Resolution 1980-276December 9, 1980?
RESOLUTION 80 - 276
+ RELATING TO PETITION FDPO- 80 -V -17 FORA
'
VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM BASE FLOOD
ELEVATION REQUIRED BY THE FLOOD DAMAGE
PREVENTION ORDINANCE (FDPO) NO. 79 -62.
�f WHEREAS, the petitioner William J. Ryan, Jr. desires to build a
single family home at 853 West Valley Drive, Bonita Shores (Lot
Block 18, Unit 2, Bonita Shores Subdivision) and has requested a vart•
ante from the Minimum Base Flood Elevation required by the FDPO No
^'
79 -62; and,
WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Appeals has held a public hearing
as required by law; and,
F.
WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Appeals has reviewed Petition
4,
FDPO- 80 -V -17 in accordance with Section 18, Paragraphs (5), (6) and
(7), and has made a finding that the gi anting of this petition, in Its
opinion, complies with the intent and purpose of said Section of Ordi-
nAnce 79 -62 as follows:
(5) The 3.22 feet reduction from the Flood Insurance Rate Map
(FIRM) 13' National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) require-
ment to 9.78' NGVD is the minimum variance necessary, con -
side ring the flood hazard, to afford relief.
This conclusion is based on the following facts:
The adjoining home on the west is at an elevation of approx-
imately 9.21 NGVD and the adjoining home on the east Is at
an elevation of 10.06 NGVD. The requested variance will put
the elevation of the petitioner's home at approximately the
same elevation.
This is reasonable in order to control drainage on -site,
allow for reasonable access and provide for an appearance In
keeping with the surrounding neighborhood.
(6) The 3.22' variance is Issued upon:
(a) A showing of good and sufficient cause based on review
{
of considerations contained in (7), following.
(b) A determination that failure to grant the variance would
result in exceptional hardship to the applicant and his
'
neighbors.
r
(c) A determination that the granting of a variance will not
result in increased flood heights, additional threats to
'a
public safety, extraordinary public expense, create
n.,
nuisances, cause fraud on or victimization of the public,
or conflict with existing local laws or ordinances$
c
(7) In passing upon this variance, the Board of Zoning Appeals
t4 4
has 'considered all .technical evaluations, all relevant t.ctoi<'s,
`. standards specified in other, suctions of thls ordinanee,l ;;ofx
the following; (The :•Hoard's findlrigs are `no' ted ! ih''tt paf i t
theses) t , ! 'yf i'� 4_ l('
.�
�`� t;a) the danger •that nui�erlatis' inay '!>e��awop!';ontboi
to the injury Of. (sucft danger virlli >r►�t �a45alof)
F ` i � r i14 olfes:ird Y Ih1+ granting of tl�ts VarfiaAe4if
,le.'uilly
w z .
�,
1 k w
.
MEN
50OX 058 racE 141
, December 91 1980
(b)
the danger to life and property due to flooding or
z
erosion damage; (owner has acknowledged increased flood
risk) -Ff�
(c)
the susceptibility of the proposed facility and its con-
tents -to flood damage and the effect of such damage on
the individual owner; (susceptibility. held to be minimal)
(d)
the importance of the services provided by the proposed°
(e)
facility to the community; (not- applicable)
the necessity to the facility of a waterfront location,
'
where applicable; (not applicable)
(t)
the availability of alternative locations, not subject to
r`
flooding or erosion damage, for the proposed use; (no
tr
alternative location is possible)
(g)
the compatibility of the proposed use with existing and
,
anticipated development; (granting of 3.22' variance
determined to be compatible)
(h)
the relationship of the proposed use to the plan and
h
flood plain management program for the area; (consistent
with County's flood plain management program)
(1)
the safety of access to the' property in times of flood
for ordinary and emergency vehicles; (access will not be
significantly affected by granting of this variance)
(J)
the expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise
and sediment transport of the flood waters and the
effects of wave action, if applicable, expected at the
site; (not significantly affected by the granting of this
variance).
(k)
the costs of providing governmental services during and
n
after flood conditions including maintenance and repair of
public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electri-
cal, and water system, and streets and bridges. (nor -
mal cost as per surrounding residences)
(1)
Variances shall not be issued within any designated
floodway if any Increase in flood levels during the base,
flood discharge would result. (Not applicable, not in
designated floodway).
(m)
Generally, variances may be issued for new construction,
,.
and substantial Improvements to be erected on a lot of
one -half acre or less In size contiguous to and surround-
1 },
ed by lots with existing structures constructed below the
base flood level, providing items (a - 1) have been fully
>,
considered; (This application complys with, this provt -,
slon).:�k ,4
ell
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Zoning Appeals,l rye
, x4
that Petition FOPO- 80 -V-17 Is: hereby granted. subject: • to the toliowtn�
conditionst
a
1. The variance
shelf he for the raductlon �of the Minimum
N
December 9, 1980
Elevation roquired by FDPO No. 79 -62 from 13 foot NGVD to 9.78
feet NGVD.
2. The Chief Administrative Official shall mall a copy of this Resolu
tion to the petitlonor by registered return receipt and such mailing
shall constitutq compliance with Section 18, Paragraph (10) of
TDPO No. 79 -62 which reads as follows:
"Any applicant, to whom a variance is granted,
shall be given written notice that -.when a
structure is permitted to be built with the
lowest habitable floor elevation below the
base flood elevation, the cost of flood insur-
ance will be commensurate with the increased
risk resulting from the reduced lowest habitable
floor elevation."
The granting of this variance has been predicated principally on
the engineering data and information provided by the petitioner
and a review of same with respect to the considerations required
by the FDPO No. ' 79 -62.
The granting of this variance by the Board of Zoning Appeals
does not make or imply any assurances that the subject property
or structures are not subject to flood damages.
Further, the granting of this va-1ance shall not create liabil-
ity on the part of Collier County or by any officer or employee
thereof for any flood damages that result from reliance on this
variance or any administrative decision lawfully made thereunder.
In accepting this variance, the petitioner assumes all respon-
sibility for any property damage resulting from its application.
Commissioner Brown motioned, seconded by
Kruse for the adoption of this Resolution.
the vote, the motion carried.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
DATE: December 9, 1980 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
• •
o .' +
''
SU.
^�
•
F` T''��+ fit!
C a}
NJS /sgg /65.0
y�..
Planning Dept.
60010
��
10/23/80