Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Accessory Structure Variance Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves after‑the‑fact variance for 120 Fraser Road; neighbors cite fire pit, lights and privacy concerns
Summary
The Board of Adjustment approved a variance to allow a roofed patio structure at 120 Fraser Road to encroach into rear and interior setbacks; the approval resolves an open code-enforcement case but drew opposition from immediate neighbors over an on-site fire pit, outdoor lighting and privacy impacts.
The Daytona Beach City Board of Adjustment voted to approve an after‑the‑fact variance for a roofed patio at 120 Fraser Road that will resolve a code-enforcement citation for construction without permits.
Julie (surname not provided), the property owner and applicant, told the board she and helpers built a covered pergola and said, "we built a covered pergola, and I I know I needed a permit... we're just requesting for an after the fact." The application asked the board to reduce the required interior side yard setback from 7.5 feet to 2.6 feet, to reduce required spacing between the accessory structure and the primary building from 5 feet to 3.9 feet, and to allow a roofed patio to encroach into required rear and interior side-yard setbacks. The application record lists the property at 120 Fraser Road, Parcel ID 531604000120, and links the variance request to code-enforcement case CE25-000.
Several neighbors spoke in opposition. Darcy Carroll, who said she owns the abutting property at 121 Rausing Avenue, said the unpermitted work and associated site features have harmed her ability to use her backyard: "I have hot ambers and smoke in my yard. I cannot enjoy my backyard," Carroll said. Other neighbors raised concerns about bright lighting attached to tall poles, a gap in a fence that allows ashes into adjacent yards, and perceived intimidation between neighbors captured on private cameras.
City staff and the board reviewed regulatory scope. Staff said an in-ground fire pit does not require a building permit and that a typical accessory structure must be at least 3 feet from property boundaries; the building department has not yet completed a full BIN-code review of the structure because the variance hearing is the start of the compliance review process. Staff also noted that the development code allows an eight‑foot fence in rear yards without a variance and that a separate variance would be required to permit a taller fence.
Board member McCray moved to approve BOA2025‑002 as submitted; McCray seconded the motion. The clerk called the roll. Board members voted unanimously in favor: David Betts — yes; John George — yes; Charlene Barlow — yes; Patrick Connors — yes; Leon McCray — yes. The board’s approval resolves the cited code-enforcement case contingent on any subsequent building-permit review and inspections required by the building department.
The board urged neighbors and the applicant to pursue neighborly mitigation measures the transcript records as suggestions from staff, including landscape screening, fence adjustments, or alternative, contained heating appliances (for example, propane-style units) to reduce ash and ember concerns. Staff also retained submitted photographs and letters as part of the case record.
