BOA Minutes 11/19/2009 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Board of Adjustment November 19, 2009 Page 5 Mr, Brent Koepke, 822 Moonlit Lane, Casselberry, Florida came forward, Mr. Koepke stated his house is located directly across from the Savino property. Mr, Koepke stated that the Saving rear yard is very wet and the grade behind the home has a steep incline and it would also require removal of some trees. Mr. Koepke was in favor of the proposed fence location to screen the alc and pool equipment. Mr. Koepke stated that the proposed fence location would not affect the traffic visibility. Ms. Gauvin asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak in opposition to the request. No one came forward. A general discussion ensued regarding the February 2008 Board of Adjustment minutes for the original fence variance approval, corner lot restrictions and screening of the mechanics[ equipment. The Board questioned the applicant's purpose for requesting the original fence variance, Mr. Guzman staked in the future the Board will need to question the applicants as to any proposed plans for the area that the variance is sought. Mr. Guzman felt that the mechanical equipment could be screened with landscaping and extending the fence would exceed the minimum variance needed. A lengthy discussion ensued regarding the criteria necessary to grant a variance, The Board expressed a concern that the applicant would later install a screen enclosure for the pool. The Board said an additional condition of approval would be added to prohibit the installation of a screen enclosure. The Board discussed the applicant providing an engineering report from a registered engineering firm addressing the drainage concerns. Mr. Guzman made a motion to continue BA 09-05 for the purpose of allowing the applicant to obtain a comprehensive report on the drainage issue in the applicant's backyard and to present it to the City for evaluation and then present it to the Board. Mr, McMullen seconded the motion, Mr. Guzman amended his motion to correct the case number to BA 09-06 and to include the fence variance in the continuation. Mr. McMullen seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote. A brie# discussion ensued regarding the type of documentation needed from the engineer. Mr. Moore felt that a letter of opinion based on a site visit should be sufftcient, The Board said the burden is on the applicant to decide what documentation he wants to provide to the Ciry.