Orange County — Board of Zoning Adjustment

SE-16-04-010 — EMILY CHARLTON

Request: 1) Special Exception: To convert existing mobile home as a detached Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) to be occupied by the applicant's son; 2) Variance: To allow a detached ADU on .49 acres of land in lieu of .75 acres; 3) Variance: To allow detached ADU with 1,022 sq. ft. of floor area in lieu of 1,000 sq. ft.; 4) Variance: To validate a substandard lot with 97 ft. of lot frontage in lieu of 100 ft. and .49 acres of lot area in lieu of .5 acres for existing single family residence; 5) Variance: To allow existing single family residence to remain 11 ft. from front (south) property line in lieu of 35 ft.; 6) Variance: To allow existing shed to remain in front yard in lieu of side of rear yards; and, 7) Variance: To allow existing shed 1.4 ft. from front property line in lieu of 5 ft. (Note: Per the applicant, the mobile home has existed on the property for many years. The applicant submitted six letters of support from her neighbors).

Decision: Approved

Hearing: The Special Exception is required as a result of code enforcement action. The first two variances are required to accommodate the ADU. The remaining variances are to validate existing conditions to ensure that should there ever be a need to redevelop the site, issues such as lot area and width will not cause any issues. Staff noted that the applicant indicated that the trailer had been on the property for a considerable amount of time. However, due to the dense tree canopy on the property it was not possible to confirm or refute this through a review of historic aerials. Staff noted that many of the applicant's neighbors had submitted letters or correspondence in support of the request. Only one correspondence had been received in opposition. This came from a person who actually lives in Mt. Dora, and is not a neighbor. Staff also noted that, if the Special Exception is approved, there is an unpermitted septic system on the property which the applicant must get approved by the Health Department in order to keep the trailer on the property. The applicant gave a brief history of the property. She noted that her son will occupy the mobile home, and that the mobile home will never be rented out or occupied by anyone other than a relative. There being no one was in attendance to speak in favor of or in opposition to the application, the public hearing was closed. The BZA concluded that given the dense vegetation and the placement of other homes in the neighborhood, that this would not be an intrusion. The BZA did inquire about a for sale sign located on Terrell Rd. near the property. The applicant noted that this sign was not for their property. A motion was made an seconded to approve the request. The motion was unanimously approved.