Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-20-01 *kw MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING HELD THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2001 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Resnik called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. in the Commission Chambers at City Hall. The roll was called and a quorum was declared present. Chairman Resnik led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag and Member Colburn led the invocation. PRESENT: Chairman Resnik, Vice - Chairman Savino, Members Colburn, Cox, Tice and Wilsen. Also present were Zoning Coordinator Harper, City Attorney Cookson, and Administrative Assistant II Maxwell. ABSENT: Member Ward, who was un- excused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Vice - Chairman Savino, seconded by Member Cox, moved to approve the June 21, 2001, Board of Adjustment Minutes as presented. Motion carried 5 -0. NEW BUSINESS CASE NO. 05VR -2001: Marbais Zoning Coordinator Harper read into the record the issue: Should the Honorable Board of Adjustment recommend to the Honorable Mayor and City Commission that the Applicant's variance request be approved enabling the Applicant to construct an accessory structure to his home 11.3' from the Orlando Avenue right -of -way vs. the 25' setback prescribed by the Land Development Code (L.D.C.)? Zoning Coordinator Harper gave a detailed history of the case for the subject property which is located at 716 East Lakeshore Drive. Zoning Coordinator Harper stated the Applicant applied for a building permit to erect a room addition to his home that, if granted, would result in a 11.3' setback from the Orlando Avenue right -of -way vs. the 25' setback prescribed by the L.D.C. "Table 502" and Article V, Section 5 -4(G), page 18106. The application was rejected because on a corner lot there is a 25' building setback from both streets. Zoning Coordinator Harper stated the mere presence of a 6' masonry wall situated along the subject's Orlando Avenue frontage does not in itself insure sound buffering, vehicular safety, or other planning and design principles because the wall is not located on perpetual maintenance or homeowners association property, whose continuity is guaranteed by deed covenants or plat regulations. In other words, if the wall should be damaged or lost, the subject's owner would be under obligation to repair or replace it, although he probably would anyway. To further illustrate this point, there a relatively Board of Adjustment Regular Meeting Thursday, September 20, 2001 new subdivision located a short distance away from the subject on Orlando Avenue, which was platted without first having safeguards in place for its wall maintenance. Further, the homes are situated at least 30' from Orlando Avenue, but the homeowner's association took aggressive action to try to persuade the City of Ocoee to repair and agree to thenceforth maintain the subject wall but the effort was resisted for the present time. Zoning Coordinator Harper stated the Applicant has offered no explanation or justification for not wishing to observe the 25' building setback from Orlando Avenue, as per the LDC's threshold requirements which will be presented in more detail below in the "recommendation" section of the Staff Report. Exhibit #3 clearly depicts there are other locations on the subject property where the proposed addition may be built without the need of a variance. Zoning Coordinator Harper stated staff recommends denial of the Applicant's Variance request to build the proposed addition to his home because it would intrude 13.7' into the 25' secondary street setback. The Applicant has ample space to build the proposed addition elsewhere on his property with no deviation necessary from the L.D.C., thus the Applicant has made no showing of hardship etc., as described in the four following threshold requirements that are specified by the L.D.C., Article IV, Section 4- 9, pages 18093- 18094, and if granted would have "the effect of nullifying the intent and purposes of these regulations." r.. 1. "Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land involved and which are not applicable to other lands." 2. "That a literal interpretation of the provisions of these regulations would deprive the Applicant the rights commonly enjoyed by other properties with similar conditions." 3. "That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from actions of the Applicant." 4. "That the granting of the Variance request will not confer on the Applicant any special privilege that is denied by these regulations to the other lands...under similar conditions." Applicant, Steve Marbais stated only the corner of this addition will be 11.3' from the setback and there are several homes in the area that are in violation of the L.D.C. Mr. Marbais further stated this addition will cost approximately $130,000, which will bring property value up in the area. Discussion ensued. The Public Hearing was opened. As no one wished to speak, the Public Hearing was closed. �1rrr 2 Board of Adjustment Regular Meeting Thursday, September 20, 2001 Member Savino stated the shape of the lot should be taken into consideration, which would give the Applicant "Special Conditions and Circumstances" as outlined in the L.D.C. Discussion ensued. Member Tice, seconded by Member Colburn, moved to recommend to the Honorable Mayor and City Commission approval of the Applicant's Variance request, as the request did meet the "Special Conditions" as outlined in the L.D.C. Motion carried 5-0. OTHER BUSINESS - None COMMENTS -None ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m. Nifty Ihtik Administrative Assistant II Maxwell Chairma Resnik fir► 3