Board of Adjustment Agenda and Packet 2019 08 21

Home Browse Search

Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes June 19, 2019 Page 4 of 8 Leedy asks staff when the lot coverage code was adopted. Ritchie says that it was adopted in 1997, which was the same regulation as when the house was built. 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 tells the board that staff is required to follow the lot coverage rules exactly, but the board follows the interpretation of the six criteria. Stuart says he decides by going by the interpretation of the criteria and that he has a different view of how the six criteria are applied in regards to this case. Criteria 1: The unanticipated shape of the house makes the property unique. Criteria 2: No other houses nearby are C shaped. Criteria 3: Unanticipated weather and the shape of house makes the property easier to develop with a solid roof. Criteria 4: The applicant did not intend that the shape of the house would become a problem. Criteria 5: The covered patio is hidden so it will not change the character of the neighborhood. Criteria 6: The additional lot coverage is a minimum request. Therefore, all six criteria are met for Stuart. Ewy says the problem for him is that the original owner designed and built the house knowing that they were building it to the total lot coverage allowed. Gorsevski has a hard time knowing that the board constrained with interpreting the six criteria. Stuart says that in the past the board has decided that some of the criteria does not apply to the variance case. Ewy says his other concern is if the board approves the application, down the road the homeowner or any future homeowner could enclose the patio, creating a way to increase the size of the house. Ritchie mentions to the board that they could add a condition to the variance's approval saying that the patio could not be enclosed in the future.