Flagler County planning board approves 14.06-foot setback variance for shed at County Road 2006 East

The Flagler County Planning and Development Board on a voice vote approved a 14.06-foot front-yard setback variance for a 16-by-16 pump house and shed at 30 County Road 2006 East.

Staff presenter Mister Mingo told the board the parcel sits at the southeast corner of County Road 2006 East and County Road 305, is designated for agriculture and timberlands, and is zoned agriculture. He described the request as relief from the 50-foot front setback along County Road 2006 East for a pump house and shed and said the variance requested equals 14.06 feet from the required 50-foot minimum.

Mister Mingo said the structure was built earlier and that the case is an after-the-fact variance. He cited permit 2017 O70131 (issued January 2018) and an as-built survey dated 03/13/2019 showing the closest corner of the shed at 35.994 feet from the front property line. Staff told the board the contractor had placed the slab centered on a surveyor stake and continued construction under that assumption, and that moving the 16-by-16 wood-frame shed was not feasible because it contains the parcel's well and has existing underground electric service connections.

Property owner Pete Sizberg told the board he and his builder had not realized the 50-foot requirement and said the builder followed the surveyor's stake. "I actually think it should be approved — it's not bothering anybody," Sizberg said during public comment.

A board member moved to approve, noting a nearby neighbor had expressed support; the motion was seconded. During discussion a member asked about usual accessory-building setbacks and size thresholds. Mister Mingo said residential accessory structures have a 10-foot separation from a principal dwelling in residential districts but explained that in this agricultural district the 50-foot setback applies because the structure exceeds the small-structure threshold (staff referenced thresholds such as 60 square feet and 6 feet in height for smaller accessory structures). The board then voted by voice and the chair announced the motion carries.

The board's approval followed staff's recommendation that the criteria in the Land Development Code section 3.0703.E be found met for the requested variance; an alternative motion to deny had been provided in the packet. The packet also included photos, a survey showing wetlands on the east side of the parcel, and the as-built survey used to calculate the setback.

The Planning and Development Board returned to approve the April 9 meeting minutes and then adjourned without further substantive business.