CTYy OF - ARASOTA City of Sarasota Board of Adjustment Minutes October 26, 2022 The following are the motion minutes of the Board of Adjustment meeting held in the City Commission Chambers at City Hall, 1565 1st Street, on Wednesday, October 26, 2022. Ms. McLeod Wilkins confirmed that Director Lucia Panica was available by telephone to participate in the meeting. All in attendance stood for the Pledge of Allegiance. The meeting came to order at 1:34 p.m. Chair Ruch reminded everyone in attendance to silence their cell phones and stated that the microphones were live and recording. Roll call was taken. PRESENT: Matthew Ruch, Chair; Olga Hanlon, Vice Chair; Shane LaMay, BOA Member; Chad Turnbull, BOA Member; James Lee, BOA Member; Alison Christie, Development Review Chief Planner, Development Services, and Secretary to the Board; Angela McLeod Wilkins, Administrative Assistant, Development Services ABSENT: None LEGAL COUNSEL: Mike Connolly, Deputy City Attorney The July 27th, 2022 meeting minutes were approved as submitted. Mr. Connolly announced that the public hearing for 22-VAR-09 would not be held and that the hearing for 22-APP-03 would be Quasi-judicial. Mr. Connolly then explained the Quasi-judicial hearing procedures and noted that the process for an Appeal is a two-step process, and that he would provide information related to the process when it was time for that hearing. Ex-parte communications were disclosed. Ms. Christie recited the Pledge of Conduct for all in attendance, and everyone intending to speak was sworn in. Time Limits were announçed. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Variance Petition No. 2022-VAR-09, Allen and Patricia Shipes, owners, requesting two (2) variances: 1) a reduction of the minimum lot width requirement of 80 feet to 68.2 feet, for a total variance request of11.8 feet; and 2) a reduction of the minimum front setback requirement of20 feet to 8 feet, for a total variance request of 12 feet. Address: 1621 Bay Point Court. Zoning Code Table: VI-203. Legal Description: On file in the Zoning Division of the Development Services Department, City of Sarasota. Zone District: RSF-2 (Residential Single Family). G. Matthew Brockway, agent. Mr. Connolly stated that Matthew Brockway, agent for the owners, had informed him that the owners were withdrawing their application for the second variance of their initial variance requests. Mr. Brockway approached the dais and stated that the owners' architect has developed a plan that does not require a variance. Mr. Brockway confirmed that the owners of the property at 1621 Bay Point Court had decided to withdraw their request for a reduction to the front yard setback. Administrative Appeal Petition No. 2022-APP-03, Thomas Frascone, aggrieved person, appealing the determination rendered by the Director of Development Services on August 10, 2022, as a result of a request for Zoning Code Interpretation 22-ZCI-02, filed July 12, 2022, by the aggrieved party. The issue for the appeal is the placement of an uncaged, in-ground pool within the required 20-foot front yard setback, specifically whether such placement of a pool is allowed per the City of Sarasota Zoning Code, and whether such placement of a pool requires a Major Encroachment. Address: 3940 Bay Shore Road. Zoning Code Sections: VII-903(1)(a), VII-903(1)(e), VII-1201b)(4)(a). Legal Description: On file in the Zoning Division of the Development Services Department, City of Sarasota. Zone District: RSF-2 (Residential Single Family). Daniel C. Guarnieri, agent for appellant. #1 - HEARING TO GRANT OR DENY AGGRIEVED PERSON STATUS TO THE APPLICANT Mr. Connolly explained that the application was for an Administrative Appeal to Zoning Code Interpretation No. 22-ZCI-02, and that the Board would first need to hold a hearing to determine if the applicant qualified as an "aggrieved person", as defined in the Zoning Code, before moving forward with a public hearing for the requested appeal. The public hearing was opened. Daniel Guarnieri, representative for the appellant, and Thomas Frascone, the appellant, approached the Dais. Mr. Guarnieri and Mr. Frascone presented a case in favor of Mr. Frascone's status as an aggrieved party. The Board had a discussion the matter of Mr. Frascone's status as an aggrieved party. There were no speakers from the public signed up to speak. Patrick Seidensticker, representative for Greg Anderson, the owner of the property at 3940 Bay Shore Road, approached the Dais. Mr. Seidensticker presented a case in opposition of Mr. Frascone's status as an aggrieved party. The Board questioned Mr. Seidensticker. Page 2 The Board discussed the matter of Mr. Frascone' 's status as an aggrieved party. There were no speakers from the public signed up to speak. Mr. Guarnieri and Mr. Frascone approached the dais for the: second time and provided a rebuttal The Board further discussed the matter. Vice Chair Hanlon made a motion to grant aggrieved person status to the applicant. The: motion was seconded by Mr. Lee. The motion to grant aggrieve person status to the applicant, passed 5-0. (Hanlon - yes; Ruch - yes; LaMay - yes; Lee - yes; Turnbull - yes) #2 - HEARING TO APPROVE OR DENY AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL TO 22-ZCI-02 Chair Ruch opened the public hearing for Administrative Appeal No. 22-APP-03. Ms. Christie provided an overview ofthe appeal. Mr. Guarnieri and Mr. Frascone approached the dais and presented their request for an appeal of Zoning Code Interpretation No. 22-ZCI-02. Mr. Seidensticker approached the dais. He objected to both the granting of aggrieved party status to the appellant, and the appellant's request for an administrative appeal of Zoning Code Interpretation No. 22-ZCI- 02. Mr. Guarnieri approached the dais for the second time and provided a rebuttal. Ms. Christie referenced an email chain in the Board Member packets from Ms. Panica to the applicant. Ms. Christie also noted that she had complied a list of examples of pools permitted in front yard setbacks in the City of Sarasota. Ms. Panica commented that several pools in front yard setbacks that were permitted in the City prior to her time as Director of Development Services. Ms. Panica also clarified that the Building Official of the City of Sarasota has authority to interpret the Building code, and does not have the authority to interpret the Zoning code. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Connolly explained details oft the Board's S role in making a decision on the appeal. The Board discussed the appeal. Mr. LaMay made a motion to deny the appeal. Page 3 Mr. Lee seconded the motion. The motion to deny the appeal of Zoning Code Interpretation No. 22-ZCI-02, passed 4-1. (Hanlon yes; Ruch - yes; LaMay yes; Lee yes; Turnbull - no) The Board had a brief discussion related to the variance process and the expenses associated with filing an application with the Board of Adjustment. Presentation of Topics by Board Members Ms. Hanlon informed the Board that she would not be having surgery. Presentation of' Topics by the City Administration or Legal Counsel to the Board Ms. Christie asked the Board to clarify whether they would like to have one alternate member or two alternate members. Mr. Connolly explained the circumstances under which an alternate member would be utilized. Ms. Christie stated that there would be a meeting November 16, 2022 and that the Board would be hearing one case. Scheduling of Special Meetings There were no Special Meetings scheduled. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 3:35 p.m. &A U ctts bonn CAiR CHAIRPERSON of the Board of Adjustment SECRETARY to the Board of Adjustment Page 4