Text · page 2 of 5
Ms. Hahn made a motion, seconded by Mr. Adrian, to approve Application # 6161. Ms. Hahn 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 – It will not • 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 # 6162 Kathleen Albee – Requesting one (1) area variance for a proposed residential addition at 4763 Crestwood Dr (Zoned R1) Kathleen Albee, homeowner, spoke on this variance. On one side of the house it was originally built with 5 foot, and then they changed it to 10 foot. She is looking to go straight back and add an addition for a primary suite and tear down an existing sunroom and rebuild it. She had a letter from the neighbor on the border and she has no objection to the project. The Board had no further questions. Findings: Mr. Kuebler made a motion, seconded by Mrs. Hahn, to approve Application # 6162. 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 – It will not • Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some feasible method other than a variance – Yes • Whether the request is substantial – No • Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district – It will not