Title:
title
7377 Grand Avenue - Request for a fence height variance from six (6) feet to eight (8) feet in the R-1A (Single Family Dwelling) district; BV2025-123 (Daniel Sposato, Applicant) District 1 - Dallari (Jealyan Moreno, Project Manager)
end
Department/Division:
division
Development Services - Planning and Development
body
Authorized By:
Kathy Hammel
Contact/Phone Number:
Jealyan Moreno/407-665-7387
Motion/Recommendation:
1. Deny the request for a fence height variance from six (6) feet to eight (8) feet in the R-1A (Single Family Dwelling) district; or
2. Approve the request for a fence height variance from six (6) feet to eight (8) feet in the R-1A (Single Family Dwelling) district; or
3. Continue the request to a time and date certain.
Background:
• The subject property is located in the Oakcrest subdivision.
• The subject property is a corner lot and, as such, considered to have two (2) front yards for setback purposes. The front of the house faces Grand Avenue. The Park Vale Boulevard side is where the variance is being sought.
• The proposed privacy fence encroaches into a Utility easement and at building permitting will be required to meet the criteria for placement with an estoppel letter.
• The proposed privacy fence is 5 feet from the sidewalk and 19 feet from the edge of pavement.
• Traffic Engineering has no objection to the placement of the fence as it relates to sight visibility.
• The request is for a variance to Section 30.14.19(b) of the Seminole County Land Development Code, which states that the fences are limited to six (6) feet six (6) inches height.
• There have not been any prior variances for the subject property.
Staff Findings:
The applicant has not satisfied all six (6) criteria under Section 30.3.3.2(b) of the Seminole County Land Development Code for granting a variance as listed below:
1. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same zoning classification; and
2. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant; and
3. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by Chapter 30 to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning classification; and
4. That the literal interpretation of the provisions of Chapter 30 would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning classification and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant; and
5. That the variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure; and
6. That the grant of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of Chapter 30, will not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.
Staff finds that the following variance criteria have been satisfied:
Having a swale in the rear of the property, the literal interpretation of the provisions of Chapter 30 would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning classification and would not work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant. Section 30.3.3.2(b)(4)
Staff Conclusion:
Based upon the foregoing findings, the requested variance is not in the public interest and failure to grant the variance would not result in an unnecessary and undue hardship.
Staff Recommendation:
Based on the stated findings, staff recommends denial of the request, but if the Board of Adjustment determines that the applicant has satisfied all six (6) criteria under Section 30.3.3.2(b) of the Seminole County Land Development Code for granting a variance, staff recommends the following conditions of approval:
1. Any variance granted will apply only to the fence as depicted on the attached site plan; and
2. Any additional condition(s) deemed appropriate by the Board of Adjustment, based on information presented at the public hearing.