Appeal to the Decision of the Environmental Protection Commission Mark Kassar November 11, 2008 Environmental Protection Division Environmental Protection Division

Location Map Ashok Patel Mark Kassar

Aerial Subject Property

As-Built Survey

Dock Ties Detail

Property Boundary – Seen from end of Terminal Platform Property Boundary Markers Mr. Patel’s Dock Mr. Kassar’s dock

Variance Request Information Mr. Patel requested a side setback distance of 4 to 5 feet instead of the required 10 feet from adjacent property lines. This request requires a variance. EPD sent notices to the shoreline owners within 300 feet of the subject property informing them of Mr. Patel’s request for a variance. On May 28, 2008, EPD received an objection to the request for variance from Mr. Mark Kassar at 5944 Masters Boulevard, who is the abutting property owner to the north.

Variance Information As required by Section (a)1, the applicant is required to demonstrate: 1) how strict compliance with the provisions from which a Variance is sought would impose a unique and unnecessary hardship on the applicant - the hardship cannot be self-imposed; and 2) the effect of the proposed variance on the abutting shoreline owners. The environmental protection officer (EPO) may approve variances to the provisions of this ordinance in order to provide greater protection to the water bodies and shorelines than provided under this ordinance. As required by Section (a)1, the applicant is required to demonstrate: 1) how strict compliance with the provisions from which a Variance is sought would impose a unique and unnecessary hardship on the applicant - the hardship cannot be self-imposed; and 2) the effect of the proposed variance on the abutting shoreline owners. The environmental protection officer (EPO) may approve variances to the provisions of this ordinance in order to provide greater protection to the water bodies and shorelines than provided under this ordinance.

Variance Information Pursuant to Section (a) 1, the Environmental Protection Officer may recommend approval of the variance if such variance would not; 1), be contrary to the Public Interest; 2), where, owing to special conditions, compliance with the provisions herein would impose an unnecessary hardship on the permit applicant; 3) that the hardship is not self-imposed; AND 4), the granting of the variance would not be contrary to the intent and purpose of this Article.

Staff Findings 1.In order to conform to an irregular lot shape as well as to follow a path of least environmental disruption, the dock was constructed to minimize impact to the forested wetland system 1.In order to conform to an irregular lot shape as well as to follow a path of least environmental disruption, the dock was constructed to minimize impact to the forested wetland system. 2.The EPO may approve variances to the provisions of this ordinance in order to provide greater protection to the water bodies and shorelines than provided under this ordinance.

Possible Tree Removal Represents trees possibly removed if access walkway were moved

July 20, 2008 EPC Action Approve the EPO’s recommendation to approve the request for variance.

Action Requested ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of the Environmental Protection Commission Decision.

Environmental Protection Division Environmental Protection Division 800 Mercy Drive Orlando, Florida FAX Mercy Drive Orlando, Florida FAX