1 / 16

BCC PUBLIC HEARING ON BZA #VA- 14-03-008, MARCH 6, 2014 APPLICANT/APPELLANT: CHERYL SINKOWITZ

Orange County Zoning Division. BCC PUBLIC HEARING ON BZA #VA- 14-03-008, MARCH 6, 2014 APPLICANT/APPELLANT: CHERYL SINKOWITZ. May 13, 2014 (Continued from May 6, 2014). Background. CASE #: VA-14-03-008 APPLICANT: Cheryl Sinkowitz

asta
Download Presentation

BCC PUBLIC HEARING ON BZA #VA- 14-03-008, MARCH 6, 2014 APPLICANT/APPELLANT: CHERYL SINKOWITZ

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Orange County Zoning Division BCC PUBLIC HEARING ONBZA #VA- 14-03-008, MARCH 6, 2014APPLICANT/APPELLANT: CHERYL SINKOWITZ May 13, 2014 (Continued from May 6, 2014)

  2. Background CASE #: VA-14-03-008 APPLICANT: Cheryl Sinkowitz REQUEST: Variance in P-D zone to construct pool, pool deck and pool screen 0 ft. from rear property line in lieu of 5 ft. ZONING: P-D (Eastwood) TRACT SIZE: 75 ft. x 100 ft. LOCATION: East side of Tuten Way, west of Downpatrick Blvd., west of Lone Palm Rd. DISTRICT: #4

  3. Zoning Map

  4. Aerial

  5. Aerial

  6. Site Plan Proposed pool at zero ft. setback (on rear property line)

  7. Site Photograph

  8. Site Photograph

  9. Site Photograph

  10. Staff Analysis • At time of PSP review, zoning staff advised developer a 15 ft. rear yard setback would not provide sufficient area to construct accessory uses (pools, sheds, etc.) • No similar variances have been granted in this subdivision

  11. BZA Findings • The BZA, as a matter of policy, does not support zero ft. setbacks. • Approval of the request may establish an undesirable precedent in this subdivision • In 1993 staff advised developer of concerns prior to platting

  12. Community Feedback At BZA • Adjacent neighbors submitted letters in support • Eastwood Community Association submitted letter in support • 2 commentaries in favor and none in opposition were submitted to BZA

  13. BZA Recommendation • Denied the variance request in that there was no unnecessary hardship shown on the land and the request did not meet the requirements governing variances as outlined in Section 30-43(3), Orange County Code. (unanimous 7-0)

  14. BCC Action Requested Deny the request consistent with BZA’s recommendation of March 6, 2014

  15. Orange County Zoning Division BCC PUBLIC HEARING ONBZA #VA- 14-03-008, MARCH 6, 2014APPLICANT/APPELLANT: CHERYL SINKOWITZ May 13, 2014 (Continued from May 6, 2014)

  16. Variance Criteria, Sect. 30-43

More Related