e right good afternoon everyone welcome to the city of Mader Beach code enforcement and variance uh special magistrate hearing if you're here for the variance you're in the right spot we're going to do a code enforcement case first so again if you're here for variance you're in the right spot but those matters will be taken up by the agenda after we do the code en for ment however if you want to talk to me when for the variance you'll need to stand and be sworn in just a couple moments so welcome to the city of madira beach code enforcement hearing my name is Bart Valdez and I'm a practicing appointed special magistrate to hear today's cases I'm a practicing attorney and have been a member of the fora bar for over 20 years I've been appointed to this position in accordance and with the authority set forth in chapter 162 Florida Statutes it is my role to fairly and objectively review the matters presented as such I would like like to advise you of certain matters related to today's proceedings today's matters will be heard in the order that they appear on the agenda every effort will be made to hear all persons having relevant evidence argument or comments to offer related to the specific case that is being heard if you wish to speak today it is necessary that you be sworn in by the City attorney in all cases since the city has the burden of proof the city will present its case first respondent or property owner then will be given the opportunity to refute the city's allegations formal Rules of Evidence do not apply to this proceeding however I will exert every effort to ensure that fundamental fairness is afforded to all parties after hearing all relevant evidence I'll be I will issue an order the order will be reduced to writing and you'll be provided with a copy by mail therefore please make sure that we have your current address additionally in regard to the code enforcement matters you advised that I do not have the authority to Grant you a variance permit or special exception of any kind my role is solely to determine whether a city code has been violated and to provide you a reasonable time to correct the violation by whatever means is available to you please be advised that you may be subject to a fine and a lean may be recorded on your property if the violation is not corrected by the compliance deadline if you wish to present any information to me today it is necessary that you swear affirm that you will tell the truth therefore at this point in time the City attorney will swear in all Witnesses and this includes any members of the public that are affected by any of the code enforcement matters and expect to and want to uh speak with me today so anyone that's going to speak if you could stand up raise your right hand I'm going to swear you under oath everyone that's going to speak if there's any chance that you're going to speak let's all swear you in right now you swear that the testimony you're about to give is going to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth thank you all right and if you're a little nervous at first time you're going to get one more chance in a few minutes but please uh please remember if you weren't sworn you will not be able to speak to me all right first matter on the agenda is C- 24-21 for the property located at 113 145th Avenue East East is a city ready to proceed we are go ahead Mr TR I would uh we would call our witness uh Deputy Cory Snider uh Deputy if you could tell us what your o occupation is and your job responsibilities uh my name is Cory Schneider Deputy Sheriff penel County I am currently assigned to the city of madira beach in both a law enforcement and code enforcement capacity all right are you familiar with this property located at 113 145th Avenue East yes I am who owns this property uh per the uh penel County Property Appraisers the owner name is an LLC SNJ Management LLC out of 195 197 Governor Street Patterson New Jersey all right and this case is this a proactive case or uh was it as a result of a complaint uh I received information from the city business tax department about a possible apartment renting and they did not have record of a business tax for this location which led me to the location do an inspection at which time I determined that short-term rental activity was occurring okay so um let's start uh going through the packet that we have here that will eventually tender into evidence so that we can do it chronologically so Pages three through 10 looks like it's a print out from uh Mike Twitty as the panel County property appraiser is that the print out for this this off of this particular property that is correct all right and it does reflect that the property owner is SNJ Management LLC that is correct okay and did you also print out the um website for the tax collector's office for pelis County yes I did and that what what pages is that reflected in page number 11 okay and what does that reflect as the property owner it would be the same SNJ Management LLC 1951 197 Governor Street Patterson New Jersey 07501 okay so what was the first date that you went to the property determine whether there was a violation of the property at February 3rd 2024 at 8:50 a.m. and when you got to the property what did you determine uh I spoke to uh tenants Amy and Roger O'Neal Who told me that they rented the unit um uh for the month of February through the 10th for approximately $2,000 it was captured on body camera okay um and is that a violation of any particular city code uh yes it is okay and what was the what is the code section that's being violated as a result of that interaction the code for this section is 110201 which is an R2 this this property is within the R2 zone of the city and this Zone has for a minimum of a 3-month rental period okay and so this interaction reflected a rental period for a shorter period of time than 3 months correct that is correct all right and did you uh following that in inspection of that property and talking to those people at the property did you wish a courtesy letter to the property owner to advise the property owner of the code violations that were existing on the property yes I I sent a letter courtesy letter to the uh owner on record from the penel County Property Appraisers in the tax role that advised them of the the R2 rental rules within the city and the requirement for a city business tax all right did you also issue in that courtesy letter uh the registration information for short-term rentals as well that's correct also prop owner to do when that courtesy letter was sent to cease uh to obtain business tax and cease short-term rental activity okay um and did that occur no it did not all right did you do a second inspection on the property subsequent to the first one on May 3rd I mean I'm sorry February 3rd yes I did and what date was that on February 24th at 9:15 a.m. I spoke to a readed who advised she rented the property or one of the units at the property through Airbnb for the 222 223 224 for three nights for the total of $850 okay as a direct result of that did you issue a notice of violation yes I did okay and when what dat did you issue that notice of violation uh the same day all right 224 2024 and is that reflected on page um 16 17 of the packet yes it is did you send that by regular mail and certified mail yes I did okay and is that certified mail reflected on page 18 yes it is did you get compliance with regard uh to the violations at this property as a result of the notice of violation that was sent no I did not did you do a subsequent inspection then yes I did and what date was that on 321 2024 approximately 10: a.m. I made contact with the property and spoke to multiple people at the properties and three different renters provided me with statements as to the length of time they were staying the amount that they paid and the website that they used to obtain the the rental units and did you have that reflected on body camera yes I did and can you play that for the special magistrate today yes okay and a o imately how long is this video 4 minutes and 18 seconds okay hello how you doing up I'm Deputy Snider uh just compliance check just one minute your time there are you guys the owners no renters rers Snider um how long are you staying for I'm out you're out tomorrow no not tomorrow Saturday Saturday okay uh different you guys are I'm in the back our room oh there's three Oh I thought there were four in the back and two up front holy cow I had no I thought there was just a duplex okay um you you're leaving yeah um get your name Matt Fleming Matt Fleming and then um how long did you stay uh a week ago so we checked in the 14th I think it was 14th through 21st through today the 21st remember what you paid yeah 1,300 bucks and then um the website Florida rentals Florida rentals okay well she said she got off a v some Airbnb vbo Florida rentals okay and which unit were you in three three okay very good thank you it's painless that's and you're in a different unit you're in two can I ask you the same questions yeah we arve down uh look I can tell you for sure 8th the eth through the 23rd 23rd okay and then uh almost two weeks yeah well 15 nights 15 nights and then do you remember you paid oh this that be good yeah I like the questions with I get to see yeah yeah I yeah it's you're you you're a block from the beach so I mean I fig 16 and 16 32 3,200 okay and uh which website did you guys Airbnb and then tell me your first and last name again Kevin peas Kevin peas y very good you guys en all that I'm not no I I got a camera going that's why I'm turning it you guys are going to be famous you're not at all very good I I can't I'm 53 years old I can't remember I just okay that's it you want a card are you good okay gentlemen give it to him he's staying okay all right thank you gentlemen I appreciate it so there's so there's six units or eight units six holy cow okay I look at the appraisers I just so the different the different zones had different renting regulations and then we do we have to do inspections on them to see how they're renting and all that stuff so I think these are different sizes yeah the back two connect there's people back there now oh wow okay Full House oh well they just left like since we've been here three or four different how about this young lady hello how are you are you the property owner no no are you renting um yes can I get one minute of your time okay okay all right here we go that's this is all just uh just a thank you sir I appreciate it just a compliance inspection that's all just um uh what's your name Kim Kim what's your last name Kim Ben okay and then um you're not the property owner you're just renting right we're here for Tuesday through we leave Saturday morning Tuesday uh that just passed Tuesday through Saturday yeah do you remember what you paid um I can tell you you can tell me okay [Applause] while you're looking that do you remember which website it was that you booked hopper Hopper Hopper okay why no no just because everybody's different I think Airbnb and then Florida rental Hopper yeah Hopper and we play 795 7.95 that was Tuesday through Friday Friday well no tomorrow's Friday three nights um check in Tuesday March 19th through Friday March 22nd right okay okay yeah we leave tomorrow you leave tomorrow okay oh I thought we left Saturday and then tell me your name again Kim Kim okay got it thank you that's it appreciate it thank you okay after having this interaction with these uh three different people on um on that date March 21st did you issue a notice of hearing for today yes okay yes I did and was that notice of hearing sent by regular and certified mail yes it was and it was sent to the address listed at tax collector and Property Appraiser's office that's correct okay um and um I just want to go through the packet a little bit more so the notice of hearing that he issued was on pages 19 and 20 of the packet 19 21 through 23 well that's the notice of hearing and statement of violation correct yes 19 and 20 is the notice of hearing and the statement of violation is 21 and 22 that is correct okay have you heard anything from the property owner since you've issued this notice of hearing a statement of violation for today's Hearing in addition to the uh mailing of both regular and certified mail we did post the property um I did receive a phone call from someone that identified himself as working for the management for the uh units um he told me over the phone that he was not going to be at the special magistrate hearing probably nor was the property owner uh I did provide my phone number to give to the property owner to call me and to to my best of my knowledge I have not received any phone calls either city hall or on my personal phone Department share phone from the property own okay all right so let's just follow up then with the Affidavit of service that was shown in the packet at page 23 correct that's correct and this Affidavit of Service reflects that you sent the notice of hearing by regular mail certified mail and posted the property as well as posted City Hall correct that is correct all right and there were also some additional photographs in the packet at the very end could you go through those photographs and explain to me what they are starting at page 24 24 would be a copy of the certified mailing thing and that's the certified mailing of the notice of hearing and statement of violation that's correct all right the next photograph page 25 25 would be a copy of the of the packet placed on the front of the property located at 113 145th okay and uh the next photograph page 26 would be just a a a zoom out of the same thing showing the 113 address all right and the last photograph in the packet uh it was just some just some information that was that's on the uh one of the doors of the units just um information for residents arriving okay so have um have you or anyone else in the Sheriff's Office Bend to this property today to determine whether the violation continues to exist yes Deputy craigger uh about 45 minutes ago went to the property spoke to uh Ania from Georgia who reported she rented the property from 420 to today use Airbnb as the resource to to rent the apartments or rent rent the unit and paid $500 he also did captured on body camera which is available if you would like to see it okay I don't think we need to do that um so with the regard to the three violations failure well first of all operating a short-term rental at a R2 property um there was also a uh failure to obtain a business tax receipt or an occup license for the property has that been accomplished no okay and has the short-term rental um been registered through as set forth in section 34- 503 no it has not okay so the property is still in violation as of today that is correct okay and with regard to gaining compliance of the property and this if the special magistrate finds that there is a violation um how much time do you think it would be necessary to take the property to come into compliance I've been working on this since February so I wouldn't give them any more than two weeks to 30 days okay whatever the the city's opinion is on it um all right and with regard to the dollar amount of the fine are you seeking the $250 a day for the violations yes I am per per per code yes all right thank you I have no other questions of the Deputy it would tender into evidence the agenda packet starting at page three and running through Page 20 7 and ask that it be received all right Mr TR I'll go ahead and accept into evidences exhibit number one Pages 3 through 27 of the agenda package and I guess is exhibit to the the video the video uh that was shown here of the three different renters who all had what appeared to be short-term rentals all right is there any uh anyone here on behalf of the owner of the property SNJ Management LLC anyone here on behalf of the property okay seeing none uh Mr tras are there any other witnesses that the city would like to call no we have no other Witnesses all right uh last call anyone here on behalf of SNJ Management LLC or the owner of the property at13 145th Avenue East all right seeing no one coming forward are there any members of the public that have knowledge as to this code enforcement violation that we want to provide testimony here today okay seeing none uh Miss TR said the city's position is um I Heard 14 to 30 days but uh is it $250 per violation and there's three violations on the property is that what the the city would like me to find in my order there are three violations on the property 110201 6233 and 34- 503 it would be we're asking a fine of $250 a day for all three as one combined gotcha okay all right based upon the evidence and the record developed I do find that there is a code violation of all three code Provisions cited in the notice based upon the testimony Deputy Snider will give the landowner 30 days to come into compliance thereafter it'll be a $250 per day fine all right any other code enforcement matters that are before me today no there are not okay in that case welcome to the city of madira beach variance special exception use special magistrate hearing again my name is Bart Valdez and I'm the appointed special magistrate to hear today's cases I'm a practic attorney and have been a member of the Florida bar for over 20 years I've been appointed to this position in accordance and with the authority set forth under Florida law in the city of Mader Beach code of ordinances it is my role to fairly and objectively review the matters presented today in these variance requests as such I would like to advise you of certain matters related to today's proceedings today's matters will be heard in the order that they appear on the agenda at this time I have read and reviewed the applications with all attachments any written submissions by anyone having an interest any Ely submitted written objections and the materials provided by the city staff in all cases the hearing will be presented in the in the following order first the city will present its case and staff report and the applicant may ask questions of the city's representative next the applicant will present his or her case supported by Witnesses and evidence and the City May cross-examine each witness next public comment will be solicited or received from parties directly affected by the variance individual testifying do not have the right to cross-examine the parties all public comment should be limited to 3 minutes per person last public participation will then be closed I'll deliberate and then make a decision to Grant or deny each variance requested in the application formal Rules of Evidence do not apply to this proceeding however I will exert every effort to ensure that fundamental fairness is afforded to all parties after my decision today I will issue an order the order will be reduced to writing and the applicant will be provided with a copy by mail addition Additionally you advise that I do not have the authority to Grant you a building permit you must still obtain a building permit for any work you intend to do on your property if you wish to present any information to me it is necessary that you swear affirm that you will tell the truth therefore in just a moment the city will administer the oath to anyone else who's not already taken an oath if you expect to talk to me today during the hearing on your variance then you will need to rise and be sworn this includes any members of the public who are directly affected by the variance and may wish to provide public comment is there anyone else in the audience who was not sworn in in the first hearing that now needs to be sworn in all right in that case Mr tras is the city R to proceed on V 2024-25 62 West Parsley Drive we are go ahead Mr ask the city would call Joe P plia who is going to present this particular case Joe if you could please um state your name your job occupation and your responsibility is here at the city yep uh so my name is Joe Paglia I'm a planner one with the city of madira beach I primarily review permit applications for planning and zoning and also review variance applications and alcohol applications thank you are you familiar with this particular um variance application today 202 24-02 Greg Gallagher yes I am okay if uh you could go ahead and um present the staff report and Rec recommendation and go through the packet when you're complet with that okay uh staff report and recommendation special magistrate meeting April 22nd 2024 okay application is v22 24-02 applicant is Greg Gallagher Property Owners Patrick and Denise win property address 14062 West Parsley Drive madira Beach Florida 3370 8 parcel ID 10-311 15-34 398 d018 d0180 legal description Gulf Shores fifth ad block R lot 18 zoning and future line use is R1 single family residential residential Urban the request is a 23t rear setback a 6' 8 in wests side setback and a 5' 8 in East Side setback specific code Provisions are section 110-1 181 two rear yard water front Lots 30 ft and three side yard total side set back of 15 ft with a minimum of 7 ft on each side one background their current building was built in 1951 before the r1's single family residential zoning District Land Development regulations were adopted and does not meet the current side yard or rear yard setback requirements the existing structure is a slab on grade pre-firm structure the applicant submitted a new construction permit application 2023-2024 being addressed by this variance request the applicant is requesting to reduce the rear setback by 7 feet and the side setbacks by total of 2.4 ft to match that of the current structure as stated in section 882-2349 provided incorrect setback information however there are no records of any City staff providing any such misinformation Additionally the applicant's letter reports receiving an approval letter from Frank DeSantis before receiving Mr carrier's contradicting letter is worth noting that Mr desantis's review letter was done on behalf of the building department while Mr carrier's review letter was done on behalf of planning and zoning department and all new single family homes in madira Beach are required to be approved by both of these departments which is what cause the applicant confusion City staff are exploring rewording such letters to make sure future permit application applicants understand the process for permit review and avoid this confusion two variance criteria section 2- 507b and Analysis special C uh special conditions and circumstances exists which are particular to the land Building or structures for which the variance is sought and which do not apply generally to the lands building or other or other structures in the same district special conditions to be considered shall include but are not but are not limited to the following circumstances findings a substantial or irregular shaped lot this lot is an irregular triangle shape due to the due to its location at the end of a culdesac as a result the front property line is only 24 feet wide rounding around the CAC rounding around the CAC C residential neighborhood character Google Earth images show most of the other houses in this culdesac encroach into the required side and rear setbacks e architectural Andor engineering considerations the new home would be elevated and all current construction and all construction features would be more resistant from flood waters two the special conditions and circumstances that circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant a self-created hardship shall not justify a variance findings the need for this variant variance results primarily from the irregularly shaped lot which is not a result of any actions from the applicant or the homeowner this plot for the property and the existing home were approved before the current R1 single family residential zoning District Land Development regulations were adopted three granting the VAR will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied to other lands buildings or structures in the same zoning District findings approval of the variants will not Grant any special privilege to the property most properties in this zoning District do not have the irregular shaped lot that 1462 West parsley does which significantly limits the buildable footprint similarly 1460 West Parsley Drive directly next door on the same cesac was granted smv 2015-02 on April 14th 2015 that approved variance reduced their rear yard setback to 16.42% regulations subpart B of this code and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant findings due to the irregular sh lot shape literal interpretation of the setbacks would deny the homeowner a new single family home of similar size to many others in the zoning District Five the variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land findings the setbacks being proposed by the applicant in this variance are the minimum amount of variants required that will make possible the reasonable use of this land the current structure already encroaches into the required rear and side setbacks the current the setbacks being proposed by this variance match the setbacks of the existing structure the proposed variance would not lead to an increase in the non-conformity additionally it is worth noting that the applicant has revised their application Andi plan on two separate occasions at the request of City staff to get to the currently proposed setback requests as staff did not find the previous two requests to meet this criteria six the granting of the variants will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the city Land Development regulations and that such variants will not be injurious to the to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare findings the proposed variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the city Land Development regulations and will not negatively affect the character of the neighborhood the harmony of the neighborhood in general scheme of the development of the neighborhood will be unchanged Additionally the new home proposed would be a FEMA compliant replacing the existing flood prone and non-conforming structure which would improve the area and public welfare three staff recommendation staff recommends the approval of V 202 24-02 uh submitted by me Joseph petraglia the attach ments uh we have the application uh with a survey of the existing structure and S plan with the proposed structure location and uh public notice and mailing and postings uh Pages 28 through 31 of the staff report or the staff report which I just read uh Pages 32 through 34 is a letter from the applicant with the letters they receive from the city um on the permitting process Pages 35 through 36 is their existing survey pages 37 and 38 is the applicant submitted pictures of the property location pages 39 through 47 um is their application page 48 is the survey of the proposed structure page 49 is the mailing affidavit page 50 is the posting affidavit uh 51 is the public notice 52 is the affidavit which were both sent in the mailings uh Pages 53 to 54 are the the mailing labels and then Pages 55 through 58 are the posting pictures thank you just a few more questions have you received any written correspondence um with either for or against this proposed variance yes okay and could you go through those please yes so I had a a phone call from a neighbor that uh wanted to discuss it and then I also was forward in an email from a another neighbor um for a disapproval of the variants and and do you have copies of those with you today I'm I'm familiar with and I provided a special magistrate with the one that is from Daniel and Andrea wallaker yes that's that's what I have okay and it looks like just a few minutes before the meeting there was another objection that was posted did you do you have a copy of that uh no I did not receive I didn't look at that email yet I believe it just came in uh the one that the one that I have is from Friday and it was forwarded this morning okay and then I saw on my phone that they emailed at 2 o'clock I'll read that one into the record I do have it by email after the testimony has been completed okay so um you asking for uh your staff report to be placed into evidence yes okay thank you I don't have any other questions for you all right go ahead and accept into evidence Pages number 28 through 49 of the agenda package as exhibit number one all right anything else from this witness before I call up the applicant or property owner for cross- examination no all right is is either the applicant or the property owner here in regard to this variance all right sir uh come on up real quick I in just a moment I'm going to give you an opportunity to provide whatever information you want however this is your opportunity to ask any questions of the witness who just provided testimony today again this is only an opportunity to ask questions and cross-examine do you have any questions for Mr petraglia do not all right uh have a seat you may be coming back up real soon I don't know if Mr tras has any other Witnesses I do not have any other Witnesses but once the public testimony is done I'd like to read that other email into the record all right sounds good okay sir come on back up and first give me your full name and relationship to either the property owner or applicant Greg Gallagher uh builder for the home owners all right Mr grager what would you like to tell me about this variance request um I think Mr petralia did a excellent job in conveying everything that's on our mind and the homeowners mind clearly um the homeowners are dealing with a very irregular lot um the newly proposed home uh that Mr petrula and his team are recommending approval of this variance is still a very modest 2,200 2200 square foot home uh does not go outside the boundaries of their existing non-compliant home uh and uh the city would end up with a FEMA compliant home U and that's about it I mean it's pretty straightforward all right thank you sir Mr tras any cross-examination no thank you all right uh Mr Gallagher are there any other Witnesses you'd like to call or any other evidence you'd like to provide to me at this time I do not all right thank you sir have a seat um if I need anything else I will call you back up but have a seat for now all right at this point in the proceeding we'll go ahead and accept public comment from anyone who is directly affected by this variant so any members of the public that would like to come up and provide any information to me in regard to application v22 24-02 for the property located at 14062 West Parsley Drive please come forward now okay going once going twice no takers okay Mr tras would you like to read read in whatever you believe was a timely filed objection to this variance yes I'd like to read an email that came from Tina morison at um from an email address of Tina ADC Concepts online.com it was emailed on Monday April 22nd 12:41 p.m. the planning department the subject line is disapproval of V 2024 d022 and then it reads dear madira Beach planning board I am writing to express my disapproval of the proposed zoning variance I feel that this is a new build and all should be built to all standard setbacks there are no hardships that deem the excessive set bats it's misspelled uh that this build is asking for I am also very concerned with the fact of building so close to the seaw wall that it will impact all of the surrounding neighbor seaw walls thank you for your attention to this matter sincerely Tina Morrison 14048 West Parsley Drive in addition to that the other email was from Daniel and Andrea wallaker that was the one that I provided to you in paper format before the meeting that one um was sent to the city FR a April 19th at 409 pm. all right thank you Mr tras all right Mr tras anything else uh based upon those objections public comment or anything that the applicant has said that you'd like to bring to my attention no staff recommends approval of the variant though all right uh based upon the report of Staff the testimony of Mr Gallagher and the fact that the objections do not appear to be directed to any of the factors which I'm permitted to consider I'm going to go ahead and Grant the variance as recommended by the staff okay let's move on to the next one which is V 2024-25 95 GF Boulevard is the city ready to proceed yes we are go ahead Mr tras gonna call Mr Jay Sturman Jay if you could um state your name your uh your occupation responsibilities here at the city my name is Jay steerman I am a planner 2 here at the city madir beach and my responsibilities uh are primarily pering and I also assist with uh long-range planning are you familiar with this application V 202 24-3 yes I am and did you prepare this staff report and recommendation yes I did okay if you would go ahead and present that staff report please this application is for V 20240 3 the applicant is bodak Hayes Architects and the property owner is Tampa home Pro Incorporated the property address is 13495 GF Boulevard Mader Beach Florida 33708 the partial ID is 15-31 D15 58320 010- 0080 legal description Mitchell's Beach Revis block 10 Lots 8 through 10 less Road rideway per official records books 4355 page 231 and book 4426 page 1135 Zoning for this property is C3 retail commercial zoning district and the future land use is residential office retail the request for this application is to allow six feet sidey yard setback along 135th way allow 6 and 1/2 ft rear setback at the northern half of the rear property line and allow the elimination of the five foot perimeter landscape buffering requirement along two sections of the rear property line one starting from 44.5 ft south of the northern corner of the parcel spanning 33 fet and the other starting from the Eastern corner of the parcel spanning 23 feet the specific code section is 110- 321 2 and 3B that the minimum rear setback of 10 ft shall apply in the C3 retail commercial district and that the minimum side yard setback for Lots less than 120 ft in width within the C3 retail commercial District be no less than 10 ft on one side the other section is 1006-30 1 and2 that the exterior of all vehicular use areas shall be landscaped with a buffer strip which is at least 5 ft in width that when paved ground surfaces are adjacent to properties zoned exclusively for residential use all land between the paved surface and the property line shall be land landscaped and that the Landscaping shall include a buffer strip of at least 5T in width adjacent to the abing property containing a hedge or other durable screen of landscaping at least 5T in height for background the property is in the C3 retail commercial zoning district and residential office retail future land use category the lot comprises of contiguous Lots 8 n and 10 from the mitel's beach plat 13495 GF Boulevard is on the Southeastern corner of 35th AB in Gul Boulevard the rear of the property abuts a one-way alley that separates the C3 retail commercial zoning district from the R2 low density multif family residential medium zoning District the widening and realignment of Gulf B of Art in the early 1970s reduced the dimensions of the lot and further altered the shape to become a clipped parallelogram configuration many of the C3 commercial buildings in this area on Gulf Boulevard were built before current zoning code and do not meet the minimum setbacks therefore are considered legally non-conforming the widening of Gulf Boulevard exacerbated or in some cases could have created these non-conformities the setbacks for the existing building at 13495 Gulf Boulevard do not conform to the C3 zoning District setbacks with a sidey yard setback of 4.8 ft and a rear setback of 6.3 feet uh both the minimum rear and sidey yard setback in the C3 zoning district for this lot size is 10 ft therefore before the building is considered legally non-conforming the two-story building on the property was constructed in 1947 and was most recently used as a Veterinary Hospital Tampa home Pro Incorporated purchased the property in October of 2023 and intends to demolish the current building and construct a four-story mixed use building with eight temporary lodging units ground floor parking ancillary rooftop amenities and an ancillary ground floor restaurant the proposed structure increases the current side setback from 4.8 ft to 6 ft a reduction in the non-conforming setback the reduction in the rear setback is due to the screening wall around the dumpster which at its nearest point to the rear property line measures 6.5 ft the current building has a rear setback of 6.3 feet exclusive of the rear wooden staircase and therefore this request reduces the current non-conforming setbacks the applicant also seeks an exception from the minimum 5-t perimeter buffering Landscaping along two sections of the rear property line line one starting from 45.5 ft south of the northern corner of the parcel spanning 33 ft and the other starting from the Eastern corner of the parcel spanning 23 ft in order to accommodate four of the 14 required parking spaces which protrude into this 5 foot perimeter Zone the total proposed landscape area 2,21 Square ft is nearly double the minimum required 1,1 square feet for the development as for the variance criteria and Analysis uh special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land Building or other structures structures for which the variance is sought and which do not apply generally to the lands building or other structures in the same district special conditions to be considered shall include but are not limited to the following circumstances we have findings for item a and item e item a substandard or regularly shaped lot if the site involves the utilization of an existing lot that has unique physical circumstances or conditions including irregularity of shape narrowness shallowness or the size of the lot is less than the minimum required in the district regulations we found the lot is irregularly shaped which adds difficulty to the creation of a developable site compliant to setback screening and parking standards the widening of Gulf Boulevard in the 1970s and subsequent roadway improvements also shorten Lots fronting Gulf Boulevard including the Mitchells Beach plat block on which the subject site is located as described in the background section of this report uh item C was also uh responded to which is residential neighborhood character if the proposed project promotes the established historic or traditional development pattern of a block face including setbacks Building height and other dimensional requirements we found the project if approved would provide a Greener better screened mixed use layout which more closely matches the surrounding character and seeks to accommodate The Irregular angles of the property line and adjacent rideways item e architectural and Ora engineering considerations if the proposed project utilizes architectural Andor engineering features that would render the project more disaster resistant the new structure must be compliant with all current flood plane fire protection and forer building code requirements the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant a self-created hardship shall not justify variance the hardships encountered are not self-created by the applicant the lot was originally larger when the plot was first approved the widening of Gul Boulevard reduced the length of the lot number three granting the variance will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied to other lands buildings or structures in the same zoning District the variance requested is contextual to the site and narrow in scope the proposed side and rear setback requests in the variants are less non-conforming than than the existing structures setbacks number four literal interpretation would deprive the applicant of Rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning District under the terms of the Land Development regulations subpart B of this code or section 14-25 of the code of ordinance ordinances and would work unnecessarily and undo hardship on the applicant found that landscape requirement and best practices for safe driveway and access design are at times incompatible with the regular lot shape the requested setback reductions from 10 ft to 6 ft at the side along 135th AV and from 10 ft to 6.5 ft at the northern half of the property line appear to be the minimum required in order to satisfy other applicable requirements for the s's development program adjacent structures within the same ploted block as the subject property such as tied the knot beach weddings and the West events buildings have had their Lots impacted by rway widening and have narrow setbacks than what is currently permitted rening rendering these buildings legally non-conforming as well number five the variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land found the variance is narrow in scope and suited to the specific dimensions and circumstances of the proposed site plan namely the regular lot shape the current building does not meet the current setbacks and this request is a reduction of non-conformity the reduction of the landscape buffer requirements is minimal and due to the small area of the lot is difficult or impossible to achieve with new parking standards that were not in place at the time of the construction of the current building the adjacent buildings within the same ploted block mentioned above currently have little to no landscaped area around the parking area and have much narrower front side and rear setbacks than what is currently permitted number six the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the city Land Development regulations or the code of ordinances when it relates to section 14-25 and that such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare we found the granting of the variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Land Development regulations and is not injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to Public Welfare the subject property will have a similar character to adj adjacent commercial structures regarding lot coverage setbacks and orientation the development of the new building will also create more landscape buffer area between the commercial and residential areas than currently on the site the side step back will also increase the amount of open space between pedestrians and the building side along 135th Avenue as compared to the existing structure the rear setback for the principal exterior structure wall will be 10 ft the minimum permitted in the C3 zoning District staff recommends approval of V from 10 ft to 6 ft from the property line along 135th Avenue to reduce the rear side setback the the required rear setback excuse me from 10 ft to 6.5 ft at the northern half of the rear property line and to eliminate the 5-ft perimeter landscape buffering requirement along two sections of the rear property line one starting from 45.5 ft south of the northern corner of the parcel spanning 33 ft and the other starting from the Eastern corner of the par par spanning 23 ft submitted J steerman planner 2 city of madir Beach Community Development Department and attached are the site plan boundary survey variance application applicant justification letter property deed and public notice mailing packet CH could you go through the rest of the packet and explain besides the staff report that you just reviewed starting at page 65 through the end of the packet and explain what each of these items are page 65 through 72 is the uh application from the property owner and applicant Pages 73 through 79 are the site plans with the conceptual renderings for plans that were submitted by the applicant Pages uh 80 is the applicant justification letter um there was a small error in the next part which is the property deed um page 69 should be behind page 81 these are the uh property deed documents um which were separated and they should they should not be um but after that is the uh affidavits of mailing and posting uh which is starts on page 82 and then page 84 is the public notice page 85 is the notice of intent to be an affected party page 86 is the mailing labels derived from the county proper appraisers and then finally on page 92 we have the photographs of the postings thank you can you go to the exhibit that would re would reflect the sidey yard buffering or the landscape buffering that is being requested and can you explain the start and finish points that you're recommending in your staff recommendation yes that is on should be on page 74 yep so the 5ft perimeter landscape buffering requirement um one starts from 45.5 ft south of the northern corner of the parcel all right where's that where's that starting point if you could do we have a arrow that you can jump onto that and show I can work with Joe to to get there it's on this screen it would be the top left uh corner of the parcel that is yeah all the way to the parcel boundary uh that corner okay all the way in the top left uh that is the northern Corner okay um and so starting from 45.5 ft South of that corner and then spanning 33 feet along that property line all right that's the yellow portion the first yellow portion that is the larger y yes near the near the middle uh portion of that property line is the why is it needed uh why is the Landscaping buffering need variance in that particular location this is because we have parking spaces which are directly abing the rear property line uh which would not be normally permitted they would need to be screened by that 5 foot perimeter Landscaping buffer uh the applicant was not able to fit the required parking spaces um adequately into the area um 14 is the minimum that's required and the parking spaces would not be long enough or they would not be accessible um in any of the layouts um that they could find so this is their their final option was to apply for this variant in order to accommodate those parking spaces all right so before we finish up on that particular location the 14 13 and 12 those are reflecting numbered parking spaces on the diagram that's correct okay the triangle at the back of the property um that is highlighted in yellow is that the other portion that is um that you are recommending approval of [Music] a loss of the buffering landscape requirement yes okay and again can can you tell us how that was measured then starting at the back property line is that correct we're starting from the Eastern Corner which is that which is that corner in the top right of the screen okay there and it spans 23 feet uh from that from that corner okay so the the only um the only part of the perimeter landscape buffer buffering that would need to be um removed would be on that rear property line since it is compliant um on the side uh so that's why that that triangle is only at the rear side of that five fo five foot perimeter buffer thank you all right those are all the questions that I have are you asking for the special manag R to receive the packet into evidence yes I okay all right go ahead and accept into evidence uh as exhibit number one to V 20243 Pages 59 through 94 of the agenda packet and Mr steeran I'm going to call up anything else from Mr steerman no thank you all right I'm going to call up the um applicant or anyone on behalf of the property owners U to come up now sir I do have one question for Mr steeran is there any difference between the requests that the applicant has made and your recommendation for approval uh no there's there's no difference uh per se um I think I I attempted to make the language more clear as it relates to the paral itself uh rather than what is proposed on the site plan okay understood but it's not a you're not imposing a different condition on what the applicant applied for you're recommending approval just setting forth exactly what you'd like to see in my order as to what the variant should read yes that's correct okay thank you uh all right sir what is your name and relationship to the uh applicant or property owner yeah I'm Jack bodak of bodak hay Architects uh I'm the uh one of the architects involved in the project and um I'm here to kind of present uh uh and actually most of it's been well presented by the city uh the property as you know the hold on Mr Bosak because I'm going to give you a chance to say everything you want do you want to ask any questions of I don't okay all right uh don't go anywhere stay right there Mr TR does the city have anything else there's no other Witnesses all right Mr Bosak now go ahead and tell me whatever you want to tell me about the project um this this property the biggest thing about this property is the adverse effect that not only the adverse effect that the uh the taking that happened uh originally on Gul Boulevard but also the fact that the property as you can see on the diagram really has kind of a strange angular twist to it and it made putting a square building squarely uh parallel to either the rear or the side property line very difficult uh the yellow areas that you see I'll I'll cover this this is one of the later things but um you can see we do have we maintain the Landscaping on the corner which is what the public sees for the most part on 135th and traveling uh down the alley uh we really had a lot of trouble getting the parking and the building to fit on the adverse size of the site The yellow section is where the parking spaces do back out on the far right corner uh you can see the Landscaping actually was maintained uh back up in the uh area uh between the alley and that yellow spot but the yellow spot is where we had to um had to eliminate the Landscaping to fit one of the required parking spaces in basically the site is approximately 10,000 a little over 10,100 Square ft and the adverse um uh effect of the diagonal nature of the site then shortened by a considerable amount of of by taking on the road created some unusual setbacks the existing building is actually uh 7.7 feet off of Gulf Boulevard uh we're going to increase it to the code required 25 ft the 135th side of the street uh the required is 10 and we're increasing it from the 4.8 to the uh 6 feet uh which is still uh deficit of about 4 feet but it is an improvement uh on the Alley in the rear the uh the encroachment primarily in the rear as you can see is not the building itself the main building it's the dumpster uh we had a hard time locating the dumpster so we located it so that access to it uh for emptying the trash um on pickup days is a lot easier uh once again encroachment of the dumpster into the site as you can see in itself was was quite a undertaking but it does uh that is the uh encroachment in the back it is not the main building I just wanted to bring that out the Redevelopment code applies we didn't want to go through the Redevelopment code because we felt that we could handle everything with within this uh with these three what we consider to be reasonable variances the uh functional opsol of the building that's there has been an issue the site is almost entirely paved and covered by building from one end to the other in this present State and naturally we greatly improve the uh the perious um surface um area on the site the we're requesting this modification to the setbacks and the um elimination of the required Landscaping on the Alley U aside from that all other conditions meet the Florida building code the zoning uh regulations and FEMA regulations uh We've designed everything within that uh Spectrum the space on the ground floor is a, 1400 square foot proposed ancillary space that is allowed within the regulation of the uh eight units we are proposing aside from that I mean I really the the it's been well presented by the city and we think it's a reasonable request and we would um like to request that be approved thank you Mr buak Mr tras any questions I have a few questions Mr BRC have you had the opportunity to uh review the staff report and recommendation yes okay and um you have no objections to the staff recommendation as it's laid out in the staff report correct none whatsoever thank you thank you m TR you beat me to it so same anything I'd have Mr boak would you like to call any other Witnesses or present any other information to me today no I believe uh I've presented uh between the staff report which we've have met with the staff fully concur with their um uh determinations and we would respectfully request that you consider approval of this request all right thank you Mr Bosak if there are any members of the public that comment and you want another shot tell me anything I will give you that shot in just a few minutes all right are there any members of the public that would like to talk about V 202 24-3 is that this one here that is the one we're talking about right here this one up on the screen all right come on up sir and what I need you to do is uh give me your full name and address or tell me how you're affected by this variance my name is Paul bam 13500 1 Street East uh we live in Eco Village just adjacent to the property going in all right hold on sir I got Paul as a first name spell your last name for me bam b y a m okay sir all right understand your uh go ahead sir I didn't mean to cut you off go ahead no I'm a uh resident in the neighborhood uh adjacent to the property uh there's been uh a lot of activity going on there with the six West uh with the events going on activities going on quite a popular place it's bringing a lot of activity to our neighborhood some good some bad noise all night not all night till 10 11:00 I don't know if there's noise ordinance but the parking is become available or is become a problem it's filling up our neighborhood streets when there's emergency vehicles that need to come down in into the Golf Boulevard area and First Avenue it it's blocking up areas for vehicles to get through they're talking about the alleyway they're bringing in buses to drop people off for this entertainment venue they're going through a one-way alley in our backyard the wrong way so they can get their bus through I don't think this is real safe I'm totally opposed of everything that you guys have talked about on this building I I guess I should have attended more meetings and I will talk to our neighbor Neighbors around the area we sure do like the the beach we moved here from Northern United States to get here Minnesota to enjoy the beach now we're here partying every weekend with the Event Center adding that that property there is just going to create more and more excitement for everybody with all the vrbos around us it's just turned into nothing but party I understand we're in a vacation resort Community but let's have a little bit of Civility and life around here um I I'm opposed of everything that they've talked about all right sir thank you for providing your comments today appreciate that are there any other members of the public that would like to comment in regard to V 20243 okay going once going twice all right we'll close public comment Mr Bosak would you like to provide any additional information based upon the public comment uh no no additional information but I do think that I understand the gentleman's consideration about the venue uh event next door which um is a fairly substantial event uh holding place I don't think that should be uh necessarily affecting our request though thank you very much Mr TR same question to you in in that regard you want to address public comment I have nothing thank you all right all right based upon the staff report the evidence provided today I'm going to go ahead and Grant V 20243 and I'm going to use the exact language that the staff recommends on page 64 of the packet all right let's move on to the last one which is V 2024 d04 this is for the property located at 13510 first stre East is the city ready to proceed we are all right go ahead Mr tras um we were going to have uh Joe petraglia um present this particular case Joe you've already been sworn in are you familiar with uh this particular property and the variance request 20244 yes sir did you prepare the staff report and recommendation yes okay if you want to go ahead and present that please sure okay staff report and recommendation special magistrate Mee meeting April 22nd 24 application is V 202 24-4 the applicant is David green and Cecilia Donovan and that is also the property owner property address is 13510 1 Street East madira Beach Florida 33708 parcel ID 15-31 d5- 58320 d009 d70 legal description Michelle's Beach reev revised BLK 9 lot 7 and Ne apostrophe l y half of vac Ali on S SW p r deed bk55 8 PG 368 zoning future land use is R2 low density multif family residential residential medium the request is to reduce the sidey yard setback by half a foot to allow three a three foot wide utility deck the specific code Provisions are section 1 t-26 3 side yard a single family lots less than 50 fet wide May reduce the total side setback to 10 ft with a minimum of 5 ft on either side and section 110- 2064 for only those dwelling units with the lowest habital space elevated at or above the elevation designed on the flood insurance rate map firm exterior stairs platforms for mechanical equipment and chimney shall be allowed to extend into the side yard setback but only to a depth of no more than one half of the required setback such equipment shall be located in the middle 1/3 of the structure all mechanical equipment must be appropriately shielded from public view with materials including but not limited to lovers lattice and the like one background the structure was built in 2016 under another variance V 2014-16 which granted 13510 First Street amongst other addresses within Eco Village a 5- foot setback on both sides of the house which is now granted by right which is now Allowed by right excuse me and the ability to add an additional 1 foot to the 50% encroachment permitted for platforms and mechanical equipment under Section 110- 933a any addition altercation or renovation to a non-conforming structure cannot increase the degree of non-conformity therefore the applicant cannot extend the existing platform by right the city clerk was not able to locate the order granting the variance to verify if the ex expiration date if an expiration date was given and section 2- 503f states that all variances granted by the special magistrate and not acted upon within one year of being granted shall automatically expire uh City staff recommended to the applicant that they should apply for this additional variance in this variance the applicant is only requesting an additional 5 foot encroachment into the side setback to extend the existing utility deck and allow for access to accompanying electrical components to two Tesla power walls which is half the 1T additional encroachment approved from the previous variants Duke require such platforms to be 3 feet wide however City Land Development regulations only allow for a 2 and 1/2t encroachment into the setback for mechanical equipment and platforms which is 50% of the allowable 5- foot setback two variance criteria and and Analysis special conditions and circumstances exist which are particular to the land Building or other structures for which the variance is sought and which do not apply generally to the land buildings or other structures in the same district special conditions to be considered shall include but are not limited to the following circumstances and City staff found C residential neighborhood character many houses in Eco Village including 13510 First Street already have utility Decks that ENC encroach into the side yard setback by more than 50% and also finings of e were found architectural Andor engineering considerations the purpose of of the proposed utility deck is to install a modern energy storage units and replace equipment elevated above the base flood elevation to support additional solar panels to power the home without a generator during a power outage two espe the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant the self-created hardship shall not justify variants findings this is not a self-created hardship because the applicant does not have enough exist existing side yard space to add a compliant platform without encroaching more than 50% the applicant has not yet begun work and has been researching how to complete this project while complying with all applicable codes three granting the variance will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied to other lands buildings or structures in the same zoning District findings other properties located in the Eco Village were granted the same variant in 2016 and would also be able to install the same power walls being proposed by this applicant four literal interpretation would deprive the applicant of Rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning District under the terms of the Land Development regulations so Part B of this code and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant findings literal interpretation of the setbacks would deny the homeowner the ability to extend their utility deck while other property owners located in the R2 zoning District would be able to do one to build one by right five the variance granted is the minimum variance that would make possible the reasonable use of the land findings literal uh 3 feet is the minimum width of such utility decks Allowed by Duke on other codes therefore the additional half a foot5 foot being requested by the applicant is the minimum allowable to install such equipment which is a reasonable use of the land additionally is worth noting that the applicant has reviewed other options as to locations for such equipment before settling on the sidey yard six the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the city Land Development regulations and that such variants will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to Public Welfare findings the proposed variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the city Land Development regulations and will not negatively affect the character of the neighborhood as previously many other Homes located in the Eco Village including 13510 First Street have already already have utility Decks that encroach into the required side yard setback the harmony of the neighborhood and the general scheme of the development of the neighborhood will be unchanged three staff recommendations staff recommends approval uh submitted by Joe Petr which is myself and the attachments include application with the existing survey images of the utility deck markup of the proposed utility deck extension and Equipment a public notice of mailing and posting um that can be found on pages 99 through 107 of are the application that was submitted to the City Pages 108 to 121 of the agenda packet are images and the existing survey provided by the applicant page 122 is the posting affidavit and Page 123 is the mailing affidavit uh the following two pages 124 and 125 are the public notice that was sent out followed by 126 the notice to be affected party that was sent out 127 through 131 are the mailing labels uh 132 through 134 are the posting pictures have you received any correspondence or phone calls from any person that uh would deem themselves to be an affected party no okay are you asking for the special magistrate to receive into evidence of Staff report and recommendation that you prepared um that and it's in the packet yes I am okay all right I have no other questions thank you all right we'll go ahead and accept in as exhibit number one to V 202 24-4 the pages of the agenda package which are Pages 95 through through 34 13 134 yeah gotcha 134 Mr trag I just want to make sure um at page 115 appears to be some kind of sealed document is that part of the elevation certificate for the property it's right after that page legible to me if that's something critical that's in the record I would just ask that the city supplement the record with a legible copy after the hearing if that's critical I don't find it to be critical um that's part of the elevation certificate that the applicant provided okay no problem all right uh is anyone here on behalf of the applicant or the property owner all right uh sir come on forward and what is your name and relationship to either the applicant or the property owner my name is Joe Lions I work for lunex power I'm a solar contractor that uh Mr Green has contracted with to try to build this stuff all right Joe you said Lions is your last name l y NS yes sir excellent all right sir uh in a minute I'm going to give you an opportunity to tell me anything you want about this you have the right to ask any questions of Mr petraglia as you probably heard he's recommending approval with no conditions do you want to ask him any questions at this time no sir all right uh does the city have anyone anyone else no other Witnesses all right Mr Lions what would you like to tell me and about this or show me about this application that you have or has been submitted on behalf of the property owner and applicant I have nothing for you guys I think that they've presented everything clearly and accurately all right Mr tras any questions of Mr Lions no I don't thank you all right Mr Lions anything else you'd like to show me any other Witnesses you like to call or anything like that you sir all right have a seat sir are there any members of the public that would like to provide comment in regard to application v2244 any members of the public all right come on forward uh sir and I know your name already but go ahead and uh for the record for this hearing go ahead and give us your name again sir my name is Paul bam I'm a uh resident of madira next to Mr Green and I think it's okay that he could put the the wall up all right so we'll note that is no objection and a no objection from the okay great thank you sir all right Mr tras anything else no staff recommends approval okay uh Mr Lions do you want to say anything else okay I'm going to go ahead and Grant variance number 20 24-4 all right is there anything else before me today Mr tras no sir that will conclude today's hearing thank you everyone for coming e