Good evening. [sighs and gasps] Welcome to the Board of Adjustments and Appeal meeting, regular meeting for July 24th, 2026. Uh at this time, we'll call the meeting to order. And if I ask everyone to please join me as we pledge allegiance
to our flag. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you. Um, may we have roll call,
please? >> Chairman Taylor, >> here. Vice Chairwoman Van Deven >> here. Member Beckles >> here. >> Member Green >> here. >> Member Willis >> here. Very well. We have a full quorum tonight of five members.
And uh first up is approval of the minutes for the May 27th, 2026 meeting. Do I hear any corrections or additions that need to be made to the minutes? All
>> [laughter] >> right. Seeing none, may I have a motion about the minutes, please? >> Mr. Chairman, I move to approve the minutes. >> We have a motion. Do I have a second? >> I second it. >> All right. Motion and a second. All those in favor, please say I. >> I.
>> Any opposed? All right. Passes unanimously. All right. Uh, all right. Reading time. Apologize. All right. Uh, notice to everyone. We have all persons who anticipate speaking
on any public hearing item must fill out an oath card to be heard on that agenda item and sign the oath contained their own. These cards are located on the table near the entrance to the council chamber or may be obtained from the recording secretary. This meeting will
be conducted in accordance with procedures adopted in resolution 24-1997. Those speaking in favor of request will be heard first. Those opposed will be heard second and those who wish to make a public statement on the item will speak
third. The applicant may make a brief rebuttal if necessary. A representative for either side for or against may cross-examine a witness. Anyone who speaks is considered a witness. If you have photographs, sketches or documents
you would desire for the council commission to consider, they must be decid submitted into evidence and were retained by the city. Please submit such exhibits to the recording secretary. Applicants for land use or zoning related items are advised that the res
resume résumés of the staff members who prepared the application staff reports are on file in the city clerk's office. All right. Uh that little speech is everyone is speaking tonight has filled out a little card and turned it into our
secretary. Very good. Thank you. All right. Yeah, I appreciate that. Um, chairman confirms that all agenda items have been properly advertised. Staff? >> Yes, chair. All items advertised properly.
>> Very good. Uh, members statements that they visit any of the sites or spoken to any members of the public regarding the items on to be reviewed today? >> No. And I am a yes in the relationship that this is a business and I am a
customer of one of the applicants, the very first one of variance number one. So I have visited the location because my vehicle was there. Uh will that make any standing from our last discussion we had last year on this thing? I don't
think so. So I'm putting that out there if there's anyone objects to that. [snorts] All right. um consent agenda and old business. We have none. So, I guess we'll get started with our first variant. Variance number 11-2026
at 109 Fiser Avenue. So, staff, would you give us the page number and get us going on that, please? >> Thank you, chair. Um, we'll start on page 10 of your agenda packet and then as is the first variance of the night, I'd like to go over the powers of the
BAA. LDR section 34-226 states that the board shall grant a variance request when in the opinion of the board of adjustment and appeals owing to special conditions, the literal enforcement of such ordinance or regulations would do manifest injustice to or impose an unnecessary hardship
upon the applicant. In order to authorize any variance to the provisions of such ordinance, the board must consider the following criteria. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other land, structures, or building in the same
zoning. That special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The granting the variance requested will not confer upon the applicant any special privilege that is denied by the ordinance to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. The literal
interpretation of the provisions of the ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of the ordinance that the variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land building or structure. The granting of the variance
will preserve the spirit of the ordinance and remain in harmony with its general purpose and intent. that in granting the variance, the public safety and welfare must be assured. And in no case shall granting of a variance result in a change of use which would not be permitted in that zone.
And with that, we'll begin with variance number 11-2026 for 109 Fiser Avenue. The applicant is requesting a variance to the land development regulations section 28-317C to allow a zero foot side interior
sideyard setback for a primary structure in lie of the required 10-ft interior sideyard setback. According to Bard County Property Appraisers office, the subject property is approximately 0.08 acres in size and contains a 1520 ft
building constructed in 1947. Um, property records indicate that the property was previously under common ownership with the adjacent parcel located at 613 Orange Street. The lot appears to have been subdivided in 2023. While lot split creating two parcels
from one parent parcel does not require review by city staff or approval by the city council, no city records indicate the division was reviewed by staff to ensure that the newly created lots met the minimum zoning standards, including minimum building setbacks. Now, following the separation of the parcels,
a 350 foot addition was constructed without a permit along the interior side property line with a zero foot setback. Permit number B PBP26-041 0614 is currently under review for the addition and as proposed, the addition
does not comply with the 10-ft interior or setback as required by the LDR. Based on the information provided, the request does not appear to satisfy the variance criteria set forth in LDR section 34-226. The hardship appears to be self-created resulting from the subdivision of the
properties and subsequent construction of the addition without the required approvals or permits. The staff recommends denial of the variance allowing interior sideyard setback of zero feet for a primary structure. The special conditions and circumstances are self-created. Approval of the variance
may grant the applicant rights not commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of the ordinance. Um that's all I have for the staff. I would say that the variance for the zero foot setback does not guar say that the
building that is currently there will be able to remain. It is under building permit review. I do believe there's some potential issues for um with it being on the zero foot um that having that be a exterior wall a firewall rating um in
addition to the potent the current easement uh the roof overhang and the the setback because that's kind of protruding into the other property. So there will be other issues that need to be addressed throughout the building permit stage. Um for this the zero foot
setback would not necessarily solve all all of those items for the current construction. >> All right. How long ago was it we heard first heard this? Uh >> last year. >> Last year. >> Yeah. >> A date kind of what month? >> I believe it was in in the summer as
well. I was it was one year ago. that we heard this and >> and it was withdrawn at that time. There was no ruling before the okay before we had a final meeting. Now we had two meetings on it. I believe >> there was one where it was postponed. We
did not talk about it. Um it was postponed and then on the next meeting I believe it was withdrawn. >> Okay. All right. Um can you tell me about these things with the building department for a permit we're talking about? So at when
we first had the variance last year, there was no permit that had been submitted and there was no um engineering plans or design plans for the structure. Um that is in that is now has been created. I believe that is on
page 20 of your packet is the submitted engineering plans. Um the comments from building that were received for this address how uh with it being a zero foot setback they have to treat it as a exterior wall that needs to be fire
rated. Um the current plans don't show that in addition to the potential overhang of that um the roof area where the water is flowing off onto the property owner. It's not captured on the the current property. Um all those would
be items that would need to be um addressed as well as um I believe there's also additional issues with the inspection. They would need engineer an other another engineer to verify since the building's already created that it passes inspection rating. So there's
there's multiple other things that would need to be addressed um with the structure outside of the variance. Thank you. Do we have anyone else has questions to the staff? All right. I see no other questions of
staff. At this time, we'll open up for the public hearing. May I have the first card, please? >> David Rupy. >> Welcome, sir. If you please come up, give us your full name and address for the record, please. >> Hi, good afternoon. I'm David Ruby. I'm
the owner of uh Dave's Automobile and 109 Fisher app. Um I have copies of a letter. I'm gonna just, you know, my talk. If you guys want a copy, you're welcome to it. >> Sure. All right. Well, thank you all for being
here and uh doing your job. So, thank you for that. Um uh I just wanted to kind of remind you what we briefly talked about last time I was here and some of the changes and etc. that was going on and just kind of remind you of what we talked about last
time and the reason we got to where we're at, you know. Um, but uh, [snorts] you know, I've been in the repair industry since 1987, been celebrating 40 years doing this work, you know, and, uh, pretty proud of that. I started that first job in Connecticut, my first shop, and then moved to Florida, continued
working as mechanic since 2000 here in Bvard County. Um, I, uh, built a mobile business until 2000 from 2000 to 2010. I opened up a shop on Hopkins A in 2010. I co-founded
with Automotive Innovation here in Titusville. And after that business closed due to some family issues, uh, I returned to the mobile repair until I began operating 109 Fiser in 2018. I purchased the property in 2019.
So, yeah. Does that does that make sense? Because it was purchased by Micah in what year? >> I don't have those direct things. It was the um no when the the building was
initially constructed and then it appeared to have been subdivided in 2023 but without any type of staff review. I can't confirm. >> Okay. So that date may be incorrect but I thought I bought it pretty early in that
it may have been 2023 now that I think about it because of everything that goes on around here. But uh anyway so since that business has grown significantly. We completed over 11,600 repair invoices. We are now averaging about 30 cars a week. And we've expanded into advanced services to be used and
available at dealerships. You know, uh things like calibration, mobile programming, R134 AC, Napa Auto Care Center, a lot of pieces and parts that have brought the level of the business up. Um we offer threeear 36,000 mi
warranty. People love love that around around here. And uh you know we also maintain a strong arguably probably the top shop in town. So um knowing I've made mistakes and trying to do the right thing but I've uh so what
happened is as the business grew space became major challenge from 22 to today. I've made nine separate attempts to buy other properties find viable properties that I could get my hands on and and change the location or whatever to make it better. Um, each attempt involved
weeks or months of negotiation, but every one of them fell through due to parking issues, property condition, financing gaps, or contract complications. Despite constant effort, I have not been able to secure a viable alternative location. Because of these limitations, and because of real safety and
environmental concerns, including tire overflow, water accumulation, mosquito issues, noise, and lack of weather protection, I built a temporary covered tire rack. I figured that I would get a property and I wouldn't have to have it, you know. So, um,
I made the decision virtually in a few weeks and and threw it up during the Christmas break. Um, I did it all myself. I just wanted to cover things up and and be able to store and hold some equipment and and those tires undercover
and all the waste oil and all of the uh pieces and parts that come off the cars that shouldn't be outside. There was no room inside. The cars were being demanded. You know, people needed me to fix their cars, you know, and I was blessed to have that business. So, um
after not being able to find a viable alternative, that's what I did. I uh built that rack and um it's weather resistant, removable. It meeted uh immediately improved organization safety, environmental issues, and workflow. That's uh what I did with the belief that I wouldn't need it. You
know, I would try to find another way to do this. Um in early 2025, I spoke to the code enforcement and began researching compliance requirements. I also signed a lease for 90 maiden lane, 100 yards away from my building, couple properties down, had three small bays in
it, and a very small amount of property. I thought I could at least somehow move that stuff around uh to create an annex building. In just three and a half months, that building became 98% operational and it's now fully equipped and in use.
It has helped with workflow and parking a little bit, but even with this, the challenge remained the same in the Fiser building. The new building helped with parking and workflow, but doesn't currently offer solutions to the other concerns. So, waste, new, or used tire, scrap metal, and supplies that need to be
undercover. It's the best way to handle it environmentally and safety issues. Since the last board meeting, I've taken every step I was recommended here. I hired action permits represented today by Amy Mister Meister and her husband
happens to be behind her um who has extensive uh experience with zoning and permitting. She helped me hire an engineer and a draftsman to evaluate the structure and certify that it meets building code requirements. Once the drawings were completed and signed, I applied and paid for the building permit.
Uh the secretary, she mentioned that um that there was some other things that were on that list. I was not aware of, you know, how the building permit they've sent me some notes requiring um
the waste questionnaire and safety plan, but you know, there was no sense in going forward because the biggest thing was I had to get the variance in order to get the permit. So, that kind of slowed that down. I responded to every request from the city. I'm prepared to hire someone to create a life safety plan, ready to submit the waste
questionnaire to water resources. At this point, the only thing preventing me from moving forward is this permit office with the permit office need for this variance. So, uh today the annex building is fully operational. All lifts and equipment are installed. We've divided workflow
between the two buildings, moved all the equipment around, parking has improved, but as I said with long uh several long-standing shops closing, Sweenies and affordable auto, our shop has absorbed a lot large portion of those clients. Um,
while we have stepped up or leveled up our services as the community requested and now depend on us, we need safe, organized space to meet that demand. The temporary structure continues to solve this problem. It was built for tire and supply overflow, water and mosquito control, noise reduction, weather
protection, and even room for uh in the bay for safe placement of an alignment rack. That's was an important part of that. with it. Uh without it, operations become less safe and less compliant. I want to be clear. I'm fully willing to modify the structure, engineer it
further, apply the addition for additional permits, or work with city staff on any long-term solution needed. I simply need the time and flexibility to remain operational while continue to serve the community responsibly and working toward full compliance. Uh so today I respectfully request approval of
the variance where at a minimum an extension or opportunity to modify the structure to meet municipal requirements. Um I have prepared photos and the report you know for showing the improvements in current operations and of course I welcome any questions you
may have. >> Do I have anyone who has questions? No. Okay. >> I do. >> You got a question? Go ahead. >> Yeah. You You mentioned that you recently are leasing another building. Yes. >> I've seen the sign as I go by Garden
Street. >> And how many bays does that have? >> It's kind of two bays and a half a bay. I call it almost three. >> So, >> would it not be feasible to maybe use that half a bay for your tire storage? And I looked at how that is.
>> Yeah, >> I' I've thought about a lot of pieces and parts of how we could rearrange in there. Um the wall space to the lift areas is so small. If you block the flow of cars through the bay, then you you kind of obstruct the bay the other bay
altogether. So I couldn't see a way to do that that was safe, you know, for for others. You know, I've reduced the tire quantities a lot. Um I was stocking hundreds of tires sometimes. Now, I just keep a very bare minimum. Mostly some
used tires that, you know, people may need here and there, but and then uh of course uh keeping the uh the used tires, the junk tires under cover, keeping the water out of them, keeping mosquitoes out. That's what a big part of that
importance is. You know, a lot of places you go where the tires are just stacked outside, the mosquitoes and stuff are just swarming the area. you know, we don't have enough property to allow that to happen, >> you know, >> and you don't have enough property on the outside of that building that you're
leasing that you could >> it again very similar in condition. You know, I was hoping that I could do something with that better. Um, but literally the building has a driveway that's about maybe a hundred feet long.
Enough room to put like three cars on one side, a couple cars in front, and couple cars in back and the cars in bays at night where to stock them. Otherwise, we're fence line to fence line and the rest is in the street. on the other side of the building. It's not even a car
length from the building to the street and there's no there's a small corner on on the side that wouldn't be conducive to put stuff outside. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So, yeah. >> You have anyone else that has a question
for this applicant? >> Would a five foot setback help you at all? I I thought about if maybe with the possibility of
so right now it's it's set with a tire rack on one side and a tire rack on the other side and the roof goes fully over it. It's about 11 ft wide and 35 ft deep. Okay, you can see kind of in the pictures what it is. If I was to somehow come up a way to cut the roof down the
middle and take that off, then yeah, there would be about five feet left. I would have to take off and cut that whole side. Problem with that is it's not fully enclosed either because there wouldn't be enough room to have the tire rack and walk in there with only 5T.
So, it would be better just to be outside again. Um, I did want to remind you all that uh when I got there, there was a big ugly old 8- foot tall fence that was on the exact line. My original plan was, you know, I'll just take the
fence down because it's garbage and I would just put this wall enclosed wall up. And honestly, as I finished that, I looked at it and I said, "This is just like a screen porch. All I have to do is put that cover over the top of it and I got fully enclosed." I made that split decision and literally
went back and bought the material to put it on that time. You know, I was like, "Oh, I didn't realize I did that that well, you know." So, I had built screen porches with my dad when he had a business in the area, you know, doing some uh whatever. So, I kind of had an understanding of how that's all built. But as I built the tire rack, I
structured it so, you know, so well that it was a really strong little unit. Then I decided to put doors on the ends. So, it came out like I wasn't really planning on it that way at first, but it's the way it came out. >> Okay. So, your answer is no. Actually,
>> I don't I don't see how to do it that way. I thought about just the tires, you know, but it's kind of outside then I don't know how you could enclose them if we did be like cabinets outside maybe. But it it didn't look really I I don't know that it what it doesn't
contain is like the waste oil storage is a uh a container that's about a little bigger than this desk area and there's eight drums inside it that are contained so that if there's any spillage or whatever that is contained inside that
that deal that's environmental requirement right but when it was outside I had built a wood cover over it lasted about three years and then deteriorated to find a way to cover that or to keep it on that property looked I
couldn't think of any other way and then when I saw that I had built that structure around it I said wow it wouldn't be hard just to cover it up then I have no water no concerns none at all you know it's fully safe and that would be outside of the five
foot area it's bigger than the five foot >> thank And all the letters we saw from last time, I assume they're still updated and all your >> We work real hard on keeping the community happy. >> All right. From all your neighbors and
everything. All right. Are there any other questions of this applicant? All right. Thank you very much, sir. I appreciate it. Do we have another card to speak? >> No more cards. >> No more cards. Okay. At this time, we'll
bring it back to the commission for questions or recommendations. Uh question you brought up. They're going to have a firewall on the outside. >> Yes. my understanding >> complex
>> for I'm trying to see if I can find the so the comment from building is it exterior wall shall be fire resistance rated in accordance with the table 601 based on the type of construction and table 7055
based on fire separation distance. So I asked um uh Mr. Adams, what how help me understand that because I'm I'm not a building afficionado. Um, and basically he was explaining that with it at a zero
foot setback, you have to at the property lines, you have to imagine that it's bumped up to another building. Um, because that other neighbor could come in and get their own zero foot setback or so. So, that exterior wall needs to be fire rated to for the other building.
um at the current plans that are submitted, I don't believe it meets that. So, um I I went through all these questions with building because last time um it seemed to be a concern over permitting the variance and when we did not know if the structure was sound or safe or how it was constructed because
it was without a permit. Um with the permit and everything involved now, they would have to ensure that the this is meeting the fire standards, building standards with that zero foot setback. Um I'm not sure if the setback were reduced less than that like a foot or
two five however if that changes that um forgot to ask that question but there was that and then also with the eve um the eve and the overhang you can't um technically it could be protruding onto the other person's property because it's at a zero foot setback um so then now
we're encroaching onto another property um potential runoff so that would have to be um resolved as well and then I think fire also had some life safety questions. They wanted to know what the plan was and anything. I don't know if that's been updated or provided yet. Um
but those were just some items that were of concern to the building department. Um that would not be resolved with the variance being pressed that would still have to go through um when they go through the permitting and be fixed there.
>> All right. I mean how you fix not run off if you put a gutter but that protrudes >> they could do a gutter. I don't know if it's a recessed with the I forget the type of gutter it's called but um could be recessed with something there there
were options available so there is something but um I just because of the conversation last time about the worry over the structure itself if it were to be approved I just wanted to kind of get that information for you guys. >> All right Mr. Chairman, the uh
>> yes, >> the minimum um fire resistance requirement for that wall would be two hours and it may be as much as four depending on the use of the building. It changes with the with the various uses. So storage is one one uh category,
manufacturing is another, industrial use is another. So it it will change and the building department is aware and they'll be reviewing that aspect. Uh also associated with this was a slab with a foundation that hasn't
been wasn't properly inspected. So that would have to be confirmed by engineering inspection or so th those are things that the building department's aware of and they they would be pursuing that. So that's essentially uh
that's not everything. The other thing would be as they move back from the property line the fire resistance separation goes down. So it may be two hours at the line and one hour at 5T. So those are the things that get uh get
reviewed. The overhang you mentioned uh has to be non-combustible and enclosed. So those those are things that they will all look at. So it's just a matter of whether we consider this a self-imposed hardship or
not. That's really the question. I guess I have a question for the applicant. [clears throat] Knowing the if you will come up please Mike. Knowing about these different restrictions or requirements at the building department. Do you still wish
to go ahead for a variance from us? >> I mean sound pretty r uh pretty tight. >> Yeah. So, two things that cross my mind as I'm sitting here. Um, and, uh, one change that I didn't mention at all that
I don't know if it's still possible or not, but, um, first is, you know, you talked about five feet and as you described that um, that idea, is it possible I could get two or three feet and still have a walkway? That might
work. Um, getting five, you know, I I can't see that. not to put the tires that we really need in there. Um, so that would be one possibility to reconstruct that. Uh, the material is all it's it's aluminum screen porch
material that we built it with, which apparently the engineer said was done well in that respect. U, yes, the drain gutter does hang over. Sherry, the neighbor, wanted that there so that she could direct the water where she wanted it. So, I said, "Okay." So, um, you
know, that that was the gutter part that hangs over her property. She wanted that. I said, "Okay, not a problem." Um, so the bringing up Sherry and her husband Jeff. Um, they uh were sitting on their porch just before I left and I
walked by and I told them I was on my way here and I said, "I remember that I think it was you that mentioned the idea of possibly buying a piece of the property next door as well." And as I walked up to them and started talking to them, they were talking about some difficulties they were having
financially. And I said, you know, I'm going to throw this at you. I don't know if you're, you know, in a different place now or whatever. I said, I might be able to buy a portion of your property. What I do remember is that you
had said something about needing 25 ft to the building next door, and there isn't quite that. I think if um if you can picture this, the corner of my building and the corner of her building, it that's the two that get closest
together. I'm going to guess that's about 18 ft. So, it's not quite if I can only go back five feet on my property line, so to speak, because that's all I have behind my building. So, if I went five feet back and then out 10 feet or
so and bought that strip all the way up to the street, I might be able to satisfy the requirement, but no negotiation has been made. They nodded in approval. That might be an idea. That's as far as I got and that happened
today. So, last year they were not interested. this year there's, you know, maybe their financial hardship might change their mind. I don't know. So, >> thank you for your reply, sir.
>> Chair, I would just add because on page 19 of the packet kind of has the aerial survey with the little outline drawing of the um thing. You can see from that building that's there, it's already at that 10-ft setback, which is the minimum, which is the building setback.
So any type of um addition would require a variance. I I know you had just asked if he wanted to go through with it or not, but they are at the maximum right now at that 10 foot. So to have anything there would need some type of variance.
You're speaking of back of the building. So, you're looking east, >> pa p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p page 19, um that yellow is going to be this addition that we're discussing, >> correct? >> Um and that is their um sideyard setback. So that where that yellow
abutts that property line there, that's their neighboring property. So that's the interior sideyard. And they only have if that yellow piece wasn't there. You can see the setback for the main building is about 10 and a half feet I believe.
So to have any type of addition on that interior side would require a variance of some form. Are there any other questions or comments, please? I'd begin by saying I am not a fan of zero foot
setbacks. Don't think it's a good idea. However, with this zoning classification and the location of this building, the fact that it was built in 1947 and you see the needs, you see some hardships, but you've got the neighbors on your
team, you've got signed letters from them all, they don't dispute it. I think your biggest challenge is going to be the building department. This is nothing compared to what's going to be put through there. So, I would caution you to be flexible moving forward. And uh I don't have a problem approving
this variance, but uh the tough road is ahead no matter what we do here tonight. Good luck. Are there any other comments or any motions to be made on this matter? >> I I wonder with the the
zero foot setback and your neighbors being so compliant and right now, you know, neighbors move. So, if you do get a variance and then it's it's in the way of maybe somebody who
wants to buy the property, that's going to be hardship for them. So, I'm just thinking of the future. Just a comment. Mr. Chairman, I'm not going to be able to support the request for variance
as proposed as as it is a self-imposed hardship. Okay, we have had some conversations. Uh at this time, we'll accept some kind of motion on the on this item, please.
I can't make the motion now. Somebody has to make a motion. I'm going to go with a motion to approve the variance number 11-2026 to allow zero foot interior sideyard setback for property located at 109
Fisher Avenue, Titusville. >> I have a motion. Do I have a second? Not seeing a second. Motion fails. Do I have another motion? >> I have a motion to deny variance number 112026 to allow a zero foot interior
sideyard setback for property located at 109 Fischer Avenue. as this appears to be a self-created um hardship. >> I have a motion. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> I have a motion and a second. At this
time, may we have roll call, please? >> Vice Chairwoman Van Deven. >> Uh yes. >> Member Beckles. >> Yes. >> Member Green. >> No. >> Member Wheelis. >> Yes. Chairman Taylor.
>> At this time, I'm going to have to vote no. I mean, yes. I'm sorry to approve this motion. All right. I'm sorry, but this motion did not pass with us tonight. So, have to go back to the building department and work on some other thing, Dave.
Okay. [snorts] Thank you. Okay. Uh at this time [clears throat] we'll crick up our next variance number 13- 2026 for 3 533 Hillrest Avenue. So staff, would you
enlighten us and give us a page number, please? >> Thank you, chair. Beginning on page 42 of your packet, variance number 13-2026 for 533 Hillrest Avenue. The applicant is requesting a variance
to land development regulations chapter 28 section 28-304C to allow less than the required 25- ft rear yard setback for a primary structure for property located in the single family medium density zoning district for the construction of a
single family dwelling. Specifically, the request seeks to permit a rear yard setback of 3.1 ft where 25 ft is required. The subject property is a vacant residential parcel along Hillrest Avenue approximately 32 acres in size.
The park parcel contains two zoning designations single family medium density and open space and recreation with the O portion of the property generally encompassing an area of suspected wetlands. The zoning on the property remains unchanged since the establishment of the parcel and the minimum rear building setback of the
RMBB zoning district is measured from the zoning district boundary rather than the property line. The applicant proposes to construct a single family residence on the upland portion of the site outside of the O area. Given the parcel's limited size and configuration, there's no feasible way to develop the
property in compliance with the dimensional standards of the R1B's district without a variance. The proposed rear setback would allow for the construction of a single family residence in a location similar to the other surrounding residence on their respective lots while maintaining a scale and character consistent with the
surrounding single family properties. Staff are recommending approval of the variance request to allow a single family residence to be constructed with a year rear yard setback of 3.1 ft where 25 is required. In granting the variance, special conditions and circumstances do not result from the
actions of the applicant. the limited lot size and configuration within the single family medium density zoning district create a hardship as there's no feasible way to develop the property. Um approval of the requested variance would not confer any special privileges upon the applicant that is denied to other
lands, buildings or structures within the same zoning district. The plot plan showing this is on 54 of your packet. you can see that um zoning map line um the sketch out of the one-story house
and where that 3.1 is coming from um for the distance between the R1B the the structure to the O zoning um but you can see the actual to the property line um it's about 75 80 feet set back from the
property line itself it's that distance from the zoning districts that we pull the setbacks So that is it for staff. >> Okay. So this 3.1 is just to get to that
zoning map line, not necessarily the back of the property. Correct. >> Correct. >> Yeah. Because the setbacks come from the zoning district when there are the two different districts on the property, which is how the code has been applied. Um so with that they only have the 3.1
feet um at its smallest. It the you can see the line kind of you know eb and flow. So there's 4.9 3.1 4.4 but for that most restrictive of 3.1 um that's the variance being requested.
>> So if they were build a house on there they could not go any further back on the property. Is that correct? >> Correct. Because it comes from the zoning district. So, they do have the 1570 foot square foot house um proposed. There is a little sketch out on there.
You can see it's in compliance with the um front and sideyard setbacks. It's just that rear yard setback because of the change in the zoning map. >> Oh, okay. I didn't understand that when I first looked at it. Thank you.
Any other questions for staff on this particular item? Seeing none, we'll open it up for public hearing. Do we have a card on this, please? >> No card. >> No card. All right. Then we will close
public hearing portion of this and bring it back for discussion or questions. Further question staff um see staff says recommended because of the and I personally yeah with this much backyard
but knowing they can't build anything back there uh I have no problem with this but I don't have a problem with this setback being set like that. Any other comments or suggestions?
Just this is one of the original subdivisions of Titusville. And this I believe this is the back um southwest corner of the lake that it backs up to. It's hard to tell from our drawings
here, but I believe that's where it is. It's a little corner. Yeah, there's a drawing uh on page 57. You can see all the orally show lake. >> It's not lake. >> It's wetlands. I'm not I don't believe it's a lake.
>> Depends on how much rain we have. Right. >> That's what That's what I was about to say. Depends how much rain we've had last week. >> Yeah. Okay. All right. Do I have a motion on this item, please? Mr. Chairman, I move to approve variance
13 2026 to approve uh for 533 Hillrest Avenue to have a 3.1 foot setback where 25 ft is required. >> I have a motion. Do I have a second?
I second it. >> Very well. Any other discussion? Seeing none, may we have a roll call, please? >> Member Beckles? >> Yes. >> Member Green? >> Yes. >> Member Willis? >> Yes. >> Chairman Taylor? >> Yes. >> Vice Chairwoman Van Deven?
>> Yes. >> Very well. >> So that has passed. Okay. Variance. The next item C. Variance number 15-2026 for 701 Booker Street.
And what page should we go there? 61. >> 61. >> 61. Very well. >> Variance 15-2026 for 701 Booker Street. The applicant is requesting a variance to the land development regulations chapter 28 section 28-305C
to allow the construction of a single family residence with a side corner setback of 10 ft instead of the required minimum of 20 ft. The subject property is a non-conforming corner lot under 5,000 square feet with 49.9 ft of frontage along Booker Street and 99.94
feet of frontage along Second Avenue. These dimensions do not do not meet the minimum 6,500 square foot lot area and 65 foot lot width outlined in the single family highdensity zoning district standards. The surrounding area is primarily composed of single family home
homes and vacant residential parcels, many of which share similar dimensions and configurations with the subject property. The lot was originally platted as part of the Reeden Island subdivision in 1913, well before the administrative resoning in 1993 that established the current
dimensional requirements for development on the site. The applicant has indicated that the narrow width of the corner lot conra creates a constraint in meeting the required 20ft side corner setback. Now, a proposed plot plan has been submitted depicting the requested 10-ft
side corner setback. However, the plan also shows an interior sideyard setback of 9.81 ft where a minimum of 10 ft is required and a rear yard setback of 22.2 feet where a minimum of 25 ft is required. As submitted, the proposed development would require additional
variances beyond the requested side corner setback as the current application does not request relief from those additional setback requirements. So unless the plot plan is revised to demonstrate compliance with all other applicable dimensional standards of the R1C zoning district, the applicant would
need to submit a separate variance application to request the additional setback reductions. But given the non-conforming width of the lot and its corner location, these conditions may constitute a hardship that supports the request for a reduced side corner setback. If the requested side corner
stepback variance is approved, the applicant will still be required to demonstrate compliance with all remaining applicable standards of the zoning district or obtain approval for any additional variances prior to development. So with that, staff are recommending approval of the variance to
request to allow a single family residence to be constructed with a side corner yard setback of 10 ft instead of the required minimum of 20. and granting the variance special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The reduced lot width presents a hardship to the
applicant and granting the variance would not confer upon them special privilege that is denied by ordinance to other lands, buildings or structures in the same zoning district. Plot plan we're discussing is shown on page 68. And that's just to say that as it's
currently present, we're only asking for the 10-ft side corner setback. That's what was advertised and on the application. The plot plan you see does not meet the other setback requirements. But if the variance were to be approved, we're not approving the other setbacks.
They would either return to address those setbacks or update the plan to meet current st the standards outside of the 10 foot. If that makes sense. Knowing
these other setbacks and various require would it not behoove the applicant to come back and have an amended application to have all this in one time instead of having to pay money for multiple >> we have already advertised and we're here um at least for this one for the
second one uh for to postpone and come back and redo we'd still have to readvertise we'd have to add the different things so I don't think it would make much of a thing whether whether we put them all in one package or just this um that the applicant is here so they can
address if they would like to do that. Um but returning for the variances either by postponing this one and adding on the others or keeping this one here and just coming back for more um wouldn't change the timetable any and I
don't believe it would change much with the fees but the applicant is here so they could you know better address that question for you. Okay. [snorts] Any other questions for staff on this? [snorts] Seeing none, we'll open up for
public discussion. Do we have input? You have a card. >> Excuse me, sir. >> Would you please come to the mic and please >> Yes, sir. Welcome. And if you won't mind, give your name and address for the record, sir.
>> My name and address, uh, my name is Michael Jackson and I currently live on 4235 Jupiter Avenue, Titusville, Florida. >> Okay. And, um, under the circumstances, can we just come back and have this all
compiled into one without the other fees? That's what I prefer. Well, so there there will be additional fees regardless just because there we would have to re we have to the only thing that has been advertised is the side corner setback. Got
>> you're requesting additional variances um with the plot plan as the plot plan is pres presented there would be a need. So we would have to advertise for those as well. >> Um and then staff review is only for that. So, I do believe there would be um it's it's $100 for each additional
variance and other things and then also the legal advertisement fee. So, I don't have all of that. So, I'm not sure what your entire package would be, but there would be additional fees associated with it. Um got >> with postponing. So, you we're welcome to postpone and couple everything
together or add those on later. I staff has no opinion either way, but um >> I prefer to we prefer to postpone. >> Postpone. Yeah, absolutely. So >> for the site is going to have to be done anyway.
>> Uh what would be the right word? Continue or postponed? >> Postponed. >> Postponed. Okay. Okay. Thank you, sir. >> Okay. We've had a request from the applicant to postpone this to so they
can amend this application and come back to us at a later time. Uh, is this take a vote? Vote vote on this is what we have. >> Motion would be appropriate. Yes, >> a motion would be appropriate. Yes. Motion. >> Okay. Uh, I've had a request. Do I have a motion to follow this applicant's
request? >> I'd like to make a motion. to postpone variance number 15-2026. >> The address being 701 Booker Street. >> The address being 701 Booker Street. >> Very good. At the request of the applicant. >> At the request of the applicant.
[laughter] >> Very good. Do I have a second? >> I will second it. >> Very good. Any other discussion? >> Yes. >> Yes. It's just just a a thought that uh it may be easier to adjust the footprint of the house uh than it is to go through
the the whole process of having Well, see, then you don't really want to very likely don't want to continue this at this point. >> You can adjust your footprint. >> Yeah, adjust the footprint from the back. It'll be easier. The side is
pretty much there. As you said, it's 9 I mean 9.8. >> Yeah, 9.8. >> 9.8 be 10 in. So I can ask for the variance in between there. That shouldn't be a big problem because I own the own property as well next next to it. >> My point is if you can adjust the footprint of the house and you have this
variance in place, you don't need anything else. >> I'm going to need the variance from the from this this point where I'm at that variance is needed. Period. >> Right. Understand. Yeah. >> But the other two I can't I I can't take care of that. So that that is a that is a thing I'm going to address as well. You know what I mean? I might don't have
to ask for a variance for those. That's what I'm going back to the drawing board to address as well. >> But you you still want to go with the continuence. >> Well, I I I want to see first. >> Yeah. The po the postpone would give him the time to make sure >> time to make sure. You know what I mean? Because I do, like I said, I own the
property around there. >> Okay. >> So, I I'm trying to I'mma see. That's what I >> understand. Thank you. I just wanted to bring that up. It's >> Yeah. I got >> easier route. >> Yeah. >> Thank you for your input, sir. All right. So, we've had a motion and we've
had a second and we've had some discussion on it. May I have roll call, please? >> Member Green? >> Yes. >> Member Willis? >> Yes. >> Chairman Taylor? >> Yes. >> Vice Chairwoman Van Deven? >> Yes. Member Beckles? >> Yes. >> Very good. So, this at this time this is
postponed uh till next to another meeting. All right. Coming up to item D, variance number 16-2026 concerning the property at 2374
Landing Drive and staff enlighten us on that and page numbers, please. >> Thank you, chair. Page 75 of your packet. Uh, variance number 16-2026 for 2374 Landing Drive. The applicant is
requesting a variance to ordinance number 24-2019 to allow a reduced interior sideyard setback for the construction of a single family dwelling on property located at 2374 Landing Drive. The subject property is a vacant residential lot located
within the Brooks Landing phase 2 and is zoned planned development. The property is identified as lot 51 of the Brooks Landing phase 2 and contains approximately 5,893 square feet which is below the 6,000 square foot minimum lot size established
by the approved plan development. The applicant proposes to construct a single family residence and is requesting a variance to reduce the required 5-ft interior sideyard setback along the south property line. Due to the slight curvature of the property line, the proposed setback ranges from
3.97 feet to 4.5 feet as depicted on the submitted plot plan on page 83 of your packet. As part of the Brooks Landing phase 2 plat, a 5-ft private drainage easements, 5 foot private drainage easements were established along all side and rear property lines. Because
the drainage easement along the south property line is privately owned and maintained by the homeowners association, the applicant obtained a partial release of the private drainage easement, reducing the easement from 5 feet to 3 feet along the property line. This item has been recorded with the Bvard County Clerk of Courts. The
submitted plot plan demonstrates that all other applicable setbacks, setback requirements, and development standards of the plan development are satisfied. The requested variance is limited solely to the reduced interior sideyard setback along the south property to accommodate the proposed single family dwelling. The
subject property was created as part of an approved Brooks Landing phase 2 subdivision and does not appear to possess any unique physical characteristics or special conditions that distinguish it from other lots within the plan development. that staff are recommending denial of the variance
to request to allow an interior sideyard setback of 3.97 feet in lie of the required five foot minimum. The subject property was created as part of an approved Brooks Landing phase 2 subdivision and does not appear to possess any unique physical characteristics or special conditions
that distinguish it from other lots. That's all that I have. um when site plans were approved since this is less than what was then required how did it get through planning? So, in the
site plan, I don't know if there was necessarily dimensions for the specific one. I'm not sure. Um, but the ordinance that was created with, you know, the city and the plan development was for 6,000 foot lots. And so, that's
whether it how it made it through, I'm not sure, but it is at the 5,893. Yeah, I see a little curv curvatur on 83 as you posted. There's a little slight deviation where the C1 and C2 is and
that might account for the couple of feet there we're talking about. [sighs] So the three-foot drain line has been established by the HOA and recorded. Is that correct? >> Yes. So, there was the five- foot that
was there. Um, and then we discussed with the applicant how without that being reduced, you wouldn't be able to approve a variance for a structure and an easement. So, with that, they received a partial release of private drainage easement. That's on page 84 of your packet from the HOA um
relinquishing part of that from a 5 foot to a three-foot. >> Okay. Thank you. Are there other questions of staff on this? Not seeing any. We'll open up for the public hearing. And do we have a card?
>> Yes, Chrissy. >> Welcome. [snorts] And if we could have your name and address for the record, please. >> Chrissy Inisencio, 1000 Legion Place, Orlando. I represent the owner and the builder, Ryan Holmes, in this. This was
the first that I heard that staff was suggesting denial. Um, I thought we had been approved on the variance for staff level. Um, so I'm basically just here to answer any questions that you may have. As you can see on the document you have in front of you for the plot plan. It is
a rectangular shaped lot and it is skinnier in the front. We're not sure how that happened between PSP and civil plans getting approved and then plats getting recorded. Um, so what we are asking for is a little more than one foot variance on that far right corner,
which is showing a 3.97 set back at this point. So this is a set plan the what we call a model. >> Yes. So this is depicting the home. It's already it's the home is already sold. They just cannot start building it obviously until we get the permit
approved. Um so the homesite itself is a it should be a 50 foot front set um 50 foot wide lot. So they are proposing to build a 40 foot product on this to meet the five foot side setbacks. You know in a perfect world on a lot that works. Um
so for this community to maintain uniform housing um they could not go any smaller than a 40ft product. Okay. Any other questions of this applicant? All right. Well, thank you very much.
Any other questions of staff? >> No, none discussions amongst ourselves. >> Only uh for staff. Um are there any other lots in this subdivision that uh fail to meet the 50 foot front
width requirement? Not that I'm aware of. >> So this is just one that was the oddball >> here. So >> and they're all 6,000 square feet. >> They should I there was hund over 100
lots in this one. I hadn't gone through [laughter] after to see. But um this is the only building permit out of the ones and I I believe the neighborhood is getting close to fairly built out. the only one that's popped up with the issues that we have here today. >> Mr. Chairman, from my perspective, I
don't see a problem with making the adjustment to allow it to move forward. >> All right. Uh, I can see a problem with the builder trying to put knock one foot off the house and then redesigning that
[laughter] much so myself. All right. Well, there's no other discussion or anything. I'll be happy to take a motion at this time. [snorts] Motion to approve variance number 16-2026
at 2374 Landing Drive, Titusville to allow an interior sideyard setback of 3.97 ft. >> I have a motion. Do I have a second? >> I'll second motion. >> We have a second. May I have roll call, please?
>> Member Willis? >> Yes. >> Chairman Taylor? >> Yes. Vice Chair Chairwoman Van Deeven. >> Yes. Member Beckles. >> Yes. >> Member Green. >> Yes. >> Very well. So, the variance has been approved.
All right. Uh let's see what's next on Pit Parade. Okay. Well, we have time for petitions and requests from the public presence. Public just left. Okay. So, we'll close
that. Uh do we have any reports at this time staff? >> Uh we will have uh we have two variances for the July meeting actually three now with the postponement for tonight and then um one for sure for August because
they have already asked postponement from July to August. So we will have meetings the next two months. And then just as a reminder with the um July meeting, Kim wanted me to make sure that know that that is going to be July 29th. So that is the last Wednesday of that
month. July always kind of throws us one down. So July 29th will be the BAA meeting for for them. Very well. [sighs] Anything from council? [clears throat] >> No report. >> Very well. Any staff members or any
members of the board? Excuse me. >> Just just a reminder that our financial statements are due to the state before July 1st. >> Yes, those online. >> Is that a $25 fine per day?
>> You got it. I mean, you got an email or >> you get a you're due. You'll get an email. I think >> Yeah, it's all by email now. They don't send the hard copy. Did you not get it one? >> I would request that you ask that young lady right over there to make sure that
she makes get that sent to you. >> Yes. Come >> through the clerk's office. Comes through the clerk's office. >> How long? >> June 1st. >> June 1st. Yeah.
>> And you have till July 1. [laughter] >> Okay. So, you got a little homework to do in the next couple of days. I don't >> It doesn't It's a lot easier to fill out. >> Yeah. You still have to say yes. No. No.
Yes. >> No. No. No. No. No. >> Even though I don't get any. >> You turn your mic on when you're talking. Sorry. We're online. Okay. Uh well, I have
nothing to add. Anyone else have anything? Well, try to stay out of the heat. Enjoy the summer. [snorts] This meeting is journed.