Interoffice Memorandum
DATE: December 11, 2025
TO: Mayor Jerry L. Demings and County Commissioners
THROUGH: N/A
FROM: Tanya Wilson, AICP, Director, Planning, Environmental, and Development Services Department
CONTACT: Renée H. Parker, LEP, Manager, Environmental Protection Officer
PHONE: (407) 836-1420
DIVISION: Environmental Protection Division
ACTION REQUESTED:
title
Accept the findings and recommendation of the Environmental Protection Commission and approve the request for waiver to Section 15-343(a) (side setback) to reduce the northern side setback from 10 feet to 1.4 feet and approve the request for variance to Section 15-342(a)(8) (floor elevation) to reduce the minimum floor elevation from 1 foot above to 0.07 feet below the control elevation of Lake Irma with the condition that a Hold Harmless Agreement is recorded between the applicant and Orange County for the Kathryn Cowden [After-the-Fact] Dock Construction Permit BD-25-03-022. District 5. (Environmental Protection Division)
body
PROJECT: Environmental Protection Commission Recommendation for Request for Waiver and Variance for After-the-Fact Dock Construction Permit BD-25-03-022.
PURPOSE: The applicant, Kathryn Cowden, is requesting an After-the-Fact Dock Construction Permit with a waiver to Orange County Code (Code), Chapter 15, Article IX, Section 15-343(a) (side setback) and a variance to Section 15-342(a)(8) (floor elevation). The project site is located at 3513 TCU Blvd, Orlando, FL 32817 (Parcel ID No. 12-22-30-3378-01-670) on Lake Irma in District 5.
Background:
On February 12, 2024, the Environmental Protection Division (EPD) received an Application to Construct a Dock at the subject property (BD-24-02-008). The applicant was requesting to rebuild an existing dock in roughly the same location and included an Application for Waiver to reduce the side setback requirements. According to historic aerial photographs, the original dock appears to have been in place prior to the adoption of Chapter 15, Article IX on December 12, 1988, and was constructed over the property line to the south. EPD received objection letters to the application from both adjacent property owners (Thomas Hagood at 3507 TCU Blvd. and James Miller at 3519 TCU Blvd). During the review process, the applicant decided that in lieu of a new dock permit, they were going to follow the criteria in Section 15-346(c), which allows for maintenance of unpermitted “grandfathered” docks, and asked EPD to stop contacting them. Accordingly, the application was closed.
Section 15-346(c) Maintenance of unpermitted “grandfathered” docks states, “Docks constructed on or before December 19, 1988, are allowed to remain as originally constructed. Maintenance activities of unpermitted docks constructed on or before December 19, 1988, do not require a permit under this article, unless repair or replacement occurs to more than fifty (50) percent of the dock.” Under Section 15-323. - Definitions, “Maintenance means the act of keeping the dock in a safe and useable condition consistent with original design specifications.” Additionally, “Repair means to restore a dock structure to the original design specifications, including the replacement of the entire dock or portions of the dock.”
On May 14, 2024, EPD received a complaint from an adjacent neighbor (Thomas Hagood) stating the subject boat dock was being demolished with the intent to replace it. On May 20, 2024, EPD staff conducted a site visit and observed dock construction at the subject property and a Field Warning was issued. On June 7, 2024, EPD staff met with the applicant onsite and observed new posts were in place for a boathouse and half of the original walkway had been removed. Since more than fifty (50) percent of the dock was being replaced, which included a slightly larger terminal platform size, the dock required a new permit, to be reviewed under the current Dock Construction Code, Chapter 15, Article IX.
On June 21, 2024, EPD issued a Notice of Violation (NOV) (Incident 24-637359) requiring that the unauthorized boat dock be removed or to submit an Application to Construct a Dock to attempt to permit the dock after-the-fact. On October 23, 2024, EPD issued a Notice of Hearing for the Special Magistrate after the response timeframes lapsed with no response to the NOV. On December 9, 2024, the case was heard before the Special Magistrate. The corrective actions in the Order from the Special Magistrate required the applicant to completely remove the unauthorized boat dock or to submit an Application to Construct a Dock by March 9, 2025. The Special Magistrate did not impose the penalty recommended by EPD.
On March 7, 2025, EPD received an Application to Construct a Dock for the subject property. The application includes a request for waiver to reduce the side setback to both adjacent property lines and a variance for the floor elevation not meeting the minimum height requirement of one foot over the Normal High Water Elevation (NHWE) or established control elevation.
Waiver - Side Setback
Chapter 15, Article IX, Section 15-343(a) states, “Private docks on lots or parcels having a shoreline frontage of one hundred (100) feet or less, including designated mooring areas, must have a minimum side setback of ten (10) feet from any property line or projected property line.” The applicant has a shoreline that measures approximately 43 feet; therefore, requiring a side setback of 10 feet. The applicant is requesting a side setback of 1.4 feet from the northern property line and negative (-)1.3 feet from the southern property line.
EPD received a Letter of No Objection (LONO) from the property owner to the south, Thomas Hagood. Additionally, an access easement has been provided between the applicant and Mr. Hagood to allow a portion of the dock to remain over the property line. In accordance with Section 15-350(e), the Environmental Protection Officer (EPO) has determined that there is no negative impact to the environment, and a LONO has been received; therefore, the waiver request of negative (-)1.3 feet from the southern property line can be administratively approved by EPD. Although the EPO has determined that there is no negative impact to the environment for the side setback to the northern property line, the owner to the north, James Miller, issued a letter of objection on September 24, 2025; therefore, the waiver for the side setback to the northern property line cannot be administratively approved by EPD.
Pursuant to Section 15-350(e), “the applicant must describe how the waiver would not negatively impact the environment and the effect of the proposed waiver on abutting shoreline owners.”
To address Section 15-350(e), the applicant’s agent (Kelly McLoughlin) states, “There is no negative impact on the environment as the dock has been reconstructed under appropriate conditions as the project was believed to be replacement under the Grandfather rule, which we understood to require replacing the structure in the same place and the same dimensions as what previously existed. The replacement structure is now free of termites, structurally sound and therefore safe and much more visually pleasing to the surrounding community. Any disturbance of vegetation and shoreline was minimal and has regrown and thrived in the short time since construction was completed.
The reconstructed dock is in the exact location with the same overall dimensions as the dock that was previously in place as of its original construction over 30 years ago. The only exception being the landing at the end of the dock (furthest in the lake from the shoreline) previously extended over the property line of the neighbor to the south which was reduced in size and believed to have been placed within the property line. Upon survey, it was discovered that a small piece of the dock still extends over the furthest corner of the property line and as such, an easement was agreed to, executed and recorded with the neighbor for that portion of the deck. As a result, the only effect on the neighbors would be positives in that the dilapidated, 30+ year old dock is now a brand new, solidly structured, much safer and more visually appealing version of its previous self.
Variance - Floor Elevation
Section 15-342(a)(8) states, “The floor elevation must be a minimum of one (1) foot above the established control elevation or NHWE.” The NHWE of Lake Irma is 54.74’ and has an outfall control elevation of 54.64’ requiring the floor elevation to be a minimum of 55.64’. The dock has a floor elevation of 54.57’ which is 1.07’ below the minimum allowed elevation.
Section 15-350(a) states, “An applicant may apply to EPD for a variance from a requirement of this article…At a minimum, the applicant must: (1) Identify the section(s) of this article that the applicant seeks a variance for and the extent of the requested variance; (2) Describe the impact of the requested variance on the surface water and the environment; (3) Explain the effect of the requested variance on any abutting or affected shoreline property owner(s); (4) Describe how strict compliance with the section(s) of this article would impose a unique, unreasonable, and unintended hardship on the applicant; and (5) Explain why the hardship is not self-imposed.”
The applicant’s agent has provided the following responses to Section 15-350(a)(1)-(5):
(1) “Chapter 15, Article IX, Section 15-342(a)(8)
(2) There will be no impact on the surface water and the environment.
(3) There will be no impact on abutting shoreline owners’ view or navigability, and there are no affected shoreline property owners.
(4) The NHWE of this lake is not 'normal'. Even in extreme high water, the lake doesn't reach the NHWE. We are requesting a variance based on precedent set by approval given to the neighbor to the south (3507 TCU Blvd) on January 5, 2021 for the same request, and so that the dock does not have to be torn down and rebuilt. In addition, due to the actual normal high water level in Lake Irma, an additional 12 inches difference between the deck height and the water level would impose a significant safety hazard for getting into and out of a boat from the dock given the significant height difference it would create between the two.
(5) Due to circumstances that are public record, when the new deck was constructed, we believed it was being done so under the Grandfather rule and was being rebuilt in the same manner and at the same height as it had previously existed for 30+ years. As it was ultimately determined a permit for construction was required, we have submitted all required permitting documents and are requesting this variance as the final piece to receiving an after the fact permit for the rebuilt dock structure as it is currently built.”
In regards to water elevations of Lake Irma, the current elevation of the dock is 54.57’ NAVD88 and the highest recorded water elevation on Lake Irma was 55.9 feet NAVD88 (in September 2004). Since the 2004 recorded high water elevation on Lake Irma, there has been one other recorded instance of the water level above the NHWE; 54.94 feet NAVD88 in July 2005. According to measurements from the Orange County Water Atlas, the water levels have not exceeded 54 feet since August 2005.
In regards to precedent referenced by the applicant in item #4 above, at the January 27, 2021, meeting of the Environmental Protection Commission (EPC), a similar variance request was heard for the adjacent property to the south at 3507 TCU Blvd. The height of that dock was 0.22 foot above the NHWE. The EPO recommended denial of the variance request; however, the EPC voted to overturn the recommendation and approved the variance with the condition that the applicant enter into a Hold Harmless Agreement with Orange County.
Public Notification and Objection
On September 12, 2025, a Notice of Application for Waiver was sent to the adjacent property owner to the north, James Miller. On September 24, 2025, EPD received an objection letter from Mr. Miller regarding the request for waiver. The objection states that the required setback is 10 feet and this is the second request for the reduced setback. Mr. Miller states that after the first request was refused, the owner and contractor went forward with construction of the boathouse and deck. Mr. Miller states that this infringes on his view of the lake and reduces his property value.
On October 21, 2025, a Notice of Application for Variance was sent to all shoreline property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. On November 13, 2025, EPD received another objection letter from Mr. Miller. He states that he is formally objecting to the variance and waiver request. The letter reiterates his concerns with impacting his view and affecting his property value.
On November 12, 2025, the applicant, agent, and objector were sent a notice to inform them of the Environmental Protection Commission meeting on December 3, 2025.
Enforcement Action
There is an open enforcement case (24-637359) for the subject property for the unpermitted dock. The enforcement case also included an unpermitted seawall, although the seawall has since been authorized by the Board at their meeting on December 2, 2025 and the permit (SADF-25-02-006) was issued on December 11, 2025. Issuance of the dock permit will resolve the enforcement case. If the application is denied, the unpermitted structure(s) will be required to be removed in order for the property to be in compliance.
Additionally, Chapter 15, Article IX, Section 15-353(d) states in part, “Any person determined to have violated section 15-324 for failure to obtain a permit prior to constructing a dock or modifying an existing dock such that a variance or waiver would be required, may be subject to an additional administrative penalty in the amount of one dollar ($1.00) per square foot of the entire structure.” Therefore, an administrative penalty of $380.40 was assessed for failure to obtain a permit prior to construction. The penalty amount was remitted on November 5, 2025.
Staff Evaluation and Recommendation
Staff evaluated the request for waiver for compliance with the criteria for approval. Although the EPO determined that there was no negative impact to the environment, the recommendation of the EPO was to deny the request for waiver to Chapter 15, Article IX, Section 15-343(a) (side setback) to the northern property line based on a finding that the applicant failed to demonstrate there will be no negative effects on the abutting shoreline owner pursuant to Section 15-350(e), as an objection was received.
Staff evaluated the request for variance for compliance with the criteria for approval. Pursuant to Chapter 15, Article IX, Section 15-350(c), Variance criteria. A variance application may receive an approval or an approval with conditions if granting the variance: (1) would not negatively impact the surface water or the environment or if there is a negative impact, sufficient mitigation is proposed pursuant to paragraph 15-250(d), if appropriate; (2) Would not be contrary to the public interest; (3) Where, owing to special conditions, compliance with the provisions herein would impose a unique and substantial hardship on the applicant; (4) Where the environmental protection officer has determined that the hardship is not self-imposed on the applicant; and (5) Would not be contrary to the intent and purpose of this article.”
The EPO concluded that the variance request is self-imposed as a dock could be constructed that meets the floor elevation requirement. Therefore, the recommendation of the EPO was to deny the request for variance to Chapter 15, Article IX, Section 15-342(a)(8) (floor elevation).
Environmental Protection Commission
EPD presented the waiver and variance request in a public hearing before the EPC at their December 3, 2025 meeting. The applicant, their agent, and the objector were present at the meeting. Discussion among EPC members took place, including the effect of the dock on the abutting shoreline owners and the water levels of Lake Irma.
The EPC voted to reject the findings and recommendations of the EPO, and made a finding that the request for waiver was consistent with Section 15-350(e) and recommended approval of the request for waiver to Section 15-343(a) (side setback) to reduce the northern side setback from 10 feet to 1.4 feet; and made a finding that the request for variance was consistent with Section 15-350(c), and recommended approval of the request for variance to Section 15-342(a)(8) (floor elevation) to reduce the minimum floor elevation from 1 foot above to 0.07 feet below the control elevation of Lake Irma with the condition that a Hold Harmless Agreement is recorded between the applicant and Orange County for the Kathryn Cowden [After-the-Fact] Dock Construction Permit BD-25-03-022. The motion passed 4-2.
BUDGET: N/A