BOA Minutes 02/23/2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Board of Adjustment February 23. 2006 Page 2 contacted the various utilities and has received documentation from the utilities with the exception of Sprint. Mr. Matt Dorsten, Planner, reviewed the background information and the analysis of the request, provided in his memos to the Board of Adjustment, dated February 17, 2006 (copies on file in the Community Development Department). Mr. Dorsten suggested continuing this item until the applicant has received the documentation from the utilities involved with the easement. Mr. Dorsten stated the variance does not meet all of the criteria for granting of a variance; therefore, the Community Development Department does not support the request. Mr. Dorsten said if the Board of Adjustment chooses to grant the variance, the motion should state the variance approval is: "To allow a 3-foot encroachment into a required side yard building setback, creating a 4.5-foot side yard in lieu of the required 7.S-foot side yard." He said the motion should state that the variance approval is based upon the staff report dated February 17, 2006 and attached the exhibits, the Board of Adjustment's findings of fact and conclusions, the site plan dated November 9, 1998, and the conditions outlined in the staff report which are: 1. The variance applies to only that northern portion of the property affected by the addition. 2. The applicant shall provide documentation from the subject property's electric provider allowing forthe addition that is the subject of this variance to be built within the easement. 3. The applicant shall obtain a building permit within 120 days after the approval of the variance. 4. The applicant shall complete the improvements proposed per the original building permit that is to be obtained within the 120 day building permit deadline. 5. All of the above conditions shall be fully and faithfully executed or the variance shall become null and void. After a brief discussion regarding the easement, Mr. Miller asked the applicant to come forward. Mr. David Anders stated that the architect may have a design that would reduce the encroachment into the easement. Mr. Anders stated he received information that the City of Casselberry has no water lines in that area and there is no conflict with People's Gas, Seminole County Traffic Engineering and Seminole/Orange water. He said he has not received any documentation from Sprint regarding the easement. Mr. Miller asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak in favor to the request. No one came forward. Mr. Dorsten requested that condition no. 2 of the conditions of approval be changed to read as follows: "The applicant shall provide documentation from the utility provider's to the subject property that are electric provider Darties to the easement allowing for the addition, that is the subject of this variance, to be built within the easement."