Orange County — Board of Zoning Adjustment

VA-02-04-054 — Florida Conference Association of Seventh Day Adventists

Request: Variances in R-1A (single family 7,500 sq. ft. lots) zone to enclose residential carports existing at less than 7.5 ft. from side property lines as follows: 1. Lot 66 (2620 Audrey Ave.): 4.9 ft. in lieu of 7.5 ft. from the east side property line; 2. Lot 67 (2610 Audrey Ave.): 5.6 ft. in lieu of 7.5 ft. from the east side property line.

Decision: Denied

Hearing: Staff reported to the BZA that the applicant's initial variance application in December 2001 was rejected by the Zoning Office because the intent of the proposed construction was to create office storage units. Verbal consultation with written follow up by Zoning to the applicant indicated the proper procedure at this time was for a rezoning and small scale CPP amendment for office use. In January of 2002, the applicant requested resubmittal of the Variance, stating they had changed their plans. They indicated they would rent storage facilities elsewhere, and that the homes on-site would be rented to families. The applicant indicated the enclosure of the carports would be to provide additional living area for the families. Both buildings were red-tagged by the Building Division in August of 2001. The violation was for enclosing the carports of both homes without a building permit, and the order was to cease and desist construction activity. Staff made an on-site inspection March 2002 in conjunction with the Variance application. The visit revealed construction activity and construction materials stored on-site, in violation of the Building Division's order. Staff also learned the applicant filed a rezoning/CPP amendment with the Planning Division, which, if approved, would be finalized by the end of July this year. Staff expressed concern about whether or not the immediate use of the structures would truly be for rental homes or in fact for office storage. Staff pointed out that if the applicant is successful in obtaining P-O zoning, another variance application would be required as the building setbacks under P-O are more restrictive than R-1A setbacks, and there are other P-O performance standards that may require variances. At the BZA public hearing the applicant stated their intent is to enclose the carports for office storage. The applicant said they wanted to move forward on the current application because the contractor needed to get the *