Loading...
REVIEW COMMENTS DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION MEMORANDUM #05-118 Staff Report Community Redevelopment Agency Board Meeting Date: July 1, 2005 File No: ZNCV 05-005 Location: 625 NE 15th Place (Lot 17, Yachtsman's Cove Subdivision) Owner: Maryanne Deasy Project: Pool screen enclosure for an existing single-family dwelling. Variance Request: Relief from Chapter 2, Zoning Section 5.C.2, requiring a ten (10) foot side yard setback to allow a six (6) foot variance, resulting in a four (4) foot side yard setback for a screen enclosure within the R-1-AA Single-family Residential zoning district. BACKGROUND The subject property and surrounding neighborhood is zoned R-1-AA, single family residential (see Exhibit "A" - Location Map). The lot, developed in 1979, conforms to the current R-1-AA zoning district building and site regulations. The subject neighborhood is developed with single- family homes. The rear of the subject property currently abuts Seaview Mobile Home Park, which was recently approved for a townhouse development called the Seaview Park Club, The property is located on the north side of NE 15th Place with a depth of approximately 131 feet and a frontage of 75 feet. The subject variance is requested because the previous owners of the house chose not to have a screen enclosure erected when the pool was constructed. By not constructing a screen enclosure around the pool, they followed only the appropriate pool setbacks, which allowed the edge of the water to be at eight (8) feet from the side property line. The deck around the pool extends an additional four (4) feet from the waters edge, leaving four (4) feet to the property line (see Exhibit liB" - Survey). As constructed, these improvements met code at the time of installation and still do today. However, the new owner is desirous of constructing a screen enclosure around the pool due to her allergies associated with insect bites, and has submitted a letter from Dr. Michael Chidester in support of her request (see Exhibit "C"). Screen enclosures, those with screen walls and roof, are required to comply with the minimum building regulations, which in this case is ten (10) feet for a side yard. In order to comply with the code, the screen enclosure would be two (2) feet into the pool. The applicant also advised staff, in a pre-application meeting to discuss the potential variance, that a contractor had been hired to build and install the screen enclosure, and prior to obtaining a permit, the contractor has already pre-fabricated the screen panels (but has not installed them). The applicant has also submitted with the variance application, letters in support of her variance request from the most affected property owner, the one to the east, the property owner on the west side of her property and the property owner across the street (see Exhibit liD"). Page 2 Deasy Variance File No, ZNCV 05-005 ANAL YSIS The code states that the zoning code variance cannot be approved unless the board finds the following: a. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. b. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. c. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this ordinance to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. d. That literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of the ordinance and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant. e. That the variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure. f. That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this chapter [ordinance] and that such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. (Exhibit "E" contains the applicant's response to the above criteria.) Staff conducted the analysis focusing primarily on items "a", "b" and "c" above, which require that the request is initiated by special conditions and circumstances that are peculiar to the subject land, structure, or building, which are not the result of the actions of the applicant. Additionally the granting of the variance would not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by the regulations to other properties within the same zoning district. Despite the responses from the applicant, a variance is to be granted on the basis of a hardship, which is established by characteristics other than those created by the landowner, or previous owner(s), by various site improvements or alterations. The emphasis of criteria "a", "b" and "c", in order to justify a hardship, is on natural or unique limitations relative to other properties within the neighborhood that are similarly zoned. The variance should make more equitable the regulations when applied to the various properties within the area. Alternatively stated, in order to meet criterion "c", one should assume that the same structure proposed similarly on an adjacent property could be constructed without a variance. The subject request has been initiated due to the homeowner's desire to screen an existing pool. The previous owner, who had the pool constructed, did not take into consideration when determining the pool's ultimate location, that they could be limiting themselves or future owners in the construction of a screen enclosure. As a result, the former owner has created a situation that now limits the applicant's ability to construct the enclosure within the setback regulations. The same size pool and deck could have been constructed within the back yard, following code regulations, and still allowed room for the screen enclosure, without need for a variance. While Page 3 Deasy Variance File No, ZNCV 05-005 not due to actions of the applicant, those of the previous owner created the hardship, and ultimately result in the failure to meet the special conditions language contained in a - c above. With respect to criteria "d" and "e", traditionally, variances are intended to prevent the total denial of reasonable use of a piece of property. If this were applicable to the subject case, then denial of the ability to build the pool screen enclosure would be construed as a denial of the reasonable use of the property. Staff does not concur with this position, but rather believes that the existing improvements on the property, which include the home and an unscreened pool, represent "reasonable use" of a parcel zoned for single-family homes. It should however be noted, the applicant has submitted a letter from a doctor, indicating that the screen enclosure would be beneficial to the applicant relative to her allergies. While not necessarily denying reasonable use of the property, a potential argument could be made for the reasonable enjoyment of the property and certain improvements thereon. Regarding criteria "f', as noted earlier, the applicant has submitted letters of support from her neighbor to the east, immediately abutting the side yard into which the pool enclosure would encroach. This particular property, 635 NE 15th Place, has a pool which would be adjacent to the applicant's, and the trustees for the property state they".. .do not object to a screened in pool cover for the existing pool. ..". Additionally, letters of support are attached from the property owner to the west of the applicant and a neighbor across the street. CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the request for relief from Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 5,C.2, to allow a four (4) foot side setback for a screen enclosure, resulting in a six (6) foot variance to the minimum ten (10) side yard requirement within the R-1-AA zoning district, be denied due to the lack of traditional hardship, and due to the circumstances not being peculiar to the lot itself. Staff is supportive of residential redevelopment and associated improvements and recognizes that past variance requests have been reviewed by the City using more than the traditional criteria, or interpretations of this criteria, which places greater emphasis on economic potential, minor home improvements, and characteristics of or impact upon surrounding properties. For these reasons, staff offers the following additional information for consideration: 1, The pool was built prior to the applicant's purchase of the property. It is not an instance where the applicant built the maximum size pool knowing it would preclude the installation of a screen enclosure, and is now requesting to vary the City regulations to accommodate one; and 2. The subject request represents the minimum amount of area required to screen the pool and deck, based upon these existing improvements; and 3. Staff has received no letters of objection, but received only letters of support of the proposed expansion from adjacent property owners. Specifically, a letter from the abutting property owner to the east of the subject property, which would be the most impacted by the proposed screen enclosure. J:ISHRDATAIPlanningISHAREDlWPIPROJECTSI 62S NE 1S"' Place Deasy Variance\ZNCV OS-OOSISTAFF REP,doc ... 1 in. = 74.9 feet 625 NE 15th Place - Deasy Variance EXHIBIT A EXHIBIT B It/E /5711' ?LAcPF' ( so ' ..faM/) ----/ r(J ""/~ f VAS# ~ -- N \I). ~ .. r,(J.J T 75'.00' (PJ ?s: (), J tA) /0' t/,.) ~~ ~~ "'l'" 'I " Q~ ,\\ \ l(: \ ~ ~, ~ ~,~~ ~~~~ ~.: ~ ~~ o-~~ ~ (. , )< ~'b ~ ~ b "" r~~ ~\. ~'" I'\l g '" ~ 'b \} , ~ ,. '; ,: ; . ~ -:. .' F . .- ~ ". ~. ~ .- " \- ~ \'. ~ lo./Z Z/.35' :73.76 ' "- ~ '\ ~ ~ !\) ~ ('4 \l" 6"- w \) 3' S> ~~ ~ CI Ill, "' . i~ ~ \'l>. ~ ~ - (\ ~~ ~~ () " 30.46 . , . .' '~DV' ' . '. " COiVC , .,~,". ~ \N~ :-..- ~ {} ~ , '. " .', yt 1 /. ~3 . ~ , " " , >-.. III \)J - . ~ ... ~ ~ \>> 01 POOl.. 1.7.-98 . . ~ Vi .. ~ . , i ~. '\ ." . . ~ , . <= p,M::. , . , - . ~ , t'-.. ::-.. ~ ~ VI '\ r "- " ........ ~ "" cA.Jr 75": (JO . ~JM) . A/ror ~r parr ~~ tt~ ~ ~ ..... C) ~ , ~ ...z:.- ~ . . ~ ~ ~ ~~ ,~ tJl ~~ . -.- ~O\JrOF CVd~1l7t./~ FJ) PI< ( 1u/J;#E7l. /JI-I- /601 I?<;p ~ '\ ~ \ It" ~ \) EXHIBIT "e" I. D. Chidesler, M.D.. P .A. ~~ !IIJ! ~~ Intental MediCine 2601 F1aglc:r Ave. Suite 316 West Palm Beaoh, Florida 33407 Phone 561-65 $-9170 Fax 561-655-3622 May 16, 2005 Re: MaryAnne Deasey Ms, Deasey has asked me to write in support of her getting a screened in porch secondary to her allergies to insect bites, I feel that this would be of significant benefit for her and any assistance you could render would be appreciated, If you have any questions or concerns p~ease feel free to contact me. ,i " I . I I ^^ I '^II '" .,. I .., ,. ^ ^ -J . J I I ("''lI1I TO: CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH PLANNING & ZONING BOYNTON BEACH, FL. 33425 PLEASE BE ADVISED WE, ADRIAN H, WINCHELL, TRUSTEE OF THE ADRIAN H. WINCHELL REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST AND HELEN J, WINCHELL, TRUSTEE OF THE HELEN J. WINCHELL REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST, LOCATED AT 635 N.E. 15TH PL. LOT # 16 OF YACHTMANS COVE, BOYNTON BEACH, FL. HEREBY DO NOT OBJECT TO A SCREENED IN POOL COVER FOR THE EXISTING POOL, LOCATED AT 625 N.E.15TH PL. LOT # 17 OF YACHTMANS COVE, BOYNTON ~ ADRIAN H. WINCHELL. TRUSTEE ~ 0I.l4~ HELEN J~~~;LL, TRUSTEE DATED 5/16/05 Page 1 EXHIBIT "0" EXHIBIT 0 May 17,2005 Code Commissioners City of Boynton Beach, Florida N OTIC E As the \Vestem-adjacentfand-awnerfntbeproperty ~at625- NE 15th Place, in Boynton Beacrrr owned by Johttand Maryanne Duncan,. 1 hereby declare- that I have no objection to the erection of a screened patio enclosure around the Duncans' existing sWimming pootr despite the- facUhat the enclosure's measure~ts do not conform precisely to the city's regulations relating to the allowable distance from their property's eastern boundsl y Hfle, ~/~ ~ .~ ( ti CahiU :S15 NE 15th Place Boynton Beach, Florida EXHIBIT 0 RICHARD F. HARTWIG 620 NE 15TH PL BOYNTON BEACH, FL 33435 April 17 , 2005 To Whom It May Concern: I have no objection to my neighbors, John and Maryanne Duncan, at 625 NE 15th PL. building a screen enclosure over their pool. Sincerely, ~~?~ Richard F. Hardwig " , I EXHIBIT E Addendum to Application for Variance for John Duncan and Maryanne Deasy-Duncan. Page 2. MAY I 8 LOUS Question 4 A. That special conditions and circumstan~biliif~~J to the land, structure or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district; Special conditions exist in that this is where the pool had been previously been permitted to be built. The pool construction and the home construction were completed at the same time (circa 1979). The unique conditions for variance would not exist if the pool construction were different. B. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant; These conditions came into existence during the construction of the residence around 1979. Maryanne and John Duncan purchased the property in 2004 and Maryanne since 1996. C. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands, buildings or structures in the same zoning district; This is not a special privilege as there are many screened pools and porches within the area. The screening provides comfort and enjoyment for all the homes having the structure from the insects that are abundant in the same area. D. That literal interpretation ofthe provisions ofthis chapter would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of the Ordinance and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant; The screen enclosure surrounding the pool will block most biting insects that the owner, Maryanne, is allergic to. (See letter from Dr, MD Chidester) This will allow her the peaceful and healthful enjoyment of her home that many other homeowners have within the zoning district. E. That the variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure; The screen structure will be permanently attached to the existing improvements (refer to Aerial Photo - teal highlighting). No additional property will be used. , , , EXHIBIT E F. That the granting ofthe variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this chapter and that such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare; The structure will be harmonious with the intent and purpose of the chapter, Screen Porches and Pool structures generally enhance the value of the property as evidenced by the sheer number of homes having them, When reviewing real estate sales advertisements, one will notice the attention to homes having such structures. G. Variances to minimum lot area or lot frontage requirements, that property is not available from adjacent properties in order to meet these requirements, or that the acquisition of such property would cause the adjacent property or structures to become nonconforming. Applicant shall provide an affidavit with the application for variance stating that the above mentioned conditions exist with respect to the acquisition of additional property. Our current neighbor has no interest in selling any of his property. If he were to sell us sufficient property to bring our property into compliance, his house and pool would no longer be in conformance with the current code, EXHIBIT "F" Conditions of Approval Project name: 625 NE 15th Place - Deasy Variance File number: ZNCV 05-005 Reference: I DEPARTMENTS I INCLUDE I REJECT I PUBLIC WORKS- General Comments: None PUBLIC WORKS- Traffic Comments: None UTILITIES Comments: None FIRE Comments: None POLICE Comments: None ENGINEERING DIVISION Comments: None BUILDING DIVISION Comments: None PARKS AND RECREATION Connnents: None FORESTER/ENVIRONMENTALIST Comments: None PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: None ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD CONDITIONS Conditions of Approval 2 DEP ARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT Comments: 1, To be determined. ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS Comments: I 1. To be determined, I I I S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\625 NE 15th Place - Deasy\COA.doc S:\Planning\Planning Templates\Condition of Approval 2 page .P&D ORA 2003 form.doc