Title:
title
9483 Shortleaf Court - Request for a building size variance from 1133 square feet to 2640 square feet for a storage building in the A-1 (Agriculture) district; BV2025-131 (Logan Bordeau, Applicant) District 3 - Constantine (Kathy Hammel, Project Manager)
end
Department/Division:
division
Development Services - Planning and Development
body
Authorized By:
Kathy Hammel
Contact/Phone Number:
Kathy Hammel/407-665-7389
Motion/Recommendation:
1. Deny the request for an accessory structure size variance from 1,133 square feet to 2,640 square feet in the A-1 (Agriculture) district; or
2. Approve the request for an accessory structure size variance from 1,133 square feet to 2,640 square feet in the A-1 (Agriculture) district; or
3. Continue the request to a time and date certain.
Background:
• The subject property is located in Bear Lake Forest subdivision.
• The proposed accessory structure is 2,640 square feet, a 1507 square foot increase above what is permitted by the Seminole County Land Development Code (SCLDC). The SCLDC permits an accessory building of 1,133 square feet when not used for agricultural purposes. The living area of the primary dwelling is 2,266 square feet. The applicant intends to use the structure for storage of personal property.
• Section 30.6.1.2 of the Seminole County Land Development Code states:
(e) Accessory buildings shall not exceed the principal building in terms of mass, size, and height unless located in the A-1 zoning District and used for agricultural purposes such as a livestock barn or stable. Each detached accessory structure or building shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of the living area of the principal building. This provision does not apply to accessory structures within the A-3, A-5, and A-10 zoning Districts. A screened pool structure height may exceed the height of the principal structure, but no taller than permitted by the applicable zoning district.
• There have not been any prior variances for the subject property.
• Six (6) neighbors have signed a petition in support of the variance was submitted.
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 not been satisfied:
• Approving a variance to allow an accessory structure to exceed the principal dwelling living area by more than fifty (50) percent would confer on the applicant special privileges that are denied by Chapter 30 to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning classification. Section 30.3.3.2(b)(3)
• The general intent of the Land Development Code is to maintain consistent setbacks; therefore, the grant of the variance will not be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of Chapter 30 would be injurious to the neighborhood, and otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Section 30.3.3.2(b)(6)
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 2,640 square foot accessory structure 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.