|
Back to Calendar
Return
|
| |
6. 1.
|
| Board of Adjustment |
|
|
|
| SUBMISSION DATA: |
REQUESTED VARIANCE:
The Applicant is seeking variances to eliminate the rear and side building setbacks along with a variance to the marine/estuarine/riverine (MERS) setback.
RELEVANT AUTHORITY:
Land Development Code of Escambia County, Florida (Ordinance No. 96-3 as amended), Section: 3-2.11(d)(7)a,b & Section: 4-5.5.b. Estuarine Setbacks (2)
(7) Structure setbacks. For all principal structures, minimum setbacks are:
a. Front and rear. Fifteen feet in both front and rear.
b. Sides. Ten feet on each side, including any group of attached townhouses. For structures exceeding 35 feet above highest adjacent grade, an additional two feet for each additional 10 feet in height.
(2) Estuarine shoreline protection zone. An estuarine shoreline protection zone is established along the estuarine shorelines extending 15 feet landward of the mean high water line (MHWL).
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
There are special conditions and circumstances that do exist which are peculiar to the land, structure or buildings and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. Such physical characteristics include, but are not limited to, exceptionally narrowness, shallowness, shape, topographic conditions, or the presence of sensitive environmental resources, any or all of which will result in peculiar or practical difficulties.
The lots in question pre-date the LDC and are much narrower than called for in the zoning requirements. This situation presents clear, practical difficulties in the use of the property for single-family residences as allowed by code. The required zoning setbacks would unreasonably reduce the buildable area and constitute a hardship for lots this size. |
| CRITERION (2) |
The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant.
FINDINGS-OF-FACT
The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant as the land was platted by the County prior to the adoption of land development regulations. |
| 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
The approval of this variance 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. |
| 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 land development code would deprive the applicant 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. |
| 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
Given the unique size and topography of these lots, the requested variances are necessary to make reasonable use of the lots in a manner similar to nearby properties. |
| 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 these variances will be consistent with the general intent and purpose of the land development code and will not be injurious to the area or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.
|
| STAFF RECOMMENDATION: |
Given the unique situation in the platting of these lots versus the current setbacks, the requested building setback variances are appropriate. The variance to the MERS setback is justified due to the developed nature of the shoreline and the existing over-water constuction.
Because these requests meet all of the required criteria, Staff recommends approval of the variances as submitted. |
| BOA DECISION |
| The Board adopted Staff Findings and approved the Variance request as submitted. |
|
|
|