BOA Minutes 03/27/2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Board of Adjustment March 27. 2008 Page 3 In response to the Board's question, Mr. Brasol said that the adjacent neighbors do not oppose the requested variance. Mr. Bowman asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak in favor of the request. Mr. Tom Erskine, 420 Diane Court, Casselberry, Florida came forward. Mr. Erskine said he is Mr. Brasol's neighbor and he does not oppose the variance. Mr. Bowman asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak in opposition to the request. No one came forward. A lengthy discussion ensued regarding the requested variance conforming to variance criteria number 2 and 4. Mr. Bowman asked for a motion for BA 08-02. Mr. Armour made a motion to approve BA 08-02 that the circumstances are not a result of the applicant's actions but the limitation of the depth of the property due to a situation created by the builder that a screen room could not be added without encroaching into the setback. The literal interpretation of the provision of the ULDR would deprive the applicant of his rights commonly enjoyed by other properties due to the restriction imposed by the limited depth of the property. Mr. McMullen seconded the motion. Mr. Bowman restated Mr. Armour's motion stating that on stipulation no. 2 the Board finds by fact that the condition was generated by the positioning of the home by the builder and not the applicant's action requiring the variance and noA that it would create a hardship on the applicant due to the size of the lot and location of the home to use his property to build a screen room due to the restriction imposed by the limited depth of the property and including the conditions as stated by the City - excluding condition no. 3. with the City's agreement. The Board was polled. Mary Anne Gauvin Yes Earl McMullen Yes Ed Bowman Yes Luis Guzman Yes Arlin Armour Yes The motion passed unanimously. Fourth Item of Business: BA OS-03: 906-952 E. State Road 436 (Casselberry SQuare). Variance requests to Chapter 3, Article X, Section 3-10.2(6) "Exterior lighting" to allow: 1. An average parking lot illumination of 3.37 foot-candles (maximum) in lieu of the allowed maximum 2.5 foot-candles.