Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Variance Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Applicant at 660 NE 119th seeks variance guidance for back-bedroom addition; board outlines process
Summary
Tiffany Hill asked the Village of Biscayne Park planning board to allow a back-bedroom addition to match an existing 3'2" wall rather than follow a 10-foot setback. The board clarified this meeting reviews the addition application, explained the four-point variance criteria and recommended resubmitting with fuller plans and elevations.
Tiffany Hill told the Village of Biscayne Park Planning & Zoning Board on June 1 that she plans a back-bedroom addition at 660 Northeast 119th Street and asked whether she could match an existing 3-foot-2-inch wall rather than meet the 10-foot rear setback.
"I'm Tiffany Hill at 660 Northeast 119th Street," the applicant said as she outlined a plan to add a bedroom behind the existing structure and to keep that addition flush with an existing encroaching wall. She said the front additions would comply with setback rules and that the back bedroom is the element prompting a potential variance.
Board members explained that the item on the agenda that night was an application review for the addition and not a variance hearing. The board walked through the variance process: an applicant typically must fill out the four-point variance questionnaire (necessity, least-possible variance, unique hardship, and effect on neighbors), the board makes a recommendation, and then the commission schedules a public hearing on the variance.
Members requested additional materials before moving to a recommendation. They asked for clear elevations showing how the proposed addition ties into existing roof and wall lines, section drawings with dimensions for height and articulation to avoid large, blank two-story walls, and any revised lot-coverage calculations. The board noted that if the variance is denied at this stage, the applicant may reapply with the questionnaire and supporting information; the sequence discussed was: review, variances if needed at a later hearing, then commission consideration.
The board offered procedural guidance: submit complete plans (architectural, plumbing, electrical), supply the variance questionnaire responses, and show how the front and rear additions would be phased if the applicant prefers to do front work first and rear work later. The board did not vote to recommend a variance that night and asked the applicant to return with the requested documents for a subsequent meeting.
