Loading...
Resolution 1979-172CA November. 27, 1979 RESOLUTION 79 - 172 �? RELATING TO PETITION FDPO- 79 -V -1 FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM BASE FLOOD ELEVATION REQUIRED BY THE FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION ORDINANCE (FDPO) NO. 79 -62. WHEREAS, the petitioner has requested a variance from the Mini- mum 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, WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Appeals has reviewed Petition FDPO- 79 -V -1 In accordance with Section 18, Paragraphs (5), (6) and (7), and has made a finding that the granting of Petition FDPO- 79 -V -1, in Its opinion, complies with the intent and purpose of said Section of Ordinance 79 -62 as follows: (S) The three (3) foot reduction from the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) 11 foot National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) requirement to 8.0 feet NGVD is the minimum variance neces- sary, considering the flood hazard, to afford relief. This conclusion is based on the following facts: The adjoining homes on the north and south are at an eleva- tion of approximately 6.5 feet NGVD and the requested variance will put the elevation of the petitioner's home approx- imately three feet above the existing home. This is a reasonable difference in order to control drain- age on -site, allow for reasonable access to the subject home and provide for a reasonable appearance in keeping with the homes in the surrounding neighborhood. (6) The three (3) foot 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. (c) A determination that the granting of a variance will not result in increased flood heights, additional threats to public safety, extraordinary public expense, create nuisances, cause fraud on or victimization of the public, or conflict with existing local laws or ordinances. (7) In passing upon this variance, the Board of Zoning Appeals has considered all technical evaluations, all relevant factors, standards specified in other sections of this ordinance, and the following; (The Board's findings are noted in paren- theses). (a) the danger that materials may be swept onto other lands to the injury of others; (such danger non -existent or minimal) (b) the danger to life and property due to flooding or erosion damage; (not materially affected by granting of variance) BOOK 050 PACE247 November 27, 1979 050 PAC 2AQ, ! E 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 facility to the community; (no increase in service result- ing from the granting of a variance) (e) the necessity to the facility of a waterfront location, where applicable; (not applicable) (f) the availability of alternative locations, not subject to flooding or erosion damage, for the proposed use; (no alternative location is possible) (g) the compatibility of the proposed use with existing and anticipated development; (granting of 3 foot variance determined to be compatible) (h) the relationship of the proposed use to the plan and flood plain management program for the area; (consistent with County's flood plain management program) (i) the safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles; (access determined adequate) (j) the expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise and sediment transport of the flood waters and the effects df wave action, if applicable, expected at the site; (not applicable) (k) the costs of providing governmental services during and 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, (normal cost as per surrounding residences) and; (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 sur- rounded by lots with existing structures constructed below the base flood level, providing items (a -1) have been fully considered; (subject property is less than It acre in area and there are existing homes on abutting lots to the north and south); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT' RESOLVED by the Board of Zoning Appeals, that Petition FDPO- 79 -V -1 is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: 1. The variance shall be for the reduction of the Minimum Base Flood Elevation required by FDPO No. 79 -62 from eleven (11) feet NGVD to 8.0 feet NGVD. 2. The Chief Administrative Official shall mail a copy of this Resolu- tion to the petitioner by registered return mail, and such mailing shall cons ,Vtutb compliance with Section 18, Paragraph (10) of November iv, FDPO No. 79 -62 which reads as follows: 11(10) 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." 3. 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 variance 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 Wimer motioned, seconded by Commissioner Pistor for the adoption of this Resolution. Upon call for the vote, the motion carried. DATE: November 27, 1979 ATTEST: �1WLL; ,1A RE AN K ' x i NJS /sgg /11 -Q Planning Dept. 10/30/79 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: DAVE /C. "DOC' BROWN CHAIR MAN BOOR G50 PACE249