Laserfiche WebLink
I 3O <br />Board members discussed the request, noting that the homeowner's need was reasonable and the <br />variance was minimal. It was agreed that the variance aligned with the existing structure, and no <br />objections were raised. One member emphasized the shape of the lot, which narrowed toward the <br />back, explaining that a conforming addition would result in a very small space. Another member <br />expressed support for the addition, commending the applicant's decision to add first -floor living, <br />and indicated their approval as well. <br />Motion Passed: 5-0 <br />215-2025; Justin Ulrich; 27905 Blossom Ln. <br />Representatives: Justin Ulrich; Phil Klonowski from Classic Decks <br />A pool deck project was presented with a two -foot variance request for a side yard setback. The <br />code required a 10 -foot setback, while the applicant proposed 8 feet to preserve a tree and <br />maintain a functional deck design. The building department had discussed the project and noted <br />the importance of keeping the tree. The applicant emphasized the desire to avoid cutting the tree <br />down and the benefits of its natural shade. <br />Board members asked about communication with neighbors, construction progress, and the <br />purpose of the 10 -foot setback. The applicant confirmed no objections from neighbors and <br />discussed challenges related to the lot's shape and deck layout. City staff explained the intent of <br />the setback requirement, primarily for privacy and maintaining space between structures. The <br />applicant clarified that the proposed layout would allow room for the tree to grow without <br />damage. <br />Mr. Mackey moved to approve 215-2025; Justin Ulrich; 27905 Blossom Ln.; seconded by Mr. <br />Papotto. <br />Board members discussed the project, with one member acknowledging the applicant's <br />thoughtful approach to preserving the free while maintaining an aesthetically pleasing design. <br />The member expressed support for the project, noting it would enhance the property and provide <br />better space for family activities. Another board member agreed, emphasizing the aesthetic <br />benefits and the tree preservation. They also highlighted the applicant's cooperation with the <br />building department and their awareness of the variance requirements. Overall, the board was in <br />favor of granting the variance. <br />Motion Passed: 5-0 <br />ADJOURNMENT <br />With no further business before the board, the meeting adjourned at 7:26 p.m. <br />2 <br />