Agenda

Back to Calendar Return

6. A.

Board of Adjustment

Meeting Date:	06/20/2018
CASE: V-2018-05
APPLICANT:	Ted & TC Moucheron
ADDRESS:	1600 Ora Drive
PROPERTY REFERENCE NO.:	29-2S-31-2201-000-000
ZONING DISTRICT:	MDR, Medium Density Residential
FUTURE LAND USE:	MU-S, Mixed-Use Suburban

SUBMISSION DATA:

REQUESTED VARIANCE:

The Applicants are seeking a variance to allow a 6 foot privacy fence in the front yard of a residential dwelling.

RELEVANT AUTHORITY:

Land Development Code of Escambia County, Florida (Ordinance No. 96-3 as amended), Section: 5-9.4 (a)

(a) Fence heights in residential districts. Maximum heights for fences constructed in
residential districts, except those on Pensacola Beach, shall be:

Opaque Materials
Transparent Materials Which Do Not Obstruct Light, Air and Visibility
Front yard 3 feet 4 feet
Side yard 8 feet 8 feet
Rear yard 8 feet 8 feet

CRITERIA

Land Development Code of Escambia County, Florida (Ordinance No. 96-3 as amended), Section 2-6.3 (b)

CRITERION (1)

Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure or building and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district.

FINDINGS-OF-FACT

The parcel in question is a large (1.29 acre) residential property with 260 (±) feet of depth behind the residence. Staff finds no unique physical hardships on the land that would necessitate a fence variance in the front yard.

CRITERION (2)

The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant.

FINDINGS-OF-FACT

The Applicant was granted a fence permit to build a 6 foot privacy fence in the side and rear yard. The fence that was built is in the front yard, not as indicated on the approved plan.

CRITERION (3)

Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this land development code to other lands, buildings or structures in the same zoning district.

FINDINGS-OF-FACT

Granting the requested variance would not in itself confer a special privilege that other properties wouldn't be able to seek through this Board.

CRITERION (4)

Strict application of the provisions of the land development code would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of the land development code and would create an unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant..

FINDINGS-OF-FACT

Strict application of the code would not create an undue hardship as there are no unique physical hardships on the land.

CRITERION (5)

The variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure.

FINDINGS-OF-FACT

The requested variance granted is not the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure. A privacy fence could be constructed in the side and rear yards as indicated on the issued fence permit.

CRITERION (6)

The granting of the variance will be consistent with the general intent and purpose of the land development code and that such variance will not be injurious to the area or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.

FINDING OF FACT:

The requested variance would not be injurious to the area or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

STAFF RECOMMENDS

Staff finds that the request does not meet criteria 1, 2, 4, and 5. Denial of the request is recommended.

BOA DECISION

BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FINDINGS:

The Board adopted Staff's findings and denied the Variance request.

Attachments
Working Case File