Title
ZV(R)2026-0019 - 0025
Jeannie LaGuerre
701 SW 71 Way (District 1)
Summary Explanation and Background
SUMMARY EXPLANATION AND BACKGROUND:
PROJECT DESCIPTION / BACKGROUND:
Jeannie Laguerre, owner, submitted seven residential zoning variance requests to legalize an existing circular driveway for the property located at 701 SW 71 Way in the Boulevard Heights Neighborhood, which is zoned Single-Family Residential Zoning District (R-1C).
On October 2, 2025, the city cited the property for work performed without permits, Code Case No. 251003217.
In October 27, 2025, the applicant submitted building permit application No. RX25-10214 to construct a circular driveway at the property. However, the building permit application cannot be approved as the work on the property exceeds the provisions of the City’s Land Development Code (LDC).
The applicant is providing an “As Built” survey for the following requests:
• ZV(R)2026-0019: to allow 46% Front Lot Coverage (Total) for an existing circular driveway in a single-family residential property, typical lot.
• ZV(R)2026-0020: to allow 46% width of lot instead of the required 40% width of lot for an existing circular driveway in a single-family residential property, typical lot.
• ZV(R)2026-0021: to allow 2’-4” setback along a segment of the northern side property line instead of the required 5' for an existing circular driveway in a single-family residential, typical lot.
After reviewing the applicant’s initial request and, according to the survey, it was noted that further modifications were made to the property, specifically: deck expansion, new spa and new paved surfaces along the north and south sides of the home. As result of the existing conditions, the petitioner would like to include the additional requests:
• ZV(R)2026-0022: to allow an existing 6’-6” wide walkway along a segment of the northern side property line instead of the required 3' wide in a single-family residential, typical lot.
• ZV(R)2026-0023: to allow 2’-6” augmenting to 3’-6” setback along a segment of the rear property line instead of the required 5’ rear setback for an existing pool deck in a single-family residential, typical lot.
• ZV(R)2026-0024: to allow 2’-6” augmenting to 2’-11” setback along a segment of the southern side property line instead of the required 5’ side setback for an existing pool deck in a single-family residential, typical lot.
• ZV(R)2026-0025: to allow an existing 5’ reducing to 2’-6” wide walkway along a segment of the southern side property line instead of the required 3' wide in a single-family residential, typical lot.
Per staff research of the city’s archives, no permit information can be found for the detected work. See copy of survey dated August 18, 1992. The survey was used to reference location for (10.80’ x 29.25’) roofed structure (terrace) project approved under building permit No. 106976-0, completed in April 2011.
Per Broward County Property Appraiser imagery, the circular driveway, walkway, and deck footprint had existed at location since at least 2013 and 2016 respectively (See property changes).
The applicant is aware that Board consideration of residential variance requests does not preclude the property owner from obtaining all necessary development-related approvals or permits.
Per the City’s HOA list, there is no HOA in the neighborhood where the property is located.
VARIANCE REQUEST DETAILS:
ZV(R)2026-0019) is to allow 46% Front Lot Coverage (Total) for an existing circular driveway in a single-family residential property, typical lot.
ZV(R)2026-0020) is to allow 46% Front Lot Coverage (Total) instead of the required 40% Front Lot Coverage (Total) for an existing circular driveway in a single-family residential property, typical lot.
ZV(R)2026-0021) is to allow 2’-4” setback along a segment of the northern side property line instead of the required 5' for an existing circular driveway in a single-family residential, typical lot.
ZV(R)2026-0022) is to allow an existing 6’-6” wide walkway along a segment of the northern side property line instead of the required 3' wide.
ZV(R)2026-0023) is to allow 2’-6” augmenting to 3’-6” setback along a segment of the rear property line instead of the required 5’ rear setback for an existing pool deck in a single-family residential, typical lot.
ZV(R)2026-0024) is to allow 2’-6” augmenting to 2’-11” setback along a segment of the southern side property line instead of the required 5’ side setback for an existing pool deck in a single-family residential, typical lot.
ZV(R)2026-0025) is to allow an existing 5’ reducing to 2’-6” wide walkway along a segment of the southern side property line instead of the required 3' wide in a single-family residential, typical lot.
Code References:
ZV(R)2026-0019-0025)
Table 155.620 Accessory Building and Structures
ZV(R)2026-0019)
Type, Driveway, Circular, Maximum Dimensions, 40% lot coverage
ZV(R)2026-0020)
Type, Driveway, Circular, Maximum Dimensions, 40 % width of lot
ZV(R)2026-0021)
Type, Driveway, Circular, Maximum Dimensions, Side, 5 feet
ZV(R)2026-0022)
Type, Walkway (Single Family Lots), Maximum Dimensions, Rear, 3 feet in width
ZV(R)2026-0023)
Type, Deck or Patio, Setback, Rear, 5 feet
VARIANCE DETERMINATION:
The Board of Adjustment shall not grant any single-family residential variances, permits, or make any decision, finding, and determination unless it first determines that:
Its decision and action taken is in harmony with the general purposes of the zoning ordinances of the city and is not contrary to the public interest, health, or welfare, taking into account the character and use of adjoining buildings and those in the vicinity, the number of persons residing or working in the buildings, and traffic conditions in the vicinity.
In the granting of single-family residential variances, the Board shall follow Section 155.301(O) Variance:
1. Purpose: To allow for the provision of relief from certain development standards of this LDC for one or more of the following reasons:
a) There are special circumstances or conditions applying to the land or building for which the variance is sought, which circumstances are peculiar to the land or building and do not apply generally to land or buildings in the neighborhood, and that the strict application of the provisions of the zoning ordinances would result in an unnecessary hardship and deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of the land or building; or
b) Any alleged hardship is not self-created by any person having an interest in the property nor is the result of a mere disregard for or in ignorance of the provisions of the zoning ordinances of the city; or
c) Granting the variance is not incompatible with public policy, will not adversely affect any adjacent property owners, and that the circumstances which cause the special conditions are peculiar to the subject property.