Good morning, everyone.

Welcome to the to this morning's land use hearing officer hearing.

My name is Steve Lewis, and I'll be this morning's land use hearing officer.

Before we get started, if we could all stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Thank you all.

Thank you for that.

At this point in time, I'd like to introduce Colleen Marshall from Development Services staff, who will introduce other members here at the Dais and go over any changes to this morning's agenda.

Good morning.

Good morning, Colleen Marshall Development Services.

To my left is Mary Dorman and Jared Delphina, the Hillsborough County County Attorney's Office.

Carmen Mason, a development services staff is joining us virtually.

During the course of the hearing, a number of other planners will be presenting their findings for various cases and introduce breach item.

We have no changes to the published agenda.

Very good.

Just take a few minutes.

The order of presentation for the variances is development services presents the staff report and findings.

They have five minutes for that purpose.

And the applicant presents their case and they have 15 minutes for that purpose.

Then anyone in the audience who wishes to speak in support speaks next.

Anyone in the audience who wishes to speak in opposition, then follows.

Then development services as an opportunity to provide any additional information.

Then finally, the applicant has an opportunity for rebuttal.

There's one special use on this morning's agenda, and I'll go over that procedure when we get to that item.

Regarding the time for proponents and opponents, 15-minute time frame.

If the total time is the total time for each category, if there are a number of people to speak, we will add up the total number of people, and the 15 minutes will divide it as equally as possible.

You may wish to designate a single person to more efficiently use the time.

When you come to the podium to speak, please start by giving your name and address for the record.

There's a sign in sheet at the end of the day, and if the clerk can raise your hand.

Right over in that area.

The meeting is being recorded, and we want to make sure we accurately document who is speaking on the record.

When you're done speaking, please sign in with the clerk's office with your name, address, and application number of the agenda item that you're speaking to.

At this point in time, the county attorney's office will now provide the legal requirements for appealing a decision made by the land use hearing officer.

Good morning, Jared Delfino, Assistant County Attorney.

This land use hearing officer public hearing is for variance and special use requests.

This is the time for interested parties to present evidence and testimony.

Once the land use hearing officer has closed a case, the record of that case is also closed, and no new evidence regarding that case may be submitted thereafter.

Any decision by the land use hearing officer may be appealed to the land use appeals board.

Should a decision of the land use hearing officer be appealed, the record evidence, including the testimony presented at this public hearing, shall be the only evidence that is subject to review by the land use appeals board.

In reaching a final decision on petitions, the land use appeals board will only consider the decision of the land use hearing officer and the record evidence, including evidence any evidence from this public hearing.

If an appeal is filed, the land use appeals board hearing shall consist of oral argument by the party appealing the decision, county staff, and any interveners, each of whom may be represented by legal counsel.

The following shall have standing to appeal a decision of the land use hearing officer or to intervene in an appeal.

One, the applicant, or two, anyone who appeared before the land use hearing officer, presented testimony or other evidence, and is adversely affected by the decision of the land use hearing officer.

It is the role of the county attorney's office to ensure that no new evidence or testimony is allowed before the land use appeals board that was not presented to the land use hearing officer at today's hearing.

The county attorney will recommend that the land use appeals board disregard evidence or testimony that is outside the record made at today's public hearing.

Any evidence presented to the land use appeals board that is outside the record created at today's hearing could jeopardize the legality of the land use appeals board decision, and the presenter of that evidence could hurt their own cause.

The safest course of action then is for you to write down any comments you make today and repeat them to the land use appeals board.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All testimony must be provided under oath.

Therefore, if you plan to speak, please stand and raise your right hand so I may swear you in.

Okay.

Thank you.

You may be seated.

All right, this point in time.

Ms.

Marshall ready for the first item.

Today's agenda we have no vested rates, fee waivers, remands, reconsideration requests, or site development variance requests, which brings us to Section G sign variance request.

Item G1, variance 260531.

The applicant is Laurie Smith, Florida certified sign directors.

The request is a variance to sign requirements.

Staff findings will be presented by Sam Paul.

Okay.

Good morning.

Development services.

The applicant is requesting a sign setback variance to install a pole sign on an ASC1 property located at 16235 Lake Magdalene Boulevard.

LDC Section 7030 C1B requires poll signs to have a 10-foot minimum front setback.

The applicant is requesting a five-foot reduction of this requirement to allow a 14-foot 10 and a half inch sign uh tall pole sign to have a five-foot front setback from Lake Magdalene uh right-of-way.

I'd like to add that the uh residential support use requirements of part 7 um LDC 7030 C3B do not apply because the property is agriculturally zoned.

Um that concludes my report if you have any questions.

In the backup, I was looking for a survey to find out where the right-of-way line, I didn't see a survey.

Um, do you know where that right-of-way line is?

It they marked it um it's basically at the edge of the parking lot.

Um how do you know that?

On their on their site plan, they it was an aerial site plan.

There's a line that they depicted there as the as the setback.

I mean, typically it's the uh back edge of the sidewalk.

Typically it is, you know, um that or sometimes they allow another foot or two to from sidewalk maintenance.

True.

But in this, but that's not sometimes there's exceptions to that.

Um I'm not sure what the exception would be, but I looked at it in GIS and RGIS records were pr it showed pretty much the same location.

Um the the site uh uh the sign code requires a site plan, it doesn't specifically require a survey.

Right.

So as long as it's something that looks in you know that we feel is accurate, then we can approve this the site plan.

Okay.

Well, in this particular case, it's an issue of do they have enough room to put the sign that they're requesting, you know, 10 feet back from the edge of right-of-way, and there's an island in the parking lot where the existing sign is located.

That is correct.

Right, and in my opinion, looking at uh the length of that island, there's ample to place the sign at 10 feet back.

That's why it's a critically important point to know where the right-of-way line is.

Okay.

Um I discussed the location of the sign with the applicant several times before this application came through and explained that the sign basically could not extend past the island, so I don't know how wide the sign would how the how they made the basically geometry work, right?

Where the the sign would not extend past the island into the drive aisles.

Well, it uh to that point uh the drive aisles are 24, 25, 26 feet wide.

Correct.

They're extraordinarily wide.

So it is room to expand and extend the island.

And you go back and look at historical aerials, they used to be landscape islands throughout their parking lot, and over the years they've removed all their landscape islands and their parking lot.

So their ability on this behalf of this property owner to add islands and put the sign back 10 feet.

So that's why I come back to the same question about where that right-of-way line is.

I don't think they even need to expand the island.

I think there's room on the island, but that's my question.

If you have any additional information, maybe you come back on rebuttal and I'll I'll turn to the applicant in this point now.

The only thing um I would add is that a lot I'll tell people a lot of times to keep the signs two feet away from the drive aisle in case there's you know to allow for cars to move without possibly hitting the sign.

Right.

Which and then if a parking lot is general parking space is generally 19 to 20 feet deep and the islands are roughly the same.

So if a 10-foot setback, excuse me, that if everything lined up, that would allow basically if you take 10 off the eight or nine feet plus another two feet, that would allow a limited window for the sign.

I explained that to the applicant.

All right, the the island's about 16, 18 feet.

And if there's five feet between the back of a maybe the curb to strike that.

If they're saying the back of the parking space is the edge of right-of-way, so they have 18 feet.

So their sign is roughly seven feet.

So that leaves them 11 feet to play with, and that's enough.

Okay.

Well, um I don't understand the hardship.

That's that's where I'm getting at.

Okay.

And I you know, I explained the design parameters to them, and they came through, they came and submitted the variance application.

All right.

Let's let's hear from the applicant.

Okay.

Okay.

Applicant, please.

Laurie, go ahead and unmute yourself.

Thank you.

Sorry.

Can you hear me now?

Yes.

Good morning.

Okay.

Hi, good morning.

My name's Lori.

Uh this particular ma'am.

Can you state your full name for the record?

Lori Smith.

And your address.

4835 Laurel Oak Drive, Pace, Florida.

Thank you.

Is that it?

Okay.

This particular parking lot, the parking spaces are only 14 feet.

Um so the island that this sign sits on is only 14 feet from what we discerned off of the property appraiser website as to where the property line currently is.

And the existing sign that that is there now that we will be replacing that property line looks like it goes halfway across the sign that's currently there.

I don't know if it's due to um history or the old, I don't even know how old the original sign is.

Ma'am, do you do you have a survey?

I I don't have a survey.

I pulled my information off the property appraiser website.

Okay.

Did you measure the the length of the parking spaces?

Yes, we did.

We sent um our employees out there to to perform a serve a survey of the area, and they measured the parking spaces.

They took the imagery from the um property appraiser website and measured from there to get um and but the sign itself is seven foot four inches wide.

So we have it backed up.

Um I'm showing it backed up to the edge of the um to the to the edge of the island within maybe a foot, and then that would allow us a five foot setback to the edge of the parking lot, which the property appraiser website shows as the property line.

That's where the five foot comes in.

That's five foot from the edge of the parking lot to the leading edge of the sign would be five feet, and then seven foot four inches is the width of the sign, and then that allows for just a little space at the end of the island before the before the flow of traffic would begin.

Okay, anything else.

Um not at this time.

Do you have any further questions?

No, I just wanted to know if you had a survey.

Oh, not a civil survey, no, we do not.

Okay.

All right, thank you, ma'am.

Thank you.

This point in time, is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application?

I see no one responding.

Anyone in the audience wishes to speak in opposition to the application?

See no one responding.

Development services, anything further?

Nothing further.

Okay.

The applicant, an opportunity for rebuttal.

Um not at this time.

I'm not sure what more I could add.

Okay, thank you, ma'am.

With that that concludes this application, Ms.

Marshall, ready for the next item.

This brings us to section H variance requests item H1, variance 25 1340.

The applicant is the re so Lopez.

The request is a variance to accessory structure requirements.

Staff findings will be presented by Jared Fallon virtually.

Okay.

Yes.

Uh good morning.

This is uh Jared Fawn with Hillsborough County Development Services.

Uh, this is a request uh for a variance to accessory structure standards to allow an existing such accessory structure to occupy more than 20% of the required ear yard.

Plan development code allows accessory structures to occupy up to 20 percent.

Granted that the rear yard is not closer than three feet.

Uh in this case, the variance is for 13 percent, uh resulting in 33 percent of the required ear yard being occupied.

Um happy to answer any questions.

Uh how do you how do you calculate the size of the rear yard to figure out how much space they're occupying for their accessory structure?

Uh so the rear yard is the area between the property line and the required rear yard setback.

In this case, I believe it's 25 feet.

So that area of 25 feet.

Okay.

Did you calculate what that backyard square footage is?

Okay.

Um so that's basically it.

Okay.

All right, to be clear, the accessory structure is understanding it's 618 square feet.

Is that your understanding?

Yeah, looking here.

Um yes, that's correct.

Okay.

And do you know if that structure has electricity?

So it is labeled as an office.

And so I assume that it does, but I I am not 100% sure on that.

Do you know if it has public water and sewer?

That's my knowledge.

Okay.

All right.

No further questions.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any applicant, please.

Mr.

Chair, uh Ms.

Lopez has not joined the uh meeting virtually.

I don't know if she's in the room.

Ums Marshall.

She signed up virtually.

And I there was an email that was just sent to communications 10 minutes ago that she didn't receive the link.

She was gonna be contacting them to try to get on.

Okay.

Well, um why don't we hold this item open and in abeyance?

We'll come back to it at the end of this morning's agenda.

Okay.

All right, hopefully, she'll join us by that point in time.

Okay.

All right, set that one aside for now.

And we'll move on to the next item on this morning's agenda.

Next item is item H2, variance 26027.

The applicant is Matthew Remsen.

The request is a variance to lat development standards.

Staff findings will be presented by Sam Ball.

Uh good morning, uh same ball at development services.

Uh this application um was continued during the February 9th Luho hearing to allow the application to or excuse me, to allow the applicant to correct the application for the setback.

Um this applicant is requesting a variance to lock development standards to allow a staircase to remain within the required southwestern side yard setback on an AR zone property located at 9809 Harold Bedford Road.

Uh the minimum side yard setback for AR zoning is 25 feet.

Uh section 60103 I2 allows for stairs to encroach up to three feet into a side yard.

Uh the applicant is requesting a six-foot increase to this uh three-foot allowable encroachment, uh, which would uh result in the staircase having a six foot uh setback from the southwestern uh property boundary.

Uh the subject property has an atypical figuration of access from John Robins Road uh public right-of-way uh through multiple easements, uh and based on the shape of the lot and the means of access, the front property is oriented towards the southeast, the sides are towards the southwest and northeast, and the rear um is oriented towards the northwest.

Uh development service staff issued a termination of nonconformity review for the property under application DNC 250998, which resulted in the approval of a legal non-conforming lot and approval of the residential structure in the attached deck.

However, the location of the staircase that's the subject of the variance was specifically excluded from the approval of the non-conforming structure.

Uh, this concludes my presentation.

I'm available for any questions.

All right, we we did hear this one uh previously, right?

And remember the that is correct, and then the distance was 10 feet on the application information last time.

This time I see it's six feet.

Correct.

And I and I explained previously prior to the previous application that it didn't look like 10 feet.

Right.

And anyway, throughout the hearing, we decided that he decided it was a safe move to continue.

Yeah.

Good.

Got it.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

Any applicant, please.

Morning.

Welcome back.

Thank you.

Okay.

Good morning, everybody.

My name is Matthew Remsen.

I'm the owner of the property 9809, Harold Bedford Road, Riverview, Florida, 33578.

And I'm requesting a variance to allow an existing staircase to project 90 feet into the required side yard where three feet is currently permitted.

This results in the staircase being located six feet from the side property line.

The home was constructed in 1988 and is elevated 16 feet above grade since its original construction.

The porch and staircase have remained in the same location and configuration over the years.

Only routine maintenance has been performed, such as replacing deteriorated wood for safety purposes.

No expansion or relocation of the structure has occurred due to the height of the home.

The staircase is an essential component for safe access.

Relocating the stairs to comply strictly with the setback would either eliminate the primary entrance or place it in a location that is unsafe or impractical, particularly for family members with medical limitations.

Granting the variants will not adversely impact neighbor neighboring properties.

The home is located in a secluded area with no nearby residences within approximately a thousand feet.

The variance represents the minimum relief necessary to maintain safe access without expanding or intensifying use of the property.

And finally, this is not a self-created hardship.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, sir.

I appreciate you going back and uh measuring the distance from the stairway to the property line.

Oh well, thank you for allowing me to do that.

Sure.

All the paperwork again, so thank you.

Yeah, you got it.

Thank you, sir.

No no questions.

Thank you.

This point in time.

Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application?

See no one responding.

Anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application?

See no one responding.

Development services, anything further?

Nothing further.

Thank you.

And sir, any final comments, rebuttal?

No need for rebuttal.

That that concludes this application.

Ms.

Marshall, ready for the next item.

Next item is item H3, variance 260381.

The applicant is Bernadette Rogers revocable trust.

The request is a variance to let development standards.

The applicant's requesting a five-foot variance to the required 25-foot front yard setback in the RDC 6 zoning district to allow a 20-foot front yard setback for a new home on the subject property.

Happy to answer any questions.

No questions.

Thank you.

Applicant, please.

I'm Bernadette Rogers, and the address uh is uh five three one seven orange avenue.

Ma'am could feature name again.

I'm sorry, I couldn't hear it.

Bernadette Rogers and ma'am, are you the property owner?

I am the owner.

All right, thank you.

Okay.

All right.

So I just wanted to understand the fact that I'm still within my property according to my survey that was done.

The front driveway.

And I really didn't understand why we even needed a variance hearing.

Simply because we weren't uh we were told that we were encroaching uh not that we had gone outside of the property line, as well as the survey, we're still on our property that I own.

So I didn't even understand what the need uh for the variance hearing was, but then they said that uh I had uh needed the variance hearing uh because of the setback.

Well again the setback that we have is 20 feet based upon the land development codes for an individual unit, and they then said, well, the area uh is zoned for duplexes, and I'm like, okay, so I see houses and I see duplexes, so uh kind of became like a little debate, and uh it just all kind of like went crazy, everybody went crazy other than myself.

Uh they tried to accuse me of having the wrong type of permit when the uh land development code and the building codes uh said that I could have a owner's permit, but the owner permits only allow certain things, not uh a foundation or anything like that.

So when I hired this uh contractor, he was supposed to be uh green side up contracting and service uh servicing LLC, that's the name of their company.

Uh he was supposed to uh do his part of you know registering with the county and so forth and uh after their saying that you know they didn't have a uh permit uh of some sort, so then I went to check it out because again he confirmed because he said that he worked for the Department of Transportation, so I'm you know I'm just like okay, so anyway, um still on my property based on my survey and everything that's being done uh behind the property line and where the uh county is claiming that we're encroaching, we are encroaching, but we're not actually on the uh the county side of the uh property line.

So I I didn't I'm not I don't know I don't I just think that if there's um someone made a mistake uh at the building department because the uh individual that designed the house and all of that, you know, they have to get uh cr clear of what this fact would be when it is a one unit, the individual unit and one unit.

Uh and and according to what I understand that is correct, it would be the the 20 feet setback.

Um but we're here today about the uh 25 foot setback for a duplex.

So I guess there's some ambiguous or ambiguity with the way all of that stuff is written.

Because a duplex is not a single family home.

It's two units.

Or that's why I call duplex.

Do plex means two and uh individual house is one unit.

So um and uh then let me go on further to talk about the septic.

So we've we've uh gotten the type of septic that is that can be uh utilized in that space because it was a septic tank there previously uh because there was a house there previously and uh but the the health department wants us to buy something expensive according to what they want uh and you can't tell me what to spend my money on uh and then uh you falsify documentation to deny me the permit before I could provide you the documentation for the permit um so we're we're wanting to go with um uh uh uh uh the same it's the same type of system it's just a slower in processing than the one that the state uh the health department not the state but the health department is saying um uh which is more expensive than the one that operates the same but at a slower speed and I provided uh that documentation uh for you to uh get the uh clarity on that but now this is going to be the end of my testimony about this stuff because I'm not dead I'm just needing to speak my mind and my piece uh these um contractors uh there is something wrong somewhere when you hire a contractor he gives a contract to uh do the work to and so forth and he's paid to do that in the stages or the steps as they say uh uh and then he doesn't uh provide the materials and the uh he gets he gets um what you would say uh I don't say discombobulated or he gets offended and then instead of the uh employees or the staff or the administration or whatever you want to call them uh instead of them letting me uh get someone to continue on with the construction uh became a problem and now there is damage to my property my foundation uh has now has a crack in it and um there are other things uh like just when they came to put their sign out there they discarded their materials and on my property and then they said they took it but they did not uh because we uh saw the the boxes that they discarded right grandma you've kind of gotten a little a field of uh tangent with other issues but I think I understand the request and uh okay well I just want you to know that me being uh ADA citizen I'm disabled and crippled I should not have been uh treated that way uh for someone else's mistakes but also now I have property damage to my trusses and the foundation because it took just entirely too long to get to this hearing over uh address which uh for your information uh all most of those are I would say a handful of the uh APOL uh GIS listing uh their uh letters have been being returned as uh dead boxes that's what they're saying because they keep sending it back and forth to them and they just wrote on the envelopes dead boxes.

Uh all most of those are I would say a handful of the uh APOL uh GIS listing.

Uh their uh letters have been being returned as uh dead boxes.

That's what they're saying, because they keep sending it back and forth to them, and they just wrote on the envelopes dead boxes.

So um, but they did uh we could have had this hearing in February, and they did all of that to uh because of a uh um I think it was a name that was missed bail or something like that when they did the certificate of mailing, so the process had to be done all over uh where we didn't even get to do March.

Uh they skipped over March and just went into April.

Um, and just this is like and see I'm I'm in this I'm at a uh one of these Airbnbs, and uh it's not ADA compliant, and so um I'm I'm someone that know how to um improvise and so that's what I've been doing uh improvising and paying um uh storage fees and rental fees for things that I didn't even need to because when I asked for them to continue with the building of the house, uh they could have allowed that to prevent the damage to the trusses, so those have to be replaced now, and the foundation have to be repaired because of the crack in it, and uh you know it it it it this was really like uh unnecessary.

I don't think that this should be ma'am.

I understand the request.

I think we're good.

Your your position is clear.

If I could, let's move on.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, ma'am.

This point in time, is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application?

No one responding.

Anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application?

See no one responding.

Staff anything further?

Nothing further, thank you.

All right.

Uh County Attorney's Office, anything further?

There are a lot of other comments made about other issues outside the realm of the variance application.

Um, I don't think that the county attorney's office has any comments at this time.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

And ma'am, an opportunity for rebuttal.

Um I'm just you know uh glad that we're at the end of this uh aspect now.

I I just need the um whatever is due me for all of this trouble for something uh very simple that could have been resolved instead of going through all of this process and the delay uh which you know we have 120 days and I'm outside of that, and it's it has caused me significant harm hardship and harm physically.

Um thank you.

All right, hearing me out.

You're welcome.

Have a good day.

Likewise, ma'am, have a good day.

All right, with that that concludes this application.

Miss Marshall are ready for the next item.

Next item is item H4, variance 260421.

The applicant is Yamera and well.

The request is a variance to light development st standards.

Staff findings will be presented by Sierra James.

Good morning, Sierra James of Development Services.

The applicant is seeking a variance to the rear yard setbacks to accommodate an addition to the home and side yard setbacks to address the original non-conforming footprint of the home, and the RSC6 zoning district, the required rear yard is 25 feet, and the required side yard is 7.5 feet.

They are seeking a variance of 25 feet, resulting in a zero-foot rear yard setback, and a variance of 0.2 feet, resulting in a 7.3 foot side yard setback.

The property is currently under co-compliance violation for the unpermitted addition to the home.

Those improvements also extend into the county right-of-way, and they do have a permit open to bring the right-of-way into compliance.

It is to staff's understanding that they will remove the infrastructure in the right-of-way rather than vacate.

I'm available for any questions.

Based on your review of the application, you say there's the variance to the rear yard set back is to one recognize some existing structures.

Yes, and one and two is to allow for additional expansion of additional structures.

So the variance to the side yard is for the original structure that was non-conforming, and then the variance to the rear yard is for in an unpermitted addition that has already been made.

Already.

However, yes, sir.

However, the extension does extend into the county right of way, but they have stated that they will be removing what is in the county right of way, but would like the zero foot yard set back for their property.

Okay, understood.

Yes, come.

All right, thank you, ma'am.

All right, at this point in time, um the applicant.

Good morning.

My name is Ned Rollins.

My property address is 7910 North sign Beans in the street, Tampa, Florida 33614.

I got my neighbor is who got a translator for me for my English nobody good.

Okay, that's fine.

Excuse me, sir.

Was that your full name?

He's not at Rollins.

Thank you.

Sorry.

My name is Marilyn Mandina, and I'm his neighbor.

Um, so he's basically here to ask for a zero setback because of the Marilyn, just I know you're in the neighborhood but just what's the address.

Oh, my address is 7908 North St.

Vincent Street.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um so he's asking for a zero setback in order not to have to cut the like little construction that he created, which was is a storage shed um or storage room.

So basically that's what he's asking for.

It's like literally, I think a foot he measured, a foot into the county um property back there, I guess.

So is there um I don't think it's a foot.

It looks a lot deeper than that.

So hopefully he has a survey and he knows exactly where the property line is and how far into that right away he encroaches.

Okay, so he does have a survey, it's from when he bought that house.

Um when he bought the house, apparently he was informed that back piece.

I don't know, I think it's five feet, he said, um, was part of the property, but then apparently the county or the city came out and said no it was not, so he did push the fence back to where the survey says is his 25 feet.

Yeah, um the his property line is except for that one little piece where he's asking for the zero set.

I I just gotta I can't iterate reiterate this enough.

It's more than one foot.

So I don't want their him to walk away from this hearing thinking it's one foot.

It is not, it is a lot deeper than one foot.

That little piece?

I don't know what piece you're talking about, but sale aquí.

Okay, that's a lot uh you may easily look at the he says that since he moved the fence back to where it's supposed to be, it's he says it's one foot.

Right.

Um that it sticks out for the feet.

That he would have to, because now the fence runs like this, and then it sticks out a little bit that way.

So he would have to tear all that off to push the fence back one foot.

Ah, all right.

Besides um, I would recommend after this hearing that he talks to somebody from development services, right?

Um if you could give him a business card so he can call you so you can work with you and you can explain to him where his property line is, where his encroachments are.

And I'm certain he's got uh he's got a code enforcement violation.

Yes.

So hopefully he's got the name and the number of the code enforcement officer as well, so we can discuss where his property line is and what his encroachments are with the enforcement officer as well.

So make sure that he goes through all this effort that he doesn't um do it wrong.

Let's do it right the first time.

Okay.

I think he did speak with um for it.

The prop one of the properties.

And they they're the ones that told him to in this hearing to say that he was asking for a zero setback.

That's all I know.

I don't know anything else about it.

That is clear.

That's fine.

Okay.

I'm sorry, the court enforcement code on the bundle of the city.

Yeah, the code movie.

Enforcement officer showed it said he marked to me that the Senate the back to the property, 25 feet.

He said that right there.

I move it my fan, right?

Uh and 25 feet.

He said that recently, I move it for the new code close to my my shed or my.

If he's speaking, he needs to get on the microphone.

I don't know if the clerk is picking this up.

I'm sorry.

Yeah.

No, no, my English no.

You do stay here.

Okay, I try my English, okay.

Okay.

They called enforcement.

He called me.

I got him go to my house.

I got a marked 25 feet.

The most appropriate property line.

The property line, I move my phone ready to the property line, supposed to be for the subway.

This is the reason is they here today for COSUD BAT okay to close one fee separate for the my contraction.

Yeah, you know.

But I understand a long time he got it bigger when you buy the house.

He told me, I explained to me what is the problem.

I got to move it ready.

But I don't know.

So you do inside the property line inside the my house, you need how much you separate.

And so the reason bot.

So he tried to.

So the court of enforcement officer told him uh the agent that's a number, everything here.

Yeah, he's the one that said say this when we come to the market to me in the line and say you move your fan here to here 25 feet.

I moved my fan ready, I caught it in my back, I move it now.

This is the reason.

Um it's too close.

All right.

When you when you bought the property, uh did you add any further additions to the home that went further into that or the rear yard?

No, I mean basically just mango trees, but no, as far as adding actual structure, no.

Okay, when did he buy the property?

2017, April of 2017.

And he has did not since 2017, he's not added any additional buildings to the property.

No.

Okay.

Not past his property line, no.

There was a shed there that when he bought the property, it was already there, so he left it, but then somebody reported it that it was in county property, so then he had to he removed that shed.

All right, so the the existing house.

It was like that in 2017, and he's not added on to it.

Well, no, he did, he has added on, but he's within his within his property line, not past that.

Okay, did he encroach into he's supposed to have the house 25 feet back from the property line?

So the addition that he added, was it into the 25 foot setback?

Yes.

Yes, that that little piece, yes.

Okay.

Okay, how how big was this addition?

Length and width, if he knows.

11 by 12.

Okay.

All right.

Okay, that helps me.

Thank you.

Okay.

Anything else?

Uh no, and he just he won he did want to um just say that he feels um that he hasn't had any problems with the neighbor until the neighbor he had a party and someone parked in front of his house, and the neighbor got a little upset, and that's how all this began.

Because this has been like this since 2019.

And all of a sudden it's been become a problem.

Just because someone parked in front of his house on the street, not on the person's, and that's they have filed the complaint, which is made this a problem seven years later.

All right.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Is he going to get a core at this point in time?

Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application?

See no one responding.

Anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application?

See no one responding.

Um Ms.

Marshall, do you do you have a feel for how big is extension is into the right-of-way beyond his property line?

Based on the survey, um, it's five point three feet.

Or at least that that was what shown on the date of the survey.

Okay.

Um, just so you understand that his survey is showing he's got a five foot extension outside of his property um that needs to be removed.

It's not one foot, it's at least five feet.

Yeah, yeah, it it's the fence.

Is that what you're saying?

No, I'm saying there's a house encroachment in outside of his property line into the old right-of-way.

It's a five foot extension.

Um extended off.

So that's where your property line is.

That's a new one.

This piece of the home is encroaching into the county pro um right-of-way.

So that has to be removed, even if you are permitted the zero foot setback, you have to remove that piece of the home because that's in county property.

That's okay.

No, I'll give it a good idea.

Remove the line to out everything out.

So everything past that line right there needs to be removed.

So that addition to the house, I think you said that's five feet, about five feet.

Has to be removed.

So there's a five yeah, very much.

I I can't see what that is.

I mean it's not that's the extension of the house.

So this part right here, this is all a part of the home.

So this is the home.

Mm-hmm.

Yeah.

And this it moves back into county rideways.

Right there.

Yes, ma'am.

And then there's a line that shows that's where they were encroaching in county right-away, that's where the fence was.

The fence needs to be here all the way through.

Okay.

Okay.

So okay, so then he's asking for that so that he doesn't have to move this fence through here.

He can keep it.

No, the fence needs to be there and he needs to remove the house that's in the way of the fence.

Okay.

He has to do it.

Yes.

Even asking for a zero setback, he heard it.

That's right.

Yes, and it's not related to the zero setback request.

He's put a house on property he does not own.

Got it.

Got it.

Okay.

This is his colleague's business card.

So if you have any other questions, okay.

All right, thank you.

So we have a move.

All right, Miss Marshall, thank you very much.

Sure.

Okay.

All right, and ma'am, any final comments on rebuttal.

Any final comments?

No.

Okay.

All right, thank you very much.

All right, thank you.

All right.

Well, that concludes this item.

And Miss Marshall ready for the next item.

Next item is item H5, variance 260467.

The applicant is Todd Seamy.

The request is a variance to minimum lot size by availability utilities.

Staff findings will be presented by Michelle Montebano.

Okay.

Good morning, Michelle Development Services.

Um the applicant is requesting a variances to the minimum lot size permitted for the use of septic on two parcels.

Uh LDC section 6010603 requires a minimum lot size of one half of an acre of upland is required for the use of a septic system.

Um one parcel is 0.24 acres, the other is 0.29 acres.

Um this has come up because the two parcels are not lots of record, they were divided through the property racer's office, and now they're coming through to divide them through development services.

Thanks.

Um the the request is for two lots, not just one, two.

And then my understanding is that there's a house on one of the lots.

Correct.

And that house is already on septic, as far as you know, correct, yes.

Okay.

So they need a variance for the existing house that's on a septic tank?

Yes, because we believe it was split to the acreage that it is now after our vesting date in 1989.

Um so to memorialize that split that happened, they have to go through development services and get a certified parcel.

And that means that each parcel needs to meet um our current development standards.

Okay.

And so the agenda talks about a variance to the middle and lot size by available utilities and a variance to lot development standards.

I wasn't I wasn't following.

What did what does that mean?

I think there was maybe a thought that there would needed a variance for the stairs, but ultimately it was not needed.

So it's just for middle and lot size for our septic tank.

Correct.

All right, very good.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, the applicant, please.

Good morning, Todd.

See me.

Uh 191 PL box 191 gibson Florida 33534.

Let me go to the Elmo real quick because this is just um an interesting kind of case here.

Yes, um, I guess the staff was saying here.

This is our this is our property here, okay.

The owner is here also, and we're in permitting, okay.

So he's been in permitting for this piece, only to find out uh recently that this piece was cut in half, okay.

So as he went to the title company, this had a folio number from the property appraiser, Bobby Enriquez's office.

So he know he believed he could build here, and this woman bought the home, okay, and she had no issues or or whatsoever.

And so when he was going for his permit, it came back that we needed a variance for lot development standards and the septic tank issue.

This home does have a uh septic tank existing.

So this woman, Miss Fernandez, is party to this hearing.

So both of them, that's why you see the radius here, and I notified it notified, you know, within the 300 feet uh requested.

So as you see here, you know, our application is 910 uh 9107 memorial and 5803 more loop.

Right.

Okay.

So that's why that's that's there there.

We are in, as I said, we're in building permitting, and this is how this came up.

Okay.

Uh this is our permit number and some comments here, and so we are all approved, except you know, they requested us to put a driveway in instead of on memorial to move it over here as their driveway is here.

Right.

So that is why we're here.

Okay.

Um just just one go ahead.

Uh yeah, okay.

Um was that if you know the existing house that's on septic, when was it built?

I'll tell you this.

Here is here if I have a date.

I have a survey of the home.

Um I'm looking for a date on there.

Does it show?

Does it not show?

You can't okay.

Okay.

So this is the this is the neighbor's home here.

Okay, we're over here on the vacant lot.

And um I'm looking for a signature assigned date.

I can't I can't make it out, but this is the survey about a year and a half ago.

Oh, I'm sorry, here survey 4145.

Bottom okay.

So this home was here, okay, and so the vacant lot was sold to us, and unbeknownst to Ms.

Fernandez, who owns this piece who signed on for our hearing today, she didn't know that she had an inexisting non-conforming lot.

Okay, and so I had to go to her to have her sign the application to let her know she's in violation and to remedy it here today.

All right.

Um this is a picture of her house, just so you can see that's her existing home right there.

Yeah, if you could just uh turn that I can turn that a little bit better here.

There we go.

Uh okay.

And so a bigger neighborhood question is there not public sewer available in this neighborhood?

No, as I'm surprised, I'm surprised there's not.

There's uh this is a septic tank.

As far as you know, everybody on the street, all the houses around there are on septic tanks?

Yes, sir.

To my knowledge, too much she's on septic, and she's been on septic, and I that's that's surprising in Hillsborough County.

Yeah, you know, I think the commissioners need to put some uh some some can't sanitary sewer there.

This is this is her deed, just so you see, you know, and I went to her house and had to return that, please.

This is uh yes, I'm there we go.

That's Ms.

Fernandez.

That's the owner of that piece that was that home right there.

Okay, okay.

And um, you know, so that that's your honor.

That's why we're here today, is because not only you know my client was just getting a permit and thinking everything was copacetic, only to find out that he had an existing non-conforming lot and the previous and the owner next door had one, and apparently that property was cut in half, and right they in so that's where we are.

So another question is is there on public are they on public water?

Yeah, I believe they're on public water.

Okay.

I believe they're on public so that's where we are there.

And um I have the owner of this of my piece, which is right there.

You know, here today on right here.

So I have him here just to uh you know respectfully say thank you.

All right, any that conclude your presentation?

Yes, sir.

Any questions?

No, very I'm good, thank you.

Uh is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application?

Support yes.

Go ahead.

Say your six good morning, say goodbye.

Good morning.

Say your name.

Good morning.

My name is Leonardo Alleman.

My name is Leonardo Alleman, good morning.

And your address?

Uh 25 Relevant.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Okay.

Is there anyone else in the audience that we should speak in support of the application?

All right, sir.

If you could sign in.

Yeah.

This point in time, is there anyone in the audience that we should speak in opposition to the application?

No one responding.

Ms.

Marshall, the question uh I brought in the past is uh about public sewer versus septic and the standards and the land development code about allowing for smaller lots to use septic.

So the as far as the use of septic versus the um connection to public wastewater, the code allows for the from the parent parcel up to three lots can you can split in the urban service area and not have to connect to sewer.

However, then six this 60106, this section, um, requires the half acre for use of septic.

And so if they're not each meeting the half acre, then they would need the variance.

All right.

So they do not need to connect to public sewer because of that land development code standard, but the lot size is still an issue.

Correct.

Yeah.

Right.

Um, just for the record, the the existing house was built in 1956.

Um when they were um working on the research, we we did try to find a permit, but we didn't have anything in the record.

And I believe the the split um by deed was done in the early 2000s, I believe.

Okay.

And the vesting date of 1989.

Yes, July 26, 1989.

What happened on July 26, 1989?

That's the date that the county adopted the comprehensive plan.

Okay.

And to your knowledge, do you know if public sewer is available in this neighborhood?

There appears to be some public sewer near there, but I I can't speak to how easy it is to connect, not or what type of line.

Yeah.

Okay.

All right, with that, the applicant is an opportunity for rebuttal.

Your honor just want to say thank you.

Appreciate you um working with us through the variance process to remedy both Ms.

Fernandez's situation and my client situation.

All right, very good.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you so much.

That that concludes this application.

Ms.

Marshall, we're ready for the next item.

Next item is item H6, variance 260479.

The applicant is Ms.

Kumar Patel.

The request is a variance to lat development standards and staff findings will be presented by Logan McKay.

Morning.

Logan McKay Development Services, application 260479.

The applicant is requesting a variance for mechanical equipment setbacks to allow a generator within the rear yard of the property per LEC section 60103I3.

Mechanical equipment such as air conditioning units, pumps, heating equipments, so forth, including generators, uh may not project into required front yards, may project up to five, but may project up to five feet into required rear yards.

The applicant is requesting a four-foot variance, resulting in a one-foot rear yard setback for the generator.

No additional findings available for any questions.

The applicant, please.

Morning.

Good morning.

Hi, my name is Ambishkumar Patel.

I'm the owner at uh 12430 Horseshoe Bendrick, Lithuania, Florida.

33547.

Okay.

Um this generator was installed through a big company, Generex.

Um we researched and looked for the largest one.

Um who was you know well into the business.

Uh the salesman came out, he looked at everything, uh, saw everything, submitted we submitted the property surveys, um, and they said everything was good to go.

We submitted the HO applications.

Um they got the permitting done.

Uh generator got installed uh through Cantor Power, who is a manufacturer of Generac.

Um then uh installation it was placed, the electrical inspection was done, then gas inspection was done.

Um between we heard uh the inspector who came out through the county that this may possibly be um within that one foot setback issue.

Um and this was in between the electrical and gas uh inspections.

So I contacted Generex, I was asking, like, hey, I heard something about this possible issue.

Is this an issue?

Do we need to pause?

Um Generac said no, that's not the issue.

Though there was some um back and forth between them and the inspector, and generics told me it was an electric issue, which uh the inspect the installer came out and fixed the electrical issue, they proceeded with the gas inspection, um, and then at the end uh to finalize the turn on, it was determined that I had to file the variance for it.

I asked Generax to um represent, uh, but they said I had to represent myself.

Um and then I you know I was wondering why I didn't know from their end from the start because I wanted to follow everything to the T.

Um and uh you know I put deposits in uh they helped me with the application uh submission, and then I had to make some corrections on it.

And Charles Phillips, who works for the county, was very helpful in uh making me make those corrections.

But uh what we said in the application was I I wanted to move the generator after after I found out the issue.

Um there was no space on the right side of the house because it would come to too close to any other property, and on the left side of the house, there's an easement.

Um, and we were told we cannot install the generator on that side.

So I wanted to try to move it somewhere where we could make this work.

Um and they said there's another spot and the lines are in and all.

So and what what is behind you?

What's uh use the retention pond?

It's it's a huge retention pond.

Okay.

That was the other issue.

Was would it be uh any sort of uh threat to that side?

But there's no threat to anyone else on the sides or or to us.

Okay.

All right.

Anything else?

No.

Okay, I'm good.

Thank you.

Thanks.

All right, sir, if you could sign in.

This point in time, is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application?

Yes, ma'am.

Please come forward.

Good morning.

Hi, how are you?

Um, I'm Jill Catch Tori.

I live at 12426, Horseshoe Bend Drive.

I live directly to the left of Mr.

Patel, and I approve the location.

There is no place for him to put it other than that.

Okay.

Thank you, ma'am.

Okay.

You're welcome.

Is there anyone else in the audience?

So we should speak in support.

See no one responding.

Anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application.

I see no one responding.

Staff anything further?

Nothing further.

Thank you.

Okay.

Applicant opportunity for rebuttal.

Good.

All right, very good.

Thank you, sir.

With that, that concludes this application.

Ms.

Marshall, ready for the next item.

Next item is item H7 variants 260493.

The applicant is Sharkeese Clayton.

The request is a variance to accessory dwelling requirements.

Staff findings to be presented by Jaron Fullen virtually.

Yes, uh, this is Jared Fallon with Hillsborough County uh development services.

Uh this is a request for variance to the minimum lot size uh requirements for uh accessory dwellings for property in the RC six zoning district.

Uh according to the land development code, a minimum lot area of seven thousand square feet uh shall be required to allow an accessory dwelling.

Uh the subject property is six thousand square square feet currently, uh which is a variance of a thousand square feet.

I'm happy to answer your questions.

So I think you've said it, and I I apologize if I'm making you reiterate.

But the request is is that the applicant wants to put an accessory dwelling unit in his on his property, but he can't because he doesn't have 7,000 square foot lot.

Is that correct?

Yes, that's correct.

Uh land development code section 61102.

A uh requires at least 7,000 square feet.

Okay.

So this issue before me is not about the accessory dwelling unit, its size, its shape, its location.

It's just about the lot size.

Well, it it really is about the accessory dwelling.

Uh the standard that that section is about the accessory dwelling standards.

Uh sort of to establish an accessory dwelling, you have to have at least 7,000 square feet.

Right.

But it has nothing else to do with the size of the accessory dwelling, its setbacks, its height.

Not how you do it.

Just about the lot, yes.

Correct.

All right, very good.

I got it.

Thank you.

Yep.

All right, any applicant, please.

Um Charquez Clayton, uh, property owner of 4604, North 72nd Street, Temple, Florida.

Okay.

Okay.

Anything to add?

I think it's a little uh misconfusion here.

Uh I'm not trying to put anything on the property.

Uh I bought the property in 22.

Um, and I I did have knowledge of the previous property owner uh started a application process with you guys of trying to get uh permit for something he already had um established and built when I bought a property.

Um I did have a call in on me from a uh former tenant that I was working with a program, and that's why I'm here today just to see uh how I will move for as of now.

Um it out.

I haven't a cut all power and order um using this just for storage now, and I just want to see what I can move forward now.

I'm not clear what what you just said.

Uh so code enforcement came by because I was working originally I was working with a a program.

I was a vet in the you're working with what program?

Uh it's called empath.

Okay.

Um I was a vet and the tenant, the tenant called.

What is I'm sorry, you're gonna have to slow down for me.

Okay, what program are you talking about?

It is called it's uh affordable housing program for example.

Yes.

All right.

Um so I was a Vid and the tenant.

Uh the tenant was getting angry, called code enforcement on the property.

Um and what does that have to do with filing a variance?

So I'm not I didn't file a variance.

I'm here today because of code enforcement said I have an access of dwellings.

I'm not filing a variance for it.

Yeah, that's what I thought you said.

So I'm not clear.

Ms.

Marshall, if you didn't file an application, how did he get to this point?

The the code of enforcements told me that I would have to talk to you um that you guys, and they told me I would have to have a hearing for uh the developed uh property when I bought it already.

Uh maybe it's uh the the terms that you're using.

I mean code enforcement has said for you to file it.

So it's so you did file.

So yes, so code enforcement came one day and just said, hey, you have a set of dwellings, you need to go to a hearing.

I called you guys.

Um I talked to them, they said yes, you would need to, you know, pay a certain amount here to hearing.

I'm here today.

I'm not so excuse me, Mr.

Hearing Officer.

Yes.

I think that maybe the confusion is because the applicant is stating that he bought the property like this.

So he's not trying to put anything on the property that it was like this when he bought it.

So perhaps that's the confusion.

Yeah.

But let me just ask, did so maybe the prior property owner filed the variance?

Uh he did have an open permit, but he didn't finish it.

So the code of enforcement is basically saying I have a uh illegal non-permitted dwelling on my property.

I'm just trying to tell him I bought the property like this.

I didn't establish I didn't uh construct anything after I bought the property.

And as of right now, no one's in that property at all.

It's just used for storage.

Well, is your intent to at some point in the future?

Because this runs with the property, it's not about what it's used for today.

Uh-huh.

It's are you still interested in and you eventually at some point in the future using that structure as an accessory dwelling unit?

Uh that seems like a hassle.

Um I spoke with um forgot what's the guy's name um that was just speaking.

Um it's not it's only 7.6 away from the property line.

He said I would have need 25, so I I'd rather just use the storage unit and not put anybody in it.

Um if he's not wanting an accessory dwelling unit, which seems to be the sort of the foundation for why he filed, do we want to give him a little time to think about the application and come back next month or two months from now?

Since he's using it for storage anyways, I don't I don't know if there's a rush.

Um so someone was standing before, like I told you I work on the program, and then when the code enforcement came, he told me I would need to you know get him out of there, do the proper steps, go to the hearing.

Um so I mean, instead of just doing all the hassle, I know the property line is not gonna be big enough for it.

I'd rather just use it as a storage uh storage unit than trying to you know um do you have any objections to continuing this while you can work with staff to figure out what the bat best path forward is for you?

Uh no, sir.

Okay.

And staff can talk to code enforcement if necessary, so there's open communication, so everybody understands that you did show up at this hearing.

You are trying to remedy a code enforcement issue.

Um that may give you the time to work with staff to make sure we're moving forward in the direction you want to go in.

Does that make sense?

Yes, sir.

Okay.

Ms.

Marshall, if if he if we continue this application, when is the next hearing he could go to?

Um just get the exact date.

It'll be June because the May hearing is May 11th, so we're past the mailing deadline.

Let me just get the accept date.

Okay, just give us a second it'll be June 8th.

Okay.

2026.

And and why if you could explain to them why we can't go in May?

We have to go to June 8th.

The there's a the mail notice that has to be will have to be resent.

Um there's a 30-day require uh requirement, it has to be sent at least 30 days before.

So for the May, the May hearing being May 11th, since we're at April 13th, we're past that deadline for the mail notice, so it wouldn't need to go to the June hearing so that it could be noticed appropriately.

Okay.

And um, if if I'm not trying to uh do a variance on trying to permit it, uh is that a point of me coming back to the June?

Yeah, if you decide that you know what I don't need to do this, you can just withdraw.

Okay, okay.

Okay, all right, and who's responsible for the notice?

That the applicant so if you if you do decide you want to move forward, you're responsible for notifying the adjacent property owners.

Okay, and then I just wanted to make sure like uh um closed out.

Do uh do I reach out to you guys about what do you mean by your closed out?

I'm not closed out, but if I'm if I'm withdrawing from the variance, you're saying if you're withdrawing, then you don't need to notify the adjacent property.

Okay, okay.

Okay, all right.

I think we got a plan.

All right, all right.

So you're welcome.

So variants 26-04.

Get the number right.

9-3 will be continued to the June 8th.

Land use hearing officer hearing at 9 a.m.

in these chambers.

Okay, very good.

All right, with that, we'll move on to the next item.

I'm sorry, the the June hearing got moved to June 15th.

I apologize.

It was originally scheduled for the right.

Let's strike June 8th from the record.

It's June 15th is the land use hearing officer hearing.

And sir, I don't know if you heard the discussion, but June 15th is the Luo hearing.

June 15th.

Okay.

All right.

All right, well, that concludes this item for now.

And we'll move on to the next item on this morning's agenda.

Next item is item H8, variance 260539.

The applicant is Jason Fawcett.

The request is a variance to let development standards.

Staff findings will be provided by James Baker.

Hello, so the staff um presents first and then yeah.

Good morning.

Good morning.

The applicant is requesting a variance of five foot to encroach into the required 25-foot front yard setback.

This encroachment is to accommodate a standard depth 25-foot two-car garage attached to the existing primary residence, which will be 20 feet from the front property line.

The requested variance is from the LDC section 6.01.01 requirement of a minimum 25-foot front yard set bank in the required RSC 6th district.

The variance will be five feet, and the result will be a 25-foot front yard set bank.

Okay, thank you.

All right, now the applicant.

The address 1014 Eccles Drive, Tampo, 33612.

Thank you.

Um so yeah, it's just that the existing uh garage is not suitable for my customers um needs right now.

Um it doesn't hold the cars as it should.

Uh he's requesting to do an addition forward towards the um property.

And um the way the house sits on the lot and the way the road is turning.

Um I can't get a proper garage um to fit a vehicle in the addition without a um a variance.

Okay, proposing to build a 25-foot by 20 garage attached.

Um the well is staying is existing, I'm not touching that.

Um both neighbors are in agreement um with the project.

Um, all the finishes are gonna tie into the house to remain.

All right, for the record, you're you're that the property owners hire you as a contractor to do the improvements.

Yes.

Got it.

Okay.

All right, anything else?

It's clear.

I understand the request.

Yep.

All right.

Very good.

Good.

Yep, you sign in.

All right.

At this point in time, is there anyone in the app in the audience who wishes to speak in support of the application?

Good morning.

My name's Hunter Glassen.

I'm the homeowner, honeowner of um 1014 Eccles Drive, and I mean, obviously, I support it.

I don't know if this is worth your time, but I'm here.

All right.

Appreciate your time.

Thanks for coming downtown.

Uh sir.

I also need you to sign in.

And if you have any questions, all right.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application?

See no one responding.

Anyone in the audience wishes to speak in opposition to the application?

See no one responding.

Staff anything further?

Nothing further.

Okay.

Applicant opportunity for rebuttal.

Any further comments?

All right.

No need for rebuttal.

With that, it concludes this application.

Ms.

Marshall ready for the next item.

Next item is item H9, variance 260567.

The applicant is affordable building products of Florida.

The request is a variance to accessory structure requirements.

And I'll present the staff findings.

The applicants requesting a variance of 1.5 feet to the required 25 foot rear yard setback in the RSC6 district to accommodate an existing accessory structure with a 23.5 foot rear yard setback.

Building permit HC BLD-25-0068475-REV one was issued for the accessory structure with a rear yard setback of 25 feet shown.

An error in the required yard measurement was discovered following the construction of the accessory structure.

Happy to answer any questions.

No question.

Thanks.

The applicant, please.

This is variance 26-0567.

Is the applicant online?

Mr.

Chair, we do not have anyone checked in online for that item.

Okay.

Um we have a special use, and then we have another item that we kind of put in, we did put on abeyance.

Uh why don't we hold this one to be the second in line in abeyance?

And maybe somebody can reach out to the applicant and see if they can join us.

Yes.

All right.

We'll hold this one in abeyance.

At this point in time, we'll move to the special use on this morning's agenda.

And we'll come back to this item later.

This brings us to section I special uses.

Item I1, special use 260420.

The applicant is 11202 Dewhurst LLC.

The request is a special use for COP alcoholic beverage permit with separation waivers.

Tim Lampkin will provide staff findings after presentation by the applicant.

Okay.

The applicant, please.

Good morning, Cami Corbett with the law firm of Hill Ward and Henderson 100 101 East Kennedy Boulevard, suite 3700 Tampa, Florida.

I forgot where I lived for a second.

Um, this is an existing uh assisted living facility called the Bridges at Sweetwater Grand.

You could have the presentation come up, please.

You're seeing it, Mr.

Hearing Master.

I have not yet seen it.

Just need the it's it's up on the screen.

I just need it to there.

So it's all you broke it.

Yep, you just needed to put it upstairs.

That's all.

This is the existing facility.

Uh it's located on Bloomingdale Avenue.

It's right across from the Winthrop development.

You can kind of see that there where the commercial development is at the on the south side.

It's currently has a future land use of res six and res 12.

The zoning is PD.

We recently did a major modification to the PD.

You can see the lotted single family homes to the north part of where the red outline is for the special use.

That is part of a common PD.

There's single family residences there, and then there's this assisted living facility with this community.

Um and the part of the major modification was to transfer some of those single family units into the ALF to add some additional beds, and that was recently unanimously approved by the board.

Okay.

What we're in here for today is an AB for a special use permit for the bridges uh community facility, which is out is sort of shaded in yellow here.

And this is the existing facility that have an existing dining room, indoor and outdoor areas.

They currently serve meals there.

The idea is to turn this into more of an amenity for the overall PD.

Uh, there are no outside uh folks coming in to use this restaurant, is solely for the assisted living and for the single family residential that are within the bridges community.

And this is the wet zone boundary.

Uh and again, you have the wet zone survey, and we are asking for a distance separation from residential uses.

So because of those uh close proximity of the single family uses, we have residences as close as 11 feet, but those are direct the alcohol uh beverage permit is for to serve those residents within the community.

Um we don't have any distance separation for community uses or for other A B establishments.

Um we have for justified the waiver essentially, it's within the existing community clubhouse, it's buffered from residential uses by the pond and existing vegetation, and it doesn't negatively affect the community's residential uses due to these separation, and again, it's for an amenity for the uses of the residents within the community.

Staff has reviewed this and is recommending approval, and we'd respectfully request the same.

And I'm here to answer any questions.

Should you have any?

Um I'm not sure this is related at all, but are the single family homes?

Is that are they part of the is this like some sort of live in place and move into the it is it's loosely structured, so there's different ownership.

The single family was developed by another developer, and those lots were sold to individual families, and then there's an owner of the assisted living facility, but it's an overall scheme of development, it's all within the PD and they're all tied together.

Okay, and do those people who live in those single family homes, they have access to the restaurant, yes, they do facilities.

And I don't know if this is relevant either, but there's a AB type.

I think it's called like a 11 C.

So is that so we want to do the four cup because it'll be a uh essentially an SRX or restaurant license, it will be a state license for a restaurant, and so we wanted to be able to have uh beer, wine, alcohol, um, liquor.

Okay, and to ensure that the 11c didn't release square peg round hole, didn't fit right, didn't fit.

Okay, all right, and you're uh representing the the owners, but did is there a membership meeting where they have to get together?

Is this a owner's decision?

This the owners of this facility own this, but they coordinate very closely with the uh rest of the development.

Okay, all right, thank you.

Okay, um development services staff Hello Tim Lamkin.

Uh as you heard uh SUAB 26-420.

It's a request for a distance separation uh for a for COP alcoholic beverage permit.

Location may be uh familiar as the applicant stated, it's associated with uh major modification 25-1247, which was approved by the Hillsborough County uh Board of Commission on March the 10th, uh 2026, uh partly to allow additional uses within the clubhouse, including a member only restaurant with alcoholic beverage service.

And as the applicant stated, the required separation from residentially zoned properties 250 feet.

The applicant is proposing a separation of 11 feet from residential for a waiver of 239 feet, and as shown on the wet zone survey residential areas within the same planned development or located 11 feet west, I'm sorry, east of the proposed wet zone within the uh indoor outdoor community center.

Additionally, these residential areas are also located within the same mixed use plan development PD 04-0459, with the community center being for the benefit of the members only residences.

Uh, there have been no objections from review agencies, the applicants included additional justification within their narrative request for the reasons above uh the location of the alcoholic beverage permit within the member only community center negates the need for strict adherence to the specific distance requirement.

Staff finds that the proposed wet zoning will not result in significant impacts on surrounding land uses and the application of the specified distance requirement is therefore unwarranted and uh finds the request to be approvable.

And that concludes my presentation unless you had any questions.

No questions.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

This point in time, is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application?

See no one responding.

Anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application?

No one responding.

Um development services.

Anything further?

Nothing further.

Thank you.

Any applicant opportunity for rebuttal?

No need for rebuttal.

That concludes this application.

Marshall, we're ready for the next item.

So take us back to um H1 variants 25-1340.

The applicant is now on virtually.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Slopez, I believe believe, Ms.

Marshall, correct me if I'm wrong.

We already introduced the item and the staff did the presentation.

Yes.

Okay, so ma'am, it's now your opportunity to say any words in support of uh the application that was filed.

Thank you.

Um my name is Larissa Lopez, and I'm the property owner of 4525 Tarbon Drive, Tampa Florida 33617.

Um, so this request is based on an existing accessory um that exceeds the allowable enroachment of 20% because of the limitation in my yard and the the way that it's shaped, it's kind of like a diamond shaped.

Um, that would only give me about 240 square feet of allowable rear yard access coverage um for this this building or or this um this office that I'm trying to establish.

So the square footage of my actual property is about 1,974, and this new office structure would be about 618 square feet, which would exceed that 240 20 percent that I'm given.

Um this unit would not inflict any issues with any of the neighboring um properties, it would follow all of specific kind of like drainage, um public welfare safety issues, so it wouldn't cause any issues to the outstanding properties.

I don't know if you heard my question, ma'am.

No, sir, I'm sorry.

All right, uh there's a application talks about there's a variance for rear yard lock coverage, and it's saying it's exceeding the land development code standard of 20 percent that your rear yard lock coverage is 33 percent.

How did you get to 33 percent?

Um I'm not entirely sure.

So I went by my survey as far as like distancing everything specifically from um fencing, I guess kind of like county lines and all that stuff.

Um so I when we initially started this structure.

I don't believe that the 20 percent rear yard was in place.

I believe that kind of happened afterwards, um, because I had submitted everything and it was originally approved, and then I was told that I needed to request a variance hearing for this being outside of that 20% rule.

Hmm okay.

Um same question I had for staff earlier.

Um the accessory structures labeled as an office.

So uh the question I had is there electricity provided to the office?

Yes, there won't be and does it have air conditioning?

Yes, and does it have uh water and sewer?

Yes, sir.

Okay, right.

Um did it's in your rear yard, and it's hard to see.

How did code enforcement get involved?

This happened when we had that hurricane back in 2024.

Um, so where my property line or where my property is, there's specific property lines that have to deal directly with Tico and electricity.

Um, when the hurricane hit, one of those lines came down and caused an issue.

So when Tico had to come back out to rewire all of those lines, that's when the issue aroused could you um provide a little bit more detail as to how they got involved?

So a hurricane came.

I guess the power went out, and then Tico came out and started repairing power lines and what happened next.

Yes, right in my backyard, there's one of those like holes with large power boxes on top.

Yes.

Um, so that be damaged during the hurricane.

Right.

Um then um County Hillsborough Tico got involved, they had to come repair, and then um uh I guess that was reported directly to the county, and that's when code enforcement came out.

Do you why?

Why why would they call code?

Why would Tico call code enforcement?

Uh well this property, this office wasn't originally in my initial survey, so this was a um an establishment that was established afterwards after I after I purchased the property, so I'm not sure why code enforcement was called okay.

Um, that is all right, thank you.

All right, thank you.

All right, thanks.

Um this point time is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application.

I see no one responding.

Anyone in the audience wish to speak in opposition to the application?

See no one responding.

It's Marshall.

Do we have any idea why code enforcement got involved?

I do not sure.

Okay.

Um I do have some clarification on the the measurements for the 33%.

Okay.

Um initially when the applicant came in, the request was for just over 20% and didn't specify the exact percentage.

Um, and we asked the applicant to clarify that, and in doing that, we also ran calculations approximate, but um because the so the rear yard being 25 feet deep, um, and then when you look at the way that the um lot is configured, essentially it's like a rectangle and a triangle next to it, and we calculated that area um which was 1376 square feet, and then um the area of the accessory structure that's within the rear yard because it sits back between seven and a half and nine and a half feet, um a portion of it isn't within the required rear yard, so that doesn't count towards the 20 that 20 percent calculation.

So um the portion that's within the rear yard is uh approximately 453.75 square feet.

Yeah, so then we took that divided by the 1376 square feet of the rear yard, that's the rear yard, which came to approximately 32.9 percent.

That was how we came we verified the 33 percent.

What I'm struggling with is I don't understand how Tico would call the county code enforcement, they're not doing that math, right?

They're I have to double check.

I don't believe well, I'm not sure if it was permitted previously or if it may have been because it wasn't permitted and then received the then realized that that it the only requirement that it didn't meet was the 20 percent, it meets the setback requirements.

Right.

I mean the staff report says it's an unpermitted construction, right?

So building department would get involved with issuing a building permit of some kind for the accessory dwelling correct accessory structure, correct?

Well, yes, glad you clarified that because that's yes, so yes, ma'am.

So initially that's how they saw it started.

So I um did request a permit to finalize structure and get everything permitted.

Um, and while that was being partially accepted and running through, I was then told that I needed to have a variance request because the only I guess the only thing that wasn't breaking through was at 20% or that 30% of them trying to understand the math um as it was being explained.

Um but that's the only requirement that I'm not meeting.

So I think the variance hearing is the last part that I need to establish the building permit.

So upon um getting a result of this hearing, then that would then potentially cause approval or denial of the building permit that I'm trying to establish.

So it kind of goes one into the other.

Okay, when did um your initially build the structure?

Um it was August of 2024.

Okay.

And um what's the office use for?

Um, so I am a public notary.

I work with health insurance, car insurance, and immigration forms.

I currently do have an office that I'm working out of, um, but I'm trying to establish this closer to home just to come back a little bit.

I would have another employee with me, so that's why we're establishing kind of that electric um water and all that stuff.

That way I can keep privacy from my home and then just work directly out of the office.

Okay, so it's you're trying to work from home essentially.

Yes, work from home, but also have privacy to not have um someone else with me in my home.

So just home but separate.

Okay, all right.

Um kind of jumped out of order, but I think Kali, unless you have anything further.

Nothing further.

Okay.

And ma'am, uh last comment, any final comments.

Um, so as far as um what happens next, I I'm assuming I would be reached out to with a decision from variance, and then from there I would proceed directly with my initial application with code enforcement and direct those results to them, or is that something that happens automatically?

Yeah, my my decision comes out in about three, four weeks, and development services staff will forward that uh decision to you.

Okay, um, so you can call them if you're in anticipation of the decision, and they'll get it to you as quickly as they can.

Otherwise, it gets mailed to you, email or uh hard mail.

Okay, thank you.

I understand.

All right, very good.

Thank you, ma'am.

Thanks for thanks for joining us.

Thank you.

Okay, so that concludes this application.

Um go to the last item.

So this will bring us back to item H9, variance 260567.

Um, the applicant was affordable building products of Florida, and I've been notified that they are on virtually now.

Okay, all right.

Um can you hear us?

I can okay.

Uh good morning.

Good morning.

Yeah, and ma'am, that's your opportunity to say a few words in support of your variance that you filed.

Okay.

So this is um this is an issue we did an accessory structure.

Um it was a 20 by 30 uh garage.

We had a back setback of 25.

I think it was I need your full name and address, please.

Oh, I'm sorry, uh Maria Marriage.

215 Hernando Street.

Thank you.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

You may continue.

Okay.

Um, so we we uh built the structure and with the permitting department, we had to um or the building department, we had to submit a survey upon completion, and in doing so, um it came back with 23.93 feet and 24.03 feet from the property line.

So and we have a 25 foot setback, so we were asking for a variance to just accommodate that a little over a foot.

Okay, it's pretty straightforward, ma'am.

I understand.

Yes, yes, it is anything else.

Um, I mean, know that it is it's just that little pesky foot.

Okay, all right, very good.

Thank you.

Let's see if anybody uh wants to speak in support or opposition.

This point in time, there is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak in support of the application.

I see no one responding.

Anyone in the audience wishes to speak in opposition to the application?

I see no one responding.

Staff anything further?

Nothing further.

Thank you.

And ma'am, any final comments?

Uh just thank you for your time.

All right.

Thank you for joining us.

Thank you.

All right.

Well that that concludes this application.

And it concludes this morning's land use hearing officer hearing.

We are adjourned.