Agenda

Back to Calendar Return

6. B.

Board of Adjustment

Meeting Date:	10/16/2019
CASE: V-2019-05
APPLICANT:	John and Veronique Landis, Owners
ADDRESS:	5047 Challenger Way
PROPERTY REFERENCE NO.:	23-3S-31-2050-013-001
ZONING DISTRICT:	HDR, High Density Residential district
FUTURE LAND USE:	MU-S, Mixed-Use Suburban

SUBMISSION DATA:

REQUESTED VARIANCE:
The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the required rear yard setback of 5 feet to 2 feet to allow for an accessory structure.

RELEVANT AUTHORITY:

Land Development Code of Escambia County, Florida (Ordinance No. 96-3 as amended),
Sec. 4-7.3 Accessory uses and structures.
(b) Specific uses and structures.
(10) Swimming pool enclosures. Screened enclosures for swimming pools may be erected no closer than five feet from the rear or side property line. No pool enclosure shall be allowed on any easement unless authorized by the grantee of the easement through an encroachment agreement.

CRITERIA

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

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

Staff finds that there are no special conditions or circumstances peculiar to the land, structure or building. Review of the adjacent and surrounding properties and structures shows an average lot size and shape as compared, with similar structures and buildings.

CRITERION (2)

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

FINDINGS-OF-FACT

Based upon information from the submitted application it appears that special conditions and circumstances do not result from actions by the applicant. The pool structure was constructed in 1992 and no pool enclosure was anticipated at the time of construction. The lip of the pool is 5 feet from the rear property line which meets the setback requirements for accessory structures.There are no restrictions on the plat that would prohibit the construction of the pool enclosure in the 5 foot rear setback area. However, there is a 10 foot utility easement of the side of the property that has been impacted by a deck. The applicant has indicated on the site plan that the deck structure will be removed. See Exhibit A and site plan submitted by the applicant.

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 of the variance as requested will not confer on the applicant any special privileges that are not available to all property owners in the County.

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 provisions of the LDC would not deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district and would not create an unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant.

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 variance requested is the minimum allowance to make possible the reasonable use of the existing land, building, or structure.

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

Granting of the variance will not be injurious to the area or otherwise detrimental to public welfare.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

STAFF RECOMMENDS

There appears to be no substantial hardship associated with the requested variance and recommends denial.

BOA DECISION

BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FINDINGS:

The Board disagreed with Staff's findings and approved the variance as requested.

Attachments
Working Case File
Exhibit A