Board of Adjustment Agenda and Packet 2018 04 18

Home Browse Search

Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes November 15, 2017 Page 5 of 9 stairway users from additional vantage points onto neighboring yard and sun porch). Molly Schaaf agrees to work with Marianne Gibbs to gain approval of the final design plans of these stairs prior to construction. Furthermore, some form of stairway and landing "privacy screen" affording visual privacy to the lot located north of 812 La Farge needs to be a condition of this variance approval, for as long as Marianne Gibbs (or entity controlled 100% by her, such as a revocable trust) is the property owner of 822 La Farge Ave, the neighbor to the North. a. Should Molly Schaaf sell 812 La Farge Ave while Marianne Gibbs (or entity controlled 100% by her, such as a revocable trust) is still owner of 822 La Farge Ave, she will need to disclose this in the property disclosure when she lists the property." Public Comment Against: None heard. Summary and Request by Staff and Applicant: Schaaf reiterates her discussion points stated above and asks the board to approve her variance. Closed Public Hearing and Discussion by Board: Stuart says that he understands why staff denied each criterion, but believes that the violations are very weak. Regarding criteria one, although the lot may not be unique within a street radius, he sees the lot very unique compared to the rest of Louisville. He sees that the hardship has not been brought on by the applicant and believes that the addition is reasonable and modest. Seeing that it only affects the neighbors since the exterior architecture is remaining consistent, if the conditions are met then Stuart sees no issue with the variance and will be approving it. Campbell sees that the applicant has brought the hardship on themselves when they bought the property. He agrees with the city's analysis of the first criteria. It was not satisfied and because of that, two, three, and four are not satisfied as well. Campbell will not support the variance. Meseck believes that the home no longer fits the homeowner's needs and that the hardship has been put on themselves, not the City. Meseck is concerned that if they approve this, this point will be brought up in future hearings. He also has a hard time approving a case that does not meet any of the six criteria. Ewy said she struggles with the hardship aspect, but is amazed with how well the applicant has worked through the issues with the neighbors and has seemed to come to a good agreement. With six criteria not being met though, it does make it difficult for the board to approve the variance. Ewy is unsure if she should approve or deny this case at this point of the discussion. Levinson states that once he got past the applicant not meeting the technical criteria and focuses on what the applicant is actually doing, he does not even really notice the