Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Local planning agency approves variance for accessory dwelling at 1678 Southeast 10th Street
Summary
The City of Stuart Local Planning Agency approved a variance allowing an accessory dwelling unit to sit 0.6 feet from the side property line—short of the 5-foot setback—after staff described a survey error and neighbors submitted letters of no objection.
The City of Stuart Local Planning Agency on Tuesday approved a variance allowing an accessory dwelling unit at 1678 Southeast 10th Street to remain 0.6 feet from the side property line, a 4.4-foot deviation from the 5-foot setback required under the city's land development code.
Planner Michelle Arbazow presented the staff report, detailing that the structure had been built under a permit but that an as-built survey by a subsequent firm, R L Vaught and Associates, showed the structure closer to the property line than the original survey indicated. "For the record, my name is Michelle Arbazow, planner 2 with the development department," she said while summarizing notice, zoning and the variance standards the board considers.
The property owners, Braden and Kylie Olson, told the board they relied on an earlier survey when they purchased the home in 2020 and built the unit themselves. "We don't have the financial bandwidth to, like, hire builders for something like this," Kylie Olson said, describing the work as a family undertaking and asking the board to consider the financial hardship of demolition.
Tyson Waters, the Olsens' attorney, said the owners did what the city's process required and relied on a licensed surveyor whose work later proved incorrect. "They did everything they were supposed to do," Waters said, urging the board to approve the variance to allow the family to complete final inspections and close out the permit.
Neighbors submitted letters of no objection and one nearby resident, Steven Bowers, spoke in favor of the request at the hearing, calling the Olsens a "great family" and saying he saw "no negative impact on the neighborhood."
Board members questioned whether a third survey should be required and discussed potential long-term remedies such as easements or license agreements for fence locations. After deliberation a board member recommended approval and the board recorded a roll-call vote approving the variance. The board cited the applicant's demonstrated reliance on an earlier survey and the presence of adjacent letters of no objection in the record.
The planning agency's approval allows the property owner to proceed with final inspections for the accessory dwelling. The board did not record any required follow-up tasks in the public record at the meeting.
