My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08/17/2004
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2000's
>
2004
>
08/17/2004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/23/2022 4:38:07 PM
Creation date
10/1/2015 6:04:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
08/17/2004
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
Archived Roll/Disk#
2929
Book and Page
127, 466-513
Supplemental fields
SmeadsoftID
433
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
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).
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br /> <br />Mr. Bush <br /> displayed a photograph of Mr. Kleinknecht’s pool and expressed his conviction <br />that this pool is several feet lower than the rest of the lot. <br /> Administrator Baird noted that the inspectors had gone back several times due to Mr. <br />Bush’s complaints and the drainage plan was done by an engineer. <br /> Chairman Ginn wanted a clarification of the finished lot grade in the Code, specifically <br />addressing the height of walls and fences so there is no gray area. <br /> County Attorney Will Collins explained that “finished grade” is wherever the slab is after <br />all fill has been put in. <br /> <br />Dennis Mathern, <br /> 25 Starfish Drive, stated that he was the general contractor for the <br />Kleinknecht home and noted that the property to the west of Mr. Bush’s home is much higher than <br />the Bush property. Because of regulations, water cannot be drained into the river. The pool was <br />built at the level of the property but the back of the property had to be raised to get drainage to the <br />front of the property. The retaining wall had never been anticipated but was added to satisfy the <br />County at major expense to Mr. Kleinknecht. The fence was also added due to landscaping issues <br />between the neighbors. <br /> Commissioner Adams felt if the issue is the fence, then the matter should be referred to <br />Code Enforcement. <br /> <br /> Chairman Ginn felt these same regulations need to be applied to the Gaudiosi property <br />where the fence is at least 6 feet above the neighbors’ yard. <br /> Administrator Baird felt that is a separate issue, this is just a fence issue. Staff feels this <br />fence meets the Code requirements. <br /> Director Keating commented that the Gaudiosi north retaining wall, which is close to the <br />house, will slope down to the property line. At the property line the slope is about even with the <br />existing grade. <br /> <br />AUGUST 17, 2004 27 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.