Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Setback Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pensacola zoning board denies homeowner’s request to place shed three feet from side lot line
Summary
The Zoning Board of Adjustments denied a variance request to reduce a 7.5-foot side-yard setback to 3 feet for a replacement shed at 2001 East Young Street, finding the hardship appeared self-created and that alternatives existed on the lot. The denial was unanimous.
The Pensacola Zoning Board of Adjustments unanimously denied a request to reduce a side-yard setback so a homeowner could build a new shed inside her privacy fence.
The board considered application ZBA2025-024 for 2001 East Young Street, where applicant Jennifer Staten said the existing 1938 shed is rotted and she wants a new shed placed 3 feet from the side property line so it will sit inside the yard’s privacy fence and not block a child’s bedroom. "...where we'd like to put it just 3 feet off the property line, it would be inside the property fence," Staten told the board.
Board members and staff pressed the applicant on alternatives, including using an existing slab elsewhere on the lot, placing the structure entirely within the rear setback (which can allow a 3-foot separation for accessory structures), or repairing the existing nonconforming shed. Staff explained that accessory structures entirely within a rear setback may be placed 3 feet from property lines, but structures outside the rear setback must meet the principal 7.5-foot setback.
At least one board member said the record suggested a self-created hardship because the applicant’s preferred placement was driven by a desire for more green play area rather than site constraints the code recognizes. Board member 6 stated the request "doesn't fall into the 7 criteria" and described the situation as hard to support under the variance standards.
A motion to deny the variance was made and seconded; the board voted unanimously to deny ZBA2025-024. The chair told the applicant she could discuss alternatives and permitting with staff following the hearing.
The decision means the applicant must wait at least one year before reapplying for the same variance or pursue solutions that meet existing setbacks or qualify under nonconforming-structure repair rules.
