>> COUNCIL MEMBER GOOD AFTERNOON, THIS IS THE APRIL 24TH, THIS IS THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING. I'LL NOW CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER AND ASK THE CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL SO WE MAY
VERIFY THE PRESENCE OF A QUORUM. >> CALLAHAN IS ABSENT. HUTCHENS. >> HERE. >> INGRAHAM. >> AYE. >> PERRY. >> HERE. >>MRIKAROVA IS ABSENT. WANG. >> HERE. >> WE HAVE FIVE MEMBERS PRESENT.
>> THANKYOU. LET THE RECORD SHOW WE DO HAVE QUORUM. WITH THAT, WE'LL PROCEED TO OUR AGENDA. A COPY OF WHICH WAS POSTED TO PUBLIC ACCESS AVAILAB MOTION TO APPROVE THIS AGENDA?
>> SO MOVED. >> SECOND. >> IT'S MOVED AND SECONDED. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION IN THE MOTION? HEARING NONE. >> AYE. >> ANY AGAINST, INDICATE BY SAYING NO. THAT MOTION PASSES AND THE AGENDA IS APPROVED. I
BELIEVE ALL THE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE SEEN A COPY OF THE MINUTES FROM THE APRIL 10, 2025, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING. >> SO MOVED. >> IS THERE A SECOND? IS THERE A DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION?
HEARING NONE, ALL INAVOR OF THE MOTION INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY ABSTENTIONS? IF YOU WEREN'T HERE, PLEASE ABSTAIN. WITH THAT, THE MOTION PASSES AND THE MINUTES FOR THE ZONING BOARD
OF ADJUSTMENT, APRIL 10, 2025, MEETING ARE APPROVED. MR. ELLIS, E THERE ANY PETITIONS OR COMMUNICATIONS? >> THERE ARE NO PETIONS OR COMMUNICATIONS THIS EVENING. >> ALL RIGHT. LET'S REVIEW THE AGENDA. I'L TALK ABOUT WHAT
DISCUSSIONS ITEMS ARE. THESE ARE ITEMS FOR THE BOARD WILL TAKE PUBLIC TESTIMONY, DELIBERATE ON AND MAKE A DECISION. AFTER THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY HAS BEEN HEARD FOR EACH DISCUSSION ITEM, IILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR
THAT AGENDA ITEM. ONCE I CLOSE, NO ADDITIONAL WILL BE TAKEN. BUT STAFF MAY ADDRESS QUESTIONS. BOARD MEMBERS WILL THEN DISCUSS AND ACT ON MOTIONS. AND THE CHAIR ONLY VOTES IN THE CASE OF
A TIE. WE HAVE ONE LAND USE REQUEST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA. AGDA ITEM 5. 5728 OLIVER AVENUE SOUTH. THIS IS A DISCUSSION ITEM. WE HAVE NO CONSENT ITEMS TO CONSIDER. AND
SO LET'S MOVE ON WITH AGENDA ITEM 5. MR. CAIER. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR PERRY, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. ITEM 5 IS
A VARIOUS REQUEST TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED INTERIOR SIDE YARD FOR THE ADDITION OF AN ATTACHED GARAGE AT 5728 OLIVER AVENUE SOUTH. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS
IN THE UN3 URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT AND BFC3OR DOOR OVERLAY DISTRICT. 7,909 SQUARE FEET IN AREA. THE EAST FRONT PROPERTY LINE CURVES OUTWARD AND
RUNS ALONG OLIVER AVENUE SOUTH APPROXIMATELY 85 FEET. THE LOT TAPERS AND NARROWS TOWARDS THE WEST REAR PROPERTY LINE WHICH RUNS APPROXIMATELY 45 FEET. THE EXISTING PRINCIPLE USE IS A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING WITH AN ATTACHED GARAGE FACING THE FRONT
LOT LINE. IMPROVEMENTS ON THE PROPERTY INCLUDE A TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING, TWO CONCRETE PATIOS, TWO AT GRADE DECKS, WALKWAYS, RETAING WALL,
AND DRIVEWAY ACCESSIBLE FROM SOUTH. THERE IS NO ALLEY. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT ADDITIONS TO THE EXISTING CENTER UK --
STRUCTURE. -- TO MATCH THE NEW GARAGE ENTRANCE. THE EXISTING STRUCTURE INCLUDES AN ATTACHED SINGLE STALL GARAGE THAT DOES NOT CURRELY CONFORM TO THE ORDINANCE'S YARD REQUIREMENTS WITH THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE STRUCTURE SLIGHTLY LESS THAN THE
REQUIRED MINIMUM FIVE FEET FROM THE INTERIOR SIDE PROPERTY LINE. THE PROPOSED ADDITION MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS FOR ATTACHED ACCESSORY USES DESIGNED FOR THE PARKING OF VEHICLES. WHICH SHALL EXTEND NO MORE THAN FIVE FEET
CLOSER TO THE FRONT LOT LINE AND THE FACADE OF THE FIRST STORY. THE WIDTH OF THE GARAGE WALL FACING THE FRONT LOT LINE DOES NOT EXCEED THE WIDTH OF THE
STRUCTURE. REDUCE THE INTERIOR SIDE SETBACK FROM FIVE FEET TO 1.2 FEET. SO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED INTERIOR SIDE YARD FROM FIVE FEET TO 1.2 FEET. AT THE TIME OF THIS HEARING, THE
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HAS RECEIVED NO PUBLIC COMMENT. THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HAS ANALYZED THE APPLICATION TO VARY THE YARD REQUIREMENTS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. CHALLENGES EXIST IN COMPLYING WITH THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE OF
CIRCUMSTANCES UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY. THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE PERSONS PRESENTLY HAVE AN INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT BASED IN ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS ALONE. THIS PARCEL DOES HE AN UNUSUAL
SHAPE AND LACKS ALLEY ACCESS, WHICH ARE SOMEAT UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES. HOWEVER, THESE CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT CREATE A PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY IN COMPLYING WITH THE ORDINANCE'S YARD REQUIREMENTS. IT'S POSSIBLE TO CONSTRUCT ADDITIONS OF AN ATY
THAT WOULD COMPLY WITH THE ORDINANCE'S YARD REQUIREMENTS. ALTERNATIVE DESIGNS COULD ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT A LARGER ATTACHED GARAGE WHILE MAINTAINING AT LEAST A FIVE-FOOT SETBACK FROM THE INTERIOR SITE PROPERTY LINE. THIS FINDING IS
NOT MET. THE PROPERTY OWNERR AUTHORIZED APPLICANT PROPOSES TO USE THE PROPERTY IN A REASONABLE MANNER THAT WILL BE IN KEEPING WITH THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE. AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE CONTINUED USE OF THE PROPERTY AS
A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING IS IN KEEPING WITH THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. BUT THE PROPOSED ADDITION DOES NOT ALIGN WITH THE APPLICABLE GLIDANCE AND POLICIES RELATED TO THE FORM. YARD CONTROLS PROVIDE FOR
ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT OF USE LAND AND LIMIT CONFLICTS AMONG LAND USES BY LIMITING THE DIMENSION AND USE OF YARDS IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE LIGHT, AIR, OPEN SPACE AND SEPARATION OF USES. YARD CONTROLS ALSO PLAY A
ROLE IN STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, DEFINING PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SPACES, AND CREATING A LANDSCAPE BUFFER FOR GROUND LEVEL RESIDENTIAL USES. THEIR REQUEST TO REDUCE YARD REQUIREMENTS TO 1.2 FEET IS UNREASONABLE CONSIDERING ALTERNATIVE DESIGN OPTIONS CAN REASONABLY COMPLY
WITH THE APPLICABLE GUIDANCE AND BUILT FORM STANDARDS OF THE ORDINANCE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THIS FINDING IS NOT MET. AND FINALLY, THE PROPOSED VARIAN WILL NOT ALTER THE
CHARACTER OF THE LOCALITYR USE OR ENJOYMENT OF OTHERS IN THE PROPERTY AND VICINITY. WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL O THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC. THE REQUEST TO
REDUCE THE REQUIRED INTERIOR SIDE YARD TO 1.2 FEET WOULD ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE LOCALITY. IF GRANTED, THE PROPOSED VARIANCE WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE. IN ADDITION
TO THE ROLE, YARD REQUIREMENTS, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND PROVIDING ADEQUATE LIGHT AND AIR, THESE REQUIREMENTS ALSO SUPPORT EMERGENCY RESPONSES BY MAINTAINING ADEQUATE SPACE BETWEEN DEVELOPMENT, ESPECIALLY ON PARCELS WITH A LACK OF ALLEY
ACCESS. THIS FINDING IS NOT MET. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDS THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ADOPT STAFF FINDINGS AND DENY THE VARIANCEEQUEST TO REDUCE
THE REQUIRED INTERIOR SIDE YARD AT 5728 OLIVER AVENUE SOUTH FROM 5 FEET TO 1.2 FEET. THANK YOU. >> THANKS FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.
ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? YES. >> THANKS, CHAIR. WHAT ABOUT THIS PROJECT IMPEDES THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THOSE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES? IT LOOKS PRETTY SIMILAR TO OTHER PROPERTIES ADJACENT TO IT AND ON
THE SAME BLOCK. WHAT ABOUT THIS IS NOT IN CHARACTER WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ACTUALLY GOING TO IMPEDE SOMEONE' HEALTH SAFETY? >> CHAIR PERRY, BOARD MEMBER, THE DISCUSSION WE'VE HAD AMONGST
ZONING STAFF IS RELATED TO EMERGENCY RESPONSE. WE DIDN'T HAVE REVIEW OF EMERGENCY RESPONSE OR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT OR ANYTHING. BUT REDUCING THE REQUIRED YARD FROM 5-FEET TO 1.2 FEET WHERE THERE'S NO ALLEY
ACCESS, I KNOW FOR OTHER PERMITTED OBSTRUCTIONS THE MOST IT COULD BE IS TWO FEET FROM THE PRERTY LINE. AND ONE REASON IS TO ALL FOR ADEQUATE ACCESS TO EMERGENCY RESPONDERS.
>> OKAY. >> YES. CHAIR PERRY, BOARD MEMBER HUTCHENS. I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS TO BEAR IN MIND, STAFF'S DOING SOMETHING ON THE ANALYSIS THAT THE OTHER PROPERTY
OWNER COULD DO SOMETHING. SO TH CONSIDERATION. IT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE OPEN ON THE OTHER PROPERTY AROUND THE STRUCTURE. SO THAT'S KIND OF ONE OF THE CONSIDERATIONS. WHICH IS WHY THAT FINDING IS DONE IN THE WAY IT IS. BUT YOU KNOW, YOU COULD CERTAINLY FIND OTHER THINGS ON
YOUR END. BUT THAT'S ONE OF THE RATIONALES BEHIND STAFF'S THOUGHT PROCESS. >> CAN I ASK A FOLLOW UP THEN? >> ABSOLUTELY. >> ARE YOU ABLE TO GIVE YOUR
LAPTOP TO PULL UP THE PLOT ESSENTIALLY. I THINK THE ADJACENT PROPERTY IS MUCH CLOSER. AM I WRONG? >> CHAIR PERRY, BOARD MEMBER, THIS -- >> DO YOU HAVE THE PLAN VIEW OF IT? >> YEAH. I'LL HAVE TO USE TS
OTHER GADGET. OKAY. >> MY CURIOSITY HITS ME BECAUSE THERE'S ANOTHER ACCESS ON THE
OTHER SIDE OF THE HOUSE. SO IF IT'S ABOUT ACCESS, THERE'S ACCESS. JUST ABOUT AS MUCH AS ANYBODY NEARBY.
>> IS THAT VISIBLE FOR YO >> YEAH. ESSENTIALLY I'M JUST MAKING THE CASE THA I'M CURIOUS WHY IN AN EMERGENCY RESPONSE CONSIDERATION, I HEAR YOU ON THAT, THE I BELIEVE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY HAS PLENTY WIDE
ENOUGH WAY FOR EMERGENCY ACCESS AND RESPONSE. IT'S VERY SIMILAR TO THE ONE JUST TO THE UTH OF IT. >> YES, IT IS. OKAY. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAF
I SEE NONE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> WE MAY HAVE YOU UP AGAIN. LET'S OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICATION? SUCH AS THE APPLICANT. >> YES, SIR.
>> OKAY. IF YOU COULD GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. >> GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS MAR
OLIVER AVENUE SOUTH. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. G AHEAD. >> THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE MY COUNTER POINT TO THE STAFF FINDINGS. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK BEN CRIER WHO HAS BEEN EXTREMELY PROFESSIONAL AND HELPFUL IN NAVIGATING THIS PROCESS. I'M THE ONLY ONE HERE,
BUT IN AN EFFORT TO BE RESPECTFUL OF ERYONE'S TIME, I MADE COMMENTS WITHIN THE VARIANCE STAFF REPORT PROVIDED BYBEN. I FELT THIS WAS THE MOST EFFICIENT AND ORGANIZED WAY TO PROVIDE TALKING POINTS FOR SUPPORT OF MY PROJECT. I HAVE EPARED HANDOUTS FOR THE BOARD
TO FOLLOW ALONG. COULD I PASS THOSE OUT? >> SURE. IF YOU COULD HAND THEM TO THE CLERK.
>> I'LL BE ADDRESSING TWO AREAS WITHIN THE ANALYSIS SECTI OF THE REPORT AND WILL BE READING THE FINDING COMMENTS AND PROVIDING A REBUTTAL FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THE SECD HANDOUT PROVIDES EXAMPLES OF SIMILAR PROJECTS. I WILL CONCLUDE BY BRIEFLY REVWING
THOSE EXAMPLES. WHEN EVERYONE GETS IT, COULD YOU PLEASE TURN TO THE BLUE TAB. AND IT'S ON THE BACK SIDE OF THAT BLUE TAB OR THE CONTENT THAT I'LL BE REFERENCING. >> MM-HMM. >> THE BLUE IS JUST HIGHLIGHTED
COPY FROM BEN'S REPORT OF THE FINDINGS. YARD CONTROL PROVIDE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND USE OF LAND AND TO MINIMIZE CONTENT -- USE OF YARD IN ORDER TO PROVIDE
ADEQUATE LIGHT, AIR. YARD CONTR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT. CREATING A LANDSCAPE BUFFER FOR GROUND AND LEVEL RESIDENTIAL USES. THE REQUEST TO REDUCE YARD REQUIREMENTS TO 1.2 FEET IS UNREASONABLE CONSIDERING ALTERNATIVE DESIGN OPTIONS CAN
REASONABLY COMPLY WITH THE APPLICATION GUIDANCE AND BUILT FORM STANDARDS OF THE ORDINANCE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE FINDING IS NOT MET. MY RESPONSES THOSE COMMENTS. NO CONFLICTS WITH OUR PROPERTIES HAVE BEEN IDENFIED. IN FACT, MY NEIGHBOR
AT 5736 OLIVER APPLIED FOR THE SAME VARIANCE AND WAS GRANTED PERMISSION. I RECEIVED THE NOTICE AND I HAD NO REASON TO OBJECT. NOW I'M ASKING THE SAME CONSIDERATION IN MAKING IMPROVE
WATER MANAGEMENT WILL NOT BE ALTERED. CURRENTLY WATER FLOWS FROM NORTH TO SOUTH IN SWELL. THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL TOPOGRAPHY OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN 1947 AND CONTINUES TO FUNCTION PROPERLY
TO THIS DATE. ALTERNATIVE DESIGN OPTIONS ARE NOT AVAILABLE TO ACCOMMODATE A STANDARD TWO-CAR SIDE BY SIDE GARAGE CONSIDERING THE UNIQUE PARAMETERS OF MY LOT. THERE IS NO WAY TO PROVIDE A TWO-CAR GARAGE. WE'VE IDENTIFIED
ARCHITECTURELY AND WITH A SURVEY THAT WE HAVE NO OTHER OPTIONS. THE PROJECT WILL NOT IMPACT AIR FLOW. OUR WEDGE SHAPE ALLOWS MORE AIR FLOW THAN TYPICAL. SIMILARLY, LHT WILL ALSO NOT BE AFFECTED AS A RESULT BECAUSE OUR HOUSES ARE SET ASKEW OF THE
TRADITIONAL EAST-WEST GRIDLINES. UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS OF OUR LOT AT SUPPORT THE USE OF A VARIANCE. THERE IS NO ALLEY ACCESS. THIS IS VERY UNIQUE CONDITION IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
ALLEY ACCS ALLOWS FOR SETBACK REDUCTIONS. ZONING ORDINANCE HAS DIFFERENT STANDARDS. THE INTERIOR SIDE YARD REQUIREMENTS MAY BE REDUCED BY ONE FOOT WHEN THE ENTIRE ACCESSORY BUILDING IS LOCATED ON THE REAR 40-FEET, AND
THE REAR 20% OF THE LOT, WHICHEVER IS GREATER. PROVIDED THAT THE ACCESSORY BUILDING SHOULD BE LOCATED NOT LESS THAN -- OF THE PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE OF THE ADJOINING LOT. THE UNIQUESS OF THE LOT AND NO
ALLEY ACCESS PRECLUDES US. WE ARE ONE OF THE ONLY BLOCKS IN ARMITAGE THAT HAVE WEDGE-SHAPED BLOCKS. THIS IS A UNIQUE CHARACTERISTIC. I'M NOT BASING
THIS VARIANCE REQUEST ON ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS. TO THE CONTRARY. I'M PROPOSING INVESTING A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY INTO OUR HOME. IF THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS APPROVED, THIS WILL ONL ADD VALUE TO OUR HOME AND THOSE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE ONE-CAR
GARAGE. IN 1947 WHEN OUR HOUSE WAS BUILT, MOST FAMILIES HAD ONE CAR. -- ACCOMMODATE MODERN NEEDS. THE MAJORITY OF HOMES IN TWO CAR GARAGES. THERE IS
CLEARLY AN ACCOMMODATION WHICH I'M NOT ABLE TO UTILIZE. EVERY QUARTER LAW DOES NOT APPLY TO EVERY PROPERTY. THE VARIANCE PROCESS PROVIDES THE BALANCE TO THIS PROCESS. BY DEFINITION, VARIANCES ARE INTENDED TO
PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY WITHIN THE RIGID FRAMEWORK OF ZONING LAWS. RESPONDS TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES. THEY ENSURE THAT ZONING REGULATIONS DO NOT BECOME OVERLY BURDENSOME. EXAMPLES OF
THE ARMITAGE NEIGHBORHOOD IS OUR HOPE THATHIS IS DEEMED A REASONABLE DEVELOPMENT. THE REQUEST TO REDUCE WOULD ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE LOCALITY. IF GRANTED, THE
PROPOSED VARIANCE WOULD BE -- OR NEARBY PROPERTIES. IN ADDITION, THESE REQUIREMENTS ALSO SUPPORT EMERGENCY RESPONSE BY MAINTAINING ADEQUATE SPACE BETWEEN THE DEVELOPMENT,
ESPECIALLY ON PARCELS WITH A LACK OF ALLEY ACCESS. THIS FINDING IS NOT MET. THE PLICATION FOR VARIANCE WOULD NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OR BE DETRINTAL TO MY NEIGHBORS. MY NEIGHBOR TWO HOUSES SOUTH OF MY ADDRESS
APPLIED FOR THE SAME VARIANCE I'M APPLYING F AND WAS GRANTED. THERE ARE NO NEGATIVE RESPONSES FROM THE NEIGHBORS. AND THE CONSTCTION HAS NOT EXHIBITED ANY DETRIMENT TO THE QUALITY OF LIFE AS A RESULT. HEALTH. NO ADVERSE HEALTH ISSUES HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED. SAFETY.
THEREAS NO THREAT TO SAFETY OR ACCESS FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE. LIKE MY NEIGHBOR, I HAVE A FULL GATE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MY PROPERTY WHICH PROVIDES ACCESS TO LIFE SAFETY PERSONNEL. WE'VE HAD TREE TRIMMERS USE OUR YARD
FOR ACCESS BECAUSE OUR NEIGHBORS YARDS DO NOT PROVIDE EASY ACCESS. ADEQUATE LIGHT ANDAIR. THE WEDGE SHAPE OF OUR LOT PROVIDES MORE SPACE IN BETWE BUILDINGS BECAUSE IT GETS LARGER FROM BACK TO FRONT. THIS IS CLEARLY VISIBLE IN THE FOLLOWING
PHOTOS. THE FOLLOW PHOTOS SW MY NEIGHBORS CONDITIONS AND MY PROPOSED ADDITION. THE NEXT SHEET I REFERENCE THE HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY MAP SHOWING THE PROXIMITY OF MY PROPERTY TO THE EXAMPLE PROPERTY THAT WAS GRANTED THE SAME VARIANCE. MY
PROPERTY IS AT 5728, AND MY NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY IS TWO LOTS TO THE SOUTH AT 5736. THE NEXT SHEET SHOWS THE EXAMPLE OF THE PROPOSED GARAGE THAT WILL BE A MIRROR IMAGE OF WHAT MY NEIGHBOR
HAS CONSTRUCTED. THE NEXT PAGE. THIS PHOTO SHOWS THE TWO-CAR ATTACHED GAGE ADDITION WHICH IS EXACTLY THE SAME CONDITION A AIR MOVEMENT AND LIGHT EXPOSURE WHICH IS UNIQUE TO OUR BLK. IF
YOU LOOK CLOSELY AT THE ABOVE PICTURE, THE OWNER BUILT A TWO-PLUS GARA. MOST LIKELY WITHIN THE FIVE-FOOT VARIANCE. WAS GRANTED PERMISSION EVEN WITHIN THE BONUS SPACE. I AM
REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ACCOMMODATE THE MINIMUM INTERIOR DIMENSIONS PRACTICAL FOR A TWO-CAR GARAGE. NEXT PAGE SHOWS A PHOTO OF THE CLOSER VIEW OF THE GARAGE IN PROXIMITY TO TH PROPERTY LINE. THE NEXT PHOTO
SHOWS THE DIMENSIONS FM THE CORNER OF THEIR GARAGE TO THE PROPERTY LINE. WITH A VARIANCE OF ABOUT PLUS OR MINUS ONE INCH. THE PHOTO ON THE BOTTOM SHOWS THE GATE ON MY NEIGHBOR'S PROPER WHICH ALLOWS FOR EMERGENCY ACCESS FOR PERSONNEL
AND UTILITIES. THE NEXT PAGE SHOWS MY FOUR-FOOT GATE WHICH ALSO ALLOWS FOR UNINCUMBERED ACCESS FOR EMERGENCY RESPONDERS. THE SECOND HANDOUT THAT I PREPARED ARE JUST OTHER EXAMPLES
OF HOM WITHIN MY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT FROM LOOKING AT THE STREET AND NOT GOING ON THE PROPERTY PHYSICALLY TO MEASURE ALSO EXHIBIT ADDITIONS SIMILAR TO MINE THAT ARE WITHIN THE FIVE-FOOT SETBACK. FIRST ONE IS
AT 2105 57th STREET, TWO-CAR ATTACHED GARAGE WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE PROPERTY SETBACK. THE SECOND PAGE IS AT 211657th STREET. THERE'S A NEW THREE-CAR GARAGE WITHIN THE FIVE-FOOT SETBACK. THE NEXT PAGE IS AN
AERIAL VIEW OF THAT SAME PROPERTY. NEXT PAGE 2216 57th STREET SOUTH. TWO-CAR ATTACHED, DETACHED ADDITION. IT'S NOT ON THE ALLEY WITH LESS THAN FIVE-FOOT SETBACK. THE NEXT PAGE
SHOWS THE STREET VIEW AND A LITTLE BETTER VIEWPOINT OF THAT LOT LINE ENCROACHMENT. NEXT PAGE, 5445 AND 5441-NEWTON AVENUE SOUTH SHOWING EXISTING SINGLE CAR GARAGES WITH NEW CONSTRUCTION ADDITIONAL TWO-CAR
DETACHED GARAGES. THIS SHOWS HOW LOTS ON ALLEYS HAVE AN APPROVED STIPULATION THAT DOES NOT APPLY TO MY UNIQUE LOT. 5710 AND 5714-NTON AVENUE SOUTH SHOWING TWO CAR ATTACHED ADDITIONS WITHIN THE FIVE-FO SETBACK. IT
DOES NOT APPEAR THAT THIS CONFIGURATION SHOWSAIR, LIGHT, STORMWATER OR 50-FOOT SERVICES. TWO US CAR ADDITION AND A BONUS ROOM SIMILAR TO MY PROJECT. THE TWO PLUS CAR SPACE APPEARS TO PUSH THE ADDITION WITHIN TWO FEET OF THE PROPERTY
LINE. 5710 AND 5714, THE NEXT TWO OR THREE PAGES ARE JUST ADDITIONAL ANGLES SHOWING THAT CONDITION. AND THEN LAST EXAMPLE
IS 5824 QUEEN AVENUE SOUTH, TWO CAR ATTHED GARAGE ADDITION AERIAL VIEW SHOWING WHAT APPEARS TO BE ZERO LOT SETBACK. THAT IS A PICTURE OF A POOL IN THE BACKYARD. THE FINAL TWO PHOTOS ARE SHOWING A DIFFERENT AERIAL VIEW AND THEN THE STREET VIEW OF
THAT CONDITION WHICH AGAIN APPEARS TO BE A ZERO LOT LINE CONDITION. I'VE BEEN IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY OVER 30 YEARS AND I FULLY UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR BUILDING CODES AND BUILDING STANDARDS. I ALSO
UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF VARIANCES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT ARE EXPERIENCED. I'VE APPLIED FOR THIS VARIANCE AND WAS RECOMMENDED TO BE DENIED IN THE INITIAL REVIEW PROCESS. I HAVE INVESTED A SUBSTANTIAL AMOU OF TIME AND MONEY TO GET
THIS PROJECT TO THIS POI AFTER WITNESSING LIKE FOR LIKE PROJECTS BEING BUILDED AND COMPLETED IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. I HAVE PROVIDED AN EXPLANATION TO ALL THE STAFF COMMENTS AND SHOWN EXAMPLES OF EXACT AND SIMILAR
CONDITIONS TWO HOUSES AWAY AND WITHIN MY NEIGHBORHOOD I HOPE THAT THE INFORMATION I HAVE PRESENTED TO YOU THIS EVENI PROVIDES ADDITIONAL INSIGHT AND CONTEXT TO SUPPORT THE PROJECT MOVING FORWARD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.
>> THANKS FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. ANY QUESTIONS OF MR. HENESSY? YEAH. >> I JUST WANTE TO CLARIFY SOMETHING. IN THE STAFF REPORT FOR VARIANCE, CHALLENGE ONE, THAT WAS SET, YOU KNOW, IT IS POSSIBLE TO CONSTRUCT ADDITIO
THAT WOULD COMPLY WITH AN ORDINANCE YARD REQUIREMENTS. I WAS CURIOUS TO HEAR YOUR RESPONSE ABOUT THAT. >> YEAH. SO IN ORDER TO GET A TWO-CAR GARAGE YOU NEED AT LEAST 20 FEET WIDE TO DO THAT. WE CANNOT DO TT WITHOUT THE VARIANCE. AND TO DO ANYTHING LESS THAN 20 FEET IS NOT A TWO
CAR GARAGE AT THAT POINT. IT'S A ONE CAR GARAGE AND IT BECES FINANCIALLY NOT FEASIBLE TO INVEST THAT KIND OF MONEY WITHOUT HAVING THE ABILITY TO PUT TWO CARS IN THERE. >> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES. >> THANKS, CHAIR PERRY. THANKS
FOR YOUR REPORT. SUPER DETAILED. I THINK YOU MAKE A GOOD CASE. MORE COMMENT THAN A QUESTION. BUT GOOD CASE. APPRECIATE IT. >> THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE? I DON'T SEE ANYONE.HANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT. I REALLY APPRECIATE IT.
>> OKAY. SINCE THIS IS THE ONLY PERSON IN THE AUDIENCE, WE WL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND COMMENT. I'D ACTUALLY LIKEO
ASK STAFF A QUESTION IF I COULD. MR. HENNESSEY IS SAYING HE CAN'T REALLY BUILD WHAT HE NEEDS TO -- HE WOULD LIKE TO, I SHOULDN'T SAY NEED. THIS TWO CAR GARAGE.
STAFF IS SAYING THAT IT IS ACTUALLY POSSIBLE TO DO THAT. CAN YOU HELP US FIGURE THAT OUT FOR THE QUESON. STAFF'S
CONSIDERATIO WAS YOU COULD MEET THE FIVE-YARD REQUIRED SETBACK BY COMPROMISING LIVING SPACE. BY ALTERING THE DESIGN THAT WAY. >> OKAY. >> YEAH. >> ALL RIGHT. AND JUS AS A REMINDER TO US, THE REQUIREMENT IN A SINGLE FAMILY HOME IS ONE
CAR OR IS IT ANY R? ANY PARKING SPOT? >> NO. NO PARKING REQUEMENT. >> THERE'S NO PARKING REQUIREMENT. OKAY. >> RIGHT. >> OKAY. YUP. THAT CHANGE. YES.
>> I'LL TAKE A WHACK AT A MOTION IF YOU'RE INTERESTED. >> SU. >> NOTWITHSTANDING STAFF FINDINGS, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE REQUEST. VARIANCE FINDING NUMBER ONE WITH THE FINDINGS, THE PARCEL JUST
LIKE THE STAFF REPORT CALLS OUT HAS AN INUSUAL SHAPE. LACKS ALLEY ACCESS. WHICH IT SAYS IT'S NOT A UNIQUE OF CIRCUMSTANCE. I WOULD SAY IT IS A PRETTY UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE COUPLE THAT WITH THE CURVATURE OF THE LOT LINE.
LARGE TREE ASSOCIATED AND THE HOME'S POSITION ON THE PROPERTY. IT IS SKEWED 1940s BUILD. SKEWED TO ONE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. I THINK ALL THOSE THREE THINGS P TOGETHER IS A UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE FOR THAT PROPERTY.
FINDING TWO ABOUT THE -- I LOST HERE. SPIRIT AND INTENT. I THINK IT IS IN THE SPIRIT AND -- I DON'T THINK IT FLIES IN THE FACE
OF THE INTENT OF THAT REGULATION BECAUSE I DON'T THINK CHANGING IT TO WHAT HE'S ASKING FOR IS ACTUALLY GOING TO DO WHAT THE VARIANCE OR WHAT THE CODE IS ASKING FOR IT TO DO. I THINK THERE STILL IS ROOM FOR THE SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS. I DON'T THINK IT IMPEDES HIS NEIGHBORS IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM. AND I
THINK FOR FINDING THREE, I THINK IT'S COMPLETELY REASONABLE TO DO WHAT HE'S DOING. I DON'T THINK IT AFFECTS THE CHARACTER WHATSOEVER. LOOKING AT GOOGLE MAPS AS WE'RE SITTING HERE. JUST AS THE APPLICANT STATES, THERE ARE NUMEROUS PROPERTIES IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD ESSENTIALLY
IDENTICAL TO WHAT HE'S ASKING FOR HERE. THOSE ARE MY THREE ATTEMPTS. AND I'D LOVE TO HEAR ANYBODY'S COMMENTS ON IT. >> OKAY. SO THAT'S A MOTION. BEFORE WE GET COMMENT, IS THERE A SECOND? >> I'LL SECOND.
>> AND THERE'S A SECOND. AND I WOULD ASK FOR COMMENTS ON THE MOTION. IF THERE ARE ANY. AND HEARING NONE, I WILL ASK THE
CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL. >> I THOUGHT THERE'D BE MORE COMMEN. EXCUSE ME. BOARD MEMBER EICHOLZ. >> AYE. >> HUTCHENS. >> AYE. >> INGRAHAM. >> AYE.
>> WANG. >> AYE. >> CHAIR PERRY. >> I DON'T VOTE. >> OH, THAT'S RIGHT. IN CASE OF A TIE. SO WE HAVE FOUR AYES AND ZERO NAYS. EXCUSE ME. >> GREAT. SO YOUR REQUEST IS
APPROVED. GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR PROJECT. THANKS FOR COMING DOWNTOWN. >> OKAY. GREAT. AGAIN, THANKS
FOR COMING DOWN. LET'S SEE. ARE THERE ANY OTHER MATTERS TO COME BEFORE THE BOARD? SEEING NONE, OUR NEXT MEETING IS MAY 8TH OF THIS YEAR. I THERE A MOTION TO ADJOURN?
>> SO MOVED. >> SECOND. >> AND IT'S SECONDED. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. >> WE ARE ADJOURNED.