Agenda

Back to Calendar Return

6. 2.

Board of Adjustment

Meeting Date:	09/09/2015
CASE: V-2015-08
APPLICANT:	Mark Lydon, Agent for Roberston Brazell, LLC
ADDRESS:	2755 Fenwick Road
PROPERTY REFERENCE NO.:	42-1S-30-3001-001-003
ZONING DISTRICT:	Heavy Commercial and Light Industrial District (HC/LI-NA)
FUTURE LAND USE:	Mixed-Use Urban (MU-U)

SUBMISSION DATA:

REQUESTED VARIANCE:

The Applicant is seeking a 13 foot setback variance for the west property line allowing the west side setback to be 137 feet. The current required setback is 150 feet (the height of the tower) from any residential zoning district line.

RELEVANT AUTHORITY:

Land Development Code of Escambia County, Florida (Ordinance No. 96-3 as amended), Section: 4-7.12.a.3

(3) Setback from residential zoning. No commercial communication tower shall be located closer than the height of the tower to a residential zoning district line.

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

Section 2-6.3.c.3.a of the Land Development Code defines special circumstances or conditions specifically as follows: Exceptional conditions. There are exceptional conditions or circumstances that are unique to the land in question, not ordinarily found on other lands in the vicinity and not a result of the owner's intentional action. Unique conditions or circumstances include exceptional narrowness, shallowness, shape, or topographic conditions of the land or the presence of environmentally sensitive lands in or around the land.

Current zoning presents practical difficulties in building tall communication towers where they are needed due to the density of existing development of residential and commercial uses. Staff finds that these circumstances do meet the need for a variance.

CRITERION (2)

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

FINDINGS-OF-FACT

The unique conditions of this case are not self imposed, The Applicant is seeking to meet all requirements of the Land Development Code and will proceed through the Site Plan Review process.

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 relief will not confer a special privilege.

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

Section 2-6.3.c.3.b of the Land Development Code (LDC) defines, substantial hardship as under the unique land conditions or circumstances prompting the variance request, the strict application of LDC standards causes an exceptional practical difficulty or undue physical hardship to the owner that effectively prohibits a permissible principal use or denies rights and privileges legally enjoyed by owners of other properties in the vicinity or within the same zoning district.

The submitted request does meet this criterion.

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 is the minimum necessary given the unique circumstances present.

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 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.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the Board approve the variance request as submitted.

BOA DECISION

The Board adopted Staff's findings and approved the Variance as requested.

Attachments
Working Case File V-2015-08