My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOA Minutes 07/27/2006
Laserfiche
>
City Clerk's Public Records
>
Minutes
>
Advisory Board Minutes
>
Inactive Board Minutes
>
Board of Adjustment Minutes
>
BOA Minutes Archives
>
2006 BOA Minutes
>
BOA Minutes 07/27/2006
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/14/2008 3:44:26 PM
Creation date
10/14/2008 3:38:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Meeting Type
Regular
City Clerk - Doc Type
Minutes
City Clerk - Date
7/27/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Board of Adjustment <br />July 27, 2006 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />side yard setback. Ms. Berg said they have not received any complaints from the neighbors. <br /> <br />Mr. Charles Senzee, Planner, reviewed the background information and the analysis of the request, provided in <br /> <br />his memorandum to the Board of Adjustment, dated July 17, 2006 (a copy is on file in the Community Development <br /> <br />Department). Mr. Sanzes stated the variance application does not meet ail of the criteria for granting the variance; <br /> <br />therefore, City staff cannot support the request. He said if the proposed addition does not encroach any further into the <br /> <br />side yard building setback than the existing residence (6-inches), staff may be able to support the variance request. Mr. <br /> <br />Senzee said if the Board of Adjustment chooses to grant the variance requested for BA 06-08, for the property located at <br />1024 Crystal Bowl Circle, to allow a 1.5-foot (or a 0.5 foot) encroachment into a side yard building setback, the motion <br />should be based upon the Board of Adjustment's findings of fact and conclusions, the property site plan (Exhibit B) dated <br /> <br />March 15, 1993, and the conditions outlined in the staff report which were: <br /> <br />1. The variance shall only pertain to the proposed addition as shown in Exhibit B. <br />2. The addition shall meet all other site development criteria. <br />3. The existing wood shed shall be removed. Any future accessory structures must meet all site development <br />criteria. <br />4. A building permit for the addition shall be obtained from the City's Building Safety Bureau within 30 days of <br />the approval by the Board of Adjustment and the certificate of completion shall be obtained with 120 days <br />of the issuance of the building permit. <br />5. All of the above conditions shall be fully and faithfully executed or the variance shall become null and void. <br /> <br />After a brief discussion, Mr. Billerbeck asked the applicant to come forward. Ms. Berg said they were not aware <br /> <br />that their home encroached into the setback. Ms. Berg said that she discussed moving the roof lines with the engineer <br /> <br />and he recommended following the existing roof line. <br /> <br />Mr. Billerbeck asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak in favor of the request. Mr. Mark <br />Criswell, 1026 Crystal Bowl Circle, Casselberry, Florida came forward. Mr. Criswell said most of the lots in his <br />neighborhood have setbacks between 5 and 7 feet. Mr. Criswell said the addition would provide nice curb appeal and an <br />improvement to the neighborhood. Mr. Criswell said he supports the variance. <br /> <br />Mr. Criswell said he is a licensed general contractor and the Chief Building Inspector for the City of Orlando. Mr. <br /> <br />Criswell said to construct the addition on an angle to the existing house would be a construction anomaly and would add <br /> <br />significantly to the cost of the project. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.