PUBLIC HEARING: CASE NUMBER: SUBJECT: Variances to ... · Variance 2: A variance to the front yard setback from the required 40 feet to 36 feet to construct a new single-family residence

GROWTH AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION 123 West Indiana Avenue, DeLand, Florida 32720 (386) 736-5959

PUBLIC HEARING: August 20, 2020 – Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission (PLDRC)

CASE NUMBER: V-20-085

SUBJECT: Variances to separate nonconforming lots, to the minimum yard requirements, and maximum dock size on Rural Mobile Home (MH-4) zoned property.

LOCATION: 1859 and 1855 Camp South Moon Road, Astor

APPLICANT(S): Joseph Cartwright

OWNER(S): Joseph and Sheryl Cartwright

I. SUMMARY OF REQUEST

The applicant requests five variances to build a new single-family residence and legitimize existing structures on the lot. The requested variances are as follows:

Variance 1: A variance to separate lot 5724-00-00-0120 from lot 5724-00-00-0110; and

Variance 2: A variance to the front yard setback from the required 40 feet to 36 feet to construct a new single-family residence; and

Variance 3: A variance to the side yard setback from the required 15 feet to 0 feet to legitimize the location of an existing wooden dock; and

Variance 4: A variance to the maximum size of a dock from 750 square feet to 1,722 square feet for an existing dock and boatlift; and

Variance 5: A variance to the side yard setback from the required 15 feet to two feet for an existing 10-foot by 16-foot shed; and

Variance 6: A variance to the waterfront yard setback from the required 40 feet to 25 feet for an existing 10-foot by 16-foot shed on Rural Mobile Home (MH-4) zoned property.

Page 1 of 38

Staff Recommendation:

Variance 1: Approve variance 1, case number V-20-085, as the variance meets all five criteria for granting said variance.

Variance 2: Deny variance 2, case number V-20-085, as the variance fails to meet two of the five criteria for granting said variance.

Variance 3: Deny variance 3, case number V-20-085, as the variance fails to meet one of the five criteria for granting said variance.




Page 2 of 38

II. SITE INFORMATION

1. Location: West side of Camp South Moon Road, approximately 500 feet north of its southern terminus, in the Astor area.

2. Parcel Number(s): 5724-00-00-0120 and 5724-00-00-0110 3. Property Size: ±16,453 square feet and ± 6,451 square feet, respectively. 4. Council District: 1 5. Zoning: Rural Mobile Home (MH-4) 6. Future Land Use: Rural Recreation (RLR) 7. Overlays: Not Applicable 8. Local Plan Area: Not Applicable 9. Adjacent Zoning and Land Use:

DIRECTION ZONING FUTURE LAND USE EXISTING USE

North: MH-4 Rural Recreation Single-Family Residence

East: MH-4 Rural Recreation Vacant, wooded/wetlands

South: MH-4 Rural Recreation Single-Family Residence

West: St. Johns River St. Johns River St. Johns River

10. Maps:

ZONING MAP FUTURE LAND USE MAP

Page 3 of 38

III. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW

The subject property is located on the west side of Camp South Moon Road, approximately 500 feet from its southern terminus. The parcel is developed with a boat dock, and wood frame shed. A mobile home previously existed on the site and was removed in 2017, according to building permit records.

The parcel is zoned Rural Mobile Home (MH-4). The MH-4 zoning classification requires a minimum lot size of one-acre and a minimum lot width of 100 feet. The lot meets the required minimum lot width at 100 feet but does not meet the minimum lot size at approximately 0.38 acres. The minimum yard requirements for the MH-4 zoning classification are as follows: front – 40 feet, side – 15 feet, rear – 40 feet, and waterfront – 40 feet. As an agricultural type of zoning classification, reduced setbacks are not permitted for accessory structures.

The applicant purchased the property in December 2019 and intends to construct a 1,775 square foot residence with attached carport on the property. However, the property does not meet the area requirements of the MH-4 zoning classification and is considered a nonconforming lot. It was split in 1988 without approval through the subdivision process by previous owners. The subject property has transferred ownership five times since the lots were last held in common ownership. Based on a title research letter provided by the applicant, the subject parcel may have been in common ownership with the parcel to the south prior to 1988. However, a house has existed on this lot since 1981 and on the lot to the south since 1959 according to the Volusia County Property Appraiser’s records. In order for the new owners to be able to obtain a building permit to replace the single-family house on the subject property, a variance to separate nonconforming lots is required.

The lot is approximately 100 feet wide by 120 feet deep (when measured to mean high water line). This lot requires a 40-foot front setback and a 40-foot waterfront setback, leaving approximately 40 feet of lot depth to build on. Additionally, the lot has a 50-foot buffer for the wetlands as this property lies within the Natural Resource Management Area. In order to minimize the impacts to the wetland buffer and to minimize the variance requested, the applicant has requested a variance to the front yard setback from the required 40 feet to 36 feet.

Page 4 of 38

As a part of the variance process, multiple structures have been identified that will need additional variances. These are existing structures that have been constructed or enlarged without permits. The structures are as follows and shown below on the survey:

Existing Structure 1: A 1,722-square-foot wooden dock partially over a previously existing concrete slab.

Existing Structure 2: A 10-foot by 16-foot shed.

Existing Structure 1: This structure is an approximately 1,722-square-foot existing wooden dock comprised of a 31-foot by 19-foot boathouse and two large wooden platforms. According to Section 72-278 of the Zoning Ordinance, a dock is limited to 750 square feet including boathouses. The boathouse on this property was originally permitted in 2005 as a 19-foot by 25-foot boathouse with a five-foot by 20-foot dock. Based on aerial photographs, it does not appear that the five-foot by 20-foot dock was constructed. It is unclear whether the boathouse was built

Page 5 of 38

larger than described in the permit, or expanded at a later date. No further permit records for the boathouse and dock could be located.

The applicant has recently added two platforms to the dock. One platform appears to be entirely over water and is approximately 200 square feet. The other platform is primarily built over an existing concrete slab but does extend over water. Due to their extension beyond the seawall, both platforms are considered a part of the dock. These additions increase the size to more than the maximum 750-square-feet. The 200-square-foot platform lies in approximately the same location as shown in the 2005 permit site plan. However, the dock is larger than what was permitted, and as this addition was done recently, a new permit would be required. Therefore, the applicant requests a variance to the maximum dock size from 750 square feet to 1,722 square feet in order to obtain the required permit.

A corner of the dock appears to lie on the property line. This portion of the dock was constructed over an existing concrete slab, which extends beyond the property line onto the parcel to the south. According to the applicant, the concrete slab has existed in its current location since the properties were in common ownership in 1988. The applicant stated that the reason for the wooden dock is that the concrete slab was in poor condition, and he believed that constructing a wooden platform over top would be the best way to solve the problem with minimal impact to the area. A variance for this structure is needed to reduce the southern side yard setback from the required 15 feet to 0 feet.

Existing Structure 2: This structure is a 10-foot by 16-foot shed shown in the photo to the right. This shed was recently placed on the property and lies approximately two feet from the southern property line and 25 feet from the rear, waterfront property line. As seen in the variance site plan and survey, the shed lies in the corner of a notch in the south property line. This means that the south and east sides of the shed are subject to the side yard setback requirements. The applicant states that a larger shed previously existed in this portion of the lot closer than two feet to the property line. Without a survey that shows the previous structure, it is not possible to verify the setback.

Based on aerial photographs, a large shed existed on the property very close to the property line, potentially encroaching into the neighbor’s yard from at least 2003. This structure can be seen as recently as 2015 in aerial photos identified with an arrow, below. The applicant believes that the subject shed has less of an impact on the property than what previously existed, and has provided a letter of support from the neighbor to the south who this shed impacts the most. Additionally, county staff has confirmed that if the shed is more than three feet from the neighbor’s residence, the structure would not be in violation of building code separation requirements if a permit is obtained. The applicant has provided

Page 6 of 38

measurements to show that the shed is 4.5 feet from the neighbor’s residence. Therefore, the applicant requests a variance to the southern yard setback from the required 15 feet to two feet, and a variance to the waterfront yard setback from the required 40 feet to 25 feet.

Aerial Photo – 2015

The applicant is aware of the issues relating to the existing unpermitted structures and has committed to obtaining all necessary permits to bring the structures into compliance.

The following table provides a summary of the variance requests:

Structure Request Variance # Lot Separate Nonconforming Lots 1

Proposed Residence Front yard: 36’ from 40’ 2

Existing Structure 1 (dock) Side yard: 15’ to 0’ Size: 750s.f. maximum to 1,722s.f. 3 & 4

Existing Structure 2 (shed) Side yard: 15’ to 2’ 5 & 6

Page 7 of 38

IV. REVIEW CRITERIA AND ANALYSIS

Section 72-379(1)a.4 of the Zoning Ordinance contains five applicable criteria by which a variance application may be granted. The following staff evaluation is based on these 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.

Variance 1: The subject parcel was previously owned in conjunction with the parcel to the south most recently in 1988. There were houses on both properties beginning in 1981, and up until 2017 when the house on the subject property was removed. The applicant purchased the property in 2019. In order for the new owner to obtain a building permit for a new house on the subject property, the applicant is required by the county to legitimize the subject nonconforming lot.

Staff finds that this criterion is met.

Variance 2: The subject lot is significantly smaller than the minimum required for the MH-4 zoning classification and it is not a standard rectangular shaped lot. As the waterfront yard setback is measured from the mean high water line, the applicant is left with approximately 40-feet of lot depth in which to construct a residence. Additionally, this lot is subject to a 50-foot wetlands buffer in the rear, waterfront yard. While the proposed residence does impact the wetland buffers, and according to Environmental comments will require wetland alteration permits, a variance request to reduce the required front yard will reduce the impacts to the buffer.


Variance 3: The applicant contends that the property was developed with a concrete slab underneath where the landward portion of the dock has been constructed. The concrete slab was placed across the southern property line by a previous owner and had become uneven. According to the applicant, the concrete has existed since the properties were held in common ownership. He suggests that because the concrete slab has existed, and the deck is an improvement on top of that, that no further negative impacts to the area have been created.


Variance 4: The original boathouse and dock were permitted at 575 square feet. The existing boathouse is approximately 589 square feet, and there has been approximately 1,133 additional square feet added to the dock, including the area build over the previous concrete slab. Because the portion built over the concrete slab is a continuous structure with the portion that overhangs the water, it is all considered part of the dock, and therefore, all subject to the maximum size of 750 square feet. A special condition may exist with regard to the portion built over the concrete slab, however; there is also additional dock

Page 8 of 38

area over the water that exceeds the maximum size requirement. This size requirement is applicable to all docks in Volusia County and is not considered a special condition.

Staff finds that this criterion is not met.

Variances 5 & 6: The applicant contends that a structure previously existed closer to the property line than the current shed and that the current placement of the shed allows for emergency vehicular access to the St. Johns River if necessary. While this may not be a special condition, the lot does not meet the minimum lot area requirement of a standard lot in the MH-4 zoning classification, leaving less room for structures that meet the required minimum setbacks. The proposed, modestly sized residence fills nearly the entire buildable area of the lot, leaving no room for accessory structures to meet the required setbacks.

Staff finds that this criterion is met

ii. The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant.

Variance 1: The subject parcel was sold off by a previous owner without the benefit of subdivision approval or a variance. The current owner is not responsible for this action.


Variance 2: The subject lot is significantly smaller than the minimum required for the MH-4 zoning classification and includes a 50-foot wetlands buffer in the rear, waterfront yard. While the proposed residence does impact the wetland buffers, and according to Environmental comments will require wetland alteration permits, a variance request to reduce the required front yard will reduce the impacts to the buffer.


Variance 3: The applicant did not construct the concrete slab over which the dock platform is built. As a concrete slab built on grade, it was not subject to a setback to the property line. However, as wooden platform now considered part of a dock, it is subject to the minimum 15-foot setback for a dock. Had a permit been sought prior to construction, this setback requirement would have been addressed.


Variance 4: The applicant built the additional portions of the dock without benefit of a permit and is therefore responsible for the current circumstances of the dock exceeding the maximum allowed size.


Variances 5 & 6: The applicant is not responsible for the size of the lot.


Page 9 of 38

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.

Variance 1: Literal interpretation of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of the right to build a residence on the subject lot which has previously contained a residence as recently as 2017.


Variance 2: Literal interpretation of this ordinance would prevent the applicant from constructing the proposed residence in the proposed location. However, it would not prevent the applicant from constructing a residence that met the required setbacks.


Variance 3: It is not a commonly held right to construct a dock within zero feet of the property line. However, the structure has been constructed over a deteriorated concrete slab. Literal interpretation of this ordinance would require the structure to be removed within 15 feet of the property line, while the deteriorated concrete slab remains underneath. This may be considered to work an unnecessary hardship.


Variance 4: It is not a commonly held right to construct a dock that exceeds 750 square feet. However, literal interpretation of this ordinance would require the applicant to remove a portion of the existing dock or boathouse, which may be considered to work an unnecessary hardship considering that a large portion of the dock is over a deteriorated concrete slab that is situated over the land rather than over the water.


Variances 5 & 6: Because the lot is zoned MH-4, any accessory structure must meet principal structure setbacks. Given the reduced size of the lot and the proposed footprint of the house, literal interpretation of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of the ability to construct any accessory structure that meets the required setbacks.


iv. The variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, structure, or sign.

Variance 1: The variance to separate nonconforming lots is the minimum variance required to build a residence on the lot.


Page 10 of 38

Variance 2: The variance is the minimum variance that will make possible the proposed residence without further encroaching on the wetlands buffer or encroaching into any other setback. However, it is not the minimum required to construct a residence on the lot as it could be redesigned to meet the required setbacks.


Variance 3: The variance requested is the minimum variance that will make possible the continued use of the wooden deck and enable to owner to apply for the required after-the-fact building permits.


Variance 4: The variance requested is the minimum variance that will make possible the continued use of the wooden dock and enable to owner to apply for the required after-the-fact building permits.


Variances 5 & 6: The variances requested are the minimum variances that will make possible the continued use of the 10-foot by 16-foot shed in its current location, and enable to owner to apply for the required after-the-fact building permits. However, the shed can be moved to reduce the encroachments, recognizing that variances will be required wherever it is placed.


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.

Variance 1: The lots have not been held in common ownership since 1988 and have been separately developed with previous single-family residences on each lot since 1981 and as recently as 2017. The variance to separate the nonconforming lots will not be injurious to the area involved.


Variance 2: The applicant argues that several houses in the area do not meet the required 40-foot front yard setback. Based on aerial photographs, it appears that there are houses constructed with approximately 30-foot and 35-foot front yards on Camp South Moon Road. The grant of this variance would cause the residence on this property to be similarly placed and would not appear to be injurious to the area involved.


Variance 3: The applicant has provided a letter from the property owner to the south stating there is no objection to the current placement of any existing accessory structures. There

Page 11 of 38

has been a concrete slab in the location of the dock since 1966. There is a fence that separates the structure from the neighbor’s property, and the neighbor house appears to be built up against the common property line. Also, the neighbor’s dock appears to be built to the common property line. It is unlikely that this portion of the dock will be injurious to the area involved.


Variance 4: The applicant has provided a letter from the property owner to the south stating no objection to any existing structures. The original boathouse and dock have existed since 2005, and a portion of the new dock is built over the deteriorated concrete slab landward of the water. In reviewing aerial photographs of other docks along this stretch of the river, it does not appear out of character with the size and proportions of the other docks.


Variance 5: The applicant has provided a letter from the property owner to the south stating there is no objection to the current placement of any existing accessory structures. However, the placement of the shed at two feet from the property line provides little room for maintenance without trespass onto the adjacent property. The size of the property does not afford enough room for the accessory structure to meet the principal structure setbacks; however, other residential zoning classifications allow accessory structures to be placed within five feet of a property line. This provides enough space for upkeep and maintenance of the accessory structure. Due to this, and that the neighbor’s house appears to be built very close to the common property line, it may be injurious to the area to have the shed located two feet from the property line.


Variance 6: The applicant has provided a letter from the property owner to the south stating that there is no objection to the current placement of any existing accessory structures. Additionally, based on the size of the lot and the footprint of the proposed house, there is no place on the lot that a rear setback variance would not be needed. Other residential zoning classifications allow accessory structures within five feet of a rear property line. A 25-foot rear setback will not likely be injurious to the area involved.


V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION



Page 12 of 38





Should the PLDRC find that the applicant has provided competent substantial evidence to support approval of these variances, the following conditions are provided for consideration:

1. Variance 2 is limited to the size and location of the residence shown on the variance site plan attached to this report. Any enlargement or alteration that is not consistent with the site plan shall require approval of a separate variance application.

2. If any accessory structure identified in the variance site plan attached to this report is damaged in excess of 50% of its assessed value, as assessed by the Property Appraiser, any reconstruction of the structure shall thereafter comply with the applicable requirements of the zoning ordinance, or obtain approval for a new variance.

3. The property owner or authorized agent(s) shall obtain and complete all required building permits and inspections for the existing, unpermitted accessory structures identified on the variance site plan within 90 days of rendition of the variance determination.

VI. ATTACHMENTS

Variance Site Plan Site Plan Survey Written Petition Nonconforming Lot Letter Environmental Comments Letter of Support Site Photographs Map Series

Page 13 of 38

VII. AUTHORITY AND PROCEDURE

The commission may, except as otherwise provided in Section 72-379 of the zoning ordinance, 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.

Pursuant to Section 72-412, no variance shall be granted, in whole or in part, unless four members concur. A tie vote shall be grounds for continuance to the next scheduled meeting.

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 14 of 38

VARIANCE SITE PLAN Variance 1:A variance to separate lot 5724-00-00-0120 from lot 5724-00-00-0110.

Variance 2: A variance to the front yard setback from the required 40 feet to 36 feet to construct a new single-family residence.

Variance 3: A variance to the side yard setback from the required 15 feet to 0 feet to legitimize the location of an existing wooden deck.

Variance 4: A variance to the maximum size of a dock from 750 square feet to 1,722 square feet to legitimize an existing dock attached to a boat lift.

Variance 5: A variance to the side yard setback from the required 15 feet to two feet to legitimize the location of an existing 10-foot by 16-foot shed.

Variance 6: A variance to the waterfront yard setback from the required 40 feet to 25 feet to legitimize the location of an existing 10-foot by 16-foot shed.

36'-0"

Variance 2

Variance 3

Variance 5

Variance 4

Variance 6

Page 15 of 38

Page 16 of 38

Page 17 of 38

Page 18 of 38

Page 19 of 38

Page 20 of 38

Page 21 of 38

Page 22 of 38

Page 23 of 38

Page 24 of 38

Page 25 of 38

Page 26 of 38

Page 27 of 38

Page 28 of 38

Page 29 of 38

Page 30 of 38

Photographs Site Visit Photograph

July 2020 Shed, dock and boat

house are visible.

Site Visit Photograph July 2020

Environmental Permitting

Shows view of dock extending into water

Page 31 of 38

Aerial Photo showing large docks on Camp

South Moon Road north of subject property

Aerial Photo showing large docks on Camp

South Moon Road south of subject property

Page 32 of 38

Aerial Photo showing neighbor’s residence proximity to property

line

Page 33 of 38

ALIC

EC

RE

EK

PROPERTY LOCATION V-20-085

ST JOHNS

RIVER

PAYN

E C

RE

EK

CAMP SOUTH MOON RD

1 " = 1,000 ' SUBJECT PROPERTY I 7/27/2020

Page 34 of 38

AERIAL V-20-085

CAMP SOUTH MOONRD

1 " = 400 ' SUBJECT PROPERTY IMAGE DATE 2018 I 7/27/2020

Page 35 of 38

ZONING CLASSIFICATION V-20-085

STJOHNS

RIVER

PAY

NE

CREE K

CAMPSOUTH MOON RD

A-2

FR

RC

C

B-7

MH-4

SUBJECT PROPERTY I 1 " = 400 ' 7/27/2020

ZONING BNDY AGRICULTURAL FORESTRY RESOURCE MOBILE HOME

COMMERCIAL CONSERVATION RESOURCE CORRIDOR

Page 36 of 38

FUTURE LAND USE V-20-085

STJOHNS

RIVER

PAY

NE

CREE K

CAMP SOUTH MOONRD

RLR

ESC FR

ESC

ESC

ESC

RLR

C

1 " = 400 ' SUBJECT PROPERTY I 7/27/2020

CONSERVATION FORESTRY RESOURCE WATER

ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS CORRIDOR RURAL RECREATION

Page 37 of 38

ECO/NRMA OVERLAYV-20-085

STJOHNS

RIVER

PAY

NE

CREE K

CAMP SOUTH MOONRD

I 1 " = 400 ' SUBJECT PROPERTY 7/27/2020

ECO

NRMA

Page 38 of 38

Documents

PUBLIC HEARING: CASE NUMBER: SUBJECT: Variances to ... · Variance 2: A variance to the front yard setback from the required 40 feet to 36 feet to construct a new single-family residence