|
Back to Calendar
Return
|
| |
6. 1.
|
| Board of Adjustment |
|
|
|
| SUBMISSION DATA: |
REQUESTED VARIANCE:
The Applicant is requesting a variance to the subject property to reduce the distance from 100 feet to 25 feet from the residential zoning district for restaurants selling alcoholic beverage.
RELEVANT AUTHORITY:
Land Development Code of Escambia County, Florida (Ordinance No. 96-3 as amended), Section: 3-4.7 (b) (3)
f. Restaurants. Those selling alcoholic beverages shall be at least 100 feet from any residential zoning district (LDR-PK, MDR-PK, and HDR-PK) measured as the shortest distance between any exterior wall of the restaurant and the boundary line of the residential zoning.
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
The proposed structure on the site plan, as submitted by the applicant, would result in the restaurant being less than the required 100 feet from the residential zoning district to the east, if the restaurant owners plan to sell alcoholic beverages. |
| CRITERION (2) |
The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant.
FINDINGS-OF-FACT
Based on the application, staff does not find special conditions and circumstances unique to this site. The placement of the building within the 100' foot distance limitation is an action of 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 the variance requested will confer on the Applicant special privilege that is denied by the 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
Staff finds that the strict application of the code 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 requested variance is not the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure given that, based on the submitted site plan, the site could be redesigned to avoid the 100' foot distance limitation. |
| 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 granting of the variance would not be consistent with the general intent and purpose of the Land Development Code. |
| STAFF RECOMMENDATION: |
Staff recommends denial of the variance request as it does not meet all of the required variance criteria.
|
| BOA DECISION |
The Board voted to accept the Applicant's request to table the project for 30 days. |
|
|
|