Laserfiche WebLink
CITY OF CASSEt.t3ERRY <br />BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT <br />The City of Casselberry Board of Adjustment held a public hearing an Thursday, November 19, 2009, at 6:30 <br />P.M., in the Casselberry City Hall Commission Chambers, 95 Triplet Lake Drive, Casselberry, Florida. <br />Members present were: <br />Mary Anne Gauvin <br />>=arl McMullen <br />Arlin Armour <br />Luis Guzman <br />Members absent were: <br />1=d Bowman <br />Statf members present: <br />Sandra Smith, Chief Planner <br />Joni Dixon, Sr. Staff Assistant <br />First item of Business; Approval of Minutes for the public hearing held an Thursday, July 23, 2009, <br />Ms. Gauvin stated the Chair would entertain a motion on the approval of the minutes for the public hearing held <br />on Thursday, July 23, 2009. Mr. McMullen moved to accept the July 23, 2009 minutes. Mr. Guzman seconded the <br />motion. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote. <br />Second Item of Business; Qisclosure of Ex-Porte communications, <br />No disclosure of Ex Porte Communications was made by the Board. <br />Third Item of Business BA 09,06: 831 Moonlit LanelMichael 5avino. Variance request to grant two variances to <br />the Casselberry Unified Land Qevelopment Regulations. The variance requests areas follows: <br />1 y A variance to Chapter II, Article VII, Section 2~7,9g, "Requirements forswimmingpools and/or <br />screen enclosures" to allow a swimming pool 1 deck forward of the front building line of a <br />corner lot. <br />2) Avarianceto Chapterll, ArtlcleVll, Section 2-7.14c, "Resldenfialfences orwalls"to allowasix <br />foot tall vinyl fence within a designated front yard in [ieu of a three foot tall fence which is <br />permitted by code. This request will modify the location of an existing fence which received <br />variance approval in 2007, <br />Ms. Sandra Smith, Chief Planner, reviewed Mr. Senzee's memo dated November 9, 2009 supported by a <br />Powerl'oint presentation (a copy is on file in the Community Development Department). Ms. Smith explained that the <br />information far each variance would be presented separately and requested the Board provide a separate motion to <br />address each variance independently of the other. <br />