##VIDEO ID:1k7d_yAnCwU## [Music] all right you all ready sir good evening welcome for those of you in the audience who have not attended one of these hearings recently please allow me to review our normal procedure staff will introduce each item for consideration as we go down the agenda if you would like to speak on a matter please fill out the speaker form located out in the lobby uh indicate which numbered item on the agenda you are going to be speaking about whether and also whether you're for or against the item and then since we don't have a clerk who are we handing that to today who wants to volunteer yeah bring it to me I'll figure it out the applicant and supporters will be heard first those in opposition to the request will be heard next then the applicant will be given a chance for rebuttal comment should be restricted to pertinent information regarding the agenda item under consideration and if you are an individual you will have three minutes for comments and if you represent a group you'll have six minutes speakers should move closer to the podium uh when their item is being presented by staff speakers also should identify themselves clearly for the record by stating their name and address each speaker should be given respectful and courteous attention also the board may ask questions of speakers staff uh or whomever we want to talk to you're welcome each speaker should be given respectful and cous attention any disagreements that happen in the community that's all outside we don't get into that here uh information that you might want to share photos site plans letters things like that uh presented at the public hearing will be kept as part of the public record uh if you have things that are on a digital device only we ask that you uh make sure the next day to send a copy to staff I'll then ask for a motion from the board once a motion has been made and seconded discussion will be closed to the floor following board discussion a vote will be taken during voting board members who do not cast objecting votes will be considered to have voted in favor of the motion any person grieved by any decision of the board of of this board May within 15 day F 15 days file their appeal to the board of County Commissioners and after tonight's hearing staff can help you with that if necessary and in closing I'll just remind you it's R Scout season so uh Kathy there you go boom I got cath this is yours you don't bribe them on TV all right with that number one please good evening Kathy Hamill interim planning manager and I'm going to be presenting tonight a previous planning manager's decision um that decision um was appealed and it is a planning manager appeal of the planning manager's determination that a conversion permit or an application for a principal structure unit to establish a principal use on the property must be applied for and approved by the county prior to the submitt and consideration of a variance request for an existing legal accessory structure I'm going to go I'm going to take a step back kind of give you guys the groundwork of how we came to um this situation um prior to 2015 there were two platted Lots on Shady Lane there was Lot 19 and lot 20 they were functioning as a single family home they had a mobile home they had a garage and they had a boat dock and this is quite common where people will combine lots and make it one building lot um but in 2015 the mobile home was removed and as soon as the mobile home was removed that is what created the situation because then you no longer had a primary use you had two accessory structures which aren't allowed to be a primary use on the on the property and then so they're still combined and then in 2020 I believe that um the applicants purchased one of the Lots and then from there there was a code violation for having the accessory structures without a primary use and the remedy for that was for them to remove those accessory structures um we then met with the applicants representative trying to come up with some options that they could have one of them was the code enforcement to remove the accessory structures the second was to put a primary use on on the property so then those accessory structures would be legal or they could convert the garage do a conversion of the garage and make that a single family home um they went to the code enforcement board presented those she G has given you some additional time to get the permits or go through the process so he submitted for a variance because because the garage was basically kind of put right in the middle of the lot it didn't meet the setbacks needed and so not just was it allowed to be there without a primary structure it also didn't meet the applicable setbacks so the applicant came in do to have a variance um we um at that time we in reviewing the the variance our sual County Land Development code prohibits a variant prohibits a variant to be be taken to the board of adjustment prior to legitimizing the accessory structures on the property um the current use of the property for accessory structures is not a legal use of the property and granting a variance to the garage without it being converted over to a single family home is not allowed you can't Grant a variance to an illegal structure and so hence we have the appeal of that planing me manager's determination that they believe that you you can have um the disagreement is that that you can't have those structures without having a primary structure um let me make sure that I didn't miss anything and just in summary that there must be a principal structure a mobile home or a conversion of the garage um at the time and then at that time we can consider um the variances for the legal accessory structures and this concludes my presentation I'll be happy to answer any questions gentleman any questions yes sir Mr Excuse me uh yes chair this is just for a matter of public record uh just for um due to personal and professional relationship with the the owners of the land um I will be refraining from any comment uh on this particular matter and voting as well and voting as well noted thank you app that's appreciate that thank you of course um gentlemen any other questions um m a few questions yes I understand what's I understand what's said in our packet and I understand what you just said a few minutes ago about the code prohibits uh taking an action on the variances until the current illegal use and I say it of course in a non-criminal is taken care of yes what's the site for that does it actually say that action is prohibited do we have a site for that um can I answer that question please yes NAA borker Deputy County attorney for the record so as Kathy said in her um in her open in her statement um the violation on the property which has been adjudicated by the special magistrate is accessories structures on the property without a primary structure that has already been determined as being in violation has it I hear that but just for for for my purposes we're we're counselor we'll get to you in a minute and um Can can you give me a site to the code that the special Master referred to in reaching that decision and I know I'm catching you flat footed that might not be fair that's okay I will give you a site to the code for the original violation but since that time the Land Development code was reorganized they there was a LDC amendment that reorganized it so the site is no longer valid so I'm going to give you a site to what was in the notice of violation and then a site to the accessory structure provision if you want the most updated Chang it okay well then then I guess my next question is is the is the County's position basically if we're if we're talking about the variances that's basically a fruit of the poison tree type argument so the violation let me answer the first question um 3.6.1 point2 accessory buildings and uses in residential areas this is in the rm1 zoning District subsection B in no event shall an accessory building boat dock or structure be established prior to the principal use to which it is accessory being be established defined as thank you the county defines that as the accessory structures must be on the property with a primary use in this case the original accessory structures were established when there was a primary use on the property because as Kathy said Lots 19 and 20 there were they were combined so they were developed all together they were developed with a mobile home on on the property and then the accessory structures were on the property the mobile home was then demolished removing the principal structure and then the properties were split and the split caused well the the removal of the mobile home and the non-replacement of the mobile home with another primary structure caused the accessory structures to be on the property without a primary structure thereby not being accessory any longer they're primary at that point or they don't have a primary structure and the structures that were built on the property then violated the setback because the properties weren't combined anymore so the garage now sits right on the property line between the illegally split structures they didn't go through the process to split the structures to split the Lots when they came forward they just deed them to two separate people the by they I mean the prior owners I I I follow and and you're making sense and I appreciate that two two quick questions and then then I won't I won't Grill you all night a question I had asked earlier is it it sounds like if you if you distill down the County's argument it's basically that going considering the variances uh before taking care of that illegal use you're basically a fruit of the poison tree argument is right that bringing the variances forward on the accessory structures would legitimize the accessory structures and further our position is that the board of adjustments can't Grant the variance on the on the accessory structures because it' be permitting a use that's not permitted by the code and that's prohibited under well that's not a power given to the board of adjustments you have limited Authority you only have the power given to you that's in the Land Development code would it be last question I promise would this would it I doubt that though I hate it when you're right um would it be would we be allowed to consider you know consider and deny that's one thing but consider and approve the variances contingent upon those those illegal uses being rectified yes so our position staff's position is that these can't move forward because we don't have we have a building permit in for conversion of the garage but it hasn't moved forward the comments haven't been addressed um the staff wants it to see so the last comment is you need a variance for this everything else is taken care of on the plans and then they come through the variance and then it' be conditioned on that yes so the variance for the principal structure at that point if they were to do the conversion um if they were going to put a new uh primary use on the property that was within the setbacks they wouldn't have to come in for a variance but I'm probably getting two in the weeds in answering your question so the question is do you have the authority to say we are going to overturn the planning manager's decision and say that the variance for the accessory structures can move forward to be considered by our board yes you have the authority to do that um if you did that if that was the will of the board then uh the application for the variance would move through the process and it would come back to you and at that time you could take action on that however you saw fit but I would be consistently reminding you of what the code requires and what your Authority is I follow makes perfect sense thank you uh gentlemen last second call any questions you've been so patient thank you sir y um I'm going to clean up a little bit because you did just I'm sorry um Mr Jones can you just state your name for the record um Mark Jones uh here on behalf of uh Dennis and Juliet dregers the owners of the property um I'm going to clean a couple things up um it's our position this was not an illegal lot split and quite frankly I just figured this out this morning so I'm I'm this is not my I got you moment but I contacted the Property Appraiser's office because I was curious to when this parcel actually got its parcel ID it did not happen in the 2020 warranty deed it actually in 2014 the owner of the property filled out and applied for a lot split to the Property Appraiser's office um now I understand that doesn't mean that this is a developable lot at that point but it did create a legal lot that sat there for six years before it was then transferred by warranty deed um so it wasn't an illegal lot split but it is subject to the zoning when the lot split took place okay so here's a couple other important things that I think need to the board to hear these structures were built in 1967 these aren't anything that the property owners did the property owners quite frankly didn't do anything wrong um they're what you would call a buyer and due course um the lot was for sale willing seller legal lot they purchased it they got a warranty deed they got a a title policy which isn't going to cover something like this because it was a legal lot split and they bought the property here's another important factor for the board to consider they bought this property in 2020 in 2022 they applied for and received a permit to R roof the barn in question uh the county came out to the property inspected the property inspected the roof approved the roof it's there in my world in legal world that's called a stopple okay the county knew it was there considered it a legal structure but approved a permit on this structure notwithstanding then we come to 200 um 23 and like most code enforcement issues the two neighbors were going back and forth with one another and they I don't know why but um Turned the dredgers in and code enforcement shows up and starts doing some inspections and and investigations on the property the dredgers find out well maybe we do have a problem so they requested a uh inspection report or a um uh some kind of investigative report on the structure and that's when all this came out and the county said wait a minute the warranty deed created an illegal lot split that's not the case Okay um we did work with the county and I was very appreciative staff was pretty good in coming to a resolution that we thought we could live with they were going to convert this garage into a a home they had a 5year plan plan to make all this happen when they purchased the property within 5 years they were going to retire on that little lot well they didn't realize that that the conversion costs for that 1967 garage County building Department's requiring they want some pretty intrusive testing to figure out what's under the slab they um the property's in a flood plane even though it's never seen a drop of water inside that garage Ian didn't even touch it but um so the cost to convert that garage wasn't something that these folks could handle uh we submitted building plans they went through the inspections that budget was here by the time it got out of County review it was up here so they took a step back and the plan that we had with the county was convert the garage get the variances you're fine and we were moving towards that well we got thrown a curveball with the increased costs of the garage so these folks over the last few months have been investigating what can we put there we've got a general contractor he's came in come in and explained to them what size uh mobile home they can put out there they're working through the financing of the mobile home so I asked the board I filed it all at once because I was trying to get this thing moving right and the variance application was filed and they came back and said nope you can't do it now so I'm asking for conditional approval of the variants um Mr dregers he's right over here is it your wife's and your intent to have a mobile home on that property by the end of this year so we are working towards the ultimate solution where none of this is a problem I just want some time for these folks so I believe it was said that we can get a knock it back down to have the variance reviewed and it can get approved conditionally upon putting in a primary dwelling unit on the property cuz that's the ultimate goal thank you sir gentleman any questions yes one question yes sir yes Edward Levant back to when you said the permit was given for the roofing was there any notice or citation given that the by the county that the structure was illegal at that time not at all okay thank you nor would you like to com we'll we we'll get to rebuttal we'll get to rebuttal in in a minute just take take lots of notes uh couple of questions on the issues of of of the lot split there's there's two thoughts that come to mind one is as we're discussing it now though but isn't it to a certain degree kind of a res judicata issue that that's already been decided at was wasn't there I think Deputy County attorney had mentioned there was a decision by somebody on that point I don't believe there was the the the code enforcement wasn't on the lot split the code enforcement was that the structures didn't they they weren't allowable under the zoning it didn't have anything really to do with the lot split or whether it was legal or not I'm just here to again I just thought it was interesting it was a legal lot split not withstanding the way the property stands right now the zoning that's on it I agree we need to have I'm not arguing that fast fact we need to have a primary structure there it's just the timing of it gotcha second question on the lot split there was the arguably illegal lot split done by deed you had found uh through through your hard work a a an earlier document on the lot split correct do the lines of where the split occurs between those two documents match so here's an interesting thing the county didn't do anything as far as the lot a little history I learned today that's pretty neat uh this came from a plat from 1960 uh it was one of the only subdivisions out in that area Believe It or Not There is a subdivision out in Geneva it is this one for some unknown reason the county vacated that plat but all the lots are still there right so when these folks split the lot the the property appraisers office and I've got in an email from from Katie Grasso this morning they didn't do anything they just the lot that was there they just called that a new lot so they didn't it didn't change anything does that make sense it does but my question though is that even though nothing was done on the on the older item that you recently discovered are the lines the same as the lines on the deed yes okay um and of course someone someone who's a buyer and do course that doesn't necessarily give them a right to do something that's contrary to the Land Development code no no it doesn't which which of course you you disagree with that determination but at least just philosophically we're we're in agreement on that I'm stating these folks didn't do anything MH right in my interpretation of the code also is it says to as you notice be established well in my mind that means to to build a barn right if if if these folks came on and bought this lot and they put in uh a built a shed him him and his buddy went out there on a weekend and and bought some Lumber and they built a shed and and put an electrical line on it in plumbing and didn't get any permits at all they deserve to be in front of Code Enforcement right that's not what happened here I mean this is a 60 plus year old fully functioning Barn there's nothing wrong with this thing and the County's initial solution to all this was tear it down that's Cod enforcement yeah uh all right uh second call any other questions based on this conversation thank you sir appreciate it is there anyone in the audience here to speak in support of the applicant or of the we don't do that in planning manager appeals do we you can ask for public comment just public I see hand are you speaking in in support sir yes sir please well no please please come to the microphone what a good puppy you have uh yes Daisy her name is Daisy if you could please share with us sir your your your name and address for the record uh my my address is 2060 Shady Lane I am his neighbor Daisy I'm sorry I to no no no no we're we're all dog people here it's okay supposed to stay where she's supposed to stay she's just uh a little nosy no she's okay um sit down all right um in support of him sir I missed your name could you just state your name I know your dog's name is Daisy DA yeah everybody wants to talk to Daisy nobody wants to talk to me uh my name is Lawrence Bernstein okay I'm the owner of the adjoining lot split that we're talking about I'm on the on the other side of that lot split I'm part of that lot split it was one lot and now it's now it's two lots legally all right um you know I don't I you know what they're talking about uh demolishing that building uh you know that's unrealistic that building's been there long with than not been almost alive and uh that's that shouldn't shouldn't even enter into anybody's mind I don't have a problem in the world with the building being where it is it's actually 3 feet short um of the 10t set setback you're talking about 3 feet you know that's ridiculous you know the variant should uh if when comes before you it should be approved yeah easily there because there there's nothing there stopping for except 3 feet you were talking about 36 in you know uh that's unrealistic and uh you know as far as I'm concerned and I signed a letter stating that that that by all means go ahead with uh with building whatever you want on that lot uh I'm all for it you know I I you know it's it's right up against the defense but it it's okay with me completely you know so thank you sir all right appreciate that wel find my dog is there anyone else in the audience who'd like to speak on this matter Daisy I'm sorry Daisy come on come on also Mr Jones would would you would you mind please uh publishing to the board that that new document you'd found sure just so we can just since it was referred to do you is that your only copy do you need it back no okay I understand I lose it once I give it to you anyone else here in the audience anyone in the audience to speak in favor of this matter or opposed to this matter all right um I think what I'd like to do then is here's staff's rebuttal and then Mr Jones let you have the last word I just wanted to follow up with the building permit for the re roofs re roofs don't re roofs do not require zoning approval because it's just putting Improvement on existing structure so it would have not been reviewed or captured by zoning at that time gotcha anything else from staff in response yes ma'am I'll just make one note um I'll just uh direct you to page 30 of the minutes from the spe code enforcement special magistrate minutes I believe you had a question about the code enforcement case and so if you look like the the fourth to the last line it said officer Hill stated that to be in compliance there would have to be a primary residence on the property and the special magistrate agreed and stated that is the goal and then Mr Jones said that he'll give his clients time to put a mobile home on the property if they have to gotcha thank you ma'am anything else from staff or the County County Attorney's Office all right Mr Jones final word I think I've said pretty much everything I need to say unless there's any other questions at all I have a question yes sir Mr Joon about this document I mean looks like the it was the application by potentially the trustee of the original property and it was received by the county was there any action taken that you know of by the county you'll you'll notice on there there's an approval towards the lower quarter of the page it was approved and um thank you that that I was expecting to see something a little bit more than I got something official on understand something any questions all right thank you sir uh gentlemen your favor your pleasure any motions um question for staff real quick Kathy I know you're just looking at that yeah document is there anything anything we should be worried about on that document or anything that's out of sorts well this document is from s County property appraiser not from our office if it had our office as a head on this so this is for their their tax purposes it's not for zoning purposes it's not a process for us we do have a lot combination form in this is not it a lot um it goes both way combining or UNC combining so so what so what is it then I think what this is is that these are platted Bots that have been accepted by some County and so when you go to property appraiser it's not like they're creating a a new lot they're just falling back on the platted lot that was accepted and approved by the county and That's The Way We Were were able to legitimize the lot so because they didn't make any changes at all they were the original dimensional requirements of the lots that were approved and accepted by the county and I I agree with that Mr Jones I'm don't mean to speak but yes sure do you want thank you for catching that sorry I just want to have a conversation in the hall sorry no and and I agree glad with what's been said um but that didate a legal lot the the the difference is once it lost the residential structure on it the other two structures became non-compliant which I'm not arguing with right but but the the premise that what was in one of the reports and what what came to me to appeal it started off with a report that this was an illegal lot split and and I don't agree with that I'm just and again I'm I'm not trying to determine based on our report we there is a procedure that we go through just one second um the question you know I was looking at is that the permit that was issued or applied for in 2015 approximately I don't know N9 months after that application was done there was when they were requesting to be demolishing the uh uh removed the mobile home so if the lot was split then no your timeline's a little off I I apologize I'm looking at the isn't that date on that form the 201 2014 October 8th I think it was oh this year yeah the demolition order from that my client got was in 2023 okay I I I'm just looking at our report it says 2015 April 23rd was it when a demolition permit was issued to remove the mobile home and I'm just trying to find out the timeline I'm I'm the one that's getting confused yes you're right okay so I'm just I'm wondering why the lot was it was split into two individual tax parcels with a home that was I don't know on one side or not so to be removed so yeah I I can't I just got that document this morning I I can't answer that question yet correct October 8th 2014 Megan zorski clerk for the record thank I also want to note that when when we fill out that form there's criteria in which we will split a piece of property one of the major ones is that you cannot make any existing building non-conforming on there and the garage is non-conforming so we would have not approved that that lot split we are now because of him stating that he does want to make a primary structure if he does all those things and gets the variances then we could legitimize the lots and that's what we're moving towards right I mean I think we'd all agree that's that's what we've been moving towards um it was to be the garage conversion that that's just not possible so we are going to have a a mobile home on that lot and the mobile home can be in within the variances corre would you still keep the garage yes I mean why would I mean just asking yeah yeah there's um I don't think any person would would who's been there to see it there not only the garage just there's another issue there's a dock this this is this property is on a canal that leads right out to the St John's river and it's got a very if I could this is the structure we're talking about the garage this right here is the dock if I were in I could let this go I'm not letting that dock go cuz it's pretty it's pretty nice it's concrete it's got a boat lift and and the County's initial solution was tear it all down so you can legitimize this slot split I that's just not acceptable so um hold on one one I'm sorry that was my yeah yeah so um again the end goal is to get everything compliant and and that's what we were working on now I had filed the variances because again I was trying to move it all forward at the same time the garage conversion came off the playing board but the variances kept going forward in my mind and I was trying to keep it going without losing application fees and all the stuff that goes along with that gotcha gotcha thank you sir so if you are going forward the plan now is to put a mobile home on the piece of property then making the accessory structures legal except for the the variances so if you can get the mobile home into building department and get it accepted then we can start the variance process for the shed but make it conion on the final approval of the mobile home does that sound good totally agree that that's what I my legal councel agrees with me yes he's also next are we are we making this issue moot then or should we continue it or I still feel as though that the planning manager's decision is correct that you should not have an accessory structure as a primary use um so for me I still would recommend you uphold that determination that's not going to impact him him applying for the mobile home he's going to get the the mobile home is allowable use so he's going to get the mobile home and will just you know fix the variance when the mobile home is up let me ask this question just to make sure I heard you correctly and I I don't want to presume to say I know how these gentlemen will vote but is is what you're just saying that let's say this this board does affirm the decision of the planning manager what was just discussed most recently here can still go forward that won't Kos any of that I got you all right thank you all thank you no please go ahead I have a question our our decision tonight is whether to uphold or not uphold the planning manager's decision we have nothing as far as how we worry about the the actual variances what would you just all discussed though was a a possible scenario to move things forward very conditionally on you know the residence being placed so that it meets our requirements um how does the applicant if if if as a board we can't approve that variance how do how does we get by that I mean I understand there we could approve it with a condition under those it'll come back to us but the code says that we can't approve the variants regard there's no we can't approve it flat out they're they're discussing a way to fix it yeah approval with a VAR you know a conditional variance that's all I'm asking is how that how that would move forward because what I understand from the applicant could you bring the microphone down please I'm for the folks on TV please I'm sorry um with the applicant is that they would like to proceed forward with a mobile home on the property so what we can do is that you know mobile home is a pretty easy quick process um it's not it's not like building um a house once that is submitted we then can allow them to apply for the Varian and go forward concurrently and then we will not Co the um mobile home until the variance is granted to the shed and then everything will be legit good that's your question kind of I mean the the language was that I read through all the documentation was that the condition was that it would be placed it would be the permit would be submitted and approved I I what you just said is submitted then we could move forward is that I'm correct no so a a permit is submitted and then it's approved and then if it's for a residential structure it's seed and final so it could be submitted and approved and then that you you've said exactly what I just said okay yeah and I apologize Kathy what you said is it sounded like at least from my where I was sitting that they could submit it move forward with the variance but there wasn't anything regarding approval of the the thing and and it was different The Way It Was Written that's all I was trying to clarify it's submitted approved and then final final got it thank you quick question for you you're right no no no final questions uh ordinarily when we're considering an individual applicant variances and things like that for that whatever decision we make has no value no precedential value here though if we affirm or deny this decision does it have a precedential value I mean uh typically variances are looked at on a case-by casee basis but this is a planning Manor's decision oh that's right if we on that decision right yes it is Pres yeah all right gentlemen any other questions you've all done an excellent job thank just before we go just thank you all very very professional I appreciate it uh why don't someone bravely make a motion and then we can discuss it before voting Mr chair sir I make a motion to uphold the planning manager's decision we have a motion from the vice chair Mr Wright to uphold to affirm the planning manager is there a second Mr chair a second we have a second from Mr Levant discussion I'll I'll just share my thought on that and it's that boy do we see all the time people come in and innocently buy property and especially in the older parts of the county and then goodness there are all kinds of problems um and and I am so sympathetic for that but I I I do feel confident that in this matter staff has reached or the planning manager did reach a correct interpretation of the code um I feel a little better saying that because it sounds like the parties are moving towards an amicable resolution of it but I do think uh our staff our our always top-notch staff did interpret this correctly but that's my thinking and I I respect yall's decisions I'm I'm fully in agreement with the fact that I believe the decision was correct um and I'm the history has shown that both parties the applicant is still wanting to move forward with this the magistrate gave them time under those considerations and what I heard here is that you know obviously we have a at least a moving path forward to to try to find a resolution for it so um but I like I said I don't I don't see any reason there's nothing stands out to me that the planning manager made a mistake or or is an error in his version of or their version of it so thank you any other thoughts all right so we have a motion to affirm approve the uh decision of the planning manager it's been second all those in favor of the motion signify by saying I I I those opposed all right unanimously affirmed and of course Mr Jones if you guys can't work things out you know what to do thank you gentlemen yes indeed do you all want to move on to the second one or does anyone need a quick restroom break or all right item number two please good evening Angie Gates item number two is a request for a rear yard setback variance from 35 ft to 20 ft for a detached gym and a side yard sou setback variance from 20 ft to 10 ft for a storage container in the rc1 county homes district and the null wood subdivision located at 1667 Kingston Road the request is to bring into compliance the construction of two unpermitted accessory structures that were built into the required side and rear yard setbacks code violation 23- 268 on September 23rd 2024 the board of adjustment denied the applicant's request for rear yard setback variance from 35 ft to 10 ft and a sidey yard South setback variance from 20 ft to 7 ft for a 525 ft um squ foot detached Gem and also denied the request for a sidey yard South setback variance from 20 ft to 7 ft for a 160 Square ft storage container the applicant's new variance request is proposing to move the detached gem West 5 ft and north 13 ft to then only be encroaching the rear yard setback 15 ft instead of the originally requested encroachment of 25 feet by moving the detached gem North 13 feet the sidey yard South setback variance would no longer be needed for this structure the applicant is also proposing to move the 160t um storage container 3 ft to the north encroaching 10 feet into the required sidey yard South setback instead of the originally requested encroachment of 13 ft um I spoke to the gentleman in the rear he I believe he is here in opposition this evening he was here in opposition when the original variance was heard was before you um he'll have more to State it was last minute of the day so I he has documentation so I wasn't able to get any of that I had already shut down and came down here um to do that but um this concludes my presentation for this I'm I'm here and available for any questions that you may thank you ma'am gentlemen any questions seeing none is the applicant here come on up sir please if you'd uh share with us your name and address and whatever you'd like to share good afternoon my name is uh Dr Yasser Muses I'm the um husband of my wife is the the owner of that property 1667 Kingston Road um the magistrate like like uh the young lady was saying I'm basically moving in the the the structure that it was there to remedial the the situation that was happening already uh from the neighbor on the back this one right here so what I'm requesting for the uh for the board is basically before uh in June of last year I believe if you can correct me with that that uh the set setbacks were 20 from side and 20 from the back um basically right now they're 20 and 35 from the back um I'm just requesting the 20 because it gets really close to that septic tank and if I have to service that septic tank in the future I'm just kind of trying to planning ahead um I'm trying to figure it out that way it's not so close to the property that's basically it sir but I'm trying to figure it out how I can move on and get everything sorted out and and and then um pretty much congruent with everything and that way I eliminate the the headache of for my my neighbor and and and get everything sorted out sir gotcha yeah thank you sir gentleman any questions yes sir Mr Beasley bigley I was like thank you five years you got my name I appreciate that um so one of the biggest things that we look at that I know I do personally is I look at these circumstances number one question is how does the special condition circumstances that exist um on the land structure building basically uh not appliable to other land structures or buildings how is this a how does that apply because I see it says here there are no special conditions or circumstances one of the things that we looked at is you know when you buy a property when you buy a land you kind of know what you're getting yourself into this is what you're allowed to do with the land this is what you're allowed to do this you know you know your Parcels how how is this going to create a special circumstance is my question well to refract with you sir and I and I uh understand your point of view I I to be frank I didn't know the setbacks cuz I'm I'm not in construction I'm a doctor so I'm not in into that um the person and the company that we hired to do that told us that we weren't required any type of uh um uh permitting or anything like that and and again it was my fault I I I agree to it um you have documentation saying that no sir they don't they don't give you it's just a verbal and I was like okay you know you guys know what what to do um but right now my my my point is that I'm trying to move it and and and kind of Remedy the the situation that that is right now and and that way that septic tank is not so encroached to that building that's that's all you know I know and I know that you had said that I I know that we had heard from Angie that uh there's somebody in the back of course that will be speaking but I'm sure what are the other neighbors um yeah we don't get involved in the squabbles but what have you checked with any other the neighbors and uh the neighbor right next to me yeah has no issues and I have letters stating that he has no issues but the letters are from the pre previous variants that we were submitted on it I don't know if we can use it uh but he said that it wasn't an issue and the back neighbor for me doesn't have an issue either sir okay thank you Mr chair yes sir I would say if if they approved a more dense more intense use and you're now asking for something arguably less if you want to publish those letters and share them with us sure otherwise it's not something that's in the record you know the board can take whatever weight they want from it yes thank you and to reiterate Mr Wright um I took your advice and I put some vegetations in that area if you want to see the picture sir sure I'm assuming the other neighbor 1670 well I I'll I'll hold that for the neighbor puts it back there Madam clerk could you please rotate that about 90 degrees the other way kind of phone is it decides whether we want to keep it or not not that good right we get to keep the phone that it works that's right yeah it's our phone now there we go yeah okay I'm doing it upside and doctor could you please point to the the new plants you you'd mentioned these other ones one those gotcha bamboo yes sir got you are there other photos you'd like to share this one is a little bit fuzzy but he needs to sorry needs to send those pictures to staff right now and doctor please if you could um after the meeting if you if you could um send those email or whatever to staff please yes I will excellent gentlemen any other questions for the applicant yes sir Mr Evans um so really quickly about the the bamboo that you just showed us is is the purpose of showing us that bamboo to say that the metal structure isn't visible to any of the other homes cuz there's a bamboo Shield there now well from from last variant uh one of the suggestions was to put vegetations in that area because the the neighbor um on the back was having a big problem seeing the metal structure which I understand that point uh so I try to mitigate that type of situation just to work out something I'm not here to argue with with anybody so um so we did it meanwhile I knew that I had to move it because of varand was already uh denied so I did this basically just to to just kind of to to make sure I get the question answered so is it your belief that the bamboo is not only taller than the metal structure but basically Shields it from view from other neighbors it will get chill inut yes sir it will get chill yes sir and then if we could go back to the site plan um uh that he's he's gotten the the folder where on that and and she's pulling it up I know but where actually is your septic and drain P I'm not seeing on the site plan I just want to make sure um I've kind of in relation to where you have your proposals where is the septic and the the drain field okay all right so then that kind of brings me back to the metal building the metal building from if I recall from the last meeting yes sir is already constructed already poured it's got concrete base yes sir right everything's rooted correct so you know looking at at the terms of you know the the least restrictive means right if you have to remove the building anyway from its foundation and repour and re reset why aren't we able to put it into compliance where we don't need a variance like like I said earlier sir when when I measured I I just didn't and it's my opinion I just didn't feel comfortable being so close about 10 ft away from from from that septic tank that if I have to you know move the septic tank do anything with that area then I I'm I'm not going to be able to to work on it my opinion I'm I'm again I'm not a a construction person but I think it'll be easier for someone to maneuver them the heavy equipment when they do a septic tank okay all right that's fair yes sir you he questions yes one yes sir Mr leavon thank you chair when was the uh last time you've had your accepted Tank Service uh last tank um probably about a year ago so when you had your accepted Tank Service did you notice any additional area um that may encroach on the metal building like the surrounding area what the actual needed to work on the septic if I well the the tank has a lid okay so they can come in and they they they drain that area um and I don't know if I'm answering your question but if the drain fi a we have to change the drain field and fix it because something gets clotted or something like that then it will be encroach into and close to that that meal building proposal that that uh that I'm saying and that's why I'm I'm trying to figure it out and put it around 20 sir I don't know if I answer your question you answered my question thank the questions all right thank you sir welcome is there anyone else in the audience to speak or anyone in the audience to speak in support of this application seeing none do we have someone in the audience to speak in opposition to it sir please come down and when you get to the podium if you'd please share with us your name and address I give that to um thank you uh Mr chairman Mr Vice chairman and board um my name is Ken Shannon I own the property down in the corner 224 adir Avenue which is right across the uh right across the fence where his shed is it's it's unfortunate I was away when this happened a couple of years ago when he put this in I was actually at a country and came back and it was done really quick we we we have a great neighborhood everybody loves everybody and actually I'm sure we'd be good friends um he I'm sure he didn't do this maliciously I'm sure it was done because he needed this building and so that's my intention is not to be tough with with my neighbor um this is a drawing I did today uh just I'm I wanted to see what what's going on but a couple of things was was the prop did the zoning in the property change if I understand um my neighbor correctly originally there was a 35t setback line that recently changed to 20 is that true no okay oh I okay so it is 35 what there's a couple of things there's about a six to to 8ot topography change between my property and his property so when you're sitting on my pool deck and you look up what he's built is going to look a lot bigger because it's a story and a half I I don't know the dimensions of the building sorry I'm guessing it was 16 by4 just a guess so 16 by4 um it's a story and a half it's a white building it's 77 in from the property line you know it's just a big eyes swort and I appreciate that he put this was taken yesterday these are bamboo shoots that he put in there and I appreciate that he did it and you know and he put up a little fence he actually put a fence beside the trees to try to screen the building for us and that's something we appreciate I'm trying to understand though you know we have one acre lots in this in this neighborhood we have these setback lines for a reason because we have tons of space and there's lots of places is to put a building like that I understand the drain field thing there's a septic tank close to his house probably two septic tanks these houses are big and they have two septic tanks and potentially two drain Fields um I understand not wanting to break into the drain field I think it would be interesting to see where the edge of the drain field actually is because we're compassionate we need to look at that but this is a really good slide I'll tell you why take a look at the four houses in this picture there are two other houses that have out buildings one of them have both of them respect the setback lines you won't hear me when I do this but I'll show it you by the way you have about 30 seconds left this one and this one they both they both respect the setback lines I'm just saying that there's lots of places and I could work with our neighbor we want to be friends we want to be good neighbors There Are Places to put this the reason you don't want to put it visibly is because it's a steel structure building that's not very attractive I'm sure he doesn't want to look at it and I should have want to look at it you want to put it in a place where you don't see it that's that's that's obvious so we do we do disagree um but I want to work to to come up with the solution because we want to be good neighbors thank you sir I appreciate that gentleman do you have any questions for the speaker see any anyone else in the audience to speak in opposition you're okay do you want me back there yes sir yes sir you're you're you're I asked if they had questions and they didn't uh seeing nobody else in the audience just speak seeing none uh your pleasure gentlemen Mr chair Mr Wright motion to approve we have a motion to approve from Mr Wright do we have a second a second Mr chair Mr Levant has seconded any discussion seeing none all those in favor of the motion i i oppos n n and I'm going to vote on the eyesight there we go 3-2 motion passes number three item number three is request for a sidey yard North setback variance from 10 ft to 7 1/2 ft for a garage Edition and a rear yard setback variance from 30 ft to 10 ft for a detached Workshop in the A1 agriculture district and the Mandarin Section 8 subdivision located at 1841 Long Pond Drive the proposed garage addition will be 832 Square ft and will encroach 2 and 1/2 ft into the required North Side yard setback the proposed attach Workshop will be 1,200 square ft and will encroach 20 ft into the required rear yard setback there have not been any prior variances for the sub subject property and this concludes my presentation thank you ma'am gentlemen any questions for staff seeing none could you please sh with with your name and address sir uh name is Guy Cornell representative D Home Solutions um we're located at 709 Commerce Circle in Longwood you're a contractor yeah we never get to talk to the contractor this this is going to be great you get two this is n day the owner of D home Home Solutions and I'm the project manager for thank you sir what do you have to tell us well uh we're doing the uh um when when I when I fill up the variance report and stuff at the at the officer she had mentioned that the rear variance wasn't going to create a problem because of the was was within the setback she said because of being in the agriculture is what the gy variance office told me so I don't know whether that the rear variance is still going to be an issue yes yes there was some discrepancies in our oh okay so the code has changed and it is a 30 foot reard okay okay um well as I wrote down the you want to talk about that yeah part address please again Just sh with this your name and address for the record I'm n day I'm the contractor um so same same address uh same address 709 Commerce Circle Castle be or Longwood Florida um 32750 do you need my contractor's license number any other identification yes sir thank you see uh I want to address the backs the rear setback first because I this has gone back and forth we were told that it had a 30 foot setback off the backline and then we were told that it had a 10-ft setback which would be perfectly fine um and we're just really trying to figure out what the setback really is um You' made mention that there was some discrepancy what what's do you have any other information on that we're just trying to understand if we're filing for a variance or why or I mean I know you said yes but miss Gates do you feel I mean I can answer it I absolutely can answer it just try have respect that we're catching you flat footed so no I'm sorry no it's fine um when when the application came in for for review the it was originally submitted for both the setbacks that were presented before you today as you know our code changed in on April 1st of 2024 um there is a discrepancy with a footnote in our code there's two portions of our code one states that it meets the old setback which is 10ft side and rear the new code States until that footnotes removed the new portion of the code states that it has anything over 200 ft has to meet a 30ft rear yard setback so that is the code we are going with the new code though says 10 correct the new code says 30 feet wow so if they had just waited a little while it used to be 10 foot side and rear for anything in the in this zoning district there is a footnote that is being removed from code but it's still there so that means they have to be 30 foot in the rear yard and not the 10 so that's why this variance is applicable so when the homeowner purchased it he thought he that makes sense because we couldn't figure it out we he had plans drawn up with a 10-ft setback and then when we apply for permit they're like no it's a 30ft setback but then we got information that you don't really need to have we we've actually redone our variance paperwork a couple times because of this so I'm going to plead for that based on the fact that in reality this homeowner bought his home being told there's a 10-ft setback and it's been changed afterwards um and I think that's pretty cut and dry or should be um the other piece of this is the side yard we need what do we need guy 3 feet 7 yeah twoot we just kindly need to beg for a 7 fo6 set back off the side to so that we can give this man a three-car garage because the reality is a man needs a three-car garage and a woman needs a three-car garage so she can keep her man out of the house so um the you realize you were on television I I I'm trying to get some make money as a com comedian it's not working out very well um the uh we're and the reason we don't want to change that we can without tearing into the existing home we need that much room it's that's the minimum that we can have to get a three-car garage and they want to be able to drive through the three-car garage so that they can store trailers they they it's a EG so they can have a trailer back there they just want to keep everything neat and tidy we're doing a major facade change on the home it's going to be an improvement to the neighborhood um the 7 foot6 is very minimal change uh in set back off the sidey yard it will not encroach in the neighbor's yard um you know I don't I don't see where there'd be any any discrepancies and I don't think they had anybody no one had any negatives about it so that's all I have thank you gentlemen any any questions gentlemen Mr Sor Mr um just uh I I guess to be consistent so the the rear setback the 10 foot could you potentially move that Building forward so we could but it would encroach into the backyard quite a bit because there's also on this that it's something that I don't need a variance for we're adding a uh like a a pool Cabana back there so it'll put those so close together that it'll look weird Okay um we're doing like I said it's a major Improvement on the property um there a pool being redone you know new new covering a pool Cabana this storageworkshop um the three-car garage that you can drive through and then he has a nice neat place to keep his trailers where no one sees them um that's any other questions sir yeah Mr wght um my question obviously is similar um the not holding the 10-ft rear that you guys are looking for um understanding that in the in their criteria they indicate that they were having something constructed at the moment um without I mean again I don't we don't have a site plan but um you indicated that would be close proximity if they had to move the building the the shed in the back forward what kind of distance you talking about um let me see actually let me see we might have a s plan here bear with me a second may I submit this or pass it around this is the proposed this is anything just you know I'm speaking for the chair but obviously if you if you let us see it and you show it to us it stays with us so um maybe you just want to use it as we can print it again or we can put it up there I just didn't I didn't want you to hand it to it and then all of a sudden you asked for it back no no the we applied for permit it was voided you can see in there we've applied for one but it's voided until we get this under control is in there uh this was part of the original package so is that the the pool the construction that building with to the left to the rear of the this is existing that's the new part this is the new and then this is based on it being 10t off sure this is the original plans as so is there anything anything restricting it for coming it to your right forward um nothing restricting it but if you look at this in real life like we pulled this uh the 30 ft up when I had my survey my my surveyor went out and staked it out we had this pull 30 ft up and home owners like there's there's no way we can do this and I agree with them it puts this almost in line and it just looks it takes away from the backyard understood I just I again for me I'm looking how to balance it you know I mean I I you know know you 30 may be extringent but you know if you came up another 5et you know can you do that and we've already kind of determined that you know seven feet isn't a big deal so um yeah I mean I think that would be a probably a reasonable compromise it's not my final decision to be understood you know there a propos our our goal here is to you know obviously give you whatever the minimum we think you know can work so at least that would be my opinion but you know I mean 10t 10 ft strong 30 ft too much you know is there is there a room for us to move it forward to um and again I use the last last thing we just did you know it was trying to find some mitigative purposes of moving you know maybe can't move the whole thing but we move something to help so yeah I think I think if either I think the homeowner would be probably happy if we were moved at 5 foot forward and you know we could he would be you know accepting of that I mean he was pretty adamant about this is the way it was but you know and there is a there is a good Tree Line back behind where that is so as far as being able to see that or any uh i s or anything it's not going to be it's not going constructed as an nice or either it's going to be you know going to be nice looking buildings understood thank you I mean that that you answer my question yeah I'll make if I make a side note construction is uh to match the home it's Block it's it's a nice thank you Mr thank you gentlemen no other questions gotcha thank you gentlemen uh anyone in the audience to speak in support of the application y y you guys have a seat thank you thank you seeing none anyone in the audience to speak in opposition to this application seeing none return to the board gentlemen your pleasure move to approve motion approved from Mr Bley second second from Mr Evans all those in favor uh Mr chair could discuss us real quick well yeah sorry you're right I I should have asked I didn't I'm sorry just any any thoughts on you know like I said I mean UND I would not recommend holding line and obviously I'm in favor of moving forward with you know proving I'm just wondering is there an opportunity here for us to gain a little bit of space and and move the building you know I know Mr you know Mr Evans had indicated asking the same question so I would be interested in being able to find some giving us a little bit more leeway by adding you know maybe a condition I mean I'll share my thoughts I mean part of it is it is an agricultural um and there is a lot of tree lines so I mean in in regards to keeping with the harmony of the neighborhood and and land development I mean there's not a huge difference I don't think to the neighbors between 5T or 20t um but you know conversely as well I mean it there there was no sport opposition and in turn to to change it I mean it it also feels without the owner here I mean the owner isn't here correct is okay um I don't know I just to me like he came for a a 10 foot I'm not looking for you to jump on I I'm just asking questions Ian I agree as well it's it's it's agricultural area it's a couple feet and and like I said no support and opposition and I'm just looking at the the overall area very hearty growth in that area I I don't see a problem with it thank you so just for the record there was a request to amend the motion and and you've declined to do that so we're voting on the original motion there was no amendment I I I didn't make an amendment I just wanted some talk so there was no not to change your so there's still a first still a motion still a second I'm saying and the the motion stands unamended yeah and all right all those in favor I opposed all right enjoy thank you moving on item number four is a request for a sidey yard North setback variance from 7 and 1/2 ft to 4 feet for a set of exterior stairs in the r1a single family dwelling district and the holiday Bear Lake subdiv Vision located at 3550 holiday Avenue the proposed exterior excuse me they're not proposed they are there the existing stairs will be uh 75 in in height 12 ft in length or yeah 12T in length and 52 in in width this came off of their drawing and we'll encroach uh 3 and 1/2 ft into the required side yard North setback the building department required the stairs to be there um there are pictures in the package of the distance of the Ingress egress to the elevation because they had to do a stem wall at some point so the building department required them to put in the stairs which is leaving them to get a variance um a letter of opposition was submitted after the agenda was approved and printed it was emailed to everyone but just in case there was a copy left on the dis for everyone this evening um there haven't been any prior variances uh for this property and that concludes my presentation wow so the building department made them do something violative of the code yes wow yeah gentlemen any questions for staff unbelievable seeing none is the applicant here please coming up man' and if you would share with us uh your name and address my name is Karen Nino my address is 3550 holiday Avenue um when we submit the regional plans um one of uh the requirement for the approval was to be six Ines above street level the access uh to the side unit was on the plan as well and they were aware about that um and when we were in the stage of framing the house um the inspector asked me what will be the stairs made from and I showed them on the our back our uh duck and showed them that it's going to be like from wood the same type of the duck so he said it's going to be part of the frame in so just go ahead and complete it per code and uh call in for inspection and that's what I did after I did that I inspect the stairs and said everything is per code but it doesn't show anywhere so we did apply uh the um the plans for the stairs and after we apply for the stairs we ended up being through zoning that we have to have 7 and a half fit set back in at 4 um and that's why I'm here for the variance because we are here in a situation that instead of one step we have three okay gentlemen any questions for the applicant this is the stairs are still though on your property they're not my property can I show a picture please on on there but but after the meeting if you could please email that to [Music] staff basically this is the street and the unit is back there I can make it closer so you can see there's an AC over here and these are the steps three steps there should be pictures in your agenda packet yeah and the other side of my home our picture doesn't have the AC unit in it oh sorry and this is the other side of the house that I have nothing everything is clear so if God forbid there's something I mean there's nothing there on the other side and I have no issue with other neighbors all right thank you ma'am gentlemen any questions I I've got one that I I think honestly we' we've already you know answered ad nauseum but I just want to clarify one more time the original building plan that was approved had that door already there and okay all right yes okay thank you ma'am thank you okay is there anyone here to speak in support of the application seeing none anyone here to speak in opposition to it seeing none I'll close the floor gentleman your pleasure uh Mr chair moveed to approve Mr Evans has moved to approve Mr Wright has seconded discussion seeing none all those in favor of the motion hi opposed all right it's approved enjoy your stairs item number six is a request for a rear yard setback variance from 20 feet to 11 ft for a screen room enclosure in the PD plan development district and cadent park Cadence Park 2 subdivision located at 5683 Green Arrow Place the insulated roof screen enclosure will be approximately 280 Square ft and will encroach 9 ft into the required rear yard setback the rear the property backs up to a 25 ft landscape wall drainage and open space easement after the 25t easement starts a 100 foot Seaboard Coastline railroad right of way an approval letter from the Cadence Park homeowners association was submitted along with two letters of support from adjacent neighbors and there have not been any prior variances for the subject property and this concludes my presentation thank you ma'am gentlemen any questions for staff Mr bigley did you have one no just another funky lot it is isn't it it's three months in a row is the applicant here yes anything you'd like to add sir yeah sure pleas just please give us your your name and address uh so my name is Sumit Gupta and my address is 5623 green Arab Place Sanford and I'm the owner of the property yes sir so um this is something like which we want for kids and uh for the elderly people like my in-laws live with us and they want to stay out most of the time instead of inside and then because of the weather conditions bugs and so much things so it's hard to sit outside and um that's why we put this variance it's the first variance we submitted a permit in the beginning and uh considering that it is okay to put that but we found that uh we cannot put uh the insulated roof uh but uh it is allowed to put the uh the uh the screen enclosures uh so so that's why I submitted this request to have um the the U insulated roof we are leaving I'm leaving 10 ft agement which is like um the bare minimum required for that the sides are same I'm not touching anything on the side ements the neighbors are uh no issues and they approved the letters are there HOA is coming under HOA under Cadence Park and ho also uh provide the approvals for this VAR got you thank you sir gentleman any questions i' got just one Mr Evans um I see on the HOA approval that they marked that you have to have a specific coloration and all that I mean the one that you're getting is in compliance with them yes so all the colors will be a same like the building color and it should be there all right sounds it good any others thank you sir is there anyone here to speak in support of the application seeing none anyone here to speak in opposition seeing none gentlemen move to approve motion to approve Mr Begley do we have a second second second for Mr Wright all those in favor opposed enjoy it sir thank you next okay we're item number which one are we now six is a request for a re setback variance from 20 ft to did we go backwards or did we you're the right one it's the same one okay to 11 there's two of them same subdivision 11t for a screen room enclosure in the PD plan development district and the Caden Park uh 2 subdivision located at 5683 Green AO place um the insulated roof screen enclosure will be approximately 280 Square ft um and will encroach 9 ft into the required rear yard setback they also abut uh the landscape wall and drainage open space easement and the 100t railroad Coastline easement um an approval letter from the Cadence Park homeowners association uh was submitted and there haven't been any prior letters um or variances there was two letters of support from adjacent neighbors submitted thank you m'am gentlemen questions for staff seeing none is the applicant here anything you like to add sir please just give us your name and address yes sir my name is himan I'm the owner of 568 through Green Arrow place so similar s like U we have a small lot at the B and we want to make the maximum utilization of it for the kids and for the elderly and hence requesting the variance for the enclosed Clos sir makes sense any questions gentlemen thank you sir anyone here to speak in support of the application anyone here to speak in opposition seeing none your pleasure gentlemen move approve motion approved Mr Begley is there a second second second from Mr Wright all those in favor I opposed all right you guys take turns and join item number seven is a request for a front yard setback variance from 50 ft to 35 ft and a rear yard setback variance from 30 ft to 20 ft for a single family dwelling in the A1 agriculture District in the Morning Star subdivision on vacant lot number two the proposed single family dwelling will be approximately 5,15 Square ft and will encroach 15 ft into the required front yard setback and 10 ft into the required rear yard setback a letter of support was submitted from the neighbor located at 2546 Morning Star place and there have not been any prior variances for the subject property this concludes my presentation thank you ma'am gentlemen any questions for staff new uh no construction started yet Angie no so the trees are still there any all right I I'll have a question for the owner then thank you any other questions sign is the applicant here yes sir please have you chair with us your name and address good evening Arvin mahendru 5717 Red buug Lake Road uh Winter Springs Florida yes sir um do you have anything to share or just would you like to answer the question I can answer any question any Mr Bley um the trees saw that crossed the way just afraid of kind of if you could just show me where that's set where the that house in the area wise is going to be kind of in the way of the trees are those trees going I'm assuming a lot of those are going bye-by but um I'm just worried about what the for that setback wise where is that going to be approximately so um we're trying to Center the the building in the middle of the property okay um some trees there's a there's a little bit of opening right there so the some trees in the front and some in the back may be kind but we're trying to take as much of the open area as much as possible okay thank you any other questions thank you sir can I give please yes so the purpose of for the variance is to um there's a screen enclosure that we like to uh have in the back and that's the reason we're asking for the setback um so the property will be shifted slightly to the front and the screen enclosure will be uh basically to accommodate the screen enclosure in the back um and in the front of is is Morning Star place and so in front of Morning Star place is a subdivision so there will be no uh properties in the front that will be offended by this this move in the front and in the back is only a screen enclosure there's no property owners that will be offended by this move either very good thank you sir thank you is there any anyone in the audience to speak in support of this application is there anyone in the audience to speak in opposition seeing none I'll close the floor your pleasure gentlemen move to approve Mr Bley is moved to approve is there a second second second for Mr Levant uh any discussion seeing none all those in favor I opposed all right enjoy your new home thank you our next item oh you're very welcome our next item is at 400 Old Mims Road they are asking for a front yard setback from 50 ft to 16 ft for a privacy fence and a second one a front yard setback variance from 50 ft to 26 ft for a gate and columns this is located in the A5 zoning classification um they are proposing a six foot privac sense along the front yard AB budding old men's Road and they're also proposing to have two um electronic Gates that will have columns the incoming gate will be 26 ft from the property line and 4 2 ft from the edge of the pavement from oldman's road that gives the cars plenty of times to queue off of oldman's Road and not create any kind of safety issues they have provided two letters of support from each one of the Neighbors on the east and west that would be the most impacted um this concludes my presentation and I'll be happy to answer any questions very well done gentlemen any questions for staff seeing none yes sir no I'm the owner nothing nothing you don't have to to speak if you don't want to or as long as we get a yes I don't need to speak well in that case well is that a challenge gentlemen any questions for this rather cocky applicant all right seeing none anyone in the audience to speak in supports seeing none anyone in the audience to speak in opposition seeing none gentlemen uh Mr chairman to approve Mr Evans has moved to approve do we have a second second Mr Bley has seconded all those in favor opposed all right enjoy sir thank you very much confidence comes in handy our next item Sheffield Court they did not comply with all the public notice requirements and so we're going to have to continue them to next month so February 24th our next item item number 10 is located at 929 millshore drive this is a request for a sidey yard West setback from 7 1/2 ft to 5T and 1 and 1/2 ft and 5T to 1 and2 ft I AP I apologize on this um from 7 and 1/2 ft to 5 1/2 ft for an accessory structure in the R1 zoning classification this is located in the Lake Mills subdivision and they're wanting to construct a 660 Square ft um accessory structure that's going to be 24 ft um 8 in by 14 ft and 6 in this structure was constructed in 1989 it's on the back corner of um their property there hasn't been any prior variances for this subject property um but there was a um a code enforcement violation and he's here now to rectify that and if you have any questions I'll be happy to answer them gentlemen any question for staff yes yes sir shed's already existing when I'm seeing okay and okay I'll ask the rest to the owner good any other questions all right there sir if you'd please share with us your name and address uh yes uh my name is Charlie null um I live in 2126 alale Kirkland Lake alale this here is uh my property um excuse excuse me yeah originally built the shed back in 1989 it was unpermitted like many other things that I'm I have this is the last thing that needs cleared up and um I added on to the shed 8 ft which encroached on the seven I didn't I wasn't aware and I should have been aware that it was a 7 fo5 setback from the back side property lines um that addition also was added on without a permit which I'm trying to get cleared up here now um so the um looking for a 5 foot5 easen um to accommodate the the location of the existing shed at this time and then I've gone and I went ahead and had an engineer draw up the drawings I I took apart part of the ex interior of the walls so I could so when I have an inspection for this shed to get approved of they will see just exactly how it was constructed and I uploaded all that to the project task with uh seal County okay any questions I got one so what I'm hearing is bought the house shed was already there I built the house in ' 87 um and in 89 I I built the shed ah okay so and yeah well that answers my questions did you talk well actually did you talk to Neighbors about anything yeah the ched's been there for like I said since uh ' 89 30 years I figured it nobody's really said it actually I I took it upon myself because during that I guess probably about 20 10 the area started getting a little bit more developed and the the original shed looked little bit of an eyesore so I disassembled cut a foot off of the the height of the shed for the walls lowered the SE the roof down so you actually can't even see it from the road I've got some pictures on my phone if uh that I could show if if you guys feel needed I mean personally I'm good but okay would any would any member of the board like to see the photos we're good thank you sir okay thank you right thank you sir anyone in the audience to speak in support of this matter anyone here to speak in opposition seeing none close the floor gentlemen Mr chair motion to approve Mr Wright has moved to approved do we have a second second we have a second for Mr Levant all those in favor all those opposed all right sir your shed is safe thank you challenge AC our next item is 5620 Wayside Drive they are requesting for a front yard stepb variance from 50 ft to 1 foot for a fence and gates in the A1 agricultural zoning classification um this is located on wayve drive and they are proposing a 6ot open fence and Gates along the yard AB budding Wayside Drive can you show the picture of the picket fence the white picket fence this white picket fence has been there for years and so what they're trying to do now is they're trying to replace that with a 5 foot open black aluminum fence they came in and they got the permit for the columns and before he was able to put the permit in for the fence we changed our code and so he got caught in that middle spot where the columns are there and they're permitted but now the fence needs to have a a setb because it's it's over um the four the pig fence four feet this is over 5 feet so he's now um asking the board of adjustment um to consider his variance request and I right and I don't think um the safety issues on there is that um the fence is 25 ft from the asphalt of Wayside Drive which gives enough queuing of the Cs to come off a Wayside Drive so that's not a public safety issue this concludes my presentation happy answer any questions gentlemen any questions for staff one question yes sir Mr Leon just how long has the white pick fence been there oh it's been quite a while I went back on a lot of aerial if you could real quick give us your name and address please sir uh I'm David Edwards I'm the homeowner of 5620 way uh we we bought the home in 2010 and uh it was I know the fence had been there probably 10 years before that um from the previous owner any other questions for the applicant as long as we're here hope you didn't buy a lotto ticket in between all this man that's some luck right there all right thank you sir is was there anything else you'd like to share uh not unless you have questions I think that was it all right right easy enough it's fun being at the bottom of the agenda uh anyone here to speak in support of the application seeing none anyone here to speak in opposition all right I'll close the floor gentlemen move to approve move to approve Mr Begley is there a second second second for Mr Levant all those in favor opposed all right sir good lucky defense have a good evening next our last item on the agenda is 1306 Bell Vista sorl it's a request for a side yard e set back from 6 feet to one to 1T 5.5 in for solar panels in the PD subdivision this is located in the bellisa subdivision they're wanting to do ground M mounted solar panels um they're wanting to do 535 Square ft which is about 38x 14 it's going to be a rack in which then the solar panels are located on top of it this property is in a unique situation because you can see that it's three exited but where the fence where the solar panels are going to be at is actually facing Sand Lake Road in which there is a subdivision wall and then he's also the neighbor that's most impacted that you see in green he's got an approval from his neighbors in green and this concludes my presentation perfect gentleman any questions for staff seeing none our applicant is here if fure with is your name and address please sir I Aman Pera address is 1306 belage Circle long um I don't say the description there's a small error it is the I need the variance towards e uh not East towards north okay I'm sorry I said it wrong um did I okay any questions me yes gentlemen any questions I have a question Mr Right why ground why not I mean there's from the aerial there's other homes that have solar on the roof why do why uh what What's the reason um when I did the research for the U uh solar panels uh I saw several uh on internet saying that uh sometimes they uh get water leak in the roof so and uh so to prevent uh avoid that situation and also uh uh if I put uh solar panels on the roof uh they'll be facing east and west West sides I don't have much roof on towards facing south but South is the best direction to get uh most electricity and uh other reason is uh if I put uh if I I had to replace my roof then I'll have to take down the whole solar panels and do the roof repair and put it back again so so I'm not using the my back card for anything just empty there so I thought it would be uh better to put it on the ground thank you no no you've answered my question thank you any other questions thank you sir is there anyone in the audience to speak in support seeing none anyone in the audience speak in opposition oh yes sir I don't think I'm in opposition anymore I think we clarify that how are you Mr per thank you I am the neighbor to the east okay I was in support I'm the one the letter of approval address Jo Boyd 1302 Bell Vista Circle um I was surprised to get the letter from the county saying he needed a one and a half he was going to build it 1 and 1/2 ft from the fence because the drawing shows at 11 ft from the fence so if he's not trying to build it one and 1/2 ft from the fence i' have no issues with that he's meeting the sidey yard step back okay so it will be 11 ft from the fence like it shows on the diagram I just that's all I wanted to make sure so no opposition better safe for the record y thank you all right and seeing how there's no one else in the audience I'll close the floor uh gentleman your pleasure move to approve motion to approve for Mr beagley is there a second second for Mr Wright all those in favor opposed all right enjoy sir and I tell you what I was one of those persons who had a leak from it being on the roof so your research was correct so was my neighbor really yeah I got a whole new ceiling in my kitchen because please save your infomercial for ler and if you want to thank you sir thank you all right next on our agenda that's I have to say that's the first time I've ever seen somebody coming opposed change in the middle right right before the that was awesome opposition you're invited to the barbecue I guess next week I thought you was here the whole time I see next thing on our agenda is reelecting chair and vice chair uh like to nominate jimway for chair Mr Bey thank you very much thank you that right as seconded those in favor I opposed thank you gentlemen I I it means a world to me thank you that's why we considered not doing it just I waited two seconds I could have wait you know I could have waited three or four but my friends said said how do we want to make Jim tonight see two eager Jim just to make you laugh it's a good thing Jay's not here because You' be getting yelled at right now because you would have stepped on her toes oh so when she listens to the minute she'll have a good giggle because she's supposed to call that so can I have a motion for vice chair please I would like well no I can't I'm I'm the chair gentleman anyone have an idea here Mr Wright you are the currently I'm going to pass the gble and they can nominate you to be the vice chair if you I'll second that I was going ask anybody else wanted it I'll be honest I was torn between you and Austin so it's all good it's fine I'm still on next year 2026 president absolutely For You Austin I mean did you did you no it's fine it's either way has it been seconded it's fine is uh no it has not been then I will second I thought you oh no I second it I thought you made a motion you okay I'm so sorry then yeah please those in favor I I all right uh thank you uh you you've been passing and real quick before we adjourn just as an FYI um you may have saw your packets that there was an Ethics presentation scheduled today um Kathy and I spoke and we're bumping it to the February meeting so so until then the ethics rules are waved very ethical uh so yeah just is an FYI and I promise I'll do my best to keep it short and painless so we always do a great job that won't be a problem all my commentary tonight I probably should have viated every ethic we had can I get an can I get a motion for approval of the calendar please I'm well I'm I'm moving just making sure cuz you keep talking trying to keep you on track I have a brother before the bar speaking I'm not going to interrupt him goodness um the calendar they printed and passed out to us and and my question to the staff would be not that it's a big deal but why are we meeting so much earlier aren't we normally the last last Monday of the month a lot of these are like the 7th the 14th the 4th and 9th I thought it was the third Monday it the third Monday I thought it was the third yeah third now it's the fourth Monday it is the fourth nope Kathy's right yeah shocker Kathy's right that I'm right she's right again doesn't matter to me I'm just any any reason why we kind of changed the way we normally do it they should all be on the fourth Monday we haven't we haven't changed that the only thing I could think of is like May 19th that's where we have um a conflict with labor so no I'm I'm tell you it it shows you how much I need to take a nap I'm sitting here looking at the application deadline I'm sorry that is correct no I'm sorry I'm being I'm being a complete this is why we did this after we take a revote for shair please you just won [Music] in all right I heard the gabble all right uh all right so is there a motion to cherl entertain a motion to approve the calendar a motion to approve have a second second all in favor all right calendar is approved uh ethics training we've discussed uh any old business seeing none the minutes did we get the minutes yes they were sent via email are you moving to approve them then so made all right second they have a second for Mr Levant all those in favor all right that passes uh we are adjourned there you go [Music]