Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PLDRC deadlocks 3‑3 on Seabridge South screen‑room variances; tie becomes technical denial
Summary
The Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission split 3‑3 on a request to legalize and enlarge an unpermitted screen structure in Seabridge South, producing a technical denial because variances require four affirmative votes. The homeowner told commissioners the covered addition is needed for shade and durability.
The Volusia County Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission failed to approve two variances for a Seabridge South homeowner on June 18, 2026, when the panel split 3‑3 — a result that legally counts as a denial because the body needs four votes to grant variances.
Staff had recommended denying the variances, which would have allowed replacement of an existing unpermitted screen enclosure with a larger 228‑sq‑ft covered screen room and 324‑sq‑ft screen enclosure (total footprint 552 sq ft) that increases lot coverage from 38% to about 41%. The property is a conforming R4 lot, and the unpermitted enclosure dates to the late 1990s, staff said.
Applicant James Uzzell told commissioners his family — retirees who moved to the area for the climate — needs a small covered area to use their back yard in the morning without direct sun. "We just want to create a little seating area for ourselves," Uzzell said, explaining concerns about awning durability in a salt‑air, hurricane‑exposed location and saying a roofed structure would be safer and longer‑lasting.
Commission debate centered on whether the existing lot coverage and prior administrative variances weigh against the request. Commissioner Bush cited county flooding and overbuilding concerns and said she would vote no, arguing that permitting additional covered structures can exacerbate long‑term flood risk. After a motion to approve carried a 3‑3 tally, county counsel explained that, because the PLDRC requires four affirmative votes to grant a variance, the split operates as a denial and the rendition will reflect that the commission could not find competent substantial evidence to support the request.
The applicant was told the decision can be appealed to the County Council within 10 days of rendition. The commission closed the item without further action.
