Board of Adjustment Documents 1990

Home Browse Search

Ross asked Mrs. Hourly if she would be willing to work the applicant concerning the fence. Hourly stated she hoped that the details would be worked out. Her concern is if this is not part of the approval then she has no control on this issue at all at a later point in time. I think we can work out the type of fencing, whether it should be shrubs instead of fencing, but I do hope that you would make it some kind of condition that there be something put in then leave the details to us. Oshiro stated that in the planning of the building the addition starts at the back of the existing house and goes back 30 feet. The main addition faces their back yard. When we designed the house we also placed the windows so that they didn't create a privacy issue. We tried to keep the windows toward the west. Hourly and I have discussed the fence issue and she know that I really don't want to put up a fence because of the neighborhood, but I am willing to work with her to find something that we can both agree upon. Ross moved to approve the variance with no conditions, seconded by Smith. By Roll Call Vote Motion was denied 3-1 with Sears voting no. After a lengthy discussion regarding whether the condition ot a fence be placed on the variance and if the board was responsible to do this or not. Board felt that the issue was up to each of the individuals. The board hoped that each of the individuals would work with each other to come up with a solution to this situation. Ross moved to approve the variance with no conditions, seconded by Smith. By Roll Call Vote Motion Passed 4-0. B. ANGELA S. CLARK - SETBACK VARIANCE Chairman Sears opened the public hearing. in the Louisville Times June 13, 1990. Notice was published APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION: Angela S. Clark 1014 Meadow ct. Clark stated she is requesting a variance to construct a 34' x 15' ground level wood patio at- tached to her home. This proposed construction would encroach into the 20' setback as per city ordinance, but does not go against Summerhill covenants. I realize that the planning office is not recon@ending this variance so I am willing to reduce -the variance from 20' to 10'. Chairman Sears asked if there is anyone that would like to speak in favor of or in opposition to this proposal? None At this time Wood entered a letter from Mr. McDaniels regarding the deck that is being proposed and his support of the variance.