Commissioners uphold denial of after‑the‑fact setback variance at 1735 Carlton Street

The Seminole County Board of County Commissioners on Sept. 9 unanimously upheld a Board of Adjustment decision denying an after‑the‑fact request to reduce the east side yard setback from 10 feet to 2 feet for a detached accessory structure at 1735 Carlton Street in Longwood. The denial preserves the county’s required 10‑foot side setback for detached accessory structures in the R‑1AA single‑family district.

The Board of Adjustment initially denied the variance request on June 23, and the applicants — James Reason of 1735 Carlton Street and his wife — filed the appeal. Angie Gates of Planning and Development told the commission staff found that one or more of the six variance criteria in the Seminole County Land Development Code were not met and recommended the board uphold the denial.

Neighbors who live adjacent to the property spoke in opposition at the hearing, saying the structure was built without required permits and encroached into the required side setback. Andrea Dinkins, who lives at 1701 Carlton Street, told commissioners the metal building sits about 2 feet from the shared property line, is roughly 30 feet long and 12 feet tall, and “encroaches into the required 10‑foot side setback that we’re entitled to.” Philip Taylor, a nearby resident, said the unpermitted structure is “illegal” and should remain denied.

The applicant, James Reason, acknowledged he built the structure without permits and apologized. He said he had discussed the project with neighbors before building and had planted screening vegetation and offered to move the structure, but he maintained that shifting the building 8 feet would not materially change its appearance from the neighbor’s back porch.

Commissioners and staff discussed how the county measures overhangs and awnings. Planning staff clarified that code allows up to an 18‑inch overhang beyond the vertical plane before the overhang itself is included in the setback measurement; otherwise the setback is measured from vertical support. That technical clarification did not change staff’s recommendation.

Commissioner Konstantin moved to support staff’s recommendation and uphold the Board of Adjustment denial; Commissioner Lockhart seconded. The motion carried unanimously. The board did not direct further action beyond upholding the denial, and commissioners urged the neighbors to continue trying to resolve remaining concerns.

The decision leaves in place a building code violation (listed in the record as Building Code Violation 25‑76) tied to the unpermitted construction; staff noted the structure’s lack of permitting was a central issue in the Board of Adjustment’s decision.

The commission’s action preserves the county’s standard side‑yard setback for the R‑1AA district and upholds the Board of Adjustment’s finding that the variance request failed to meet required variance criteria.