Yes. And then. Yes. Parents will work. So. That's why. Yes.
I'll have to get some business pictures sitting at the back.
So. Over here also set the internet on fire. Okay. Yes.
This is the City of Tarpon Springs. Board of Adjustment meeting of Wednesday, October 22nd, 2025. The time is now 6:30 p.m. and I call this
meeting to order. Madam Secretary, would you please do a roll call of the board members? Mr. Fuchs here, Mr.
Wood. Mr. wood here. Miss Turner, present. Mr. Grossman here. And Miss Risch is absent.
Okay. Thank you. All right. We do not have our normal five members here. So the applicant
does have the right to postpone being heard this evening until we do have a full five members. If the applicant is here, do you wish to go forward with the
four members? We do have a quorum. Three would be a quorum. Would like to go forward. Okay. All right. And then. Okay. And
then city attorney, would you please read the quasi judicial announcement and procedures and then please swear in any witnesses that will be testifying this evening? Yes.
Thank you. Good evening. This is a quasi judicial proceeding where the Board of Adjustment acts in a quasi judicial rather than legislative capacity at a quasi judicial hearing. It is
not the board's function to make law, but rather to apply law that has already been established in a quasi judicial hearing. The board is required by law to make findings of fact based upon the evidence
presented at the hearing, and apply those findings of fact to previously established criteria contained in the Code of Ordinances, in order to make a legal decision regarding the application before it. The
board may only consider at this hearing that the law. Excuse me, 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, than the board is required by law to find in favor of the applicant. By the
same token, if the competent, substantial and relevant evidence at the hearing demonstrates that the applicant has failed to meet the criteria established in the Code of Ordinance, then the board is
required by law to find against the applicant. Does anybody intend to testify this evening? Would you please stand and
raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm that your testimony this evening will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank
you, thank you. Excuse me. Testify. I mean, I'd like to speak and be heard, but is that what you mean? Yes, ma'am. Okay, okay, okay. If you just real
quick. If I could get you to stand and raise your hand. Do you swear? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you give in these proceedings this evening will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth? Yes. Thank you ma'am. Okay. Thank you for that. All right. So at this time, I am
calling up item number 25, Dash 66. We way. I'm hoping I pronounce that correctly. Variance to reduce the required rear yard setback. For the
purpose of expanding a screen enclosure with a solid roof. And the location is 751 Salt Lake Drive. And would the city
staff member please present this item now? Sure. Ali Keene, Principal planner with the Planning and Zoning Department. The subject property is outlined in red here on the
screen. It's off of Salt Lake Drive. The property, as well as all surrounding properties are in the RPD residential planned development zoning district. Specifically, it's the North Lake single family residential
subdivision planned development. There is some mobile home park zoning to the north of the site. The applicants are here this evening requesting a variance approval to reduce the required
rear yard setback, and this is for the purpose of extending their existing screen enclosure with a solid roof on the backside of the home. The requirement is 20ft, and they're requesting a setback of
16ft. This is a look at the proposed site plan, and I'll walk you through all of my colors and markups here in just a moment. Typically with a planned development when they go through the approval process,
each development has establishes their own setbacks as they go through that process, specifically for the North Lake development, for properties that have at least 120ft in depth, that minimum rear
setback is 20ft. Again, they're proposing to have a setback of 16ft for the expansion area. And that is the blue dotted line here on the screen. One thing I'll point out is the
rear property line of the subject site is not a straight line. It's actually angled and angles inward towards the center of the property to a point here. So on this drawing,
all of my measurements may not look like they're going to the closest point of the property, but the setbacks and all the numbers are measured to the closest point. So when you do measure setback, it's from the structure to the closest point
of a property line. So I just want to provide that clarification as I move forward. So for some comparisons, the existing setbacks of the property, the existing screen
enclosure, which is the orange line here on the screen, is at 18ft. The existing roof line or the covered portion of the screen enclosure is approximately 39ft, and the
existing home at its closest point here is about 27ft. The land development Code, as you know, does have specific setbacks for pools and screen enclosures that have a screen
roof in that section of the code. It allows the screen enclosure with an open screen roof to be as close as five feet to the rear property line. So this is why the existing enclosure is permitted to be
closer than 20ft. And it's important to note that if the proposed expansion didn't have a solid roof, it would be permissible under our current code without variance approval
in this current configuration and layout. When zooming out and looking at the context of the property, it is a waterfront lot backing up to Salt Lake, so there are no
residential lots directly behind the property. As I mentioned, the property line does have an angle that goes inward to the rear yard of the property. This is the only lot that I found in the subdivision
that does have the situation of the rear lot line. There's also an existing upland preservation area here in green, as well as a wetland preservation area in blue that go along the rear of
the property. The upland preservation areas ranges about 5 to 6ft along the rear property. However, both of these preservation areas do not count towards or are taken into
consideration when measuring a setback. When you're strictly applying the setbacks solely from a property line to a structure, not outside the property. Some other
considerations, one being the existing footprint of the home. As I mentioned earlier, the rear setback of the house in the area where they're looking to expand the enclosure is at
27ft. So this would potentially allow for them to expand the enclosure with a solid roof without a variance approval. They have about seven feet to work with. The applicants indicated that they would like
to put a hot tub in this area, and their contractor stated that the proposed size in that area extends a little over 10.5ft, is for adequate space around the proposed hot tub,
and also allows for the posts and the footings to be installed without disturbing their existing pool. So any sort of redesign of the enclosure would need to take into consideration the existing pool layout, so that there
wouldn't be any sort of damage or cause any impact to that. Lastly, as we know, our comprehensive plan was recently updated so staff is now working on doing some updates to Land
development code. In response to that, one thing we are looking at are setback requirements for covered screen enclosures. Over the years, this has been a common issue. It has resulted in a lot of
variance requests that I'm sure you all are familiar with. And this is really for because residents have a desire to have shaded outdoor spaces, because we have seen a lot of variances
come before the board staff felt it was an important item to take a look at as we do these updates, we have started doing this review. However, we have not finalized what those
potential changes are, nor have they moved forward to the Board of Commissioners for approval. Because of this, you may have noticed that staff did not do a formal recommendation on this
application. However, if the board does choose to approve the request this evening, we do recommend having a condition attached to the request or the approval, and that is that the
area under the solid roof may not be altered to form an enclosed, air conditioned living space unless it meets the North Lake RPD residential minimum setbacks. And with that,
here are your variance criteria, and I'm happy to answer questions. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for your presentation.
Does the board have any questions for the city staff? Yes, sir. Miss King, can you go back to your there? You go to your color coded one. Just want
to make sure that we're all on the same page with our colors. And thank you very much for this. So trying to remember what you were saying as well.
If this was a well, because this is going to be a solid roof extension that you were saying that there wouldn't be the need for the variance in the first place if it was
trying to find the page that you said, I think it was the next page that you had set it on. Yes. The rear setback of the home of 27ft allows for
extension with the solid roof without a variance. Can you explain that with the colors here? Sure. So again, the minimum setback is 20ft in this
subdivision. So the existing home is at 27ft to the closest point. The angles kind of make it a little more challenging. In some areas it's a little further. But at the closest
point is 27ft. So potentially they could pull in the expansion and extend it up to 20ft away and have a solid roof that wouldn't necessarily
require a variance approval. They also could potentially do partly solid, partly open screen. That's not usually desirable in this particular situation, but there are
potentially ways that you could modify it to meet that. One consideration that the contractor did bring up were the placement of the footings in the roof. And I will point
out that the covered portion, they are matching the gable of the roof. They're doing a shingle roof. It's not a pan roof. So the the footings are also to help support that. And
that was also part of the consideration for the sizing. But there are potential ways that they could pull it in to, to meet the code. So the proposed requested solid roof
section is the blue dotted line correct? Yes. Gotcha. And the problem is it's this I see the 16 foot at that smallest part.
It needs to be 20 for us not to be sitting here today. Right? Right. And in some portions of it may be at 20ft. Right. Because of the unique angle.
Correct. Gotcha. But you have to. And following the laws look at that. Most the closest point of that property line, which I see is where that tip comes in.
Correct? Okay. And I would have to look at the survey really to verify is that 20ft. But there may be areas of course. And then it also like you were saying the provision would be
if they were to whatever size it may be, with or without a variance, if there is a solid roof, they would still be prohibited from enclosing it. You know, putting up walls,
making it an actual livable space. That's our recommendation for a condition. Typically, once there's a solid roof over the roof is what kicks them into meeting their
their district or their their subdivision setbacks the open screen they get to follow the screen enclosure setbacks. So once there's a solid roof there,
they're already there's a variance for that setback. So potentially in the future, someone may not even be the current applicant. Someone could come in and want to enclose it. They're already at that setback. And so we would
like to, you know, put that condition in like we've done before with condition, you know, conditional. Go ahead. Mr. Because I know I have other questions. Quick question. Yes.
Two quick questions, maybe not. So if they want to just if they screen it in and don't go with the solid roof they're fine. Correct. Yeah. Okay. And we know that things might change. But at this time they haven't
changed. Hence why we're here. Yes, I know we've gotten some things that came in that have a little, somewhat wording that would rather not this happen. They had mentioned that there's
already been variances denied. Do we have that on record or there's been fact checked? I, I don't have, I don't have the the information on that. I did try to do some research on the
past variances. I did find that there was a variance request for one of the properties. I can't verify that our approval. I didn't have the time to to look at that at the time that these came in. But I will
mention that, as you know, each variance that comes in is looked at individually based off of a property. It is not a precedent setting item. You have to look at it individually
based off of the property, based against your criteria set before you, because it really is based off of the hardship of the property. Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Fuchs. I think I'm good. Okay. I do have some questions as well. And one of them, I think more is for the city
attorney. And I'm interested to know which takes precedent precedence, because we did receive two other letters from
residents. And one of the letters it made mention of the HOA that they have some rules and regulations in regards to
this as well. But this is here before us, and we do not know from the documentation that we have, if the HOA was contacted and gave approval or did not
give approval, I'm interested to know what who would take precedence in this in this situation? Would the city take precedence or would the HOA take precedence? So there's
separate proceedings. So I don't know that it's even necessarily a matter of precedence as much as you the board makes its ruling. And
then the you know, we're obviously not privy to the HOA agreement and their rules and everything. So that's a separate thing that the applicant would have to proceed
with and satisfy as its own set of proceedings. So our decision does not affect the ability to make some decision of their own,
depending on their depending on their rules. They, they could it would in theory shut them down. Still, even if, even if we allow them to proceed okay. Or even if they you allow them
to proceed, I should say. All right. So to follow up on that, so we as a city, we don't need to contact HOA in any way to, to to proceed with our. Oh no,
there's no duty or obligation on behalf of the city to do so. Okay. And I do have some questions. Additionally in regards to the property here.
So the the orange line that is that representing the current. Okay. Yes. So if, if they were to put a solid roof on that
orange line, would they need a variance. They to cover the entire thing. Yes. Because it's at 18ft okay. So any any solid roof anywhere on that would need a variance. Not anywhere.
If if the solid roof was up to 20ft away, they could do it. If they met their setback. That orange line is not 20ft away. This is 18ft. If in theory, if
they wanted to go and leave two feet open, that would be permissible. So a lot of fine lines here. I got it. So we're
18ft in the shortest distance to the existing pool enclosure. Now if if it were two more feet
they could put a solid roof without a variance. Two feet. Sorry. I'm sorry I confused you. So if, if there were two feet,
two feet. And if they, if it was two feet less shorter and it was 20ft to the property line. So if the pool enclosure was 20ft to the property line,
would they be allowed to put the solid roof there without a variance. Yes. So they could. So for most of what they have there, they could do the solid roof without a variance. Yes.
So the the part that we're really looking at is the, the, there's two feet, it looks like from the blue line to the orange line for half of it. So
that's a two foot difference. And then on the bottom there that's a that's a ten foot ten foot difference ten feet away from where the current roof
line, it's still give or take about the same two feet. It's a four foot deviation from what they're required to do overall because they're going to 16ft I see. So the ten foot eight
inches from the house that didn't have the property line considering. So it's really a four foot. We're talking about a four foot difference okay. And then if they did just to
clear up because I think I heard it, but no hearing aids, I want to make sure that if if there was no roof on this at all, they would not need a
variance at all in the way that they want to do it now. Correct? Yeah. If there is no no solid roof, it was just an open screen. They could do it how it's proposed. In theory, it could go up to five feet away
from their rear property line. And that that applies to anyone. All right. We have five
standards that we always go by. And the city normally makes a recommendation by using those standards to, you know, help us, give us another opinion. We did
not do that in this case. And from what I understand is that this situation is under review in the in the land development Code. That would alleviate us
sitting here tonight, probably looking at it to ease up, because we've had several of these. So does that potentially could it potentially could it
just depends on what the final allowances would be. I'll say as we're going through our review, we're really taking a look at our current yard encroachment section. There's a
section in the code that allows for, for example, front front yard porches to extend so far into your setbacks or balconies
in the side yard. There's allowances for decks to like elevated decks to go into your rear yard. So we're taking a look at what those allowances are and seeing how they could
potentially be applied. Probably the most relevant one that we have is our front porch allowance. And that can be a covered front porch. And that's something that allows it to
extend up to ten feet into a front porch, but no closer than a certain distance to a property line. So with that said, because these changes are
potentially coming in in the near future, we felt that we just want to provide you all the information, and we wanted you guys to make a decision based off the criteria and evidence provided tonight, and
then let you go from there. Okay. All right. Looking at this, it looked it looks like
it's leaning towards leaning towards an approval of it. And in most of the instances here in in reading this, I guess that's more of a statement than
a question. So sorry about that. All right. Let's see if I have I think there was 1 or 2 more I
had. The property line. Okay. And yes, in one of these, one of the reasons for the situation was that the rear
property line angled in versus just going straight across. Staff felt that that was one potential physical hardship on the property. To take into
consideration, is that it just it provides some difficulty in measuring or a difference than other properties in the surrounding area. Okay, like if
I may that that the way with the leaning in of the odd point. I know we've had applications before us before that. Thinking
of that triangle lot on Tallahassee Shore Drive, I think I think Tallahassee, where it was needing the variance because of the, you
know, shape of the lot, had the requested addition, had like the corner, like a little triangle of a corner poking out,
if you will. So to clarify, we are talking just the covered roof, which is not what's existing of the whole screen. And if I may, to help us
clarify, there were some points in a couple letters from residents, one of which referenced. Impacting their view. Maybe if we could. I know
you usually have a slide that has the neighborhood view of several. There we go. Let's see
if we can. Find the address. Again. Did you have any other questions? The 787 one. Right.
Maybe it was 787. I try to point out the wrong home and how that view would be. I'm not. The applicant might be able to
provide more information on that. 7787 it's in the packet here. There you go. Okay. This
one, that one okay. Thank you. I'm sorry I disappeared. So that home there is concerned about the view. The white roof
one. Yeah. Okay. Which one was 787. That one roof at the top.
That 787. Okay. Okay, if I may, for a point of clarity. So when we were talking about the whatever you want to call it,
concave version or whatever of that lot. So based on this, I don't know what you want to call it. Document here is that
it's, it's a foot and a half right from like the south end to the whatever the first notch that comes out, it's a foot and a half of a variation. So we're
talking about like the lot line not being straight. It's by whatever 18in. Any more
questions from the from the board for the city. No. That's fine. Maybe maybe later maybe
later. Okay. So at this time, thank you very much. At this time, I would like to call up the applicant to make their presentation. If they wish to
do so. When you get to the podium, please state your name and address for the record. And also, when you're finished making your presentation, please stay at the podium in
case the board members have any questions for you. Say your name. Richard Whiteway 751 Salt
Lake Drive in Tarpon Springs. And Pat leeway, 751 Salt Lake Drive, Tarpon Springs. Address.
She sort of stole my thunder on this. As to the HOA, we have sort of changed management companies, but when we first called them, they said you should get the variance first,
then go to the HOA because you can't get a variance. It's a it's a moot point. We had a couple of other items, the same thing that happened around our property. The blue line does
show. And the reason for it because of the shape of our pool, that upper corner column is required just to hold it up,
and we had to move it out because of the pool. Otherwise we'd have to take out the whole pool to do it. It is only going to be a hard covered roof. There's no sides because we're
just looking for some outdoor space to put a kitchen and a Jacuzzi. And if you look at
some of the drone photos we gave you, you can see that there's nobody. And I actually took pictures from the side line. Also going up, you'll see some flags that look up.
There's nobody that would be blocked at all from being able to see the lake from this
extension. These are these are your drone. Yes. Okay. We did indicate which is our house and which is the one who wrote the letter, which is around the
point. But even from there, our next house over has a bunch of trees which block all the view. If you're looking sideways, blocks the view of trees, then
the house next to it has a pool cage that goes out. So there's really nobody that blocks. And then my neighbor on the other
side, he's blocked by trees, trees, trees. So looking at this picture that you took, it's the overhead where your
your house is kind of in that bottom right where you were showing it. You can see the, the pool. So it looks like probably like the area where
you have some steps on your pool where it just kind of juts out a little bit. The closest end to your proposed roof addition. If help me out here
on this blue dotted lines, you know that the top one, which would be so that if if you were to have that solid roof, that would kind of start covering a
little bit of that jutted out of where the stairs are. So it just kind of helps me give a little visual of like, that's where the roof cuts. And then the rest of that pool, like 95%
of your pool is open. Yes. No roof. It's it's it's kind of cutting that. And you were proposing to have the roof line kind of extend, you know,
keeping with the existing roof line that you have kind of two different roof lines happening here. You have on. Looks like the little addition part of it.
Yes. That's the back. That's the it's not addition. It was part of the original house. That's back bedroom, bathroom and bathroom. And we have our contractor here. He can explain
how he can fit all this together. Right? Visually. Okay. Questions for the applicant. I just butted in. Sorry about that. That's okay. That's okay,
isn't it? Are you finished with your presentation? I think so, okay. I said she stole my thunder. Do any of the other board members have any questions for the applicant?
Okay, I do have a question. I have I have a question, and I don't I don't even know why this is relevant. I guess it's more curiosity than anything, but the way that there's a 18
foot jump to the where the screened area is, there going to be a differential between where the hard roof is and where the screened area is? Is that going to be? Is there going to be a two foot set out
for screened area? Yes. That's the intent. Yeah. And then just because I'm visual, it looks like the roof line is going to fall in suit with whatever that kind of beam is that's currently supporting your, your
screened area. Is that what that is going to look like? It's essentially going to follow the line that the birdcage already. Yes. Okay. We want it to be we want it to
look seamless and as part of the house. And the roof will be flush with the larger of those two gables. Is that the intent?
Yes, that's the contractor. Yes. I think that answered my question. Anybody else? That was my question. I couldn't get
the words to thank you. Okay. All right. Thank you for your presentation at this time. You may be seated. Thank you. At
this time, I'd like to call for any public comment. So if there's anyone here who, from the public who wants to make a a statement or comment, now's
your time. Make your way to the podium. And then when you get to the podium, please state your name and address for the record. And when you're finished making your comments, you may then be seated after
you're done. Okay. Daniel Roth, 778 North Lake Boulevard, Tarpon Springs. I'm the general contractor that is going to be doing the project. I'm also a resident in the neighborhood.
We got a variance for almost the identical thing about 22 years ago when Pioneer Development was building the neighborhood, we put a similar
addition on our own home. Got a variance for while pioneer was still the Declarant. What we're going to do there is the roof line in the back of the house,
the the taller roof line, not the one on the smaller park going out, but the roof line that you see there that's going to extend all the way out. The roof line on the smaller
portion will come up, rise up to meet. That will just be one gable end out in the end. So you won't have a roof line describing it right to you. Yeah. So you won't end up
having a roof under a roof, if you will. That's taking care of the little one. No, it'll be one big roof back there. You won't actually see two roofs back there anymore. You just
see one, okay. Do you have any other comments? Just. I don't know. Okay. Thank you. You may
be seated. Are there any other public comments? Okay. When you get to the podium, please state your name and address for the record. And then when you're finished, you may be seated
afterwards. David Daniels, 740 Salt Lake Drive, Tarpon Springs. I. There's been some some talk that no variances were allowed
in the area out there. I was directly across the street from their house 15 years ago. I had an addition to my house I was
actually asking for 12ft. And the committee. Said it'd be okay, but I had needed the signature of all the people around around the lake there. I
got almost all of them. Since I didn't get all of them, they wouldn't give me the variance, but they did give me a smaller variance with any problems. So I just wanted to verify that
there was a variance given. Okay. All right. Thank you. Other public comments. Again, when you get to the podium, please state your name and
address for the record. And then when you're finished, you may sit down. Linda Farrell, 1242 Paradise Lake Drive. I've lived in the I lived in at my
residence for 25 years, and I've served on the board, the HOA board, in several capacities. I'm currently on the Architectural Review Board,
and while I'm speaking on that, so I remember this as they have never approached the board, our board, for any advice, no less,
an application to do this, and they have not spoken to the to my knowledge, and we're in close contact with the old and new management companies. This
has been directly sent to the city for approval and gone over the heads of our our Architectural Review Board and
the Board of Directors. There have been several requests over the years, and they have all
been denied for variances. Including Mr. Daniels. Excuse
me. Go ahead. Thank you. Let her make her public comments. I believe this violates our HOA
covenants and proper review process by not coming to us first. Many residents and board members strongly oppose this
request. Granting it would set a precedence for future variances. We are a community
of 122 houses, many of them bordering on either the lake or preserves or reserve area. I don't even know what without
houses behind them, the reserve area and views are very important, and even those is just a roof he can inside
inside his structure. He could be building his his his hot tub up on the up from the ground. I mean, nobody's saying what he's
going to be doing inside this, this structure. So he may not be putting walls on it, but he could be putting big. Stoves
and things that are six foot high inside there and that would obstruct views. And therefore I believe that this
request should be denied, as were all the previous. And thank you for your time and your consideration. Okay. Thank
you. You may be seated. Are there any other public comments at this time? I would I wasn't sworn in, but I'd like to make
one comment. You can you can only make a comment if you're sworn in. Can you still swear her in or is it too late? Would you like to be sworn in? Yeah. Okay. Could you please stand up?
Do you swear or affirm that the testimony given in these proceedings this evening will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do one of the letters, ma'am. Do
you go to the go ahead to the podium, and then when you get to the podium, state your name and address for the record. Karen Roth, 778 North Lake Boulevard, Tarpon Springs,
Florida. One of the addresses in the letter that you received is this gentleman's where they said that he didn't get the variance. He not only got the variance, but he put in a
bathroom and he put in a mother in law suite. And he's on the pond. So none of those views were obstructed. There's aerials clearly showing that nothing is going to be
obstructed here. On on that same pond, there was another person that did the exact same thing put a hot tub in and put
a vinyl roof in. We also got the almost the exact same variance and we're on seven, seven, eight. It is an outdoor kitchen that is being put in
and it is a. If they still decide to put their hot tub in, but there's so that they have enough room for that if they still decide to do that. But basically it is for their outdoor kitchen and to have a
roof over it so that when it rains, they don't have to run in. Thank you. Okay. Thank you.
Any more public comments? I. Attorney city attorney, the lady who spoke previously is raising her hand, but I think
she we do have time limits, right. If if you would like ma'am. The one that can we limit this to like two minutes. I believe it's a minute. As
long as the variance that you just spoke of. And her own personal house, that is not. There's there's a stone wall behind her. It doesn't affect
anybody else. So she got her variance. And that has nothing to do with any of these other situations. So that is not applicable. That's all. Thank
you okay. Thank you. All right. I don't think there's anybody else to talk. So at this time I'd like to bring the item back to the board. Thank you for all the public comments. We
appreciate, you know, you coming in and talking. Does the board have any comments or discussion? I don't sorry. Go
ahead. Mr. Can you bring up the other map with the measurements for me real quick? So you see the irregularity like the one
section, it is 27ft. Is that what I'm saying? Yes. The the backside of the home is 27ft. And just for clarification, that's this portion here. Okay.
So I just want to make sure that you know us as a board. We understand everything that's been presented to us. First, the attorney stated to us today
that. If we were to approve this, it still would have to go through the community. HOA, who then has the right to approve
or deny or make other provisions. We are simply looking at the variance for the setback. So this is one of many steps, am I correct? Right. This would be essentially I
believe somebody alluded to it earlier, essentially a threshold issue before they go to the HOA. If the HOA rules apply because of the opinion,
from what we have learned, that if we were to say no, it's a moot point. It dies. Right? Okay. And as we know from previous applications, this is of course, one of many steps.
It's us, it's HOA, then planning and zoning. Whatever they do after that is they it still has to be, you know, the construction has to be approved.
There's the permitting. If in the future there's issues of an appropriate structures or ancillary things, that becomes
a code enforcement issue. So getting a roof does not mean everything under the roof from here to eternity is out of
following any other rules. Yes. Correct on that. Okay. Yes. Any other discussion? Sure. If I
may. Yes. Yeah. So first and foremost, I want to kind of echo your comment about, you know, conflating the HOA with the land development code and what it is that we're doing. As
the attorney said, the HOA will likely if, depending on what the rules are, have standing in a different venue for whatever that might be. Is that accurate, sir? I'm sorry, I would have standing in a different venue
if their rules agreed to it. Exactly. They did with this. Correct. It's their own set of procedures. The other thing is that since it was mentioned in, in some of the literature that we have here regarding the
obstruction to the view, I wanted to highlight the specific language where it talks about significantly diminishing property values and understanding what significantly diminishing
property values is as it pertains to a view as it was brought up. And then the other thing that I would, I guess it's more of a statement than a
question, but as it relates to the outdoor area and what is or isn't stored outside of a house, I don't know what the covenant says in the HOA, but that's also nothing that's covered by anything that we're presiding
over as far as if they wanted to put, you know, ten feet of garbage bags outside their back door. It is what it is. And I think that understanding that
the limitation for future use is. Definitely something that we need to consider. But outside of the rest of that, barring anybody else's statements, I'll make a motion
for approval. We're not there. We're not? Nope. That okay. Your comments are done, I am done. Anyone else have comments?
Okay, I do have some comments. So the area that we're looking
at. Is about two feet over the line where you would need not need a variance and half of it and then four feet for the
other half. Can you go to the slide that has the picture of the property, the one with the
trees as well? This one or the so so so subject property? Yep. That or the one closer. Actually, if you have the bigger one that would be better.
This one. Yeah that one right there okay. So I wanted to address the view issue. And in my opinion you know when you buy a property you're buying a
view. The property next door has trees in the front of it. So they don't have a view of the lake at all. The to the bottom, the property to the top,
kind of the same thing. So I, I personally don't see how the this roof structure is going to diminish. Anybody's view of, of
the lake. And I'm if I had a house on lake I'd want the view because that's why I bought the house. But I don't see that effect. I don't I don't see that having the effect there.
And I see that we're, we're pretty close to it's not like it's 50ft over the line or, you know, you know, it's a pretty close. Tolerance there. And I
think that it's not it's not that far also in addition, the five standards that we go by, I've been looking at these and it looks like the five
standards have been met. Three of them clearly. I think the city would agree with that. And then to were provisionals I think that we have that the
situation meets all those five. I think that we have satisfied, you know, the, the five standards that we have to go by.
And this is when we make a decision. This is this is more of a statement and kind of like for the record, but when we make a decision, we have rules that we have to follow that are
not emotional rules. These are these are rules and guidelines to to help us make decisions about people's property. When you buy a property, it's your
property and you want to be able to use your property the way you want to use it, as long as you're not hurting somebody else. And I think to maybe
alleviate some of the of the fears I heard tonight of maybe some future situations. This board is tasked on a case by
case basis. So there is no real precedent for us. Each case that comes before us is decided on the merits of the
information that's presented to us in this packet. We don't go out to see the property, we don't pull neighbors, we don't inspect the property. We don't.
It's our decision is based upon what you heard and saw here tonight. That's it. We can't use any other information and each one is case by case. So if
another one came tomorrow and it was very similar but didn't fit these, these rules or guidelines, that would be a different decision. Okay. So
since I've made some comments or anybody on the board, I want to make any additional comments. Okay. So at this time I will
close the board comments session and I will ask for a motion on this item from the board. Does anyone want to make
a motion? I'll make a motion for approval. Do I have a second? I will second, but with a condition. Yeah, absolutely.
So if we may amend your motion to say that we approve with the condition that the area under the solid roof may not be altered to form enclosed or
conditioned living space unless the North Lake RPD minimum setbacks are met, I am
agreeable. Okay, so second. So then I made the motion. Did you make the second based upon. And I'll second it however we go.
Yes, I concur with your adjustment to for clarification. So Jackie made the motion for approval with staff's recommended condition, and Mr. Fuchs made the second. Correct.
Okay. All right. So so for clarification, amended motion, amended motion, amended motion. And then a second by Mr. Fuchs, motion had been clarified and
adjusted to include the city's recommendation of additional wording and and rules that they would have to follow. And then it was second again. So now we
need Madam Secretary to do a roll call of the board. Mr. Fuchs approve. Mr. wood approved. Miss Jack, miss
Turner approved. Mr. Grossman approve. All right. Congratulations. Your application request has been
approved. All right. Now, for other board attorney, we have agenda to approve. Minutes. She
had requested to speak again, but public comments. Chiefs. I think Miss King is addressing it. Okay, okay. You're good,
you're good, Miss King. Okay. Is there official proceedings going on here or no. There was a request for additional public comment, but then that closed
public comments are closed. We're good to go. Okay. Thank you. All right. So moving on to the next item. You guys are done. Yes. Congratulations.
Okay. It has been approved. All right. So next item on the agenda is to approve minutes from the last meeting. And
there are substantial. Do I have a motion I guess we want to do this as a as a block of them all together. Or do you want just one meeting's worth
of agenda of. Oh, yes, it is one meeting. It's just I'll make a motion to approve the September meeting minutes. All right. Do I have a second? I
will, Mr. would second, madam Secretary. Mr. Fuchs approve? Mr. Would approve, Mr. Turner.
Approve. Miss. Miss Turner I apologize. That's okay. Mr. Grossman. Approve. Okay, so now next item on the agenda is
staff comments. As staff have any comments or announcements? I do I have a few. First and foremost, I want to introduce you all to Chloe Siegfried. She
is our new executive assistant in the planning and zoning department. She comes to us from public works and we are very excited to have her here. She's she works for Public
Works for two, three years, about a year and a half. It seems like she's been here forever, a year and a half. But we're really happy to have her here. She's picking up super quickly and I think she's doing
a great job. So we're excited to have her on board. Welcome, Chloe. Good luck. All right. And then I have a couple more things I also provided to you guys tonight. A flier for a
community engagement session we're having tomorrow evening. If you guys are interested in attending, this is our second workshop for the place to be downtown master plan. This
downtown master plan. This is something that essentially is going to provide some recommendations for updates to the smart code, which sometimes you guys get to deal with when
it comes to variances. So if you guys are interested, we'd love to see you. It's tomorrow from 6 to 8 p.m. at the community center, and it's mostly it's a short presentation followed by just some interactive activities. So
it's not the entire duration. And then lastly, I know that I pulled you guys like a long time ago about who would like to receive paper printed packets and who would not. I
have now forgotten that except for miss Rich. So I was wondering if you guys could let me know who all would like me to still print them a packet and leave it up front. Anyone
here? I'm good. No paper. Okay, great. I will just continue to print them for miss Rich. And that is excellent. Okay, that's all I have. Thank you. Miss, do we have anything on the next month's docket? We do have one
item on the agenda next month. And I believe that miss McNeese is going to handle that one. Oh. So. Surprise. And do we have a date for that? Because that's
right around Thanksgiving, I believe it's November 19th. Let me look at it and I'll verify that. Probably. Yeah, I think November 19th 19. So it's the
week before Thanksgiving. Yes. Yeah. It was pushed earlier because of Thanksgiving. Yeah. November 19th, the week before Thanksgiving. Okay. Correct. And then board. Does the board, anybody on the board have any
comments or announcements. No. Just welcome Chloe. Thank you. Okay. No other comments at this
time I am adjourning the meeting this evening. It's 7:24
p.m. and the meeting is now adjourned.