Laserfiche WebLink
Board of Adjustment <br />Meeting Minutes <br />March 19, 2014 <br />Page 8 of 16 <br />Staff Presentation of Facts and Issues: <br />McCartney summarized the request for a building separation variance at 623 Garfield: <br />. Background: <br />a. Owner wants to add to the existing house <br />b. House originally built in 1945, considered historic by age <br />c. Existing detached garage is located 3.5 feet from the house <br />d. Louisville Municipal Code requires buildings to be located 5 feet <br />from each other <br />e. Owner would like to retain house and gara . therefore a building <br />separation variance is required <br />▪ Staff finds all criteria, which are applicable, are in c nce. <br />▪ Staff recommends approval of this request. <br />Questions from Board to Staff: <br />Fuller asked if there are any drawings for us to re <br />McCartney stated variances are not guided by„ ecific development 4 ite plans are <br />not always required. <br />Applicant Presentation and questions from the »rd tg »'applicant: <br />Graham Bailhache, owner, presented his proposal stating he would like to keep the <br />existing house and garage. He add i plans to do addition also involve removing <br />the driveway from Garfield to have ®aded acc He stated his intent is to <br />maintain the Old Town Character. <br />Stuart asked if a variance Id be re <br />McCartney stated the <br />then be considere <br />Ewy asked if the <br />McCartney stated it w <br />He adde <br />re attached. <br />rn setbac` ' °variance because they would <br />on (HPC) reviewed this request. <br />than 50% of the roof being removed. <br />HPC at subcommittee. <br />s released :' e <br />Publ;=`sent in i ii "tion` ' •plication: <br />Ful : vad an email fr .etty eck who was in opposition of the variance request <br />due to - size of house ough Old Town. <br />Public Pr- ., in Favor o a plication: <br />Doug Grush; j Garfield .proves of the redevelopment and believes it fits in the <br />neighborhood. <br />Public Hearing CIo Board Discussion: <br />Malmquist stated he did not see any issues with this request and does not believe the <br />opposed email has any specific issues with this request. <br />Stuart agreed and believes all criteria have been met. <br />Malmquist made a motion to approve. Ewy seconded the motion. <br />