Title:
title
3088 Truman Boulevard - Request for an east side street setback variance from fifty (50) feet to zero (0) feet for a privacy fence in the A-1 (Agriculture) district; BV2025-083 (Ruth Cooper, Applicant) District 5 - Herr (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 east side street setback variance from fifty (50) feet to zero (0) feet for a privacy fence in the A-1 (Agriculture) district; or
2. Approve the request for an east side street setback variance from fifty (50) feet to zero (0) feet for a privacy fence in the A-1 (Agriculture) district; or
3. Continue the request to a time and date certain.
Background:
• The subject property is located in the Lincoln Heights subdivision and is within the A-1 Zoning District.
• The property was cited with a code violation for construction of a fence without a permit.
• The gate is eleven (11) feet from the edge of pavement of Lincoln Avenue. There are no sidewalks on their side of Lincoln Avenue.
• The subject property is a corner lot and considered to have two (2) front yards for setback purposes. The front of the house will face Truman Boulevard. The Lincoln Avenue side is where the variance is being sought.
• The proposed privacy fence will be six (6) feet in height and will encroach twenty-five (25) feet into the required side street setback.
• 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(e) Agricultural zoning classifications: fences and walls are limited to a maximum height of five (5) feet and an additional one (1) foot for embellishments within the front yard setback; and eight (8) feet within the side and rear yard setbacks. Fences located within the front yard setback must be open split rail; steel woven wire may be used behind split rail fences for animal containment, but no barbed wire is permitted. These regulations shall not apply to property having an agricultural classification from the Seminole County Property Appraiser. 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 has not been satisfied:
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 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.