Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the After The Fact Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board denies after‑the‑fact variance for large rear patio after neighbors and members question permitting
Summary
The Board denied BOA 2026-011, an after‑the‑fact variance request to allow a large rear paver patio to remain. Board members raised questions about size, contractor/HOA advice and precedent; a neighbor letter warned against rewarding unpermitted work.
The Board of Adjustment on June 18 declined to approve an after‑the‑fact variance sought by Avnish Patel that would have allowed a 124‑by‑20 paver patio (about 2,480 sq ft) to remain within reduced side and rear setbacks.
Patel told the board he sought HOA approval before construction and said a contractor advised him a city permit was not required. Board members reviewed the packet, including a neighbor’s written objection, and pressed for why the patio was so deep and whether a smaller layout could have met the setback rules. Staff cited the submitted survey showing roughly 21.4 feet from the back of the house to the property line and noted the patio depth created a 4‑foot encroachment into the required setback.
Several members said after‑the‑fact approvals can set an uneven standard and expressed reluctance to approve work constructed without prior permits. One board member said, "If we would have reviewed this at a time an application was done, we probably... would not have voted for it." A motion to approve the variance failed; the chair recorded a three‑to‑two split and stated the motion did not pass. The board advised Patel to consult counsel and consider modifying the work or pursuing a permitted alternative.
