![youtube image](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/4_YqnGcYKVk/mqdefault.jpg)
►
From YouTube: Board of Adjustments September 27, 2023
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
D
A
F
A
B
Matters
before
the
city
of
Tarpon,
Springs
Board
of
adjustment
are
quasi-judicial
in
nature
and
a
quasi-judicial
procedure
preceding
a
board's
function
is
to
make
findings
a
fact,
based
upon
evidence
presented
at
the
hearing
and
apply
those
findings
of
fact
to
previously
established
criteria
contained
in
the
city
of
Tarpon
Springs
code
of
ordinances.
This
is
a
legal
decision
regarding
the
application
before
the
board.
The
board
may
only
consider
evidence
that
the
law
considers
competent,
substantial
and
relevant
to
the
issues
arising
from
the
application
and
the
applicable
code
sections.
B
If
the
evidence
demonstrates
that
the
applicant
meets
the
criteria
contained
in
the
code
of
ordinances,
then
the
board
is
required
by
law
to
approve
the
application.
If
the
evidence
demonstrates
that
the
applicant
does
not
meet
the
criteria
in
the
code,
then
the
board
is
required
to
deny
the
application
any
and
all
persons
providing
testimony
at
this
hearing
are
required
to
do
so
under
oath.
All
persons
testifying
at
this
hearing
must
give
their
name
address
and
must
indicate
whether
or
not
they
have
been
sworn
for
the
record
prior
to
proceeding
with
their
testimony.
B
F
All
right,
I'll,
finish
up
all
testimony
and
questioning
at
this
hearing
must
have
just
matters
that
are
relevant
and
material
to
the
issues
under
consideration,
based
on
the
criteria
contained
in
the
city's
code
of
ordinances.
Any
board
members
who
have
disclosures,
such
as
ex
parte
Communications
or
conflicts
of
interest,
placemaker
disclosures
at
the
beginning
of
the
hearing.
The
following
is
the
established
procedure,
which
will
be
followed
at
today's
quasi-judicial
hearing.
First,
the
chairperson
will
announce
the
case.
F
Then
planning
and
zoning
department
staff
will
present
a
statement
of
the
case
and
the
applicant
and
the
board
members
will
have
the
opportunity
to
ask
questions
of
Staff.
Then
the
applicant,
or
the
applicant's
agent
or
attorney
will
have
the
opportunity
to
present
additional
information
on
the
applicant's
case.
F
Then
the
applicant
will
be
questioned
by
the
board
and
staff
public
comments
and
favor
and
against
the
application,
will
then
be
considered,
and
then
staff
and
the
applicant
will
be
given
the
opportunity
for
rebuttal
before
the
public
hearing
is
closed
and
the
board
deliberates
on
the
matter
at
this
time.
Anybody
who's
going
to
speak
at
this
hearing.
Please
stand
and
raise
your
right
hand.
A
B
B
The
applicants
are
here
today
requesting
variance
approval
to
allow
them
to
construct
an
eight
foot
tall
privacy
fence
in
their
side
yard,
where
the
maximum
height
allowed
in
residential
districts
is
six
feet.
Foreign.
This
is
an
aerial
photograph
of
the
subject
property.
The
applicants
are
proposing
to
construct
the
fence
along
the
east
side,
property
line
in
the
area
outlined
in
red
and
again
they're
proposing
a
height
of
eight
feet.
B
The
next
few
slides
is
a
couple
pictures
provided
by
the
applicant
to
give
you
some
reference
of
the
property.
The
first
one
I
pulled
from
our
online
podometry,
just
to
show
you
again
that
dense
tree
buffer,
that
was
along
this
side,
property
line
that
has
now
been
removed.
The
opponent
indicated
that
they
had
some
maintenance
issues
and
once
the
pool
and
the
fence
are
constructed,
it
will
make
it
difficult
to
maintain
that
true
buffer.
The
photo
here
provided
by
the
applicant
on
the
right
hand,
side
shows
what
it
looks
like
now.
B
B
This
is
a
picture
provided
by
the
applicant
of
one
of
the
neighbor's
properties.
Another
reason
why
the
applicant
is
requesting
a
taller
fence
is
their
neighbors
have
elevated
decks,
so
the
two
feet
provides
additional
privacy.
Staff
does
recognize
that
the
adjacent
properties
do
have
elevated
decks,
but
just
for
note,
the
elevation
and
the
actual
Topography
of
the
ground
is
relatively
similar
between
the
subject
property
and
their
neighbors.
B
The
last
thing
I
just
wanted
to
point
out
as
well,
is,
as
you
notice,
I,
have
the
fence
highlighted
back
at
this
portion.
Staff
just
wants
to
make
the
board
aware
that
we
do
have
a
recommended
condition
if
the
board
chooses
to
approve
the
request
that
the
fence
must
still
comply
with
all
front
yard
fence
requirements
which
would
basically
be
25
feet
back
from
this
front
property
line.
They
cannot
exceed
four
feet
in
height
and
they
also
would
have
to
comply
with
any
sort
of
site
visibility
triangle.
So
we
just
want
to
reinforce
that.
B
B
Don't
believe
the
fence
is
there
I
think
this
is
when
the
trees
were
still
still
there.
This
picture
here
shows
a
fence
and
I'll.
Just
sorry,
I'll
defer
the
applicant
I
believe
that
they
may
have
put
this
fence
in
when
the
trees
were
removed,
but
I'll.
Let
them
give
you
some
details
about
the
history
of
that.
D
The
the
deck
that
was
in
the
other
other
picture
is
that
the
applicants
that
are
the
neighbors
Deck.
B
Yeah
and
just
for
some
clarity
too
looking
at
the
site,
this
is
the
side
yard
of
the
subject
property
and
you
can
see
that
there's
two
neighbors
rear
yards
that
kind
of
butt
up
to
the
back.
A
G
A
G
A
Is
there
any
additional
information
that
you
would
like
to
provide
for
us
this
evening?
Yes,.
G
So
one
of
the
reasons
we
tore
down
the
fishtails
we
planted
them
when
we
built
the
house
for
a
buffer
and
some
privacy,
our
kids
were
still
young
when
we
built
a
home,
so
we
weren't
thinking
about
pools
now
they're
older,
we're
thinking
about
putting
a
pool.
In
two
years
ago
we
had
a
a
raccoon
and
Palm
rats
and
fade
invade
our
attic.
It
cost
us
over
six
thousand
dollars
to
get
them
removed
and
try
to
patch
up
whatever
damage
they
did.
G
So
removing
the
trees
was
kind
of
happened
regardless
if
the
pool
was
going
in
or
not
right,
because
we
just
don't
want
animals
in
our
attic,
both
neighbors
I
spoke
to
both
of
them.
One
of
them
is
here:
they
both
need
want
the
Privacy
just
by
walking
out
your
back
door
you're
looking
at
everybody's,
whatever
they're
doing.
If
they're
standing
on
our
patio,
you
can
see
right
into
their
home
and
everything
else.
G
G
A
G
B
A
It's
the
looks
like
the
schematics
from
the
pool
company.
B
Yeah
the
picture
that
you're
referring
to
the
applicant
provided
the
plan
for
their
pool
that
they're
installing
on
the
property
and
that
did
go
through
permitting
and
has
been
approved.
A
D
A
Okay
hold
tight,
we
might
come
and
ask
you
some
more
questions,
but
in
the
meantime,
is
there
anyone
present
who
would
like
to
speak
either
in
favor
or
opposition
to
this
application.
I
Good
evening
my
name
is
Jeff
knuckles
I
live
at
643,
Bayshore
Drive
in
Tarpon,
Springs
and
I
have
been
sworn
in,
and
I
wrote
a
letter
in
support
of
this
fence
thing,
but
I'll
just
go
ahead
and
read
it.
If
it's
all
right,
save
me
from
ad
living,
my
name
is
Jeff
Knuckles,
my
wife,
Deborah
and
I
are
the
neighbors
to
the
northeast
of
Pete's
house.
We
are
in
I
can't
pronounce
his
last
name.
The
reason
I
call
him.
I
We
are
in
total
agreement
with
the
petition
to
install
an
eight
foot
fence
along
our
mutual
property
lines.
When
we
purchased
our
home
three
years
ago,
there
was
a
very
tall
dense
tree
line
that
you
could
see,
so
we
really
didn't
Envision
it
being
removed
because
it
was
such
a
great
privacy
area,
but
I
totally
understand
why
he
wants
to
do
that
to
build
a
pool
and
and
clean
up
the
because
it
was
pretty
messy.
I
I
I'm
going
to
skip
the
part
about
this.
This,
like
I,
said
reality,
doesn't
equal
regulations
sometimes
if
he
were
to
build
the
front
25
feet
of
regulations
on
a
four
foot
fence
it'd
be
up
against
a
six
foot
fence.
So
that
makes
no
sense
at
all
to
to
do
that,
but
evidently
he's
not
going
to
do
that.
So
I'm
not
going
to
worry
about
that
planning.
I
A
hedge,
like
planning
staff
had
recommended
would
take
years
to
grow
up
to
do
any
good
and
plus
he
had
the
same
problem
with
maintenance
that
he
has
now
and
I'd
like
to
be
able
to
keep
our
drapes
open
and
our
windows
open.
So
we
can
see
the
stars
in
the
beautiful
sunsets
and
that's
all
I
have
to
say
so.
Thank
you.
J
J
I
Echo.
This
gentleman's
comments
that
defense
height
could
be
raised
because
the
houses
have
to
be
raised
up
to
meet
current
codes.
So
by
allowing
only
a
six
foot
high
fence,
he
is
correct.
It
seems
like
we're
losing
our
privacy
I
think.
If
the
houses
have
to
be
raised,
it
would
be
beneficial
to
raise
the
height
of
the
fence
as
well.
So
we
support
the
gentleman's
request
for
a
variance
and
that's
all
I
want
to
say.
I
didn't
write
a
letter,
but
I
do
I,
do
support
it
and
I
think
it
makes
sense.
J
J
K
Just
have
a
question
again
for
staff:
the
city
requires
some
of
the
new
construction.
If
it's
in
flood
areas
to
be
raised,
is
there
anywhere
in
the
codes
that
does
address
fencing
when
the
city
permits
raise
property?
No.
B
K
K
All
five,
because
in
this
case
you
know,
I
I
certainly
agree
with
the
testimony.
That's
been
shared
and
I
can
see
this
as
an
ongoing
issue
throughout
the
city,
as
we
have
raised
properties,
but
our
position
when
we're
looking
at
the
current
codes
and
the
legal
aspects,
the
the
criteria
is
pretty
clear
and
I,
don't
see
it
meeting
some
of
the
criteria
and
so
I,
don't
I
won't
be
able
to
support
it,
but
I
I
wish
there
was
a
way
in
the
future
to
be
able
to
address
this
for
future.
K
E
Does
this
raise
in
a
two
feed
extra,
have
any
safety
issues
involved
with
that.
B
I
I,
don't
I,
don't
believe
so
I
mean
I,
don't
necessarily
do
any
sort
of
inspections,
that's
more
the
billion
departments
per
view,
but
I.
Don't
necessarily
think
that
in
a
taller
fence
would
create
any
additional
safety
concerns.
K
B
Yeah
and
just
and
just
in
general
fences
require
permits,
I
would
say,
even
if
they
did
the
an
extension
on
the
existing
fence.
That
would
still
probably
require
a
permit
for
review
and,
like
I
said,
the
building
department
does
do
inspections
of
those.
A
Question
realizing
you
know,
like
Miss
rich
said,
we
are
constrained
by
the
criteria,
one
through
five,
as
we
always
have
in
front
of
us
and
the
unique
nature
of,
as
she
said,
the
increase
the
elevation
changes
that
we're
seeing,
but
the
code
requirements
of
the
fencing
not
being
aligned
with
that.
Are
you
seeing
officially
permitted
or
not
higher
fences,
and
these
kinds
of
situations
are
we
facing
this
in
other
similar
areas
in
the.
B
City,
so
I
have
not
directly
experienced
that
particular
request.
I
know
we
do
have
people
that
inquire
about
taller
fences,
whether
it's
because
of
their
elevated
structure
or
not
I
can't
say
that
that's
the
reason,
but
you
know,
as
we
continue
to
develop,
we
have
more
stringent
FEMA
requirements,
so
it
potentially
could
be
something
that
comes
up
in
the
future,
but
I
haven't
dealt
with
it
yet.
D
So
question
for
staff:
you
have
recommended
the
Nile
based
on
code
and
it's
this
situation
is
here
before
us
tonight,
because
I'm
assuming
we
can
vote
one
way
or
another
and
I
think
part
of
what
we
need
to
do
is
apply
our
thought,
processes
and
common
sense
to
this.
And
if
we
were
to
vote
to
approve
it,
you
know
based
upon
the
lower
fence
being
on
the
first
25
foot.
Are
we
allowed
to
do
that.
F
So
what
you
would
be
doing,
if
you
found
for
an
approval,
as
you
would
be
saying
that
they
have
met
that
criteria?
What
staff
lays
out
here
are
provisional
findings,
it's
just
a
recommendation
based
on
their
review.
If
you
feel
the
testimony
and
evidence
that's
been
brought
before,
you
shows
that
they
have
otherwise
met
the
criteria,
you
can
make
that
finding
and
approve
it.
With
the
subject:
exclusion
of
that
front
25
feet,
there
was
one,
the
very
last
one,
the
fifth
one
where
staff
did
recommend
a
finding
that
that
has
been
met.
F
The
fact
that
it
was
plotted
so
that
this
particular
parcel
has
two
backyards.
On
that
same
side,
that
could
be
construed
as
unique
for
two,
whether
or
not
it's
been
self-created.
Well,
certainly,
they
didn't
plant
the
property
yeah,
but
that
depends
on
your
review
and
your
findings
of
the
facts
and
evidence
that
have
been
presented
in
this
hearing
and
how
you're
going
to
apply
them
to
these
five
criteria.
That's
your
purview
as
those
findings,
a
fact.
D
I,
haven't
okay,
so
yeah,
so
I
have
a
thought
on
that.
So
I
think
it
has
been
met
because
in
one
of
the
letters
and
the
testimony
that
the
property
had
to
be
raised
up
three
feet,
so
they're
basically
standing
three
feet
high,
instead
of
just
on
the
ground.
So
I
think
that
the
that
standard
has
been
met.
D
Physical
surrounding
topographic,
topographical
conditions
are
not
every
home
in
that
neighborhood
has
that
elevated,
so
most
of
the
homes
are
that
six
foot
would
be
at
six
foot,
so
this
home
doesn't
I
think
that
one
has
been
met.
My
opinion
I.
B
Does
the
the
variance
apply
to
the
entire
property
it'd
be
specific
to
what
they're
requesting,
so
it
would
just
be
along
the
east
property
line,
so
essentially
from
the
front
corner
of
the
house
to
the
back
is
what
they're
requesting.
F
Technically,
the
code
applies
to
the
entire
fence
around
the
property.
Yes,
the
I
know
based
on
what
staff
testified
to.
There
is
concern
about
the
site
triangle
on
the
front
corner
by
the
road,
which
is
part
of
the
reason
they
were
specifically
looking
to
limit
it
and
then
also
too,
because
of
the
criteria
that
you
have.
That
says
it's
the
minimum
variance
required
for
for
what
they
want
to
do,
and
so
that's
why
it's.
H
H
H
E
H
H
A
Potentially
be
adapted
yes
for
for
such
need.
I
do
agree
with
this
with
that
point,
so
not
everything
catching
up,
but
as
much
Miss
rich
said,
we're
in
the
interpretation
position,
unfortunately
not
to
make
or
change
the
rules
that
we
may
believe.
A
J
K
A
All
right,
I,
I
agree
it
it's
a
struggle
and
that's
where
it's
the
literal
versus
the
human
and
in
doing
that,
quick
rundown
for
the
benefit
of
others
present.
Where
number
two
is
the
conditions
or
special
circumstances,
particular
to
the
property,
have
not
been
self-created
or
resulted
from
an
action
by
the
applicant
or
with
prior
knowledge
or
approval
of
the
applicant,
so
I
appreciate
and
can
respect
where
he
attempted
to
plant
those
fishtail
palms
and
I.
H
H
A
Not
being
number
three
is
that
little
literal
enforcement
of
the
requirements
of
the
city
of
Tarpon,
Springs,
comprehensive,
Land
Development
code
would
have
the
effect
of
denying
the
applicant
of
reasonable
use
of
property
or
legally
conforming
buildings
or
other
structures
which
I'm
assuming
that
could
be
the
pool
and
the
requested
variance
is
the
minimum
variance
that
will
make
possible
the
reasonable
use
of
the
property.
A
A
Can
they
enjoy
their
pool?
Yes,
does
everyone
around
them
want
to
hear
and
see
them
enjoying
their
pool
all
the
time?
That's
another
question
number
four
is
granting
the
variance
will
not
confer
any
special
privilege
that
is
not
allowed
for
other
lands,
buildings
or
structures
in
the
same
zoning
District
No
variants
will
be
granted
that
extends
to
the
applicant,
a
use
of
property
that
is
not
commonly
enjoyed
by
other
persons
in
similar
circumstances.
A
That
is,
that
is
a
tough
one
as
rich
said,
because
that
the
addition
of
that
eight
foot
section
there
that
could
certainly
be
seen
as
a
special
privilege
that
others
don't
have.
However,
there
are
unique
circumstances.
A
H
Mr
Boris
can
I
make
a
point
on
item
number
four.
Yes,
sir,
the
fence
itself.
H
Is
an
item
from
all
these
conditions
here
that
is
unique
to
this
property?
Can
we
find
another
property
similar
I?
Doubt
it
very
much
and
on
the
other
hand,
this
board
historically
has
not
been
looking
for
other
properties.
What
other
properties
have
done
only
specifically
what
we
have
in
front
of
us
correct
and
what
is
either
proper
for
the
neighborhood
for
the
neighbors
and
so
on
so
forth
and
for
the
owner
of
the
problem.
H
D
Okay,
I
have
a
couple
comments.
Number
two:
it
looks
like
from
where
I'm
sitting
one
one
I
think
we
addressed
I'm.
Okay
with
one
five
is
okay,
so
we
have
two
three
and
four
looking
at
item
number
two:
the
conditions
are
special
circumstances
peculiar
to
the
property,
have
not
been
self-created,
as
I
said,
it
has
not
been
met,
I
don't
think
they
have
been
self-created,
because
the
need
for
the
offense
is
primarily
because
the
land
on
both
sides
has
been
required
to
be
higher,
so
they
did
not
I.
K
D
But
the
the
FEMA
requirements
are
town
are
town
wide,
but
that
particular
property
has
not.
Every
property.
Has
a
three
foot
raise
on
it
correct,
so
they
didn't
self-create
that
FEMA
told
them
to
do
that
they
didn't
create
it
themselves.
My
in
my
opinion,
I
think
that
the
spirit
of
this
is,
if
you
create
something
just
to
get
something
else,
then
maybe
that's
not
allowed.
But
if
you
didn't
create
it
and
now
it's
a
problem,
then
it
needs
to
be
addressed.
I
think
we
can
apply.
D
You
know
our
thought
process,
our
common
sense
to
that
I.
Don't
think
that
they
self-created
this
situation.
So
to
me,
I
think
that
that
one's
been
met.
The
literal
enforcement
requirement,
city
of
Tarpon,
Springs,
Land
Development
code,
would
have
the
effect
of
denying
applicant
reasonable
use
of
the
property.
I
know
that
I
had
a
poll
and
I
had
kids
and
my
wife
and
so
forth.
I
wouldn't
want
privacy
from
my
pool.
D
So
you
know
because
when
you're
in
a
pool
you
know
you're
wearing
bathing
attire
and
if
somebody's
standing
next
door
and
they're
six
foot
tall
and
they're
four
foot
over
the
fence.
Looking
into
my
property,
I'm
might
not
feel
as
comfortable
as
I
want
to
on
that
one.
So
I
think
that
is
denying
reasonable
use.
I
think
reasonable
I
think
privacy
is
reasonable.
Use,
so
I
think
that
I
think
that
one's
been
met
as
well
and
then
granting
the
varians
will
not
confer
any
special
privilege
that
is
not
allowed
others.
D
H
K
Well,
I
certainly
hope
this
city
will
will
look
at
when
they're
doing
their
recommended
code
changes,
but
I
I
do
think
it's
a
special
privilege.
If,
if
the
city
is
telling
every
other
pool
owner,
you
know
you
have
to
have
the
six
foot
fence
not
higher,
and
then
the
few
that
come
by
you
know,
I
just
I
think
it's
a
slippery
slope
to
go
down
your
methodology
of
thinking.
I
I
do
think
it'd
be
great
for
them
to
have
an
eight
foot
fence,
but
I
I
can't
match
that
in
the
criteria.
K
D
In
this
town,
oh
I,
understand
I
I,
agree
that
we
that
the
code
we
have
to
adhere
to
the
code
I
agree
to
that.
But
that's
why
we're
here
I
mean
it
wouldn't
be
in
front
of
us
if
we
couldn't
make
a
decision
so.
K
A
This
has
always
been
one
of
those
tricky
situations
for
this
board
because
we
are
the
human
element.
Yet
there
there
is
the
code
in
front
of
us
and
I
know.
Miss
Keane
is
always
very
good
about
bringing
us
to
the
attention
to
City
leadership
of
saying
we.
We
are
seeing
these
unique,
interesting
circumstances.
A
So
this
is
the
opportune
time
as
the
city
is
making
these
reviews
and
changes
that
we
can
keep
up
with
things.
I
mean
I
made
a
note.
I
made
a
note.
I
bet
you
did
I
I
have
no
doubt
just
like
our.
You
know,
because.
A
D
A
K
B
Just
I
can
clarify,
we
just
wanted
to
reinforce
and
they're
not
proposing
to
do
this,
but
if,
for
any
reason
they
tried
to
get
the
eight
foot
fence
within
the
front
yard
that
it
would
not
be
permitted,
it
only
applies
to
the
side
yard.
We
just
wanted
to
have
a
double
reinforcement.
What.
A
H
H
A
A
Thank
you,
okay.
So,
let's
move
on
to
our
application
number
23-91,
which
is
a
variance
to
reduce
the
required
side.
Street
setback
for
the
purpose
of
constructing
an
addition
on
an
existing
family
single
family
home.
The
location
of
the
property
is
528
wide
View
Avenue
Miss
Keane.
If
you
can,
please
present
the
information
to
us.
It's.
B
B
B
This
is
a
look
at
the
proposed
site
plan
provided
by
the
applicant.
The
blue
area
is
what
the
proposed
Edition
it's
a
little
over
1100
square
feet
in
size.
The
applicant
is
indicated
that
they
are
building
this
addition
for
their
aging
parents
to
move
in
with
them
and
again
because
they're,
a
corner
property,
Sunset
Drive,
is
considered
the
side
street,
which
requires
a
slightly
larger
setback
than
the
typical
side
yard.
In
this
case
again,
they're
requesting
10.9
feet
here,
11
feet
from
this
corner,
where
15
feet
would
be
required.
B
One
thing
to
note
is
the
minimum
rear
setback
in
the
r100
district
is
30
feet.
This
is
the
rear
yard
of
the
property.
They
are
meeting
the
30-foot
setback,
but
they
could
not
extend
or
relay
out
the
addition
to
go
any
closer
to
the
rear
yard.
This
Orange
Line
shown
here,
is
where
there's
an
existing
privacy
fence.
The
applicant
indicated
that
that
will
remain
and
the
addition
will
be
inside
the
privacy
fence.
B
B
There
are
a
few
things
to
just
consider
along
the
lines
of
what
I
was
talking
about
from
Sunset
Drive.
We
do
have
site
visibility
triangles,
which
you
were
all
familiar
with.
We
require
a
certain
Clear
Sight
distance
for
intersections
and
driveways.
In
this
case,
the
proposed
Edition
does
not
encroach
into
any
of
the
required
site
triangles,
so
it
does
not
violate
that
section
of
our
code.
The
next
thing
to
point
out
are
the
allowances
for
accessory
resolving
units.
B
The
code
does
allow
all
Residential
Properties
to
have
one
accessory
dwelling
unit
on
the
property
they
have
to
adhere
to
these
restrictions
that
are
listed
on
the
screen.
That
includes
not
exceeding
600
square
feet
in
size.
You
can
only
have
one
per
parcel.
The
primary
dwelling
has
to
be
owner,
occupied
all
setbacks
and
lot
coverage
must
be
met.
They
can't
have
separate
utility
meters
and
we
do
require
them
to
record
a
restrictive
covenant,
just
basically
documenting
that
they
meet
those
standards.
B
The
proposed
Edition,
although
they're
having
their
parents
move
in
with
them,
is
not
it's
too
large
to
be
considered
an
accessory
dwelling
unit,
and
what
that
means
is
it's
not
basically
a
stand.
Standalone
dwelling
that
comes
down
to
a
full
kitchen,
which
then
comes
down
to
a
stove,
so
they
cannot
have
a
full
kitchen
in
this
back
portion
of
the
addition
and
the
applicant
is
aware
of
that,
and
they
are
not
proposing
that
we
just
wanted
to
make
you
aware
of
some
of
the
allowances.
A
H
The
staff
recommends
approval,
and
yet,
from
my
understanding
of
the
code,
is
either
20
or
600
square
feet
as
an
addition.
Why
is
this
this
crepus
here
where
this
addition
is
a
thousand
square
feet,
so.
B
That's
what,
when
I,
laying
out
the
considered
an
accessory
dwelling
unit,
they
are
not
proposing
a
full
kitchen,
so
these
restrictions
that
are
listed
here
don't
apply.
We
just
wanted
you
to
be
aware
of
it
that
it
can't
be
considered
a
full
separate
unit.
So
there's
no
limitation
on
the
size
of
the
structure
you
can
have
as
long
as
you
meet
typical
setbacks
and
things
like
that.
I'm.
H
K
K
B
An
accessory
dwelling
unit
can
technically
be
attached
to
the
primary
structure
or
separate
you
more
frequently
will
see
them
as
a
standalone
structure.
In
this
case,
the
applicant
is
proposing
to
have
a
larger
accessory
I.
Don't
want
to
call
it
that
a
larger
living
space
for
their
parents,
so
it
can't.
We
just
can't
consider
it
and
it
just
one
of
the
limitations
for
them
is
you
can't
have
a
full
kitchen,
so
that's
they're,
taking
more
space
for
Less
amenities,
contradictory.
F
So
the
regulations
regarding
accessory
dwelling
units
kind
of
stem
from
the
Independent
rental
of
the
unit,
and
if
you
have
a
kitchen
in
there,
then
it
could
essentially
be
rented
out
separately
from
the
main
house.
That
would
also
then
have
a
kitchen
by
having
it
so
that
no
kitchen
is
allowed
within
there.
It
restricts
them
from
being
able
to
rent
it
out
separately
to
anyone
other
than
their.
Their
parents
are
essentially
family
members.
Okay,
all.
A
E
F
Doesn't
constitute
a
legal
conflict
of
interest
because
he
doesn't
have
any
monetary
interest
in
it
he's
just
a
neighboring
property
owner,
so
the
disclosure
is
mostly
to
address
any
potential
ex
parte,
Communications
and-
and
you
didn't
have
any
discussions
with
the
applicant
regarding
this
matter.
Did
you.
E
F
L
L
528
wide
View,
Avenue
and
I
have
been
sworn
in,
so
I,
basically
I'm
building
this
Edition
for
my
parents.
They
are
currently
living
with
me
and
it
would
it's
I'm,
only
asking
basically
kind
of
four
four
feet
just
to
be
or
four
and
a
half
feet
just
to
be
extended.
It's
still
going
to
be
into
my
property
line
inside
my
yard.
I
cannot
go
any
on
the
other.
L
I
cannot
go
on
the
right
side
because
that's
where
my
living
room
is
and
that's
where
my
windows
are
so
I,
believe
that
that's
the
egress
part
that
we
I
have
to
have
some
kind
of
exit,
and
also
there
is
a
already
built
deck
that
it
was
built
while
when
I
bought
the
house,
so
we
cannot
go,
you
know
we
cannot
go
that
way.
At
that
point,
that's.
L
Also,
the
the
sidewalk
is
a
3.2
fit
inside
my
property,
which
I
don't
mind
at
all,
according
to
the
survey,
so
maybe
I
would
just
let's
even
up
for.
L
But
yeah
that
would
be
on
if
there's
any.
A
L
I
was
where
that's
why,
when
we
started,
I
was
aware
that
we're
not
allowed
to
have
another
kitchen
which
we're
perfectly
fine,
because
this
is
connected.
We
do
have
somebody
with
special
needs
which
my
mom
will
be
taking
care
of.
So
that's
why
we
needed
a
little
bit
bigger
space
when
it
comes
to
the
it's
kids,
my
sister
kids.
So
that's
why
we
need
a
little
bit
bigger
space.
A
A
B
C
B
H
A
A
A
A
You
too,
all
right.
So
our
final
application
for
the
evening
is
number
23-94,
which
is
a
variance
to
reduce
the
required
front
and
side
yard
setbacks
for
the
purpose
of
constructing
an
attached
garage
on
an
existing
single-family
home
properties
located
at
734
loquat
Drive.
And
can
we
have
staff
presentation
please
it's.
B
Let's
see
this
property
is
kind
of
right
around
the
corner
from
the
last
application.
It's
on
the
south
side
of
loquat
Drive
shown
in
red.
This
property
is
in
the
r100
single-family
residential
zoning
district.
There
is
some
r100a
zoning
across
the
street,
which
is
also
a
single
family.
Zoning
District
applicants
are
requesting
a
variance
to
reduce
the
front
and
side
yard
setbacks
for
the
purpose
of
constructing
an
attached
garage
onto
the
existing
home.
B
This
is
a
look
at
the
proposed
site
plan.
The
garage
is
highlighted
in
Orange
here.
The
existing
home
in
blue,
the
proposed
garage
is
24
by
28..
The
applicant
has
indicated
it's
slightly
larger
than
what
a
typical
two-car
garage
would
be
because
they're
intending
to
make
it
a
side,
load
garage
they're
going
to
adjust
their
driveways.
They
can
access
it.
This
way,
rather
than
having
the
front
loading,
the
front
yard
setback
from
the
garage
to
the
front
property
line
is
6.88
feet.
One
thing
to
note
is
the
garage,
although
it
has
a
shorter
front
yard.
B
Setback
from
the
corner
of
the
garage
to
the
edge
of
pavement
of
loquat
is
25
feet
and,
again
being
that
it's
not
a
front
loading
garage.
We
don't
have
those
same
concerns
that
we
typically
do
with
closer
setbacks,
with
cars
parked
in
a
driveway
overhanging
streets
and
in
this
case,
there's
no
sidewalk,
but
if
there
ever
were
sidewalks
in
the
future
and
they
are
proposing
the
side
yard
to
match
the
existing
side
yard
of
6.6
feet
with
the
home,
there
is
an
existing
one
car
attached
carport.
B
B
Some
considerations
with
this
application
first
is
just
looking
at
the
history.
You
guys
are
all
familiar
with
legally
non-conforming
lots,
and
this
is
one
of
them.
It
was
plotted
in
1958
as
a
part
of
the
Bayshore
heights
subdivision.
The
home
was
then
constructed
in
1959.
Our
current
Land
Development
code
went
into
effect
in
1990
and
that
deemed
this
property
legally
non-conforming
in
both
with
and
in
area
the
existing
home,
as
you
see,
is
non-conforming
already
inside
setbacks.
B
The
carport
is
basically
on
the
property
line
and
the
existing
home
is
only
six
and
a
half
feet
from
the
East
property
line.
Another
consideration
I
kind
of
mentioned
a
few
of
these
earlier
with
loquat
drive.
This
is
a
fairly
wide
right-of-way.
It's
60
feet
wide
and
there
are
no
sidewalks
on
the
south
side
of
the
street.
B
The
garage
will
still
be
set
back,
25
feet
from
the
edge
of
pavement
and
the
proposed
side
load
garage
really
prevents
those
vehicles
overhanging
and
then
the
larger
garage
size
that
they're
proposing
allows
them
to
do
this
side,
loading
and
then
again,
if
sidewalks
were
to
be
proposed
for
any
time
in
the
future.
If
the
city
went
to
do
a
project
along
there,
the
proposed
garage
would
not
impede
that
construction
of
the
sidewalk.
B
The
last
thing,
I'll
point
out,
is
the
applicant
used
to
have
a
really
beautiful
oak
tree
in
their
front
yard,
which
is
shown
here
in
the
street
view.
They
never
considered
doing
this
project
until
that
tree,
unfortunately
has
died
and
they
are
removing
it.
So
the
proposed
garage
will
be
kind
of
in
the
same
location
as
where
this
tree
was
and
hear
your
criteria
and
I
can
answer
your
questions.
Thank
you.
Any
questions.
H
B
M
F
B
F
H
Prior
pick,
the
previous
slide
showed
that
the
house
is
equally
from
the
property
line.
What
it
looks
like
exactly
what
one
side
is,
the
other
side
is
the
same,
and
it
doesn't
show
any
any
driveway.
B
Picture
that
I
am
showing
is
basically
where
this
light
is
here
from
this
corner
kind
of
just
looking.
This
direction
and
I
was
just
trying
to
capture
so
you're,
looking
kind
of
in
the
area
where
they're
proposing
the
garage
to
be
for
clarity.
This
point
here
up
to
the
edge
of
pavement
is
25
feet.
Okay,
from
this
point
here
to
the
front
property
line,
which
is
this
yellow
line,
is
this
6.88
feet?
B
Sorry,
it
doesn't
show
very
well
here,
but
there's
an
arrow
just
pointing
in
between
yes
and
then
the
picture
I
think
it
kind
of
skews
a
little
bit.
Actually,
even
if
you
look
on
like
the
property
appraiser
site,
because
the
lines
skew
it
looks
like
they
don't
have
that
much
space.
B
A
B
M
I
think
you've
touched
unless
you
have
questions
No
I,
not
really
just
showing,
where
the
drive
on
the
left
side
it's
hard
to
see
in
that
picture.
That
was
before
it,
but
the
drive
on
the
left
side.
So,
like
you're,
saying
the
side
approach
and
if
you're
looking
at
that
picture,
the
the
tree
would
have
been
out
the
outside
the
garage
corner
there.
It
would
be
in
that
six
foot,
so
the
corner
of
that
that
garage
would
be
before
that
tree.
A
Okay,
any
questions
for
the
applicant.
M
I
don't
know,
oh
in
the
application
you
were
asking
about
utilities
I
did
measure
all
the
utilities
when
they
were
out
there
when
they're
putting
them
in
because
they
did
cut
their
water
line
in
and
the,
and
so
you
got
the
fire
line
going
through
there.
And
then
you
have
the
water
line
and
the
sewers
and
the
easement
behind
me.
So
so.
M
Aware
of
that,
and
you
even
the
depth
of
them
and
digging
that
trench
that
deep
and
doing
your
proper
depth
setbacks
when
you're
digging
your
trench
you'd
have
plenty
of
space
to
dig
to
dig
through
there
and
there
shouldn't
be,
because
even
when
they,
when
they
did
the,
they
were
obviously
in
front
of
my
tree
to
dig
through
the
easements
for
all
that
stuff.
So
all
the
existing
utilities
are
plenty
out
of
the
way.
D
Just
for
clarity,
you
said
that
the
proposed
garage,
the
the
front
of
the
garage,
would
be
on
the
house
side
of
the
tree.
Yes,
so
the
rest.
M
M
Across
the
street
about
the
sidewalk,
you
see
that
with
the
new
development
there's
no
driveways
that
are
facing
that
way,
but
there's
a
new
side
with
that
development,
which
was
nice,
they
put
a
whole
sidewalk
down
that
side.
So
my
house
is,
you
know,
50
plus
years
old,
now
and
and
I.
Don't
think
they'll
ever
put
sidewalks
on
that
with
that
across
the
street,
not
impeding
anybody
so
right.
A
B
H
M
M
M
Down
there
also
sees
what
I'm
doing
and
does
the
same
and
and
and
take
in
consideration
the
way
their
house.
Most
of
them
are
configured
the
same
way,
except
for
maybe
some
Corner
Lots
or
something,
but
everybody
has
their
driveway
on
the
right
side.
So
if
they
all
kind
of
did
the
same
thing,
it
would
be
to
me
it
would
be
a
benefit.
You.
B
I
could
just
add
something
kind
of
along
those
lines.
We
did
have
a
staff
recommended
condition
and
we
thought
about
kind
of
how
the
street
was
addressed,
and
we
do
recommend
that
they
have
a
window
placed
on
that
front
wall
of
the
garage
just
to
help
with
Aesthetics
along
the
street.
A
B
A
Have
not
clear
communication?
Okay,
so
if
we
can
bring
this
back
to
the
board
for
any
questions,
comments
concerns
okay,
I
appreciate
and
thank
you
Miss
Keane,
for
pointing
out
the
condition
with
the
window
on
that
front-facing
area.
If
we
can
call
for
a
motion
motion.
H
A
In
a
second
whoever,
now,
what
does
this
motion
include
the
condition
to
have
the
window
in
the
front.
H
A
Okay,
so
to
approve
for
the
setbacks,
with
the
condition
that
there
will
be
a
window
incorporated
into
the
design
of
the
garage
wall
that
is
facing
loquat
Drive,
and
you
second,
that.
C
K
I
have
a
change
to
the
minutes
on
page
two
number,
five
and
six
at
the
top
of
page
two
is
a
repeat
of
three
and
four.
So
if
we
could
eliminate
five
and
six.