►
From YouTube: Heritage Preservation Board July 11, 2016
Description
City of Tarpon Springs Heritage Preservation Board meeting July 11, 2016
A
E
C
C
B
F
F
F
B
A
This
is
a
quasi
judicial
proceeding
where
the
Heritage
Preservation
Board
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
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.
A
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
board
is
required
by
law
to
find
in
favor
of
the
applicant.
A
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
at
this
time.
Anyone
wishing
to
speak
this
evening,
would
you
please
stand
and
raise
your
right
hand
to
be
sworn
in.
Do
you
swear
our
firm
that
the
testimony
you're
about
to
give
is
the
truth,
the
whole
truth
and
nothing
but
the
truth.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
B
You
our
first
case
is
CA
1646,
First,
United,
Methodist,
Church,
501,
East,
tarpon,
Avenue,
replace
window
with
nude
or
construct
and
I
knew
and
construct
a
new
ramped
sidewalk
and
construct
a
a
covered
roof
between
the
two
sanctuaries
to
provide
improved
handicapped
accessibility
and
when
I
kind
of
heard
from
the
city.
Please,
on
this,
yes
good.
D
Evening,
everybody,
it's
nice
to
see
all
of
our
members,
and
our
alternate
here
like
to
welcome
our
alternate
for
the
board
and
our
new
member,
who
was
an
alternate,
moved
up
to
the
to
the
main
board.
So
thank
you
for
everybody
being
here
again.
The
application
is
requesting
a
certificate
of
approval
for
the
following
work:
remove
a
window
at
a
new
door
and
sidelight
at
a
ramped
walkway
between
the
structures
and
place
a
canopy
over
the
walkway
between
the
st.
D
you
know,
sanctuaries
the
address
for
the
property
is
501
East,
tarpon
Avenue,
the
architecture
star
is
the
mission
style,
and
this
is
located
in
residential
office.
General
and
residential
office
used
the
current
use
of
the
structures
for
a
church.
The
faith
chapel
was
built
in
nineteen
twenty
in
the
mission
style.
It's
an
example
of
architecture
in
the
modern
area,
the
structures
of
contributing
resource
and
the
main
features
include
arched
windows
and
buttresses,
and
the
main
church
remains
intact.
What
other
buildings
are
now
connected
to
the
structure
at
the
rear?
D
The
site
includes
a
new
sanctuary
that
was
built
in
nineteen.
Seventy,
four
among
other
structure.
Again,
the
applicant
is
seeking
the
certificate
of
approval
for
the
work
above.
The
applicant
will
be
replacing
the
existing
the
existing
concrete
between
the
buildings
with
a
ramped
sidewalk
and
installing
a
new
canopy
over
the
area
between
the
faith,
chapel
and
the
1974
sanctuary.
The
changes
are
being
requested
to
improve
the
handicapped,
accessibility
between
the
structures
and
I've
kind
of
put
pictures
in
between
or
all
throughout,
the
report,
to
kind
of
illustrate
what
they're
doing
so.
D
Everyone
could
follow
along
it's
a
little
bit
harder
to
see
what's
actually
happening
here
because
of
the
types
of
windows
and
things
that
are
being
addressed,
but
I
think
you
can
follow
along.
As
you
see
the
the
different,
the
different
pictures
with
that
under
the
analysis
section
of
your
report,
the
proposed
windows
to
be
removed
in
the
rear
of
the
faith
chapel,
the
window
is
not
one
of
the
arched
windows,
which
was
noted
in
the
master
file
the
file,
the
file
for
the
master
file
for
this
structure.
D
The
original
trap
was
connected
to
other
structures
on
the
property
in
the
recent
past
through
additions
to
the
structure,
the
door
that
is
proposed
is
more
consistent
with
the
later
editions
of
the
building.
The
area
where
the
alterations
are
to
occur
are
not
visible
from
the
street
and
should
have
no
negative
impact
on
the
surrounding
structures,
because
there's
an
alcove
because
of
the
way
that
the
edition
came
along,
it's
kind
of
in
a
hidden
area
back
here,
also
with
the
trees.
D
So
you're
not
going
to
see
this
if
you're
walking
down
the
sidewalk
in
the
rear
and
you're,
definitely
not
going
to
see
it
from
carpet
Avenue
on
the
back
side
of
the
building,
so
there's
going
to
be
limited
visibility
to
these
changes.
We
still
need
to
make
sure
that
they
are
consistent
with
what
we
expect
for
this
particular
building
on
to
the
next
criteria.
The
proposed
changes
are
consistent.
Wit
me,
excuse
me
back
while
the
architecture,
the
faith
chapel
and
the
lady
largely
alterations,
are
in
the
Mediterranean
style.
D
It
is
important
to
note
that
the
structure
is
an
example
of
modern
era
construction.
It
went
into
a
little
bit
of
information
on
the
modern
era.
Construction
is
based
on
the
notion
of
form
follows
function,
the
principal
expressed
by
Frank
Lloyd
Wright.
The
monitor
is
defined
by
the
use
of
a
newly
available
building
materials,
including
sheet
glass
and
steel.
The
proposed
door,
which
made
of
new
materials,
is
common
to
the
post,
we're
period
embracing
the
ideals
of
the
modern
area,
but
using
new
materials
that
are
more
readily
available
since
that
modern
period
again.
D
The
whole
idea
of
using
those
materials
to
solve
problems.
Okay,
are
more
modern
problems.
The
proposed
can
pay
will
be
attached
to
the
1974
structure
again
and
not
visibles
for
the
street,
so
the
canopy
that's
going
to
be
actually
going
over
these.
This
area
between
these
two
structures
is
actually
going
to
be
on
the
newer
portion
of
the
chapel
or
the
newer
chapel
rather
than
on
the
older
chapel.
So
the
impact
of
that
canopy
is
actually
not
gonna,
be
on
the
chapel
on
the
existing
chapel.
That's
actually
the
structure
that
we're
really
looking
at.
D
However,
this
1974
sanctuary
is
getting
close
to
eating
its
own
historic,
having
its
own
historic
value.
So,
as
a
result,
we
again
need
to
be
thinking
about.
You
know
things
that
are
in
their
own
time,
so
you
know
their
products
of
their
own
times.
I,
really
don't
think
with
the
types
of
materials
that
are
being
asked
for
for
the
canopy
that
it's
a
problem.
It's
consistent
with
that
1974
chapel,
they'd,
similar
types
of
materials
were
used
in
the
construction
of
that
structure.
D
So
they've
done
a
really
good
job
doing
that,
but
there
is
really
differences
between
that
1950s
chapel
and
the
newer
chapel.
So
I
just
want
to
make
that
clear
to
everybody.
The
proposed
changes
are
consistent
with
the
existing
style
and
the
windows
being
replaced
is
not
a
stylistic
window.
The
proposed
door
has
a
postmodern
appearance,
but
this
area,
the
chapel
again
is
it
has
several
different
window
styles,
so
I
don't
think
it's
going
to
be
out
of
place.
D
D
D
The
proposed
canopy
again
is
barely
visible
from
the
street,
and
the
canopy
is
similar
in
appearance
to
the
existing
aluminum
ions
that
overhang
the
current
doors
that
are
part
of
this
structure.
The
proposed
alteration
will
not
impact
the
overall
size
of
massing
of
the
contributing
structure
will
not
impact
the
surrounding
structures,
because
it's
not
really
visible,
there's
no
additional
landscaping.
That
is
proposed
with
the
application,
since
the
area
of
alteration
is
barely
visible
from
the
street.
D
The
use
of
new
materials
will
have
no
impact
on
a
distinct
architectural
style
again
because
it's
not
affecting
the
hope
to
the
faith.
Chapel,
it's
affecting
the
other
sanctuary.
The
proposed
alterations
are
consistent
with
the
various
buildings
on
site.
The
proposed
alterations
are
consistent
with
the
Secretary
of
Interior
standards
for
rehabilitation
guidelines
and
rehabilitating
historic
structures.
The
proposed
alterations
are
consistent
with
the
city's
comprehensive
plan,
Elena
Velma
coat
and
again
because
this
is
these,
improvements
are
going
in
to
improve
a
da
accessibility,
it's
something
that
makes
it
even
more
so
appropriate.
D
Ok,
because
they're
actually
trying
to
comply
with
more
current
codes
than
what
is
currently
of
currently
visible
on
that
site.
So,
as
a
result,
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
the
application
to
remove
a
window.
Add
a
new
door
and
sidelight
add
ramped
walkways
between
the
structure
and
place
the
canopy
over
the
walkway,
and
with
that
I
can
answer
any
questions
that
you
may
have.
B
G
My
name
said:
Hoffman
Hoffman,
architects,
29,
West,
Orange,
Street
yeah.
This
I
think
is
5
the
smallest
project
that
I've
ever
presented
to
anybody
yeah.
But
but
here
we
are
we're
following
the
rules,
this
actually
the
sanctuary
of
the
1950s
sanctuary,
which
is
only
one
year
older
than
me
very
historic.
It
doesn't
seem
like
that
old.
From
my
viewpoint.
G
Anyhow,
it
is
on
the
edge
of
the
s
most
eastern
part
of
the
district,
and
it
was
even
it's
this
building
that
was
I,
guess
brought
on
to
the
district,
so
you
know
the
face
of
it,
so
I'm
not
sure
if
actually
that
canopy
is
in
the
district
or
not
it.
That's
why
it's
connected
to
the
1974
edition
I
just
want
to
particularly
point
out
is
Heather
said.
So
too
did
a
great
presentation
for
me.
G
The
only
handicap
access
are
coming
back
out
the
front
door
and
actually
going
all
the
way
around
the
block,
and
so
this
makes
a
direct
connection
between
you
see
me.
If
you
went
out
the
back
doors,
you
can
go
down
some
eight
and
a
half
inch.
Riser
I
mean
various
it's
dangerous
for
anybody,
much
less
anybody
handicapped,
so
we're
making
a
connection
through
from
the
the
chapel
sanctuary
into
the
narthex
of
the
main
sanctuary
in
a
flowing
way,
and
the
canopy
makes
it
work
so
that
in
inclement
weather
they
can
still.
G
You
know,
make
that
Trek.
So
it
takes
you
to
the
to
the
main
sanctuary,
which
then
brings
you
to
the
restroom,
so
it's
all
accessible,
so
that's
the
main
driver
of
it
and
and
why
the
trustees
of
the
churches
are
anxious
to
get
this
done.
So
I
guess
I'm
just
here
for
questions
from
this
point.
Thank
you.
F
C
C
G
And
that
there's
two
reason
for
that:
one
is
the
it's
more
of
a
direct
flow,
the
others
that
were
using
a
full
light
door
so
that
you
can
see
the
visibility.
You
know
you
can
see
that
the
door
if
we
match
the
existing
style
of
that
door,
that
original
doors
it's
a
solid
plank
door,
and
so
in
this
situation,
we're
dealing
with
a
number
of
people,
and
so
that
visibility
is
a
very
important
thing.
We're
also
bringing
light
into
the
space
which
the
window
did
previously.
So
that's
the
main
reason
behind
that
and.
D
D
So
I
mean
it
doesn't
look
like
you
can
see.
It
looks
like
it's
very
low,
it's
not
like
getting,
but
there
is
a
step
there
and,
though,
and
the
step
up
from
there
to
the
actually
the
edge
where
the
threshold
of
the
door
is
it's
a
higher
step,
so
anybody
they'd
have
to
do
a
ramp,
and
when
you
deal
with
ramping
and
that
type
of
thing
you
have
to
bring
it
down
at
a
certain
pitch.
D
If
you
go
too
high
of
a
pitch
the,
if
somebody
was
in
a
wheelchair,
they
would
roll
right
off
of
it.
So
as
a
result,
it's
this
is
not
the
probably
the
appropriate
place
to
do
it
because
they
would
have
to
zigzag
and
we're
going
to
have
this
not
attractive.
Handicap
accessibility
ramp
just
to
get
people
in
that
door.
My
other
question.
C
C
F
I
J
B
D
D
Okay,
this
again,
the
applicant
is
requesting
a
certificate
of
approval
for
the
following
work:
to
construct
the
wood
pavilion
over
16
by
16
crong
feet,
patio
at
216
banana
Street.
The
architectural
style
is
framed
vernacular
the
future
land
use
of
this
property
is,
are
you
and
the
zoning
is
our
60?
D
The
structure
was
constructed
in
1939,
as
example
of
residential
architecture
in
the
depression
/
in
New
Deal
era,
the
structure
again
as
frame
vernacular
style
and
is
a
contributing
resource.
The
residences
cross
cable
with
a
steep
pitched
roof
with
a
moderate
overhanging
exposed,
rafter
tails.
The
south
side
of
the
structure
has
a
porter
sure,
a
supported
by
turn
wood
posts.
The
exterior
plan
of
the
residents
is
irregular
in
shape
and
the
exterior
fabric
is
a
weathered
board.
There
is.
D
There
is
a
one
and
a
half
storey
stucco
garage
at
the
rear
of
the
property,
which
is
the
reason
why
I
ask
the
applicant
to
provide
us
a
schematic
or
a
site
plan
which
is
in
your
packet
to
show
the
location
of
that
two-story
structure,
because
the
maps
that
I
have
in
there.
The
aerial
is
really
got
a
lot
of
cover.
So
you
can't
see
well
on
the
aerial
what's
actually
on
this
property,
which
is
why
we
ask
this
applicant
to
provide
us.
D
This
is
something
that
we
at
the
planning
department
we
kind
of
gloss
over
it
here,
but
it's
something
that
we
look
at
so
I
want
you
to
still
be
recognizing
that
we
are
still
looking
at
that
information
and
trying
to
work
with
applicants
to
make
sure
that
they're
meeting
the
land
development
code
so
that
your
certificates
of
approval
that
go
out
the
door
are
still
consistent
with
the
land
development
code
and
the
regulations
for
the
next
step,
which
is
permanent.
So
that's
what
what
what's
in
blue
here
on
the
on
the
footprint
is.
D
The
actual
patio
is
under
that
footprint
and
in
your
packet
as
well.
There
is
actually
a
drawing
that
they've
drawn
out.
It's
fairly
good.
I
mean
our
are
reproductions,
getting
a
little
bit
better.
We
got
a
new
copier,
but
it's
still
not
as
good
as
I
would
like
it.
It
shows
you
what
that
structure
is
actually
going
to
look
like
physically
on
property.
Okay,
again,
the
applicant
is
seeking
the
certificate
of
approval
to
construct
the
wood
pavilion
shown
in
blue
here
over
the
existing
16
by
16
concrete
patio.
D
The
proposed
million
is
located
at
the
rear
yard
is
not
visible
from
banana
Street.
It's
also
going
to
be
limited,
ly
visible
from
the
rear
alley
because
of
that
two-story
grow.
Well,
it's
really
store
and
a
half
garage
I'm.
According
to
the
site
file.
It's
not
going
to
be
visible
from
either
those
streets.
The
proposed
really
will
be
constructed
of
wood,
which
is
consistent
with
the
primary
structure
on
the
property
and
the
other
contributing
structures
in
the
area.
D
You
have
several
consider
you
have
quite
a
few
structures
here
in
this
area
that
are
framed
vernacular
style.
So
this
is
consistent
with
those
other
structures
that
are
in
the
area
on
to
to
the
main
structure
is
not
being
altered.
So
this
number
two
is
really
not
not
applicable
here.
The
proposed
changes
will
have
little
or
no
impact
on
the
historic.
Just
the
proposed
patio
is
not
visible
from
the
street
and
the
roof
line
of
the
pavilion
is
similar
in
structure
to
the
residents.
D
So
when
you
look
at
the
sketch
of
the
building,
you
can
see
that
that
building
has
a
very
similar,
pitched
roof
and
that
type
of
thing
again
it's
going
to
be
a
much
smaller
structure.
So
it's
not
going
to
have
the
same
appearance
as
the
as
the
cottage
kind
of
has
it's
really
going
to
have
a
very
different
experience
experience
the
picture
on
the
roof
is
a
little
bit
different,
but
it's
similar
it's
not
exactly
the
same,
but
it
is
a
similar
structure.
D
The
proposed
pavilion
will
have
asphalt,
shingles,
which
is
the
same
roofing
material
currently
on
the
residents
right
now,
what's
shown
on
the
master
site,
pile
is
a
composite
shingle
that
composite
shingles
very
similar
to
an
asphalt
shingle
they're,
nearly
identical
according
to
anthony,
who
is
now
been
giving
me
a
schooling
on
what
shingles
are
or
if
these
different
types
of
things
that
are
coming
through
under
Florida
product
approval,
to
make
sure
that
we're
applying
the
historic
district
provisions
correctly.
That
asphalt
shingle
is
very
similar
to
the
composite
shingle.
D
That's
on
that
on
the
existing
structure,
so
we'll
have
that
similar
look
to
the
shingles
that
are
there
now
the
color
may
vary
because
we've
gotten,
we
don't
look
at
color,
so
the
colors
may
vary
from
time
to
time
on
these
types
of
structures,
but
it
is
the
same
type
of
use
either
the
same
type
of
product.
The
proposed
million
will
not
impact
the
overall
size
and
massing
of
the
contributing
structure
and
will
not
impact
the
surrounding
contributing
structures
really
because
it's
not
visible
from
the
the
district
on
the
street.
D
There's
no
additional
landscaping
is
that's
proposed.
With
this
application,
the
main
structure
is
not
being
altered,
so
number
seven
is
not
appropriate
is
not
applicable.
The
proposed
pavilion
is
consistent
with
other
structures
on
on-site.
The
proposed
civilian
is
consistent
with
the
Secretary
of
Interior
standards
of
rehabilitation
and
guidelines,
rebuilding
historic
structures,
and
the
proposed
ruling
is
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan
and
the
land
development
code.
Basically,
what
I
want
to
say
to
this?
The
setbacks
for
the
are
60
district
would
allow
this
structure
to
go
closer
to
the
alley
than
it's
actually
at.
D
So
it's
meeting
not
only
its
side
setback
requirements,
but
also
the
rear
setback
requirements
and
any
of
the
distance
criteria
that
would
be
required
between
structures
is
also
met
here.
So
it
is
clearly
meeting
the
LDC
requirements
here.
It
is
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan
so,
as
a
result
again,
there's
no
impact
on
archaeological
sites.
I
will
not
be
impacted
by
this,
and
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
the
application
to
construct
a
wood
pavilion
over
the
existing
16
by
16,
concrete
patio
and
I
can
answer
any
questions
that
you
might
get.
H
H
D
Trying
to
think
of
the
word
any
connection
between
the
structures.
Okay,
so,
as
a
result,
there
they're
allowed
any
they're
allowed
additional
structures
on
the
property
under
the
coat,
not
the
historic
stuff.
Aside,
just
under
the
land
development
food
part
they're
allowed
a
number
of
different
types
of
structures.
You
can
have
a
storage
structure,
you
can
have
a
garage
in
many
places
you
can
convert
those
garage,
especially
the
historic
district.
A
lot
of
the
garages
were
converted
to
living
units.
D
Our
code
allows
for
all
those
type
of
things
so
there,
but
those
are
all
consistent,
but
there's
no
connection
show
in
between
the
exists
that
are
the
current
patio
and
pavilion
that's
going
to
go
there.
The
proposed
for
voting
is
gonna
be
over
in
that
additional
structure,
so
this
will
not
be
in
addition
to
that
structure.
It's
just
in
addition
to
the
property
as
a
whole,
and
so
it
meets
the
criteria
of
the
land
development
code.
But
that's
a
really
good
question.
D
If
they
decide
to
combine
those
roofs
together,
that's
going
to
require
them
to
come
back
here
because
they're
not
currently
showing
that
as
part
of
this,
but
it
looked
like
from
the
structure
the
way
they're
doing
it's
basically
just
going
to
be
a
wood
pavilion,
groove
they're,
going
to
have
some
screening
on
there.
So,
while
the
rafting
system
probably
could
be
tied
in
if
they
chose
to
in
the
future,
to
you
know
to
make
it
like
a
you
know,
front
entryway
or
something
like
that.
D
You'd
still
have
to
come
back
here
and
talk
to
you
guys
about
that,
because,
even
though
it
is
in
the
rear
of
the
property,
no
one's
going
to
see
it
that
type
of
thing
they
still
are
going
to
have
to
meet
that
burden
of
proof
to
tie
that
structure
together,
because
there
is
historical
value
to
that
additional
structure
on
the
property,
simply
because
it's
on
the
site
file,
how
I
found
out
it's
a
story
and
a
half
instead
of
two
stories
like
the
applications.
As
was
I
read
the
site
file
to
go
through
that.
D
So
there
is
a
difference
in
that
site
file
from
what
our
folks
saw
now.
Is
it
possible
that
it's
been
altered
and
since
that
that
is
that
thing
I'm
sure
it
is
possible,
but
again
that
alteration
should
have
been
brought
forward.
This
board
I
found
nothing
that
this
property
is
currently
gone
through
there.
So
I'm
willing
to
think
that
one
and
a
half
stories
versus
two
stories.
It
is
what
it
it.
You
know.
People
just
assume
that
too
it's
a
really
two-story
structure,
windowing,
what
we
consider
one
and
a
half,
but.
I
D
So
right
now
way
it's
shown.
This
is
a
solid
structure,
but
your
that's
a
good
question,
because
they
could
they
could
do
that
in
the
future.
If
they
chose
to
you,
because
again
it's
a
wood
system,
they
can,
they
can
intertwine
those
woods
systems
but
they're
on
notice.
As
of
this
application,
if
it's
not
consistent
with
this-
and
these
folks
will,
let
me
know
and
I
will
I
will
it
will
not
get
past
your
permanent.
Essentially,
however,.
B
D
Is
there
sufficient
distance
between
the
two
on
the
site
plan?
I
can't
tell
you
what
they
told
me
was
10
feet,
but
again
that
they're
telling
me
that
they're
not
showing
me
that,
because
I
can
tell
you
right
now,
mine's
not
to
scale
this
one's
not
to
scale,
and
the
one
that
was
emailed
to
me
is
not
to
scale
okay.
So
all
right.
B
J
D
That
those
are
not
clear
on
this
drawing
I
mean
you
can
see
that
you
can
see
that
that's
there,
but
there's
no
clear
indication.
It
says
that
there's
probably
there's
no
clear
indication
if
the
asphalt
shingle
goes
out
that
far
or
if
that's
or,
if
that's
going
to
be
open
on
this
end,
based
on
the
what
they
have
here,
I
only.
D
J
J
D
Because
it's
going
to
be
a
box,
so
it
may
be
in
that.
That's
the
other
question
that
you
have.
If
you
have
Experian
that
it
has
the
exposed
rafter,
look
it's
going
to
have
to
have
that
all
four
corners.
It's
not
going
to
be
able
to
talk,
no
matter
whether
it's
east
west,
or
whether
it's
norsu
or
another
source
out
there
going
to
need
that
look
on
all
four
cars.
This
is
a
square
structure,
so
I
mean
that's
up
to
you.
That's
up
to
the
board.
D
If
you
guys
are
interested
in
doing
a
condition,
we
could
basically
say
this.
The
condition
could
simply
state
that
you
know
if
that
you
choose
to
approve
the
application,
with
the
caveat
that
the
appearance
for
the
structure
would
have
that
open,
rafter
appearance
on
the
ends
of
the
building
to
match
what
the
existing
house
is.
Something
to
that
effect
is.
C
C
J
D
Make
a
motion
with
conditions,
however,
what
are
the
two
things
we
want
to
address?
The
open
rafter
look
is
one
thing,
but
if
it's
the
distance
between
the
structures,
you
cannot
approve
this
tonight
if
you're
going
to
deal
with
the
distance
of
the
structures,
because
right
now,
the
way
this
application
reads
is
it's
16?
It's
on
that
existing
patio
based
on
the
16
by
16,
which
is
what
that
patio
is.
J
D
Not
generally,
but
you
can
ask
for
that
clarification,
because
it's
not
clear
on
your
set
on
your
on
your
site
report
on
yours
on
your
site
plan.
It's
not
consistent
based
on
their
drawing.
You
can
ask
that
information.
It's
not
really
relevant
information
for
you
guys
to
have,
because
you
don't
really
look
at
that,
but
you
can
ask
for
that.
Only.
C
D
You
can
ask
for
that
as
a
condition,
and
it
would
read
something
like
at
the
time
of
permitting
the
applicant
is
to
clarify,
with
the
planning
staff,
that
the
that
the
structure
is
either
east
with.
If
you
want
east
west
facing
vs
north
south
phase,
then
you
would
clarify
which
one
is
your
preference,
so
you
would
make
it
consistent
and
then
they
would
be.
They
would
have
to
meet
that
that
condition.
D
So
if
you
wanted
east
west
or
north
south,
that's
something
that
you
would
determine
here
tonight
and
then
the
staff
would
put
that
condition
on
the
approval
that
goes
out
to
the
applicant
and
then,
obviously
again
we
would
do
the
exposed.
Rafter
would
be
the
second
one.
If
you
want
you
put
the
condition
of
it.
You
want
it
to
have
that
exposed
rafter
appearance
to
be
consistent
with
the
principal
structure.
If
that's
the,
if
that's
the
pleasure
of
the
board.
H
D
Want
do
you
want
to
clarify
the
east-west?
They
just
provide
that
that
they,
at
the
time
of
providing
permitting
just
provide
the
east-west
versus
the
north-south
orientation.
For
that
structure.
Will
that
satisfy
the
board
or
because
it's
not
going
to
come
back
to
you
right
like
if
you
decide
this
tonight,
it
goes
through
the
permitting
few
folks.
It
doesn't
go
back
here,
so
you
would
not
know
that
yeah.
D
B
C
C
B
B
I
I
I
I
B
D
Sorry
about
that
application-
okay,
again,
the
applicant
this
applicator-
that
it's
the
city
is
that
we're
making
this
request
and
the
application
is
for
a
certificate
of
approval
for
a
demolition
of
a
contributing
but
altered
structure
and
a
shed
that
is
on
the
property
on
this
property
is
contributing
but
altered
and
I.
What
I've
done
is
before
we
kind
of
get
into
the
staff
report.
Just
to
tell
you
a
little
bit
about
materials
that
are
here
for
you.
D
We
had
Denise
man
with
the
library
kind
of
work
with
us
on
this,
and
we
went
through
kind
of
like
tutorial
through
time
to
determine
when
the
principal
structure
was
removed
from
that
property,
because
clearly,
with
the
location
of
where
the
secondary
or
the
outbuilding
structure
is,
that
is
now
a
principal
structure.
There
had
to
have
been
some
type
of
principal
structure.
D
So
in
your
packet,
our
is
a
listing
of
the
sanborn
maps
and
some
information
that
shows
like
when
it
when
things
fell
off
of
time
and
I'll
go
through
a
little
bit
of
that
when
we
go
through
the
history
of
this,
but
essentially
what's
being
requested.
Today
is
a
demolition
for
this
structure,
because
it's
been
deemed
by
our
building
official
to
be
maybe
not
falling
down.
Is
the
right
word,
but
it's
it's
really
in
bad
repair.
D
The
city
got
this
property
and
we
really
need
to
be
good
stewards
of
what
what
we
are
what's
donated
to
this
to
the
city.
This
was
donated
to
the
city
a
number
of
years
ago,
and
since
then,
there
has
not
been
any
type
of
meetings
or
repair
any
that
type
of
thing
the
home
is
what
the
home
was
when
it
was
donated
here
you
know,
personal
belongings
have
been
removed
and
that
type
of
thing,
but
basically
the
house
is
it-
has
stands
the
way
it
was
when
it
was
donated.
D
As
a
result,
the
city
is
looking
at
all
of
the
properties
here
that
we
have
in
the
city
and
what
the
utilization
rate
is
for
those
and
what
we're
doing
with
those
and
how
we're
maintaining
the
the
buildings
that
we
have
in
that
type
of
thing,
in
a
mere,
in
a
manner
to
ensure
that
things
are
safe,
they're,
they're
maintained
in
a
safe
manner.
This
building's
one
of
those
buildings
that
it
was
an
outbuilding
as
a
result
of
being
an
outbuilding.
It
was
not
really
well-constructed.
D
It
was
later
turned
into
a
residence
with
several
different
editions
that
were
placed
on
there
and
you
can
see
through
if
you
go
through
all
the
pictures
that
the
building
department
has
provided
for
this
application,
you
can
see
the
condition
of
most
of
what
of
what
is
going
on
here.
The
flooring
system
is
not
connected.
The
main
structure
is
not
connected
to
the
additions.
The
roof
line
is
not
connected
to
the
addition,
so
those
additions
are
sitting
there
separately
mounted,
but
there's
no
cross
connection
and
they're
not
tied
into
the
main
structure.
D
D
That
being
the
case,
I'll
go
through
the
staff
analysis
that
we
have
here,
but
I
just
wanted
to
give
you
a
little
bit
of
a
background
to
understand
right
now.
The
city
does
not
have
a
plan,
I'm
going
to
make
this
very
consistent,
because
you
may
hear
from
people
in
the
public
tonight
about
proposed
uses
of
this
property
right
now.
The
city
does
not
have
a
plan
for
this
property.
The
board
of
county
of
our
commissioners
have
not
made
a
determination
on
what
is
to
go
on
this
property.
D
This
is
just
a
request
to
demolish
a
building
that
we
feel
is
structurally
unsound
in
a
danger
to
our
community.
Okay,
you'll
hear
from
the
building
official
that
about
that
tonight.
There
are
lots
of
potential
options
for
development
on
this
property.
Once
this,
if
the
structure
is,
if
you
guys
agree
to
remove
that
structure
in
that
structure
is
removed,
there
are
lots
of
different
uses
that
can
happen
on
this
property,
but
there
is
no
one
use
that
has
been
determined
at
this
proper
at
this
point
for
this
property.
This
is
just
the
demolition
request.
D
There
will
be
a
later
request
for
whatever
the
board
decides
that
they
would
like
to
put
here,
and
then
you
will
evaluate
that
to
determine
if
that's
consistent
with
the
heritage,
preservation
ordinance
and
with
the
ideals
of
this
board
for
the
historic
district.
Okay,
I
just
want
to
make
that
clear
or
going
in
because
you're
going
to
hear
from
public
on
one
particular
use,
but
that
has
not
been
established.
I
want
this
board
to
clearly
understand
that
at
this
point,
okay
can.
D
D
Multi-Family
type
uses
it's
a
the
same,
the
same
type
of
category
that
we
had
on
that
one
piece
on
center
street
adjacent
to
the
ecovillage
project.
That
is
the
same
zoning
category,
so
it
would
allow
attached
structures,
however,
that
had
to
go
make
another
step
because
attached
truckers
require
conditional
use
by
the
boards.
The
board
has
to
find
for
a
conditional
use.
It
allows
for
some
multifamily
allows
for
single
family.
It
allows
for
detached
our
attached
versus
detached
structures.
It
just
debase
achill
e
that
use
the
uses
that
are
allowed.
D
Some
require
conditional
use
just
like
all
of
our
land
use
districts.
Some
of
them
are
uses
by
right.
The
uses
by
right
that
you
are
allowed
on
this
property
are
pretty
much
single-family,
just
what's
consistent
with
the
neighborhood
here,
however,
there
are
other
conditional
increases
that
could
be
recommended
for
this
property.
Okay,
and
we
can
get
into
the
one
particular
use
that
you
might
hear.
If,
if
you,
if
you
like,
we
can
talk
about
that,
but
let
me
get
to
go
through
the
staff
report.
D
I
just
wanted
to
give
you
guys
a
really
good
base
for
so
that
you
understand,
you
know
just
what
the
general
public
is
coming
for,
I'm,
giving
you
what
what's
going
on
here
currently
at
the
city
with
this
piece
of
property,
there's
really
no
other
plan
other
than
dealing
with
the
Sun
safe
structure.
Okay,
with
that,
let
me
move
on
so
we're
not
here
all
night.
Okay,
according
to
the
master
file
for
116
North
ring
Avenue,
the
building
on
the
property
is
a
contributing
but
altered
structure.
D
The
building
is
listed
as
an
outbuilding
or
garage
with
a
construction
date
of
roughly
1920.
The
architectural
style
is
framed
vernacular
and
the
structure
has
two
editions
with
a
construction
d
of
1970,
and
this
again
is
proximate.
The
most
recent
use
for
the
building
was
residential
and
the
structure
was
reverted
to
a
private
residence.
Some
at
some
point
in
the
past.
Again
we
get
into
the
history
on
the
denise
kind
of
pulled
out
for
us
through
our
sanborn
maps.
It
appears
that
the
property
1960
was
developed
some
time
prior
to
at
116.
D
North
ring
was
developed
some
time
prior
to
nineteen.
Oh
nine
and
it
shows
the
property
was
developed
with
one
structure,
a
main
house
and
then,
if
we
go
on
it
shows
that
the
main
house
in
an
outbuilding
were
later
that
was
later
converted
to
the
to
the
residents
was
in
there
at
1913,
so
the
master
site
file
says
1920
is
circa.
D
The
building,
however,
the
sanborn
maps
show
it
on
there
clearly,
as
you
can
see
in
the
back
up
in
1913,
so
we
challenge
our
own
our
own
site
file
on
that
one,
but
according
to
news,
managed
research
and
city
war,
it
suggests
that
some
point
in
1970
the
main
house
was
destroyed
by
fire.
She
couldn't
provide
me
anything
from
the
newspaper
or
anything
that
just
wasn't
really
good
record
for
that.
D
It's
really
just
what
folks
remember
the
city
of
Tarpon
Springs
received
the
property
as
a
gift
from
Miss,
Jessie
Burke
and
the
structure
on
the
property
has
remained
vacant,
since
the
property
was
given
to
this
did
to
the
city
again,
the
structure
is
in
very
is
in
very
poor
condition.
The
city's
building
Vishal
has
provided
extensive
photographic
evidence
of
the
state
of
the
structure,
as
well
as
the
list
of
codes
of
the
codes
and
structure
is
violating
the
building
code
hat.
D
The
building
official
has
determined
that
the
structure
in
its
current
state
will
likely
not
survive
a
relocation
attempt.
It
has
been
further
determined
that
any
attempt
to
renovate
the
structure
will
require
the
entire
building
mmole
to
be
removed
and
stripped
down
to
the
framing.
Given
that
giving
that
it
is
likely
that
any
attempt
to
renovate
the
structure
will
result
in
a
multitude
of
issues
being
identified,
it's
increasing
the
cost
and
time
required
to
rebuilt
eight
that
structure.
D
D
So
that's
just
so
Carrie
and
you
guys
who
haven't
seen
these.
You
understand
the
difference
in
the
staff
reports.
The
structure
was
originally
constructed
as
an
outbuilding
garage,
the
structure
has
been
altered
with
two
additions.
According
to
the
building
official,
the
two
additions
are
not
structurally
connected
to
the
original
structure.
This
is
not
the
only
example
of
an
outbuilding
being
converted
to
living
quarters.
We
have
several
of
those
surprisingly
more
than
I
realized
I
realized
until
I
did
this
research?
D
How
many
in
our
historic
duster
have
been
converted
to
living
quarters,
which
is
engine
interesting,
an
interesting
trend?
Many
of
the
buildings
in
the
historic
have
been
converted
in
the
in
the
past
living
quarters.
There
are
several
examples
of
frame
vernacular
architecture
in
the
immediate
area.
The
structure
may
be
contributing
to
the
district,
but
it
is
not
unique.
Number
two,
the
conversion
of
the
outbuilding
to
living
quarters
within
the
historic
district,
is
not
unique
to
Tarpon,
Springs,
historic,
district
or
associated
with
any
particular
ethnic
group.
D
Other
homes
in
the
area
that
are
currently
be
our
currently
being
restored.
The
structure
is
a
simple
wood.
Construction
with
wood
shingles
and
the
condition
of
the
existing
structure
would
make
it
nearly
impossible
to
restore.
There
is
no
special
or
distinct
features
on
on
the
structure.
The
structure
is
not
unique.
There
are
far
better
examples
of
frame
vernacular
construction
in
the
immediate
area
and
is
not
the
last
remaining
example
of
its
kind
in
the
city
due
to
the
condition
of
the
structure.
It
would
be
nearly
impossible
for
the
structure
to
be
utilized.
D
The
building
visualized
deem
the
structure
unsafe
and
inhabitable.
The
law,
if
cleared
for
the
structure,
could
be
developed
in
a
meaningful
way
that
could
enhance
the
historic
district.
Since
the
property
is
a
city-owned,
it
would
not
like
to
be
returned
to
residential
use
immediately
we're
not
going
to
rule
out
the
fact
that
it
could
at
some
point
revert
back
to
a
private
residence
in
the
future.
D
We
don't
know
what
the
proper,
what
that
use
is
going
to
be
right
now,
so
I
don't
want
to
say
you
know
it's
never
going
to
be
residential
again,
because
that's
not
its
under
true
statement.
It
could
at
some
point
time
it
would.
It
could
also
it
would
become
an
open
space
until
I,
proper
Civic
use
can
be
determined
for
the
site
or,
alternatively,
that
the
city
decides
to
sell
it
back
to
a
private
private
individual
which
I,
don't
think
is
going
to
happen.
It's
not
in
the
cards,
but
it
is
a
possibility.
D
The
condition
of
the
structure
makes
it
near,
makes
it
nearly
impossible.
Restore
the
building
field.
Building
official
does
not
suggest
attempting
relocating
the
structure,
the
foundation
is
cracking
and
separating
and
additions
are
knock
starkly
connected
to
the
main
structure
and
the
flooring
system.
Roofing
system
are
unsafe.
The
structure
isn't
in
its
current
condition,
is
not
capable
of
earning
a
reasonable
return.
The
structure
has
remained
vacant
since
the
property
was
donated,
the
city
at
only
450
square
feet.
The
structure
is
non-conforming
in
the
zoning
district.
D
The
minimum
of
floor
area
of
the
conditional
residential
mixed
zoning
district
is
900
square
feet
again.
This
building
would
have
some
non-conforming
status,
but
based
on
what
the
building
official
is
saying
about,
if
it
were
to
be
restored,
what
would
we
take
what
we
would
take
to
restore
it?
The
likelihood
that
it
would
be
allowed
to
actually
be
come
back
in
the
same
form
that
it's
in
would
be
unlikely,
because
most
folks
would
probably
want
to
add
additional
square
footage
that
then
takes
it
out
of
the
non-conforming
status.
D
They
would
lose
all
the
vesting
for
the
existing
setbacks
and
all
that
type
of
thing
that
are
allowed
for
non-conforming
structures.
You
see
this
all
the
time
you
see,
especially
in
these
applications.
You
see,
buildings
were
built
right
on
property
lines,
that
type
of
thing
where
we
will
have
zoning
requirements.
Now
that
don't
allow
that
so
trying
to
have
a
non-conforming
structure,
that
is,
you
know,
removed
or
renovated.
If
it
doesn't
come
back
in
the
exact
same
footprint
under
the
existing
requirements
and
the
non-conforming
use,
they
lose
that
vesting.
D
D
Alright,
the
building
official
states
in
his
report
that
the
renovation
of
the
structure
would
require
a
wholesale
stripping
of
the
structure
down
of
the
framing,
and
this
would
likely
result
in
further
reducing
the
size
of
the
structure.
As
the
additions
were
not
structurally
integrated
into
the
mean
to
the
main
structure.
D
Again,
it
would
increase
the
nonconformity
under
the
non-conforming
section
would
not
allow
it.
We
would
not
be
allowed
to
Ruby
replaced
under
the
land
development
code,
so
this
is
a
place
where
your
wind
development
code
clearly
is
in
conflict.
Your
non-conforming
youth
section
is
in
conflict
with
your
heritage
preservation
section
based
on
what
improvements
are
being
required
by
the
building
official.
D
It
is
not
economically
feasible
to
restore
the
structure,
given
the
unknowns
of
the
plumbing
system,
the
electrical
system,
the
roofing
system,
the
flooring
system
and
the
structural
integrity
of
the
structure
moving
the
structure
is
not
recommended
by
the
building
dividual,
given
the
current
condition
of
the
structure
and
again
LD
c
section.
2403
restricts
the
movement
of
non-conforming
structures.
Relocation
of
this
structure
within
this
historic
district
would
require
a
variance
by
the
Board
of
Adjustment.
D
So,
in
order
to
relocate
it,
unlike
what
we
did
with
the
cottage
down
here
with
with
eco
village
you're,
going
to
have
to
get
approval
from
boa
another
board,
to
essentially
do
that
and
we're
telling
you
or
your
building
officials
telling
you
that,
based
on
the
condition,
he
doesn't
think
that
that's
a
feasible
option
where
it
was
more
of
a
feasible
option
for
a
little
cottage
that
did
get
move.
It's
not
in
this
case.
D
So
with
that
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
this
application
for
the
demolition
of
a
contributing
but
altered
structure
and
the
shed
on
the
property.
I
can
answer
any
questions
that
you
might
have
anthony
is
also
here.
If
you
have
technically
related
questions
to
condition,
that's
really
his
purview,
not
mine,
he's
the
one
who's
made
that
call
as
far
as
that,
being
an
unsafe
structure.
H
H
D
H
D
H
H
D
B
D
Girl,
I
can't
really
speak
to
that,
because
when
I
don't
know
when
the,
when
the
city
actually
took
over
the
property
and
I,
don't
know
you
know,
I
wasn't
here
when
2009,
when
that,
when
these
were
done
so
I
don't
have
enough
history.
To
give
you
a
really
good
understanding
of
yes,
that
was
you
know
this.
Is
they
put
it
on
all
the
houses
or
or
whatever
I
can't
tell
you
that
I
can't
tell
you
what
went
on
at
2009
as
far
as
when
this,
when
these
were
done,
you
know
how
applicable
there
I
know.
D
I
found
errors
on
them,
but
then
error
in
a
date
is
a
little
bit
different
on
a
condition
right,
an
error
and
a
date
is
a
gas
I
mean
they're
guessing
the
certain.
You
know
the
sir,
if
they
don't
have
good
understanding
of
one
structures
were
built.
You
know
back
during
that
time.
You
don't
know
the
gate.
You
have
to
guess,
based
on
the
style
and
again
the
main
house
is
missing
here.
So
right,
the
biggest
part
of
that,
where
you
can
guess
the
date
is
missing.
D
H
H
I
and
the
attorney
can
speak
if
I
get
out
of
line,
so
let
me
know
I
will
every
every
other
application
we've
had
for
demolition
has
required
an
engineer
report
we've
required.
This
board
has
required
that
for
every
application
so
do
we
is
that
just
us
being
over
hand
on
the
other
ones,
because
it's
not
in
here
that
we
have
to
have
an
engineer
report
or
is
it
an
hour?
It's.
D
Correct
you
have
you
have
asked
for
contractors,
reports
and
or
something
to
that
effect.
Now
you
as
a
board
can
determine
what
requirements
or
what
things
that
you
want,
but
there
is
nothing
right
now
currently
in
that
section
that
says
you
must
provide
this
now
when
you
get
into
this
is
my
issue.
If
you
remember,
we
went
a
few
months
that
are
set
back
in
December
when
we
went
through
a
demolition
and
a
new
construction
based
on
economic
hardship.
D
If
you
go
to
the
economic
hardship
section,
those
are
outlined
there,
so
under
economic
hardship,
you
provide,
you
require
a
higher
burden
of
proof.
Then
you
currently
do
under
your
demolition
section,
good
writer,
indifferent.
That's
the
that's
the
situation
with
that
with
that
code
provision
I'm
not
going
to
you
know
determine
that
this
board
can
make
that
recommendation
on
what
you
want
in
that
criteria,
and
we
can
certainly
bring
forward
a
change
to
your
language.
H
D
H
D
D
However,
so
everyone's
aware
on
this
board,
if
you
look
at
conditional
residential
mixed
community
gardens,
are
not
currently
in
allowed
use,
not
conditional,
not
permitted
nothing
silent
to
that
to
that
effect,
so
the
board's
going
to
have
some
work
if
they
decide
that
that's
what
the
future
uses
beyond
coming
to
this
board
they're
going
to
have
some
other
work
that
has
to
be
done
to
allow
that
use
to
go
on
that
property.
Okay,
it's
a
community
garden
was
what's
been
discussed
and
again
it's
been
discussed
in
passing
at
several
board
meetings.
D
This
property
has
been
identified
as
one
potential
site.
There
are
other
potential
sites
elsewhere
in
the
city,
there's
no
solid
concrete.
This
is
where
this
is
going.
This
is
really
just
it's
a
speculation
that
this
would
be
maybe
an
appropriate
place,
because
you
have
this
community
facility
down
the
street
that
you
can
utilize
for
bathrooms
and
that
type
of
thing,
but.
D
H
D
There's
nothing
in
this
section
in
the
in
the
demolition
section
that
says
that
you
must
have
it.
But
procedurally,
you
are
correct.
In
the
past
you
have
had
either
an
economic
hardship
request
or
a
new
construction
or
demolition
request
and
new
construction.
That's
how
this
has
gone
in.
Some
of
them
have
been
all
three.
My.
D
K
D
That's
something
that
I
could
talk
to
dr.
Monaghan
about,
but
I.
Don't
think
that
that's
that
that
it's
occurred
in
basically
it's
because
of
the
condition
of
the
existing
of
the
existing
building
right
now
has
just
been
deemed
to
be.
You
know
not
something
that
we
want
to
invent.
They
don't
want
to
spend
a
lot
of
time
investing
and
now
that
doesn't
say
that
it
doesn't
want
it
just
that
it
hasn't
been
done
to
my
knowledge,
I'll.
J
D
Have
absolutely
no
idea
the
answer
to
that
question
is
I.
Don't
have
enough
of
that.
Historical
thing
by
my
implementation
would
be
probably
no
because
a
lot
of
the
buildings
that
you're
dealing
with
here,
depending
upon
the
age
of
this
one's,
not
so
much
an
issue,
but
you
have
asbestos
intrusion
and
other
things
that
have
happened
that
don't
make
those
materials
as
resalable
because
of
that
cross
contamination.
Now,
that's
not
every
building
in
tarpon,
that's
some
buildings
that
asbestos
was
used
just
across
the
board
and
so
many
things
we
don't
think
about
it.
D
But
even
a
frame
vernacular
house
could
have
asbestos
tiles.
It
could
have
had
asbestos
in
on
the
walls
it
could
have
had.
You
know
any
number
of
it.
So
there's
cross
contamination
that
happens
even
if
it's
been
removed
correctly.
There's
still
cross
contamination
for
that
building
and
I.
Don't
know
the
situation
with
this
building
item
be
likely
to
believe
that
asbestos
probably
wasn't
used
because
of
the
time
frame
for
when
this
was
built.
This
was
built
in
a
time
balloon.
D
Construction
had
just
come
off,
okay,
it
had
started
happening
and
that
in
that
tends
right
in
there
you
know
the
the
nineteen
nineteen
hundred
through
1910
was
the
time
the
balloon
construction
just
started
happening.
Nails
were
starting
to
become
mass-produced.
Wood
was
becoming
a
little
bit
more
readily
available
there.
New
construction
techniques
wasn't
quite
it
was
the
beginning
of
the
modern
period.
D
Wasn't
quite
you
know
where
the
modern
period
was
with
again
to
steel
and
glass
and
different
types
of
construction,
but
there
was
a
lot
of
mass-producing
of
things
like
nails
and
that
type
of
thing
so
I
don't
know
that
asbestos
was
actually
put
in
this
building
at
any
point,
but
any
type
of
renovations
that
were
done
in
the
fifties
or
the
70s
are
suspect
because
any
of
those
materials
for
tiles
any
of
that
stuff
can
head
asbestos
in
it.
I'm.
J
B
B
D
K
Board
Anthony
missed
ratio,
building
development,
director
city
of
Tarpon
Springs.
When
this
property
I
was
asked
to
take
a
look
at
this
property.
Initially,
when
I
contacted
Heather
I,
we
knew
that
was
an
historic
district.
I've
been
in
construction.
All
my
life
I've
done
this
since
I
was
a
little
kid
and
initially
went
to
school
for
engineering
that
came
with
the
city
had
been
working
in
either
Pinellas
Parker
here
for
the
past
21
years.
K
So
when
we
looked
at
the
structure
we
took
it,
you
know
with
great
detail:
the
structure
displays
a
lot
of
deterioration
and
I'm,
not
sure
the
time
I've
been
here
for
13
years
with
this
city,
the
time
that
we
had
taken
it
was
within
my
timeline,
so
miss
Burke
had
passed
within
that
time
line.
I
was
only
at
this
property
once
before,
and
I
believed
she
was
hospitalized
at
that
point
and
it
was
in
bad
shape,
but
nevertheless
we
never
asked
to
look
at
the
property.
K
After
that,
the
way
it
was
constructed
it
initially
looked
like
it
wasn't:
outparcel
I
mean
I
went
up
in
the
rafter
system.
I
checked
the
flooring.
I
checked
everything
you
could
tell
the
way
the
construction
was
done.
It
looked
like
it
was
a
garage
or
sometime
a
storage
facility
and
later
on,
it
looks
like
it
came
at
the
effect
where
they
had
some
additions
added
onto
the
side
and
rear,
and
those
additions
are
basically
just
placed
up
against
the
shingles.
So
there's
no,
nothing
that
tied
it
together.
K
I
can't
find
anything
that
that
calls
into
a
solid
foundation
system
underneath
I
went
inside
the
structure.
There
were
some
openings
in
the
floors
that
we
explored
from
the
outside.
We
can
see
and
unfortunately,
took
a
lot
of
damage
to
rebuild
the
structure.
Of
course
you
have
an
option
to
rebuild
it.
K
Is
it
viable
option,
unfortunately,
with
this
type
of
renovation
to
rebuild
it,
you're
going
to
fall
into
our
existing
building
code
and
at
that
point,
you're
going
to
need
to
strip
the
whole
outside
of
the
building
you're
going
to
structurally
attach
those
additions
strip
around
the
foundation
system
make
sure
we
have
a
secure
foundation
system
and
then
rebuild
everything
above
that
and,
of
course,
once
you
touch
that
it
has
to
be
brought
up
to
the
current
building
code.
Yeah
I'm,
not
saying
it
could
be
done,
the
expense
might
be
great,
but
it
could
be
done.
K
I
also
looked
at
the
option
of
moving
the
structure.
I,
don't
believe
at
all
that
the
additions
are
added
on
to
the
structure
would
be
able
to
be
moved.
Those
will
not
take
it.
You'll
lose
those
additions
right,
quick
once
you
start
putting
those
I-beams
underneath
the
structure,
those
separate
and
break
off,
pretty
quickly
the
initial
host
structure.
It's
a
possibility.
You
do
have
a
possibility
of
moving
that
structure,
whether
it
would
be
viable
once
it
hits
the
road
even
that
house
that
we
moved
just
across
the
street.
K
It
took
a
lot
of
damage
and
just
moving
it
I'm,
not
sure
if
it'll
make
it,
but
you
still
do
have
all
those
options
in
the
structure.
It's
a
nice
structure
and
what
I
understand
as
the
plan
for
this
structure
as
Heather
indicated,
it's
nothing
in
concrete
terms.
They
do
wish
to
make
it.
Some
kind
of
public
facility
has
a
MIDI
Mathai
here
it
would
be
R
the
name
of
the
person
who
passed
it
on
to
us,
but
the
actual
purpose
has
not
been
identified.
B
D
No,
he
was
talking
about
the
structure
that
was
moved,
that
we
had
the
cottage
down
here
moved.
That
was
the
one
he
was
kind
of
referring
to
that,
even
that
one
sustained
quite
a
bit
of
damage
when
it
went
literally
right
across
the
street,
which,
thank
goodness
it
went
literally
right
across
the
street,
did.
K
D
It's
that
that's
going
to
be
a
probably
a
private
residence
for
some
period
of
time,
because
that's
the
zoning
there
will
not
allow
for
anything
else.
They'd
have
to
rezone
that
to
allow
for
a
different
use
on
there,
because
they
had
talked
about
maybe
making
that
the
office
for
the
ecovillage,
but
it
can't
be
where
that
is
that's,
that's
technically
the
residential
areas.
It's
the
same
zoning
as
this,
where
it's
that
conditional
residential
mixed.
K
K
It
bases
off
structural
value
on
what
we're
speaking
of
is
a
fifty
percent
rule
for
FEMA.
Once
you
physically
alter
the
structure
and
the
fifty
percent
rule
is
generated
about
the
cost
of
the
structure
as
it
stands
today
only
and
then
fifty
percent
of
that
can
be
used
for
renovations
once
you
meet
that
or
exceed
it,
and
you
have
to
elevate
the
structure
to
meet
FEMA's
current
standards.
K
K
B
I
think
just
to
mention
this
I
think
that
it.
This
is
representative
of
one
of
the
problems
in
the
city
of
neglect,
of
structures
that
are
are
just
left
the
set-
and
you
know
deteriorate
over
time
and
this
one
as
I'm
just
you
know,
observing
from
the
master
site
file
that
was
only
seven
years
ago,
but
apparently
it's
been
vacant
and
just
sitting
and
I
wish.
There
was
something
we
could
do
more.
B
B
H
D
That's
and
that's
one
of
those
things
that
we
really
had
looked
at
as
potential
before
Anthony
kind
of
evaluated.
The
structure
was
maybe
if
they
do
do
something
with
a
public
use
their.
Maybe
we
can
maintain
that
structure
and
use
it
for
something
storage,
something
so
that
we,
you
know
we
can
maintain
it,
but
it's
just
it's
not
something
that
we're
gonna
be
able
to
do
because
it's
really
unsafe.
We
don't
want
people
in
it.
B
D
It's
something
that's
a
feasible
option,
but
it's
I
don't
know
that
that
would
be
based
on.
What's
there
again
I,
I
would
have
to
defer
to
Anthony
whether
the
structure
itself
is
going
to
be
sound
enough
to
use
for
anything
that
we
would
allow
the
public
to
be
to
be
on.
You
know
if
this
was
a
private
residence.
D
You
know,
then
we're
kind
of
you're
taking
you
the
liability
on
yourself,
but
when
you're
talking
about
the
public,
it's
you,
you
know
you
have
to
have
a
tee
a
compliant
facilities
and
all
the
type
of
thing
I
mean
it
might.
Maybe
a
shed
is
exempt
from
that.
But
you
know
there's
a
lot
of
considerations
when
you're
dealing
with
the
public.
I
I
I
B
F
F
D
To
staff
comments,
but
the
first
one
is
the
most
exciting
one,
so
I'm
going
to
start
with
that
one.
This
wonderful
lady
next
to
me
is
your
new
principal
planner.
Her
name
is
Lisa.
Where
go,
she
came
to
us
from
Marion
County.
She
lived
up
in
the
city
of
ocala
she's
living
here
locally
and
she's
been
with
us
for
about
three
weeks
now
we
were
thrilled
to
have
her
I'm
gonna
give
her
the
mic,
so
she
can
say
a
few
words,
but
I
wanted
to
go
ahead
and
introduce
her
to
all
the
boards.
D
L
D
Okay,
the
other
item
that
I
have
for
you
is
the
Rose
cemetery
is
going
to
be
coming
forward
next
month.
It's
more
of
a
procedural
thing:
I'm
not
going
to
get
into
the
case
because
it's
it's,
they
want
to
designated
a
national
national
structure
or
a
National
Historic
Register
I'm,
going
to
forward
that
application
to
you
guys.
You'll
have
a
little
bit
longer
to
do
to
review
the
materials,
because
this
is
a
different
thing.
We
don't
do
it
a
lot.
We've
got
a
lot
of
new
members
on
the
board.
D
I,
don't
know
who
was
here
the
last
time
that
they
did
the
last
one
that
they
did
so
I'm
going
to
go
in
for
the
materials
for
you,
I'm
also
going
to
send
you
that
section
of
the
code.
That
applies
because
it's
a
very
different
section
we're
going
to
be.
Basically
you
your
role
is
more
of
a
appointed
board
roller.
You
basically
make
a
recommendation
to
the
board,
so
I
will
go
over
that
whole
applet
that
whole
process.
D
If
you
choose
to
go
forward
when
we
actually
hear
the
application
will
go
over
what
the
next
steps
are,
how
you
want
to
be
how
you
want
to
participate
if
you
want
to
participate,
we'll
go
through
that
during
that
hearing,
but
I
just
want
to
get
you're
going
to
get
that
material
early.
You
actually
are
going
to
have
four
applications
at
your
next
meeting,
but
that
application,
specifically
I'm
going
to
for
that
information,
to
give
you
a
longer
time
to
review
it
and
also
that
section
you'll
get
a
staff
analysis
with
it
as
well.
D
It
will
just
come
later.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
you
have
enough
time
to
go
over
that,
because
it's
a
very
different
process-
and
we
have
a
lot
of
new
members
here.
That
may
want
to
do
some
research
on
their
own
to
understand
or
have
questions
that
I'd
be
glad
to.
You
know,
get
you
in
contact
with
whoever
you
need
to
get
in
contact
with.
If
you
need
that-
and
you
know
we
a's
on
this-
how
much
as
possible,
but
I
want
to
get
that
information
out
to
end
literally
got
the
application
stuff
today.
D
So
I'm
going
to
be
sending
it
out
to
you,
probably
tomorrow,
I'm,
so
that
you
can
start
looking
at
that
stuff
and
then
it
will
get
advertised
and
go
out
with
the
normal
cycle
at
the
end
of
this
week.
So
just
so,
you
know
that's
coming
forward
it's
more
of
a
procedural
thing
than
anything
else.
As
far
as
I
just
want
you
guys
to
understand
what
we're
going
through,
because
we
have
new
board
members,
and
this
is
a
different
type
of
application.
D
D
So
we're
going
to
try
to
you
know,
advance
those
as
quickly
as
possible.
We'll
push
this
board
along
with
the
boa
board
forward,
because,
basically
you
guys
make
your
own
decisions,
you
don't
you're,
not
a
recommending
board
and
then
Planning
Board
will
get
there's
a
little
bit
later,
but
because
these
applications,
you
know
we
do
still
send
out
our-
have
sent
out
all
the
letters
on
all
the
applications
that
you
have
looked
at
up
to
this
point.
So
we're
caught
up
there.
B
D
Guidelines
I
started
pulling.
It
started,
requesting
some
resources
from
other
places,
I've
kind
of
fallen
behind
the
wayside,
because
now
Lisa's
here
and
I
need
to
I
need
to
get
her
up
to
speed.
But
I've
made
some
requests
on
looking
at
some
of
the
adjacent
communica
munities
that
are
cgl
communities.
I
want
to
try
to
get
a
good
sampling
of
those
and
then
we'll
try
to
figure
out
if
what's
the
best
way
to
workshop
with
that.
D
We're
also
going
to
need
to
talk
about
potential
updates
to
your
ordinance
for
historic
preservation
and
what
this
board
is
interested
in
doing
because,
as
we
talked
about
tonight,
there
is
a
discrepancy
between
your
demolition
section
in
your
economic
hardship
section
and
the
burden
of
proof
that
you
require
each
of
those
applicants
to
to
provide
when
I
was
new.
I
did
not
know
that
there
was
a
difference,
so
I
took
the
word
of
the
board
until
I
prepared
this
last
application
and
went
through
point
by
point
said:
wait
a
minute.
D
There
is
this,
but
it's
allowed
it's
only
for
economic
hardship.
So
if
someone
comes
in
and
all
they're
asking
for
is
a
demo
and
a
new
construction
they're,
not
asking
for
that
they're
not
required
they're
not
held
to
the
same
burden
as
that
person.
On
that
economic
hardship,
fair,
was
there
or
not?
That's
just
the
way.
It
is
the
other
section
that
I
need
to
bring
back
for
you
guys,
as
we
had
talked
about
last
year,
was
the
demolition
section
where
we
had
the
waiting
period.
D
I
basically
had
said
that
my
recommendation
to
this
board
is
that
we
provide
you
the
Avenue
an
option
to
do
that,
but
that
it's
not
a
mandatory
thing.
It's
at
this
board's
discretion,
because
sometimes
it's
going
to
be
warranted,
and
sometimes
it's
not
and
this
board
is
intelligent
enough
to
determine.
When
that
happens,
you
guys
know
what's
happening
in
this
historic
district.
It
doesn't
have
to
be
a
mandatory
thing
because,
what's
going
to
end
up
happening,
if
it's
a
mandatory
thing,
is
you
had
a
caveat
in
the
in
the
code?
That's
error
in
that
section.
D
That
said
well,
if
we
don't
want
it
we'll
just
we'll
just
do
away
with
it.
Well
then,
we
really
should
be
doing
it
the
opposite
way.
If
you
choose
it,
it
will
be
a
tool
in
your
toolbox.
Right
it'll
be
one
of
the
options
in
that
code.
So
that's
going
to
come
forward.
Your
rules
and
procedure
will
be
updated.
Your
section
for
heritage
preservation
based
on
the
the
Charter
and
what
they're
doing
with
the
standardization
may
need
to
be
updated.
D
We're
going
to
look
at
all
that
stuff
and
try
to
do
one
uniform
discussion,
so
we
may
have
multiple
meetings
to
kind
of
go
through.
All
of
that,
but
I'll
try
to
make
it
as
painless
as
possible
so
that
we
can
go
through
that.
That
may
not
be
the
last
go
at
that
document.
You
may
need
to
go
again
once
we
get
the
design
manual
up
and
start
really
looking
at
that,
because
you
may
find
that
when
you
look
at
design
manuals,
oh
well,
there's
something
in
that
design
manual.
D
D
That's
my
goal
is
to
try
to
get
all
those
steps
through
and
then
at
least
that's
progressing
through
the
design
manual,
because
if
we
need
to
go
for
the
next
round
of
grant
funds
for
anything,
if
you
guys
are
interested
in
doing
that,
I've
got
to
have
time
to
prepare
the
application,
because
what
happened
with
this
last
grant
application
is
I,
got
all
the
way
through
the
process
with
them
and
they
needed
additional
information.
I
don't
have
the
staff
time
to
donate
to
the
step
to
that
application.
D
So
we
had
to
pull
that
back
and
withdraw
that
application.
That
doesn't
look
because
I
don't
want
things
going
forward
with
our
name
on
it
that
are
half
done,
that
they're
going
to
recommend
that
they
don't
get
funded
I
want
when
we
prepare
a
grant
application
going
forward,
it's
going
to
be
successful,
grant
application.
D
We
need
to
do
that
and
do
it
right.
So
it's
done
the
way
that
this
board
wants.
So
it
becomes
a
tool
that
you
can
actually
utilize,
not
just
another
book
that
we
put
on
the
shelf
that
we,
what
we
did
this,
that
that's
not
what
we're
looking
for.
We
want
to
have
concrete
documentation
and
I
really
think
that
you
need
to
be
updating
the
buildings
that
have
been
demolished
and
new
buildings
that
have
been
come
up.
That
stuff
all
needs
to
be
updated
in
our
master
site
file.
D
It's
not
been
done
so
that
those
things
need
to
be
done
and
you
need
a
better
tool
in
your
toolbox
for
the
general
public
to
have
to
actually
be
able
to
search
that
database.
It's
not
set
up
to
really
be
user-friendly,
which
is
fine,
but
people
are
becoming
more
and
more
conscious
of
inter
of
information,
and
they
want
to
be
able
to
readily
access
it.
They
don't
want
to
have
to
make
a
phone
call
to
my
office.
D
They
want
to
be
able
to
do
it,
so
we
need
to
come
up
with
a
good
tool
that
they
can
readily
access.
So
in
mr.
bolt
and
I
didn't
forget
about
you,
I'm
still
working
on
the
clerk's
office
with
how
we
do
title
searching
and
that
type
of
thing
as
far
as
historic
structures
and
stuff,
that's
something
that
we
now
are
getting
some
gif
staff
on
board.
So
once
that
happens,
I'm
going
to
have
them
identify
all
those
parcels.
D
Once
that's
done,
it
can
generate
a
list
for
me
based
on
an
address
locator,
and
I
can
just
give
that
to
them.
I
can
give
the
same
thing
to
the
folks
in
building
development.
So
that
they
will
have
another
tool
at
their
disposal
if
they
can't
get
ahold
of
somebody
in
my
office,
they
don't
have
to
send
that
person
outdoor
that
person.
They
can
look
down
a
list
and
at
least
say
okay,
it's
this
or
it's
that.
So
that's
it's
all
tools
then
planning
on
building,
but
it's
going
to
take
some
time.
D
As
I
get
least
up
to
speed
and
kim
continues
to
learn,
you
know
a
little
bit
more
about
planning
as
she
goes
along
and
her
her
career
here.
So
that's
what
we're
planning
on
doing?
I've
heard
everybody.
It's
just
it's
a
lot
of
things
to
happen
in
a
very
short
amount
of
time.
We're
gonna
have
to
just
be
you
know,
kind
of
plug,
along
with
what
we
can
do,
but
certainly
the
minutes
will
be
are
going
to
be
our
in
the
forefront
of
all
of
that.