ITEM DESCRIPTION:
Title
VA-2414: Request for a variance from Article V of the Land Development Code to allow for the construction of a swimming pool to be constructed 20’ from the Mean High-Water Line at 166 E. Cory Drive.
Body
OWNER/APPLICANT:
Lauri Adams
PROPOSED USE:
Applicant is requesting a variance to build a swimming pool within the 50’ mean high water line setback.
REQUESTED ACTION:
1. Article V, Section 21-50.02 Table V-01 Footnotes: To allow a 20’ setback from the mean high-water line.
PARCEL ID:
8412-05-00-1000
AREA:
+0.95 acres
CURRENT LAND USE:
Single-Family Home
FLUM DESIGNATION:
Low Density Residential
ZONING DISTRICT:
R-3, Single-Family Residential
VOTING DISTRICT:
District Four - Council Person Jonah Powers
Discussion:
The applicant is requesting a variance from Article V of the Land Development Code to allow for the construction of a swimming pool to be constructed 20’ from the Mean High-Water Line at 166 E. Cory Drive in lieu of the required 50’.
Site Plan:
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 P. & Z. 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: The pool is located within the mean high-water line.
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 1.5.7: 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.
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: Other houses with pools in the mean high-water line.
b. Staff’s response: No, granting the variance will result in creating or continuing a use which is not compatible with adjacent uses.
i. The following neighborhood properties have Inground swimming pools within the Mean High-Water line:
1. 165 Cory Drive
2. 146 Cory Drive
3. 142 Cory Drive
4. 174 Cory Drive
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: Odd shape of the lot requires the pool to be built within the setback.
b. Staff’s response: A swimming pool is an accessory, there is a home on the property which would be considered reasonable use of the property.
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: Odd shape lot.
b. Staff’s response: While the lot meets the standards for conformity, the east side of the lot does not have adequate room for a swimming pool while maintaining the 50’ mean high water line setback.
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: No.
b. Staff’s response: Yes. The applicant is requesting to get a variance to construct a swimming pool which is an accessory use.
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: Yes.
b. Staff’s response: Yes, though granting the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare, it will impair the purposes and intent of the Land Development Code Article V.
This criterion has not been met.
Public Notice:
In accordance with Florida Statues Chapter 166.041, a Public Notice sign was posted and a letter was mailed to all addresses within 500 feet of the proposed variance area on July 31 ,2024. As of August 7, 2024, staff has received no requests for general information regarding the proposed inground swimming pool.
Staff Comments:
The Technical Review Committee had no comments or concerns regarding the variance.
Public Comments:
The property owners at 193 Hazelwood River Road expressed concerns with regards to the variance from the mean high water line and the possibility of a screened in pool enclosure.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff does not recommend approval for VA-2414 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.