PDD-21-2094

Published agenda

Heard once, at the Planning Commission on Sep 30, 2021.

No final outcomeThe minutes show no disposition for any appearance of this case. That is a gap in the record, not a decision.

Official title

Variance Request (Consent) – Shaunna Mizelle – Increase in the Maximum Fence Height Along the South Front Property Line Facing Sea Ranch Drive from 4 Feet to 6 Feet on a Corner Lot in a R-4 High Density Residential District – Northwest Pasco County – On the Northeast Corner of the Intersection of Melanie Avenue and Sea Ranch Drive – Containing Approximately .15 Acre

Every appearance1 of 1 are in a recording

TranscriptWhat was said at each appearance is below it. Machine transcription, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 85% of 86 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.

1Sep 30, 2021
Planning CommissionPC1Public hearingNo disposition in the minutes
Open this item →
13m
Denise
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, Planning Commission Members. Denise Hernandez, Planning and Development. The first item is item PC one. That's P D D twenty one two zero nine four. It's a variance request in the name of Shauna Mizel. It's for an increase in the maximum fence height along the South Front Property Line facing C Ranch Drive from four feet to six feet on a corner lot in an R4 high density residential district. This comes to you with a recommendation of approval with conditions as included in your agenda packet.
Charles GreyChair
All right. Is the applicant present?
Denise
The applicant is virtually present.
Charles GreyChair
Is there anyone here to object? Okay, so you would like to have that poll from this consent agenda? You'd like to have it polled today so you could speak on it? Okay. We'll pull that one.
Denise
Right. Item PC two is PDD 212095. It's an alternative standard in the name of Snow Mountain, Screamageddon, Treehoppers. For an alternative standard from the requirements of the Land Development Code, Section 406.1 signs to increase the maximum allowable height of one monument sign from eight feet to 12 feet and increase the maximum square feet in sign structure area from 80 square feet to 104 square feet in exchange for an overall reduction in the total. Total num total signage on the property in an AC agricultural district. It comes to you with a recommendation of
approval with conditions as included in your agenda packet. And I will say that on this item, Mr. Girardi is has recused himself on this item.
Charles GreyChair
Okay, and then is is there uh the applicant is present?
Denise
The applicant is virtually present.
Charles GreyChair
Is there anyone here to object? Any objections?
Jaimie GirardiVice Chair
Mr. Chair, could you vote on that one separately so so that Mr. Jority.
Charles GreyChair
So um Can I hear a motion to approve uh PC two please? And I'll
Chris Williams
make a motion to approve PC two.
Charles GreyChair
I'll second that. Okay, so we have a motion uh on item PC two as submitted and um with the Representative Girardi with withholding. Uh abstaining. Any further discussion? All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed?
Denise
Following item is PC three, it's PDD 217554. This is a special exception in the name of American Homes for Rent, Bridge Haven Residential. It's for an amenity center in an R4 high density residential district. This comes to you with a recommendation of approval with conditions as included in your agenda packet.
Charles GreyChair
Any applicants present?
Denise
The applicant is virtually present.
Charles GreyChair
Anyone here to object?
Pardon me?
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Why do you?
Charles GreyChair
All right.
Denise
Move on to item PC PC four.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Yeah.
Denise
And that's uh PDD 217559 in the name of Daveron LLC 8429 Land O' Lakes Boulevard. It's for a special exception for a professional services office in an R1 rural density residential district. Comes to you with a recommendation of approval with conditions as included in your agenda packet.
Charles GreyChair
All right. Is the applicant present?
You're the applicant? Okay. Anyone here to object? Say no objections.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Mr. Chair, I I I just have one quick question. I think it can stay on the consent, but It's if the special exceptions granted, is it granted just for this particular use or does it run with the property?
Denise
It grants it for this particular use that will run with the property.
Jaimie GirardiVice Chair
Okay. Unless it's conditioned we have in the past approved some special exceptions that are limited to that. particular individual, but otherwise it runs with the land.
Denise
Yeah, this particular one does not have a condition that states it doesn't run with the land. We didn't think it was appropriate because it is in a you know retail office residential area. Um it's uh commercial corridor on uh 41.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Okay, I just wanted to clarify that's all. Thank you. Thank you.
Denise
Okay. That concludes your consent agenda.
Charles GreyChair
All right. Um then I'll hear a motion to uh approve the consent agenda as modified.
Jaimie GirardiVice Chair
Mr. Chair, can I just ask real quick, do we have anybody on WebEx for any of the consent items that is not an applicant?
Denise
We do not have anyone on WebEx for any of the consent items that is not an applicant. We do have someone for PC five, but thank you for mentioning that.
Jaimie GirardiVice Chair
Okay. Thank you. Okay.
Christopher Poole
Motion to approve the consent agenda as modified.
Chris Williams
I'll second that.
Charles GreyChair
Do we have a second? Any further discussion on the motion?
All in favor? Signify by saying aye. Bye. Post? Okay, motion carries. So we're uh We're gonna hear um PC one and PC three then.
Denise
So let me uh share my PowerPoint for PC One.
Charles GreyChair
Yeah.
So that's the right.
Unidentified speakerVoice C
Yeah. Thank you. Yeah.
Denise
Planning Commission members item PC one is PDD 212094. This is for Shauna Mizel. This is for a variance to increase the maximum fence height along the Southfront property line facing Shea Ranch Drive from four feet to six feet on a corner lot in an R4 district. The property is located on north in northwest Pasco County, and it's on the northeast corner of the intersection of Melanie Avenue and It's approximately four hundred and fifty feet or so west of Old Diggs Highway
and a little bit over five hundred feet from nineteen.
As uh stated, the incre it's for an increase in the maximum fence height from four feet to six feet along C Ranch Drive.
This is a site plan just basically showing the fence area as it exists today. It's a vinyl fence. Here's some photographs of the fence along C Ranch Drive. The current location contains a single family dwelling on a corner waterfront lot. There is a previously existing non-conforming six-foot-tall fence on the property that was removed. The fence was replaced with a six-foot-tall vinyl fence. The Land Development Code 1203.2 basically states that if 50%
or more of the structure value was damaged, it cannot be restored except with in conformity with the regulations in the zoning district, which require a four-foot fence. There was a Pasco County Administrator for the fence, and a final hearing has been continued to a future date pending the outcome of this variance. The traffic operations division has provided that the six-foot-tall vinyl fence does not obstruct traffic or visibility at the intersection of C Ranch Drive and Melanie Avenue. And staff finds that the applicant's
hardship is a result of staff site conditions that are not self-imposed. And uh the re the uh staff recommends approval with conditions as included in your agenda packet. And I'm here for any questions you may have.
Charles GreyChair
Okay. So is the applicant virtually present?
Denise
Ms. Mm.
Charles GreyChair
All right.
Unidentified speakerVoice D
Yes, sir.
Charles GreyChair
Would uh the applicant uh like to Make their presentation or would like to w wait until the we hear what the concerns are.
Unidentified speakerVoice D
Well, I could wait for what the concerns are, but given the location of the property it speaks for itself because adjacent there are woods there where the homeless people have been
Uh
Charles GreyChair
Okay.
Unidentified speakerVoice D
that's why it's not a beautification issue. It was just a matter of conforming to what was previously there to be a in code. It is no no obstruction of the water view based on my roof line being so long. Uh and it's w it's it's one of its kind.
Charles GreyChair
Okay. Thank you. Then uh you want to w withhold further comment until we hear what the concerns are?
Can you hear me okay?
Unidentified speakerVoice D
Yes, sir. Yeah, sir.
Charles GreyChair
All right. Well then that's what we'll do. Uh I think uh Was that the lady at the back had a question? You want to come forward and please state your name and address? And let us know what your concerns are.
Christine Perez
My name is Christine Perez. I am the adjoining neighbor to her east side at [address removed]. I as well had a six-foot fence in the area when I moved in and bought the home. uh code enforcement came and when I probably six months after I put up the other side of the fence to make it match. uh informed me that it must be cut down to four feet or replaced or removed. At that time, verbatim, the code enforcement man told me that the county would come out and do
it and charge me if I did not have it done in 21 days. Here since I've been told by code enforcement that that's not true. However, my fence had to be cut down to four feet, and $2,000 fence, I was not very happy. If it's for safety reasons or reasons of the homeless, I believe that my property, which is the exact same property line that she's speaking of. Should be included. It's the same reason. I'm a single parent. It's just being a child at home. So again, same reasons as her, I feel like it should have been up. Hers
is in the front yard and the side yard. complete six foot fence all the way around. on the other side of her fence, where she still has five feet of property, has been left unkept. It has been overgrown. It's dead branches. It's out of sight, out of mind type of deal. and I feel that she can't see it and she's not cleaning it. I've actually had to pay her own son to mow that part of the grass. So I feel I should be included if it is allowed. I feel that it should be Each
end cap of that street should be allowed at that point. It should be Well,
Jaimie GirardiVice Chair
ma'am, are you are you you're not against the variance then? You only want your own.
Christine Perez
I'm not against as long as I'm included.
Jaimie GirardiVice Chair
Okay, well you can't this this this board cannot just include you in this variance request. You need to file an application for your own variance request and then it would come back to the board
Christine Perez
In the same situation.
Jaimie GirardiVice Chair
The same process that your name was going through. You'd have to go through that same process. Okay. So you can f you can talk to Ms. Hernandez about filing an application for your own variance.
Christine Perez
Okay. Thank you very much.
Jaimie GirardiVice Chair
All right. Thank you.
Charles GreyChair
Okay. Um Does the applicant have any comment there?
Probably nothing to add.
Unidentified speakerVoice D
Oh nothing to add the The property has been very well maintained, as well as hers. And From C Ranch Drive there is no obstruction of the water view. And that's all I could say. I could I could upload more pictures. you know, showing that there's no obstruction of the water view, but this is a safety issue and this was an issue of a c a code enforcement.
Charles GreyChair
And I I assume you'd have no
Unidentified speakerVoice D
objection
Charles GreyChair
to her having the same Uh exception.
Unidentified speakerVoice D
No, no, no, sir.
Charles GreyChair
Very good. All right. Well Then I'd like to hear a motion.
Chris Williams
I'll motion to approve uh PC One. Second.
Charles GreyChair
Okay, we have a motion to approve PC staff's recommendation or approval with PC One. Uh any further discussion on the motion?
Chris Williams
May I make one comment? I would suggest that this yeah the lady who uh came up here w and uh requested at the same treatment as what we're voting on, that perhaps she seek or somebody provide her with some assistance in going through the process. That's the only comment I would make. And it's just a common.
Charles GreyChair
I think and I think they certainly will. Um I think uh David, you s you steered her to the right person. I'm sure Denise would be happy to Make sure she gets what she needs to get that done.
Nope suggestion. Okay. So we have uh further discussion. All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, like, sign. Motion carries.