Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-20-2024 BOA AgendaDxkfAnnouncement& Friday, November 22 - Chamber of Commerce Finally Friday on Cleveland St - 6pm to 9pm Thursday and Friday, November 28 & 29 - City Hall Closed for Thanksgiving Holiday Friday, December 6 - 351h Annual Sebastian River Area Chamber of Comm. Light Up Night - 530 to 8pm Saturday, December 7 - Pearl Harbor Day Observance at Veterans Memorial Park-12:30pm Saturday, December 7 - Rotany Chub of Sebastian Craft Brew Hullaballoo at Riverview Park - 12pm to 4pm Saturday, December 7 - Annual Christmas Parade from Main St to Riverview Park - 6pm Sunday, December 8 - Centennial Celebration Event in Riverview Park - 10am to 6pnt Friday, December 13 - Chamber of Commerce Finally Friday on Cleveland St - 6pm to 9pm Saturday, December 14 - Wreaths Across America at Veterans Memorial in Riverview Park - noon 9. PUBLIC INPUT The heading on Regular Meeting agendas "Public Input" provides an opportunity for individuals to bring NEW INFORMATION OR REQUESTS TO CITY COUNCIL NOT OTHERWISE ON THE PREPARED AGENDA. Individuals are asked to resolve matters with staff prior to meetings. Individuals are asked to provide copies of materials for Council one week prior to the meeting if they intend to refer to specific material. City Council will not debate an issue during Public Input but may by consensus direct a Charter Officer in regard to the item if necessary or place a requested item on a future agenda. 10. RECESS THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND CONVENE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING Quasi -Judicial Public Hearings: Chairman opens hearing and asks speakers to complete oath cards Attorney reads variance request Board members disclose ex parte communication Applicant makes their presentation Staffpresents theirfindings Board Members asks questions oftipplicant or staff Chairman opens the floor for anyone in favor ofrequest Chairman opens the floor for anyone opposing the request Applicant is provided the opportunity to respond to issues Staffprovided opportunity to summarize request Board deliberation Chairman calls for a motion A. Consideration of a Variance Request - Sean Strobl - 798 Spire Avenue - Six-foot high fence on a corner lot located within the secondary front yards, and located in front of the house - LDC Sections 54-2-7.7(c)(3) & 54-2-7.7(c)(1) Staff Report Aerial Variance Analysis - Staff Board Criteria for Determining Variances Exhibits B. Consideration of a Variance Request - Brandon & Jennifer Martin - 491 Kumquat Avenue - Six-foot high fence on a corner lot located within the secondary front yard - LDC Section 54-2-7.7(c)(3) Staff Report Aerial Variance Analysis - Staff Board Criteria for Determining Variances Exhibits 11. ADJOURN THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AND CONVENE THE - COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING A. Approve May 22, 2024 CRA Minutes Staff Report May 22.2024 CPA Minutes B. Approve September 25, 2024 CRA Minutes Staff Report September 25, 2024 CPA Minutes C. Approve October 16, 2024 CRA Minutes Staff Report October 16, 2024 CRA Minutes D. Consideration of a Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) grant agreement for design of the Riverview Park renovations; appropriate matching funds and forward to City Council for approval Staff Report IR-SE-24-79 Riverview Park Ph I AgT.pdf E. Consideration of approval of Florida Inland Navigation District grant agreement for the design and installation of dry line at Law Enforcement Dock, appropriation of matching funds; and forward to City Council for Approval Staff Report IR-SE-24-80 Law Enforcement Dock Dry Line Installation Agreement F. Consideration of the Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) grant agreement for revised structural engineering assessment, design, permitting and bid package for the property located at 1540 Indian River Drive; appropriation of matching funding; and forward to City Council for approval Staff Report IR-SE-24-82 Stan Mayfield WW Ph I Agreement G. Consideration of the Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) grant agreement for the replacement of the Working Waterfront Dry Line and forward to City Council for consideration Staff Report IR-SE-24-83 Working Waterfront Dry Line Replacement Agreement H. Consideration of a Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) grant agreement for design of the Main Street/Capt. Hardee Boat Ramp Improvements Phase I; appropriate matching funds and forward to City Council for approval. 3 CITY OF SEBASTIAN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT STAFF REPORT I DATE November 20, 2024 ��- �� I TO Honorable Mayor and City Council THRU Brian Benton, City Manager FROM Dorri Bosworth, Community Development Manager SEBASTIAN Consideration of a Variance Request — Sean Strohl — 798 Spire Avenue — Six-foot high fence on a corner lot located < E N T E N N I A L C E L E 6 R A T I O N within the secondary front yards, and located in front of the 1914-1014 SUBJECT house —LDC Sections 54-2-7.7(c)(3) & 54-2-7.7(c)(1) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Mr. Strohl, owner of the property located at 798 Spire Avenue, is requesting a variance to allow a fence to be six (6) feet in height on a corner lot within the secondary front yard setback areas along Mark Street and Wimbrow Drive. The fence was installed directly on those property lines at the permitted height, but was increased to 6-feet in height when the owner added two feet of trellis to the top of the fence after it was inspected. The code requires fences 6 feet high to be twenty (20) feet back from secondary front property lines [in the RS-10 zoning district] or four (4) feet in height if located within the secondary front yard. The owner is also requesting to allow a portion of that six-foot high fence to be located beyond the front house line in front of the residence whereas the code requires the fence to be only four (4) feet in height if the fence is located in front of the house. In accordance with Section 54-1-2.5, staff has provided an analysis detailing the variance request, applicable exhibits, the criteria established for determining variances, along with additional information to assist with the Board's consideration. RECOMMENDATION Conduct a quasi-judicial public hearing to consider the variance request to allow a fence to be six (6) feet in height on a corner lot within the secondary front yards and in front of the main structure. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Aerial 2. Variance Analysis — Staff 3. Board Criteria for Determining Variances 4. Exhibits FUNDING SOURCE: Expenditure required Amount Budgeted: Funding source N/A CM Of SE"01Z - ft �W N HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND Community Development Variance Application - Staff Analysis 1. Project Name: Strohl - Fence Height for Corner Lot 2. Requested Action: A variance is being requested from Sections 54-2-7.7(c)(3) & (c)(1) of the Sebastian Land Development Code to allow a fence to be six (6) feet in height on a corner lot within the secondary front yard setback areas along Mark Street and Wimbrow Drive as the fence was installed directly on the property lines, whereas the code requires such fence to be twenty (20) feet back from the those property lines or four (4) feet in height, and to also allow a portion of that six-foot high fence to be located beyond the front house line in front of the residence whereas the code requires the fence to be only four (4) feet in height if the fence is located in front of the house. 3. Project Location a. Address: 798 Spire Avenue Sebastian, Florida b. Legal: IRC Tax Parcel ID No. 31-38-01-00003-0740-00001.0 Lot 1, Block 74, Sebastian Highlands Subdivision Unit 2 4. Project Owner(s): Sean, Corissa, & Mary Kathryn Strohl 798 Spire Avenue Sebastian, Florida 32958 (484) 634-2923 5. Project Agent: Homeowners 6. Surveyor (2012): Cecrle Land Surveying, Inc. 10749 Highway U.S. #1, Suite A Sebastian, Florida 32958 (772) 388-0520 7. Project Description: a. Narrative of proposed action: On May 7, 2024, the homeowner, Mr. Sean Strohl, applied for a fence permit to privatize their back yard, and as required, submitted a survey indicating the location of the proposed fence installation. The parcel for 798 Spire Avenue is unique in that it is considered a corner lot, but has three front yards instead of the usual two. The front door faces Spire Avenue, and per the LDC, is defined as the primary front yard, whereas the other two front yards along Mark Street and Wimbrow Drive are designated as secondary front yards. The code is specific as to the height of fences allowed in secondary front yards, along with the height of fences located in front of the house (See Exhibit A, LDC fence code). The Permit Technician assisted the homeowner explaining the code, clarifying the height of the fence for the locations proposed, and marked the survey for his permit (See Exhibit B, survey submitted with Building Permit application). The fence permit application was furthered reviewed by both the Engineering and Zoning Departments, who approved the fence as shown on the survey with a reminder that the portion located on the rear property line had to transition from 4' to 6' at least 20 feet in from the secondary front property lines (See Exhibit C, survey with staff comments & approvals). The fence was installed by the homeowner as per the approved plan, and after a Final Inspection of the fence failed because of an encroachment into the Mark Street ROW, the fence was relocated back to the property line, and the permit was closed out. Shortly after however, the homeowner attached a 2-foot high trellis -like extension to the top of the entire fence (See Exhibit D1-D7, photos). Since this trellis structure forms a barrier, (See LDC Section 54-2-7.7(c)(4) from Exhibit A), it cannot be exempted as a gardening Trellis, and is therefore considered a part of the fence structure, thus increasing the height of the fence now to six feet. The trellis addition renders the fence into non-compliance for heights allowed within secondary front yards. (See Exhibit E, depiction in red where 6-foot high fence is allowed). The homeowners are requesting variance consideration and have submitted an application requesting relief from the fence height requirement for the portions of the fence located within the secondary front yards, and the portion that extends beyond the front house line (See Exhibit F147, variance application, written justification, photos). b. Current Zoning: RS-10 (Single -Family Residential, Min 10,000 SF Lots) Current Land Use: LDR (Low Density Residential, 5 units per acre) C. Adjacent Properties: Zoning Current Land Future Land _ Use Use North: RS-10 residence LDR East: RS-10 residence LDR South: RS-10 residence LDR West: RS-10 residence LDR I d. Site Characteristics (1) Total Acreage: (2) Current Land Use(s): (3) Water Service: (4) Sanitary Sewer Service: .23 acres, or 10,000 SF Single-family residence Public water Septic & Drainfield system 2 8. Additional Staff Comments: With regards to Section 54-2-7.10, Regulation of Obstructions to Visibility, which fences on corner lots are required to be in compliance with, staff has verified, along with the applicant providing photographs, that the fence, as installed, does not provide any obstructions to traffic and traffic visibility at the intersections of Mark Street & Spire Avenue, and Spire Avenue & Wimbrow Drive. However, staff has concerns for the adjacent residence to the north located at 762 Wimbrow Drive. The house was built in 1974, is not positioned squarely on the property but sits at an angle. As such, the SW corner of the house is 3.39 feet from the southern property line where the applicant's fence is located. The driveway runs parallel along this property line approximately 6 to 8 feet away from the fence (See Exhibit D6 & D7, photos of the referenced residence, driveway, and fence). If the variance is granted, 20 feet of the applicant's 6-foot high fence would be located in front of the neighbor's house and in close proximity to the driveway, possibly causing visibility issues for drivers backing out onto Wimbrow Drive. Although there is an auxiliary driveway to the rear of this house on Mark Street, the front entrance and primary driveway on the busier Wimbrow Drive causes the most concern. 9. Board Criteria for Determining Variances: See attached analysis. 10. Staff Recommendation: With regards to the applicant's variance request, the following options can be considered: A. Deny the request, and require those portions of the fence that extend into the secondary front yards and beyond the front house line be reduced in height to 4 feet maximum by removing the trellis extension (what was permitted); or B. Grant the request, allowing those portions of the fence that extend into the secondary front yards and beyond the front house line to be able to remain at 6 feet high; or C. Partially grant the request, allowing those portions of the fence that extend into the secondary front yards to remain at 6 feet high with the condition that the fence along Wimbrow Drive must be 10 feet from that property line, but deny the portion of fence that extends beyond the front house line to stay at 6 feet high (See Exhibit G, recommended allowable 6-foot high fence placement). Staff recommends #C. 11. Board Action: Conduct quasi-judicial hearing to consider the requested variance. Dorri Boswort�Man�ag:Planner�, bate Community Development Department 3 BOARD CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING VARIANCES Section 54-1-2.5 In order to authorize any variance from the terms of the land development regulations, the Board of Adjustment must use the following criteria for approving or denying a variance: a. Existence of special conditions or circumstances. 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. Meets Standard Yes V No ❑ Unlike most other corner lots, the applicant's property contains three (3) front yards as it faces three roadways. The yard facing Spire Avenue is the primary front yard, while those along Mark Street and Wimbrow Drive are secondary. The depth of the lot is considerably less than the normal Sebastian Highlands parcel (approx. 75' vs. 125) but much wider especially towards the rear (135'vs, 80'). Acreage is the same at .23. The LDC is very specific on where a six-foot high fence can be place within secondary front yards, and because the property contains two, the backyard privacy area may be reduced if compared with other corner lot properties. b. Conditions not created by applicant. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. Meets Standard Yes ❑ No � Although the platting of the property was not the result of the applicant, desiring a six-foot high fence within the secondary front yards instead of a four -foot high fence is a circumstance created by the applicant. The applicant was aware of the height restrictions as was noted on his permit survey. The fence was installed as permitted, but afterwards increased to 6 feet high by the applicant. C. Special privileLres not conferred. 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. Meets Standard Yes ❑ No Other corner lot owners who have applied for fence permits have had to meet the ordinance regarding the heights of their fences within the secondary front yards. d. Hardship conditions exist. That literal interpretation of the provisions of the 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 create unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant. Meets Standard Yes V No ❑ Having two secondary front yards will diminish the backyard privacy area that a 6-foot high fence will achieve compared to properties that have only one secondary front yard. e. Only the minimum variance granted. That the variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure. Meets Standard Yes � No ❑ Option C from staff s Analysis could be considered the minimum variance if granted when visibility issues are taken into consideration. The Board may wish to adjust the location of the six-foot high fence along Mark Street if they determine it is warranted also. f. Not incurious to public welfare or intent of ordinance. That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the comprehensive plan and this code, and that such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Meets Standard Yes V No ❑ Staff opines that, after relocating the six-foot high fence by the suggested ten (10) feet back from the Wimbrow Drive property line in order to address concerns noted in the Analysis for the adjacent residence at 762 Wimbrow Drive, the remaining fence will not be injurious to residents, general traffic, or pedestrians. 2. Conditions and safeguards may be imposed. In granting any variance, the board of adjustment may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with chapter 163 F.S., the comprehensive plan, and any ordinance enacted under its authority. Violation of such conditions and safeguards, when made a part of the terms under which the variance is granted, shall be deemed a violation of the ordinance. Meets Standard Yes V No ❑ 5 Staff recommends, if the variance is granted, to require the 6-foot high fence along Wimbrow Drive to be relocated back 10 feet from the property line allowing improved visibility for backing out of the primary driveway for the neighboring residence at 762 Wimbrow Drive h. Time limit may be imposed. The board of adjustment may prescribe a reasonable time limit during which the applicant shall commence and/or complete the subject actions and conditions approved by the board. Meets Standard Yes � No ❑ The fence has already been installed and exists in the location the variance is being requested for. If Option C is granted, a time period of two (2) months should be prescribed for the applicant to relocate the fence along Wimbrow Drive and in front of the house. If the variance is not granted, a time period of two (2) months should be prescribed for the applicant to remove the trellis extension and bring the fence back to four -feet high where required. i. No use variance permitted in specified instances. Under no circumstances shall the board of adjustment grant a variance to permit a use not generally permitted in the zoning district involved or any use expressly or by implication prohibited by the terms of the ordinance in the zoning district. No nonconforming use of neighboring lands, structures, or buildings in the same zoning district and no permitted use of lands, structures, or buildings in other zoning districts shall be considered grounds for the authorization of a variance. Meets Standard Yes V No ❑ The request is not a use -related variance. on Exhibit Al Sec. 54-2-7.7. Walls and fences. (a) General regulation of walls and fences. (1) Permit required. Except as provided in subsection (8), it shall be unlawful for any person, association, corporation or other entity to install, erect, alter, or located a fence or wall within the city without first obtaining a fence permit for such activity. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a fence permit shall not be required for the replacement or repair of an existing fence or wall unless the replacement or repair cost exceed 50% or more of the value of the fence or wall before its repair or replacement. (b) Types offences and walls permitted. (2) Any portion of a fence or wall that faces a dedicated street right-of-way shall direct the finished side of that portion of the fence or wall towards the street. (c) Fences and walls in residential areas. (1) Height of walls and fences. Fences and walls, not exceeding six feet in height, may be placed along the boundary of a lot on that portion of the lot lying behind the front setback line and behind the front of the main structure. Fences and walls placed in front of the main structure shall not exceed four feet in height. 3) Walls and fences on corner lots. Notwithstanding the provisions of 54-2-7.7(c)(1) or 54-2-7.7(c)(2), fences and walls six feet in height may be erected on a corner lot provided they do not extend into the required secondary front yard setback area. [Staff Note: For the RS-10 zoning district, the secondary front yard setback is twenty feet. This is measured from the property line, not from the street pavement.] Fences and walls that extend into the secondary front Yard setback area shall not exceed four feet in height and meet the provisions of section 54-2-7.10. For purposes of this subsection, the term "secondary front yard" shall mean the yard of an improved corner lot located between the street and the wall of the main structure facing the street where the primary entrance to the main structure is not located. (4) Trellis structures. Trellis structures that do not form a barrier may be erected at any location on a lot except within visibility triangles or dedicated easements. Such trellis structures need not satisfy the height limitation and restrictions for residential fences and walls provided in this subsection. (e) Fences within easements. (1) Fence permit required. It shall be unlawful for any person, association, corporation or other entity to erect a fence or wall within any easement unless a fence permit for the fence or wall is obtained pursuant to section 54-2-7.7(a) prior to the erection of the fence or wall, and the fence or wall is constructed of the materials listed in section 54-2-7.7(b)(1), (2) and (5). Prior to city approval of the permit, the property owner shall provide the city a recorded affidavit acknowledging that the fence or wall will be located in an easement, and that the city or utility company is not responsible for any damages to the fence or wall if they need to access the easement area. (2) Property owner responsible for removal cost. Any fence or wall proposed to be installed within a utility or drainage easement that accesses, abuts or provides the city or utility company with a maintenance area to lot line ditches, canals, drainage tracts, or rights -of -way, may be of a permanent or temporary nature. However, if the city or utility company should later determine that removal of the fence or wall (Supp. No. 22) Created; 2024-07-02 12:18:45 [EST] Page 1 of 2 A2 is necessary for the installation, maintenance, repair or replacement of the drainage or utility facility, the property owner shall be required to remove the fence or wall within five days of the owner's receipt of written demand for removal from the city or utility company. All cost incurred in the removal and replacement of the fence or wall shall be the responsibility of the property owner. The city may remove any fence or wall within the easement, as needed, in cases of emergency. (3) Maintenance. With the exception of drainage ditches maintained by others, the property owner shall be responsible for the maintenance of all property within a utility or drainage easement regardless of the placement of the fence or wall. (Ord. No. 0-18-10, § 1, 1-23-2019) Sec. 54-2-7.10. Regulation of obstructions to visibility. (a) Obstruction to traffic and traffic visibility. There shall be no structures or planting, which materially obstructs traffic, and traffic visibility. (b) Visibility triangles. Visibility triangles, within which nothing shall be erected, placed, parked, planted or allowed to grow in such a manner as to impede vision between a height of two feet and eight feet above the center lines of intersecting traffic ways, shall be provided as follows: (1) Vision clearance at street, alley and driveway intersections. A visibility triangle shall be required at all traffic intersections. No wall, fence, hedge, or structure within the visibility triangle shall exceed a height of two feet above the elevation of the abutting street measured at the centerline. Dimensions of visibility triangle. The sides of the visibility triangle shall be 30 feet at street -to -street intersections and 15 feet at all other intersections. These distances shall be measured along the well- defined edge of pavement from their point of intersection. Where no well-defined edge of pavement exists, a probable edge of pavement shall be established from the existing centerline of the travelways, using 12-foot travel lane(s) for dedicated streets, eight -foot half width for all dedicated alleys and utility easements, and five-foot half width for single driveways. Visibility triangles shall be required at all traffic intersections, including driveways and alleys. (Supp. No. 22) Created: 2024-07-02 11:18:45 [EST] Page 2 of 2 Exhibit F1 Permit Application No. SEWN City of Sebastian w iaKucAw%Aw Development Order Application Applicant (If not owner, written authorization (notarized) from owner is required) I Name: 1, Address: -1a b 8 o t 1� t, f"1(Y `� i kao F1 • 3 T1-0' 1 Phone Number: (tf¢ti{) U3q - 2:412.5 FAX Number: -- E-Mail: c ct�Ul�►1 ZZ ® (nA [ OVA J Owner (If different from applicant) Name: Sin J. 5WI/'� t Address: -7qb CsirT3a t - c1c 6, A.V% -FL 32�l Phone Number: (! )G 3 y - Ze FAX Number. E-Mail' �� � � �2 � ��A� C • Cow L. Title of permit or action requested: PLEASE COMPLETE ONLY THOSE SECTIONS WHICH ARE NECESSARY FOR THE PERMIT OR ACTION THAT YOU ARE REQUESTING. COPIES OF ALL MAPS, SURVEYS, DRAWINGS, ETC. SHALL BE ATTACHED AND 8-1/2" BY 11" COPIES OF ANY ATTACHMENTS SHALL BE INCLUDED. ATTACH THE APPROPRIATE SUPPLEMETAL INFORMATION FORM. A. Project Name (if applicable): FP_ v Q 6ri Oi� _ t0T B. Site Information Address: Zq6 < ,,t e Lot: Block: Unit: Subdivissio `t'NE04T Indian River County Parcel #: ql -3k -Ol - eD000-5- n-740 '-QOI01 • n f Zoning Qas iicat on: Future Land Use:LD� - I Existing Use: Proposed Use: C. Detailed description of proposed activity and purpose of the requested permit or action (attach extra sheets if necessary): �} f j�4CQ l,F _ Cf_ �- �.Z- ^L'1 VfL"J ...I/ 1•!�\. r� d_ fI(f�.l /7•4�� •'/, ` I DATE RECEIVED: 1 1 FEE PAID: $ c�C, • 00 RECEIVED BY.Tr Sor F2 Permit Application No. D. Project Personnel: - Agent: FName: IAddress IPhone Number: FAX Number: ( ) E-Mail: Attorney_: Name: Address Phone Number: ( ) - FAX Number: E-Mail: En ineer: Name: I Address — Phone Number: ( ) - FAX Number: IE-Mail: Surveyor: 1 Name: I Address 1 Phone Number: { ) - FAX Number: E-Mail: - - - - - -- - - � BEING FIRST DULY SWORN, DEPOSE AND SAY THAT: ^ I AM THE OWNER __ I AM THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED WHICH IS THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS APPLICATION, AND THAT ALL THE INFORMATION, MAPS, DATA AND/OR SKETCHES PROVIDED IN THIS APPLICATION ARE ACCURATE AND TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. SIGNATURE DATE SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME BY WHO IS PERSONALLY KNOWN TO ME OR PRODUCED AS IDENTIFICATION, THIS DAY OF 20 NOTARY'S SIGNATURE PRINTED NAME OF NOTARY COMMISSION NO./EXPIRATION SEAL: F3 Permit Application No. The following is required for all comprehensive plan amendments, zoning amendments (including rezoning), site plans, conditional use permits, special use permits, variances, exceptions, and appeals. I/WE, ,_ THE OWNER(S) / — THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNER(S) OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED WHICH IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPLICATION, HEREBY AUTHORIZE EACH AND EVERY MEMBER OF THE pOW �% JT_ BOARD/COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN TO PHYSICALLY ENTER UPON THE PROPERTY AND VIEW THE PROPERTY IN CONNECTION WITH MY/OUR PENDING APPLICATION. I/WE HEREBY WAIVE ANY OBJECTION OR DEFENSE I/WE MAY HAVE, DUE TO THE QUASI-JUDICIAL NATURE OF THE PROCEEDINGS, RESULTING FROM ANY BOARD/COMMISSION MEMBER ENTERING OR VIEWING THE PROPERTY, INCLUDING ANY CLAIM OR ASSERTION THAT MY/OUR PROCEDURAL OR SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS RIGHTS UNDER THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION OR THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION WERE VIOLATED BY SUCH ENTERING OR VIEWING - THIS WAIVER AND ONSENT IS BEING SIGNED BY ME/US VOLUNTARILY AND NOT AS A RESULT OF ANY COERCION APPLIED, OR PROMISES M DE,BYVANY EMPLOYEE, AGENT, CONTRACTOR OR OFFICIAL OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN. SIGNATURE DAT Sworn to and subscribed before who is personally known to me c as identification, this _ �J__ day Notary's Signature Printed Name of Notary Commission No./Expiration Seal: � ea, �TroN e Drw4 l Frr'nst- Tl,ra�.►� �,r� S;�aS�,�I z . N a 4lFOF F`QQ� JOSHUA SIMPSON Commission # HH 1131E7 Expires April A, 2025 Bonded Thru Budget Notary Services APPLICATION FEES ARE ESTABLISHED BY RESOLUTION OF CITY COUNCIL. ADDITIONAL FEES FOR THE CITY'S CONSULTING ENGINEER REVIEW (WHEN REQUIRED) WILL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT. ACK1915WLE1)GMERT---- DATE F4 Permit Application No. WAO V P1UCkiMAND Supplemental Information Application to the Board of Adjustment 1. This application is for a (check one): ✓ variance(s) appeal(s) 2. Specify all code provisions for which a variance is being requested or the decision or decisions that you pre appealing. (Attach extra sheets if necessarv):&WaGV1t- - (0 ;-tv- 60 a M-W =109169ir W 3. Legal description of the property involved: 4. Attach the following: .w a. Boundary survey of the property executed by a Florida Registered Surveyor. The survey shall show the dimensions of the lot or parcel at issue, the location of all structures, if any, along with adjacent streets, and all easements and right-of-ways. lb. Additional data and information as required to properly advise the Board of the facts apd circ4mstanceesneeded to decide the case on its merits. c. The names and addresses of all property owners whose property or part of their real property is within 300 feet of any outer boundary of the lot or parcel of land that is subject of the application. ?( eVXkO *1y aM %;"3 -74ZU�- . F5 Sean and Corissa Strohl 798 Spire Ave, Sebastian Fl, 32958 Lot 1 Block 74 Hello, The purpose of this letter is to show the effort made to maintain my current living situation and reasoning behind the need to apply for a variance. Per the land development code Section 54-1-2.5 Criteria for determining Variances: A) An existence of special conditions/Circumstances exists on my property in regards to the unique layout of the property. I currently have 3 front yards on this properly, one on Spire ave (primary) the other is on Mark St and the last one is on Wimbrow Ave. These special circumstances are what make this property special. B) As previously stated above, the special conditions were not created by any actions by myself. C) This variance will not grant special privileges for this property, per the development code the lattice is impeding visibility for drivers, making turns at stop signs and backing out of their driveways. The fence on the back section of my property is touching one other property to which that neighbor has two driveways, neither of which are impeded by the fence or its height. (Pictures provided) The section of fence near the intersection of Wimbrow and Spire ave is not within line of sight and is 24ft Bin (shortest distance) and 30ft 2in (furthest distance) back from the road. (Pictures provided) Lastly the section of fence near the intersection of Mark St and Spire ave is 17ft 4in from the street and is 35ft back from the stop sign. (Pictures also provided) D) Hardship conditions exist due to the sheer size of the yard, in relation to the ordinance allowed by the development code. My current fence runs along the property line and allows for my children and dogs to happily run around and play, while also keeping them safe inside the fence. A 4ft high fence was installed, with 2ft of lattice placed on top to prevent the dogs from jumping over the fence. A 4ft high fence is not sufficient to keep my dogs inside the fence. Per the development code a 6ft high fence can be erected on the property, but has to be 20ft inside the property line. If we were to follow the code to erect a 6ft high fence, that would take away 60% of my yard and leave me with a 24x40 ft section of yard (accounting for the aft of yard taken off for the power line easement in the rear of the yard). E) This variance will make possible the reasonable use of the land and will allow the most space to enjoy the peace and quiet of this section of the city! F) As previously stated, the granting of this variance does not cause any issues with line of sight or impede visibility in any way. Thank you for your time and consideration into this matter. cnOF SEBAST" HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND Community Development Variance Application - Staff Analysis 1. Project Name: Martin - Fence Height on Corner Lot 2. Requested Action: A variance is being requested from Section 54-2-7.7(c)(3) of the Sebastian Land Development Code to allow a fence to be six (6) feet in height on a corner lot within the secondary front yard setback area, specifically on the property line along Poinciana Street, whereas the code requires such fence to be twenty (20) feet back from the secondary front property line or four (4) feet in height. 3. Project Location 4. 5. 6. a. Address: 491 Kumquat Avenue Sebastian, Florida b. Legal: IRC Tax Parcel ID No. 31-38-01-00002-0130-00020.0 Lot 20, Block 13, Sebastian Highlands Subdivision Unit 1 Project Owner(s): Brandon & Jennifer Martin 491 Kumquat Avenue Sebastian, Florida 32958 (727) 325-0206 Contractor: Professional Fence Installation 725 Commerce Center Drive, Suite H Sebastian, Florida 32958 (772) 588-0030 Surveyor (2005): James Fowler, Land Surveying Company P.O. Box 1677 Vero Beach, Florida 32961 7. Project Description: a. Narrative of proposed action: On July 30a', 2024, the homeowner's fence contractor applied for a fence permit to privatize their back yard, and as required, submitted a survey indicating the location of the proposed fence installation (See Exhibit A, survey with proposed fence location). The property is a corner lot with the primary front yard on Kumquat Avenue, and the secondary front yard along Poinciana Street. The code is specific as to the height of fences allowed in secondary front yards, with a 6-foot high fence permitted behind the secondary front setback line (20 feet for properties zoned RS-10, measured from the property line not edge of pavement), or a maximum of four - feet high (See Exhibit B, LDC fence code). The application and survey were reviewed by applicable staff, with the Zoning Department denying the proposed location for the requested 6-foot high fence because of its placement within the secondary front yard, and the Engineering Department denying the proposed location as being within the rear 10-foot drainage and utility easement (See Exhibit C, Staff denial comments from the MyGov permitting system). A revised survey with the fence relocated accordingly was requested. Shortly after, without the permit being issued, the fence was installed by the contractor (See Exhibit D1-D4, photos of installed fence), prompting a Notice of Violation to be issued by Code Enforcement on 8/20/24. The homeowners are requesting variance consideration and have submitted an application requesting relief from the fence height requirement for the portions of the fence located within the secondary front yard (See Exhibit E1-E8, variance application, written justification, photos). Staff visited the property to verify actual placement of the fence which discovered a 3-4 foot encroachment into the Poinciana Street ROW (See Exhibit F, survey with installed fence location in red) b. Current Zoning: Current Land Use: C. Adjacent Properties: North: _East: South: West: RS-10 (Single -Family Residential, Min 10,000 SF Lots) LDR (Low Density Residential, 5 units per acre) Zoning RS-10 RS-10 RS-10 RS-10 d. Site Characteristics (1) Total Acreage: (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 .29 acres, or 12,632 SF Single-family residence Public water Septic & Drainfield system A corner lot located at 491 Avocado Avenue and Poinciana Street, two lots south of the applicant's property, also has a fence installed, which meets the regulations regarding fence heights for corner lots within the secondary front yards. The property is the same dimensions and size of the applicants (See Exhibit G, corner lot fence at 491 Avocado Avenue). KA 9. Board Criteria for Determining Variances: See attached analysis. 10. Staff Recommendation: With regards to the applicant's variance request, the following options can be considered (See Exhibit H1 to H3, diagrams of A-C): A. Deny the request, and require those portions of the fence that extend into the secondary front yard be reduced in height to 4 feet maximum or relocate the 6-foot high fence back 20 feet from secondary front yard property line in accordance with regulations; or B. Grant the request, allowing those portions of the fence that extend into the secondary front yard to be able to remain as installed at 6 feet high; or C. Grant the request, but allowing a portion of the 6-foot high fence to extend into the secondary front yard at a specific distance determined by the Board from the secondary front yard property line, i.e. 10 feet from property line vs 20 feet per regulations. Regardless of any of the options, the fence must be relocated out of the street ROW and out of the rear easement. After consideration of the LDC mandated criteria for determining variances, staff recommends Option #A. 11. Board Action: Conduct quasi-judicial hearing to consider the requested variance. Dorn Bosworth, Manager/Planner Community Development Department 01YA .Y date 3 BOARD CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING VARIANCES Section 54-1-2.5 In order to authorize any variance from the terms of the land development regulations, the Board of Adjustment must use the following criteria for approving or denying a variance: a. Existence of special conditions or circumstances. 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. Meets Standard Yes ❑ No The property is not unusual in its size or dimensions as compared to other corner lots platted within the Sebastian Highlands Subdivision. Most corner lots are 85' in width, this lot is 100'. There are no physical obstructions or circumstances that would allow a fence to not be able to meet the requirements for corner lots. b. Conditions not created by applicant. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. Meets Standard Yes ❑ No V Requesting a six-foot high fence within the secondary front yard instead of a four -foot high fence is a circumstance created by the applicant. The property is slightly larger than a normal -sized corner lot, and as such, the previous owner installed a swimming pool & screen enclosure, rear yard shed, and lengthy auxiliary driveway on the property. The smaller back yard area would have been observed by the applicants when they recently purchased the property C. Special privileges not conferred. 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. Meets Standard Yes ❑ No V Other corner lot owners who have applied for fence permits have had to meet the ordinance regarding the heights of their fences within the secondary front yards. d. Hardship conditions exist. That literal interpretation of the provisions of the 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 create unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant. Meets Standard Yes ❑ No Adjusting the fence height to four feet or relocating the 6-foot high fence to meet code will not create unnecessary and undue hardship. The applicant will still be able to use his back yard for recreational activities (swimming pool), storage, and parking as other properties do the in the RS-10 zoning district. e. Only the minimum variance granted. That the variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure. Meets Standard Yes V No ❑ Option C from staff's Analysis could be considered the minimum variance if granted while still affording the owners additional area in their secondary front yard for privacy. Allowing the 6-foot high fence to be installed on the secondary front property line would not be the minimum variance. f. Not incurious to public welfare or intent of ordinance. That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the comprehensive plan and this code, and that such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Meets Standard Yes ❑ No ❑ Granting of the variance may not be in accord with the intent and purpose of the code, but if granted, staff opines that a 6-foot high fence permitted to be within the secondary front yard area would not be injurious to residents, general traffic, or pedestrians. 2. Conditions and safeguards may be imposed. In granting any variance, the board of adjustment may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with chapter 163 F.S., the comprehensive plan, and any ordinance enacted under its authority. Violation of such conditions and safeguards, when made a part of the terms under which the variance is granted, shall be deemed a violation of the ordinance. Meets Standard Yes � No ❑ If the variance is granted, staff recommends that conditions of approval require removal of the fence from the rear easement, and that the encroachment from the Poinciana Street ROW is eliminated 5 h. Time limit may be imuosed. The board of adjustment may prescribe a reasonable time limit during which the applicant shall commence and/or complete the subject actions and conditions approved by the board. Meets Standard Yes � No ❑ Independent of any variance decision that is made, a time period of two (2) weeks should be prescribed to have the fence receive its building permit. If one of the Options noted in the Variance Analysis is used, the applicable plan (Exhibits HI-H3) can be used for the permit approval and response to the Zoning and Engineering comments as each of these shows the fence not located within the rear easement, and without ROW encroachment. A time limit of one (1) month should then be prescribed to relocate the existing fence to adhere to the plan approved by the building permit i. No use variance Dermitted in specified instances. Under no circumstances shall the board of adjustment grant a variance to permit a use not generally permitted in the zoning district involved or any use expressly or by implication prohibited by the terms of the ordinance in the zoning district. No nonconforming use of neighboring lands, structures, or buildings in the same zoning district and no permitted use of lands, structures, or buildings in other zoning districts shall be considered grounds for the authorization of a variance. Meets Standard Yes � No ❑ The request is not a use -related variance. on Exhibit B1 Sec. 54-2-7.7. Walls and fences. (a) General regulation of walls and fences. (1) Permit required. Except as provided in subsection (8), it shall be unlawful for any person, association, corporation or other entity to install, erect, alter, or located a fence or wall within the city without first obtaining a fence permit for such activity. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a fence permit shall not be required for the replacement or repair of an existing fence or wall unless the replacement or repair cost exceed 50% or more of the value of the fence or wall before its repair or replacement. (b) Types offences and walls permitted. (2) Any portion of a fence or wall that faces a dedicated street right-of-way shall direct the finished side of that portion of the fence or wall towards the street. (c) Fences and walls in residential areas. (1) Height of walls and fences. Fences and walls, not exceeding six feet in height, may be placed along the boundary of a lot on that portion of the lot lying behind the front setback line and behind the front of the main structure. Fences and walls placed in front of the main structure shall not exceed four feet in height. 3) Walls and fences on corner lots. Notwithstanding the provisions of 54-2-7.7(c)(1) or 54-2-7.7(c)(2), fences and walls six feet in height may be erected on a corner lot provided they do not extend into the required secondary front yard setback area. [Staff Note: For the RS-10 zoning district, the secondary front yard setback is twenty feet. This is measured from the property line, not from the street pavement.] Fences and walls that extend into the secondary front yard setback area shall not exceed four feet in height and meet the provisions of section 54-2-7.10. For purposes of this subsection, the term "secondary front yard" shall mean the yard of an improved corner lot located between the street and the wail of the main structure facing the street where the primary entrance to the main structure is not located. (4) Trellis structures. Trellis structures that do not form a barrier may be erected at any location on a lot except within visibility triangles or dedicated easements. Such trellis structures need not satisfy the height limitation and restrictions for residential fences and walls provided in this subsection. (e) Fences within easements. (1) Fence permit required. It shall be unlawful for any person, association, corporation or other entity to erect a fence or wall within any easement unless a fence permit for the fence or wall is obtained pursuant to section 54-2-7.7(a) prior to the erection of the fence or wall, and the fence or wall is constructed of the materials listed in section 54-2-7.7(b)(1), (2) and (5). Prior to city approval of the permit, the property owner shall provide the city a recorded affidavit acknowledging that the fence or wall will be located in an easement, and that the city or utility company is not responsible for any damages to the fence or wall if they need to access the easement area. (2) Property owner responsible for removal cost. Any fence or wall proposed to be installed within a utility or drainage easement that accesses, abuts or provides the city or utility company with a maintenance area to lot line ditches, canals, drainage tracts, or rights -of -way, may be of a permanent or temporary nature. However, if the city or utility company should later determine that removal of the fence or wall (Supp. No. 22) Created: 2024-07-02 22:18:45 [EST] Page 1 of 2 EMA is necessary for the installation, maintenance, repair or replacement of the drainage or utility facility, the property owner shall be required to remove the fence or wall within five days of the owner's receipt of written demand for removal from the city or utility company. All cost incurred in the removal and replacement of the fence or wall shall be the responsibility of the property owner. The city may remove any fence or wall within the easement, as needed, in cases of emergency. (3) Maintenance. With the exception of drainage ditches maintained by others, the property owner shall be responsible for the maintenance of all property within a utility or drainage easement regardless of the placement of the fence or wall. (Ord. No. 0-18-10, § 1, 1-23-2019) Sec. 54-2-7.10. Regulation of obstructions to visibility. (a) Obstruction to traffic and traffic visibility. There shall be no structures or planting, which materially obstructs traffic, and traffic visibility. (b) Visibility triangles. Visibility triangles, within which nothing shall be erected, placed, parked, planted or allowed to grow in such a manner as to impede vision between a height of two feet and eight feet above the center lines of intersecting traffic ways, shall be provided as follows: (1) Vision clearance at street, alley and driveway intersections. A visibility triangle shall be required at all traffic intersections. No wall, fence, hedge, or structure within the visibility triangle shall exceed a height of two feet above the elevation of the abutting street measured at the centerline. Dimensions of visibility triangle. The sides of the visibility triangle shall be 30 feet at street -to -street intersections and 15 feet at all other intersections. These distances shall be measured along the well- defined edge of pavement from their point of intersection. Where no well-defined edge of pavement exists, a probable edge of pavement shall be established from the existing centerline of the travelways, using 12-foot travel lane(s) for dedicated streets, eight -foot half width for all dedicated alleys and utility easements, and five-foot half width for single driveways. Visibility triangles shall be required at all traffic intersections, including driveways and alleys. (Supp. No. 22) Created: 2024-07-02 11:19:45 [EST] Page 2 of 2 Exhibit C1 CM a SEBAST" HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1225 MAIN STREET • SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32958 TELEPHONE: (772) 589-5537 • FAX (772) 589-2566 Date: 11 /8/2024 Permit No: 24-2934 Work Description: FENCE Permit Address: 491 KUMQUAT AVE BUILDING PERMIT PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS Notice to applicant: Your application for permit has been reviewed for code compliance. The following comments were made regarding your project which requires correction and/or clarification. Please provide revised plans as applicable to address the comments. Corrections require a plan correction/revision form to be filled out and resubmitted through the City of Sebastian Building Department. Zoning Status: General - 111124 Denied by Joshua Simpson FENCE MUST BE SETBACK 20' FROM PROPERTY LINE ALONG POINCIANA ST. PLEASE FIX AND RE -SUBMIT. Zoning Status: General - g'az f x j Denied by Joshua Simpson Homeowners came into zoning because they were contacted by code enforcement letting them know they were in violation for having the 6' fence on the property line in the secondary front yard. Contractor put the fence up without a permit due to zoning and engineering denying the fence location at time of application. Contractor has placed the homeowner in violation by putting the fence in the wrong area and without a permit. Therefore I placed a $300 work without a permit fee. Zoning Status: General - -3l a3i.21 Denied by Joshua Simpson Contractor put the fence up without a permit. Fence was denied due to secondary front yard setbacks and fence being 6' tall by zoning and engineering. Engineering also denied the fence placement on the back property line because of the ditch in the back yard and fence would be blocking the path of maintenance and water flow. Fence is currently built in the denied locations , I spoke with homeowners and contractor on course of action to come into compliance of LDC requirements and the outcome will be checked to make sure contractor has fixed and is compliant. C2 cm 0� SEBASTIAN HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1225 MAIN STREET • SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32958 TELEPHONE: (772) 589-5537 • FAX (772) 589-2566 Date: 11 /8/2024 Permit No: 24-2934 Work Description: FENCE Permit Address: 491 KUMQUAT AVE BUILDING PERMIT PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS Notice to applicant: Your application for permit has been reviewed for code compliance. The following comments were made regarding your project which requires correction and/or clarification. Please provide revised plans as applicable to address the comments. Corrections require a plan correction/revision form to be filled out and resubmitted through the City of Sebastian Building Department. Stormwater Status: General — ? 1311 2-4 Denied by Eric Brierton Fence must stay out of the 10' rear easement due to drainage ditch. 6' fence must also be 20' from secondary front property line along poinciana st. Stormwater Status: General - 1123 j y Denied by Eric Brierton Fence must stay out of rear easment. Must have room to maintain rear easment. Must have an open rear ditch for storm water run off to collect and drain to the approate areas. Please feel free to contact our plan reviewers directly for any questions or concerns. A complete list of contact information can be found at our website at cityofsebastian.org. Exhibit E1 Permit Application No. SEB`N City of Sebastian - Development Order Application JWAIE OF PELffl,N IRiWP j Applicant (If not owner, written authorization (notarized) from owner is required) I Name: (—i�i1 Cl� �V\ 4;1'•�- t A Address: / � r-- L 3 1- 1 5-8 Phone Number: ( ) ! FAX Number. E-Mail: 6 ,- a y\ Owner (if different from applicant) Name: Address: Phone Number: ( ) - E-Mail: Title of permit or action requested: FAX Number: ( \/A-t 6N)ce PLEASE COMPLETE ONLY THOSE SECTIONS WHICH ARE NECESSARY FOR THE PERMIT OR ACTION THAT YOU ARE REQUESTING. COPIES OF ALL MAPS, SURVEYS, DRAWINGS, ETC. SHALL BE ATTACHED AND 8-112" BY 11" COPIES OF ANY ATTACHMENTS SHALL BE INCLUDED. ATTACH THE APPROPRIATE SUPPLEMETAL INFORMATION FORM. 1 ���, A. Project Name (if applicable): ? i . ��i4 B. Site InforGm%ationl� Address: �f/ l /� y 0-,A- 4 7-VIC A-5� `�k '..L '17- 9 Lot: Block: "nit: Subdivision* % • i Indian River County Parcel o Zoning Classification: t Future Land U e: �� 45 �VV) Pr�M,II 20eedV SExisting Use: C � o Use: ' C. Detailed description of proposed activity and purpose of the requested permit or action (attach extra sheets if�lcessary): 9 t t `"\ /V� vu -4- e.�-z C''e- I ACC- S 70 4-�` ro v,,k io . r� r ik A 071- 0� S�"i i� �"�� 1 '� �t ail i,► �� f �j(J�� { � lj`J�� f� �_� - �� � C_) (,� �� �. v, C_DP �. Lr�.'`, �' l, _ f�+ l l_ Cr'C � �'��`?."�. `;. - � ,,9 � r "i. .+5 _J I ('�..: �i. .>�� ?'�' '� mod`• +'w U `,. *� �;'�, �s� i � r DATE RECEIVED: ll,21. /;A� FEE PAID: $ Q DO RECEIVED BY: Af f—, Ar, jrx,� , 4-�,r a_ E2 Permit Application No. D. Project Personnel: Agent: Name: `��� 1 g IAddress t� 0 0A MA e4-C,� Phone Number I `€-Mail: Attorney: I Name: FAX NuqW.- Address Phone Number: ( ) - FAX Number: E-Mail: Engineer: Name: I Address Phone Number: ( ) - FAX Number: ( E-Mail: Surveyor: Name: Address Phone Number: ( ) - FAX Number: E-Mail: I �� (�, BEING FIRST DULY SWORN, DEPOSE AND SAY THAAS I AM THE OWNER _ I AM THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED WHICH IS TBJECT MATTER OF THIS APPLICATION, AND THAT ALL THE INFORMATION, MAPS, DATA AND/OR SKETCHES PROVIDED IN THIS APPLICATION ARE ACCURATE AND TRU MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. SINATURE ` DATE / `. SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME BY BV'dne��. M�,�r.+ WHO IS PERSONALLY KNOWN TOME OR PRODUCED Flo .�-j' r , vsx�S AS IDENTIFICATION, THIS 14 * DAY OF ���„r 2��• NOTARY'S SIGNATURE _ w+ �/ _ �✓ PRINTED NAME OF NOTARY COMMISSION NO./EXPIRATION SEAL: CONNOR DISNEY * * Commission # HH 576664 Expires July 29, 2028 " — FOF it° Permit Application No. E3 The following is required for all comprehensive plan amendments, zoning amendments (including rezoning), site plans, conditional use permits, special use permits, variances, exceptions, and appeals. I/WE, jKTHE OWNER(S) / _ THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNER(S) OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED WHICH IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPLICATION, HEREBY AUTHORIZE EACH AND EVERY MEMBER OF THE BOARD/COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN TO PHYSICALLY ENTER UPON THE PROPERTY AND VIEW THE PROPERTY IN CONNECTION WITH MY/OUR PENDING APPLICATION. I/WE HEREBY WAIVE ANY OBJECTION OR DEFENSE I/WE MAY HAVE, DUE TO THE QUASI-JUDICIAL NATURE OF THE PROCEEDINGS, RESULTING FROM ANY BOARD/COMMISSION MEMBER ENTERING OR VIEWING THE PROPERTY, INCLUDING ANY CLAIM OR ASSERTION THAT MY/OUR PROCEDURAL OR SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS RIGHTS UNDER THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION OR THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION WERE VIOLATED BY SUCH ENTERING OR VIEWING. THIS WAIVER AND C NSENT IS BEING SIGNED BY ME/US VOLUNTARILY AND NOT AS A RESULT OF ANY COERCION APPLIED, CPK<r OMIS ANY YEE, AGENT, CONTRACTOR OR OFFICIAL OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN. 7-,Q /41// Y102Y SIGLURE DATE Sworn to and subscribed before me by 8 r44112 I AleleAl who is personally known to me or produced Fl&e;,,r. as identification, this _L!J:!� day of Gis1.Pr 20?�. Notary's Signature Printed Name of Notary Commission No./Expiration Seal: %4�� CONNOR DISNEY * Commission # HH 576664 'Po, FoWZ, Expres July 29, 2028 APPLICATION FEES ARE ESTABLISHED BY RESOLUTION OF CITY COUNCIL. ADDITIONAL FEES FOR THE CITY'S CONSULTING ENGINEER REVIEW (WHEN REQUIRED) WILL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATE JECEWE rr BY: - - E4 Permit Application No. Hc"I OF PI I Ic k, 151 AN1` Supplemental Information Application to the Board of Adjustment 1 This application is for a (check one): )ovariance(s) appeal(s) 2 . Specify all code provisions for which a variance is being requested or the decision or decisions that you are appealing. (Attach extra sheets if necessary): ��A�r'1 G,NIe G 15 �� '�z° to e.54-e X Lod -� 70`- 11 p 11 e�- ,-�; r�►. 1) f�Se.ti _ f-�s� ��, t5 ��- - 4o 5+rp-e-4 i de . C' 3. Legal description of the property involved: ScJb o,5-�co\ k't�IJ cAv,A S �h 1 rz . B1 fps Lot- 2v 4. Attach the following: a. Boundary survey of the property executed by a Florida Registered Surveyor. The survey shall show the dimensions of the lot or parcel at issue, the location of all structures, if any, along with adjacent streets, and all easements and right-of-ways. _ b. Additional data and information as required to properly advise the Board of the facts and circumstances needed to decide the case on its merits. c. The names and addresses of all property owners whose property or part of their real property is within 300 feet of any outer boundary of the lot or parcel of land that is subject of the application. BY: E5 G-E`% r�. 10/18/24 Brandon Martin 491 Kumquat Ave Sebastian, FL 32958 Dear Council, our family recently moved to Sebastian from our home and businesses in the Tampa area. We've worked hard to assimilate and become part of the local community. Recently we enlisted a local licensed contractor to provide a fence for dogs and kids on the large lot we purchased at 491 Kumquat Avenue. Upon the contractor - Professional Fence Installation's fence procurement, We've inquired and proceeded in all the necessary steps to satisfy all inquiries. Per the required process we've provided the following information to facilitate a safe, reasonable and favorably aesthetic property fence. 54-1-2.5: (2) Variance Determination a. Regarding special conditions, our lot size is amply sufficient to justify and accommodate a reasonable fence for our dogs, children, etc.. without infringing on any aspect of neighborhood or public safety. Sebastian's own code enforcement officer Curtis conveyed the same opinion. As the request outlines there is justification for fencing without any obstruction to accommodate safety and yet allow the tax paying homeowners to utilize the property size effectively. Upon further review, we've observed that over 27 homes in the neighborhood have extremely tall, some exceeding 20'ft in obstructive brush and/or fencing. Some of which are as close a 16'ft from the corner without a stop sign. Our responsible strategy allows an over 70ft set back to a stop sign, with zero obstruction at the stop sign for the streets entirety. Our goal is to accommodate safety foremost and still ensure responsible utility of the property, including community understanding. (b) The current scenario and conditions were suspectedly derived from a community plan that was general in nature and didn't allow for upstanding citizens to improve their beloved neighborhoods with common sense and pragmatic approaches with still ensuring safety and overall wellness for the community. The contractors fence allows total street visibility. (c) This requested privilege is not to be conferred or conveyed to any other party or entity. (d) Regarding hardship, the existing circumstance is cumbersome for our family given the lack of lawn space the current policy provides and admits for such a large yard to accommodate dogs and children. The existing zoning/policy makes it merely impossible to have a properly accommodating fence to ensure safety for a home. In addition, one of the primary reason's we purchased the property was given the large lot and the restrictions are not conducive to ensuring best, safe, reasonable utility. (e) Our family is only requesting the minimum variance to ensure reasonable, proper and responsible use of the land and property. We're also accepting of having the contractor bring the rear fence up to pool bird cage and just allowing for adequate IM side yard access for family. (f) This submitted variance will not subject the community or neighborhood to any adverse scenarios; furthermore, minimal if any community planning obstructs are evident. The neighborhood and our fellow citizens are very positive and supportive of the structure as it provides a reasonable and productive contribution to our property and supports the reasonable, safe solution which is favored amongst our fellow residents.