CITY OF HALLANDALE BEACH
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 20, 2009
TO: D. Mike Good, City Manager
FROM: Richard D. Cannone, Director of Development Services
SUBJECT: Application #42-09-AA by Francisco Figueroa Appealing the Planning and Zoning Board Decision of a Variance for the Property Located at 1101 NE 4th Street
PURPOSE:
The City Commission consider an appeal of a Planning and Zoning Board decision denying a request by Francisco Figueroa for an after-the-fact variance at 1101 NE 4th Street to maintain a car canopy in the front and side yard setbacks of a single family home.
BACKGROUND:
On April 24, 2008, Code Compliance observed the construction of the car canopy and cited the property owner, Mr. Figueroa, for not obtaining a building permit prior to construction.
On May 14, 2008, Mr. Figueroa submitted an application to the Building Division for an after-the-fact building permit to maintain the canopy at the property. During the review process, the plans were routed to the Zoning Division where they were rejected for encroaching on the front and side yard setbacks and the applicant was notified that a variance must be sought to retain the canopy.
The applicant has since been issued a Final Order by the Special Magistrate. On May 7, 2009 the applicant was granted an extension by the Special Magistrate to comply by July 1, 2009 before fines will be imposed on the property.
At the March 25, 2009 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Board denied application #09-18-V by a vote of 5 to 0, requesting a variance from Section 32-152(d)(4)(a) of the Zoning and Land Development Code requiring a minimum 25 foot front yard setback and Section 32-152(d)(4)(c) requiring a minimum 7.5 foot side yard setback. Attached is the staff report prepared for the Planning and Zoning Board that includes the policy, technical analysis and summary minutes of the hearing.
As a result of the variance request being denied, the applicant is now required to bring the property into compliance and remove the canopy. Pursuant to Section 32-965(h)(6), the applicant is appealing the Planning and Zoning Board’s decision to the City Commission. The Notices of Hearing for the June 3, 2009 City Commission Hearing were mailed on May 22, 2009 to all property owners within a three hundred foot radius of the subject property. The Notice of Hearing was posted on the property on May 22, 2009.
DISCUSSION
Staff met with the applicant on May 28, 2009 to discuss the variance request and the applicant agreed to reduce the car canopy to 20 feet in length instead of the existing 25 feet in order to provide a 5 foot front yard setback. The applicant is still requesting to maintain the width of 22’11”, which encroached into the side yard setback. The required side yard setback is 7.5 feet and the applicant is proposing a 4.4 foot side yard setback for the car canopy.
Staff would like to point out that the current side yard setback for the applicant’s house is considered a “legal-nonconformity” as the current side yard setback for the house is 5.9 feet; the car canopy would only extend 1.5 feet beyond the existing side yard setback of the house. Based upon the design of the car canopy, the costs associated with reducing the width are significantly more than reducing the length as it would require the applicant to demolish the structure and have it completely reengineered.
Setbacks are required in order to maintain comfortable distances between structures and property lines. In addition, they provide for adequate front, side and rear yards. Setbacks also help in creating and maintaining a uniform aesthetic without imposing physical encumbrances upon neighboring properties. Although the applicant is proposing to maintain a car canopy that encroaches into the front and side yard setbacks, based upon the existing side yard setback of the house and the reduction of car canopy to provide for at least a 5 foot setback, it is staff’s opinion that the car canopy will provide for a comfortable distance between structures and property lines and assist in maintaining a uniform aesthetic.
Staff has not received any phone calls or correspondence from the surrounding property owners in opposition to the request, nor did any residents object at the Planning and Zoning Board hearing.
Additionally, the applicant has provided affidavits from the surrounding property owners in support of this request (see attached).
Based upon the above information, staff recommends the City Commission approve the appeal and the grant the variance requested subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall obtain the necessary building permits to bring the car canopy into compliance with the Florida Building Code; and
2. The car canopy shall be reduced to 20’ in length to provide a 5’ front yard setback;
RECOMMENDATION:
The City Commission approve Application # 42-09-AA by Francisco Figueroa requesting an appeal from a Planning and Zoning Board decision in order to retain a car canopy in the front and side yard setback of a single family home, subject to the following conditions:
- The applicant shall obtain the necessary building permits to bring the car canopy into compliance with the Florida Building Code; and
- The car canopy shall be reduced to 20’ in length to provide a 5’ front yard setback.
__________________________ ________________________
Sarah Suarez Christy Dominguez
Senior Planner Director Planning and Zoning
Reviewed:
_______________________________ __________
D. Mike Good, City Manager Date
_____Approved _____Disapproved _____Hold for Discussion
Comments