BZA denies special exception for outdoor vehicle storage on Harness Road after years of noncompliance

CHARLOTTE COUNTY — The Charlotte County Board of Zoning Appeals on Sept. 10 denied a special exception request to allow outdoor storage of vehicles, boats and recreational vehicles at 10102 Harness Road in Placida after staff and neighbors said the use is incompatible with surrounding residential zoning and the operator had repeatedly failed to meet conditions from a prior approval.

Community Development staff recommended denial, saying the property sits in a small commercial pocket surrounded by single-family residential zoning and that outdoor storage is better suited to industrial areas. Elizabeth Nocek, AICP, senior planner, told the board the parcel and two adjacent lots total about 1.5 acres, much of the site had been covered with shell or gravel and no stormwater or protected-species reviews had been completed. She also said an earlier special-exception approval from 2022 had expired because the applicant did not meet the required conditions.

“Staff’s professional opinion is that the proposed special exception does not meet the three criteria for granting a special exception,” Nocek said, and recommended denial regardless of the applicant because the use is incompatible with the location and surrounding residential uses.

The applicant, who identified himself as Rodick Sanovic and said he operates an RV-storage business, told the board he had been hospitalized and fell behind on compliance and that the property is under contract with potential buyers who he said would bring the site into compliance. “We have everything current, everything from day 1,” Sanovic told the board, and he said the prospective buyer has agreed in writing to make required improvements.

HOA counsel Charlie Thompson and a resident, Richard Grunt, told the board they had long opposed the unpermitted condition on the property and outlined a parallel HOA enforcement track. Thompson said the HOA holds an amended final judgment against the owner for more than $45,000 in HOA dues and legal fees and that the association has discussed a sheriff’s sale to recover those amounts. Thompson and other speakers urged the board to favor a buyer who could demonstrate the ability to comply rather than to reinstate an exception for the existing operator.

Staff and board members highlighted additional unresolved regulatory matters: an ongoing county code-enforcement case (COD-22-00406), multiple liens on the parcel (the transcript cites a lien figure of roughly $9,000 for county fines), the absence of required paving and stormwater improvements, and incomplete buffer and fencing that do not meet the county’s landscape and screening standards. Nocek noted that chain-link fence with green fabric does not meet the required fully opaque type-D buffer and that permitting, stormwater design, and environmental surveys are still outstanding.

A motion to deny SE-25-004 was made, seconded and approved by the members present. The board’s action followed staff recommendation. The transcript records the motion and that the board voted in favor of denial; no individual dissenting vote was recorded.

Staff had prepared an alternative set of conditions in case the board chose to approve the special exception, including a fully opaque six-foot perimeter fence or wall, required paving and stormwater controls, prohibitions on contractor storage and wash/dump stations, and a limited term and milestone requirements (preliminary site plan review within three months, final site plan within six months and all permitting/inspections within one year). Because the board denied the petition, those conditions were not adopted.

Motion and vote: Motion to deny SE-25-004 carried; roll-call vote recorded as affirmative by the members present (four yes votes).