Land Use Hearing Officer - 07.13.26

to this morning's land use hearing officer hearing. My name is Steve Luce, and I'll be conducting this morning's cases. At this point in time, if you could all rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. You see, at this point in time, I'd like to introduce Colleen Marshall from Development Services staff. We'll introduce the other members of the county staff that are here today and go over any changes to this morning's agenda. Colleen. Good morning, Colleen Marshall, Development Services. To my left is Mary Dorman and Jared Delfino of the Hillsborough County County Attorney's Office. Carmen Mason, Development Services staff, is joining us virtually. Alexis Meyers, the Planning Commission staff, will be presenting virtually. During the course of the hearing, a number of other staff planners will be presenting their findings for various cases and will be introduced for each item. We have no changes to the published agenda. All right, very good. I have a few instructions to read into the record. The county attorney's office staff has a few instructions to read into the record and then we'll get started. It'll only take a few minutes. Our hearing today consists of agenda items that require a public hearing by the land use hearing officer. I'll conduct a hearing on each agenda item and will file a decision within 15 working days at the conclusion of today's hearing. Our hearing will be informal. I will ask questions related to the scope of direct testimony. I may call and question witnesses as I deem appropriate, and I will decide all questions of procedure. I will take evidence but will exclude evidence that is irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious. Evidence may be presented in written form, and all testimony must be under oath. Hearsay evidence may be used to supplement or explain other evidence but shall not be sufficient alone to support a finding by me unless it would be admissible over objections in a civil action. Regarding the order of presentations this morning, regarding the variances, development services staff presents their staff report and findings, and they have five minutes for that purpose. Then the applicant presents their case, and they have 15 minutes for that purpose. Then anyone in the audience who wishes to speak in support, there's a total of 15 minutes for those people who want to speak in support. Then there's an opportunity for those who are here to speak in opposition to speak. There's a total of 15 minutes for that purpose. Then development services will have an opportunity to address any comments heard. Then finally the applicant will have an opportunity for rebuttal, and they have five minutes for that purpose. There's one special use on the agenda, and I will talk about the process and procedures for special uses when that item comes up. It's the last item on this morning's agenda. Regarding the time for opponents and proponents, a 15-minute time frame is the total time for each category. If there are a number of people to speak, we'll add up the total number of people, and the 15 minutes will be divided as equally as possible. You may wish to designate a single spokesperson to more efficiently use the time. When you come up to the podium to speak, please start by giving your name and address for the record. There's a sign-in sheet down at the end of the podium. If the clerks can raise their hand and point to where the sign-in sheet is. Yeah, there we go. The meeting is being recorded, and we want to make sure we accurately document who is speaking on the record. When you are done speaking, please sign in with the clerk's office with your name, address, and application number of the agenda item you're speaking to. At this point in time, the county attorney's office will now provide the legal requirements for appealing a decision made by the land use hearing officer. Good morning, Jared Duffino, assistant county attorney. This land use hearing officer public hearing is for variants and special use requests. This is the time for interested parties to present evidence and testimony. Once the land use hearing officer has closed a case, the record of that case is also closed, and no new evidence regarding that case may be submitted thereafter. Any decision by the land use hearing officer may be appealed to the land use appeals board. Should a decision of the land use hearing officer be appealed, the record evidence, including the testimony presented at this public hearing, shall be the only evidence that is subject to review by the land use appeals board. In reaching a final decision on petitions, the land use appeals board will only consider the decision of the land use hearing officer and the record evidence, including any evidence from this public hearing. If an appeal is filed, the land use appeals board hearing shall consist of oral argument by the party appealing the decision, county staff, and any interveners, each of whom may be represented by legal counsel. The following shall have standing to appeal a decision of the land use hearing officer or to intervene in an appeal. One, the applicant, or two, anyone who appeared before the land use hearing officer presented testimony or other evidence and is adversely affected by the decision of the land use hearing officer. It is the role of the county attorney's office to ensure that no new evidence or testimony is allowed before the land use appeals board that was not presented to the land use hearing officer at today's hearing. The county attorney will recommend that the land use appeals board disregard evidence or testimony that is outside the record made at today's public hearing. Any evidence presented to the land use appeals board that is outside the record created at today's hearing could jeopardize legality of the land use appeals board decision and the presenter of that evidence could hurt their own cause. The safest course of action then is for you to write down any comments you make today and repeat them to the land use appeals board. Thank you. Okay, thank you. All testimony must be provided under oath this morning. Therefore, if you plan to speak, please stand and raise your right hand so I may swear you in. You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth to help you God. Okay, thank you. You may be seated. And just regarding cell phones, make sure they're all on silent. Okay, at this point in time, Ms. Colleen Marshall, if you could introduce the first item for this morning's hearing. Today's agenda, we have no vested rights, fee waivers, remands, reconsideration requests, or site development variance requests. Which brings us to section G, signed variance requests. Item G1, variance 26, 1004. The applicant is David M. Smith. The request is a variance to sign requirements. Staff findings will be presented by Sam Ball. Okay, Sam. Good morning. Sam Ball of Hillsborough County Development Services. The applicant is requesting a variance to increase the allowable building sign area on a new building constructed at the southwest corner of the Selman Expressway and South US 301 intersection. Under LDC section 7030A2, the maximum sign area allowed on the north elevation is 200 square feet. The applicant is requesting a 301 square foot increase to the maximum permanent area, which would allow a 501 square foot wall sign on the north elevation. That concludes my report, if you have any questions. No questions, thank you. Thank you. The applicant, please. The applicant, please. Good morning. David Smith, Director of Development and Zoning for Stearns-Weaver-Miller on behalf of the applicant. As Sam indicated, this is a variance request to increase the billing sign from the allowed 200 square feet to 501 square feet. The factors contributing to the reason we're asking for this variance. The elevated and curved roadway of the Selman Expressway. Existing vegetation obstructions as you're approaching the exit ramp. Extraordinary setback conditions that exist because of the wetlands on site and the billing setback in the way that the right-of-way is angled for the Selman. The scale of the building and proportionality results in a smaller sign basically being lost on the facade. Here's an aerial map of the project. This is approximately a little under 800,000 square foot warehouse. It's phase one of 1.4 million square feet going on the site. The sign location would be on the north facade. We also have approval for commercial at the corner of 301 and Causeway. And then there's a facility included in this which is also the fleet maintenance facility for the project. This indicates the location of the proposed wall sign. Again, it's at the extreme northeast corner of the building. And it parallels the cross-count expressway exit ramp. So the practical difficulties that we're experiencing here is essentially unique and singular due to its location abutted on the north by the elevated Selman, the east by 301, and the west by Delaney Creek, and the south by commercial portion of a mixed-use intersection of US-301 Causeway Boulevard. Location characteristics, elevated Selman and off-site wetland along Delaney Creek contributing to making the property unique and singular. The LDC provides for building signage for each premise and for multi-purpose tenant buildings, each unit based upon one and a quarter square feet for every square foot, not to exceed 200. In our particular case, 200 square foot sign is what we're asking for the variance from, given the criteria or given the situation out there that we're experiencing. A 200 square foot sign essentially becomes illegible and lost amongst all those obstructions. We're about, there's about a 900 long facade for this building. It's quite a large building. And this would be the only sign, building sign on that side of the building. So how would the variance allow, not substantially interfere with or injure the rights of others? Given the location of the building's sign location proposed at the northeast corner of its facade, no adjacent properties will be negatively effective. The proposed sign is located at least 1,000 feet from the nearest residential property, which is located northwest of the proposed sign, and has its view obstructed by existing off-site vegetation. To the north of the elevated Selman Expressway and commercial development on the north side of the expressway, and to the south is property that is part of the same mixed-use project, with no view of the sign location, and to the east the sign can only be seen from the intersection of 301 and the Selman exit ramp. This is, the request is in harmony with the code, because essentially the LDC is, and the intent in the development process is to protect the rights of property owners and consideration of the interests of the citizens. Given the scale of the development of physical constraints that limit the visibility and legibility of the proposed code compliance sign, approval of the variance is in harmony with the owner's rights and the interests of the citizens of Hillsborough County. It will not result in, you know, getting to the actual sign purpose. The purpose of sign regulation provide minimal control of signs necessary to promote health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens, lessen hazards to vehicular traffic, preserve property values, preventing unsightly and detrimental signs, and essentially preventing their having a, just signs everywhere. Variance does not result in an illegal act of the applicant. We're here asking for the variance to receive relief based upon the obstructions and unique situations that we've experienced with this site. And it's substantial justice will be allowed granting this variance. And since the variance for the larger building sign provides clear identification of the business on the subject site, which enhances public safety, will not be detrimental surrounding property owners, and will not have detrimental impacts on the sign code as it was adopted, the purposes that it was designed to protect. So what is, what's missing here? Great. Somehow the, we did not scan, and I'll put them on the elbow if I could. This is essentially the sign and the location on the proposed building. This is kind of a viewpoint map. So what I'll be showing you over the next few slides is views from the Selman towards the building, where the sign to be located on site. Here as we're heading eastbound on the Selman, you can, you can see in the foreground, a red corner of the building, and that's approximately 900 feet with no sign shown. That shows the same distance with a 200 foot square foot sign shown on the building. Very hard to, to see, have to admit 900 feet, it's hard to see them regardless. The larger sign, the sign you know as you're coming down that ramp, okay, hey, there's the Coca-Cola building. Similarly, we have, you're getting closer and you're getting on the ramp. The other was at the beginning of the exit ramp. There's no sign, square foot sign, foot sign from the building. And again, relationship-wise, very large setback between the edge of the Selman and the building. And at this point, we've passed by the cypress trees that are in Delaney Creek obstructing the view. Again, eastbound, we're on, closer down, we're about 700 feet away. So looking is at the intersection of 301 and the exit ramp intersection. And that is on the east side of the building. That's an O sign. It's a 200 square foot sign. And that is the, so essentially the, get the general ideas is that, you know, given the scale of the building, given the obstructions, the Selman is also elevated. At this point, you actually, as you exit, you go up and then you go down to 301. And when you're coming, I'll just give you a couple other views. When you're coming westbound, until you actually get on top of the overpass, you can't see the sign at all. But perspectives would be a 200 square foot sign, a 500 foot sign on the. So based upon those graphics and illustrations, it represents the obstructions that we're running into. And I've gone through the, uh, waiver criteria, um, and apologize for a little inconvenience when those signs, uh, those, those aerials didn't get put in the presentation for some reason. Okay. I'm here to answer any questions, uh, respectfully request your approval. All right. Very good. Thank you. No questions. Point time. Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak in support of the application? When responding, anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application? Responding staff, anything further? Nothing further. Applicant an opportunity for rebuttal. Okay. No need for rebuttal. With that, that concludes this application. Ms. Marshall Rue for the next item. Thanks. This brings us to section eight, variance request. Item H1, variance 260884. The applicant is Maria Concepcion. The request is a variance to accessory structure requirements. Staff findings will be provided by Logan McCaig. Okay. Good morning. Morning. Logan McCaig Development Services, variance 260884. The applicant's requesting a variance to accessory structure requirements for the purpose of constructing an accessory structure in the front yard to store a recreational vehicle. For sections 611.04 and 60101, accessory structure shall not be erected within a front yard unless they are at twice the depth of the required front yard or 50 feet, whichever is less. The front setback for the RSC 6 zoning district is 25 feet. Therefore, a 50-foot setback is required for such an accessory structure. The applicant is requesting a 25-foot variance to this 50-foot requirement, resulting in a 25-foot setback. And we'll be able to have any questions. No questions. Thank you. And the applicant, please. Good morning, sir. My name is Maria Concepcion. My address is 2509 West High Avenue, Tampa, Florida, 33614. Could you please grab the microphone? We currently own an Integra RV or mobile home or recreational vehicle, more well-known. It is a 41-feet Integra 2023 Riata XL. This is a picture that represents a similar model. With the current application done, the setback requested was 50 feet. We understand that 50 feet will be double what is required for a regular construction. With our new proposal, we are requesting to, instead of having a 50-foot setback, having the 25-foot setback that falls within the same category that every construction has in this area. I have a picture. So this is an aerial vision from the properties appraisers. So the blue line represents the law lines where constructions typically start in this neighborhood. This is our property. Currently, this shed no longer exists. It was a covered carport that we removed where we are proposing to install this new shed. And the proposal requires a diminished setback because, as you can see here in our survey, there is already a garage that is built in this area. If we are to adhere to the 50-foot setback, we would be left with a shed of approximately 18 feet, which wouldn't cover half of our vehicle. And seeing as it is such an expensive purchase, we are looking to protect our assets. So we are requesting to shorten the setback to the 25-foot for every single construction that is in this area. The proposed shed has been applied for a 18 by 44, but we would be reducing it to a 40-foot to adhere to that 20-feet setback. I have a few questions. Okay. There is an existing garage which you had on the graphic? Correct. Yes, sir. Can you pull that back up again? Yes, sir. This is the survey. This is the garage that is existing. Okay. And did you look into putting the new garage in the location of the existing garage? So the shed will be located in front of the garage. As it is applied currently, it looks as such. Okay. The question is why not demo existing garage and push your RV garage back further? Because we would have to limit our storage space on a single-family home that is currently habited and it's being used for storage. It's currently what? There is a family living in this current house and they are using the garage as storage because the storage inside the home is limited. You don't live in this house? No, sir. So wherever you live, you don't have any room on your lot for your RV? No, sir. The RV is being kept in one of our commercial properties where we are now requiring the space for enlarging our building. Not enlarging our building, but our storage facilities. The garage is being utilized for storage by the renters. Yes, sir. What if that renter moves out like next week? It's not a renter. It's a family member that is living in this property. Okay. What if the family member moves out? They don't own it. What if they decide to move out? We don't, for some reason, we're going to move somewhere. Then there's no storage there. In that case? The point is it's a temporary. The storage in the garage currently is temporary as they are living in the property. The RV would be permanently located stored there. Yeah, you're missing my point. If your tenant family member moves out, then there's no longer tenant family member storage in the garage. That storage goes with them. Correct, sir. But the limitations in the house storage remain, so whoever moves into the property might still need the garage for storage. The purpose of a variance is to show that you've explored all other possible scenarios. What if you built a shed for storage? If the proposed new garage isn't adequate enough for the RV and storage? Unfortunately, in this part of the property, there can be any constructions, which is where the septic tank and the pipes are laid. So the only storage area would be here, and we are limited regarding the building lot. We also have to respect side setbacks, and as far as I understand, the garage is already limited to this placement. If we were to tear down the garage, we would have to build even closer to the house. The septic tank drain field is? Behind the house, sir. South of the garage or? Right here, sir. In this area. What about a shed on the other side of the garage? There is limitations regarding the setback from the side of the property as well, since this is a residential property. Which is, do you know what the setbacks are? Three feet? No, sir. I'm not familiar, but since this is a double-wide lot, the limitations are larger because of the conditions of the lot. Okay, I'll do my own research, but I don't think that's true. I think their setbacks are probably in the range of three to four feet. I'm not aware at this moment. I also checked, you know, looking at the ownership pattern along the street to see what's out there. I happen to notice that you owned four of the six lots on that street? Yes, sir. I noticed that one of the lots doesn't even have a house on it. There are a couple of garages on it. Correct, sir. That was purchased as is from the same lady that sold us this property. Once her husband passed away, they separated the lot and sold it to us as is. We're looking into how we can join those lots again, but this is a process that requires a lot of time. And have you considered putting the RV on the lot with just the garages? I'm sorry? Have you considered putting the RV on just the lot that has garages? They are not long enough to house such a large vehicle. Understood. But you would have to tear down a garage or build a new one on this lot that's performing. Correct, sir. You'd have the same exercise in a different lot where you could meet the setback. Yes, sir. That would encourage tearing down. Would you consider that possibility? We have considered it, sir. However, we do also use the current garage as storage for other vehicles. The garage itself, is it going to have walls on all sides and a roof? They will have walls on the sides and doors on both the front and the back so we can access the garage that is going to be behind it. Other questions? Thank you, ma'am. Thank you, sir. At this point in time, is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application? Responding? Anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application? Responding? Staff, anything further? I'll just note that the property being zoned IRC-6, the side yard setback would be seven and a half feet for a primary structure or an accessory structure over 20 feet in height and three feet if it's an accessory structure under 20 feet in height. Okay. That's a side yard setback. What's the rear setback then for accessory? The rear is 25 feet if it's over 20 feet in height and three feet if it's under 20 feet in height. Ma'am, do you have an opportunity for rebuttal? No rebuttal, sir. All right. Very good. Thank you. I request your approval. Thank you. Okay. With that, that concludes this application. Ms. Marshall ready for the next item. Next item is item H2, variance 260885. The applicants are William and Rose Espinel. The request is a variance to accessory dwelling requirements. Staff findings will be provided by Jared Fallon. Good morning. Jared Fallon with Development Services. This application is requesting a variance to accessory dwelling building setbacks for an existing accessory dwelling on a property zone RSC 6. According to Section 6112E, accessory dwellings are required to meet principal building setbacks. And this application is asking for side and rear yard setback variance. For the side yard, the variance is 2.1 feet, which is resulting in a 5.4 foot side yard setback. And then for rear yard, it's asking for a variance of 22 feet for a 3 foot year yard setback resulting. This accessory dwelling was flagged by code enforcement due to not meeting setbacks. And it was discovered that the previous renovations done to the building did not receive a permit. And then in our research, we could not exactly find the date when this building was constructed. But we could disseminate that at least 2014, we see the building on aerial photographs. We also could not find when the structure was converted to an accessory dwelling. Happy to answer any questions. If that accessory dwelling has electricity? I don't know. Do you know if it has water and sewer? I'm not aware. Does it have a kitchen? If it meets the definition of a dwelling, then yes, it should have a kitchen, or it would. But you don't know if it does? I don't know, yeah. I'm not sure the specifics of the building itself. Do you know if it has a bathroom? No, I'm not sure. Do you know the height of the accessory structure? I think it's on the site plan. I cannot read it on what I've printed, so. All right, I'll look for it. All right. Okay. And the reason why it's here today, they were decided by code enforcement? Correct. For not meeting the setbacks, an unpermitted building altercation. All right. We just don't know when. It may have been a storage shed at one point in time, and now we'll- Yeah, that's a possibility. Correct. It's being used for accessory dwelling purposes. Right. Thank you. All right. Thanks. All right. Any applicant, please? Good morning. Yes, hi. Good morning. My name is William Espinel. This is my wife. Rosa Espinel. Good morning. Good morning. And we're here to present our hearing. All right. Very good. Yeah, so we basically bought the house in 2015? 2016. 2016. And we bought the S's, and all the surveys that we've got, all the records that we've gotten, even from here, from the city, it shows that this has been a pre-existing building since the house was built. So, I guess it was a shed. It's always been a shed. That's not true. I've looked at historical areas. It was not there when you bought the property. When we bought the property? Correct. When you bought the property. Yeah, it was there when we bought the property. Strike that. It was not there when the house was built in 1986. Okay. Well, okay. So, we bought it as is. You know, so when we bought it, everything was, you know, how we found it like that. So, you know, what we're trying to do is we're trying to apply for the variance because, you know, now it doesn't mean the setbacks. But the building, as far as we know, has always been there. You know, it was already like that. And all that we've done was just to get permits to get it renovated. So, it was already an accessory dwelling unit when you bought the property? Yes. Okay. Yeah. So, basically, you know, when we… Do you have any evidence that it was? That was in there. That somebody was living there or… Oh, no. We don't know if somebody was living there. We know that the building was there. The building was like that. Okay. But it wasn't… Did it have… I'll ask the same question for you that I asked the staff. Does it have power when you moved in? Yes. Yes, it had power. Yes. All right. Did it have public water and public sewer when you moved in? Yes, it does. Yes. It did? Yes. Okay. Did it have a kitchen? It's got, you know… When we… When we remodeled… All right. But let's talk about when you bought the property. You said it was as is. It was a dwelling unit. The building. The building itself. Yes. When you bought it. When you went out back, looked at the shed, did it have a kitchen? No, it doesn't have… It didn't have a kitchen. It didn't have a kitchen. No. All right. Does it have… Did it have a bathroom when you bought it? It did have the… We renewed the bathroom. It didn't have like a… Like a nice bathroom. It just had a toilet there. Okay. But that's it. Okay. So… All right. I'm sorry to interrupt, but I wanted to make sure I understood. No, no. It's okay. All right. Go ahead. Proceed. Okay. So basically, you know… I can just show you some pictures so you know… The issue is it's too close from the fence. Yep. Basically. And we… We would like to… That's the property. We would like to use the property, you know… Yeah. The main reason why we bought the property because of this accessory dwelling, because we have a large family. We have three kids, you know, and we have three bedrooms. So we're basically short one bedroom. So we were thinking, you know, when we bought this property, hey, we could use it as a… You know, as a dwelling. A guest room or… Yeah. Or like when my mom comes over, you know… That's what we thought we were going to use it for. And we didn't know that, you know, it wasn't allowed to be used… Until the other… Yeah. Until December, basically. Exactly. Okay. So you… When you bought the property, remind me again, when did you buy it? 2016. All right. And when did somebody start living in it? Nobody lives there. Nobody lived there. Nobody lives there. We just set up like a nice room. Yeah. There's nobody currently living there. There's nobody living there. Okay. So if nobody lived there, then how did code enforcement get involved? We had a… We have a disgruntled neighbor that wants to give us a hard time. So that's why we're here. That's why we're here. Yeah. So… And we've done about what? Everything. Yes. It's… Yeah. It's like a neighbor's war. They're, like, you know, like… Whenever… I don't know if this is aside of scope, but he would always inject himself into our lives. And he would… life's more difficult in the side of their house he called the cops is thank God he's not there anymore but like his last nice thing to do to us was called coin for him because a property that we didn't know we was not like following the rules honestly we didn't know I mean it was there when we bought it so what we're trying to do is get everything according to code yes so we don't have any any other issue okay so I'm not sure what is specific issue but code enforcement came out right and once they got there they said well your your structure doesn't meet setbacks right exactly nobody was living there I guess I should turn back to staff if it was just an accessory dwelling unit would it meet setbacks and so enforcement comes out and it's just a shed and it meets met setbacks they wouldn't cite you for not meeting the setbacks why would they cite you for not meeting the setbacks all right we applied for a very a variance because they say that the building the way it is it's not legal so they say that we have to apply for a variance so it can be legal so that's what we did we hired when did you apply for the variance this year yeah before or after you got decided by code enforcement after we decided because we didn't know yeah we didn't know okay but code enforcement cited you for not meeting setbacks for an accessory dwelling unit apparently we pay whatever we have to pay according to whatever we was not following because they cite us we pay some penalties or whatever we have to do and then they said because we don't know they say you have to go to a hearing because you property is not meeting the distance from the neighbors from the back neighbor and the setbacks yeah yeah so like that's why we're here like we kind of purchase that we want to use that room because honestly when we have people over we don't have any place to put them so we have that a very nice set we put a microwave like we have we rebuild the bathroom it's very nice right closing but we want to use it but if it's against the law we need to find a way to kind of because we don't have the money right now to kind of even move it I don't know if that's possible or if we have to knock it down also we don't have the money to do that so we're trying to have everything according how it's supposed to so we don't have any yeah so basically when you guys came over you guys didn't find any evidence of anybody living there I remember in December we were not even in the country when we had somebody knocking on a door asking to come in to look I'm like we're not even in the country we're not here yet and then two weeks later after we arrived then we got the notice saying that you know that there's no evidence anybody's living there and they close that case and then we receive a new case I mean thank God for everything I don't know if you believe in God but I do so like thank you for everything because now we can have this thing organized but it's it's everything it comes from somebody that doesn't have anything to do calling the cops calling the city like this is not the first time they call the city on us because whatever so we're just trying to follow whatever we have to do to make it right we just we're trying to make the best out of this situation basically so we're trying to like you know make sure that everything is up to codes would have any more problems with anybody all right very good anything else no we just request your approval yeah we kind of requested approval one you know thank you all right thank you both appreciate it thank you could you come sign in please this point time is there anyone in the audience wishes speak in support of the application when responding anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application yeah please come forward good morning mr. Lewis I did say that correctly right yes okay my name's good morning my name is Brenda knows our look higher I'm one of the neighboring properties I live at 17844 morning high drive I'm here to respectfully oppose the variance requesting the regard the necessary dwelling requirements over the past four to five years the structure in question has undergone significant modifications and expansion this building is secured substantially larger and taller than the original shed that existed on the property it also appears to be equipped with a mini split or an air conditioned system indicating that it may be intended for more than simple storage purposes my concern is not only the size and scope of the structure but the also apparent attempt to seek approval after years of construction activity during this time nearby residents have both been impacted with ongoing structure noise often extending into the late evening hours in addition to the structure it includes cameras mounted on the rear of the building that face toward the neighbors properties while all more homeowners have the right to secure security measures in their property the placement of these cameras raises a legitimate privacy concern for a jaded residents I understand that variances are intended for situations involving under unique circumstance sorry unique circumstances or variances or hardships for the related to this property in this case I do not believe sufficient hardship has been demonstrated to justify the exception to establish the dwelling this there is also a spectrum demarcation which is our our property and I don't have the map it's not a straight across my property but it's up to Terry and Amanda's so it jegs out probably seven years ago they hired two different attorneys to make us move our fence because it doesn't go straight across there is in the corner a spectrum junction box so I'm concerned because I have a shed there that's has the variance that they're also going to want to take a portion of our property so that there is a spectrum demarcation or junction connection located on a property behind the shed spectrum has indicated spectrum is actually owned by coast coastal communications and I contacted the higher-ups to make sure you know what what the next steps were and they refused them to move it I'm also concerned about the pattern of code compliance issues associated with this problem property prior code related issues on this property raised concerns about whether future requirements or conditions would be considered following if the variance is granted granted this said granting this request would suggest that property owners can significantly alter structures over time and later seek relief from the requirements that apply to everyone else many residents were digitally to comply Sony require regulations permitting requirements and code enforcement standards those standards should be applied consistently and fairly to be applied to all properties and I went back and I actually contacted code enforcement when they first moved in the back fence I could stick my hand through the fence and there was a pool there they got fined for it and they had to take it down common sense when you're gonna put up something you call code enforcement and you hey can I do this they've also had other violations with chickens running loose in the backyard and yes the neighbor next to them when you're facing their house to the left there was a huge blow up and the guy sold this house and moved and in closing I mean there's just been prior code enforcements and they've been out there and I'm sure you could look that up as well I feel approval could affect the fair and consistent enforcement of zoning and permitting requirements for this neighborhood I honestly think that there's someone living in there there hasn't oh there hasn't always been water there it was a shed there was power I believe but there was not a toilet or a kitchen the previous owners used it as storage there might have been a washer and dryer out there I don't know my final point to emphasis this request is not about whether an accessory dwelling is devised desirable it's about whether the standards adopted to protect our community will be applied fairly and equally to all property owners for property owners who follow the rules and invest the time effort and expense necessary to obtain permits and comply with local requirements these standards exist to protect the neighborhoods that should be enforced especially for everyone for this reason I respectfully request that the variants be denied and that the existing accessory dwelling requirements be upheld and I'm sorry I shook through this but thank you for listening yep that's fine thank you ma'am all right I need you sign is there anyone else in the audience that we should speak in opposition I'm sorry wait to get up to the podium go ahead I'm Amanda Alfaro property 178 4-6 morning high drive and I'm here also against the Bavarians on the dwelling I live right behind the because the cut person and if they do get approved for this dwelling I think it is not fair to our community what means we can also do the same thing to our own property we can have our family build live on our properties too and I don't think that should be right and also with his property there is a camera we've called for code enforcement we told them this camera is in our backyard I feel unsafe for it we've never had any issues and all of a sudden he put a camera it's directly right in the middle of my backyard where it should not be in your backyard it's facing your back yes it's on his building and it's facing into my backyard yes we called a code enforcement whatever code enforcement has told them he slightly moved it but it's still in my backyard where I still feel unsafe let me ask same question the other position said she believes somebody's living there do you that you know if somebody's living there I don't know every night I see lights on and off they keep changing colors and I believe it could be somebody living there because sometimes there's lights on sometimes there's not it's just around the whole perimeter of that building that there are lights and they have an AC unit on the back end where sometimes I do hear it when I'm like mowing or weed eating or just out in the backyard of my with my dogs I do hear a little home from this AC unit ma'am can you state your full name and address for the record Amanda R Alfaro property 17846 morning high drive thank you and I'm hoping that this dwelling does get denied so our community stays nice full and peaceful okay thank you ma'am anyone else in the audience I wish to speak in opposition bonding staff anything further just a couple clarifications for you for the accessory dwelling unit that the permit that was submitted on the plans shows a kitchen living room bathroom and bedroom okay so it's still in review the code compliance case the complaint indicated they believe that someone was living there the inspection the first inspection that was done the code enforcement officer thought somebody's living there the complaint that came in a complaint that came in and the inspection the first inspection that was done by the code compliance officer indicated there was a failure to provide a residential building alteration permit for the renovations to the accessory structure at this point in time the applicant is an opportunity for rebuttal I'm sorry that please just speak into the microphone yes yeah this is the first time we hear about any camera issues we apologize I thought that yeah I thought you don't talk over each other either one at a time I I thought that basically if anybody has an issue that will come to us and let us know we never heard about anything if we have to move a camera remove it we'll be more happy to do so we just never heard of such a complaint let me clarify something the building outside we never well we did the roof because we remodeled the roof in our primary house we remodeled the roof I speak loud so we remodeled the roof in the little building but the structure I don't understand if it's been there for God knows how many years how it's been bothering them because it's always been there and we've been living in that property since 2016 so since 10 years ago so I do understand the camera the lights just to clarify something about the lights their motion sensor they change colors we like colors so the light change colors is those new lights and then if there's an animal it is going to turn on like those of also know whatever and the AC yes is gonna home when we sometimes decide to sleep in there for whatever reason it's gonna turn on we're gonna turn on the AC so yes she's right about the lights she's right about the camera we can move it if we bother somebody and the AC is in there as well yes we put all of that in the in the permit and it's all in process we get all the permits that we need and we apply for everything I just want to say that you know we apologize but our neighbor in the back they're actually are encroaching in our property and we went to the city many times if you can see right here it's kind of hard to see but they were encroaching by you know like two feet by 15 feet and we talked to them very nicely and all they do is curse us out or when we send the in the the cable company to them they've actually cursed them out and told us you know to curse us out too so it's been really negative with those neighbors back there so we just left it alone they are encroaching in a property and they have a fence in our property where you know I went to the city and I looked it up and basically they have an easement then it's supposed to build a fence and they build it into my property so I've allowed that to happen because I'm trying to be a good neighbor but you know now that we're trying to apply for a permit to make sure everything is okay now they're making up lies saying that we we we we altered the building the building is when we bought it it's been like that the same height the same width we just changed the color and we had a permit to get the roof done you know that the the roofing company made a mistake and didn't get a permit initially when we had the roof done for the whole entire house and then when we review this we went to the company and then they apply for after the fact permit to make sure that the roof was in compliance so we're trying to do everything to make sure that this building is in compliance with the law something else is that not the behind neighbor if not the one we have in the issue with the little space that there have their fence in our property we send them multiple letters at one point they call the cops on us because supposedly we went to their house and broke their door like the screen thank God for some reason my husband was recording and they caught when the cop was there we showed the video to the cops we didn't do anything he was even with my kids right right in the back he dropped the paperwork I'm like thank God he was recording but like he the cops saw that we didn't do anything so it's like trying to give somebody and I respect whatever you decide I understand but it's kind of unfair because like that has been how that can bother somebody when he's in my house in my property and the part for the fence like that's something for another day because it's in my property defense and I don't want to go this is something different but like you see that you're trying to demonstrate something when you're doing something different so it's I don't know I'm just trying to show that we are in a good faith to try to get our things straight we're here in good faith and we have you know some police reports like what my wife said that they made some false allegations against us and you know we have evidence to support us and that's why we haven't been to any court or anything these neighbors that came by they're very negative and they be cursing us out ever since we move into it into our property the first thing they said to us when we first moved in I say hey hello neighbor how you doing and it told me F you go away I don't know if they have confrontation with the previous neighbors we never met them we don't know I don't I don't even know who that I don't know who they are so anyway no that's it no we thank you for your time thank you thank you that that concludes this application is Marshall already for the next item item is item h3 variance 26 0905 the applicant is tell it he trustee the request is a variance to the Waimama downtown overlay standards and variance to lot development standards staff findings will be presented by Sierra James yeah the applicant please I'm sorry staff please thinking of zoning good morning Sierra James of judgment services the applicant is seeking a variance to site development standards and the Waimama overlay district and the CN zoning district they're requesting a variance to 60101 to increase the maximum impervious surface percentage by 10 percent resulting in a maximum maximum impervious area of 70 percent a variance to 32306 C1 a to allow for parking spaces between the principal building and State Road 674 a variance to 32307 B of 80 feet to allow for a maximum front yard setback of 100 feet a variance to 32307 D to allow building orientation and facade to face the parking area and a variance to 32307 H to allow for parking spaces between the principal building and State Road 674 I'm available for any questions no questions thank you the applicant please good morning yes good morning sir my name is Ryan Renardo with R squared engineering address is 10312 Bloomingdale Ave suite 108367 Riverview Florida 33578 I got a variance request before you days for the Waimama retail project this project is located on State Road 674 roughly a mile east of 301 here's an aerial of the property outlined in red you can see the western half of this property contains an existing building with some existing parking it's been in place since the 70s according to property appraiser records this future land use for this area is OC 20 zoning the underlying zoning is CN commercial neighborhood but we are within the Waimama downtown sub district B downtown center overlay it's a mouthful to say so I'll just refer to it as the Waimama overlay if you don't mind so basically the gist of this over these overlay requirements are that they're trying to pull all the buildings to the front and put all the parking behind it as you can see on the conceptual site plan you know my my client purchased this property in the 90s and they've always had a vision of adding a second building to the property and when I started looking at this for them you know I gave them a couple options and this was really the option that they had envisioned was having a second building in line with the existing building so what you're looking at on this concept plan is on the left side of your screen there's an orange that's the existing building there's some existing parking in the shaded asphalt or the shaded gray area and then on the east side or the right hand side of your screen you can see that where we're proposing the building location to be where there's the parking that basically lines up you know with the existing drive aisle a new north south drive aisle this allows for efficient vehicle movement you know in and out of the site you know we can easily connect pedestrians over to the existing building mind you this is a conceptual plan there's you know we still got to work through yeah all the permitting so there's that that's one of my questions for you have you started that review process we have not the first step is we were hoping to get through the variance process before we got through all the detailed engineering work on this because I think there's like this disclaimer somewhere but from staff saying you know you haven't applied yet you don't really know what all the issues might be that that's right I mean we've done up we've done our due diligence you know we think that you with a successful approval of the what we're requesting today I think we can make this plan work okay is it fair to say that the first variance is for a previous surface increase but the other ones are all related the yes sir the four variances they're pretty much all one and you'll even notice in the narrative that I wrote the justification that you know the criteria are all basically for the same same issue right okay and so just just moving through just to run through it these are all the variances that we're requesting it does it's a lot it feels like a lot but it's all related to really the two separate issues and then just for your reference and I felt like this was an important visual as I was going through this what you're seeing here this is an aerial that the black outline that you can see represents the Waimama overlay that we're referring to and then I drew a orange line across we where our proposed building frontage is located just to give you a visual of what's existing out there and so all the way over to you know 2022 this building was built and then moving over a new building was just constructed in 2023 and then you know several buildings from around the same time frame in the 70s when our existing building was constructed and so I think this visual is is to say hey you know we're not really changing the character of of this corridor it we're really more so in line with kind of what's out there now and we would if we were to move our building all the way to the property line where the overlay is asking for we would actually kind of kind of be out of place here to be honest with you let me let me ask a related question is I believe 674 maybe in early stages is a PD and E study for the lighting 674 I do not know the status of that the only thing I know about it's got a design speed of 45 miles an hour which is really not a pedestrian oriented roadway I guess I could look at myself but the cross-section existing right away 674 do you know what it is I honestly do not sir but that's definitely something that once we got through this phase we would be dealing with FDOT as well and in the next permitting stage yeah and I don't know if during site plan review process staff will ask you to set aside x feet off the front future widening staff would ask us to confirm with DOT if there's any additional right away required just keep that in mind absolutely yes sir anything else the only other thing I would add is that we did we sent the notices out to you know the required notices had no input either way no opposition no okay support and then we respectfully request your approval of these very good thank you sir for anyone in the audience that wish to speak in support of the application I'm responding anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application spawning staff anything further nothing further applicant is an opportunity for rebuttal no need for rebuttal for that that concludes this application it's Marshall already for the next item item is item h4 variance 260927 the applicant is Sam racks luminous electric the request is a variance a lot development standards and staff findings will be presented by Michelle Montevano okay good morning Michelle Montevano development services the applicant is requesting setback variances to accommodate two above-ground tanks per single family residence parent LDC section 60103 I3 and PD 93 0357 mechanical equipment may project three feet or no more than 50% of the required rear yards whichever is more restricted the PD district requires a minimum side yard setback of 10 feet therefore a minimum side yard setback for the equipment of seven feet is required and there was a typo in my original report it says four and a half feet where it should say seven so therefore the variance they're requesting is for three feet resulting in a four foot side yard setback for mechanical equipment pair the same code sections mechanical equipment may project five feet into required rear yards the PD district requires a minimum rear yard setback of 25 feet therefore a minimum rear yard setback of 20 feet is required the applicant's aggressive variance of eight feet resulting in a 12 foot rear yard setback for mechanical equipment I'm available if you have any questions no questions thank you thank you all right the applicant please my name is Chris Brundle talking on behalf of Luminous Electric our address is 3165 Lakewood Ranch Boulevard in Bradenton I'm sorry sir can you repeat your name Chris Brundle okay very good thank you good yes sir we're just asking for a variance here on mr. Petrillo's property there is really nowhere else to put these above-ground propane tanks he has purchased a whole home generator mostly for medical reasons and we put these tanks in a location that we thought was appropriate they are awful hold on a second you said I was kind of trying to understand the purpose so it's not for a swimming pool eating the swimming pool it's for medical purposes yes it's a whole home standby generator okay but if I heard you correctly you said medical purposes yes okay all right go ahead proceed so we're asking for a variance to place these tanks a couple feet from the property line from the side yard and the backyard 10 feet closer to the backyard variance due to no other not being able to place them anywhere else on the property okay just curious what's what size are these these tanks if you know their size of a bigger than a red box give me a general idea there are 32 inches in diameter and they stand about five feet tall okay so they stand upright yes sir got it and they are anchored down and and everything is up to code besides uh placement per jurisdiction all right very good all right anything else no sir joe very good at this point in time is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak in support of the application there's no one responding anyone in the audience just to speak in opposition to the application can I can I be heard yes yes I'm the applicant and the homeowner yes I'm not sure I'm not sure if you can see me I can see you and we can hear you okay um I'd like to say uh I'm the homeowner sir but please state I know you said you're the applicant or the owner but please state your name and address for the record yeah yes my name is Joseph Fitzgerald okay I'm I'm at 7517 Dunbridge Drive okay I'm the homeowner requesting this variance as applied for by my contractor luminous electric who just spoke yeah um I wanted to add to the variance criteria response on page nine with the variance that the tanks would have to be moved to the north side of my house against the house and the propane line piped more than 100 feet through my attic which in my opinion presents a potential hazard um and if you would note item five on page nine that the location of the tanks passed the final gas inspection at that time we had the tanks filled um the electrical the final electrical uh county inspector came and said the tanks are too close to the property lines when they've already the gas final gas inspection was already passed and as Chris mentioned on a personal note my wife and I are both 76 years old we have several health problems including but not limited to anemia we have diabetes heart disease we have some spinal issues in the event of a power outage without a generator we'd be forced to seek shelter at our age that'd be uh and and at our age and our health problems would cause a considerable hardship so I would please consider this variance carefully thank you uh very good thank you sir all right um I think I left this loss of proponents opponents and so I had staff anything further nothing further okay and the applicant and opportunity for rebuttal online survey good contractor yes sir all right very good with that that concludes this application and Ms. Marshall ready for the next item next item is item h5 variance 260992 the applicant is elvin devette baldwin the request is a variance to distance separation requirements for a community residential home staff findings will be presented by chris grand leonard yeah morning with development services the applicant is requesting a variance to the distance separation requirement for a type a community residential home the land development code requires that community residential homes housing six or fewer residents be located at least a thousand feet from another existing home of the same type the applicant is requesting a variance to allow their proposed home at a distance of approximately 560 feet resulting in a 440 foot separation from the existing community residential home on knight street that concludes my staff report be happy to answer any questions you might have um if you go back over the distance separation when you looked at this do you look at walking distance or rather than a straight line distance uh it's uh uh property is it it's property line to property line uh i know but from a practical point of view do you not take into consideration the actual route of travel between properties no that's not considered it's it's uh as the crow flies yeah okay but would you consider that a mitigating factor in your opinion uh it's for you just it's for you to decide sir understood but i'm asking your opinion i don't know if i could answer that sir um colleen could i should i answer that colleen can you repeat a question yes do you consider route of travel potentially a mitigating factor consider could be yes we do for um alcohol beverage license separations we do look at that right that's up thank you it's for the chair to decide at this point in time the applicant thank you good morning my name is alvin baldwin 505 rooks road seffner florida 33584 i'm here requesting a distance variance for assisted living facility i have a group home um a apd licensed group home that's 606 feet away from me using the straight line method if we drive it's 1023 feet away from me um the community residential homes are supposed to be a thousand feet apart i'm asking for you guys to give me a variance because we're going on the two different um agencies that home is licensed through apd i'm going to be licensed through aka the agency for healthcare administration they're a group home for um behavioral adults i'm doing elderly adults elderly to um elderly population so i'm trying to get a distance variance of 460 feet okay anything else um no thank you ma'am that's it thank you ma'am could you come sign in please sorry at this point in time is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application responding anyone in the audience wants to speak in opposition to the application responding staff anything further nothing further ma'am an opportunity for rebuttal thank you very good with that that concludes this application it's marshall we're ready for next item next item is item h6 variance 260994 the applicant is michelle tolini the request is a variance to the distance separation requirements for community residential home staff findings will be presented by sierra james good morning sierra james of development services the applicant is requesting a variance to minimum separation requirements for a type a community residential home the requirement is a radius of a thousand feet of between an existing home with six or fewer residents they're requesting a variance of 36 feet resulting in a 964 foot distance separation between the existing community residential home available for questions thank you any applicant please good morning i'm michelle tolini my address is 5792nd avenue north pinellas park florida 33782 and i'd love to put on the record first that the zoning team has been amazing this is my first time ever and they walked me through and held my hand and they were fantastic so thank you um i am requesting a 36 foot variance on a home that i believe to be outside the distance it's about 0.3 miles if you're driving um google gave me straight line as 1075 feet but the zoning tools are much better than what's open to us in the community i am trying to move my existing group home that's about half a mile away that we rent to this home that i purchased to move my residents to it's a nicer home it's a lovely community um and you know my job is to teach them to be good neighbors and good citizens the house is only half a mile so there's there's no impact on my staff they really won't have any have to travel any further it won't disrupt the day activities for the men that live in my homes so i just would be very thankful if you could so my my gentlemen that live with us with disabilities would be able to have a better life so thank you all right thank you ma'am is there anyone in the audience who wish to speak in support of the application morning good morning my name is gary hartfield my address is 5125 palm springs boulevard tampa florida 33647 okay i have known michelle telini and the company that she owns for the last 20 plus years she has worked for the agency for persons with disabilities and work with this client population for a significant amount of time her reputation precedes her as being a leader in this field and the men that she provides care for in these group homes would definitely love the the idea of a nicer home what we do in this field is provide our clients with dignity and respect for the intellectually and developmentally disabled i am myself a provider and i have been one for the last 25 years so i speak in solid support of michelle telini and her company that she represents all right very good thank you sir yeah is there anyone else in the audience wish to speak in support of the application on responding anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application yes sir please come forward good morning good morning sir my name is michael ryan r-e-i-n i reside at 902 stanbury drive brandon florida 33511 this property is adjacent to the property that we're speaking about it is a corner lot i do know that we do have special needs people in that area that have been there since i purchased the house in 2007. i purchased that house because i wanted to bring up my children in a safe environment where no cars traffic things of that sort because it is a back off the main drives of kings and lumsden i also noted that the zoning commission has changed some of those properties because of the drive when they widened lumsden drive and things they put in a hairdresser and such on the corner understandably they had to take and adjust the property for more parking and such this is one of my concerns with this since it is a four bedroom house that they would have to change the parking in there making it more of a business type instead of a residential it's a very quiet older neighborhood my house burned down during milton i spent over six hundred thousand dollars to rebuild that house because i love that neighborhood unfortunately some of the rezoning that we've seen in in the past here with elderly people passing people selling the property they rezone them unfortunately of what i've seen over these past 10 years when they've done that is that they haven't kept up with that i have have brought that up to code enforcement also these were supposed to be business only as in legal or a doctor's office things of that sort unfortunately they just put residents in there rented the property out so again it's happening at this time where they're proposing this house to be changed into this this is in the center not on a busy road like longston or hills where our excuse me king's drive where i understand once they move the the roadways and that made their properties much smaller uh the other thing is is that i've noted that we have approximately five homes and these are uh assisted living homes within a two mile radius of this um we always um every time i'm going down kings go to the publics and such i always notice ambulances always in and out unfortunately for things that do occur with elderly and such which i do understand um this to me will make a a harder for us to live in a residential area with that these type of vehicles in and out unfortunately does again happen so i do respect uh your uh zoning i hope you take this under advisement and i thank you very much for your time all right very good thank you sir yes all right is there anyone else in the audience who wishes to speak in opposition yes sir my name is uh good morning my name is james rolls and i live at 418 overland drive so i would just note that this area is a desirable area because it's close to the hospital and i understand that you know people who need assistance need a place to live but the neighborhood vibe is a family neighborhood and these are for profit or non-profit but they operate them like a business the first thing they're going to do is add a big driveway have a staff the parking is going to go under the street this street doesn't have parking on the street because people don't need it because they're single family homes and there's already a couple of assisted living homes in this area and it's going to create more traffic of the people who go to these assisted living homes you know they have to be there at a certain time and they have you know ships that they have to be there and so it's you know it's creating a work-like environment in this neighborhood and all these little streets are connected i'm not very far from this but it's in the center of this street and they could much more appropriately go at least to lumsden or kings and pick a house that's on the end of the street instead of in the middle of the block and so i wish that you would consider those issues and how it affects the people that live in this neighborhood very good thank you sir anyone else in the audience that wishes to speak in opposition to the application and responding staff anything further nothing further and the applicant has an opportunity for rebuttal um yes i would like to provide a rebuttal and i understand having a group home on your street street can be scary i do but these are individuals with disabilities it is a going to be a six-bed residential group home and underneath statute it is residential not commercial it's not an assisted living facility um the neighborhood is lovely i think there's mostly original owners too i'm sorry i understand there's mostly additional um original owners so it's an older neighborhood it's currently zoned r3 so there are not a lot of houses and they're nifty because you've got they all kind of angle away from each other instead of directly facing there is a very long driveway which will accommodate the majority of the parking yes um probably the the worst part of having a group home is your neighborhood is that you're going to see cars because my clients are staffed we have awake supervision up to four people on but it's also a large driveway on the side of the house which i did factor in it's not commercial i'm not about the money i would give everybody my personal cell and the people that monitor us and one of the nice thing about being an apd group home as a neighbor is that i have someone monitoring the property from the state of florida monthly they are holding me accountable to florida administrative code 65 g2 which goes into depth that makes sure that the property is better conditioned than if i rented it to some stranger off the street so um i will do everything in my power to be a good neighbor regardless of the outcome but i love the house and it's a great community and our goal is to be good neighbors so thank you very good thank you ma'am with that that concludes this application and marshall ready for the next item next item is item h7 variance 26 1099 the applicant is hoosh goby north side engineering incorporated the request is a variance in citrus park village development standards and variance to landscaping and buffering requirements staff findings will be presented by sam ball okay good morning uh sam ball hillsborough county development services there's a typo on the staff report um underneath the column for variance it says relief from section 606 c that should be 6064 c the applicant is requesting uh basically two variances for requirements for perimeter buffering adjacent to a road right of way for a property located in the citrus park over village overlay lbc section 310 10c requires off street vehicle uses shall be buffered and screened in accordance with section 60603 of this code basically except for the plannings must be 10 feet in height three feet cal or three inch caliber and place 30 feet off center the applicant is requesting relief from section 6064 c which would result in relief from the requirement for vehicular use area buffering along the southern portion of the western property boundary and the minimum height caliper and maximum space requirements for this area section 60604 c requires an eight-foot vehicle or use buffer area along the western boundary the applicant is requesting an eight-foot reduction to this requirement which would result in site development with zero buffer along the southern portion of the boundary as shown on the site plan i'd like to add that the upper tampa bay trail is considered a road right-of-way and because it isn't a right-of-way it it adjoins the subject's property's western boundary and is at least 50 feet in width the incompatible use buffering along the western boundary is not required i'd also like to add that variance 250277 was approved to reduce the eastern vehicular use buffer requirement from six to zero fee along the eastern property boundary that concludes my report if you have any questions no not this time thank you um the applicant please morning good morning my name is hushkovahi i'm with north side engineering we're located in clearwater 300 south voucher road um thank you sam for eloquently describing the project uh we're just basically merely um requesting a portion of that western right-of-way to be reduced to zero just because the width of the right the width of the property is very very minimal and we're trying to create a turnaround when uh patrons um will be using this ice cream shop that have to basically get around the building to um order and pick up and uh even that uh the design that we have is pretty minimal so um we're requesting only that portion uh which we showed to be 71 feet that also includes the transitional part as you get from let's say eight to zero there's a portion that cars would have to transition into that um so generally speaking just a 71 foot on the west side of the property and as sam also alluded to we had requested a a zero setback on the east side wall back at the time we had a different design and didn't need it but this particular design we really just need to be able to accommodate the vehicular use i'm glad to answer any questions um if you know where are you in terms of commercial site planning review process it is in the process we have submitted plans we have received comments um and once hopefully if this is passed um i would say in the next couple months hopefully we should obtain the permit okay um the upper tampa bay trail which is adjacent um the actual asphalt where where bicycles are are located the trail itself i mean there's a right away with yes there's a trail itself how close is the trail to the edge of payment shop you know circular driveway the queue area most of those cars i'm going to give you a guess i i would say probably 15 feet edge of pavement to the trail yeah i mean that was the only safety issue i could see is i don't know how many people actually passed by that location on bicycles but yeah and and and of course in this case as you know cars are generally stopped they're just not moving they're going pretty slow but it's true yes um okay in terms of design the design that they're moving forward with um there is no idea of of having cars park and walk into the ice cream shop um we have parking spaces shown on the pride property um as many as possible i think it's seven or so okay um but most people would either be walking there because it's a neighborhood commercial kind of a design either through the trail they would be on they would be on their bicycle maybe wanting to stop and grab a coffee or you know ice cream lots of pedestrian use is anticipated but of course cars can also be driving through there to pick up their ice cream and leave we recently developed the car wash immediately to the west of this ice cream shop and that's working fine okay that that was the concern i had is how how is this use being orientated towards the trail and the safety issues and accommodating people that want to get park their bikes and walk into the shop and there are other conflicts with the drive-through um we have you know we have adequate accessibility as far as pedestrian we have a sidewalk that goes from the parking to the building a couple of ramps and we also have a bicycle rack there okay is there a cross walk across the drive-through yes it allows people to safely yes get to the shop absolutely it has to be there for the uh ada anyways but you know other people can use it as well yeah all right no further questions yeah thank you thank you sir this point in time is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak in support of the application there's no one responding anyone in the audience who wishes to speak in opposition to the application no one responding staffing anything further nothing further okay they applicant an opportunity for rebuttal no need for rebuttal all right well that that concludes this item i believe that's the last variance on this morning's agenda the last item is for special use and just give me a second to read in the process for special uses the last item on this morning's agenda is a special use and the order of presentation is slightly different with respect to special uses the applicant will have 15 minutes to present their case and development services will have five minutes to present their position i don't know if the planning commission weighs in on this one or not but then they'll have an opportunity to to make their findings they have five minutes for that purpose and those people that are in support of the application will have 15 minutes to speak and those people that want to speak in opposition will have 15 minutes and development services will have an opportunity to address any comments and finally applicant will have an opportunity for rebuttal and they'll have five minutes for that purposes with that uh is marshall are ready for the next item just just a section i special uses item i1 special use 260219 the applicant is todd pressman the request is a special use for school and staff findings will be presented by jared fallen after presentation by the applicant okay the applicant please good morning hearing officer todd pressman 200 2nd avenue south number 451 uh in st petersburg i'm very proud today to be working with the foundation christian academy uh for this request we have our transportation uh expert here uh and some of the board members we have the principal of school i've been out of high school for i don't know 50 years and there's a principal here it still makes me nervous same here so this is uh su sch 26-0219 the foundation christian academy is affiliated with the churches of christ and shares a commitment to christian values and biblical teaching just giving an orientation of the direction of the school and how the school operates they note 16 persons or 16 students with average class size they have a 100 college acceptance rate 35 number 35 number of extracurricular opportunities located in the general lithia area on lithia pinecrest as you can see here which is uh south of 60 and a little closer uh view of the campus and closer yet still and just another view of the existing campus has a history as the school has grown slowly over the years today's issues especially used for school number one is to increase the square footage from 55 000 433 to 135 433 square feet in terms of future long-term growth as they've had to come through in the past this is really a long-term this is a long-term plan which will increase student population from 550 to 1000 students we'll talk about that more in detail and add two small ball courts so in terms of projected student population and this letter is in the record as well as here the historical annual enrollment is 19.8 students peer some units some years they have more some years they have none so will vary over time but that has been the established historical element of past growth which there's no reason to think it would be different so projected growth through 2028 2029 2030 may have been further would be 19.8 students per year would be experience has been experienced in the past this is the special use site plan on lithia pinecrest these are the proposed new facilities which are multi-use buildings and two ball courts this is the location an aerial of the two proposed ball court locations their current ball fields to the north i have the measurements per google mapping to the closest residential at 418 feet and 484 feet of those two sports ball courts and looking a little closer to indicate to you that the ball courts are adjacent to very dense high and wide forest station give you an idea of what that looks like see there's high and low so it covers obviously tremendously higher tremendously more dense than what code would require there's a drop off and pick up data for morning and afternoon there's a significant circulation plan uh mr razer transportation and and the school could refer to better detail that but it's a very specific circulation plan so it's very efficient it's a little closer look for it there's a lot of detail to it a lot of safeguards to it we did have a private planner ortiz planning look through the criteria uh in terms of the two criteria she's confirmed that we do meet those criteria under code and what's proposed with lithia pinecrest as an arterial roadway and lumsden to fishhawk identified the mpo long range plan and the location arrangement lighting of play fields will avoid interference which is she's looked at and approved in a report in the record i found that to be sufficient uh development services department uh in their report notes they uh that they do not expect to have significant impact on the surrounding area uh it's adequately buffered by either existing vegetation required buffering screening development services indicates they find no issues with the proposed changes to the existing private school and do not foresee any negative impacts on the surrounding residential uses planning commission notes that is compatible with the existing development pattern will allow for development is consistent with the codes future land use element and comp plan and the proposal is compatible with the adjacent uses maintains the character of the community they continue to note as well the actual amount of square footage is under the res 4 designation for the site and accordingly the proposed development is consistent with the number of objectives and policies indicated in their staff report so that we appreciate your attention we're happy to answer your questions and we have our folks here in the school as well in representation right does the principal want to come up and admonish everybody in the room i've had plenty experience with that but i with with respect if i may have mr razor come up and make a few comments all right very good thank you good morning uh for the record michael razor with razor transportation consulting one nine zero four six bruce b downs boulevard number three zero eight tampa three three six four seven i'm a registered professional engineer with a specialization in traffic um we performed the uh transportation analysis for the project um we identified that let me let me take one step back currently the uh ingress and egress uh for the school is from lithiapine crest road it will continue to be the case with the with the expansion of the school site currently um along a leo law enforcement officer or officers are used to uh facilitate the ingress and egress operations at the school connection to lithiapine crest road with this expansion the continued use of leo traffic control is anticipated until such time that a traffic signal is found to be warranted at that connection um there's conditions of approval that will require a traffic signal warrant for each incremented development um one thing that we did learn as we did the traffic study for this site the law enforcement officer similar to letting out a concert or a sporting event um as you know schools generate a lot of traffic during a relatively small window of time and relatively little traffic for the rest of the day um during those periods the law enforcement officers are used to safely and efficiently move traffic in and out of the campus or on and off of the campus um we have identified through the course of our analysis that the current law enforcement officer traffic control uh set up in the way that they are are flushing the traffic out of the school may not be as beneficial to northbound and southbound traffic on lithiapine crest road but we've identified that and we've talked to staff and their law enforcement officers that um control the traffic to regulate that in a more efficient manner for lithiapine crest road more importantly with the traffic signal that i had mentioned for each incremented development needs to be evaluated to see if it's warranted and i fully anticipate that it will be at the time the traffic signal goes in at the cost of the developer of the school um the county will then be able to control the amount of time that's given to the school versus lithiapine crest and be able to you know they'll they'll be the ones that control that time allocation um with the traffic signal in place our analysis identified that all you know level of service um volume to capacity ratios all fall within acceptable ranges one other thing i'd like to note um that there in addition to the traffic signal uh relatively substantial turn lane improvements would be required as well currently there are there's a northbound right turn lane to enter the school a southbound left turn lane to enter the school um our analysis identified that those uh turn lanes will be too short for the full population of the school so we've identified um lengths that would need to be implemented in association with with this um with this proposal also lithiapine crest road as i'm sure everyone seems to be aware this you know it's a it's a it's a heavily traveled road um planned to be four lane for for quite some time however um as i understand it uh commissioner uh miller has taken um on uh getting a commitment from dot for a hundred million dollars of the 250 million dollar price tag so typically when money like that starts flowing it's a snowball effect and the in the the prioritization of that project continues to grow so the four laning of lithiapine crest my understanding is that it's early 2030s where things will really start to happen on that so that road while it has the need has been there for a while the um the solution is is coming um and with that i'd be happy to answer any questions regarding um it's in the mpo plan lithiapine crest but there's no dates yet set for design and construction at land acquisition construction as far as you know my understanding is the the the there's typically for for road construction project there's typically three phases there's the planning and design there's the right of way and then there's a construction my understanding is that the only thing that is funded at the current time is the initial phase okay which is the planning design correct um and i don't have anything further to add to that other other maybe it's speculation but typically i've been involved in this business for 30 years and when the dot allots 100 million dollars towards a project folks typically would would get on board to get that project moving they you indicated that 100 million may be allocated by dot but and the entire improvement would cost i believe it's just shy of 250. all right and that money has not yet been found allocated correct all right you also mentioned that you've talked to the law enforcement folks through through through the through the school folks that there may be a better way or an enhanced way of directing traffic until such time of traffic signals there what can you elaborate sure um i mean the current operation just to give you a just a simple example if there's a a handful of cars queued up waiting to leave the school let's say five they will you know stop traffic on lithia pinecrest let those five go maybe another fifth or sixth or sixth or sixth or seventh straggler comes in it's just not very efficient typically the way a traffic signal would operate is what we would like to see the law enforcement officers do larger queues on school site lithia pinecrest runs uninterrupted for a longer duration in between in between the cycles of flushing out the school almost like interconnect of the signals like that that that in signal interconnects enhance efficiency and that's what we're trying to do here as well right so this this proposal instigated of course the traffic's required the traffic study and then when we got into it we these are things that we learned and have expressed back to the school to improve their current function i don't think there's a zoning condition that says they currently until such time there's a traffic signal that the law enforcement shall do more enhanced directing of traffic the the condition i believe indicates that the law enforcement will continue to direct traffic until such time however we understand it's in not just it's school's interest to make sure that that is operating efficiently um so the on the i did not address that the on-site queuing has been designed to meet the land development code requirement which is the formula that you may or may not be aware of it's a long it's a formula that ends up with two miles i'll ask david bell here in a moment about two miles of on-site queuing i'm that's a that's a that's a a guess at this point i'm asked david to confirm six sixty two hundred feet so i was a little shy but over a mile one point something miles all right and since it's an existing school do we have any evidence that whether or not works okay or doesn't work okay existing on-site queuing my involvement as the traffic consultant and pursuant to the requirements of the rmp really looks at the interface between the school site and the public road system i don't have any first-hand knowledge or awareness of of how that's operating internal to the school at the current time however with this proposal the drop-off and pickup function is going to be improved as well with a different circulation pattern through the school to make that as efficient as possible as well so there are on-site improvements there's the off-site improvements again traffic signal anticipated to be warranted with a with with longer turn lanes okay as a charter private school i mean i assume everybody's driving to the site generally that is the case correct yeah there's not bus service there's no bus there correct um is there any walking is there any walking biking during during our data collection observations minimal at best so it's it's a it's a vehicular parent private automobile drop-off pickup function and is anybody on your team or mr pressman's team that they have any knowledge about how the existing on-site queuing works i might be able to defer to the the school folks for that maybe the principal can come good morning my name is jonathan smith i live at 10117 deep brook drive in riverview and i am the principal at fca in addition to my administrative duties i'm in the car line every day supervising the flow of traffic right now we have four queues on the back of our property so our first objective is to get all the traffic off of lithia into one of our queues those queues would be preschool and kindergarten elementary middle school and high school and these queues operate at different times so we release the kids in 15 to 20 minute intervals that's about how long it takes us to empty uh one of the queues so they're staggered so you're you're saying like for different age groups there's a staggered yes sir drop off and then pickup times yes sir in the morning middle school and high school drop off at uh beginning at 7 10. then elementary drops off at about 805 in the afternoon the middle school car line is first uh they pick up at uh 156 at 2 15 the kindergarten uh parents arrive 230 is elementary and 246 is high school all right and in your evaluation observation is that there's no queuing to drop off or pick up that goes out on lithia pinecrest road correct correct correct yeah as far as you know on-site circulation works yes uh very very well uh and our officers do a tremendous job uh trying to uh time the the traffic to keep it from backing up we've we've been on this property since 2005 so we've uh our closest neighbors back then were the horses that lived in the horse farm across the street we've we've been a part of this community as it's grown and we've we've very much uh enjoyed that growth um on the days that are that we do not have an officer um the traffic still seems to flow uh on and off of lithia without backing up significantly onto our property uh right now all of the queues that we have um run effectively the holding queues in the back of the property uh are where the parents wait the loading queue okay the loading queue holds about 20 cars so we're able to load 15 cars at a time okay um and then as they exit we pull from the loading queues okay sounds sounds complex but it's it's really it's really quite effective all right and your your transportation folks or your site plan folks have looked at the expansion yes and they believe that with the expansion plus background that the queuings will still work yes so we currently i have um three members of my administrative team receiving cars we have the officer on lithia and then we have three checkpoints where we sort the traffic into these queues and even with the expansion uh i could potentially add a fourth uh traffic supervisor in one of those queues okay but on our side seamless all right very good thank you sir sir sir could you sir could you sign in please and to that let me add that while there is staggering occurring the land development code requires the queue area to assume all vehicles arriving with within one period so it's substantial and there's plenty of area on site to accommodate all those vehicles for one period much less the three to four staggered periods all right thank you very good all right with that mr pressman does that conclude your team's presentation yes sir thank you thank you all right staff jared fallman development services uh i have a revised staff report i'd like to submit uh there was a couple errors with the numbering um specifically with the number of children that they're proposing um in the staff originally staff report says 1100 should be a thousand and the number of square proposed square footage increase uh was stated as 81 000 and it should have been 135 000 so i'm going to submit that too uh so yes this is a request to obtain a special use permit uh to increase the number of permitted students for existing private school and child care from 500 to a thousand students this permit also seeks to increase the permitted total building floor area from 55 433 square feet to 135 433 square feet uh this private school its foundation christian academy was originally approved by special use oh three five four three and was most recently approved by special use 14828 uh so uh development services we really didn't have any issues with this one um the site it's appropriate for a school it's mixed residential uh there's no compatibility concerns that we have with uh adjacent properties uh the existing buffering screening is main is being maintained there's no changes to that um i ask you then the zoning conditions that are in the staff report i don't think there's strike through and underlines so maybe if you can just walk me through so it so it is a new special use so it's basically new condition so we don't do a strike through right um but all right so then just reword my question is that what's new so the students is being increased from 500 to a thousand and the maximum square footage permitted is being increased to 135 000 433 square feet that's it that's it so only zoning condition number one it's essentially new uh i think there are some transportation changes as well and also the site plan change as well to show the new proposed buildings right okay is there a traffic person here yes unless you know do you know which traffic conditions are um i don't know off the top of my head right i think she's coming right now okay all right anything else uh no okay all right if there's a development services transportation planner here yes sir jessica koal with development services transportation review section here to answer your questions yes if you could i don't know if you've seen the zoning conditions but if you could walk me through them and i don't know if you knew what was approved before now what's being proposed and what's new so most of those conditions i shouldn't say most a handful of those conditions are standard for all of our schools it requires the law enforcement officers to be directing traffic if we see that it is warranted on major roadways things such as the public works department assessing their queuing plan assessing how it works if there are problems the applicant and developer can work with the public works department not have to go back through this process just to alleviate the traffic concerns and the circulation if there are potential concerns a few things about this specific project the um lithia prime crest is is like you mentioned slated for improvements for the four-way lane widening at that time the applicant will have to basically will have to take their right turn lane out and relocate it for this specific application they are required to preserve right away for that four-lane widening in addition they will be required to dedicate any widening for their turn lanes and the signal widening in addition to the preservation also the impacts like the applicant mentioned for the queuing we're adding we asked the applicant to add a delineator in between the two entrance aisles so that we don't have a weave and merge issue that can create a slowdown in the queuing circulation the very first entrance to the school off of their shared access will be gated during drop-off and pickup time which will force the vehicles to go all the way through their site around through the the big fields in the back so that there is adequate stacking for these vehicles coming in and out there's other items such as another trained staff member in a different location that it than is currently proposed and that is to again assist with getting people to merge and then exiting so it's it's the setup is quite the similar but we have done a few tweaks in that front part where the existing parking lot is to make sure that there isn't any more stop conditions that would prevent the flow of vehicles into the site we did observe that some citizens had complained about the amount of traffic that is let into the site not so much out of the site so like the applicant's representative mr razor had mentioned they have worked with the law enforcement officers and the school has worked with public works and they are working on a more efficient efficient way of queuing their students currently so that that isn't as drastic of an issue for the people utilizing the roadway and as far as you know do you know if the county's engineer or your staff have they met with the folks that direct traffic out there to give them guidance um i do not believe they have directly met with the people who are directing traffic typically we ask that the developer work with the um the the law enforcement officers and public works because they know their operation better than we do they do bring our staff into discussions if warranted okay all right um in terms of a traffic signal the applicant transportation planner said that he anticipates a traffic signal will be warranted but he didn't give us a date i mean i guess that's based on the growth of the school that is correct sir yes we can't really do the uh we can't really trigger the signal until it's warranted and in the conditions for the special use they are required to do a traffic signal warrant analysis at each increment of development and with any increase in the student population is there any estimate now they're going from roughly 500 students to thousand do you know is it does it get there at 750 kids does it get there at 775 kids 850 any estimate i personally would not know that estimate it also depends on the the flow of the oncoming traffic because this is a roadway that will have some opposing movements from the southbound southbound left in and the northbound right into the school there are other factors i do believe as their transportation engineer said that they will warrant it before the widening happens this widening is going to be a little bit slower of a process um so there are some things that might be a factors not just the student population um for instance if the student this is very rare right but if the student population weren't to grow for a while that four lane widening might accommodate enough of the traffic as is and it might need to be warranted until after the four lane widening occurs but that's it's very very speculative at this time and probably unlikely with the the motivation that the school has to serve their their population of students all right very good thank you the staff because they should be on virtually okay um planning commission staff hi yes good morning alexis myers planning commission staff the subject site is located in the residential for future use category it isn't in the urban service area and not limit or not located within the limits of any community plan the proposal satisfies the intent of future meeting section objective 4.4 and policy 4.4.1 which require the new development to be compatible with the character and scale the surrounding neighborhood the proposed development is consistent with the established context as it represents a continuation and enhancement of institutional and residential support uses already present in the area based upon those considerations planning commission staff finds the proposed special use consistent with the unincorporated his work county comprehensive plan subject to the proposed restrictions by development services department very good thank you ma'am at this point in time is there anyone in the audience who should speak in support of the application on responding anyone in the audience was to speak in opposition to the application responding staff anything further nothing for the applicant an opportunity for rebuttal just make a couple comments mr. hearing officer i do want to recognize some of the other board members who are here and attending because this is obviously a very important request for them i want to place just a little emphasis again that the student growth is expected to be over a long period of time and that's substantiated by the complete history of the school and i think you've heard plenty of information that the school has worked with the county and law enforcement in the past and obviously in the future and work with mr. razor to be sure that what's proposed for transportation does work and does not impact lithia pinecrest particularly with the improvements that will be coming and with that i would just say in summary that we're glad to have the support of the zoning staff and the planning commission i also noticed by memory i believe it's 38 persons a couple times and we're very happy to hear that there's no one here in opposition i think that speaks very loudly and mr razor has some comments thank you i'd like to address your question regarding when the traffic signal might be warranted we there in the course of the preparation of our analysis we did identify that public works had done a warrant analysis within the past year or so they found that it was not warranted at that time um i looked at their study and when you look at when you look at traffic signal warrants the one that's most applicable to a school is what's called the peak hour warrant um the county didn't they looked at other warrants and perhaps not the peak hour warrant and in you know in a full fashion and from my work on this project i we are very very close to warranting a traffic signal with current plus very very minor growth to to to meet those warrant criteria very very close yes it takes a long time it does um and the conditions of approval calling for the warrant analysis to be done at each increment of approval i would imagine that during the first increment of of approval we would be looking at warranting the signal typically from the warrant study being done to con signal being implemented it's at least a year sometimes a little bit longer but that's that's generally what we'd be looking at i mean it's really not particularly applicable to this special use hearing but for the applicant and the principal who's sitting there it can take a year or two to go through the the warrant process ordering all the components of a traffic signal opposed and signals so if your transportation expert is telling you you're close i would recommend to you independent of the special use you get started on that process all right anything else mr pressman no we appreciate your time and attention we appreciate working with the staff all right very good with that that concludes this application and that concludes this morning's land use hearing officer hearing we are adjourned you