BOA Variance Case 1995_109 Lois Cir

Home Browse Search

3 use or development of adjacent property. Response: The design of the proposed addition is intended to compliment the house without any impact regarding the essential character of the neighborhood. The proposed addition would not obstruct any neighbors views or impair the appropriate use or development of adjacent property. Requirement #6 That the variance, if granted, is the minimum variance that will afford relief and is the least modification possible of the provisions of Title 17 of the Louisville Municipal code which are in question. Response: We are essentially talking about an addition of about 160-180 sq. ft. of space under one roof. This amounts to about 12% of our back yard that we would like to use as living space. A portion of that will be used as a porch (about 25%). The sunroom itself is 10' X 10-12'. This, in our opinion, is a reasonable use of additional space for a very small house. Regarding an addition to the front or sides of the house, our comments are as follows: A) An addition to the front of the house would not conflict with setbacks. However, a sunroom/porch at this location is not desirable for the following reasons: 1) The front offers views of the street and neighboring houses. Contrast this to the proposed back location with views of open space, mountains, and better use of sunlight. 2) A front addition does not "flow" well with the floor plan of the house, ie., the living room is located at the front, and a bedroom window is to the right of the front door. An addition may entirely restrict the only window and fresh air) for that bedroom. The living room window would also be restricted. 3) An addition at the front would require more complicated design changes (inside and out, that may not be aesthetic or "flow" as well as the proposed location) translating to higher costs. B) An addition to the south side (Lois Dr.' side) is not feasible for the following reasons: