Text · page 5 of 7
• Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some feasible method other than a variance – No • 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 the applicant All members voted in favor of the motion. GRANTED Application # 6175 Jason Converse – Requesting one (1) area variance for a proposed covered patio at 3659 Delilah Ln (Zoned R2) Jason Converse, homeowner, spoke on this variance. He is proposing a covered patio in his backyard. The variance is required because one of the posts come within 10ft of an above ground pool. It would be about 5ft away from the pool. He talked to all of his surrounding neighbors and has written proof that none of them object to the project. There are no environmental hazards or any power lines that this project would affect. This would be a 21ft by 16ft structure so they can have shade in the yard to entertain. The Board had no further questions. Findings: Mr. Kuebler made a motion, seconded by Ms. Mika, to approve Application # 6175. Mr. Kuebler 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 • 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 variance All members voted in favor of the motion. GRANTED