Delray Beach board approves front-yard dipping pool variance at 412 SE 4th Ave

The City of Delray Beach Board of Adjustment voted 5-0 on Jan. 16 to approve a variance allowing a 7-by-13-foot dipping pool to be built 15 feet from the front property line at 412 Southeast 4th Avenue, rather than the 25-foot setback required under the city's land development regulations.

The variance application, filed as item 2025-071, was presented by Corey O'Gorman of Place Planning on behalf of property owners Patty Britton and Miguel DeCasa. City planner Jennifer Buse summarized staff's report, citing land development regulation section 4.6.15g1a and noting the request: "to allow the construction of a new swimming pool within the front setback area at a setback of 15 feet whereas 25 is required." The board then heard public comment, applicant testimony and a staff presentation of the findings required for a variance.

Why it matters: The property is nonconforming with respect to R1A lot standards (the lot measures about 57.41 feet wide by 93.7 feet deep, with a lot area of roughly 5,607 square feet, compared with the R1A minimum of 60 feet by 100 feet). The owners and their consultant argued that the lot's size and a required alley dedication imposed after the house design reduced usable yard area and made a small dipping pool feasible only in the front yard. Granting the variance lets the owners place a minimal dipping pool in a manner they said is consistent with several nearby front-yard pools and will be screened by fence and landscaping.

What was presented: Corey O'Gorman described the pool as deliberately minimal and said the proposal "respectfully request[s] your approval" to allow a 10-foot variance from the required setback. Owner Patty Britton said the couple had built the house after a lengthy process and that the alley dedication and later regulation changes reduced their usable yard. She told the board the pool was "not a swimming pool" but a small dipping pool intended for limited use and said the design would include landscaping and screening to minimize visibility.

A neighbor, Chris McGat of 414 Southeast 4th Avenue, spoke in support, saying he and other neighbors have observed several front-yard dipping pools in the older Osceola Park neighborhood and that "we're certainly in support of this" application. McGat suggested the city consider neighborhood-specific guidance because many older lots were platted narrower than current regulations require.

Board discussion focused on whether the application met the six required variance findings in the land development regulations: (1) special conditions peculiar to the property; (2) literal interpretation would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by similarly zoned properties; (3) the special conditions did not result from the applicant's actions; (4) granting would not confer special privilege; (5) the variance is the minimum necessary to allow reasonable use; and (6) the variance is in harmony with the intent of the regulations and not injurious to the neighborhood. Several board members noted concern about precedent and the presence of other nearby front-yard pools but the board repeatedly was reminded that each variance stands on the evidence specific to the lot before it.

The board order was read into the record; the roll-call vote recorded "yes" votes from Mark Ronald, Jesse Slasser, John D'Alessio, Brenda Cullinan and Richard Kasser (Diana Morales was absent). The board's motion to approve carried 5-0. The board order states the variance was approved "only for the purposes as presented at the meeting." Staff cited land development regulation section 2.17f in advising that the board's decision is final based on the record presented.

Clarifying details recorded at the hearing: the requested front-yard setback is 15 feet (25 feet required); proposed pool dimensions are 7 feet by 13 feet with a 3-foot surround for access; the lot width was reported as about 57.41 feet and depth about 93.7 feet (lot area ~5,607 sq ft); the R1A district minimum lot standard cited is 60 by 100 feet (7,500 sq ft). The applicant stated the pool will meet side setbacks, be fenced (metal fence consistent with nearby properties) and be planted with landscaping to screen it from the sidewalk and neighbors.

The board did not attach conditions beyond limiting approval to the pool as presented. The order and roll-call are part of the hearing record; staff noted that future similar applications will be considered on their specific facts. The Board of Adjustment announced upcoming meeting dates during closing remarks.