Resolution 1980-067052 PAcE252
March 25, 1980 lr
RESOLUTION 80 - .67
RELATING TO PETITION FDPO- 80 -V -3 FOR
A VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM BASE
FLOOD ELEVATION REQUIRED BY THE
FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION ORDINANCE
(FDPO). NO. 79 -62. il
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- 80 -V -3 in accordance with Section 18, Paragraphs (S), (6) and
(7), and has made a finding that the granting of Petition FDPO- 80 -V -3,
in its opinion, complies with the intent and purpose of said Section of
Ordinance 79 -62 as follows:
(S) The 2.5 feet reduction from the Flood Insurance Rate Map
(FIRM) 12 foot National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD)
requirement to 9.5 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 home on the west is at an elevation of approx-
imately 7.5 feet NGVD and the requested variance will put the
elevation of the petitioner's home approximately 1.5 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 2.S feet 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 will not be signif-
icantly affected by the granting of this variance)
(b) the danger to life and property due to flooding or
erosion damage; (not slanificantly affected by gran 6 /
of variance)
eou 052 PACE253
March 25, 1980
(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 the minimal)
(d)
the importance of the services provided by the proposed
facility to the community; (not applicable)
(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 2.5 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)
(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
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)
(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-
ed 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 is an existing home on abutting lot to the
west.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Zoning
Appeals, that
Petition FDPO- 80 -V -3 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 twelve (12) feet NGVD
to 9.5 feet NGVD.
eou 052 PACE253
BOOK 052 PACE254 March 25, 1980
2. The Chief Administrative Official shall mail a copy of this Resolu-
tion to the' petitioner by registered return receipt and such mailing
shall constitute compliance with Section 18, Paragraph (10) of
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 Ilabll-
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 Pistor motioned, seconded by Commissioner
Brown for the adoption of this Resolution. Upon call for.
the vote, the motion carried.
Commissioner
Pistor
Motioned and aye
Commissioner
Brown
Seconded and aye
Commissioner
Wimer
Aye
Commissioner
Archer
Aye
Commissioner
Wenzel
Aye
DATE: March 25, 1980
ATTEGYria:
t ,VKILL1JiJi• -A2 R EAGA
NJS /sgg /31-BB
Planning Dept.
2/21/80
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
CLIF ID WENZEL$ CHaAIRMAN