Orange County — Board of Zoning Adjustment

VA-18-09-110 — DARLENE TORRES

Request: Variances in the A-2 zoning district as follows: 1) Variance to validate an existing developed substandard parcel with .276 acres of land area in lieu of .5 acres. 2) Variance to validate an existing residence constructed 37 ft. from the rear property line in lieu of 50 ft. 3) Variance to permit construction of a lanai 37 ft. from the rear property line in lieu of 50 ft. 4) Variance to validate an existing residence constructed 9 ft. from the side property line in lieu of 10 ft. Note: The applicant intends to follow the existing rear building line to extend the lanai across the remainder of the rear of the house. According to the Property Appraiser's information, the home was constructed in 1966.

Decision: Approved

Hearing: Staff explained that the lot did not spear on the County's historic zoning maps, so it is likely the result of an illegal lot split. However, since there is a home on it, that point is moot. The existing home is only 37 ft. from the rear property line, and applicant simply wishes to construct an open lanai across the remainder of the rear of the house in line with the existing addition. The applicant is not the original owner, so the depth of the lot is not the result of their action. Staff noted that there was an existing shed which straddles the property line with the property to the west, and that a portion of the applicant's fence is located on that property, both constructed without permits. The applicant intends to relocate those improvements back onto the subject property after obtaining the necessary permits. Staff concluded with the fact that no correspondence in favor or opposed to the request have been received. The applicant indicated their complete agreement with the staff recommendations and conditions. One owner of the property to the west spoke in favor of the application, noting that one of the conditions (#5) could cause a delay in the applicant's obtaining a permit. There being no one in attendance to speak for or against the request, the public hearing was closed. The BZA agreed with the one speaker about condition #5. Staff suggested adding language which allowed for all permits to be obtained simultaneously. A motion to recommend approval of the variances with the amended condition passed unanimously.