Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff ReportCROF SEBASTLA HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND Community Development Variance Application - Staff Report 1. Project Name: 168 Harris Drive — Carport Additions 2. Requested Action: A variance is being requested from Section 54-2-7.5(c)(6) & 54-2- 7.5(c)(7) of the Sebastian Land Development Code to allow construction of an accessory structure to exceed the 1,000 SF maximum allowable area by a total of 50 SF, and to allow an accessory structure 751 SF to 1,000 SF to be of a different architectural design from the primary residence with regards to facade and materials, colors and trim, and roofing materials & pitch, whereas the code requires an accessory structure of that size to be the same as the residence. 3. Project Location a. Address: 168 Harris Drive Sebastian, Florida b. Legal: IRC Tax Parcel ID No. 31-39-18-00003-5640-00013.0 Lots 13 & 14, Block 564, Sebastian Highlands Subdivision Unit 16 4. Project Owner: Chadwick Englert & Nicole Cotton 168 Harris Drive Sebastian, Florida 32958 (561) 596-0821 5. Project Agent: Homeowners 6. Surveyor (2019): William E. Hayhurst, PSM #44163 Hayhurst Land Surveying Inc. 445 9 h Street SW, Unit #7 Vero Beach, Florida 32962 (772)569-6680 7. Project Description: a. Narrative of proposed action: The requested variance is for a structure that was constructed in two stages. The homeowners applied for, and were issued a building permit for a 500 SF detached metal garage in 2019. The size was below the threshold required by the accessory structure code (501 SF) that required it to match the primary residence (See Exhibit Al-A2, Accessory structure code, yellow). In 2020, metal carport additions were attached on both sides of the detached garage without building permits being applied for, or approved. Code Enforcement issued a Notice of Violation, and the matter has been ongoing before the Special Magistrate since. In 2021, it was opined by the City Attorney and City Manager that because the overall size of the detached garage with the carport additions was now over 751 SF, the structure needed to match the architectural requirements found in the accessory structure code (See Exhibit S, Opinion email sent to homeowner). At the recent April 16, 2024 meeting, daily fines were being discussed for the continuing violation, and the Special Magistrate directed the homeowners to apply for a variance within 10 days so that the building permit matter could be resolved. In order for a building permit to be able to be issued for the garage and carport structure to remain as it currently exists pertaining to zoning; compliance. multiple variances are required: 1) Size, if the structure exceeds 1,000 SF (See Exhibit Al, blue); 2) Setback and easement encroachment, if the east carport addition is determined to be wider than 10 feet (See Exhibit Al, green); and 3) Architectural compliance for the items that are not of the same design as the primary residence, i.e. stucco vs. metal wall material, non -matching colors, and asphalt shingles vs. metal roof material (See Exhibit A2, yellow). The city received the homeowner's variance application packet on April 26, 2024 (See Exhibit Cl-C16, Application, written justification, survey, garage plot plan, photos). After review, and from processing the items submitted with the initial submittal, staff offers the following: • Size: To calculate the actual square -footage that the structure exceeds over the maximum 1,000 SF, staff had various conflicting documents and submitted information to use for determination: a) From incomplete 2022 building permit applications submitted by the homeowners, each canopy is described as 300 SF in size (See Exhibit DI-D2, Applications); b) From photos taken by Code Enforcement that were used at the Special Magistrate hearings, and photos submitted by the homeowners with their application, verification that the carport additions extend the length of the garage from end to end i.e. 25 feet (not including the overhang), and are the exact width of the concrete apron around the garage structure (See Exhibit El-E3 and Exhibit C10-C13, photos); c) To determine the exact width of the concrete apron, staff had three inconsistent documents for verification: ➢ 2019 building permit application submitted by the homeowners for the 500 SF garage that indicated a 12' concrete apron surrounding the garage on all sides (See Exhibit F, Application) (12ft X 25 ft = 300 SF on both sides, corroborating #a above) ➢ Survey section that was submitted with the 2019 garage application showing proposed improvements that indicated a 10' apron on the east side of the garage (See Exhibit G, survey). All other sides scale to 12 feet; 2 ➢ Survey with hand -drawn dimensions and plot plan submitted by the homeowners with the variance application that state both 11 feet and 10%11" as the width of the east side apron (See Exhibit C7-C8, survey and plot plan). Because staff cannot conclusively determine the width of the east side apron, which is essential in order to calculate the size of the carport additions and in determining how much the structure exceeds the allowable amount, and because the 2019 survey was proposed and not final, we requested an As -built survey from the homeowner. The homeowners stated because of the cost, they were not going to provide an As -built. Staff offered to reach out to the surveyor to provide details on the small area that was needed for the survey, but the owners declined. To date, an As -built survey has not been submitted and staff cannot accurately determine the size of the carport additions. • Setback & Easement Encroachment: The double lot parcel is considered a corner lot, with the east property line requiring a 10'side yard setback for structures, as per the RS-10 zoning regulations. If the east side apron was constructed as per the 2019 proposed survey and is actually 10 feet in width, no setback or easement encroachment variance is needed. If the east side apron was constructed as per the homeowner's intention to pour a 12' apron around the garage, or as the homeowner indicates on the survey & plot plan that the apron is 11 ' in width, to which above referenced photos verify that the carport addition goes to the edge of the apron, then the addition is encroaching into the required setback and the 10' Public Utility & Drainage Easement. Both a setback variance and an abandonment of easement would be needed to allow the carport addition to remain in its existing location, and to allow the applicant to apply for a building permit. An As -built survey would help verify if any setback and easement encroachments exist as it would certify the exact location and size of the carport additions. To date, an As -built survey has not been submitted and staff cannot accurately determine, if any, the amount of encroachment the east carport addition includes. • Architectural Compliance: As the garage and carport additions exist today, the following are in non-compliance with the architectural requirements for accessory structures over 751 SF in size (See Exhibit A2, yellow): ➢ The finish materials of the accessory structure do not match the primary structure — Metal vs. Stucco ➢ The color of the accessory structure does not match the color of the house ➢ The roof materials of the accessory structure do not match the roof materials of the house — Metal vs. Asphalt Shingles ➢ The required landscaping for accessory structures over 751 SF in size has not been provided 3 In their written justification letter submitted with the application, the homeowners have committed to the following in addressing the non - compliances: ➢ Paint the detached garage to match the color of the house ➢ No change to the garage finish materials ➢ Replace the house roof materials in the future to metal roofing to match the accessory structure ➢ Plant 14 Pampas Grasses on the north side of the structure Planting and painting the garage to match the house will bring these two requirements into compliance. However, the Board of Adjustment shall consider if the two remaining requests (wall finish and roof materials) meet the criteria to grant a variance. As the structure's roof material is a large part of its visibility to surrounding properties, staff feels the roof materials of the garage and carport additions should be required to match the house. b. Current Zoning: Current Land Use: C. Adjacent Properties: North: East: South: West: d. Site Characteristics RS-10 (Single -Family Residential, Min 10,000 SF Lots) LDR (Low Density Residential, 5 units per acre) Zoning (1) Total Acreage: RS-10 RS-10 RS-10 RS-10 (2) Current Land Use(s): (3) Water Service: (4) Sanitary Sewer Service: 8. Additional Staff Comments: Current Land Use residence residence residence residence Future Land Use LDR LDR LDR LDR .47 acres, or 20,473 SF Single-family residence Public water Public Sewer Variance approval does not allow immediate issuance of a building permit. A permit application and fee are still necessary, along with required documentation of structural compliance with the Florida Building Code. If the structure is also found to be encroaching into the adjacent 10' Public Drainage & Utility Easement, additional applications may be needed. t,I 9. Board Criteria for Determining Variances: See attached analysis. 10. Staff Recommendation: In consideration of 1) staff s opinion that the request does not meet the required Board criteria; and 2) that minimum variances regarding size, and setback & easement encroachments cannot be determined because of an incomplete application, i.e. missing a requested and necessary As - built survey, staff recommends that the variance(s) are not granted. 11. Board Action: Conduct quasi-judicial hearing to consider the requested variance. W. tine, Bui ding Official + D. Bosworth, Mgr/Planner $1r41a�{ Date ' 5