ITEM DESCRIPTION:
Title
VA-2623: Request for a Non-Administrative Variance to allow a proposed storage shed to exceed the height of the principal dwelling unit for the property located at 1002 Lake Avenue.
Body
OWNER/APPLICANT:
Chad Alderman - Applicant / Catherine Alderman - Owner
PROPOSED USE:
Storage Shed.
REQUESTED ACTION:
1. Per Article III, Section 21-36.02 (b)- to allow an accessory shed to be approx. 21 foot tall which is taller than the primary resident which is a 1955 flat roof at approx. 8 feet high.
2. Per Article V, Table V-1- to allow a shed to be placed 8-feet from the side yard setback in lieu of the required 10-feet, based on the requirement in Article III, Section 21-36.02 (h) Requiring the structure to meet the setbacks within Article V, Table V-1.
3. Per Article V, Table V-1- to allow a shed to be placed 13-feet from the rear yard setback in lieu of the required 20-feet, based on the requirement in Article III, Section 21-36.02 (h) Requiring the structure to meet the setbacks within Article V, Table V-1.
PARCEL ID:
7432-06-00-1650
AREA:
0.20± acres
CURRENT LAND USE:
Single Family Residential
FLUM DESIGNATION:
Low Density Residential
ZONING DISTRICT:
R-3, Single Family Residential
VOTING DISTRICT:
District One - Council Person: Charlotte Hope Gillis
Discussion:
The applicant proposes to construct a 20’ x 15' pre-engineered shed with an approx. 22’ roof height on a 0.20± acre lot located at 1002 Lake Avenue.
Under Article III, Sections 21-36.02(c), 21-36.02(h) and 21-36.02(m), accessory structures must not exceed the height of the primary or principal structure and the structure to be placed within the setbacks set within Table V-1 of Article V.
The applicant is seeking setback reductions across two property boundaries: reducing the rear yard setback by 35% (20' to 13') and the side yard setback by 20% (10’ to 8’). The applicant indicates that since they have a flat roof of less than average height it is impossible to find a shed to support proper storage requirements.
Staff Review:
According to Article IX, Section 21-100.04(d), Non-Administrative Variance, City of Edgewater’s Land Development Code;
In order to grant a Non-Administrative Variance, the Planning and Zoning Board shall make the following findings of fact:
1. That granting of the proposed variance is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan;
2. That granting of the proposed variance will not result in creating or continuing a use which is not compatible with adjacent uses in the area;
3. That granting of the proposed variance is the minimum action available to permit reasonable use of the property;
4. That the physical characteristics of the subject site are unique and not present on adjacent sites; and
5. That the circumstances creating the need for the variance are not the result of actions by the applicant, actions proposed by the applicant or actions by the previous property owner(s).
6. That granting of the proposed variance(s) will not cause substantial detriment to the public welfare or impair the purposes and intent of the Land Development Code.
Explanation of hardship by applicant: “1955 Flat Roof Ranch”
1. Will granting the proposed variance result in a conflict with the Comprehensive Plan?
a. Staff’s response: After review, Staff has determined that granting the variance would result in a conflict with the Comprehensive Plan.
i. Future Land Use Policy 1.2.9: Stormwater Management. The City shall continue to enforce the stormwater management requirements in the Land Development Code, which provide specific standards for the design of on-site stormwater systems, as well as strategies and measures to minimize runoff into the Indian River Lagoon. [9J-5.006 (3)(c)4., F.A.C.]
ii. Future Land Use Policy 1.5.7: Maintaining Site Design Requirements and Subdivision Regulations. The City shall maintain site design requirements and subdivision regulations in the Land Development Code, which adequately address the impacts of new development on adjacent properties in all land use categories and zoning districts. [9J-5.006 (3)(c)1. and (3)(c)2., F.A.C.].
This criterion has not been met.
2. Will the granting of the proposed variance result in creating or continuing a use which is not compatible with adjacent uses in the area?
a. Applicant’s Response: “No, shed shall adhere to all other codes.”
b. Staff’s response: Placing a 300 sq. ft. roofed accessory structure with reduced 20-foot to 13-foot rear and 10 to 8 foot side setbacks introduces stormwater runoff and spatial incompatibility with surrounding properties.
This criterion has not been met.
3. Is the proposed action the minimum action available to permit reasonable use of the property?
a. Applicant’s response: “No.”
b. Staff’s response: No. The property retains reasonable use by constructing a shorter accessory structure and by moving said structure to within standard Table V-1 setback envelopes.
This criterion has not been met.
4. Are the physical characteristics of the subject site unique and not present on adjacent sites?
a. Applicant’s response: “No”
b. Staff’s response: The property consists of a standard platted residential lot displaying physical characteristics similar to adjacent properties. No unique topographical or geological constraints prevent building in code compliance.
This criterion has been met.
5. Are the circumstances creating the need for the variance the result of actions by the applicant or actions proposed by the applicant?
a. Applicant’s response: “Yes.”
b. Staff’s response: Yes. The need for variance relief stems from applicant’s site design preferences to maximize structure area outside allowable building envelopes rather than physical land constraints.
This criterion has not been met.
6. Will the granting of the proposed variance cause substantial detriment to public welfare or impair the purposes and intent of the Land Development Code?
a. Applicant’s response: “No.”
b. Staff’s response: Yes. Granting setback relief and waiving height standards without land-based hardship impairs Chapter 21 intent to preserve buffers, fire separation, and visual character.
This criterion has not been met.
Staff Comments:
Fire Comment: No concerns or comments.
Public Notice:
In strict accordance with Florida Statutes Chapter 166.041 and local municipal ordinances, a physical Public Notice sign was prominently posted on the front of the site facing east on Lake Avenue on August 26th, 2026. In addition, official written Public Notices were compiled and mailed via USPS to all property owners of record located within a 500-foot buffer radius of the project boundary lines.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff does not recommend approval for VA-2624 because the applicant could not meet all six criteria of Article IX, Section 21-100.04(d), Non-Administrative Variance, City of Edgewater’s Land Development Code.