Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I call to order the Port Orange Planning Commission meeting for uh 10:23 25. The pledge of allegiance and a brief minute of meditation. I pledge to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Amen. Okay. Uh, we have a motion on the minutes from last meeting. Call the role.

I'll recall the roll. I'm sorry. Amanda St. Schmidt Scott here. Danielle here. Sorry. Here. Ben here. I'm here. Jordan. Okay. Can we have a motion for the uh consideration of the minutes from uh [clears throat] September 25th, 2025? Motion to approve the minutes from September 25th, 2025. We have a motion. We have a second. Second. Second. Maria. Call the RO. Scott, yes. Daniel Algo, yes. Maria Mil, yes.

Yes. Okay. Hey, got a short agenda tonight, unfortunately. Oh, you're running back up. I'll make a motion to open case number VAC-25-00004.

Second.

Okay. Thank you. Good evening. Um, Penelby Cruise Planning. The subject property is a 1acre lot located at 801 Fezant Run Court on the north side of Feezant um Pheasant Run Court east of Pencil Road. The property owners are requesting a variance for the secondary front yard setback to be reduced from 40 feet to 32.49 ft to allow the construction of a 20x 53 foot um by 50 foot two foot addition to their existing single family home. Subject property is the corner lot and according to the land development court um code the land develop I'm sorry I'm long week. The corner lot has two front yards. Um, so Feeasant Run Court, the yard facing Feeasant Run Court is the primary front yard and the yard facing Hensel Road is the secondary front yard. So the requested variance is to allow the addition to be built on that west side of the existing home at a distance of 32.49 ft from the west property line in that secondary front setback. The property zoned rural residential which has minimum building setbacks for a corner lot um of 40 feet from the front yard um facing pheasant run. Also 40 ft from the secondary front yard fronting on pencil sideyard of 15 ft on the east side and a rear yard setback of 30 ft. The subject property is lot 16. You can see here um right along Hensel and Pheasant on the plat here. It's part of the pheasant Run subdivision which was platted in 1992. The LDC requires corner lots to be 15% wider than interior lots to accommodate that larger secondary front yard setback. Um and so while this lot meets the um larger lot width requirement for the zoning district um it was platted at the same width as the interior lots for

this subdivision. So it is not 15% wider than than the other interior lots in this subdivision. Um also this pheasant run subdivision was platted with a 50 foot wide conservation easement along the rear property lines of the lots on that north side of the road including the subject property. However, the subject property also has a 15 foot wide conservation easement along the secondary front yard along Pencil Road. The majority of the homes in this subdivision were laid out to maximize the width of the lot uh including the subject property and the interior layout of the homes were built in a way that any addition to the homes um would most likely be required to to utilize that side the side yards um rather than the front or the rear. So, the combination of the lot width, the home layout, the side setback requirements often for interior lots allows for additions and and detached garages on these interior lots because the interior lots only have uh a side setback of 15 ft on either side. Um, however, corner lots in this subdivision which were platted at the same width of the interior lots have to meet the 40 foot wide setback on that secondary front yard. Um, so as a result, it makes it difficult to to have an addition to your to your property on that corner lot. If this house was located on an interior lot and they were proposing the same addition that they're proposing now, it would not require a variance with the normal size setback. Um, so with that, uh, in the staff report, we've had some pictures of kind of the existing conditions out there, um, of the lot. [snorts] And according to the property owners, they they they took time to design this, um, addition to avoid encroaching that 15t conservation easement on the side. Um,

and to kind of keep into the appearance um, of the home with the compat compatibility with the rest of the homes in the subdivision there. And because of the conservation easements on the property on that along that side as well as the rear um that are densely forested with trees um it basically effectively screens that proposed addition and should not create an impact to the neighborhood there. So with that um based on the findings in the staff report staff is recommending approval of this variance. Okay. [sighs] Uh Scott comments

uh looking at the diagram. So it's 42 and a half ft off of the sidewalk. Yes. So we were trying to show some So even though this is the property line here where um on the edge here, there's that 10 foot of rightway in between the property line and the sidewalk that's not going to be used because there's no improvement plan. Sure. So in addition to where you would normally be kind of like right behind the sidewalk with your property line, this property also has another 10 ft between that of this rideway that's just always going to be there.

Sure. And and had it been platted the way it was originally intended with the extra 15%, this wouldn't even be an issue, right? Because they'd be in the space. That's all I had. I was just curious if I was reading it right. Yes. Okay, Marie. Um I'm good. Dan, I'm good. Thank you. Um I only comment I have to make is that's a heavily screened area along there. So yeah, he could have built this thing without coming before us probably. But uh anyway, can we have a a roll call, please? Oh, anything from the public? Anybody? Thank you. Can we have a roll call? Stagger. Yes. Daniel,

yes. Yes. Yes. Okay. Congratulations. [clears throat] I didn't hear motion. Yeah, I motioned before we discussed. Oh, sorry. Okay. Uh any comments from uh commissioners? Any any thoughts? Biketoberfest was wonderful. We had a great crowd and uh got home safe. So, I'm good. I'd like to go on record to say I'm disappointed there's no pumpkin bread. Oh, next month. That was teased last month. I don't know what's going on. [laughter]

Tomorrow. Tim, I you you teased that last month, didn't you? That this was pumpkin bread month. Yeah. That's why [laughter] is that why Oh, so this really could have passed without a variance, couldn't it? You just wanted pumpkin bread. Let me read that. [laughter] Yeah. Right. Oh, that's great. Okay. Uh, no further comments. Any uh nothing from the public, I guess. No observers. Uh, Robert's not even here. Say, where's Robert today? I had him at parks and wreck this week, but he's not here tonight. No pumpkin bread. [laughter] There's no pumpkin bread. He's out. Well, you know, when Tom doesn't show up, everybody stays home, right?

Yeah. [laughter] Anyway, u any any comments, Tim? Anything? Okay, I guess look for a motion to adjurnn, please. I'm sorry. Additional public comments. Additional public comments. Can we have a motion? Then I will make a motion to adjurnn. Second. Okay. Meeting adjourned.