Title:
title
103 Mercury Street - Request for a side yard setback variance from twenty-five (25) feet to seventeen (17) feet for an addition in the R-3 (Multi-Family) district; BV2026-060 (George Watkins, Applicant) District 4 - Lockhart (Kathy Hammel, Project Manager)
end
Department/Division:
division
Development Services - Planning and Development
body
Contact/Phone Number:
Kathy Hammel / (407) 665-7389
Motion/Recommendation:
1. Deny the request for a side yard setback variance from twenty-five (25) feet to seventeen (17) feet for an addition in the R-3 (Multi-Family) district; or
2. Approve the request for a side yard setback variance from twenty-five (25) feet to seventeen (17) feet for an addition in the R-3 (Multi-Family) district; or
3. Continue the request to a time and date certain.
Background:
• The subject property is located in the Harmony Homes subdivision, platted in 1959 into sixty-one (61) single family dwelling lots. The R-3 (Multiple-Family Dwelling) zoning district was created May 31st, 1960. The current use of the property is Single Family Dwelling.
• The proposed shed is forty-six (46) feet by sixteen (16) feet or 736 square feet.
• The subject property is a corner lot and, as such, considered to have two front yards for setback purposes. In this case, the subject property is also considered to have two side yards.
• In this case, per LDCSC 30.1343, a side yard is measured perpendicular to the closest property line.
• The request is for a variance to Section 30.246(a) of the Land Development Code of Seminole County, which states: in the R-3 Multi-Family Dwelling district front, side, and rear yards must maintain Twenty-five (25) feet for single-story, thirty-five (35) feet for two-story.
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 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 addition 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.