Please hand it to the clerk. I'm Seth Claytor, an attorney with the law firm of Boswell and Dunlap in the city of Bartow. 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 our attention now as we want to avoid any potential conflicts of interest. I have reviewed each of the cases that will be heard here today, and I don't believe there are any such conflicts. During this meeting, please put all cell phones and other communication devices on vibrate. If your phone disrupts today's proceedings, you will be asked to stand in the hallway with said phone or immediately silence same. Explanation of procedures. The cases will be called in the order listed on the agenda unless there is a request for a case to be taken out of turn. 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 to provide. At that point, we will open the public hearing portion after the applicant has concluded their presentation. 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 the questions you raised during your comments and try to have them answered following the close of public comment. Once public comment is closed, there will not be another opportunity to come in and address the case that is before us that you had spoken to. When it is your turn to speak, either for your case or during public comment, please state your name for the records, name and address, and speak clearly into the microphone. These proceedings are recorded, and it is very important that you speak into the microphone to ensure an accurate recording. So please speak slowly and clearly. After public comment closes, the applicant and the county will be given the opportunity to answer any questions or reply to comments that 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 provided in a written final order within 14 days. That's calendar days of today. I do my best to complete them sooner. Again, if you would like a copy of my decision, please fill out the form on the back table and provide it to the clerk. Ex parte communications. For the record, I have received no ex parte communications. That means that nobody has contacted me about these cases outside of these hearings today. Interpreter. If anyone needs an interpreter, please let the clerk know and county staff will try to arrange one for you. All testimony today must be given under oath, so I will now ask the clerk to swear in all speakers. If you're going to address the land use hearing officer today on any case, please stand and raise your right hand and answer out loud to the following question. If you're an applicant on any case today, please stand and 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, and the first item on the agenda is the minutes for the August 27, 2026 hearings. However, I'm going to continue that particular agenda item until the next scheduled land use hearing officer proceedings. Okay, now I will go ahead and get into the new business agenda items and case one LDL VAR 2026-50 marker road variance and staff please. Eric Peterson for the land development division LDL VAR 2026-50. Benjamin Alejandre is requesting a variance to allow an accessory structure to be taller than the primary structure on 1.14 acres in a residential low 2x district. The property is located at 1478 Marker Road, north of Pace Road, south of Mount Olive Road, east of the Polk County Parkway, west of Pierce Road, east of the city of Lakeland, south of Polk City, and west of the city of Auburndale in section 8, township 27, range 25. On October 6, 20 mailers were sent to area property owners. One board was posted on the property on October 2. A legal ad was published in the Polk Sun News on October 7. We've received no response from the public. Aaliyah Inglema is the case planner. Good afternoon. Aaliyah Inglema with land development presenting LDL VAR 2026-50, the Marker Road variance. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow an accessory structure to be taller than the primary structure. The subject site is located just east of the city of Lakeland in section 8, township 27, range 25. The site is approximately 1.14 acres located within a residential low 2, future lane use district, and in the transit supportive development area. So the subject parcel is surrounded by a cluster of lots ranging in size from an acre to five acres and in some cases larger. The home does not have a garage. So the accessory structure is 1,200 square feet. The single family home measures 12 feet 8 inches from grade to eve, while the proposed accessory structure measures 16 feet from grade to eve. The proposed height exceeds the primary structure, which required the variance. It will be located to the rear of the home, which is permitted. So large accessory structures are very common in this area. Two other homes on the street received variance approval for accessory structures that are larger than the primary home within the past three years. So whether the variance granted is the minimum variance that will make it possible, the reasonable use of the land building or structure, is the home does not have a garage. And many other residential properties in this area have large accessory structures. Two other homes on this street received a variance approval for an accessory structure that is larger than the primary home. And I'll stand for any questions. When was the home built? Do we know? 1973. And so there is no garage as related to the primary structure. Was that as a result of a modification to the structure or was it built with no garage? It's a mobile home. They don't usually have rogers. Oh, sorry. That would make sense. I have no further questions. So is the applicant in attendance? Please come up. Would you please state your name and address for the record? Yes. My name is Benjamin Cerritos Alejandre. My address is 1478 Market Road. And is there any testimony or evidence you'd like to present related to today's case? Just testimony. I don't have any evidence, but I have I already bought the metal building, the one I'm going to install, and it's already in place. I bought it without knowing that I had to go through this process. So that's why I bought it. It's waiting to get installed, actually. It's on the property. It was a prefabricated metal building. All I got to just put it together and it's ready to go. That's what I have. So it has not been constructed as of yet. Thank you. I'm going to open the public hearing portion. Is there anyone here to speak on behalf or in opposition to the request before me for consideration? Seeing none, I'm going to close public hearing and ask if there are any additional comments from staff. No, sir. And can you just go ahead and state for the record staff's recommendation? Approval. Thank you very much. Next is case LDL VAR 2026-52. I'll ask staff to present. Eric Peterson for the Land Development Division. LDL VAR 2026-52. Arsenio Ravello, on behalf of Jose Hernandez Claudio, requests a rear yard setback from 20 feet to 10 feet for a covered porch on 0.16 acres in the Poinciana Pre-DRI and PUD 7110 development. The property is located at 630 Llama Drive, north of Coyote Road, west of Muscat Drive, east of Kangaroo Drive and Marigold Avenue, north of Palmetto Street and south of the city of Kissimmee and west of Haines City in section 24, 27 or Township 27, range 28. On October 6, 32 mailers were sent to area property owners. One board was posted on the property on October 2nd. A legal ad was published in the Polk Sun News on October 7th. I am your case planner, Eric Peterson. This is the site in the northeast part of the county, an area called Poinciana. The development began back in the late 60s, early 70s, really came into its own in the mid-80s, 90s, and has really come close to reaching full build-out recently in the 2020s. The site is north of Palmetto Street. You can see the future land uses. A portion of Poinciana is PUD 7110. Another portion is called Solovita, but it was a portion of Poinciana's PUD 9812. This is PUD 7110. As you can see, the lots are fairly uniform throughout the development. All of similar lot sizes. The only variations are when you get to the corners or the loops here, the properties become bigger. This is a fairly standard lot size. The request is to cover the slab porch in the rear yard. There's a 10-foot drainage easement on either side of the property lines for a total of 20 feet. This request is staying out of the drainage easement. A neighboring property owner to the north had a shed here, and when they went to enclose the shed and turn it into a dwelling unit, they extended the roof line from the house. This would constitute a similar request that this variance is. So it's in line with that neighboring property and their room addition. This is the site plan superimposed on the boundary survey. And that shows the drainage utility easement. Yes. And there's no infrastructure. It's strictly drainage, correct? Yes, it's strictly drainage. It's a gradual swale slope. It's hard to tell when you get out there. I mean, the drainage system was dug when the lots were formed back in the, I believe this was in the late 80s. And there's been a lot of siltation, but it still functions the property slopes to the back on both the lots. And some of the antiquated subdivision designs, you actually had gravity sewer mains that went through the backyard. And so I certainly wouldn't want to, okay. No, no utilities that I could tell. Here's the, the owner has the back slab patio. Slabs aren't judged by the setbacks until you get at least one foot above the vertical ground. This is approximately what it'll look like. This is not an architectural rendering. This is just the occupation of the space. It's going to be a hard roof coming off the, the home and will be supported by post. I put conditions in there that they can, they can screen it if, if they like in the future. This is looking from the neighbor to the neighbor's house to the north at the space, the visual space that'll occupy. This is looking at the neighbors just over their fence to the south at the visual space it would occupy. This is the, the neighbor to the north and their, uh, ADU cabana, uh, that has, was once detached structure and subject to accessory setbacks. But when they, uh, brought the roof line over became part of the primary structure. Staff finds this request will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public. There's a good six foot opaque fence around most of the, the, uh, surrounding properties. Uh, really, uh, it's not, uh, able to be discerned from neighboring property view or from the roadway, uh, granting the, uh, variance, uh, will not confer on the applicant a special privilege that hasn't been granted in other places in the development. Uh, as you can see, the neighbor to the north has a very similar extension off of their home. Um, the, uh, every, though everyone has a similar lot size, this is a very common request in the Poinciana area. Um, not common in this phase, but common in many other phases to go from that with the 20 foot setback to go from the 20 to the 10, staying out of the drainage easement with attached structures to the homes. With that, I'll stand for questions. And staff's recommendation is? Approval. Thank you. Is the applicant in attendance? Thank you. Would you please come up and state your name and address for the record? Good afternoon. My name is Joseph Hernandez and my address is 630 Lama Drive, DC Min, Florida 34759. Thank you. And is there any evidence or testimony you'd like to present today as related to your application and the case before me? No. All right. Well, thank you for coming. Thank you, sir. At this point in time, I'm going to open, uh, for public hearing. Is there anyone here, uh, to speak on behalf of the applicant or in opposition? Seeing none, I'm closing public hearing and I will ask, uh, if staff or the applicant have any additional comments, uh, or testimony? No, sir. Okay. Thank you. Next, I'm going to call case LDLVAR. LDLVAR 2026-54. Redmond Variants. LDLVAR 2026-54. Bobby Redmond is requesting a variance to allow an accessory storage structure larger than the principal structure on 0.38 acre residential property, the residential low district. The subject property is located at 3489 U.S. Highway 17 North in Bart, outside of Bartow. On the northwest side of U.S. Highway 17, southeast of Old Bartow, Eagle Lake Road, and north of the city of Bartow in Section 22, Township 29, Range 25. Let me go. Ah, sorry. On October 6th, 24 mailers were sent to area property owners. One board was posted on the property on October 2nd. A legal ad was published in the Polk Sun News on October 7th. We have received no response from the public. Tyler Daniels is the case planner. Tyler Daniels Land Development presenting LDLVAR 2026-54, the Redmond Variants. Applicant is requesting a variance to allow an accessory structure larger than the primary structure. The subject property is on the northwest side of U.S. 17, southeast of Old Bartow, Eagle Lake Road, north of the city of Bartow. Property carries a residential low designation and the surrounding abutting residential parcels are also residential low and there is high impact commercial on the southwest across the highway. Parcel is a narrow platted lot about 75 feet wide and 220 feet deep at about 0.38 acres with 17 along the frontage and a railroad right away runs along the entire rear property line. This is the current conditions. The existing dwelling is a single family residence constructed in 1954 and is about 972 square feet under roof. This is the applicant site plan not to scale. It shows the proposed structure at the rear of the lot 77 feet behind the dwelling within the five foot and 10 foot property line setbacks so no setback relief is requested and this is the proposed structure overlaid over an aerial using the dimensions from the site plan. The structure is 35 by 55, 1,925 square feet and 12 feet in height. This is the existing dwelling at about 810 square feet of living area and this is how the proposed structure would look in the backyard. The entire rear property line abuts the railroad right away and no residential parcel adjoins the rear of the site. Staff recommends approval. We find that it will not be injurious to the area. The structure is set at the rear of the lot behind the existing residents more than 190 feet from US-17 and abuts a railroad right away and the structure meets every other standard and satisfies the five foot setback and 10 foot rear setbacks with no additional relief. And with that I stand for questions. There is no utility infrastructure I would imagine. No water or sewer, no. This is septic and well? I believe so, yes. Okay. Is the applicant in attendance? Would you please come and state your name and address for the record? Bobby Redmond, 3489 US Highway 17 North. Thank you, Mr. Redmond. And is there any testimony or evidence you'd like to present? No, the main reason for building is eventually, I'm hoping by this time next year, is to have enough building materials that I want to store inside that building to build a bigger house. So that's one of the main reasons of getting it. The primary use of the structure will be for storage or equipment? Yes. Thank you. If you have no further testimony or evidence, I will go ahead and close this portion of the hearing and open for public hearing and to see if there's anyone that in attendance that would like to speak on behalf of the applicant or in opposition. Seeing that, I'll close public hearing and I'll ask if there are any additional comments from staff or the applicant. No. And just for the record, please restate the recommendation of approval. Approval. Thank you. Okay. I will call case LDLVAR 2026-55 and ask staff to present. LDLVAR 2026-55. Demian Ponzo on behalf, or sorry, Demian Ponzo is requesting on behalf of Maria Navarro and Mayasotis Villagran an accessory structure side yard setback reduction from five feet to three feet to allow an existing accessory dwelling unit to remain on site in a residential low 1x district on 0.25 acres. The subject property is located at 130 2nd Street, north of Sanders Road, south of Holly Hill Cutoff Road, east of 2nd Street, west of 1st Street, west of the city of Haines City, and section 6, township 27, range 27. On October 6th, 25 mailers were sent to area property owners. Two boards were posted on the property on October 2nd. A legal ad was published in the Pulse on News on October 7th. Kyle Rogus is the case planner. Good afternoon. Kyle Rogus with land development presenting LDLVAR 2026-55, the Navarro ADU variance. The applicant is requesting an accessory structure side setback reduction from five feet to three feet to allow an existing accessory dwelling unit to remain on site. The subject property is located at 130 2nd Street, north of Sanders Road, south of Holly Hill Cutoff Road, east of 2nd Street, west of 1st Street, west of Haines City, and section 0, township 27, range 27. The property is located in the residential low 1 site land use district and is in the Northridge selected area plan on approximately 0.25 acres. According to a property appraiser, only one home to the south and southeast of the subject property has added an accessory structure, a detached garage on the property. The detached garage is measured by 24 by 38 feet or 912 square feet on approximately 0.74 acres. The detached garage is more than twice the size of the ADU on the subject site. In addition, on the west side of 2nd Street, on a larger size lot, recent 2026 aerial photos place multiple accessory structures on site. Property appraiser has not recorded car, has only recorded car ports and screen porch additions to the property. And in this photo, you can see in yellow, that is the detached garage that was that 912 square foot property to the south and southeast. And then this property here was where you have those multiple accessory units where it's either the car ports or the screen enclosures. The home was built in 1992, meeting all setback requirements. The home currently sits approximately 57 feet from the western property line and 25 feet from the eastern property line, meeting all setback requirements. This further restricts any accessory structure from being placed within the rear of the property without impeding on the accessory structure setbacks. Only 15 feet of relief is available outside that 10 foot rear setback, which makes placing the accessory dwelling unit to the side yard the most viable option on this site. The ADU is roughly 16 by 25 feet or 405 square feet and is asking for a two foot reduction. This is a very minimal and discreet request. If the ADU was placed two feet further to the south off the northern property line, there would be no need for a variance request and they could allow a 1000 square foot ADU, which is 595 square feet more than what is existing on site through an administrative one review. The owner may not have been aware of the accessory structure side setbacks. The seven foot wide shed is 5.3 feet from the property line just outside that five foot side buffer. The ADU is less than two feet closer, approximately one foot nine inches. And this is that shed that I referenced where you can see it is about 6.4 feet by 7.4. And you have that distance of 5.3. The ADU is located on the side yard behind an existing 7.4 foot wide shed, minimizing the view of traffic. An existing opaque fence and dense vegetation along the northern property boundary helps mitigate any visual concerns from the neighboring properties as evident in the next slide here. Again, you can see this is from this vantage point on 2nd Street looking just southeast. And the approximate location of that accessory dwelling unit is going to be behind these trees and that opaque fence. Staff recommends approval. This portion of the property is the ideal location as it is screened from the abutting property to the north by an opaque fence and dense vegetation along with an existing seven foot wide shed blocking almost half the ADU from view of traffic. The nearest neighboring structure is approximately 30 feet to the north. And with that, I will stand for questions. The home was built in 1992? The home was built in 1992, correct. Was the ADU permitted? They currently have a permit in-house right now. It is temporarily on hold while they're requesting for this variance for that two foot setback reduction. Okay. Permit requirement came about through code proceedings? Correct. Is the applicant in attendance? Would you please come up and state your name and address for the record? Okay. I don't believe you were sworn in. I'll go ahead before we provide any testimony. I'll have the clerks where you went. Good afternoon. Meals with these Villagran. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you provide today is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you. Please say your name and address again. Maria Navarro. And your address? 132nd Street, Davenport. Okay. And is there any evidence or testimony you'd like to present in support of your application in today's case? Not at the moment. However, our neighbor was going to give us a letter for like a notarized letter that he's okay with us having the house there because he's actually opened the fence for him to come in and we're like family. So he was, but we didn't have the letter. He's been a little bit sick with his house. So I didn't want to bother him with that. So we don't have one right now. And what year was the, uh, the accessory dwelling unit constructed? When did, I'm sorry. What was the structure? That's the subject of the variance request. When was that structure? When did it start? Mom, I wouldn't know. Of last year of 2025 or 2026? Okay. New structure. April of this year. Is it currently occupied? No, no one's there. Okay. Um, thank you very much. Thank you, sir. Thank you. I'm going to close the hearing and open public hearing. Um, is there anyone that would like to speak on behalf of the applicant or in opposition of the case that's before me for consideration? Seeing none, I'm going to close public hearing and ask, um, whether staff or the applicant have any additional comments or rebuttal testimony. I will say I do have the construction plans for that, uh, ADU on hand. It wasn't submitted with the record for this, um, for this application, but I do have that information on hand. If you would like to have that as a copy. Um, and it does have a 2023 building permit meeting that criteria. So, um, just for the record, having that on. Do you have a copy of this for the record? You do. Okay. I'm going to go ahead and admit the, uh, the building plans into the record. Um, it will become a part of the official record and I would, do you need this to? Yes. Okay. I just want to make sure. All right. And once again, if you would mind restating staff's recommendation. Staff recommends approval. Okay. Thank you. That concludes the agenda items that we have. I have no other business on the agenda for consideration. That being said, I'm going to adjourn at 2 0 2 PM.