V-11-063
Transcription
V-11-063
GROWTH AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CURRENT PLANNING ACTIVITY 123 W. Indiana Avenue, DeLand, FL 32720 (386) 943-7059 PUBLIC HEARING: December 13, 2011−Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission (PLDRC) CASE NO: V-11-063 SUBJECT: Variance to minimum project perimeter setback for an accessory building on Urban Multifamily Residential/Indian River Lagoon Surface Water Improvements & Management Overlay (R-7W) zoned property. LOCATION: 6727 Turtlemound Road, New Smyrna Beach APPLICANT: Ty Harris, Attorney at Law OWNER: Chadham by the Sea COA c/o Morbitzer Communities, Inc. STAFF: John H. Stockham, ASLA, Planner III I. SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant requests variances to the project perimeter setback from the south and west lot lines to construct an accessory maintenance/storage building at an existing condominium complex consisting of 52 units. The size of the proposed shed is 10 ft. by 10 ft. and the location selected is along the southern perimeter of the four-acre oceanfront property. There have been temporary sheds on the site and now the applicant is requesting a permanent one. The applicant is also requesting a setback reduction from the shed to the nearest drive aisle. The applicant requests the following: Variance 1: A project perimeter (south property line) setback from 45 ft. to 2 ft. Variance 2: A project perimeter (west property line) setback 45 ft. to 30 ft. Variance 3: A reduction of the setback from the interior off-street parking area from 10 ft. to 0 ft. Staff recommendation: Approval of variances 1 and 3 with conditions, but denial of 2. Page 1 of 5 SITE INFORMATION 1. Location: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. The property is located on the east side of Turtlemound Road at its intersection with Mullet Avenue, in the community of Bethune Beach, near New Smyrna Beach. Parcel No(s): 8505-03-00-0001 Property Size: ± 4.20 acres Council District: 3 Zoning: R-7W Future Land Use: UHI/ULI ECO Overlay: No NRMA Overlay: No Adjacent Zoning and Land Use: DIRECTION North: FUTURE LAND USE ULI/UHI CURRENT USE Vacant lot East: ZONING R-9W and B-8W Atlantic Ocean Atlantic Ocean Atlantic Ocean South: West: R-7W R-9W UHI/ULI ULI Vacant lot CR A1A then single family homes 10. Location Maps: Page 2 of 5 AERIAL MAP III. BACKGROUND AND PREVIOUS ACTIONS ZONING MAP The condominium building has 52 units and no maintenance building on site. The property is zoned R-7W and has underlying comprehensive plan designations of UHI and ULI. The R-7W zoning classification has a perimeter setback requirement of 45 ft. that applies to all structures on the site, both principal and accessory. Since the property is already developed, the applicant requests that the proposed 10 ft. by 10 ft. maintenance building be located close to the south side property line and 30 ft. from the western (front) property line. The applicant also requests that the shed building abut an internal drive aisle of the offstreet parking area without the required separation distance. IV. REVIEW CRITERIA AND ANAYLSIS Section 72-379(1) a.4 Variances of the zoning code contains five applicable criteria by which the PLDRC may grant a variance. Staff bases its evaluation on the following criteria: i. Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, sign, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures, signs, or buildings in the same zoning classification. The special circumstance involved is that the developer constructed the condominium buildings without provision for an on-site maintenance building. The layout of the buildings and the vehicular use area limits the available land area to install the proposed storage building in a place that meets the perimeter setback requirement. There are now constraints to where the applicant can place it. However, the building meets the required perimeter setback from the west lot line per the applicant’s plan. The application meets this criterion for the requested variances except for variance 2, since the west side setback can be met. ii. The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The layout of the condominium buildings and the vehicular use area on the site were not the result of actions by the applicant. However, the applicant is able to comply with the code and eliminate variance 2. The application meets this criterion for the requested variances except variance 2, since the west side setback can be met. Page 3 of 5 iii. Literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning classification, under the terms of the ordinance, and would work an unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant. A literal interpretation of the provisions of this article deprives the applicant from constructing the requested maintenance/storage building. A residential complex of this size often has its own maintenance personnel and an onsite building to store equipment. The application meets this criterion for the requested variances except variance 2, which can be met. iv. The variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, structure, or sign. The request is the minimum that makes reasonable use of the structure. Any other location on the property would still require a variance. The property owner, to the south, most affected by this request is working with the applicant to address all issues. These issues include views, screening, landscape buffers, heights and materials/colors of the building. The application meets this criterion for all of the requested variances except for variance 2, which can be met. v. The grant of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this ordinance and the Volusia County Comprehensive Plan Ordinance No. 90-10, as amended, and that such variance will not be injurious to the area involved. The owners association (“Chadham”) is required to maintain the landscape plantings per section 72-284(6) of the zoning code. Having this structure on site enables this to occur more efficiently. The proposed variances will not be injurious to the surrounding area, subject to appropriate conditions of approval that include a screen wall and landscape buffer. The application meets this criterion for all of the requested variances except for variance 2, which can be met. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of variance 2 since the west perimeter setback of 45 ft. can be met on this side. Staff finds that variances 1 and 3 meet the five criteria for the requested variances and recommends approval, with the following conditions: 1. The maintenance building shall match the colors and materials of the principal condominium buildings. 2. No expansion of the maintenance building shall occur without seeking an Page 4 of 5 additional variance. 3. The owner shall obtain a building permit prior to installation or construction. VI. ATTACHMENTS Variance site plan Staff and agency comments Application Maps VII. AUTHORITY AND PROCEDURE The commission may, except as otherwise provided in Section 72-379 of the zoning code, authorize, after due public notice upon application on a form prescribed by the zoning enforcement official, such variance or variances from the terms of this ordinance as will not be contrary to the public interest when, owing to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the provision of this ordinance would result in unnecessary and undue hardship. Said variance application shall be heard only if it is presented by the person owning 51 percent or more of the specific area of land involved or upon an administrative application by the county council. Any new information to be presented at the planning and land development regulation commission meeting for any application will be grounds to continue an application to the next planning and land development regulation commission meeting. Applicants shall inform and provide staff with the new information prior to the planning and land development regulation commission meeting. Page 5 of 5 Inter-Office Memorandum TO: John Stockham, Planner II I DATE: November 23, 2011 FROM: Danielle Dangleman, Environmental Specialist III SUBJECT: Planning & Land Development Regulation Commission meeting for Date: December 13, 2011 Parcel #: 8505-03-00-0001 Case #: V-11-063, owner Chadham by the Sea Environmental Permitting staff has conducted a site visit and reviewed the variance application for Chadham by the Sea Condominiums. EP has no objection to this variance.