Board of Adjustment

with liberty and justice for all. And I'd like to remind everyone that they could please silence your cell phones for the duration of the meeting. >> And also it when you're addressing the committee, if you could speak directly into the microphone. I listen. You can do will yes, Mister Cherry present. Many. MS Cooper president. MS Tennis. President. And Mister Salem, President. If you if everyone had a chance, an opportunity to review the minutes of the last meeting. Any changes concerns, amendments, additions? I spoke with you about it take that up and are okay. And then, John, if you could please explain the judicial. >> A variance hearing is a quasi judicial hearing which is slightly more former than a legislative public hearing. There are parties to judicial hearing. The parties may include the applicant city and anyone who has applied for and qualifies for effective or status under the criteria of the city zoning code parties, proper evidence. Testimony, expert testimony and documentary evidence parties have the opportunity to cross examine witnesses and to present a closing rebuttal argument. The decision of the board of Adjustment in a quasi judicial hearing must be based on the confidence evidence in the record in the board must apply the appropriate standards of review and the zoning code relating to the type of approval request. It. At the beginning of the public hearing board estate. If it had any ex parte communications on this matter, that is contact with any parties outside of the public hearing today. So we will now ask the board members if they have had any ex parte communication. >> I did in fact, speak with the property owner as I was going and look the property. He was present. I explained that I was with the and I could not conduct any conversation about the meeting, although than just ask permission for access, which was granted. Okay. >> Considering that communication. Are you able to consider this matter today fairly and impartially and base your decisions solely on the evidence presented to >> I did do a site. Visit the know ex Parte Communications. Okay. Thank you. I did do a safe. Is it that, you know, ex parte communication? All right. And then for me, thank, you know, communication. Thank you. All right. We may proceed. >> All right. Now we will do anyone that will be appearing before the floor today. Please rise and raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony evidence were factual representations? You're about to give were present to the board of Adjustment this 29th Day of July. 26 are truthful. >> Alice, if you would, please do the pledge of conduct. >> We may disagree, but we will be respectful of one another. We will direct all comments to issues. There will be time limits on presentations. That petitioner but big. >> Limited to 20 minutes and then 15 minutes for questions. 15 minutes for rebuttal. And then 5 minutes for any public speakers. say that this up meeting is open. Read T. Number. 26 the A R o 4. >> So Petitioner Kay Andrews, Esquire on behalf of Jack and Diane Mac MAC, MS property owners seeking 5 variances to reduce the front yard setback Pearson Lane encroach on the southwestern daylight plane permit a pool cage in front of the primary building's front facade along often street reduce the required setback for pool cage taller than 20 feet and encroach on the front yard setback for accessory structures. The subject property located at 37 10 Heigl Avenue is zoned residential, single family too, and is part of the coastal islands overlay the surrounding properties are part of the same zone district and overlay. There's a single family structure on the property that experience flooding during the recent hurricanes. The property owners would utilize the requested variance is to allow for the lifting of the existing home pursuant to Table 6, 2002, 0, 3, of the zoning code. The minimum front setback for are set to zone district is 20 feet. The subject property includes 3 front yards and therefore is required to provide a 20 foot minimum setback on all 3 frontage is the applicant is requesting reduction of the required front yard setback from 20 feet to 19.4 feet. Fronting Pearson Lane for Total Variance. Request of 0.6 feet. The 19.4 foot front setback is an existing legal nonconformity pursuant to Section 5, 1, 0, 5, of the zoning code pursuant to Section 6, 1, 0, 2, U 2 single Family dwelling shall not penetrate the daylight plane. The applicant request encroachment of 6 feet, 9 inches in the vertical dimension and 6 feet, 3 inches in the horizontal dimension totaling 21.0 9 square feet in area along the southwestern side. Zoning Code section 7, 9, 0, 3, 1, B require swimming pools with cages to be located behind the front facade of the primary building. The request would allow the pool with cage to remain 5 feet in front of the front facade facing often street so could section 7.93, one requires accessory structures over 20 feet tall to be located behind the side or rear setback side setback. A 5.7 5 feet is proposed. A variance of 2.2, 5 feet from table 6 to 3. Sony could section 7. 93 1 ear requires accessory structures to be located behind the front setback. A variance of 2 feet is requested to allow an existing shed to remain the front yard setback along Heigl would not be modified and will continue to comply with Section 6 to 3. The specific variance is being sought is generally outlined above are one a variance from Section 6, 2, or 3 tables, 6 to 3 to allowed 19.4 foot front yard setback along Pearson Lane where a 20 foot setback is required. A total reduction of 0.6 feet, a variance from Section 6 wanted to you to to allow late planning coachman on the South Western facade up to 6 feet, 9 inches in the vertical dimension and 6 feet. 3 inches in the horizontal dimension. A total incursion of 21.0 9 square feet, a variance from Section 7, 9, 0, 3, 1, B to allow a with cage to extend 5. have be on the front facade of that primary building facing often street, a total variance of 5 feet. A variance from setting could section 7 93 1 AF 2 cage over 20 feet tall to have a 5.7, 5 foot side setback where an 8 foot setback is required. Total variance of 2.2, 5 feet and a variance from Section 7, 9, 0, 3, 1, easy to allow accessory structure to be located 2 feet in front of the required 20 foot front setback along street. The total variance of 2 feet. The board should utilize criteria. One through 5 is outlined in Sony could section for 66 speed as the bases in making the determination. Thank you. All right. Thank you. And then if I could have the petitioners address the committee. >> And if you could all please state your name and if the there's least warning, please. >> Catherine Andrews, my card Merrill has agent for the petitioners may have been sworn in. Thank you. Diane owner have been sworn Magnus. >> Yes, 20. >> I mean Thank you to >> All right. So I is the presentation. Go get So this is 4 37, 10 Title Jack and Diane are here with me. They're the property owners would like introduce themselves. do you open That I their agent of cart. and this is a combination of 5 variances, 3 of them address nonconformities and 2 of them are caused by the new proposal to lift to the house. That's how we'll proceed through this presentation today. So first, I'd like to give you an aerial view of where this property is located. As you can see, it is extremely coast close to the ocean. Approximately 0.1, 3 miles from the ocean. is an area that was really impacted by the hurricanes. And you can see there's still a lot of water, lot of flood risk. It isn't a high-risk flood area. Zoned as a E for under the FEMA maps. So like many others in this area, they did experience. It was between 4 and 9 feet of flood water. They were able to provide some pictures of the devastation that they experienced from this event in the 2020 for hurricane season. I just wanted to provide some visual aids on just how high above that flood water gate came in their property and the amount of their property that they had to take replace and so on. So as you can see there, you can even see next to the clear like organization structure. You can see the line of where sediment had kind of stuck to the wall. How high that water came up. So I do want highlight the unique characteristics of this property. It has 3 front yard setbacks because it fronts onto on street that fronts onto Highland Avenue and onto Pearson Lane poses 20 front yard setbacks on 3 sides of the property. What that looks like is this is the property. It's full lot line. And then right, there is what the actual buildable area is. So following the side yard on. Well, this is it would be, though, the West Side, but some of the top end of the picture for you and on the north south and east side, you can see the 20 foot yard setbacks. So that creates a very constrained buildable envelope from his property. They build their property accordingly to try and make use of that really constrained site. So I'd like to split up the variances today into 2 categories. So whenever you do substantial construction on the property, you have to bring all the nonconformities into compliance with the code and what that has resulted in his 3 nonconforming. These were identified by staff and requested to be variances to be brought to correct those. So we have to variances the 2 of the bottom there. The daylight playing in the pool cage height that are caused by the request to lift the property. And then we've got the 3 at the beginning. The front yard setback pool cage behind the facade and the accessory structures in the front yard that are existing nonconformities that have to be brought into compliance with with the code so that way they can be approved for their permit to lift their property. that's just explaining what I went previously, which is that those a nonconformities were identified once the variances were submitted to lift the property. So then that's how the application got all of those supplemental sub middles of them, adding on those additional variances as they were identified. So we'll start with the nonconformities first. That is the front yard setback. The pool cage behind the facade of the excess restructure in the front yard. So the front yard setback, as you can see, it 3 front yard setback, but that 20 feet on 3 sides of the property when the house was constructed, air-conditioned garage on the the single-family house. It did encroach 0.6 feet into the front yard setback on Pearson Lane. That was not intended, but it is how it just happened with that constrained envelope that our margin of error is very small. It just was an error on the part of the construction. So just for a visual, you can see where the green line intersects with the red line. That's the area that intrudes into the front yard setback says you can see it is extremely It almost is in Percy double from the site plan. And then for pool cage behind the facade. the pool cage cannot extend beyond the front facade of the primary structure on the property when this was constructed, they did get a permit was approved. But somewhere it fell between the cracks that it extending beyond that fuss. The front facade to extends about 5 feet be on the front facade. So we're requesting a variance of 5 feet to allow that footage to continue to be there. It's already been constructed. It's been there since 2020. So this is just correcting that. That error that came through with the permit. And there's the visual aid of where it actually extends beyond that facade. Then we have the excess restructure in the front yard. So under the code, you cannot have accessory structures in the front yard setback. There was the the 160 square feet that originally in the permit was intended to be right on that front yard setback, the 20 feet when it was constructed, it was erroneous. Lee placed 2 feet into the setback line. It is a permanent structure. So it can't be you reasonably without significant cost and moving it. And with that constrained buildable envelope, there's not really many places to move it to now that it's already been put down there and they've, you know, started building of the rest of the property around that. So we're requesting a variance of that 2 feeds to allowed to said the teen feet into the front yard setback. And that's the shed there. You will notice there is a smaller shed right next to it. That is a mobile shed and that has been moved to this would be the West, but it's on the top of them photo right up against where that pool cage. And so now it's completely outside of that setback requirement. So that little shed right next to it is is not an issue. That's not the subject of any of the variances today. Now move on to the variances that are caused the proposed lift of the property. This will be the day light plane. And as in the 20 pool, cage location. So we'll start with the daylight plane. Encroachment. So no single family structure is allowed to encroach into the daylight This property does with that's lifting of 12 feet. The lift height was calculated based off of the base, flood elevation and the rim quite free board, involuntary free board that they're allowed include into their calculations and then to account for, you know, the uncertainty of the hurricane events that we have had and the likelihood that they will continue to be so they added the additional one foot that is also in consideration. The fact that FEMA updates their flood maps pretty regularly. But there's not a set date on when they can expect those to happen. So the 12 feet was based off of those calculations and that way they don't have to try and raise their house a second time. They can just do this once and they can be relatively confident that they will never have to do this again. Another property and their investment will be safe. the result of this, which will show a visual of what that the light plan encroachments is, it will be a a variance of 21 square feet. One square inch sets in the application was 21.0 9 square feet. But we were able to have staff confirmed, but it's actually closer to 21 Square feet. One square inch on the technicality. So I just wanted to show what that actual encroachment looks like on that southwestern corner. So it's a little part highlighted in green that encroaches into the day like playing. And this is what it looks like in comparison to the House that would be impacted by the daily plane. So the rectangle is the area that actually encroaches into the daily plane. As you can see, it doesn't line up with the The the area of the neighboring house Visibility going either side of their property. So it's actually a very small encroachment doesn't their right to know light air. So on. And finally, we reach the pool cage height. So when the cage was originally constructed, it was regulated under a different provision of the code so that section of the eye. I 9, 0, 3, 1, B that section of the code allows pool cages that are less than 20 feet to be constructed, only 5 feet from the side yard setback from the side. Your property line. That's what they constructed based off of. So they send it back. 5.7, 5 feet. Now that the pool cage because with when you're raising elevated the property, the book age, which is a permanent structure attached to the property, has to be raised along with it. An increase in elevation. now that the are elevating and that way, the cage now is regulated under different provision of the code and that provision of the code requires that it followed the normal standard set of yeah, setback lines. That means that they are now having to follow an 8 foot side yard setback in the original application. They believed that they were being regulated under the rear yard setback. Staff is able to confirm that side yard is actually the appropriate setbacks that they should follow. So it's a difference of the rear yard being 15 feet and the side yard being 8 feet. So they're requesting a variance of 2.0, 2, 5 feet. That's a difference between the 5.7 5 and the 8 feet. So again, the pools already been constructed, but because they are having to raise it up to 20 feet. They're now regulators are different provisions of the code. So kind of puts them between a rock and a hard place with the pool. And I just wanted the additional visual of showing where that second shed has been moved to. Just as I know, looking at the site plan, you know it. It's not immediately clear because it was prepared in June. So it has now been moved as outside of the setback. It's no longer an issue. And then I just wanted to show the daylight page from the site the site plan. A rendering of what the home will look like once it is lifted up. And then these are the compliance slides. They've essentially go over what I've already said and what is in the application. But I can't go through them in more detail. If you like. So again, I just want to go over. The requested variance is so the first is the 0.6 feet for the home located within the 20 foot yard Set-back for the 20 foot front yard setback than the 5 feet for the pool. The part of the pool that's visible past the front facade of the primary home on the site and then 2002.0 feet for the shed located within the front yard setback again on Street. And then 21 Square feet. One square inch for the portion of the elevated home. That's the daylight plane. And then the 2.2, 5 feet for the pool within that 8 foot side yard setback line. And that concludes my presentation pretty well. very helpful. Yeah. All right. Well, this is our opportunity to you, folks. >> I do have a couple of if you could show that property, that's the kind of the sky view of that property and their relations. And then it could also see a huge have a rendering of that. How the front of the home, I'd like to see the what would be the west side of the home? >> I this know you had wants look like a shooting down over top property. I just want to see the location of where that fight. We showed it where that the 5 foot. For and the front of the have the 5 foot winning or to remove aerial or the site plan? Well, the site plan. Okay. Okay. But you have one where they had 2 different colored pictures about what the encroachment And I'd like to see that one for this one. That one right comes. Because that's the front of the house. And then I guess my question, I'm looking at the pool here and you're saying it's a permanent structure. But if you're raising the house, you've got. Physically take that down, remove it. What's preventing them to bring that into compliance while that construction phase is being done. >> You mean by by moving the pool entirely? >> No, not the whole the cage. We're talking about the kid the polls, not encroaching on its. The cage encroaching in that in that it's that's in question. That's one of the setback. I'm relieved that your request. >> Right. So you past the front facade? That's the 5 feet. Yeah. So the pool has already It's it's the base of the pool. That foundation. It's bolted into It he's a permanent structure in the the capacity that it's it's already built into the foundation that's been laid for that pulled >> But you're going replace the cage if you're going to extend it up to 20 feet the 15th. So it's already going to be redone. Why couldn't make comply with the? You know, the whole idea is we we need to minimize the number of impacts and changes. And I'm just what is the real reason why you can't come into compliance on that specific. >> So to require them to completely change the pool. Cage design versus just raising it up as one adds additional costs on them to redesign the pool versus just their original plan of moving it up entirely. The put it is already been constructed with those approved plan. So this is just correcting the approved plans that have already gone through the permitting versus having to go through this entirely again with a new design after the money they've already installed thus far in getting it to this point. requiring them to go and move it back again and redesigned their pool deck is just sort of a financial waste for them after they've already put so much into getting it to its current design where it was already proved for the permits of the current configuration that it's at. >> I did have another question. You didn't bring this up. But when you raise the height of the house, I saw on the drawing that that's going to take it in excess of 35 feet. And the Rs 2. It's 35 foot. The cap. >> It's just that the this not in excess of the 35 based off of how they're calculated from But the foundation recovery live nation, the recovery elevation. >> Okay. I was just referring to the drawing and it 36 Not just wondered how could be justified. It's complying with high. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. Anybody else? >> I have a question for Allison. So related to the daylight playing variance since there are 3 front yard setbacks. But remind me what can be done on the setback, which is like closest to the property line that it does not have an adjoining street. Cannot be reduced. I don't think understand the question And so there's like a code provision if there's a year that has 2 front yards setbacks than the other side, yes, about can be reduced to 0 in some cases know. So I thought we do have a code where few multiple fronts setbacks in you're in a district that requires a 30 foot front setback that you can then reduce the additional to 20. >> Okay. But there's already 20 first of 2. I think it's our city and our son, Juan, have a 30 foot front setback. O. All right. Yeah. That's just saying if maybe that could alleviate something on the day like clean topic, but it seems like. >> We're already kind of thing. The best case scenario here, I believe so. >> Our just kind of want to continue along the lines. Mister Cherry so help me out. I'm just trying to make sure the pool is not being rebuilt. It's just being elevated or are actually rebuilding a new poll? >> It they're extending it to continue its connect where it's connected on the House. They're extending it as the house moves adding basically onto it to move it up with the house. >> So the shell of the pool is going to be the existing show who is going to be Is that correct? Can with with the House, OK? So there's not a new poll game bill. No. And there's not a pool being rebuilt. No. So. The existing foundation of the pool will remain exactly the same as it is not to be rebuilt. >> The foundation, the bull is not changing. Now. >> Well, again, I think he view have a question You know this. Okay. Not sure that Robert's rules here that the Senate is first and mister. This is I sorry that you went through this experience. I'm sure horrifying to have water in your house. So I want to preface what I'm going to say with that I can't that experience. That being this property is not homes. That correct? >> I do not believe that applied for Homestead. one thing that I'm trying to wrap my head around is that based on elevation, 7, 3.8, you're going to 12. So you're kind of creating problem. >> Well, with the voluntary free where they're allowed to impose, which is that 3 feet on top of the one required foot. They're going up to 11. The 12 feet was based on the professional advice to come to basically prepare for potential changes with the month going forward. That's that's You can't say what's his team is going to do right now based on the nation's 7th report, 8. So you're creating your own problem. You're creating these variances because you're going up higher than you need to go up. From the base. Flood elevation. you know, I I'm just not in favor typically and mayhem, nonconforming structure, more nonconforming, especially. I understand the hardship understand why it needs to happen. Bigger kind of causing the problem by going up higher than you need to go up. So I'm just trying to understand the justification for that. So they experience between 4 and 9 feet of flooding, which is quite a variable amount to accommodate for that. They added on the >> Up to that, the 4 feet of the free Board which up to 11 anyway. That encourages them into the daylight plane as a basis. The additional one foot was added for the reasons that I stated before. >> You've already had the 4 on top of that one. Seven's the base. You need to go up one. See that former feet above the required one more for the free board that you already have 2 going up. I think there's some confusion here. >> Mister Tumminia will the FEMA chief human change, the elevation in 2023. It was 11. I understand. Okay. >> And while where that but they lowered it, which is they did. However, that still the code right? And why we have a free board. But even going up 2 feet above that free board. What kind of get you in? Probably a safe zone. So. You're kind of creating the problem. You're creating the additional. Variances that you need by going up higher than you need to go from the code. So that's kind of point in saying this. Whether regardless of of the justification for that, you're going you're creating the problem. You're creating the additional variances. >> Even if we were to go based off of the base, flood elevation, those 3 variances, the beginning would be required for any substantial destruction. It's not making sorry, nonconforming understand that they cannot afford a structure more nonconforming. >> By doing going up higher than you need to go. So just I just want to. It's just. You're creating the problem. Whoever's doing this bringing the loving House, which is understandable. They're going up higher than they need to go, which is therefore creating additional to variances. And I just want to make, but that the records are correct. >> They would still be encroaching into the daylight plane, even if they've stuck with the 11 feet which yeah, did you rephrase your question? If you only go up? To 8 feet, which is required, then it brings you out of the day light plane requirement that you need right now. >> But going up 8 feet would not keep them out of the risk of the flooding that they've already previously experienced. >> I'm not an architect or builder. I'm just wondering where did you raise the house? This is a big house. As it >> I don't have the engineering background to a walk you through that I know they're the base area and where it says words, the area. They're bringing all of that up. So the current ground floor >> is moved to the second floor that procedure used to do. That is more of a construction, professional opinion. What I can provide. So you guys are rebuilding the the bottom story out of CMU is it currently would? >> With see me. It's you know, law. >> It looks like there's it's almost like there's a story being inserted between. >> not sure but I do know that the lock. Construction on the plot. And yes, places where they have I would assume it and pour cement 2 banks that. That's what I was And way raise it is amazing. We the homes being done on Cain. >> just want speak into the mic a little bit more or think you yeah, they raised a couple in our area and it's amazing how it's done without any kind of but I do know that, you know, that's I can answer that much. I'm not an engineer or feel but I do see that. It's amazing how it's done. Thank you. Are you currently living in the home? Yes, yes or yes. We I kind of question. Is that your primary residence? Yes, it I go up to this and my daughter in the summer just to get out of the heat of a little bit. But yes, it is our primary residence. Did I hear that wasn't Homestead? No, not that I'm aware of. But that's not Homestead. >> And I quite as to why it's not homes that I don't know. Was I don't know what that means. Any Know your your your attorneys and tea or probably take care of that. I was going to get better for. Yeah, no. Yeah. >> It's pretty. It's it weighs heavy on the decision. F word looking to make an adjustment to us for someone this is their only home. You tend to. You tend to want to allow more allowance and more leeway for that. But if it's someone and it's there second, a 3rd home know this is our this I've been here for. >> Now 20 year, 21 years almost in this house. Allison, can you confirm the firm does not does not have the Homestead exemption tax exemption that there are? >> homestead means different things and for a lot of different contexts. I mean, they're saying on the record, it is their primary residence, which for other contacts means it said that they have not. They do not seem to have tax exemption on this property. I mean, that's why I asked the questions that is very had multiple houses. >> If this one's not homes, that if you suggest that you have multiple houses, that's kind of why I asked the questions. Now, let you yeah, I apologize. I should have clarified the tax exemption. Yeah. Well, that I mean the big deal. Yeah. I mean, you could sure is. might get bigger. I know >> might want separately. for us, but we do do it. >> Because we love it here. So. >> If I ask you to pull up Doug's DOB 201, place. We can put it up here on the camera hear. And this is what's confusing as to was stated earlier is what I my interpretation is that the top portion of this is the home as it currently exists. And the bottom would be what it would proposed completion. To me, it looks like they're keeping the main. Elevation. The main. Ground floor in place and then they're going to insert a second story or a middle part and you can see where the block was added in order for parade that additional height keeping that the ground floor at its current high. It, but it would raise living area and created additional floor. And that is not correct. Please let me now. The living floor is being made into the second floor. So basically you're at as you're inserting another story and utilizing the current ground floor as the foundation. Yes. And then that that garage space that would be created into 100 foot long shed or whatever they have and the documentation there now on the what would be the east side of that of House in the polls on the West side. I guess that's why I was wondering because that pole structure. is it physically attached to the house now? But if you're going to insert another low 7 or 8 feet, there. Why does the poke checked to go up? >> way the I understand it is the pool cage is just being extended along where it's already connected to the property and that as they move it up there, extending the pool cage with it. >> still don't understand if you if you're going to raise the house and start that up, you're going to have to physically on do the existing structure. The pool cage structure. Then you could insert the extra 8 foot and then reattach the existing. It seems to me that would be less expensive. And all I'm saying is just wanted eliminate one of the setbacks because he'd still be at 20 feet. You eliminate that variable together. And if you just backing off another 5 feet, it eliminates another second. Basically the only thing that wouldn't affect would be you have no problem at all with the exceptions except for exemption and >> well, correct me if I'm wrong. But if cage was to be pulled in the pool, cage will be directly next to the edge of the pool. There will be no walkway between the pool cage in correct. So you would you talking to you have to move the entire pool to accommodate moving that full backwards a little bit. I'm just I'm looking at a one or 2. Proposed first floor plan. Sheriff from me at one has the From and some clarification from a construction point of view. >> Cole, and if that second floor adding the floor, that wouldn't be appropriate because what's happening is they're adjusting their grade level. Because of flooding. So that they just having to use that for a garage purposes. But it's uninhabitable space. So that that is technically doesn't count as a 4 or anything. So this is still just a 2 story structure and they are adjusting that's understood. Thank you. All right. Any plane? >> It is. Are you buying a new cage? You could have a new cage made. Are you going use the existing What I think you have to be consistent drop part of it. I'm not sure what they're doing, OK? The cage Stace, but they have to put. So it's in good shape. Nothing happened to it with just we have to replace one of the screen's hurricane there. We haven't done it yet because waiting to see what we can right? >> I mean, it's been a year and a half. We can fight I'm hoping to come up with some solutions. Thank you. That Theresa Plaisance, >> Haha. >> It normally I I talk a lot know that this going to need. You know, I had some before today to look over this I see what you're dealing with. A nice. You're just trying to keep it very And so dealing with trying to preserve the shape that you have in the professional recommendation that you're given and the 2 of those resulted in these 4 variances. So I I just don't want to mow. I mean, I love my house and past 3 years. But I can't go so good. You should. And we're You're bracing something. And it seems like the other houses on that street are being built up very high. Well, we have one that. Going to be like, I don't know. Watt, you know, 4 stories or something. It's a new construction. They just tore down the old house and she sold there now under construction. You know, Have the neighbors anything to you? we talked to the neighbor next to but they they don't live. There. They're now ready get out they come one some while they live in a different state. The lady that was in on She doesn't stay there much. I used to see her lot with her big dog, but you don't see all. And the one in front on Pearson. She rents it to rental property. So I don't really have many neighbors center and see. I mean, once in the end, they used to say, but the radio So I don't think so. At this point. That's about it. My husband did walk around and try to knock on say hello. We're trying to raise their house. You're going to get paid for. We didn't see anybody. Okay. So My question. Sure. Oh, absolutely. What you were talking to a >> when asked you this question when when when modern movers, I guess was involved in this process, not sure who that is. But was there any discussion about not raising the garage and only raising the house, leaving the ground to the garage is already conforming. We have a garage and you have a story about that, which is already conforming. It's already above base flood elevation. You're well other probably didn't get flooded. I'm sure your second story to get flooded. Therefore they ever talk about only raising the portion of the house that's well below base flood elevation. I don't think they could. Not sure they can read the entire thing but they can't raise part of it. I know I'm not going to challenge him citation. >> don't But I'm not sure I They doing that right? That they have to the way the house was constructed. Just took that because I'm not. mean, I totally understand. Yeah, I'm not challenging. You know, I just want question was asked. Okay, thank you. told me. Come to the McCain to you. That type of construction. >> Being part of the set up. That particular item. should be. Raised because otherwise it's impossible to go ahead and get approval. 2 separate the way the construction was set up. And to get it to be able to. B. Actually involved in the construction. Yeah. That's why it took forever to get all kinds of variances and it was special construction because of the Eames and the way they. Came out the way they all set up with the construction. So anyway, that's the way they told me. He said he had. A client. He's been in business for many years. He. And then up where he didn't get it done. So that's why. They said they wanted to do it that way. Was he invited to this meeting? We asked them to come. They couldn't. >> I did ask could you send a representative? They said they don't normally do that. They even come now. >> How long you've been dealing with this variant? >> A year and a half since the hurricane, we decided we didn't want to do Then we saw couple houses being done and we both agree that that's what we wanted to do. So it's a year and a half, least. >> I mean, they did not apply for the variance year have to do that. Dealing with the issue for But it's forever because it just took so long. Any other questions. Mister Chair. I have none. >> All right. I think we're at a unless and a few other. I welcome. Keep going if you have additional issues that you dressed otherwise would go ahead put out. Hold on this and then we can talk amongst ourselves I want to thank you all for coming. And I agree. It's a time, too. >> I'm glad we came to this the meeting. Finally, came to us. So we're going to close this. Fernand. Thank you. Thank you for your time. We have no affected persons or so. the parking issue. I agree. >> I just don't All right. >> So I do want address, we have new members here. We have a right 5 questions in your packet and it talks about things must be achieved satisfactorily so that we can go What I'd like to do is kind of look over that way. We did give them a training well. >> makes me what. at to list, of And so that the criteria, in their question is they did provide some information. Unfortunately, it sounds like Yeah, Mister chair. Make sure you're talking to Mike. Okay. So Mister Chair doing to make a motion first before we have discussion party have discussion before you make a motion. Is there a motion that we went up with this? We we have a opportunity now because up until now, we're not allowed to talk to our guests are cells. >> Discussion and motion. Okay. So in their review our criteria here and we pull off their list. Rebuttal if you have one yet the blood up you have the one night over one of also when >> yeah. But again, 22 variances nation fall within criteria. Okay. This one questionnaire. And specifically another special conditions and circumstances that exist. On the land. Obviously, there are some pre-existing. Situations there because of setbacks for being on the road and they are on the and they are, in fact, landlocked on that 5 on 3 sides on the West side. We do have a one story structure. you know, my so certainly there are some preexisting want. Couple of the events have already been in place and existing and they're not expanding on the footprint. So that that's that kind of address pretty well. Do you feel that the special conditions described brought about by the applicant, at least on 3 of those. That is. The case. It is not. But 2, the sunset component that you brought up. And I thought that the cage. Is somewhat suspect because further down to talk about is just a minimal >> And I just want to touch on that, too, because if you look over the daylight Lane encroachments, it actually 6 foot, 9 inches into the daylight playing. So even if we were to move 4 feet from that, there still would be an encouragement. It would not be a significant by any means. So I see what you're saying about that. But it would require a redesign of that maybe, you know, not inserting that extra level, but are, you know, the construction? Constitution that they had keeping a structure intact probably was really facilitated lifting it the cell type of thing. so some like you're saying, there there could have been a lot more design to avoid some of these variances. >> Yeah. and could have been rectified by redo the cage going up. You know, it looks like get my interpretation. Is this it at making the roof line? But it doesn't it's not really necessary. The polls not really going up. It's staying the same spot. And and I didn't get a real clear shot from looking at the drawings of what the Westerns will the Western wall is is there's window or something that would impede the visibility out and see that either. That's what I was asking my my question. And didn't what I was looking for. >> I think those about question because the pool cage on this, he could be destroyed when they left the house that are going to who can pull cage, which would. In some cases you it. A conforming pool cage and at that point, but that's stats might take. Well, I guess terminology is kicking me here. I was under the impression that this structure was being redesigned. >> I was under the impression that the existing structure was being raised. Is that not the case? My understanding is they're going to utilize from looking at the drawings in the show, how they put input pillars in on what is now the foundation to home because there is a >> ground floor that is above. And then they're going to raise the what is the primary structure above the fine because the garage is kind of one of the. Foundation level. got a call that there's a floor floor above that. They're going to add locks cuts and are blocked and raise that house up to create. Additional height. And from looking at even another floor, partly our. They're going expand the head Hedren this tale. But you look at the back of the pack, if there are several different and pictures of how that would And that was one that. that one day show that down and see current and the revised. Yeah, I right. >> I honestly. I couldn't tell from that that they were raising a portion of the house. I can tell from that that they were repurposing. The garage is live in space. Just don't know. Oh, yeah, I'm I get the garage the whole entire the whole entire house is lifted. They're adding a new garage. So the entire old garage is now becoming living space. And there you go. just going to get it as part of that. how entire house lifting that was. Part of my question is that is already conforming. That's conforming the garage with a living above. Party is above base, flood elevation in habitable space and probably where they're living now. Imagine because it didn't get flooded. So could that the main and they just raise the area that is in the flood zone. But apparently that was the question and they can't do that. All has to be raised as one thing. Okay. From listening to Mister Chair. >> I'm not understanding that he is seen it that way. And I'm not trying to put words in sherry. I'm trying to clarify because I think you think that they're going to leave the garage where it is inserted floor in between the garage and put the existing house on top of that. Am I not correct? That's why I'm saying, yeah, that does not have been that way. Okay. That is not how it happened. We get clarification. I can tell you this. hear from could use but needs 200%. Sure. That's that's that's that's impossible met. I do this without a foundation. You can't live block wall. It's almost impossible what they're doing anyways. >> I it's it's it's it's happens all the time. >> If you want the applicant to speak again, using to reopen the public hearing, I don't think okay. I don't think we need applicant because they're not construction experts. They going to do it. yes. That's why that's why explain to you. The garage is going to be repurpose. So what you see at the top, all of that's going to be elevated. They're going to They're going to put that out, up and build a whole perimeter around that. >> And that on the ground floor is going to be created a new garage. All It all and have a double speak. All. Okay. >> That's the only way that can happen. Why ask that question? Because there's a double block between the garage, the new garage and existing house. So. That's what I noticed when asking if this could just be the portion that in the flood zone can just be lifted to leave the garage and existing. >> For So that's kind of what I picked up that. that's probably I'm sure that's the foundation structure, the structure perhaps a dent in there. >> Mary, and there's also the programmatic considerations I'm thinking of know, as as we're talking about it further. >> talked Mike where, you know, there's already an existing entry into that space and there's already an existing access to the upper level. >> And that might not translate as well. If that 3rd floor was to be done on the second floor. Maybe it's, you know, more private space. It doesn't want to be you know, right next to what used to be next to the garage. So I'm not really sure how that what kind of to be up as well as what side on the on the 3rd story. The hallway is where the stair lands related to that and where it will come from from the garage below. So. Yeah, I think it would take it would take a lot of consideration to kind of iron that out. >> Yes, so basically if I can paint the picture for you, the whole house as it is right now. It's just going to be left up. That's why I specifically asked the question about the pool. Because I just want to make sure that the Pu structure. Was 30 enough to be elevated with the rest of House. And I'm assuming these individuals that are doing this for them have come to the conclusion that that can be done. I'm not saying it cannot be done, but just pulls in themselves. They get cracking and then you've got a legal, whatever. So, but they're saying that the pool has lifted as well. So if that is the case, the whole foundation of this house to include the pool. All of the list with that simultaneously. As one unit to prevent cracking of the foundation. I can see that in the first. I can see whole. I don't understand that either. I don't think that's why I was asking that question. Yes, the pool was being lifted and they said that the begin with as well hers. Now. To campaign, as I just don't understand because then they'd have to backfill and they have. >> 10 foot there. Around their house that stay. >> Yes, we would. If we want to hear from African again, we have to reopen of clear if I want to kind So that's to the surface of the pool like. >> Like to me. So now I'm in line with Mister Cherry. Now, if they're going to rebuild the food at the pool, is there where it is? >> If the police state where it is, why does the pool cage have to change any? >> I think that just comes down to like if let's say that the poke just off the living room, you know, they're used to having those doors open and having that relationship with the EU. The pool they lifted up in the pool cages. One story lower. Then you're seeing just the top of the pool cage at your living room instead of feeling like you're part of that, experience. >> So the tip of that, but this is that apportion of the pool cage is being affected. You can design Cajun such a way that it hasn't slowed down to come back down to the existing so that it would be cut out of the portion that's obstructing the day like playing. >> Right? Yeah, I think you know what design you can definitely make any. Yeah. So there's there's cost of design. coast. >> And if if you would just quickly review a 2, 0, 4, that's the one that indicates the what I'm calling the western side of the home where the currently located. And you can see the difference between the top current and and the proposed. In that showing, you know, the much taller structure in order to keep. I guess visual line across there. Behind the House. I'm thinking that's >> for me. I'm OK with everything here except the pool cage at this point. That's that's where Mitt the been. The reason I have a problem that is because I I bake a redesigned case to get out likely just to double case is not part of the day. Yeah. The deely plant is just the primary structure, not the pool cage, the pool cage. >> in going in for the front facade in the heights because it it has a different set back over 20 feet high. So that's what they're asking for. The poor cage. So but something that's a little about that is theirs. 3 front facades on this house, right? That is correct. Okay. So really like and there's unique situation because they have. >> 3 front yard setbacks. The pool cage can't pass on any side >> no, it it's you almost Western side. It you do it. If it's less than if it's 20 feet or less. The 5 foot, what it currently is. Okay. There's 2 separate to go higher. That a 5 foot goes to a foot and then that knocks a man out. >> Oh, sorry. Yeah. of the other. The other variants, which is where you can have the accessory structure coming and like 5 foot out. And I'm assuming I had the overhead picture. Look at where the polls actually right on this edge year. >> On the what would be the north side. This is kind of like the front elevation. >> Normally right where you have the front door and the walkway this is the front. Well, there are a couple. There are 3 >> Yeah, like this like they have to get a variance for this part because it's coming past this wall right here. >> Even though like this is like kind of these to feel like the front yard. Yeah. This technically a front yard. So they have to get a variance past their front elevation on the side, $0.70. I know. But that's not that's not a feature of their billing. That's a kind of that's been built done. It was this was a mistake was made when building are talking about. You're talking about the high in the setbacks. The other variants. >> Well, the hype was not for the set of height was the setback here? Okay. On the West side. And it's only because with from 20 feet to 30 feet on the made that. Out of that. Oh, right, right, right. If it's a 20 feet, it's only 5 foot sufficient. And that's an 8 foot. Yeah, there are maybe a little more but so a fetus, even like the minimum side yard setback in this district. That's the thing is for full House. >> Yeah, that's fun. That but that complies the way it is now on the. West side at the current height. If you again referring to that 0.2, 0, 4, You can see the it. It's good remains pains. Consistency with the height of the house. And that's, you know, maybe architecturally this pleasing. But it's not necessary. don't know that it's necessary or required. >> But you could say that other people in the the ability to have like, you know, poke right outside of their mean primary living space. And then in this situation, they can't do it because of where it was previously. Permanent. That again, I I yeah, if you if you are looking out the windows here, you'd be looking at the top of the cage. >> You would be looking into the cage if you took the short cage and put it on this structure, you be looking. looking into the top. >> I'm not saying it drawing a red shows me that I'm guy. That's why I'm asking you Okay. So see what they're saying. That would be visually very unappealing and they would probably have a hard times reselling that Yeah, resell is important but again, you know, in an effort to satisfy the 5 criteria and is this is the minimal >> And then we have to make our best. Judgment on that. So saying as we go through this and discuss keep in mind that we we have a criteria that we have to try and yeah and here to break. Okay. I do feel though. Like is it even though, you know? Being in we see a lot of design solutions to things, but they it was coming the >> There is the criteria about, you know, hardship on the applicant based on the pre existing conditions. And so, you know, that's I feel like a lot of the redesigned solutions we're thinking of even though there's an infinite amount better. they don't want remediate the hardship on the applicant. They might even add more hardship on the applicant and in kind of make a greater investment to resolve them. So it was something where, you know, it would reduce their hardship. that would seem a lot easier to come out. Bush. >> I'm just looking for balance because not only trying to address it. There. Rights and responsibilities, but we need to maintain the rights and responsibilities of their neighbors as well. And all not seeing a petitioner here. Says something. One signed up and their sign was prominently displayed out front as it should have been. Okay. Anything any other? You know, we never get in this easy. >> Yeah, >> usually there's you know, bunch of upset people, as you know, kind of the audience letting, you know, their side of the story. But this neighborhood seems to be hard even see that that read. Yes. >> the rest gentleman like to share as well I think that basically the footprint does not change. I don't I don't have a a problem with but I think that it's when I look at the guess Mister raise raise a point that, you know, they they're sort of kind of causing the daylight playing issue. Part one of right. One of right potentially by going next year high. But I don't know. I mean, out there on the island, you just don't know what the right height for the You know, FEMA has all of it in its infinite wisdom. Who knows what the water's going to You know, so if these people raise their home up. And I'm I'm impressed that they live in. I think that makes that weighs heavy for me. The fact that they live in the home, it's just house that's occupied human side of the year. They live there. hope that they could continue to live in their home. >> Yeah, that weighs heavy on me know a part of that criteria that needs, I could probably find it here. I think that could there be a different design solution? Absolutely. That might solve some of these issues without making them more nonconforming. However, Mister Mister Point. They are keeping the same footprint. It is causing some. Some issues with the daylight plane. But the fact that they didn't even know Homestead was which I suggest you do that immediately. That's a lot of money tells me that this is there. Primary residence. They've been here for 20 years. This is just a way to save their house. Probably the least expensive option and still make it safe and habitable. So it kind of I think that meets. If not all the criteria, at least some of these criteria, which is the point. Understand that been going through this for a long time and you know all adaptive reuse of buildings. I'm like I said, that's good. That's been done a little bit different. And maybe in the next meeting it would be nice to hear from the person that's actually doing the work. It's typically Jermaine that they have the architects. >> To address these issues and questions. And unfortunately they I think he was on that's written in here. Those are going to be here just to MS. They were, I think you get to challenge it a little bit more. You can challenge the homeowner. Unfortunately, they don't have the knowledge or the design. >> They heard there was going to be doing, many on the >> say, I'm going said that looks like we're going in circles here >> Let's go ahead and we go ahead and get a motion. And second, we can do think of that. >> And I do a motion to approve variance. And if you have the number probably say it. 26 p a R o 4 variance. 26 V a R o 4. All right. So let's take the place. All right. Mister Salem, yes, Mister. Many yes, MS Cooper. Yes, Miss Dennis. Yes, Mister Cherry. Yes. Motion passes 5, 0, I wish you peace of mind. Well, it's just it's just beginning. >> Yeah, yes, I What's your level of confidence in the contractor you've fine. >> Holmes, great with this OK? And I might is I don't any other except this one doing it on your Year. It's not new. big. And business or how many, 20? I mean, it's not a new coke. A hoping Yeah, so. We only have to be at a house in the 7 to 10 days when we come back and I don't understand. Other place Bradenton just Good Yes. Good luck >> All right. Mister Chair on presentation topics by board members us. topics, issues want to bring up before then? >> I would like to hear about our new board members. I was going to get to that next under presentation of topics by city. But I would then I would should have to fix I'm actually do have an. >> The question about today's this is city have any liability if. this didn't work as far as the lifting of this house. >> And the Haha not by approving that system. There's no liability, licensed professionals. >> There's no liability the city permitting or not for many things messing up on permitting or inspections. Yeah. Okay. Lets there's Florida based you from a permitting standpoint, it's like they don't you have liability for their own inspections. right. was all I selling real estate. Yes. >> prove that. Obviously that question self-serving. So yeah. now we can be able to be the city. Yes, presentation of topics. I did want party that Mister, many of Mister Salem are 2 new board members. So thing. >> They're both familiar with the process. They're both former planning board members. So new to be away, but not new to serving on city boards. But welcome. Absolutely welcome. Thank you so Back of the Haha, what it is. >> It's good to people with diverse talents and knowledge and background. Then we can always use >> In that we are looking for chair. 3rd, a vice chair. >> That Haha. Tasha keeps cutting in front of me We do need to elect a vice chair because or vice chair left to the planning board. So out there that over to all to elect a new vice like Natasha. a second motion has been and seconded. to it. think do they have to do again? You're the chair of the chairs on Okay. I the list if you on it. >> Within a backup, I can handle it. Okay. Great >> So I will do like a boy. So did a real good with trashes moisture all in favor. Aye. Aye. Perfect. And then lastly, we do not have August meeting. Sorry. Long straights in a row. You can come visit if you're on hunt. But that's it for me. John, I do not have anything. All right. >> can just go ahead and adjourn. I know. I will. Thank you very much. Thank everybody for your input. Thank you, Thank