ITEM DESCRIPTION:
Title
VA-2623: Request for a Non-Administrative Variance to allow an accessory structure to have a reduced rear yard setback and allow for the height to exceed the principal structure for the property located at 2428 Kumquat Drive.
Body
OWNER/APPLICANT:
Randal Bryant - Owner / Applicant
PROPOSED USE:
Coverage storage for boat.
REQUESTED ACTION:
1. Per Article III, Section 21-36.02 (b)- to allow an accessory pole barn to be 16’ 10 ¾” which is taller than the primary resident which is approx. 14’ high.
2. Per Article III, Section 21-36.02 (m)- to allow a metal accessory pole barn on a less than 5 acres and viewable from the main thoroughfare without the need to match the primary structure in architectural design, exterior construction materials or façade treatment, roofline and color.
3. Per Article V, Table V-1- to allow a pole barn to be placed 10-feet from the rear yard setback in lieu of the required 20-feet, which will place the structure behind the typical sight line of the parcel 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:
8402-01-04-6620
AREA:
0.33± acres
CURRENT LAND USE:
Single Family Residential
FLUM DESIGNATION:
Low Density Residential
ZONING DISTRICT:
R-2, Single Family Residential
VOTING DISTRICT:
District Three - Council Person: Debbie Dolbow
Discussion:
The applicant proposes to construct a 18' 4” x 60' pre-engineered vertical-style pole barn with a 16' 10 ¾” roof height on a 0.33± acre lot located at 2428 Kumquat Drive.
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, the structure to be placed within the setbacks set within Table V-1 of Article V, and have the façade of the pole barn match the primary facade.
The applicant is seeking substantial setback reductions across one property boundary: reducing the rear yard setback by 50% (20' to 10'). The applicant indicates that aligning the structure father back will create a more esthetic feel by placing the larger metal pole barn behind the site line. Thereby, the reason for the matching façade to not be required.
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: “I just want to keep building as far back off of the street (Kumquat) as possible. Request: the total height of new building will be 16’10” tall. The height of the house is 14’.”
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, none of the neighbors have an issue with the proposed building.”
b. Staff’s response: Placing a 1318 sq. ft. roofed accessory structure with reduced 20-foot to 10-foot 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, I could move the setback to 15 feet.”
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, there is a shed behind me that has only a 2’ setback.”
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, I’m asking for the variance requested.”
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, there are many buildings like this in Florida Shores.”
b. Staff’s response: Yes. Granting setback relief up to 50% and waiving facade 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 Kumquat Drive 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-2623 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.