Text · page 2 of 7
Findings: Ms. Falkiewicz made a motion, seconded by Mrs. Hahn, to approve Application # 6171. Ms. Falkiewicz reviewed the area variance criteria as follows: • Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties – No • Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some feasible method other than a variance – No, this is a very irregular lot • Whether the request is substantial – It is not • Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district – No • Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created – Yes, but the balancing test favors granting the area variances. All members voted in favor of the motion. GRANTED Application # 6172 Richard Tripp – Requesting two (2) area variance for a proposed attached garage at 1258 West Arnold Dr. (Zoned R1) Greg Tripp, son of the homeowner, spoke on this variance. He is looking to add an attached garage to his parents’ home. Last year his father fell in the driveway taking out this garbage. He is in his 80’s. With an attached garage, he would not have to go outside to take out his garbage. They also want to fit a car in there as well. It will not negatively impact anyone’s view of the lake; it will be behind the house. The Board had no further questions. Findings: Mr. Adrian made a motion, seconded by Mr. Kuebler, to approve Application # 6172. Mr. Adrian reviewed the area variance criteria as follows: • Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties – No there will not, it’s the last property adjacent to the lake • Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some feasible method other than a variance – No it can not • Whether the request is substantial – No it is not