Laserfiche WebLink
I ,F <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 />226-2025; Jarrod Thompson; 24998 Linda Dr. <br />Representatives: Jarrod Thompson, Paul Starner <br />A variance request was made for a 9 -inch reduction in the minimum required 24 -inch separation <br />between fences on a common property line. The fence was installed with a permit, but it was <br />found to be too close to the neighbor's chain-link fence. The applicant explained that they had <br />intended to maximize property use during installation but acknowledged some negligence in not <br />properly spacing the fence. The applicant offered to remove the neighbor's chain-link fence and <br />discussed efforts to manage the space between the fences. The board clarified that the variance <br />request only concerned the applicant's fence and not the neighbor's. The building department <br />confirmed that permits specify the 24 -inch requirement, and the contractor should have ensured <br />compliance. <br />The interested party commented on the narrow space between the fences and the construction <br />process, noting that the contractor built the fence from between the two fences, which surprised <br />them. A member of staff emphasized the responsibility of both parties to maintain their property, <br />whether the variance was granted or not, and advised keeping up with maintenance to avoid <br />future issues. The applicant clarified that a contractor installed the fence, and there was some <br />confusion about the property lines. They planned to address the narrow space by killing the grass <br />and possibly using gravel for landscaping. The board discussed the plans for maintenance and <br />encouraged cooperation between the neighbors. <br />Mr. Mackey moved to approve 226-2025; Jarrod Thompson; 24998 Linda Dr.; seconded by Ms. <br />Galateanu. <br />The board discussed the applicant's demonstrated need for the variance and their commitment to <br />maintaining the space between the fences according to city code. One member expressed support <br />for the variance, noting that the issue had been addressed and the fence was already up. Another <br />member praised both neighbors for working together cooperatively and handling the situation <br />respectfully, also expressing support for the variance. <br />Motion Passed: 5-0 <br />227-2025; Ethan Kollar; 5194 Dewey Rd. <br />2 <br />