Board of Adjustment Agenda and Packet 2019 06 19

Home Browse Search

Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes May 15, 2019 Page 4 of 6 Briggs asks that when the property was purchased, did they consider the noise and how it would affect them living there. Hiivala replies saying they thought they could handle the noise from the highway but it has just increased too greatly with the increase in traffic. Briggs asks if he believes that adding the fence will increase the property's value. Hiivala says that he believes the value of the home would increase and give more of a perception of privacy. He confesses that his family has considered moving from the home because of the road noise and currently has the house listed for sale. The reoccurring feedback from potential buyers is that the noise is a hindrance of buying the property. He states though that if the fence could be built at eight feet, this would give them more reason to stay at the property. Ritchie reminds the board that an increase in the value of the property is not a part of the variance criteria. Gorsevski asks how the four versus eight foot fence compares to the sound traveling and minimizing the noise. Hiivala says that sound travels linear so if you can see the cars, you can hear the cars. He also mentions that the existing hills create a natural amphitheater for the noise. Public Comment in Favor: None heard. Public Comment Against: None heard. Summary and request by Staff and Applicant: None heard. Closed Public Hearing and discussion by Board: Stuart begins the discussion with stating that this variance request is not black and white. He believes the property is unique and that the request just barely meets each of the six criteria. He then argues in favor for each criteria: 1. The property is unique because the house is on a hill and it is commercially zoned although it is a single family house. 2. The property has a unique circumstance in that it is the only single family house in that commercially zoned area. 3. The property cannot be developed to its full potential because of the highway noise. 4. The owner did not cause the hardship because the owner did not create the noise and increase in traffic, which is increasing the road noise. 5. The fence will not be altering or changing the character of the neighborhood because it is in an industrial area. 6. The fence is straightforward, quick, and easy, although berming may be a better option. Leedy agrees with Stuart's discussion of meeting the six variance criteria. She thinks that berming may not be the better design because of the dirt and dust it would cause, affecting others more so than the fence.