Polk County Land Use Hearing Officer on 2025-04-24 1:30 PM

everyone on the back table also on the back table are forms you can fill out if you would like to speak or receive a copy of the final decision on any case on today's agenda if you think you might want to speak during the hearing you will need to complete a speaker form once the form is completed please hand it to our clerk i'm barry buonaventura an attorney with buonaventura law in tampa i have been appointed by the board of county commissioners to be a land use hearing officer to hear variants and special exception cases if anyone has a pending case in which i or my firm is representing you please bring that to my attention now as we want to avoid any potential conflicts i have reviewed the cases and don't believe that there are any conflicts but please let me know if you do during this meeting please put all cell phones and other communication devices on vibrate the cases will be called mostly in the order listed on the agenda unless there is a request for a case to be taken out of turn and today i understand we have two cases that have been moved to the top due to scheduling issues these hearings are quasi-judicial which means they require due process and the decisions are to be based on competent substantial evidence presented during the hearings county staff will present the county's review and recommendation on the case first and then the applicant will present any additional information they would like after the applicant has concluded their presentation i will open the hearing up for public comment for each case this is the public's opportunity to provide information and express their opinions on the application if you have any questions that come up during the presentation you can ask them during your time to speak please do not ask questions or make comments from the audience while others are speaking at the podium the county the applicant and i will note questions you raise during your comments and try to have them answered following the close of public comment when it is your turn to speak either for your case or during public comment please come to the podium and state your name and address for the record into the microphone these proceedings are recorded and it is very important that you speak clearly into the microphone to ensure an adequate record accurate record after public comment closes the applicant in the county will be given the opportunity to answer any questions or reply to comments that they may have come up during public comment they will also be able to make concluding statements the hearing will close for each case following the concluding statements of the parties my decision will not be given today but will be given in a written final order within 14 days of today again if you would like a copy of the decision please fill out the form on the back table and provide it to our clerk for the record i want to note that i have received no ex parte communications that means that nobody has contacted me about these cases outside of this hearing today if anyone needs an interpreter please let our clerk know and the county will try to arrange one for you all testimony must be given under oath so i will now ask the clerk to swear in anyone who intends to speak during today's meeting if you're going to address the land use hearing officer on any case today please stand and raise your right hand and answer out loud to the following question again if anyone is going to provide testimony to the land use hearing officer on any case today please stand up and raise your right hand answer out loud to the following question do you swear or affirm that the testimony you provide today is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth thank you okay the first item on the agenda is the minutes from the march 27th 2025 land use hearing officer meeting we can show that those minutes have been accepted and then moving on to new business the first two items we are going to take out of order and so we are going to start with ldl var 2025-8 ldl var 2025-8 chad weeks is requesting a variance to allow an accessory structure that is taller than the primary home in a residential suburban district on 1.82 acres the property is located at 3920 mather road east of katherine drive west of kathleen road north of duff road northwest of lakeland in section 17 township 27 range 23 on april 7th 23 mailers were sent to area property owners one board was posted on the property on april 4th a legal ad was published in the polk sun news on april 9th ian nance is the case planner all right good afternoon ian nance land development staff recommends approval of ldl var 2025-8 a request for an accessory structure to be taller than the primary a property located in kathleen area northwest of lakeland the subject site is located within a residential suburban future land use designation where minimum lot sizes are typically five acres with five foot side setbacks and 10 foot rear setbacks for accessory structures this slot is well below the five acre requirement had just under two acres but it was created prior to the adoption of the comprehensive plan and land development code the 2200 square foot site-built home on site was constructed 1966 and the owner purchased the property in october of 2017. in 2019 he built a 1050 square foot pole barn slash carport for the outdoor storage of vehicles and equipment though the accessory structure is smaller in square footage than the primary it is 19 feet tall compared to the house which is 12 feet tall let's look at the site plan as you can see the carport is located to the rear of the home and easily exceeds the setback requirements of the rs land use district staff finds this application meets the variance criteria found in land development code section 931 is not injurious to surrounding area the carport is modest in size and similar similar accessory structures are found throughout the neighborhood the unique hardship here is that this home is the only one on this block that would require variance for a carport of this height for example the property to the east is two acres which would allow this carport by right but the roof is also steeper than that of the subject home and is high if not taller than the carport other homes on the street are two stories and this carport would be shorter than the respective primary homes there with that i thank you and we'll stand for questions okay i don't know that i have any questions for for staff at this time um is the applicant present okay if you could come forward sir mr weeks when you get to the podium if you could start by giving us your name and address please my name is chad weeks address is 3920 matho road legland 33810 can you tell me what the structure is used for please my my truck my personal truck and my boat and other uh side-by-side and four-wheelers i'm sorry other what side-by-sides four-wheelers it was stored before you built the structure sitting on the property i'm going to ask another obvious question but from um what is the purpose of the structure if you already had them parked on the property why do you need the structure keep them out of elements why does the structure need to be the height that it is because i have a center console offshore boat and the height of it requires it to be that high a center console offshore offshore boat which i take it is taller than your average boat yes is there anything else you would like to add to support your application not really it looks like there's a good bit of vegetation on site is that mostly behind the structure or is there some in front of it as well there's nothing in front of it now storms took the trees then they were in front but there's the whole back property is fully treed okay and the sides as well provide um there are trees to the sides of it as well a couple of those couple of those came down during the storm but uh i've recently planted more vegetation anything else no ma'am thank you thank you so this is a public hearing and i will now open this application up for a public comment is there anyone who came here today to speak about this application either for or against i do note that we have one letter in support of the application from a neighbor but i take it they have not come here to speak but um seeing no one we will close public comment anything else from staff no ma'am okay thank you okay and um next up again um out of order from the original agenda will be ldl var 2025-13 ldl var 2025-13 hulbert homes incorporated is requesting a variance to reduce the rear setback from 15 to 7 feet to build a duplex on 0.17 acres in a residential suburban district the property is located at 1905 skyview boulevard north of skyview drive west of reynolds road east of cumby road east of the city of lakeland in section 22 township 28 range 24 on april 7th 16 mailers were sent to area property owners one board was posted on the property on april 4th a legal ad was published in the polk sun news on april 9th we've had no response ian nance is the case planner all right for the record ian nance land development and staff recommends approval of ldl var 2025-13 a request to reduce rear setbacks from 15 to 7 feet to build a duplex within the skyview area east of lakeland subject site is located within a residential suburban land use district where minimum lot sizes are five acres with 10 foot side setbacks 15 foot rear setbacks and 20 foot setbacks from the edge of pavement of private roads and this lot access is a private road created long ago when the skyview country club was located nearby this part of skyview consists of unplatted lots some of which are legal and some are not this particular 0.17 acre parcel though is a lot legal lot of record and was deemed to be eligible for a duplex through the ldc's infill policy still a lot is well below the rs standards more closely aligned with those lots within a residential low force of district here's the site plan the afghan is proposing a 1908 square foot duplex on this irregularly shaped lot the reduction to seven feet in the rear is preferable to a reduction to the front setbacks as each dwelling unit will require two off-street parking spots the applicant is also citing this duplex to avoid cutting down an existing tree on the lot there's little to no impact to the property to the rear as it is currently pasture and reclaimed mining property is unlikely to be developed in the near future to the right is a picture of the lot you can see the oak tree and the cows laying underneath shade this slight setback is this slight setback reduction is not anticipated to be injurious to the neighborhood or surrounding area and meets the variance criteria in section 931 the main objective here is to provide ample parking area and not creating obstructions with parking in the roadway which this variance will provide with that i think you will stand for questions can you go back to the site plan and show me the approximate location of that tree that should probably be about right here and there's no issue with a duplex going on a lot of the size in this location no ma'am applicant can speak to it here in a second but they've worked hard on adjusting this just right to get within all the setbacks and this is the best way to go about it yes and there's water and sewer available to the lot too eric was saying at the top of page four of your staff report um in the very first paragraph there's a comment about sacrificing three feet of rear setback at one corner of the duplex is a compromise etc um it's a request to eight feet it's probably what it should be yeah there's also um a discussion earlier um towards the bottom of page three of your staff report um about setback relief and i tried to follow that to the best i most of my ability but um am i correct that to get rear setback relief they would also have to avail themselves of front setback relief but that was not recommended because of the need to park in the front correct our land development code allows for infill lots like this to have setbacks adjusted to a lot size commensurate with the appropriate land use district i mentioned the rl4 lot size comparable let's see if i get back to that's kind of how it came up that three earlier too i was doing that math so they could place this on here with right-of-way setbacks of 15 feet rear setbacks of 10 and side setbacks of seven which they potentially do but you don't want 15 feet up front because you're going to have your truck hanging over the front into the pavement so we'll go by the rs and get a variance that way uh to allow this 20 foot setback but it's hard to pick and choose here we can't just apply one standard here one standard there okay so you just need to be consistent in the approach okay got it okay is the applicant present you could come forward please and when you reach the podium if you could start by giving us your name and address please i'm megan ray 5116 south lakeland drive lakeland florida okay is there anything you would like to add in uh support of the application but before we have you do that um did you stand at the beginning when people were sworn i did not i didn't realize i had we're going to take care of that now i'm just so everyone knows i have every applicant speak so if anyone in the audience is an applicant please expect me to call you up yes ma'am we'll go ahead and swear you now do you swear or affirm to that the testimony you provide today is the truth the whole truth in nothing but the truth yes ma'am okay now that we know that uh you are testifying under oath um is there anything you would like to add in support of the application anything you would like to explain um before i jump in with a couple questions um not necessarily this is an area that's um hasn't had so much love in a while and we're just trying to bring it back a little bit repaving the roads we're going to do um so that's just about it give it a little bit of tlc okay are you working on other lots in the area as well um within yes ma'am some of them might not require or do not require these variances one of the criteria that staff and i have to consider when evaluating a variance application is hardship something that is unique to the circumstances of this particular parcel um that would warrant deviating from the applicable standards can you address that criteria in place um the driveway was one of the um things that he had mentioned it was hard to fit a driveway per code with it go with the setbacks that we had um like he said we wanted to save the tree that was there as well is it an oak tree yes i believe so yes ma'am is there anything else you'd like to add no i am thank you i will now open up this application for public comment is there anyone who came here to today to speak to this application either for or against seeing no one we will close public comment anything else from staff no ma'am okay thank you now we will move to ldl se 2025-1 ldl sc 2025-1 is requesting a special exception to park uh michael mcintosh is requesting a special exception to park a commercial vehicle 2025 mac granite uh at his residence on approximately 1.3 acres in the agricultural residential rural area the subject property is located at 5636 south jennings road north of oak street west of watkins road south of lake hatchnahaw road also known as county road 542 east of dundee in section 20 township 28 range 28 on april 7th 30 mailers were sent to area property owners one board was posted on the property on april 4th a legal ad was published in the polk sun news on april 9th uh andrew grohowski is the case planner good afternoon andrew grohowski with land development presenting ldl sc 2025-1 the macintosh special exception the applicant is requesting a special exception to park a commercial vehicle a 2025 mac granite at their residence on approximately 1.03 acres staff recommends approval subject property is located at 5636 south jennings road north of oak street west of watkins road south of lake hatchnahaw road county road 542 east of dundee and section 20 township 28 range 28 the property is located within arr land use district where the minimum lot size is five acres properties five acres are larger do not need a special exception for commercial parking and residential districts the lot is below the five acre minimum as it was created prior to the comp plan and land development code this special exception will only allow for one commercial vehicle provided they conform to the standards in section 216 d of the land development code according to the property appraiser's website the property was first recorded through a warranty deed on january 29 1991 with a mobile home later constructed in 1994. the property has frontage on jennings road a local paved roadway with a width of about 20 feet with nearby access onto lake hatchnahaw road a paved rural major collector roadway 24 feet wide the surrounding roads near the property have no weight restrictions the applicant first purchased the property in november 2017 and later purchased the flag law outlined in red in march 2021 here is the site plan looking west the truck will be parked approximately 40 feet from the neighboring property to the north and 75 feet from the neighboring property to the south which is the applicant's flag lot the northern property line consists of an existing six foot tall wooden fence which extends the length of the proposed parking area screening and buffering requirements of the on the southern property line will be required to extend along the entire proposed parking space minimizing any visibility from the neighbors and public right-of-way to meet this requirement the applicant's plan indicates the new proposed parking area is not located in the front front yard the truck will access the backyard and be parked behind the mobile home and between two existing sheds a new six foot tall fence will be constructed on the southern portion of the property access proposed from the west side of the park is proposed from the west side of the parcel on jennings road while conducting our site visit no other commercial vehicles were seen the applicant was cited by code enforcement in the past for parking a vehicle at this location the owner is seeking approval for parking in the commercial for the commercial vehicle on their property here are additional site photos of the rear of the property with the residents on the left and the existing fence to the north approximate parking location is pointed in yellow staff recommends approval based on the site plan provided by the applicant and the applicant and recent visits to the site the request will be limited to parking one truck a 2025 mac granite as described in the application and staff report no other commercial vehicles may be parked on the site this special exception exception shall be for the owner michael c mcintosh only and shall not run with the land and with that i'll stand for questions is there going to be any sort of um cover or you know structure over the vehicle or it's just going to be exposed it's going to be open and open structure or no structure exposed so no no structure and you said no weight restrictions on the road correct that's correct and no restriction on truck traffic that's correct are there sidewalks no ma'am do you know the speed limit in the vicinity of this property um on jennings road the speed limit is 35 miles per hour um lake hutchnell road is 55 miles per hour okay is the applicant present we don't have an applicant here for this one okay um i don't know that we've never ever actually had that happen where someone hasn't arrived in time for the hearing so how do you typically handle that do you require the applicant to be here uh well to provide their own testimony yes uh we should move it to the end of the agenda and give them a chance to get here i'm fine with that we can continue this to the end to see if they show up in time um so we will pause um i do know that we have um someone who has shown up to speak regarding this application um connie edwards okay i just want you to know that you will be given an opportunity to speak but we're going to set this aside to give the owner every opportunity to arrive okay so that one will be set to the side and continued till later and we will um move on to ldl var 2025-6 ldl var 2025-6 is a uh is a request by josh joshua medina uh to for a variance reduction on the side accessory setback from five feet to two feet on both sides and five feet to four feet in the rear for an rv cover the property is 0.06 acres the uh it is located in a leisure recreational district and a plan unit development number 8624 known as deer creek on april 7th 67 mailers were sent to area property owners one board was posted on the property on april 4th a legal ad was published in the polk sun news on april 9th we've had no response from the public eric peterson will be presenting this case let's see this is uh in the northeast part of the county uh deer creek is a uh began as an rv park and uh evolved into a mobile home park uh subdivided over time and uh there's a mixture of rvs park models and mobile homes in the in the park the applicant is requesting a car or rv port to go over the unit there was a an rv port on the property previously it uh this is the new request it's a little larger uh the the uh applicant is requesting two feet uh to go to two feet on one side and because of this addition that that they'd like to make to the carport of approximately seven feet in width it puts it two feet on this side and then in the rear to in order to maintain the 10 foot setback they need to go within one foot of the rear of the property this was the the former one was fit within the setbacks this carport isn't uh all that much larger and it could fit within the setbacks were it not for the addition of the seven feet extension that you see here outlined in red it's very characteristic to have carports that cover the predominantly or most most of the lot of these properties the lots are very small there's a mixture of housing types within them you can see park models rvs things of that nature some of them just stand alone but there's many variations on them there's multiple canopies or rv covers of this size so it wouldn't look necessarily look out of place for the area however it would be encroaching onto the the two sides and slightly in the rear staff recommends approval uh it it won't it appears that it won't be injurious or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare because it's very similar to all the other rv covers and things of that nature in the area there is a condition requiring the drainage to be our gutters to be provided so that drainage onto other neighboring properties is is contained with that i'll stand for questions so this lot has a five foot rear utility easement yes okay and the structure would encroach into that easement if the um just four foot and uh according to site visit we did not observe any uh utilities that have been encroaching on the the plat has that rear uh utility easement on all the uh thoughts was the owner of the easement consulted um we don't have anything in our records no who is the easement in favor of it is a uh it belongs to the hoa the the property owners or it's the dedicated to the hoa and for use for communications and uh power and things of that nature or does the county normally um authorized variances that involve an encroachment into an easement without consulting the easement holder we do uh once once we uh receive a uh 811 locate and all the easement holders have had a an opportunity to uh review and comment so that hasn't been done no they'll be required to do that upon building at building permit in um aerial that you have up there the structure that is to the left i don't see i don't see a north arrow so i don't know what direction west okay very well usually they're in that oriented that way but not always um does that structure that's to the on the lot to the west does that meet yes it does uh and it's a very similar in size and like if they were centering this on the property they could they could meet the setbacks but they're going back to the site plan here it's this additional seven foot enclosure that they'd like to add on to it on the side which they've they've shifted it over here three feet and this is going another seven feet and it'll look encroach two feet over uh on the lot and that's an enclosure or a patio cover yeah we believe it's a patio cover we didn't really get uh confirmation from the applicant as to what it was but according to their uh diagram here it's just a another roof portion it won't be as high as the rv port but it will be a covered area sir i see you raising your hand we don't take comments from the audience if you are the applicant you will be given an opportunity to speak but there's no need to keep raising your hand we don't take comments from the audience um so you're unclear whether it's um an enclosure or a cover at the moment yes we the only notation on the site plan is it's lower it's a lower ceiling than the other structure so we assume it's just as open as the carport just the roof is not as high if it's an open structure um am i correct that there's no concern with a 10-foot building separation because it's it's open yes yes well if it is so it is open so that's all we okay are aware of right now um there are several references in the staff for staff report to the structure that used to be on site um do you know how long ago that was removed it was permitted in 2013 it's uh in the 2020 aerial but it's gone by the 2023 i believe the uh applicants representative uh said that hurricane milton removed it there are also references in the staff report to the prior structure structure meeting original setbacks yes different setbacks oh the x changed no they they did not change the original setbacks are five and five on either side the uh the former structure was only 20 feet wide this one is i believe 24 feet in width an additional two feet more the other going back to the drawing here when it was set on on the property before it could meet the five feet on one side and then it had nine feet two inches to spare on the other side and it was only 20 feet wide okay we'll now ask the applicants representative to come forward and since you were not here at the outset we will need to swear you in as all testimony here is taken under oath so i'm going to have our you can come to this podium right here and our clerk will swear you in do you swear or affirm that the testimony you provide today is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes thank you and i will have you start by giving us your name and address please yeah um i just want like i'll have you start by giving us your name and address joshua medina 147 northampton drive davenport okay thank you i'm the uh representative also the general contractor who's going to build uh build uh this structure and um i thank you so much for you know showing that just to do a little correction if i didn't um understand correct you said there was two feet set back on the back but we have actually four feet set back uh the original stroke work the structure that we had uh basically it's because the drawing that is not really showing but like we pretty much building exactly where it was before because when hurricane milton uh you know took it off we have like three feet sat back uh i think that's what the originally have and but when i measure it was like about two feet only so that's why we're asking for variance and the left side of the structure that we adding it that we you know proposing to add actually align with the existing uh existing structure there on the left side if you look at the survey i know the survey on the left does not show that little little little house there but the left is like is exactly yeah it doesn't have in there but if you look at the picture um a previous picture if you please thank you you you go back this one you can just go oh yeah yeah you see that structure over there so the the one that i wanna that will be exactly where i want to build i mean mr richard wants to build uh this structure and that was exactly where it was before but i'm adding it uh the one on the left to align with the existing discharge storage room over there so it's not like you know and so for the back for the settlement we are four feet away from it from all the line from all the uh electrical and all that so i'm hearing conflicting things i'm hearing that the structure that was up previously met setbacks and now you're telling me that you're putting this new structure up that requires a variance but it's in the same location and meet setbacks so i'm hearing two very different things uh the thing is before we had three feet set back with the new rules now apply they want five feet set back so that's why i'm applying for a variance so we can go back to the two feet because right now unless correct me if i'm wrong but when we read it they say they want five feet set back on both sides and there was like 20 feet in the front from the runway and five feet from the back so the original like where we have previous there was about three feet set back three two feet because we cannot see like exactly where the line is i'm gonna have to get a survey putting the post there so that's why i'm applying for two feet because if i have an overhang i'm still good and we're gonna have to apply gutters like we said for for drainage and all stuff but basically i'm building exactly where it was and adding on the left side just in the front part um to align with the existing storage on the back say that red uh thing you know okay are the setbacks five feet or three feet they are five feet um the previous um structure might have been placed without a a definitive survey and they could have had some error there i guess sure but um what we're here to discuss today is what you're going to do and not or what you would like to do and not what was up before so the setbacks are five feet um the structure that is on the left side that does not run the full length of the parcel that is a patio cover or something of that nature yeah we're going to build exactly the same that that that we're building and we have picture that we propose what we're going to be building and on the left is going to be a lower ceiling that's all because when you park the rv you know it wants to have something covered for chairs or whatever is it open on the sides it's all open all open so it's just to cover no walls um no wall is going to be covered no it's only the structures like post and uh and the ceiling and the um variance that is being requested in the three variances that are being requested they're all for the posts is that correct eric that they are all for the posts and that's where we measure the post yes just uh a lot of the uh carton the rv ports you see go right up uh to the extreme side with the very little overhang some of them have no overhang on them and you allow up to a three foot overhang two foot three foot yeah provided they're they're not do not encroach onto the neighbor so in this case it would be less than three feet on the sides yes it would okay so now that we know that it is entirely open there is no fire code issue correct that is correct all right so um this is for the applicant's representative why is the larger structure needed um larger than what was previously there yeah he wants to add the the piece on the left just for extra space you know for chairs or or for for the golf carts and stuff like that and and we'll align with uh with the existing uh storage room over there and if i had to go with the five feet uh i would have to break concrete i'll lose you know now we have to change the slab and it's gonna be a lot more money to spend and you know he just bought the property and he lost the the whole cover on the milton and right now we're proposing to build with the eight by eight post which is going to be a lot more stronger he has like three by three aluminum and we are proposing to do eight by eight pressure treated post and i have just one question um when you say the uh three feet five feet set back is that the post or the overhang count as well or no the overhang doesn't count as long as it doesn't exceed three feet or the property line gotcha gotcha so in this case i'll have to have no overhang i mean well if we have two feet set back then we're good has an application been submitted to the hoa for approval yes and what is the status of that they said if you guys agree they'll be fine they'll be okay with it because it's you know it's not changing anything much for them so they don't have a concern about the structure being placed in their easement not at all not at all um and we consult them first because you know if they say no we wouldn't go ahead even if you have approved from you guys they would wouldn't allow it okay anything you would like to add um i just really want to ask for mr richard because he he lost a lot of things like you i fixed his house as well and again he just bought this place and hurricane me was a blew it off and i'll start listen no worries we're gonna rebuild and then when i found out that the new variance you know the variance right now it's five feet set back i said mr richard we need to apply for a variance because otherwise it's going to be a lot more cost for me to break the slab and everything and now that we've built thing he said all right let's add that this thing on the side you know so i can put the golf cart and everything that would be right in front of those that storage over there and this picture i think is old because the on the left hand side it's already a house there there's a couple living over there with a spoke with them and everything and we have you know plenty of space between the the fixture structure to where we're going to do and our trucks are going to be right open as well okay thank you thank you i will now open up this application for public comment is there anyone who came here today to speak to this application either for or against seeing no one we will close public comment anything else from staff no ma'am okay next up is ldl var 2025-9 ldl var 2025-9 indarjit halal is requesting a reduction in the rear setback from 20 feet to 14 feet for the construction of a new screen room with an aluminum roof on a new and existing concrete slab the property is 0.21 acres in the point sienna pre-dri number one pud 71-10 the property is located at 450 cinnamon drive lot 8 of point sienna subdivision north and south of cinnamon drive east of pacific road north of coriander drive south of caraway drive west of marigold avenue southeast of the city of pain city in section 15 20 township 28 range 28 on april 7th 37 mailers were sent to area property owners one board was posted on the property on april 4th and a legal ad was published in the polk sun news on april 9th we have had no response from the public andrew grohowski is the case planner good afternoon andrew grohowski with land development presenting ldl var 2025-9 the cinnamon drive variance this is a variance to reduce the rear setback requirements from 20 feet to 14 feet to allow the construction of a screen room with a solid roof attached to an existing residence staff is recommending approval the subject property is located at 450 cinnamon drive lot 8 of point sienna neighborhood 3 village 7 north and south of cinnamon drive east of pacific road north of coriander drive south of caraway drive west of marigold avenue southeast of haynes city in section 15 township 28 range 28 the property is located within the point sienna planned development community which was approved under pud number 71-10 the surrounding area consists of entirely residential development which is what you would typically find in this area of point sienna new multi-family union units are under construction to the west across from pacific road this is another 2023 aerial of the subject site outlined in blue the site is located in a gated community where the roads are privately maintained due to the large rear 20-foot setback it is common for property owners to request a variance in order to build any additions on loss throughout the area of point sienna for example the residence at 403 caraway drive outlined in red on here um sorry i just lost my place uh was for a similar request case number ld var 14-38 received approval for a rear setback reduction from 20 feet to 10 feet in order to construct a screen room at the rear of their property as a bit of background the original plat for point sienna neighborhood three village seven was approved under pud 71-10 the developer then replotted this area in 2006 shown here under tuscany preserve at lake marion phase two consisting of 101 single-family lots the easement setbacks and lot dimensions remained unchanged and were still consistent with the prior 1971 plat of point sienna neighborhood three village seven here is a closer view of the subject site there are still plots of land that are undeveloped the applicant purchased this property in may of 2024 the approximate location of the addition is outlined in red dedicated open space known as gateway five on the 2006 plat is to the east of the subject site here is a close-up view of the subject site with the proposed addition per section 209f of the land development code since the structure is attached to the primary residence and has a solid roof it is considered part of the primary residence and must adhere to the rear setback requirements of the primary structure which is 20 feet the rear of the property backs up to a 10-foot public utility and storm drainage easement the easement will not be encroached upon given this request here is the submitted site plan for the app from the applicant take notice of the public easement on the northern portion of the property according to the site plan this green room will measure 26 feet by 10 feet and consist of an aluminum roof staff recommends approval based on the site plan provided by the applicant and recent visits to the site the site will not be injurious injurious to the area and will not encroach upon the designated 10-foot drainage and utility easement thereby thereby not circumventing any approvals by the bocc as mentioned a prior variance request case number of var 14-38 was granted approval in 2014 in the nearby vicinity for a similar proposed screen room which has existed for over 10 years in the vicinity and with that i'll stand for questions so the adjacent property to the east it's not a lot it's platted open space correct these are greenways uh that go through the point sienna subdivisions uh when they platted over they had to maintain the the placement of that greenway because it also serves as drainage a greenway for what purpose well they call it a greenway on the plat but it's really to move water during storm it's it's primarily drainage yes is the concrete slab that's needed for the structure is it already there partially already there not there at all they have sort of conflicting information on that there's an existing concrete pad i'm unsure if the applicant is going to expand upon that existing concrete or create a new one altogether do you know if the existing concrete pad is large enough for the proposed structure it is not do you know if the hoa has approved this request i've been in talks with the applicant so we do have a letter from the hoa with that request approval subject to state federal county requirements okay so the hoa has approved it subject to everyone else correct green light okay is the applicant present okay if you could come forward to the podium sir please and i don't believe you were here at the outset of the meeting so before you before you get started sir we're going to need to swear you in because all testimony here is given under oath so i'm going to have our clerk swear you in and ma'am if you're going to speak as well then you'll both need to be sworn in okay okay help my wife because my hearing is not that good do you swear or affirm that the testimony you provide today is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes you do if i could start by um having you each say your name and address please hey my name is radica jailal i live in 450 cinnamon drive okay and i'll need you to speak into the microphone please so it catches the recording hey my name is radica jailal and i reside in 450 cinnamon drive in kissimi florida thank you i am inderjit jailal 450 cinnamon drive once again and this is my wife radica with me okay so i understand the homeowners association has approved the request uh yes you currently have a patio at least in part of the location uh like a concrete pad patio just just a concrete pad and i asked them if i could put a awning or some tent over it because inside the huts get so hot and they need to put the ac on but i get very congested with the ac i need to sit outside until the house is cooled down so they said this is the only thing they can do to uh build uh build a screen room and had the ceiling um insulation change i put all new windows but it's still hot inside and and and there's no way outside because it's sun everywhere around the house yes is there anything else you would like to add in support of your application yeah when when it rains sometimes it beats it into the sidewalk and it gets into the living room the concrete pad they have there with the screen door it's um the previous owner never took care it's all rusted the screen door um this the patio door and you can't open the the door because it's just a concrete pad and if you open it the rain comes straight into the house that's it okay thank you okay thank you very much well now open up this application for public comment is there anyone who came here today to speak about this application either for or against seeing no one we will close public comment anything else from staff no ma'am thank you and that takes us now to ldl var 2025-11 ldl var 2025-11 robert jones requests a variance for a 1600 square foot accessory structure to be 145 percent larger than the primary structure in a residential suburban land use district on approximately 1.18 acres the property is located at 3929 timberwood drive north of highway 60 south of the parkway east of county line road west of church avenue southwest of the city of lakeland in section 17 township 29 range 23 on april 7th 27 mailers were sent to area property owners one board was posted on the property on march 28th a legal ad was published in the polk sun news on april 9th we've had no response from the public kyle rogas is the case planner good afternoon carl rogas with land development presenting ldl var 2025-11 the jones accessory variants the applicant is requesting a 1600 square foot accessory structure to be 145 percent larger than the primary structure in a residential suburban land use district on approximately 1.18 acres the subject site is located at 3921 timberwood drive north of us highway 60 south of the polk parkway east of county line road west of church avenue southwest of the city of lakeland in section 17 township 29 range 23 the property is located in the residential suburban land use district in the suburban development area and is approximately 1.18 acres the owner purchased the property in february 2006 according to the polk county property appraisers website the house was built in 2000 at 1104 square feet the proposed accessory garage structure will be 1600 square feet which is 45 145 percent larger than the primary structure the property appraisers website does not identify the home was built and constructed with the garage and no additions have been made the subject site is below the five acre minimum lot size in the residential residential suburban land use district and is slightly below the two acre lot size per chapter 2 section 209 g if the subject site was 0.82 acres larger it would have met the minimum lot size per section 209 g therefore no variance would be required and the applicant would be allowed to construct the accessory structure up to 2 000 square feet 400 feet more than what is currently proposed through a variance request the accessory structure will be located to the west of the primary structure the accessory structure will be approximately 90 feet from the edge of pavement and 20 feet from the neighboring property line to the west the nearest home is 35 feet on the neighboring property to the west there are other accessory structures slightly below the 1 000 square feet in the area and directly across the street measuring at 1 200 square feet then here's the site plan submitted note the accessory structure will meet the setbacks for rs land use district the accessory structure will be 90 feet from timberwood drive a county maintained local roadway and 20 feet from the west property line the accessory structure will be 40 by 40 feet oriented perpendicular to the roadway allowing minimal visibility from timberwood drive this photo is taken from the south property line looking north in this picture you can see an approximation of where the accessory structure will be located and not block the view of traffic staff recommends approval the request will not block or limit the view of traffic off timberwood drive the accessory structure will meet setbacks in the rs land use district if the property was two acres subject 209 g allows accessory structures administratively to be permitted up to 2 000 square feet or 150 of the principal structure square footage whichever is more than which is more than what is being requested garages unlike other accessory structures are permitted in the front yards and with that i will stand for questions and you said this is permitted in the front yard because it is at least partially a garage correct you also said that there's no evidence on the property appraiser's site that there was a garage or is a garage there but are there any other storage structures that are similar in purpose yes i'm not sure what the purpose for these accessory structures are but there are currently existing structures on that property but the property appraiser does not show that the house was built with a garage at the time okay is the applicant present if you could start by giving us your name and address please sir my name is robert jones 3921 timber wood drive okay can you tell me the purpose of the structure please it's basically a large three-car garage uh one of those items in the picture is not a building it's a camper so i'll be parking three vehicles in it plus my tractor and my boat and the four other structures are going to disappear got two sheds there's a carport that's been there since 72 i needed to tear it down 10 years ago but and a chicken coop that goes away you said a chicken coop yeah it's like a barn and a carport and yeah there you can't see it because of the trees a lot of them trees are gone now because of the storms but there's a carport combo shed then there's another shed along this uh west side of the property east side of the property there's two there they go away and then next to the camper is the barn for the chickens okay and so the proposed structure is essentially going to replace all of those yeah well i already have a permit for a 30 for 30 in the back that's the barn that's going to replace the barn for the animals but the everything else is going to be for the garage there's a lot more you know i got a tractor if the application is approved um staff has recommended that a condition of approval um be included that would state that um the structure is limited to the storage of items associated with the residential use of the property and no home-based business or commercial uses may be permitted uh within that understood understood is there anything else you would like to add in support of your application well just that i'd be able to clean the place up a little bit thank you so this is a public hearing and i will now open up this application for public comment is there anyone who came here today to speak about this application either for or against seeing no one we will close public comment and anything else from staff on this one no ma'am okay then we will move on to ldl var 2025-14 ldl var 2025-14 jared winn of kimley horn and associates on behalf of trimac building systems inc request the variance to the impervious surface ratio on a business park center two property in the rural development area from 0.55 isr to 0.75 the property is located at 4320 county line road south of drainfield road south of spring creek drive north of medulla road west of hamilton road west of the city of lakeland in section 6 township 29 range 23 on april 7th 16 mailers were sent to area property owners one board was posted on the property on april 4th a legal ad was published in the polk sun news we have two letters in opposition i believe you have them in your packet county line road is just that it's the county line to between us and hillsborough county it's also the city limits of plant city so this is a area that's changed a lot over the years the property was recently changed to business park center 2 and they began development when they discovered that the impervious surface limit in the rural development area for business park center 2 is 0.55 they were anticipating it to be 0.75 like other bpc districts in the county as you can see in other cases nearby warehouse distribution facilities could go to the 0.75 because they were in the urban growth area and this rural development area is kind of a a lingering area from days past this is what the county looked like when the comprehensive plan was was in its infancy and the urban service areas were first set out and this is it today back then the city of plant city was another two three miles away now it's right there so a lot has changed in this area and it's growing urban the development areas are intended to indicate where public investment goes that's part of the plan uh and the public investment has come to this area there's substantial water waste water that are being planned and programmed for the area it's a four lane road actually a five lane road if you count the median uh there the airport it has grown leaps and bounds over the past few years this is a an area that's highly as you can see uh warehouse and distribution on both sides of the county lines and uh with that the planning the map for the area really hasn't changed significantly uh since then so uh this when they planned out to do this modest sized warehouse uh facility as you can see compared to the ones across the uh county line road uh they went over the uh impervious surface area by point uh at uh they're they're currently at a 0.63 the request is to go to 0.75 even though the the current one shows a 0.634 impervious surface area the 0.75 gives them the ability in the future to expand uh add parking things of that nature uh once the site is developed there's ample room for storm water they are connecting to uh water and wastewater with the city of lakeland uh they're temporarily they've been permitted to do these two buildings in order to do this building they need the variance currently they're awaiting the extension of the the water and sewer lines uh they will be going on a temporary septic system that'll be in this area but will be discontinued once the other building is built and the line is there as you can see the nature of the area when you're on the ground looks considerably different on one side of the road than the other there's major uh power lines uh that have that have been uh placed along this corridor sidewalks on both sides are planned and water and wastewater is coming this way from other developments that are coming in traffic is awful heavy as well when you're out there because uh this is a well-traveled road and uh staff found three reasons in the criteria that this uh variance should be granted one we don't feel it'll be injurious or or detrimental to the area the uh there's uh requirements for uh landscaping and buffering and things of that nature to for the nearby residents a lot of this area is in transition the properties to the north and to the east are also business park center too and we're part of that last change those properties will change in time special conditions and circumstances exist as you can see the the plan is not caught up with the programmed infrastructure and if it if the plan had planned for it first before the infrastructure came there then we wouldn't be here requesting the variance and the applicant has done many uh warehouse and distribution facilities in the area and did not realize that they had creeped into the rural development area and that had the more stringent impervious surface cover and with that i'll stand for questions tell me again um i know you addressed at least some of this but um sanitary sewer and stormwater how are they currently handled and how will they the the plans we have approved now are tim are well will there is a water line there uh that they're connecting to but the sewer line will come from a development to the north that you're actually going to hear on the next case once that is extended to that that development it'll continue down to this one and uh they will cap the uh senate the septic tank and uh go to uh sanitary sewer i have some drawings here as an addition to show this is where they would connect this is actually the future connection to the the wastewater system their lift station is in this area here this is a force main which will take sanitary from the various buildings pump it up to the drain field for now then reverse at a later date and go to the right of way where the uh it will connect to the city of uh lakeland's system so the design for the lift station that will be on site the lift station will be needed regardless because they're collecting all the the wastewater from all the buildings at once and moving it to the septic system if they were going to stay on septic they would have individual septic tanks for each building but it uh it's just an interim uh means until they can the line can get to them there's a statement in your staff report that there are urban services and infrastructure available to accommodate the proposed intensity can you elaborate on that yes well we have a a five-lane road that connects two very major highways in the state of florida uh this is an ideal route they are nearby the the airport which serves uh a lot of uh where warehousing and logistics for the area uh there's a new uh expansion to the fire station at the airport uh that also serves this uh area uh there are um see other services to the south uh the area the city of lakeland has annexed farther to the south along county line road it's one of their bigger uh expansion areas and it's predominantly residential but they brought services down to that area uh this this line i believe is either currently looped or will be looped down to the that area of the city so this is kind of a hole in the donut of a lot of urban development in a very industrialized area just this area further to the south south of medulla road there's a public shopping center and there's uh on uh pipkin road there is a substantial amount of residential going in we've also four-laned uh or in the process of four-laning pipkin road it's almost completed to uh wearing road and then wearing road to uh south florida it is a three lane how often are the development areas evaluated to determine if they're still appropriate for a particular area i have to say not enough a lot of times people look at the future land use map and think that's all that exists but the foundation of the future land use map is the development areas map that is supposed to guide our public infrastructure a lot of this infrastructure came to the city and they weren't necessarily following our our plan when they extended it uh we should have better intergovernmental coordination i guess uh in the future but uh that's that's kind of the reason why this area has been left out of of being moved up to the urban growth area before long there'll be a bus route through here and we'll it'll be transit supportive development area on top of that so it is heavily urbanizing this is the flight path the the runway begins right after that oh that's the airport right that's the airport right there yeah it's kind of off the screen i wanted to show more of plant city there are references in the staff report to the spring creek subdivision yes the spring creek subdivision which was established uh back when this was a much different area this this is to the south of the spring creek subdivision uh one thing about the site here is that there is a a pond that was dug for various reasons uh to the north that give a good separation between the spring creek subdivision and the proposed development so that you know if there's any chance of this extra impervious surface cover causing more runoff to the area it would be captured in that pond but the system is designed for uh to contain all of its drainage uh on the site in a retention pond and outfall into the right of way of uh county line road that retention pond that you're identifying that's off-site correct oh yeah this is off-site it was actually part of the land use change um going back to the future land use map uh it was included in the land use change however the site uh is short of it that's the pond right there and as you can see the the neighboring properties except the ones to the south are all within the business park center 2 district okay is the applicant's representative present good afternoon for the record mark wilson with kimmy horn and associates uh 109 south kentucky avenue in lakeland say mark wilson mark wilson yes uh engineer with kimmy horn and associates okay so we had a letter of authorization for jared win with kimmy horn but i guess you're here instead yeah standing in for jared he had to travel today and we had an updated letter of authorization submitted that allows kimmy horn to speak on behalf so excellent thank you okay um before i ask any questions is there do you have any comments that you'd like to provide in support of the application sure thank you um eric did a great job of um submitting most and talking about most information so i may just want to touch on a few of those points uh and just maybe state that um i think us and county staff both were a little bit tripped up if you will by the 0.55 isr and versus the 0.75 in the urban growth because uh no one discovered it till right near the end of the review process and it was a uh-oh moment so um i wanted eric to leave this map up here because i think it gives you a pretty good picture of the overall area and how it's changed you know he showed the aerial data from you know 20 plus years ago how much growth has happened out there and quite honestly it's probably the last five years you've seen a tremendous amount of growth in this area eric noted we had the five lane road you have a significant investment infrastructure out there with a number of roadways in this corridor and investments and utilities and that would be power water and sewer in this corridor we've done a number of developments in this area and some of them are in within the city of lakeland you can see on this map here there's a gray areas that's the city of lakeland a lot of those areas are business park industrial type uses that you see adjacent to the airport that was just our eastern boundary and then you see it on the other side of county line road and plant city hillsborough county there's been a significant amount of growth that's happened down there and they equally have made investments into public infrastructure roadways that they shared with pole county but also utilities from the plant city hillsborough county side and really we're here to talk about the isr only today because everything else we're in compliance with the land development code we've already got level two construction plan approval we've started construction on site phase one's approved it meets all the standards isr setbacks buffer a number of things that the opposition was noted in the letters um we've already checked those boxes we already have approved construction plans site work has already started we've already addressed all those issues phase one again meets the isr what's going to happen is when we do phase two and we increase the building size we discovered that we're exceeding that impervious surface ratio now everything around us for the most part except for the small enclave of this rural development area is urban and you could do 0.75 without any problem generally we're not really hitting that 75 percent or 0.75 impervious ratio which tend to be in the 70 or lower and like eric stated this site's around 63 percent i think it is so we don't really need 0.75 but i think staff agreed if we go from 0.55 to 0.75 it's consistent with everything else it just makes it easier so uh next time somebody comes out here in this map here it's going to be consistent there's not going to be an obscure you know 0.65 or 0.70 number to just be consistent with the urban growth boundaries that we are adjacent to um we are getting utilities service on the city of lakeland city of lakeland electric city uh water which is adjacent to our site as eric noted sewer is not there yet so in the interim we do have septic tank that we're proposing for phase one and we're going to be building the infrastructure to get us up to county line road so in the future when sanitary sewer does become available it can be an easier connection to happen but right now it's it's not there but again that meets all the state rules we've got construction plan approval it's it's moving forward but we've planned for the future to when sewer comes along we can tie into it so the biggest issue right now is just the impervious surface ratio our site's designed for it we have the stormwater runoff we have the water managed district permits and all the other agencies that are required for that we're doing everything we need to do we just have a proposed additional impervious area in this location that exceeds what's allowed in the rural development area so you are not relying on the uh retention pond that is off site but to the north of this parcel well yeah and i think eric sort of covered that up in the sense of he noted where our stormwater pond is in the south southeast corner that's where our stormwater pond is its size for our whole project so we are not relying on the pond to the north that's correct i think maybe to eric's point that that pond was built there i'm not sure what time and it probably catches some runoff from somewhere but it's not relevant to what we're doing it may be a bit of a buffer but it is not essential to your project correct and prior to us doing this project i think you noted one of the opposition letters someone noted i believe that there was some other development plan there with a different combination of tracks being put together but that just didn't work out so we've moved forward with trimac to to do the site we're doing here today and we're here to talk about the impervious surface ratio only because everything else has been approved and we're under construction with phase one it's likely this whole area transitions i know the county is looking to redo their make some comp plan changes and you know next year and likely this is going to change at that point in time i would expect uh just timing doesn't work out for us that's why we're here before you today and and maybe more than likely as you can see what the city of lakeland boundaries are when you get utility service water and sewer from the city of lakeland you sign a voluntary annexation agreement we're likely as it becomes contiguous to become annex in the city of lakeland we'll we'll see when that happens but you know the allowable impervious surface ratio there is along the 0.75 to 0.8 range so again we're going to be consistent with that area so one of the criteria that staff and i have to consider when reviewing a variance application is hardship something unique to this parcel that justifies deviating from the code in this case the isr requirement can you address that criteria in place yeah and the hardship for us is as you can see by the adjacent developments for the most part everyone's you see a lot of impervious on the aerial i think the satellite photo that eric had showed in the staff report does a pretty good job you see a lot of white rooftops you see a lot of paved surface parking these types of sites for storage warehousing distribution they need large impervious surfaces you have trucks truck parking trailer parking building square footage and to do developments of this size you need to maximize the impervious to make it a viable usable project as you can see by what's on the arrow up there today so the 0.55 is it makes it a very difficult project to do so you need the 0.75 to stay consistent with industry standards consistent really with county standards and urban growth areas which is what this is transitioning to when you say consistent with industry standards tell me what you mean by that industry standards with what's required to develop sites like this so warehousing again you have the truck courts which are larger links right 55 and longer you know foot trailers you have the tractors themselves that pull it you need to park these trailers in some places then they need to maneuver around so they need to pull in turn around appropriately they also need to back up and maneuver you have to provide parking for employees as well the driveways are typically larger the drive aisles are larger everything's a little bit larger to handle the truck traffic so you end up increasing your impervious surface to accommodate those those elements and those issues compared to you know maybe a typical commercial project which not doesn't have to manage as many large trucks is there anything else you would like to add in support of the application before i open up public comment i don't think so thank you so much for allowing me to speak thank you and before i call up the individuals who have signed up to speak and i do have three speaker cards so far i do just want to pause for a moment and um skim through the letters that have been submitted okay uh dart um with as i open up public comment and the public hearing for this application we will start start with richard moser moser moser gotcha all right if you want to come to the podium sir um i believe you were sworn earlier yes i was very good um then if you could start with your name and address please and it would help me if you identified um where you live in relation to this property as okay my name is richard moser i live at 4210 county line road with my wife wendy and we are the owners of that pond that everybody talked about that pond has actually been permitted by swift mud and we just renewed the resource permit that they require every five years there's an operating pond so that's up to date and that's been renewed so that's not a mystery first of all i'd like to point out that the applicant is looking for a variance to get more more impervious area based upon the fact that it's urban development all around it and i totally agree with that that you know they they do have urban development all around it but what perplexed me is i talked to mr win jared win the engineer on april 9th and i asked him how do they plan on dealing with the sanitary and his answer was we're going to do it on site and if you need any more information it's public record what we're doing so i went down to to the county building here and i pulled down the maps there wasn't a single map that showed phases or septic or anything to do with sanitary at all it was like there was no mention of it whatsoever so they want to get the benefit of having an urban area and at the same time with the with the septic they want to go with the residential area i mean you can't have your cake and eat it i have many concerns about the septic being put in that large one of them is the amount of nitrogen that it will produce in the ground and run off into our pond number one but more important is the creek behind the property nobody talked about that it could run backwards over to the creek and basically contaminate everybody's drinking water i mean i don't know there's no studies on so that is number two issue number three issue is the fact that they don't have any barriers or any buffers or they have a 20-foot buffer with no barrier fencing they have a road 20 feet away from my property line parallel to the property line with no fencing going there but they have a road going 20 feet away 20 feet is like from me to your desk right there so i think the least we could ask for is a property boundary fence on that on that area right on the property boundary and that you know i'm concerned about the way that they're going about the permitting it really concerns me you know they're not they're not having an open book they're not transparent um another concern of mine is the activity they have at nighttime we hear dump trucks at midnight one o'clock two in the morning we thought it was a gunshot or an accident and we woke woke up to see a dump truck leaving i mean why are they bringing phil in at midnight it's just another question to be answered and that's that's primarily my concern i think they they should be granted variants based upon that they're going to tie into the sanitary system as opposed to a septic system it's too large of a system for what they're proposing that's it okay um are you an engineer sir pardon me are you an engineer in the past yes okay what type of engineer civil i don't practice so i'm retired i understand were you licensed in the state of florida no i would not i was more into land development end than i was into engineering end okay but that's what my schooling is were you licensed in another state sir i would not okay thank you thank you okay next up i have um michelle proche if you could start um by making sure i've stated your name correctly and then um with your address and tell me where that is in relation to the subject property please 4240 if you could speak into the microphone please there you go 4240 county line road lakeland 33811 okay and where is that address in relation to this property that little indentation there just north of the the building up front that's our helm right there where the arrow is up to the north where the little indentation is at right right down just a little bit that's our home okay and we have the same concerns that rich and wendy have as far as the sewer possibly contaminating our drinking water and our two other concerns same as them is the fact that those two buildings are only going to be offset 20 foot from our property line we would like to have a little bit more of a buffer than that and also a fence so that we can have a little bit of privacy and a little bit of peace and quiet that we've enjoyed for so many years we're not against the development but we would like to have something to give us a little bit of privacy and that's it i mean we have the same concerns as they have because they're they're our neighbors thank you thank you i also have a speaker request from mark approach mark proche 4240 county line road lakeland florida 33811 i live in the same location as michelle of course um we've recited there since 1989 is when we moved in there it was family property it um the property has never sold since 1884 um it's been passed down through family and all that um we were part of a deal where a developer came in to buy four partials and we were included um back in 2023 and my partial was smaller than everybody else's so when we signed the contract we did everything um the con i mean the investor that was buying it came back and requested that we put in for the rezoning rezoning rezoning change to bp2 which i really didn't want to do it but i gave into it because i i kind of felt pressured or whatever um that deal fell through um so trimac came in and bought the 19.36 acres of land and like i said our parcels um north of them and east of them um but what we would really well back to the the first deal on the the first investors that came in they had a um 50 foot barrier on spring creek drive okay that they had approved and all that um that 50 foot barrier is not there in this case now um so we would really really really really like a border fence not landscaping and like michelle said we are not not against the development of this proposed site or anything we just want to be treated fairly on it and everything um we are concerned about the sewer of course because we are on well water and everything um and rich covered quite a bit of it too but also um on the land use hearing officer staff report on page number six on the last paragraph it states that we sold that property to trimac we did not have anything to do with that sale of that property and we didn't have any intentions or or we didn't have any idea um what the intent of the land was for but that was stated in the staff reporters report page six that we actually sold the land to them and we didn't that is the property that at one time was under contract but you didn't close yes ma'am that is the property that is south of us and east of us you have not sold any property to the applicant no ma'am but they had it stated in in the report is there anything else that you would like to say regarding your objections or anything else about the application we do have your letter okay included okay your letter right here um you did attach some photographs yes ma'am i sure did um as they was referring as as you can see in that letter that um they kept referring to the urban development in the area urban development in the area talked about plant city which is a whole different county than us which is the hillsborough county and everything but i included those pictures in there on the other warehouses or the developments that was there with the border fences um that was referred to in the report as urban development urban development so if they can use urban development i've got pictures of other urban developments that has border fences on it okay so if i can use that i can try to use it for to help me out okay you really want a border fence yes ma'am on on the um south side of our property in the east side of our property anything else no ma'am all right thank you thank you is there anyone else who um is here today to speak regarding this application yes hi my name is wendy mosher 4210 county line road lakeland florida i do understand that there is a lot of urban development or not urban but industrial development we agree with it we're not against it but until that development takes over our property or even marks we would still like to be treated as a residential what that means to me is that pond is that kim lee and horn referred to is not a retention pond it is a natural habitat i want a border not just landscaping but a serious border that will prevent things from blowing into the natural habitat that we have with all the hurricanes all the new traffic down county line road we have tons of trash that keeps accumulating it gets into the drainage system that's along county line road with a development such as being discussed and construction i can see foresee an awful lot of debris being blown into this natural habitat we have alligators we have turtles we have fish we have hawks we have birds that basically live there so my request is a substantial buffer border wall whatever to protect my land that's all i have thank you is there anyone else who would like to speak regarding this application you may add briefly sir if there is no one else okay i don't see anyone else but very brief sir one thing i did forget to mention is that there are many trees on the property on both properties that mark has and on the one that trimac bought and many of these tree lines are within a 20-foot buffer but there's no consideration to save these trees at all i mean it there's no mention of it on the plan it falls in a buffer anyway and part of the root system might fall on the road but they can get around that by putting turf block in that section and and those three deserve to be saved that's it thank you thank you okay i don't believe we have anyone else who wants to speak regarding this application um i will give the applicants representative an opportunity to respond to anything that they have heard um and while you are coming up i have some questions for um mr peterson um many of the comments that i have heard from the residents who live nearby are about um site planning issues i would call them um buffers um sanitary sewer septic versus septic um construction issues regarding trucks arriving leaving in the middle of the night um those are the ones that that come to uh the drinking water issues as well are those issues um issues that are considered during the variance process uh no uh the there is a county ordinance with regards to uh hours of operation on when you're uh constructing a site um there are limitations on the time of day um so there shouldn't be we will uh see to it that uh during the site construction that the uh contractor is aware that they they're they have an ordinance that they have to follow the issues such as um septic and sanitary systems um drinking water buffers etc are those pertinent to today's issue of the isr request i would say that they're they're not um if if they're not granted the variants the septic tank will be there because um it would remain um they will you know not necessarily have to connect uh to uh use that utilize that other area for the the phase two of their project um if if they're you know they were staying to the 0.55 then you know they could put in a septic tank just as well to serve the site uh there's uh many septic tanks to the north in spring creek drive and the residences uh this uh facility will be mostly uh there'll be fewer uh probably less output based on the number of employees versus the uh the uh you know day round uh usage of water and wastewater in spring creek drive on each individual subject tank that borders that property so this one probably not have as much impact it's regulated by the health department they have their standards for the infiltration and things of that nature so we trust that the health department and in the future florida department environmental protection will oversee that we are not here today for site plan approval but to the best of your knowledge does the proposed site plan that apparently has worked its way through the county review process does that meet the setback requirements for the land use district yes it does meet the setback requirements and the landscaping and buffering requirements for the bpc2 district when abutting residences there's different standards uh for uh screening and buffering if it was a residential district but the fact that they are the budding use uh land uses our business park center uh lessens the requirements okay um so now um mr wilson i wanted to give you an opportunity to um address any of the comments that you heard from the four individuals the neighbors for your client um who spoke in opposition to the application yes and i was going to maybe make an additional comment but actually i think you just stole my thunder asking uh staff the questions that you were about you know what we're here for today the variants and the staff not the site plan approval which has kind of already gone through that process but i don't think we heard anything today from the the neighbors that they didn't have in their letters so it was rather consistent which i think that's a good thing and i don't know that any of those are really relevant to isr impervious service ratio they really seem to be more relevant to a fence or buffer we do have a pretty substantial buffer that meets the latest county standards they've raised them in the last couple of years for industrial next to residential for you know obvious reasons and it's it's pretty substantial some a lot of tree planting understory trees as well and some shrubs and those are on the plans and i think it's going to look nice once they get planted and once they mature i understand some of the residents here who have spoken today on the northern side they're wanting a fence i don't think that's unreasonable to make that request to be quite honest with you we'll take it back to the owners of trimac and if there's any way that we can work something in like that um you know we'll try our best to get with our client and see what we can do to be a good neighbor i mean they want to be a good neighbor so um everything else that was mentioned related to construction activities uh like eric said i'm sure staff and the inspector will get uh involved on site we'll do the same thing to get involved on site with the contractor and try to understand what's going on because there are specific hours of operation that they should be following so um we'll have to stay on top of that if those um requirements are not followed there certainly is the um code enforcement um process although i'm sure your client would like to avoid that as well or they'll be back here in front of a different hearing officer yeah we don't want to be in front of that hearing officer i'm sure you don't okay anything else uh no thank you anything else from staff we uh pulled our background information from the comprehensive plan amendment case and so we haven't updated it we didn't realize that the ownership issue had changed at the time the comp plan had gone through it was the intent to purchase those properties so we'll update the report for that all right thank you okay we will now move on to ldl var 2025-15 ldl var 2025-15 mark wilson kim lee horn and associates on behalf of bellagio property manual management request a variance to the impervious surface ratio on a business park one property in the rural development area from point five five to point seven five the property is located at 40 40 county lion road south of drainfield road north of spring creek drive north of medulla road west of hamilton road and west of the city of lakeland in section six township 29 range 23 on april 7th 19 mailers were sent to area property owners one board was posted on the property on april 20 april 4th a legal ad was published in the polk sun news on april 9th 2025 we've received no response from the public for this request this area might be familiar uh based on the last case it is also on the county line road it is north of the the past site is north of spring creek drive as you see here uh it is in a business park center one property the difference between business park center two and business park center one is business park centers two allows for out outdoor storage of finished goods it also allows for various uses of like auto body repair and things of that nature whereas business park center one all has to be contained within the building so even though the the the final product product might be um different from the the last this one will not have the ability to do outside storage it is in the same situation this is this site even abuts urban growth area the i showed you how it was 30 years ago today it's a lot different as a matter of fact they're developing what warehouses on the remaining side the creek that was mentioned that runs from the north to the south and joins with this creek system to become i believe english creek or polly creek somewhere down the road that contributes to the alifaya uh provides a lot of separation between those two but really it contained these developments from getting uh any any larger than or more impervious surface area uh just by virtue of the where the creek ran through it however this site is predominantly all upland and very developable the applicant intends to uh cover similar uh impervious surface this area this is their stormwater retention pond it will be located there outfall into the county's right of way this is the site plan this is a they're developing at a 62 percent just over 62 percent uh impervious surface but they desire the full ability to use the 0.75 if so needed in the future to the north there is a warehouse distribution facility it just so happens to be in the urban growth area and directly across the street you see the cross dock section of another warehouse in plant city and then to the south you see the other warehouse that uh uh is opposite the previous case and this uh dog was very concerned with me posting the property and followed me everywhere i just wanted to take him home but i'm sure the neighbors wouldn't have appreciated that he was a nice dog the app the uh staff recommends approval uh it it meets three of the criteria in uh section 931 it's not in doesn't appear to be in dirt injurious uh to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare it matches a lot of the other warehousing distribution facilities that's uh that surround it and they also have higher impervious surface areas than uh even what the applicant is proposing their special conditions and circumstances because of the difference in development areas that really hasn't cut up caught up with the public uh investment into the area and the applicant uh like in the previous case got through the process then all of a sudden discovered that the uh the floor the impervious surface ratio was different in the rda but the same land use and as i mentioned before we all think of the future land use we don't often look at the urban service boundaries for the different nuances that they require with that i'll stand for questions you put up the image that shows the development areas and um what uh what is the isr that is permitted in the urban growth area 0.75 same as the request and this is for a similar type development as the case we just discussed except for the different permissible uses uh between um the uh bpc1 and bpc2 outdoor storage etc i don't believe the uh the previous case was taking advantage of the bpc2 aspect they they just so happen to have requested that when it was uh when it went through the hearing process this one only needed bpc1 this will be a totally enclosed warehouse and distribution facility except for the loading and unloading and it will be connected to water and wastewater too that is on the plans it's this site that will bring that sewer line further down from uh the north uh to bring it closer to the other development that had intended to connect to it once that happens and this site is planned to be connected to water and wastewater at the outset at the outset yeah there's no septic tank temporary septic tank on the site plan and has this um proposed development been through all of the county permitting process as well site plan approval etc like the the other case um this one is is on on hold we can't approve it until the um because they they are over the isr the the one previous we approved phase one which was what remained under is under the uh 5.55 isr they needed this that variance uh to add the third building that you saw on the site plan this one is only one building and they need the the variance to go forward okay otherwise they got to go back and go with a smaller building all right can the applicant's representative please come forward oh it's me mark wilson with kimley horn uh 109 south kentucky avenue engineer um in lakeland florida and uh bad timing on our part here these projects had a little bit different timeline but we stumbled upon the issue about the same time so they are both kind of coming before you at the same hearing so um i say bad maybe it's good because you kind of get to get all the facts out that that one hearing and not have to take a few months between that gap i would like to maybe eric if you wouldn't mind um putting up the land use that you had because it showed the urban growth areas i think it's important just to point out again and i know this case needs to stand on its own from the previous one so um i thought it's important just to point out here that we do have a bbc1 land use and we actually left a strip of land on our southern border when we did this land use a conditional approval land use or actually we may just change the legal description we left a strip on the south just to make sure we left a buffer to that adjacent neighborhood when we did this project here and we've also positioned the building when we get to the site plan you'll see that parking is on the south side of the building and then the truck courts on the north side so we're trying to be respectful of the neighborhood that's been there for quite some time as this whole area's transition from rural to more intense urban growth as you can see by all the warehouses that have popped in around here if we had picked up on along with staff if we had all picked up on the fact that the isr changes in the urban growth area versus the rural development area we probably would have when we did our land use change we would have just thrown in to change that urban growth boundary i believe i'm not sure if the project at the corner of drain field did that eric under a separate case but i noticed that they are in the urban growth and i think they were one time in the rural growth area or something like that so um if we'd have picked up on that we would have already had that approved and not been here today but that's that didn't happen so we're here today to ask for the variance to increase from a 0.55 standard to a 0.75 and similarly on another project we were talking about we are below the 0.75 but it just makes sense to keep things consistent so we're asking for the 0.75 even though we're in the 60 range 60 plus percent range and uh we do have water from the city of lakeland we have electric from the city of lakeland and uh we are not too far from city lakeland city limits as you can see with the airport boundary just to our east and some other projects that are developed adjacent to us across the creek again with the industrial warehouse really more warehouse distribution type uses than it is industrial i think industrial tends to make people think of outside type work like eric was talking about bpc2 this what we're proposing here and what the site plan is going to have is all inside use warehouse distribution employees trucks come in large open space building where you move goods in and out and around and for those reasons we need some increased impervious area to maneuver the trucks to park employees to have a building of that size it's amazing how technical these buildings can get because there's certain sizes and dimensions and specifications you need to meet and adhere to so uh there's really a science behind it it's not an arbitrary size there's you know column spacing structural issues garage doors a lot of a complicated science that goes into sizing these buildings and maneuvering these trucks around and with that we tend to almost always are going to be higher than a 0.55 impervious surface ratio which is what we're here today to ask to go higher to allow us to accommodate that sewer is going to be provided by the city of lakeland they're struggling with capacity right now so we're working with them on capacity and what the timing is going to be we have not planned for a septic tank to be on this project i suppose we could if it gets down to it if we have to do that we'll work with county staff if that comes to fruition but right now there's a lift station proposed on our site plans that are being reviewed and or hopefully we can get through this process approved by the county and we'll be connecting to our north to sanitary sewer with the city of lakeland but again they're struggling with capacity issues so it's a delicate issue right now we're trying to work through uh i would i think the arrow here and some of the other exhibits that eric's presented to you uh speak volumes of the the amount of rooftop and impervious that you see before you in this area uh we're being consistent uh with what's been developed in this area and that's how we kind of got through the land use change at a prior hearing or prior hearings and uh we feel it's it's uh it's appropriate for what we want to do and due to the nature of these types of buildings we really need to have a larger impervious surface area than a 0.55 to address um the hardship criterion yeah and again the hardship is uh gets back to the industry and and what it um what it needs to function and uh trucks uh loading areas uh additional trailer parking employee parking the building uh size itself and then the driveways drive aisles and everything when you put all that together you end up with site plans that end up having a higher impervious surface than uh the 0.55 it gets higher than that somewhere in you know in the mid 60s or maybe 70s up to 75 is allowed i think if you see across the street uh what's happened in hillsborough county and even on our side of the county uh it's a pretty intense impervious you know higher impervious than what we're asking for but uh so we're we feel like we're keeping it on the low side of what the industry has but we need that to make it viable for us okay anything else i don't believe so thank you thank you so this is a public hearing i do not have any um one who has signed up to speak regarding this application but is there anyone in the audience who came to speak about this application either for or against seeing no one we will close public comment is there anything else that staff would like to add nope nothing we have to go to ldl var 2025-18 ldl var 2025-18 valerie on behalf of b and v holdings request a rear primary structure setback reduction from five feet to zero for the enclosure of a new deck with a solid roof in a planned development pd 81-22 the property is located at uh 10 citrus ridge drive located on lot 10 on the west side of marsh on the southwest corner of of the intersection of with mandarin and the east uh east of uh many old man noel lane within citrus ridge subdivision northwest of the city of davenport in section 20 township 26 range 27 on april 7th 44 mailers were sent to area property owners one board was posted on the property on march 28th and a legal ad was published in the lake in the polk sun news on april 9th we've had no response from the public the applicants currently have a a small deck they'd like to enlarge it just a little bit uh in order to do that they need to go to zero this is a development that is in the northeast a very urbanized area as you can see by all the different land uses that surround it it's at the end of citrus drive uh uh the the streets even though the address is all for the entire development is a 10 citrus ridge uh each street has uh individual names on it uh this is marsh this is uh mandarin uh citrus drive valencian and uh this is manuel lane here in another subdivision this uh graphic doesn't necessarily represent the request they're not actually going out of the property line i was in in one respect i was trying to put the deck at the end of the home because that's where it's going to go uh but i also traced the line uh for the the property line the uh images you see are just a little bit off because they're of the angle of the sun makes them gives that shadow effect so it pushes them to the to the west here uh it's not going off the property line oops the wrong button very quirky about this development polk county ended up with the utility lines that were in the development this was a rv park uh like many others uh that transformed into a mobile home park over time uh the county uh maintains the water and the wastewater in the area because we accepted the system into our system and a lot of the lines did not quite follow the utility easements where they were supposed to go there is a five foot utility easement that this request will go on however there's no utilities in the utility easement they actually go under the the water line is underneath the uh structures in this area so technically they're not going to be on this the structure's already over the line uh in the future if we ever have to replace that line it'll most likely be moved this is an open space area that's owned by the hoa and more than likely they would uh move they would cap off the line and and build a new line in the future if it ever became a problem so it's just one of those things that is in the future we we would rather if there's any expansions to these structures that they say on their property and not go into the open space track that is the hoa because one day that will be where utility lines will be run so this applicant has done the uh due diligence in requesting the the locate and the clearance from all the uh different utility companies including our own polk county utilities and that has given the clearance to go ahead and add this they've also gotten a letter from the hoa allowing them the uh conditions of the development allowed for a certain size screen room or a certain size deck uncovered deck that they have today they are requesting a variance essentially to uh those that those standards this is a deviation from the standards to enclose this deck and expand it out a little further the steps would be changed from going this way to going in between the shed and the mobile home and then it would be right here this is essentially the property line right here that is a communications box that where where lines go along and i think i have a graphic here showing how it would relate to the neighbors as you can see the neighboring uh property owner really wouldn't be impeded or infringed upon by this this uh larger deck and enclosure because they're they're kind of screened as the same as the the neighbor to the north is screened from from uh would be screened from seeing it really so therefore staff finds that it wouldn't be injurious to the public welfare of the area involved um and uh while it does you know every variance does grant confer a special privilege uh this is just uh is not uncommon in this area uh we've had numerous uh variance requests uh in this area that have been approved we have uh i believe 34 in the development as a whole uh in this one phase that they are in 16 have been granted for expansions of decks and uh carport covers and things of that nature so uh staff finds it to be uh consistent with the area involved that'll stand for questions 34 variances that have been approved for zero foot setback not necessarily zero foot setback but encroachment into the setbacks this home is uh based on the survey this home was placed uh six feet from the property line so they're asking that's that's the full extent of the deck extension is six feet in depth and the property abutting the subject property to the rear that is owned by the property owners association yes yes it is a open space tract and for the most part most of the residents have stayed out of that open space tract and when i asked for an explanation from our utilities department who typically would be very opposed to anything on top of their water lines they said well this is a special situation and here's what here's what here's what the future plans are and this is why we we really don't see any reason to object to it because as long as they stay out of that open space tract any future improvements will you know that to the utility system will rely on that tract rather than replacing any lines underneath the dwellings if the owners association grants approval yes yes the owners association would have to grant that but uh yeah it's an interesting situation the the utilities were dedicated to uh the hoa to and on the plat and uh somehow we ended up managing uh owning and maintaining them within the polk county utilities so we're uh it's a long history so you might be sensing my discomfort maybe maybe not but you know zero foot setbacks are really disfavored well the in the conditions of approval of the pud those sheds are allowed to be there they're allowed to go to zero they're allowed to go to zero on one side and on on the rear as long as they're under a certain size and height i believe it's in the staff report the condition that and this is essentially along that same condition those conditions it's just you're they're asking for a variance to it so the conditions of approval to the pud um allow for that allowed yes there is a modification and i have it uh addressed in in under criteria eight on page five of the report uh that um allowed the the setbacks for accessory structures to go it says roofed accessory structures physically attached or connected to the principal structure or part of the principles shall be subject to the same standards as the principles oh that's sorry that's from our code i have the condition yeah it was there was a modification on february 14 2006 to allow mobile homes and uh reduce the rear setbacks from 10 to 5. um i have a reference to the other condition that's in there and i believe i included them as a exhibit in the staff report okay here it is yes under number two um the modification in 2006 uh an open deck is permitted to extend to the property line as long as it is less than 12 feet long and eight feet wide the applicant's current deck as it sits the day is is less than 12 feet long and and it's only six feet in depth they're asking to extend it and enclose it okay so if this were an open deck it would be allowed yes without a variance but because they want to enclose it it requires a variance yes uh there's also in the conditions that allow these sheds under a certain amount of square footage and i guess when i quoted it in the report somewhere but they're able to go to zero on the rear and one side any concerns about how the structure would be maintained from um the property itself without encroaching on anyone else's it's not going to encroach on any private property it they they would they could maintain it from the uh community property which they have the right to be on uh which is the abutting property line this this deck here will not extend to the neighbor's property line this is the applicant's uh shed that is on the corner of their property line just like their neighbors is on their corner and um so they're not anywhere close and the deck is not extending past the air conditioner on the side there as you can see here the proposed deck will not extend that far the communications with the utility companies were they a request to locate facilities in that easement or were they a request for consent to build over the easement or both both because i see reference to a locate request but i don't see anything in there about asking for um consent or authority to construct over the easement i think it's the the utilities stand today they're not this this deck would not encroach into any current utilities you can see the the power boxes here um the water connections uh are actually on the side of the house right um this is all the this is power communication it's all located on here which is why they gave their affirmative that it wouldn't wouldn't occupy any part of the easement they're using i guess i'm getting at the distinction between what is presently there in the easement and what future plans the utilities might have and did they give consent to put something on the easement or did they simply say we don't have anything in the easement and to me those are two different things um in their response i i believe it would have been based on their plans uh because they identified that they were clear and no facilities okay um it attached the uh conditions of approval that was in uh exhibit five and of the staff report at the very end on page 15 16. okay is the applicant present if you could start by giving us your name and address please please and confirm that you were sworn in at the outset of the hearing i believe you were but just okay very good we were sworn in uh valerie lowrie 10 citrus rich drive devonport florida 33837 okay and sir do you plan to speak as well i don't plan to okay how about you giving your name just in case oh sure brian lowrie um on the same address gotcha okay um before i dive in with a few questions do you have anything you would like to say no i think eric really described everything pretty well okay um so i take it you have applied to the property owners association and i think i've seen that they did give their consent subject to receiving this variance approval from the county our president of our hoa is with us today yes and how is it that you would maintain that structure from within your property if it would be built at at the rear property line well within the uh within the premise what we would just enter from either the side or the inside the home to maintain it around the back um we have we can go on the property line and we have green space right behind us so there's no nothing encroaching us to either side so we can there's no problem maintaining it whatsoever that green space is not owned by you no no no but we do have the right of way that we can go like it is owned by the hoa so it's common area so we can use it if we like one of the criteria that staff and i have to consider when reviewing variance applications is hardship something that is unique to this property that justifies deviating from the code's requirements can you speak to that uh criterion please yes the property at the the back of the property is facing west which gets sun practically all day long hence that's why we're asking for the roof because of the green space behind there is a lot of mosquitoes in that and that is a concern of mine plus with the extensive sun that's coming down um melanoma is also plays a factor and it's always you always think about that when you get into high sun rays all right anything else you would like to add i don't think so okay thank you okay thank you and i will now open up this application for public comment is there anyone who came here today to speak regarding this application okay i do see we have one individual and when you arrive at the podium just as always if you would start with your name and address sir i'll need to be sworn in can you please raise your right hand please do you swear or affirm that the testimony you provide today is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do thank you my name is johnny red i live at 184 citrus ridge drive i'm the current president of the hoa clear up a couple things the county is currently putting a new water main in on that street it will be at the street side no longer behind the house or under the house they've been out doing their site work now they just finished three other sections in our park recently on our common area in our bylaws the everybody has the right to walk stand work do things but not put permanent items in the common area so we approved the pre-approved her request for this room based upon that knowledge and there are many other homes that back up to common ground that have had zero setbacks also so that was one of the reasons that we approved that based upon them getting the variants that was all i had thank you is there anyone else who would like to speak regarding this application seeing no one we will close public comment anything else from staff on this one no nothing else okay and we will now go back to the item that we deferred continued earlier and uh ma'am i appreciate your patience in the back um but this is the continuation of um ldl se 2025 dash one do we have the applicant present for this because i think we went about as far as we could go through staff's presentation i believe you made it all the way through your presentation um what do you normally do in situations where the applicant is a no-show can this be continued to another hearing date without pushing you over your yes time frame it can be um as you do not do that i mean just i'm looking for the only reason why we didn't do it in the past was because we had different two different uh hearing officers but since you are the hearing officer for next month we could continue it to next month um you have the option you can take the resident's testimony since they're here and uh we can continue it it's up to you or if you can base your decision you know without the applicant's input since you know it is your hearing does your code require an applicant to be present no it does not require the applicant to be present i don't believe we we do we require the owner's authorization for anyone representing them but we don't actually require them to be present at the hearing but they do bear the burden of proof yes yeah it's more of a matter that there's no one here to represent them it's a a bigger problem if we have someone to represent them that doesn't have their authorization so we concern ourselves more with that rather than whether they're here at all okay well at a minimum since um miss edwards has waited very patiently through all of the other hearings i am going to have um you speak today um while i'm all over whether we're going to continue this but that way if if we do continue it and you choose not to return at least your comments are in the record and um it's your choice you know moving forward and um you were sworn in at the outside of the hearing okay excellent so if you could start um just by giving us your name and address and maybe explain where your address is in relation to the property that is the subject of the application and before you go before you get started if you could pull up the you're already on it okay very good okay my name is connie edwards my address is 55 30 south jennings road i've lived there for 28 years to his address i am to the north about 15 acres so go more to the north okay 15 acres it's like three plots there we go that's something i can very good okay um the only reason i'm opposing this i was actually the one that had called to complain because he was not in compliance with the area of being agricultural rule this is not the first time this gentleman has been not in compliance with the business i currently hold a class a commercial driver's license hazmat so with him being a commercial driver as well wanting to have a commercial vehicle parked he's not going to comply um he has three buildings that are like carports when i left today there was one of his trucks backed in there with the hood open doing mechanic work that's probably one of the reasons why he's not here today it's going to continue to this week monday i saw two of his trucks in and out as he quoted the speed limit is 35 these trucks run 45 to 60 miles an hour up and down this road i wish that i could find a way to put a weight limit on jennings road or speed bumps because it's just getting really really bad all of our mailboxes are across the street so we have to cross there's not one vehicle that will stop it's very dangerous this gentleman owns over five trucks because it is a roll-off vehicle there's containers he has over 20 containers and at one time he had all of that on that small plot so the people that lived right behind saw everything i don't trust this guy none whatsoever of doing the right thing there was back in september october i was out close to my trash bin there was a small gopher turtle it was about five years old his truck hit it smashed it my property my property to the north the neighbor he's the fire chief is a corridor for animals crossing i have buried in the last six months four peacocks that are wild that show up in my yard twice a day there used to be about 40 i'm down to almost half these vehicles just speed his trucks have hit many of them i'm tired of burying animals gopher turtles within like i said 28 years the last five years i have had to bury almost 10 gopher turtles crossing the vehicles just don't stop it is almost like a speedway like i said i wish i could find a way to get a truck weight limit and speed bumps on jennings road that's all i have to say today thank you well i again i appreciate you sitting through the whole hearing and i apologize for you know requiring that but we did want to give the applicant every opportunity to attend yes ma'am um it is not within my jurisdiction to um adjust the speed limit or put in a you know require you can guide me in the right direction would be nice i would direct you to staff um after the hearing um to you know determine what the appropriate procedure is for that but it's not um a part of of this hearing i just wanted to explain that to you that it's not within my power to to do that um what the applicant has requested is um the authority to park one commercial vehicle on site but he has five okay i'm just wanting to explain to you that if this does get approved it is not for all five or however many well he'll rotate them out so he can do mechanic work i understand your point i'm just telling you that um if this gets approved what would be approved is only one vehicle for you know the specific vehicle that he has requested or something comparable but he has other vehicles that are also commercial that are large vehicles he has pickup trucks with large utility trailers with heavy equipment that he parks in the yard as well there was also another one that was um oh i can't remember it's a flatbed but he has heavy equipment on top of it as well that went out this morning so he usually has those trucks running out about eight o'clock in the morning and the compliance truck that's been up and down jennings road does not abide by the speed limit either noted thank you is there anything else you want no ma'am okay thank you um this is a question for staff as i'm looking at the photos of the vehicle that he has requested uh to park here there's no trailer that's being requested it's just the vehicle itself a sec it's on top on exhibit uh six yeah of the stuff oh i see there's something sitting on the trailer okay rule of i i understand okay given that the code does not require um the applicant to be present um you know they're not going to continue it we'll proceed with whatever the applicant has given us um he chose not to be here that apparently is his choice um is there anything else from staff on this uh no nothing to add okay um then i think we are done for the day thank you sure yeah we are off the record hearing is over so you may