no.
The
shed
would
be
right
up
against
the
patio
and
there's,
like
I
said,
there's
a
hot
tub
in
that
area
anyway,.
G
I'm
still
not
following
because
I
didn't
I
wasn't
meeting
behind
the
house.
Oh,
I
was
meaning
to
the
northwest
corner
that
looks
completely
open.
It's
in
the
same
exact,
similar
inspect
in
in
in
specifications
it's
four
times
the
size
of
the
shed
you're
building.
D
F
Those
pine
trees
would
be
kind
of
round
about
where
the
you
know
you
see
on
on
this,
the
drawing
picture
about
like
if
we
wanted
to
reference
like
the
numbers
here,
that's
written
like
the
17.6
versus
where
the
heck
are
these
pine
trees
in
this
drawing
drawing,
I
think,
would
help.
E
I
G
I
A
B
A
D
I'm
still
struggling
with
when
you
said
that
the
new
plan
is
reduced,
that
you
know
due
to
the
new
measurements.
I
D
I
D
A
I
D
A
J
Yes,
what
it
says
lot
12
over
mature
oak
tree,
can't
you
put
the
shed
on
the
side
of
the
house
at
that
spot
rather
closer
to
the
oak
tree,
where
you
have
it
in
a
corner,
and
that
will
give
you
all
the
size
you
want.
I
A
No,
they
put
the
green
dot
if
you
could
put
that
slide
back
up
with
the
drawing
the
green
dot
is
there
and
that
will
show
what
mr
boris
is
referring
to,
where
the
words
mature
oak
tree
are
written.
He
is
saying
in
that
rectangle.
Could
you
put
something-
and
I
believe
the
applicant
is
saying:
no-
there
are
more
trees
involved.
C
G
Let
me
just
throw
out
my
final
hail,
mary,
that's
where
I
am
very
struggling,
or
is
that
I
can
appreciate
that
you're
coming
from
a
larger
area
in
a
larger
state
with
more
area
more
land,
but
we
have
kind
of
restrictions
here
to
what
size
you
can
put
in
the
in
the
area
of
a
house
of
what
you
bought.
G
It's
it's
almost
like
you're,
and
forgive
me
for
saying
this,
but
you
had
to
know
when
you,
if
you
bought
a
house
that
had
two
bedrooms
and
you
needed
four
you're
now
saying
that
you
need
to
do
something
different
to
make
it
a
four
bedroom,
so
you're
kind
of
coming
in
here
and
asking
us
to
lean
on
setbacks,
one
because
there
are
others
in
the
area
that
may
or
may
not
be
legal
but
we'd
be
breaking
our
rules
to
you
know
to
give
you
authority
to
it
and
two
to
avoid
our
setbacks,
because
you've
brought
a
a
property.
G
I
G
When
we
do
grant
a
variance,
it's
not
a
variance
just
for
you,
it
would
stay
with
the
property
for
you
and
thereafter.
So
we
have
to
consider
that
when
we
do
that
and
that's
why
we're
asking
these
kinds
of
questions,
I
get
that.
So
it's
not
that
we
can
sit
up
here
and
just
you
know,
because
we
have
a
power
to
do
it
if
you're
forced
with
no
other
choice
and
it's
something
that
hinders
your
well-being.
And
you
know
that's
what
we
kind
of
make
decisions
on
sheds.
G
G
I
Well,
the
when
I,
when
we
purchased
a
house
about
a
year
ago,
bottled
out
of
foreclosure,
it
was
in
pretty
bad
shape
and
we've
been
redoing
it
ever
since,
and
my
plan
was
to
keep
my
place
in
colorado
and
have
this
place,
and
I
would
probably
wouldn't
need
to
do
this.
But
for
some
health
reasons
I've
been
told
I
need
to
get
down
to
the
altitude,
and
so
that's
what
that's.
What's
going
on.
C
H
Deborah
cunningham
643
bayshore
drive.
I
just
wanted
to
address
what
you're
saying
is
because
when
we
were
driving
around
looking
for
homes,
we
knew
there
wasn't
an
hoa
there,
but
we
do
obviously
the
city
where
the
town
had
restrictions,
but
you
know,
because
we
visually
saw
that
the
neighbor
literally
directly
next
to
us,
with
like
a
foot
between
his
fence
and
his
shed,
which
is
our
lat
line.
We
just
assumed
that
there
wasn't
going
to
be
an
issue
with
that.
H
To
be
honest,
you
know
we
knew
we
wanted
to
do
a
shed
at
some
point.
We
just
didn't
really
think
there
was
going
to
be
a
problem.
So
that's
really
all
I
had
to
say
about
it,
but
I
was
trying
to
address
what
you
were
saying.
True.
G
Well,
just
so
I
could
let
you
know.
I've
been
on
the
board
approximately
six
years
and
what
you
just
said
is
one
of
the
reasons
why
we
can't
do
that,
because
we
do
have
people
that
come
in
and
they
do
make
statements
about
things
that
have
done
when
I
wasn't
even
on
here
or
other
people
weren't
on
here,
and
it
does
cause
confusion.
G
There
are
people
that
buy
lots
and
then
they
decide
to
do
something
with
it
and
realize
that
they
have
an
issue
and
it
comes
down
to
asking
all
those
questions
beforehand.
You
know.
A
C
C
So-
and
I
know
this
is
one-
that's
come
up
before
it's,
and
this
is
your
determination
whether
or
not
you
believe
I
know
you
had
mentioned
something
that
triggered
something,
which
is
why
I
want
to
clarify.
You
have
a
house
on
the
property:
a
shed
is
a
luxury,
so
number
three
goes
to
legally
conforming
buildings
or
other
structures.
C
So
it's
not
necessarily
that
can
you
have
a
shed
or
not
because
of
the
setbacks,
but
is
it
a
reasonable
use
of
the
property
in
general
and
that
would
go
to
like
swimming
pools
and
things
like
that?
You
know
so
and
that's
those
are
things
that
have
come
before
you
before.
So
I
I
just
say
that
to
clarify
the
criteria.
C
Because
what
you
the
thing
that
you
had
stated,
you
know
I
am
legal
counsel,
so
I
see
things
from
a
legal
perspective.
So
what
you
said
wasn't
exactly
correct,
because
it's
not
that
the
the
house
can't
have
a
shed.
It's
that
the
structure
or
the
accessory
structures
are
not.
The
enforcement
of
the
code
would
not
provide
them
reasonable
use
of
the
property
as
a
whole,
so
the
topographical
areas,
the
property
in
conjunction
with
the
structures
and
accessory
structures
that
are
located
or
going
to
be
located
on
the
property.
A
Seeing
none
we're
gonna
go
for
a
motion.
J
A
A
It
and
discussion
on
that
just
a
moment
that
we've
got
a
revised
set
here.
So
what
was
sent
in
the
thing
just
everybody
know
that
it's
been
oh
corrected.
G
Well,
there
was
something
wrong
in
the
please:
let's
hear
about
it,
on
the
variance
to
increase
the
maximum
fence
height,
there's
five
yeses.
I
voted
no.
D
D
A
A
So
then
we're
gonna
go
to
with
the
corrections.
You'll.
Add
that
to
your
motion
I
suspect,
and
the
second
right
roll
call
on
approval
of
minutes.
Please.
J
A
Really
do
we
have
any
meetings
scheduled
for
next
month?
I.
A
So
we'll
have
a
march
meeting,
we
do
have
spreading.
A
A
C
A
Okay,
how
about
with
zoom
meetings
we
had
done
a
few?
C
C
A
C
A
C
What
I
just
said
is
correct
the
board
of
adjustment
meetings
that
were
held
to
the
extent
that
the
governor
had
suspended
the
physical
quorum
requirement.
Yes,
and-
and
I'm
I'm
going
to
answer
my
answer-
your
questions
within
the
confines
of
my
role
as
representing
the
board
of
adjustment.
So
of
course,.
F
Is
that
the
governor's
suspension
of
the
physical
location
requirement?
Is
that
still,
in
effect,
it.
C
Was
not
a
physical
location
requirement,
it
was
a
physical
quorum
requirement:
physical
quorum.
Okay.
I
believe
that
that
that
specific
executive
order
expired
on
november
1st,
but
there
are
exceptions
to
that
expiration
in
light
of
covid
and
the
state
of
emergency
that
had
been
declared.
C
C
You
know
there
are
different
requirements
for
different
boards,
but
for
this
board
I
would
say
that
the
physical
quorum
requirement
is
in
place,
but
there
are
some
exceptions
to
say
if
we
had
someone
who
had
been
exposed
to
covid
and
was
quarantining-
and
there
was
still
physical
quorum-
that
person
appearing
by
zoom.
That
would
be
acceptable
underneath
the
the
governor's
orders
and
underneath
the
state
statute.
F
F
Well,
that's
helpful,
just
as
we
are
optimistic
that
we'll
be
able
to
travel
again
in
the
future
if
our
plans
coincided
with
the
board
meeting.
C
F
C
The
exceptions
that
were
contained
within
the
executive
order
and
the
expiration
thereof
were
related
to
higher
risk
members
of
society
or
those
who
had
been
exposed
to
covid
or
were
concerned
with
exposure
to
covid
those
types
of
things.
Okay,
seniors
or
those
that
had
autoimmune
deficiencies
or
other
things
like
that,
and
you
know
then
there's
hippa
concerns
as
well.
So
right.
A
So,
just
to
be
super
clear
if
there
were
three
people
and
and
only
three
out
of
the
seven
of
us
that
are
on
this
board,
plus
the
alternates,
you
know,
if
one
of
them
were
sick,
they
could
appear
by
zoom
to
have
a
three-person
quorum.
A
Fascinating,
thank
you
very
much,
and
I
would
like
to
specific
to
this
board
again,
of
course,
not
vice
mayor,
but
vice
chair.
Do
you
have
any
board
comments.
J
G
So
I
have
a
question:
how
can
we
rectify
not
writing
acceptances
and
denials?
You
know
writing
them
according
to
what
the
criteria
says
so
that
we
don't
have
this
in
the
future.
C
I'm
going
to
field
that
that's
just
like
an
applicant
coming
to
to
a
meeting
and
and
saying
what
they're
going
to
say,
staff
is
going
to
say
what
they're
going
to
say.
We,
the
board,
can't
really
give
any
direction
to
staff
on
how
they
need
to
prepare
their
staff
reports.
What
needs
to
be
included.
What
doesn't
need
to
be
included
because
remember
they're,
a
party
to
this
action.
C
It's
the
city,
staff
represents
the
city,
you
are
an
independent
board
and
the
applicant
rents
represents
themselves
if
you
find
what
the
staff
has
done
is
insufficient
to
amount
to
the
evidence
and
the
recommendation
is
flawed.
That's
that's
your
decision
right
and
so
that's
that's
exactly
why
you're
in
the
position
that
you're
in
the
position
and
and
tonight
I
will
tell
you
tonight's
meeting-
was
I
I
enjoyed
it-
I
always
enjoy
coming
here.
You.
C
It
was
yeah,
look,
I'm
a
law
nerd,
but
I
will
say
tonight
was
it
was
a
good
debate.
It
was
good
questions,
it
was
it
was
it
was.
It
was
what
board
of
adjustment
meetings
look
like
because
you're
seeing
two
oppo
two
sides
and
then
you're
the
arbiter
right
and
sometimes
those
two
sides
agree
and
then,
as
the
arbiter.
You
also
agree
based
on
the
evidence
that's
presented.
G
Let
me
let
me
capitalize
off
what
you
said.
We
did
have
a
case
here
that
came
before
this
board
and
the
person's
only
reason
for
coming
in
and
making
the
declaration
was
that
he
was
told
by
staff
that
this
would
be
approved.
C
G
C
That's
the
evidence
that
you
have
to
consider
and
if
that,
if
that
is
in
fact
what
staff
did,
then
that
is
in
fact
what
staff
did
and
that's
what
you
have
to
consider.
That's
that's
not
the
purview
of
this
board
right.
If,
as
a
citizen,
you
have
a
concern
with
that,
then
those
concerns
should
be
directed
to
those
people
in
positions
that
can
govern
staff
and
make
those
changes
if
necessary.
G
I
I
know
I
don't
have
that,
and
I
don't
want
that,
but
what
I
will
also
do,
then
in
each
and
every
time
that
it's
an
what
I
would
call
an
override
I'm
going
to
make
mention
about
it.
C
And
I
and
that's
exactly
the
point
right
is
you're
supposed
to
bring
out
those
inconsistencies
or
what
you
feel
are
different
from
the
criteria,
because
that's
your
job,
so
I
I
don't
and
I
apologize
if
I
came
off
as
saying
or
made
it
feel
like
I
was
you
were
getting.
I
was
getting
defensive
against
you.
I
was
saying
I
think,
that's
a
really
good
point.
I
just
wanted
to
make
clarifying
comments
for
the
record
from
a
legal
perspective
of
some
of
the
nuances.
E
C
G
So
I
have
one
other
thing,
then:
would
it
be
possible
to
have
drawings
that
show
all
of
the
items
that
are
on
the
schematic
of
the
plans?
We
have,
whether
it
be
a
tree
or
slopes
or
to
have
a
better
idea,
so
that
we're
not
asking
these
questions
that
are.
C
That's
what
if
staff
is
going
to
bring
that
to
the
table
again,
that's
whether
or
not
their
report
includes
that
is
going
to
be
whether
or
not
they
choose
to
include
that
or
not.
If
you
would
like
to
see
those
types
of
things
in
the
future,
then
perhaps
maybe
staff
will
include
them,
but
maybe
that's
not.
C
A
K
Not
do
your
homework
so
in
in
ending
this
this
beautiful
discussion,
all
I
wanted.
G
A
C
The
time
in
the
world,
mr
eisner
and
and
mr
eisner,
I
do
not
disagree
with
you,
but
ultimately
then
that
means
you
are
dictating
to
the
applicant
what
they
are
supposed
to
be
presenting
to
you
and
you're
functionally
arguing
their
case
for
them,
and
if
they
don't
have
that
then
you're
fighting
against
them.
It's
it's
the
the
burden
and
the
onus
is
on
them.
The
fact
that
staff
provides
you
with
any
of
this
information
is
fantastic
because
you
have
more
than
what
an
applicant
might
necessarily
give
you.
C
So
I
mean
you,
you
get
application
applications
in
here
from
sophisticated
developers
that
give
you
schematics
and
site
plans
and
down
to
it
a
minute
detail
and
that's
fantastic,
and
then
you
get
the
guy
who
just
wants
to
build
a
shed
in
his
backyard
and
you're
wet
lucky.
If
you
get
a
hand
sketch
drawing
it's
it's
gonna,
it
does
depend
on
the
sophistication
of
the
applicant,
but
ultimately
everybody
gets
treated
the
same
equal
protection
under
the
law.
A
So,
in
closing,
I
would
just
like
to
say
to
those
that
are
interested
in
item
number
22
that
was
removed
from
the
agenda
at
the
boc
yesterday.