Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Pool Setback Variance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

BZA approves 5-foot variance for pool cage at Gulf Cove property to preserve access and safety

5584485 · August 13, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Board approved a variance reducing the required 15-foot setback to 10 feet so a pool cage can be installed that preserves deck access for owners with mobility issues.

The Charlotte County Board of Zoning Appeals voted Aug. 13 to grant a variance reducing the required 15-foot rear-yard setback to 10 feet for installation of a pool cage at 2491 Quail Terrace in Gulf Cove.

Staff findings and applicant rationale: Sean Cullinan, planning zoning official, told the board that the house and in-ground pool are under construction and that the pool meets the 15‑foot setback but the owners asked for a 5‑foot setback reduction so a screened cage could be installed at the pool’s outer edge without blocking access behind the pool. Cullinan said staff’s review found the five variance criteria could be met, noting the applicants’ medical needs: one applicant has severe allergy to insect bites and both applicants have mobility issues; the additional decking space would permit maintenance, safe access and caregiver rescue if necessary. Cullinan recommended approval with conditions that the variance apply only to the proposed pool cage as shown and that the variance expires if the cage is removed or replaced (with a disaster exception).

Applicant testimony and public comment: Corinne and John Michniak, who are building a new residence at the site, told the board they hired Turnkey Custom Builders and Casa Pools and said the cage as originally planned would have blocked rear access and prevented routine cleaning and safe assistance. A nearby resident expressed concern about precedent, but staff and a board member said BZA decisions are case‑by‑case and do not create precedent.

Board action and conditions: The board voted to approve the requested variance and adopted staff-recommended conditions, which include limiting the variance to the proposed pool cage shown in the submitted plans, prohibiting chain-link fencing as part of required screening, and making the variance expire if the cage is removed or replaced (except for disaster-caused removal). A member noted concern about future seawall work if the cage and stem wall encroach toward the seawall. The board’s approval is conditioned on completion of required improvements and final inspections before outdoor storage or related uses commence.

Next steps: The applicant must complete any required site‑plan, stormwater and permitting reviews; the variance applies only to the cage as submitted and will be void if the cage is removed or replaced without a new variance.