City of Bloomington, Indiana Board of Zoning Appeals, 23 Jan 2020

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: Board of Zoning Appeals, January 23, 2020

Description

meeting packet: https://bloomington.in.gov/onboard/meetingFiles/download?meetingFile_id=5365

A

To order the city of bloomington board of zoning appeals for january, the 23rd.

A

2020 call roll please here here here: okay, we have a set of minutes to be.

A

Approved from november the from november 20 19, I will entertain a motion approval.

B

Of minutes from november 21st 2019 have a second okay vote. Please! Yes, yes, yes,.

B

Yes, yes, he was a sow abstain, since I have no context for one of those minutes.

C

Are accurate or not so I abstain thanks. Okay, no, he wasn't. He.

A

Was he wasn't here so, okay, it's it's a little hard to hear you carmen. That's.

A

A

Yeah, okay reports, resolutions and communications. I.

A

Just want to recognize first that we have brad whistler with us this evening.

A

He is the alternate for planning, so we will see him from time to time. So thank.

A

You for joining us this evening and flavia burrell will be the new plan. The.

A

Designated planning representative on bca for the coming year.

A

Planning commission. Thank you. Thank you. Any of any reports, resolutions to.

A

Communications, no, no okay, first thing we have to do is elect.

A

Officers for this year, I will entertain a motion for president president. I would.

A

Accept that nomination so could we have roll call? Please? Yes? Yes, yes, yes,.

A

Okay, nomination, for vice president, I nominate joe throckmorton for vice.

D

President bc, a second okay leave a little please. Yes, yes, yes,.

C

Yes, okay, we're we're set for 2020 the petitions that will be continued to.

A

February 2020, the only petition is a a 41 19 judy.

A

Baker and david holdeman and petitions withdrawn rv 17-19 city of bloomington.

A

And you v v 31 19 rimrock companies. The petitions will be hearing.

A

This evening, are you v, 26 19, kimberly carballo.

A

V: 44 19 randall mclaughlin and a a 45 19 tareq con and without further.

A

Ado, we are ready to hear the staff report for the first petition. Please.

E

Thank you. This petition is for the property located at 1300, south okay. This.

E

Petitions for the property located at 1300, south lincoln, located in the bryan.

E

Park neighborhood the 5,000 277 square foot property has been developed with a.

E

Once story single-family residence with an accessory structure, along with along.

E

The south or west property line, the property and all surrounding properties.

E

Are zoned within the residential core district? Each of the surrounding.

E

Properties have been developed with single-family dwellings, the petitioner.

E

Is requesting a use variance to allow the raising of livestock to goats in the.

E

Residential core district, the petitioner currently has two goats on the property.

E

The property has a fenced-in backyard and an accessory structure which is used.

E

For the raising of the goats, the property widths along the east and west.

E

Property lines are 40 feet and 132 feet along the north and south property lines.

E

Crops and pasture ajiz, not an approved use in the rc district livestock are.

E

Only permitted to be kept in residential estate district with upon meeting.

E

Special conditions, eligible re properties must be meet a minimum of 5.

E

Acres pasture shall be limited to one animal unit per acre. Goats are.

E

Considered half an animal unit structures containing livestock or.

E

Livestock waste must meet a setback from a front property line of a minimum of 75.

E

Feet and 50 feet from side property lines. The area highlighted here in red.

E

Is the approximate area of the goats that the goats are able to utilize the.

E

Goats are eliminated by a fenced in back yard and have access to the accessory.

E

Structure the department finds that there are negative impacts to public.

E

Health and safety of the community close proximity, animal waste is a put.

E

Potential public health risk to surrounding residents the you do allows.

E

Livestock to be kept in the ari district, only once special conditions have been.

E

Met the property: this property is less than eighth of an acre and is.

E

Significantly, smaller than the required minimum of 5 acres for maintaining.

E

Livestock and does not allow for the one acre of a dish of dedicated pastures.

E

Additionally, structures associated with raising of livestock are required to.

E

Meet minimum setbacks from front inside property lines. The current structure is.

E

Set back zero feet from the western side, property line and 14 feet from the south.

E

Side, property line and 5 feet from the north front property line the size of.

E

The property does not adequately allow for livestock and livestock waste to be.

E

Located safely away from surrounding residents, the department finds adverse.

E

Impacts associated with the proposed use variants, the site sounds smells, etc of.

E

Livestock are not customary in small lot: kerbin residential neighborhoods, the.

E

These nuisances could contribute to the loss and value of adjacent properties.

E

The department has received several letters, letters of support from local.

E

Residents that have been included in the packet as well as three calls in support.

E

And one in opposition, the department finds an open condition on the property.

E

Which would cause the need for this variance? The property was developed with.

E

A single-family dwelling, which is the intended use in the rc district, the yard.

E

And primary structure were developed with single-family residence and act.

E

Their activities in mind and can easily support those activities continued and.

E

Continued to support those activities, the department finds that strict.

E

Application of the terms of the you do will not constitute as an unnecessary.

E

Hardship, if applied to this property, the size of the property, is not sufficient.

E

To safely raise livestock, according to the you, do parcels within the rc.

E

District were not intended to host a livestock, and this parcel could easily.

E

Continue to operate as a single-family residence.

E

Okay, sorry, the department finds to that straight below that's the same one: okay,.

E

Sorry about them, the department finds that this proposal does meet some of the.

E

Goals of the in policies of the comprehensive plan, the comprehensive.

E

Plan states that urban agriculture should be supported and not hindered by.

E

Local regulation comprehensive plan calls for assessment and possible.

E

Creation of permitted agricultural uses within non agricultural zoned districts.

E

The this petition would allow for exactly that as the comprehensive plan.

E

Has identified this property as a mixed herb in residential area? It finally.

E

Policy 3.8 of the comprehensive plan gives guidance to promote and protect.

E

Local food culture in bloomington food system, this petition would purr to.

E

Promote local food system, as the goats are capable of producing fertilizer and.

E

Other agricultural uses, such as milk for human consumption, based on the written.

E

Findings of the staff report, the department recommends the adoption of the proposed findings and the denial of uv 2619.

A

Please state your name kim car by yo. Do you swear to tell the truth the whole.

A

Truth and nothing but the truth. I do live up to 20 minutes to present.

A

Your petition, okay, thank you I'll, not re present the materials that I.

F

Brought up when, when this petition came the first time, just as a reminder that.

F

The considerations for space are very different for dwarf and pygmy goats than.

F

They are for full-size, goats, so, according to stories guide, which is sort.

F

Of the bar setting for this particular animal care, the space is sufficient. It's.

F

It's actually several times more than the than the minimum space that they.

F

Recommend and I understand that the city needed to follow up with the same.

F

Arguments that it had before, but it is my understanding that the you do was.

F

Adjusted was amended to consider animals by size, in other words, by height and.

F

Weight, rather than simply by species, given that these animals are smaller.

F

Than many of the large dogs that were regularly walked by my house, I hope that.

F

That will be enough just on its own merit to allow this allowed. That.

F

Petition but just to just to reiterate from the previous conversation, the goats.

F

Aren't injurious and they're not they don't have a negative, add effect on the.

F

Neighbors they're vulnerable wrote to that. To that effect, many of.

F

These same arguments were previously applied to chickens, but with the being.

F

Able to just to set a number limit and other regulations on how to care for the.

F

Chickens within the city, then that that has worked out fine and I think a.

F

Similar approach could be taken with the goats and finally, as noted before, this would allow support of the comprehensive plan.

F

And would towards the move towards urban farming and more compact and productive.

F

Food chain, thank you for your consideration.

A

Questions are the petitioner or staff.

A

Welcome, sir sure yeah, I wonder if the staff could just give us an update on.

C

How the new you do will impact this. I know that we did make some changes in.

C

The you do, too, to the way that we regulate livestock and- and I don't.

C

Recall, city council many additional changes, but when it got to the council.

C

But would would this current situation still be in in violation of the new you.

C

Do once it goes into effect, yeah, so the you did. The plan commission did.

E

Makes a change which would address the size of the goats, but not the size of.

E

The property, so this property would still fail to meet the minimum one or.

E

Half acre pasturage requirement, so it also the new you do expanded the use to.

E

An accessory use in all single-family districts, not just the re district, so.

E

That was what the board was waiting on last time, so it did expand it just.

E

Didn't expand to this particular cases so once the new you do goes into effect.

C

This this would be permitted if it were on a half acre lot.

C

We're in the same zone really we're just that's really kind of the that's the way.

C

The question at hand is whether or not we want to allow this all in a smaller.

C

Lot then, is permitted, it's not what it would be permitted within the same zone.

C

If it were a larger lot, it would well it wouldn't no longer be a use. Ference it'd.

E

Be a development standards variance and it would require several other variances.

E

Including the setbacks from for the accessory structure, but potentially you.

E

Could review it under that? Okay, thanks.

G

You feel free. If you have further questions, do you have any other comments.

B

Process workers will come back to her for the remainder of her time. If there's.

B

Additional anonymous to address a question: yes, please well yeah! Well,.

C

You'll have a chance to comment, and I think on that shortly that sure, okay, any.

A

Other questions at this time.

D

Staff mentioned that this youth supported the idea of urban agriculture.

D

And local food processing, it looks like that definition. Of course, I'm looking at.

D

The original you do and the comprehensive plan only addresses plant.

D

Cultivation and crops and doesn't actually actually specifically says not.

D

Include the raising of animals shall not include, so how does how has that changed?.

D

So yeah it does and specifically mention that it was just a broader sense of the.

E

Fertilizer aspect, we thought would could address the crops portion so yeah. It.

E

That portion was a bit of a stretch, but we thought it was closely related that.

E

It should be considered. Okay. Thank you, one other question about that. With.

D

Regard to all of the neighbors letters and how to consider those in our.

D

Decision-Making would it be basically that the neighbors are standing up and.

D

Saying it's not in juris to the general welfare! Would that be how we might frame.

D

The use of those letters yeah so they they would be in a front our claim that.

E

It is interest, I'm sorry I mean they would be an opposition to us claiming.

E

That it is interest if you were to consider their their claim. Okay, I.

D

Understand, thank you. That's all. I have a clarification, but.

A

We're hearing this petition now under the current code, the the new you do is.

A

Not yet in place correct, yes, so we're bound by the previous definition of.

A

Livestock and in pasturage I remember that, was part of the issue. Yes correct.

E

Dear you're bound to the existing code, okay, so in when the changes were made.

A

Would the changes will be made in the in the new you do the the issue these.

A

Animals don't require pasture, so I is it just. It will just be a weight based.

A

Criteria at that point, so yes, and no because they don't require passage that.

E

Was actually language from the current code, not the the new you do. The new you.

E

Do doesn't has removed the only accounted in pasturage context. Okay,.

E

Language, but they still require pasturage, regardless of the size or.

E

Number of units of animals, so it's still the current or the the new code will.

E

Require half an acre of passage for medium livestock, which is what this.

E

Would these goats would qualify as the exact language is high rate or.

E

Miniaturized medium livestock, I'm having trouble hearing your I'm sorry, no you're.

E

Fine, that's my fault, so these these goats, that the petitioner.

E

Has would be hybrid or media or miniaturised medium livestock, so they.

E

Would still be required to have half an acre of pasturage, regardless of their.

E

Being hand fed or not, okay,.

B

Question probably for the staff, please, on item number one: the approval not.

B

Interested about miguel, I want to be clear again in support of the.

B

President's comment that we are operating off the current you do and not.

B

The new one, however, because the new you do is essentially going to go into.

B

Effect, we no longer going to object to questions about that, as I have in the.

H

Past that's an aside. I do want to make sure that I understand about the.

B

Proposed finding about the close proximity of animal waste is a potential.

B

Health for us to the surrounding residence- that was the first finding.

B

There will be that finding will be consistent now and with the change over.

B

To the new you do is that correct correct? That is the correct. That is the.

E

Reason for the minimum lot size, okay and just just to be very clear. What's the.

B

Minimum setback currently so, if it were in the resin, if this we're actually in.

B

The residential estate for there would be no required setback if, except for the.

E

Accessory structure, which would be 75 feet behind the front property line in.

E

35 feet from sight in rear, okay and the current building is: what's the setback.

B

It's a zero on one side and then roughly five from the front property line and.

B

And even if they were able to move the building, there's not that much space in.

B

That area in order to move it away to the proper setback, is that correct.

E

Correct yeah, the accessory structure wouldn't be able to meet and just as a.

B

Follow up, would you feel that the exposure to waste product perhaps is the.

B

Main concern that the city is expressing here, I'm asking you that it's an opinion.

B

No, yes, all right! I there is an addition, but yes, correct. That is one of the two.

E

Major concerns, the other concern is the potential harm to the animals themselves.

E

But yes, the largest concern was association.

E

Animal waste- okay! Thank you! The it appears as though I think you guys can.

D

Answer this, the fence runs right along the property line. Right now is that the.

D

Case or is there actually some space between the fence line and the property.

D

Line, I do believe the fence goes right up to the property line right onto the.

E

Partner, okay, thank you so for staff. So this is a use ference under the new code.

A

There there wouldn't be an opportunity for this petitioner to come back because.

A

It was it's still related to you, so does. Does the with we didn't I'm just curious.

A

If the, if the situation changes where we would be looking at it, and rather than a.

A

Use more of a developmental development variance situation, yeah exactly that. The.

E

Use variances are no longer an option in the new you do so this would be a.

E

Development standards, variance in addition to the fact that it's an.

E

Accessory use in the structure so her in the district, so it would just need to.

E

Meet or need a variance from the setbacks and the minimum lot sides.

E

Things like that, I see because the use has been added choose the uses added. Yes,.

E

Even though it wouldn't be allowed in this category like in in in what is it.

A

Gonna be r3 r4 yeah, it would be r3 in the conversion direct conversion and it.

E

Would be allowed if it were to meet the minimums or the it would be allowed if.

E

It were to meet the requirements: okay, okay,.

A

Okay, any further questions at this time. No okay! So then we go to the public. Is.

A

Anybody here from the public who would like to speak to this petition, anyone.

A

Okay, seeing no one, we are back to the.

A

Petitioner, you have an opportunity to.

A

For final comments or anything further, I'm sure you have a lot of time.

A

Remaining well, I certainly won't take all that time, but I would like to adjust.

F

Just a few things that have come up the fence doesn't actually I mean the fence.

F

Runs a property line, but there is a garden that separates and I think maybe.

F

That is part of what is the the distance from from the north fence corner back.

F

There's a garden which is now fenced, so I don't know how to without actually.

F

Being in blood row on the thing I don't know how to can we see the other picture, yeah yeah, so you see where the red line sort of gerrymanders down that's to.

F

Allow for a garden which is fenced in on which the goats don't have access to so.

F

That's why there's that distance to the property line there and in terms of.

F

Pasturage, I think the original standards were set from it's. My understanding.

F

According to, if they would need to graze- and since these, these don't need to.

F

Graze, they don't need that pasture, but they are fed alfalfa and goats. Pacific.

F

Food and then the occasional birdseed treats them, then that the consideration.

F

Of actually needing the amount of land that would grow enough grass for them to.

F

Be able to eat, that's not really a consideration, so it really is about the.

F

Space itself, and as I mentioned before this, the space that is recommended by.

F

The industry they have several times more than that particular amount of.

F

Space regarding the waste- I absolutely do understand why this would be a.

F

Concern- and of course I wouldn't want- I want to be contaminating my neighbors.

F

Or the streets or any of that- and I am very careful to keep it cleaned up- that.

F

As I mentioned before, in the previous time, when we talked, however, go waste, is.

F

Actually called berries and they're very they're discretes they're there. They.

F

Don't I don't know how to talk about waste in a forum without being overly.

F

Descriptive but they don't splat, it's not like cow patties. They actually are.

F

They keep they keep to themselves. So it's easy to gather up it's easy to.

F

Contain and if doing waste testing in the surrounding the area surrounding the.

F

Property would be useful, I'd be happy to do that. I'm also happy to be open for oh.

F

What's it called not investing inspection I'd be happy to welcome.

F

Inspectors to come to the property and to see the level of care of the animals.

F

And to see how the the waste is actually contained, as far as the setbacks go, then.

F

If we were to continue this too until it is under the new you do, then I would.

F

Happily, do whatever paperwork needs to be done to apply for a variance for the.

F

Setbacks or whatever else would make it palatable for the for the easy. A are.

F

There could I answer any questions from you regarding the animals or their care.

F

Or shelter yeah afterward in a moment if we have any further questions, sure great.

A

Then I think that takes good for any further comments at this time. No, that's.

A

All thank you, okay, sure.

A

Okay, so we're back to the board for for action for discussion, action and further.

A

Questions discussion all move denial of v, 26 19, based on findings; one two.

B

Three and four, as presented by staff, okay, do I have a second.

D

You're gonna, second, it okay! So let's, let's discuss a few things: okay, so I'm.

A

Gonna start so you mentioned that this is. This is a use variance. It has to be.

A

Heard under the current code, and um because it just simply won't exist into.

A

The future correct and the the options for the petitioner.

A

And if in in the future would be to come back with a developmental, could you.

A

Could you speak to what the options would be a jacke scanlan development.

I

Services manager, yes, so use variances will no longer be an option in the you.

I

Do after the effective date here in a couple months, we've been looking at you.

I

Know we've been trying to look at what the options are in general for small.

I

Livestock in town, where that's been less traditional and then also in particular,.

I

For this particular cases, we know that. That's why you continued it initially.

I

Was to see what the options would be under than maybe you do so as ryan.

I

Mentioned crops and pastures will be allowed as an accessory use in the.

I

Likely new zoning here, which would be r3 and the issue, is that there is a minimum.

I

Acreage required for animals that are classified for the classification that.

I

These animals would fall under that this lot doesn't meet, so that is a numbers.

I

That is a number that she doesn't meet for this parcel. So the request there.

I

Could be another request coming forward? That would be a request for a.

I

Development standards variance and the findings are a little bit different. You.

I

Know for use variance it's five findings very stringent for development standards.

I

Variance three of the same findings also stringent, but I think the use variance.

I

Is hard more difficult to to prove? Usually so, yes, we could work with the.

I

Petition in the future on that, but you know we are a little bit hamstrung title 7 of the bloomington municipal code deals.

I

With animals mostly and it, this type of animal is in a list of other types of.

I

Animals that you definitely would not want you know and you're at your.

I

Next-Door neighbor's house, if we don't have, we don't have code guidance to kind.

I

Of take this out of a larger kind of livestock view, we were hoping to get.

I

That a little bit with the update- and we didn't get quite where we thought we.

I

Were going to so that's where we are, that would be the option going forward.

I

To keep the animals on site.

D

To the petitioner you mentioned, I was in the middle of reading a few things. You.

D

Mentioned something about an inspector had been out or or would you would.

D

Welcome what tell me what you said there that, in the that I would be happy to.

F

Welcome an inspector to come out in the same way that there there's a chicken.

F

Inspector okay, you know I would, I would be happy to have or or you all lived you.

F

Care to come, but but definitely an animal welfare inspector to be sure that.

F

The or a health inspector like that, whatever whatever needs to happen to the.

D

Staff, then, what type of inspector would be doing? Something like that, so.

I

Currently, there are particular rules in title: seven for chickens, for example, and.

I

We don't we are not involved in that, so I'm not sure, but I someone from the.

I

Animal control, they are the ones who oversee that type of inspection. So I'm.

I

Not sure if they do inspect chicken coops now, then it could be something.

I

Similar here the issue, it is for a variance having to prove that this lot.

I

Is unique and needs the needs? A variance and the inspection would be specific to.

D

The health and safety of the animals right, something I believe that that is.

I

How they do it? Yes, it could not positive. Okay. Thank you. That's all voting, just a.

B

Couple of things one, I want to explain that the motion was made because we have.

B

Heard this before and we were waiting to see kind of where things were going to.

B

Go and what it sounds like is: there's not going to be a significant of change.

B

Between the current you do and the upcoming you do to grant variance now.

B

Should the motion tie or fail happy to entertain a second motion that will.

B

Continue this again until the you do is in full effect. Therefore, essentially.

B

Taking this out of our out of our jurisdiction as bza.

B

And putting it back on to the homeowner to work directly with the city based on.

B

The new you do just I'm seeing that for the benefit.

B

Those on the board here, but that's the the primary reason is that this I think.

B

The city's made or the staff has made a clear distinction that this property is.

B

Not really built for this type of abuse, and while in this case, there seems to be.

B

Support, I don't think it's something that I can can disregard the staffs.

B

Recommendation to grant a variance.

D

Someone here other comments before before my spoon. Well, I just I would say.

A

That the we will not be able to hear this indefinitely, we have to make a.

A

Decision because it's based on the current code, this was filed under the.

A

Current code, we have to hear it. There could potentially be other options in.

A

The future that will be up to the petitioner and what she chooses to do so.

A

I think, based on the information that we have at this time, I think I feel ready.

A

To make a decision based on how things are, and I don't know if continuing.

A

Really this case makes any difference how another month or two yeah, so this.

I

Petition will have to be seen under this code, no matter when you make your final.

I

Decision right well, thanks for clarifying that you can strike. Thank you.

A

Comment earlier yeah, it's just we have to make a determination. I was hoping to.

B

Put it back on the city yeah, but I do agree with the president's comments that.

B

We do have to make this decision we've heard this before, and I think it was six.

B

Months ago, roughly.

C

Yeah this is, I certainly can understand the the staffs recommendation. If you you.

C

Know if you, if you read sort of the the criteria, it's is this particular.

C

Property unique- it's not unique in this sense that the property itself proposes.

C

Some unique constraint, but it certainly is unique in that the goats are already.

C

There, the neighbors, love and support them and to the point where you know we.

C

Attempted to modify the code to to allow it. I think it sounds like we. We probably.

C

Fell a little short in in the legislative process of of accommodating.

C

This but there was a very clear sentiment of support for exactly this.

C

This case, I think, amongst certainly amongst the neighbors and at the.

C

Planning, commission and I don't want to speak for the counts, but I believe even.

C

At at council, so I certainly understand the the the staffs legal reading, but it.

C

Seems clear to me that the spirit of everyone involved is that this isn't.

C

Hurting anyone, in fact it is as a feature not a bug in the neighbourhood.

C

Here so so I don't I'm happy to to support a.

C

Variance for this, I've been approached personally by some of the neighbors who.

C

Who are in support of it? And you know I understand that it, it doesn't quite meet.

C

The the letter of the law here, but I think that's more- a failure of the law.

C

Than it is the failure of the homeowner here so so, if we're considering a motion.

C

To deny, I will likely vote no on that motion. I really have nothing to add. I.

D

Feel, like my colleagues has said, everything pretty much agree with that.

D

I'll just to to my colleague mr. whistlers comments, I would disagree that.

B

It's that no one has been harmed, no one has been armed yet I think that the.

B

Regulations are in place to prevent that from happening and I think overlooking.

B

Is such a drastic change, especially in the sizing requirements, is just us.

B

Really going beyond kind of what a variance might really allow this. It's.

B

Such a drastic change in size that something could happen whether it's.

B

Waist related, or you know, the animal does something we had those discussions.

B

Before and and while there hasn't been a pass incident, that doesn't mean there.

B

Wouldn't wouldn't be a future one, so I do think that I think planning in the.

B

Past and I think what you've done on the upcoming you do has been to be.

B

Thoughtful about what these regulations are there for, and I think that the.

B

Current you do and the new you do both allow us as the bza to make changes, but.

B

I just think again that this property is just.

B

Properly situated for this type of use- and I think it's a drastic change from.

B

The minimum requirements and that's why I would make that where that's why I did.

B

Make that motion, but just just to be clear about that difference of opinion on that. On that case, I understand the sentiment and I.

B

Appreciate the sentiment, but I think I would have a different feeling about.

B

This, if the property was much larger, so I'm certainly sympathetic to it.

A

So I I want to ask a question. It seems to me that the issue so the the size of.

A

The animals was addressed in the new you do, but but we're still still what's.

A

Critical in this case is this idea of pasturage and that's what that was what.

A

Was grounding the findings in you know under this, under the current you do is.

A

This idea of of pasturage and the petitioner has argued that these animals.

A

Don't require that that this is an exception. You know, and it's not it's not.

A

Necessarily the weight, but it's really how these animals live and function so.

A

In speaking to that issue, because to me that's where some of the disconnect is.

A

From for me, in terms of what was not addressed in that this, might this type.

A

Of animal seems to be an exception to other types of livestock who live off.

A

The land so is in your opinion, or could you give some advice as to how, in in.

A

Thinking about a variance that could potentially factor in so while pasturage.

E

Is the area where an animal grazes? It's also the area where the animal.

E

Moves around it lives its life and does its waste in so the word may be focused.

E

On the food source of the animal, it's not necessarily the intent of the you do.

E

I think I believe the intent was to focus on the space out of being adequate.

E

Enough for the size of the animal, which is why the size of the animal is, will.

E

Change the amount of pasturage required, so it's not necessarily because they.

E

Need the food source they can be hand-fed or not. So maybe I described it.

A

A little bit too limited because the information that we've gotten about.

A

These particular types of goats don't require that much land that yet that's.

E

Absolutely true for this type of goat, according to it seems to be kind of a.

A

Unique type of animal or an animal that our code isn't specifically.

A

Acknowledging correct corrections so is there, so is there that type of unique.

A

Circumstance and use could that be the basis of a variance I mean, could that do.

A

You see one asking sure so not for so for a you, spherion sai mean the five you.

I

Know are here yeah that you have to meet dozen if your five requirements so like.

I

Number three for a use, variance the need for the variance arises from some.

I

Condition peculiar to the property involved right. It's supposed to be that.

I

You know the zoning code was written for rectangular lots and you have some weird.

I

One-Off, you know triangular octagonal block that you can't meet the setbacks.

I

And sure you know that doesn't really look to that issue right. So this is more.

I

Along lines which we have you know seen in other variants, requests.

I

Of that, the user of the law is unique and that's why they are requesting a.

I

Variance not because the lot is actually unique in any way. Yes, so the the.

I

Findings for the development standards variants are going to be similar, so the.

I

Third, finding is going to be very similar that, basically, you know the lot.

I

Isn't it's not usable without the variance, so I mean this law. Is it's this.

I

Law is intended to be single-family sure it can go on being single-family. I mean.

I

We definitely feel for this issue. We've talked about it right. Many many staff hours spent on trying to figure out what is the you.

I

Know the neighbors, you know, we've we've received one complaint and then you know.

I

11 or however many pro you know, we understand that that it doesn't seem to.

I

Be an issue to the immediate neighbors right now: it's just not something that.

I

We feel like we can legitimize through the findings that are required. Mm-Hmm at.

I

This point so again with the development standards variance. They are similar that.

I

Is something we kind of haven't explored too much? What the difference is. You know.

I

If the petitioner is saying that data shows that they actually only need x.

I

Amount of space, but the code was written to cover a wide range of animals and.

I

Maybe that's not really needed, maybe something we could explore, but again.

I

That's less related to the lot than we like for variances to be right: okay,.

A

Okay, so we are ready for a vote. Anybody have anything else. Okay, roll call, please.

A

So just to review the motion is for denial based on the findings. So yes is.

C

It a night. No, yes, yes, doc morning. Yes, okay,.

A

The petition is denied. We are now on to the next case: v 44 19 randall,.

A

Mclaughlin staff report- please.

E

This petition is for the property located at 621 north lincoln, the roughly.

E

3300 square foot property has been developed with a detached single-family.

E

Dwelling the property in all surrounding properties are zoned within the.

E

Residential multifamily district surrounding uses include a detached.

E

Single-Family dwellings and multifamily dwellings, the property fronts along both.

E

North lincoln street and east cottage grove avenue the petitioner is.

E

Requesting variances from two different standards to allow for the construction.

E

Of a deck, the first variance is from front building setbacks. The second variance is from the maximum impervious surface.

E

Coverage these photos are of the deck which the petitioner is requesting a.

E

Variance for and the photos were taken from cottage grove avenue facing south.

E

And the photo on the right was taken from lincoln facing west on september 12.

E

2019 the department issued a notice of violation to the petitioner for the deck.

E

Which encroaches into the front building setbacks and caused the property to be.

E

In excess of the maximum impervious surface coverage for the rme district.

E

The you do requires that the rm district to be at our properties at the in the rm.

E

District to be at or behind the front building setback of 15 feet from the.

E

Right away or block face average, whichever is more the front building.

E

Setback along north lincoln was determined to be 22 feet from the right.

E

Away based on the block faced average along north lincoln, the front building.

E

Setback along east cottage grove is determined to be 15 feet from the right.

E

Away as the block faced average was less than the 15 feet, the deck encroaches six.

E

Feet in two inches in the into the front building setback along north lincoln and.

E

The entirety of the 15 feet along east cottage grove, the the steps of the deck.

E

Encroach an additional four feet: three inches into the front, building setback.

E

Along it, north the deck, the deck encroaches 12 feet and.

E

Five inches into the front building sack back along north lincoln and 15 feet.

E

Total along north east cottage grove, the rm district, allows you do maximum.

E

Impervious surface coverage at forty percent of the lot area, the lot area for.

E

This property is three thousand three hundred and ten square feet prior to the.

E

Placement of the deck 45% of the total lot was already covered by impervious.

E

Surfaces after the placement of the deck forty-eight percent of the lot area has.

E

Been covered by impervious surfaces.

E

Injuries found with the requested variance from front building setbacks.

E

The requested variance from front building setbacks will have negative.

E

Impact on public space in public safety, the creation of the deck further.

E

Increases the amount of structure directly adjacent to east cottage grove.

E

This, along with the decks 6 foot, 2 inch encroachment into the front building.

E

Setbacks along north lincoln may have negative impacts on pedestrian and.

E

Vehicular traffic along those roads, injury is also found in the request for.

E

The variance from maximum impervious surface, the creation of the deck reduces.

E

The green space on the property and brings the site further out of compliance, knowing adverse impacts to the use and value of the surrounding.

E

Properties have been found as a result of their busted variants and they're from the required in front building setbacks. The deck does not encroach.

E

Toward any adjacent properties, and therefore, should not negatively affect.

E

The value of those properties, no adverse impacts to the use of value of the.

E

Surrounding properties have been found as a result of the requested variance from maximum impervious surface coverage. The lot was previously over the rme.

E

District maximum and it should not affect adjacent properties. However, on.

E

July 16th 2019, the department did receive a complaint about the deck from.

E

An adjacent property owner no practical difficulties in the use of the property.

E

As a result of the strict application, the setback standards of the u-dor found.

E

While the décadas qualitex are common building, features on residential.

E

Properties, they are incidental to the primary use. The property will continue.

E

To be used as a detached single-family dwelling, there are neither environmental.

E

Constraints nor topographical challenges which prevent the property from meeting.

E

The terms of the you do as such the requested variances will not alleviate.

E

Any particular peculiar conditions on the property that limited its use, no.

E

Practical difficulties in the use of the property as a result of the strict.

E

Application of the impervious surface standards of the edl are found the site.

E

Is currently in excess of the you? Do maximum impervious surface allowances.

E

Because of the deck, because this is ex construction wood. Because of this, the.

E

Decks construction would be limited, however, this limitation would apply to.

E

Any increase of the maximum impervious surface coverage and is not unique to.

E

The construction of this deck, nor the proposed to use the request variances.

E

Will not alleviate any peculiar conditions based on the written findings.

E

In the staff report, the department recommends the adoption of the proposed.

E

Findings in the denial of v, 44 and 19.

A

Okay, thank you, petitioner,.

A

Please state your name: my name is mike harmon, representing petitioner, randy.

J

Mclaughlin, do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing, but.

A

The truth I do randy couldn't be here tonight, he's.

J

Traveling and and did not want this got delayed once before and did not want to.

J

Delay it further, so he prepared a statement, learn to read not just a few.

J

Additional comments after that, but tried to anticipate, maybe things you might.

J

Want to ask him about and when I didn't try to put it into a statement so you'd.

J

Have his words on this, so this is mr. mclaughlin statement. My name is randall.

J

Mclaughlin I owned the property at 621, north lincoln street bloomington. I.

J

Purchased the property in january 1986, the property had an existing one-story.

J

Small structure of approximately 1,300 square feet is the limestone and vinyl.

J

Exterior the property is located at the corner of north lincoln street and.

J

Cottage grove the house is oriented so that the front door faces north lincoln.

J

Street the north side of the house is in close proximity to cottage grove. The.

J

Original house is reported to been built in 1930. Apparently there were some.

J

Upgrades or work done in the house on the house in 1950 at the time the house.

J

Was built, there was no existing zoning ordinance note that established the side.

J

Yard setback or, as I understand the definition now because of the corps in.

J

Law, what I see is a side yard is deemed a front yard for zoning purposes.

J

Regardless the house was built a couple of feet off of what is now the sidewalk.

J

Along cottage grove long before there was ever a zoning ordinance and any.

J

Development standards, the house is a rental property and my petition is a.

J

Photograph of the structure that gives a good depiction of the entrance to the.

J

House would you want there's another on the next picture, there's one that the.

J

House before the deck was added there we go. Thank you. You see that the pictures.

J

Of the house now this is obviously pre deck. The deck started being constructed.

J

And so this is the now. This is about four years old, but you.

J

Can see the front step there, the white door and the steps that actually are.

J

Little below the level of the door, this is the door. This perched up as a not.

J

Silent construction, we see now we see a more true split-level here. You have what.

J

Amounted to the limit of a split-level with the lower level. You can see the window on the cottage grove side right next to that car for the lower level is.

J

So it it created them a live of a split-level type of approach by perching.

J

The house up and now there's no landing the steps to stop a couple feet short.

J

You have to step up into the doorway so back to mr. rathman statement and my.

J

Petitions photographed the structure that gives a good fiction of the interest of the house. The picture demonstrates that the entry doors that.

J

Elevated above ground level, there are four concrete steps from ground level up.

J

To the door with no true platform or landing area, there's a small area on the.

J

Top step, one step down from the love of the door to stand and wait for the door.

J

To be opened, tennis have not been a problem in this property, although on.

J

Occasion there may be trash or clutter or chairs or other objects placed in the.

J

Front yard, by the tennis I generally have managed the property myself, but in.

J

Recent years I've used a property management company. I decided that the.

J

Property would be better served and it would be an improvement to the property to construct a better staircase to the front door. I added a small deck and had.

J

The stairs constructed that brings the top step and the deck level with the.

J

Front door entrance the photograph of the property before the deck was.

J

Installed shows the small projection of a room off of the southeast corner.

J

Beside the front entrance tour, the deck is 8 feet by 13 feet and.

J

Largely filled in the area around the front door and provides a small area for.

J

What would be the equivalent of a small front porch when I decided to add the.

J

Deck I called the building department and asked about a building permit. I was.

J

Advised that what I planned for what I plan to building pit was not required.

J

And it is, nothing was said about any other permits or approvals being.

J

Required I got the idea to add the deck by looking around the neighborhood. There.

J

Are a number of properties scattered throughout the several blocks surrounding around, and particularly the property two doors south on north lincoln street that have decks porches of whip stairs the.

J

Property two doors south north lincoln, has added a staircase of the lincoln.

J

Street side that has two stories leading to the second story: apartments, a native.

J

And I looked around and saw several examples of staircases and decks that.

J

Seemed to be clean, orderly and added to the property and did not detract from it.

J

Many of the decks have staircases that are visible and properties of the.

J

Surrounding neighborhood are placed closer to the street than the steps that.

J

I have added to my property, the property two doors south and north lincoln street.

J

Have steps are placed within a couple of feet of the sidewalk the steps I added.

J

To the my property leading to the front door, more than eight feet, setback from.

J

The sidewalk, the property 619 north washington, has a huge deck. This seems to.

J

Be constructed within two or three feet of the sidewalk along cottage grove. It's.

J

A great gag, I pleaded that really added to the property. I have no doubt that the.

J

Deck helps keep the property more orderly. Well, I do not live in the.

J

Neighborhood I have been through the neighborhood frequently to check on my property. I have never observed that the large deck on the washington street property contributes to any disruptive behavior.

J

Or otherwise interferes with the pedestrian use of the sidewalk on.

J

Cottage grove, the north side of the deck I added to my property, is set several.

J

Inches back from the property line more than the existing langston wall on the.

J

North side of the house, I did not ask anyone about the issues of a pervious.

J

Surface area or setback requirements, I was not aware of an issue called.

J

Impervious surface. With regard to the setbacks, I did not ask, but I assumed.

J

That, because I saw so many examples of properties with similar construction and.

J

Many that were close to the street and the dishes I made to my property that.

J

The deck of the stairs were not an issue. I was surprised to receive a notice that.

J

I was in violation of ordinance to the extent that the deck is close to the.

J

Sidewalk in cottage grove, it is not as close as the existing wall that has been.

J

In place for decades, that's mr. mclaughlin statement so.

J

Several comments that, first of all, there's some terms been thrown out. That.

J

I did object to mr. roebling in his comments. His explanation used the word.

J

Unique unique is not a standard, isn't an issue for a design standards, variance.

J

It is for you sparing us, but it is not as an issue, in fact, there's nothing in.

J

This law, or in the ordinance on design standards of various development.

J

Standards various that you'll find the word unique practical difficulties.

J

Peculiar to property is not the same as unique, unique, be truly means.

J

One-Of-A-Kind, but if you're looking at staff there, you can see a lot of things.

J

In the staff report, I think it's page 35 is an overview of the. I call the.

J

Schematic of the the neighborhood, oh, you agree, the pages. Are we never? Okay, that's.

J

What happens? Fine thanks the that's schematic and you can see that the red.

J

Box is this property 621 north lincoln? Look on the the west side of lincoln.

J

Street every structure from 10th street to cottage grove on the site is built.

J

Closer and existing now closer to the to the sidewalk than the this steps in dec.

J

And yet this causes harm they, their staff has made a finding that this.

J

Causes injury, every property south of this property on the west side of.

J

Lincoln street down to 5th street is has structures, steps and handrails closer to.

J

The sidewalk that are these steps are 8 foot back and yet the staff report says.

J

These present injury to pedestrian use, and it is the even with the deck the.

J

Steps it's the furthest back from the sidewalk of the street, of any structure.

J

In that block- and those are not- this is a problem of original construction. There.

J

Was other properties a couple of them have had things added? If you look around.

J

The photograph site he had the police.

J

Thank you. This is the first one obviously taken right at corn. Looking.

J

South toward 10th street fact it's there in the trees there to the back. That.

J

Photograph, you can see the red steps, those are post original constructions.

J

Step and a second-story deck italy, the second-story apartments in that and that.

J

Property, you see the steps come down. You can see from this photograph. The.

J

Contrast of how close those are to the sidewalk on lincoln than what these.

J

Steps would be the staff finding is these calls, for. It is in a risk of.

J

Injury or interference with vesting use of the sidewalk. Now it's just not.

J

Possible please: this is continue on down past that property. Look at this. The.

J

Steps, the handrails they're all right at the sidewalk we're eight foot eight feet.

J

Set back from this sidewalk, these are on the sidewalk, and yet this is two doors.

J

Down three doors down south of us and yet the staff finding is that our steps.

J

Eight foot off the sidewalk interfere with pedestrian useless sidewalk. I.

J

Challenge you to disregard that fact and not approve it, because it does. It's not.

J

It doesn't make sense, I'm sorry it just doesn't as to the no. I do not want to be.

J

Misunderstood that she might have proved another variance or that other.

J

Properties have structures does not say this has to be approved. That's not it's.

J

Not true, I understand, there's no precedential value and a vga variance decision. They all stand alone. But what I'm? What I do.

J

Urge is that, because these other things exist and you can examine that it, it.

J

Allows you to find that this variance would not cause harm that these are not.

J

Do not interfere, you just look around and the one at 6:19 north watch, the.

J

Street, it's a huge ticket wraps around the structure, it's closer than what this.

J

Is and yet historically, there's no evidence that that has caused a problem.

J

Caused injury and interfered with traffic interferes pedestrian use so.

J

While those structures, whether they were permitted or not, I don't know I'm not.

J

Trying to cause any buy trouble, it may be perfectly permitted, but but there.

J

Were simple reality is the the simple truth. Is it's evidence that.

J

This deck and these stairs will not cause injury or there's no evidence to.

J

Support they would cause injury when you have examples surrounding this property.

J

Every direction of structure steps decks, porches railings that are closer to the.

J

Sidewalks and the pedestrian use than what these are. So I would ask you that.

J

You disregard the staffs finding, in fact on number one on the injury issue now.

J

The this is the lincoln street side. The cottage grove side is a much different.

J

Story there you've got a structure, that's built decades before anybody ever.

J

Worried about, I know that the site would even existed on the cottage grove at the time. I suspect it didn't not and not given the year of construction, that it.

J

Came in later, but it but it's an existing condition. So the real issue.

J

There I think it's gonna, be the issue practical difficulties. No, and that's why.

J

I've checked to the use of the term unique because that's not the standard.

J

And and you're also, what is being read to you explained to you, it was stated.

J

That the it this variance would not relieve the peculiar conditions. That's.

J

Not what that's, not the criteria again set out probated the legal criteria is.

J

In your packet, you put it on the screen and I'll probably come back up again, but.

J

Number three does to say relieved that the conditions, because you can no.

J

Variance is going to relieve the condition of the existing structure built just a couple feet off of what is now the sidewalk. So no it's not if.

J

Nothing's gonna relieve that you can't move the structure, there's not room and.

J

It can't be done. It was built, probably there's structures all over, that.

J

Neighborhood, as you see that that don't be those setbacks, don't meet the 2015.

J

What he said it was 22 foot setback on lincoln street. You can't find a.

J

Structure on lincoln street 22 feet back on in this block, but there regardless.

J

The so if you go back to the peculiar condition, so our the practical.

J

Difficulties, which is what it the standard is the irony of this petition.

J

To me is the last time is here a couple months ago, three months ago, I think it.

J

Was we were meeting in this room at that time? Joe hoffman spoke up on the regard.

J

To another implication and offered some comments with regard to as examples.

J

Variances on setbacks for constructing car ports and those have been granted.

J

Numerous times the fact that someone become so routine.

J

I think we're often seeing those going to the hearing officer and not even.

J

Coming to you now, because you have approved or the hearing officers.

J

Approved of variance for a setback violation to construct the carport does.

J

That mean this has to be approved. No, but what it does tell you is that you that.

J

This vza and the hearing also have recognized the practical difficulties.

J

With some of the older neighborhood structures built at a time when setbacks.

J

Were not the issue or built at a time when we weren't building garages and car.

J

Ports, they were out there and there's it's the practical difficulty that you.

J

Can't do anything about that now you can't move the location of the house, the.

J

Residential structure and yet it's a reasonable use to add a carport to the.

J

Property, that's exactly the situation here. So while those approvals don't say.

J

This has to be approved, the rationale and the analysis on those fits here and.

J

Would allow you- and I would suggest, should cause you to prove this for the.

J

Same reason, I want to go on to them the impervious surface. We have a.

J

Disagreement on whether this deck is an impervious surface issue. First of all, I.

J

Want to read from the ordinance this is the you do definition of impervious.

J

Surface a percentage, the area of the discovery by be impervious surface.

J

Impervious surface means any surface artificially covered or hardened. So as.

J

To prevent or impede the formulation or absorption of water into the ground.

J

Including, but not limited to asphalt, concrete.

J

Roofing material, brick, plastic, gravel or swimming pools now understand that says.

J

Including, but not limited to so it's not an exhaustive list, but it is interesting.

J

It says nothing about wood, so there's nothing about.

J

Materials, it wasn't even an example. Now you may or may not have mr. whistler.

J

Would have involved in plan commission meetings, were you looking to develop lamps and impervious surface and the number of times that a pervious surface.

J

Issues have satisfied by it was called in pervious, pavers and pervious papers.

J

Do allow some penetration, but they do hinder part of this absorption. They just.

J

They still allow it and it's an acceptable turned it. If you go back to.

J

The pictures of the deck this deck is elevated from the ground.

J

These are planks on the other side, please.

J

Than one with the showed the full deck to the side.

J

Thank you, you can see. The deck surface is planck's their spacing. There will be.

J

Water penetrating through the deck to the ground below to allow water.

J

Absorption, if these are viewed to hinder, they cannot be viewed as hindering.

J

Anymore, the pervious pavers do because pervious papers are a hard material that.

J

Just are porous by design to allow for some penetration, the wood itself.

J

Actually does is would hinder, I would have suggested it allows penetration.

J

What does not does not repel water, it allows some penetration, but even the.

J

Deck structure with the planks and the spacing in between planks allows for.

J

Water to penetrate through into the ground below and there's one picture.

J

From under the deck that demonstrates that, with the deck in place, you can.

J

Still see under the edge of the deck sorry, the last one, I think he probably.

J

Had up there there we go it's a shadow down there, so a little hard to see, but.

J

There's grass growing under this deck and not that a lot of that area in the.

J

Deck are the existing of the older that concrete block steps they're still under.

J

The deck who's built over it so that hardened pervious surface is still there.

J

So as to the rest of the deck is clear for this picture that water's coming.

J

Through and it can absorb there, I would disagree. There's an impervious surface.

J

Issue at all, but to the extent that you find that there's at least some.

J

Increased impervious surface we have for deck post, okay, fine.

J

They're solid into the ground, therefore, deck posts. There's that one lesson per.

J

Se and a half we're seeing increase its de minimis and would suggest it should.

J

Not even require various but extends, it is it's. It's that structure that minimal.

J

Interference are very minimal, hindrance or interference with absorption of water.

J

Is is necessary to allow to overcome the practical difficulties of reasonable.

J

Residential use, the property- it's interesting that this is attempt. This is.

J

To deny a deck, it wasn't. How many years ago, the planning commission was pushy.

J

A development standard we need to be adding front porches if we don't have.

J

People walking neighbors anymore, we do encourage front porches and people and.

J

Try to get back to a community and neighborhoods, and yet this house had.

J

Newports, it's pretty much of a pill box when constructed at the time furfle.

J

Acceptable, it's perfectly acceptable to add a deck to it now as a reasonable.

J

Residential use of the property- that's not possible without the variance.

J

Because of the practical difficulties of the location of the house already on the.

J

Construction on the ground and the variance on the setback, and I would.

J

Suggest that the the variance of the setback is is almost a non-issue when.

J

You looked at every other property. Already approach is further than what.

J

End within this same block of these structures, do we ask that you find the.

J

It there is no injury caused by this to the to the public good and that there.

J

Are practically difficulty said this would, over the various overcomes that by.

J

Allowing the deck to be constructed as it is, it is an act of the fact is this.

J

Is not an informer station in that sense that it is certainly after the fact and.

J

Mr. mclaughlin tried to explain in his statement how he got to that point. Thank.

A

You questions for staff or petitioner.

C

Thank you. I just get good staff. Could you comment on the impervious surface.

C

Question is it? Is it true that that decking is not specifically in the code.

C

Defined as impervious surface so decks and decking material is not listed in.

E

The definition of impervious surface, however, it does say any artificially put.

E

Or hardened surface, which prevents or impedes percolation it would staff.

E

Contention that any block of wood would impede in penetration into the ground.

E

From water, but that is a that's an interpretation, not something that's. It's.

E

It's a consistency. It's been that way. As long as this studio has been adopted, the.

E

Current, that's consistently been the staffs interpretation correct, but it is.

C

Staffs interpretation, as opposed to something that is catified sure so well,.

I

Kind of on the flip side of that the you do specifically calls out permeable.

I

Pavers and allows those to be counted in you're, not against your impervious count.

I

That's the only thing it allows so yes, decks are not specifically mentioned you.

I

Know houses are not specifically mentioned other other things that aren't.

I

Permeable or not specifically mentioned, but yes, that is an interpretation and.

I

Has been the way that that has been done since the you do came into place so just.

A

To follow up when you do improve impervious surface calculations, you you.

A

Regularly take decks into account, yes, decks.

I

Okay, could you speak a little to the stare issue, how those factor into front.

A

Setbacks so stairs are allowed to encroach stairs specifically not decks.

E

Are allowed to encroach into any setback up to six feet because of the location.

E

Of the deck the stairs encroach past that fit air that 22 feet and well past.

E

Their six foot allotment of encroachment, so they're full four feet: three inches.

E

Is counted as an encroachment into the front setback along lincoln and and so.

A

The distinction you're making when there's steps that are in the front.

A

Setback say that come you know as as you you know, there are many situations where.

A

You we don't step down all at once and one run, but rather that's that's kind of.

A

Parsed out it's because it's connected to the structure, that's how you look at.

A

This differently, correct, yeah, stairs intercepts, are their own defined rather.

A

Than things in the landscape, exactly okay, okay,.

A

Any other questions sure.

B

And I just want to be clear. First of all, I would like to make it just a statement.

B

Before I ask the question, which is I'd like to thank the petitioners representative for being so well-prepared and understanding that.

B

President is is not set by any decisions made by the bca. That's typically the.

B

Thing that we fight so I appreciate- and I know that you've been here before us.

B

Before and thank you for making those statements in your in your statement, I.

B

Want to go back to something that you said, I'm gonna make sure I understand.

B

This or if you could explain it a little further there was mention made that the.

B

City was contacted before this was put up and given the size he did not go to.

J

20 square feet involved in so he did not need to build and commit and part of.

J

What he's trying to say any statement he he didn't ask any further questions nor.

J

Did they volunteer, but there might be other criteria, but I wouldn't expect to.

J

Go to a department do that frankly: yes, bob what they do and then this then.

B

Following that goes to staff which is building permits, they would not.

B

Typically, ask questions about setbacks and other issues is that correct? That is.

E

Correct that building department does not consider those. If I understand that.

B

Statement then the the petitioner had asked this is the size of a deck. I'm.

B

Building is that a problem the building department said? No, it's not you don't.

B

Need a permit, however, there was no further investigation as to setbacks and.

B

Other things that was required from another department, correct yeah, they.

E

Wouldn't know that also, just for the record, I believe the height is the.

E

Determining factor for a building permit- and I think it's this is a below the.

E

Height, rather than the size, okay, so, okay, I didn't quite gather that, but it does.

B

Relate to my next question to you, which is there, is some mention about possibly.

B

Impeding vehicular sightlines, okay, so with that, how did you determine.

B

That this particular structure may impede the sight line from cottage grove.

B

And I'm assuming in particular, turning right onto lincoln, so it wouldn't in.

E

Lincoln is one way north there lincoln both north and kind of turning on to it.

B

From college right, you have to so great to go left.

E

No one from lincoln should be turning left onto cottage grove, which way does.

B

That go that go yes, so it's one way! Yes, okay! So then, with that understanding, I'm.

B

Not really that familiar with those roads there, but how did you determine that that particular structure was, though, was impeding vehicular so.

E

Potentially, impeding it's so it's the combination of, in quote the encroachment.

E

Ports cottage grove with the approachment towards north lincoln, the.

E

Fact that it has two frontages caught would increase the amount of covered.

E

Area you can see in this photo a bit it's not exactly from the right-of-way.

E

But you can see that it makes the sidewalk difficult to see and then also.

E

With that cottage grove is disjointed in it at its intersection with lincoln the.

E

Westernmost portion is significantly about 22 feet further south than the.

E

Easternmost portion, so it's already a tricky tif intersection for pedestrians.

E

There's no stop sign a long link in there, so there's you're coming north on.

B

Lincoln a you went turn left on cottage grove. Right, yes, is what you're saying.

B

And it's it's! You can't necessarily see pedestrians correct. Okay. Now let me ask.

B

You from that corner that cottage grove corner if a pedestrian were to come to.

B

That corner and proceed directly across lincoln is there also a street cut out.

B

There would that be crossing into the middle of a block, so you would be.

E

Crossing if you're, on the north end of the cottage grove, you would be crossing.

E

To the south of version of cottage grove, sidewalk and.

E

If you were on the south version at the westside, you would be crossing into the.

E

Middle of the block- and I guess my point there is it's not really lined up.

B

No yeah, it's disjointed! It's a it's an odd! It's not intersection anyway. So.

B

That's it look and also was mentioned in this room, this report by staff that.

B

There was a complaint that was issued, but I kind of scrolled through there. I did not see the indication of what that complaint was. Is that something you can.

B

Share with us the complaint, I believe I didn't receive it, but I believe it had.

E

To do with the encroachment into the sifrin setbacks was the major point of.

E

Contention as well as impervious surface is the two things that are touched on in.

E

The variance request, and was it neighborly or is the complaint from a.

E

Neighbor, I believe it was from anna budding neighborhood, yes to the south.

B

I'll ask the petitioner: are you aware of any complaints about this story? Well, I.

B

Know who made the complaint? Because I talked about human food and by half the.

J

Stamps happens to be a friend of mine and he's also an attorney, and I was talk.

J

To him about some other matters, we got to talk about soil matters and he I know he owns property, this neighborhood, and so I asked him.

J

About it and I said I've and he said well, I was the complaint and so why'd.

J

You complain, he says you know people need to learn to draw the permits. That was his comment to me. So he did not. He may have other complaints. The only.

J

Thing he said to me nothing specific about the deck of the steps or safety.

J

Earthiness is his personal estate. Was I'm tired of people not draw apartments.

J

They need well, I think he thought they need. You need to build up a bit, but.

J

That's that was his statement. Thank you back to the staff the the petitioner had.

B

Mentioned a number of times at 6:15, I believe, is the address that that.

B

Structure, the the stairs come out quite a ways. I think we had that you have a.

B

Picture of it, the red stairs that you showed us a number of times comes out.

B

How is this existing structure different, or is this also a structure that the.

B

City believes is in violation, so this structure is pre, you do they did not.

E

Have to conform to the same setback standards it's so. The new dad was.

E

Grandfathered and corrected, and now I'll, just ask the question: if it had not been.

B

Grandfathered, and would this be in violation, it would be it's okay. Thank.

B

You sounds for any questions.

D

So I understand that we're not looking at.

D

Peculiar conditions, specifically we're looking more at practical difficulties,.

D

Based on strict application of the you do, however, later on you do mention.

D

Peculiar conditions that who would not alleviate this property is, if I'm.

D

Looking at the significantly smaller than the vast majority of the properties.

D

In the neighborhood I do see that there are some other small corner lots, but the.

D

Amount of of land you have there to consider in percentage of impervious.

D

Surface and for setbacks is quite a bit less than the norm. That is smaller than.

E

The newly divided minimum lot size for the district, and would that not be.

D

Considered a peculiar condition to the property you're asking: if what the fact.

I

That it's smaller than the minimum lot size for the zoning district could be.

I

Considered a peculiar condition. Yes, sorry, I should make sure. Yes, we have. We.

I

Have considered that I think in the past it's hard because that's less, I care a.

I

Physical characteristic of the property than its relationship to the code and in.

I

This area, though it is zoned rm hold on. Let me see.

I

There are other comparable single family lots and smaller in the immediate area.

I

It's not it's not like a sea of lots of meat rm and then this lot is like a.

I

Remainder and the fact that it has two frontages that it's on a corner. Yes, so.

I

In some ways, yes, that is unique in other ways. Every block has four corner: have.

I

Two block has four corner lots so, depending on how the request.

I

Specifically, interacts with the fact that it's a corner, sometimes we have you.

I

Know sometimes we have considered that yes and the impervious surface in.

D

Considering that are making the rule that it, the decks would be included in.

D

Impervious surface surface coverage was that mostly because of the idea of new.

D

Construction and that you don't want to have to go through trying to figure out what material this is. Is it really going to block water, or would you actually.

D

Have the opinion that a slotted or a plank deck like this really does have a.

D

Negative effect on the land in the same way that impervious surface does sure so.

I

I think part of it is it's. Yes, it's slotted now you know so. Yes, water will.

I

Trickle through the slabs you know, are they put an outdoor rug on it? Is that.

I

Gonna function: in the same way, I mean you know we have to draw a line somewhere, and the line is that, if you're developing on the property, putting.

I

Something over the earth. What I, when I started here a number of years ago,.

I

Something that we, you would hear planners say in this context would be.

I

You know some people have like a second-story deck, where it's completely.

I

Open underneath they have grass, you know the.

I

It said the rain hand said that they would not count that against, because the.

I

Earth is there and it's able to collect. You know water. You could grow things.

I

There, in these cases, where you're, covering up the the ground, where nothing.

I

Could live there, you're hindering the the access of the water and then that's.

I

Always been counted against okay, but it really is about the water getting to the.

D

Land not about something growing there or about what might live there. There are.

I

Lots of positives for having open space, so one of them is water percolation. You.

I

Know other one is that there's some of other things that you've mentioned: okay.

D

Okay, so we want each site to have that and then we have established a minimum.

I

Of what that should be yeah, okay- and I don't mean to beat a dead horse about.

D

The injury but I drove through there today and I I don't understand the.

D

Reason you know, I didn't see any issues with sight lines being blocked. I didn't.

D

See, even if there were a pedestrian walking across I'm, so I'm still really.

D

Not understanding why it was considered to be interest with regard to traffic.

D

Sure so you know this one is a little bit borderline for us as well. We talked.

I

About that with mister carmen, but we do think that the regulations are in place.

I

For a reason, some of those reasons are for protections of pedestrians to be.

I

Able to see you and so that the vehicular occupant couldn't see a pedestrian in this case. In this case, I think, being a corner lot kind of works.

I

Against them a little bit because you know you've mentioned the lots to the.

I

South or mr. throckmorton asked, would that also.

I

Mean code, no one wouldn't meet code. Would that be a little less of a red.

I

Flag for us, maybe because it's not actually at the corner where this could.

I

Cause we're where this does kind of caused us some concern for us yeah. It's.

I

Not a humongous deck but like mr. carmen has brought up in other hearings about.

I

The you know car ports that that that mr. kaufman brought up in november. I.

I

Believe it was, and yes, we have done variances for that. Those typically are.

I

On side or rear yards, something that is very typical, accessory structure, decks.

I

Are also accessory structures, we wouldn't, I would say I would say that.

I

I'm pretty confident if we went back and looked at how many car ports we've.

I

Approved we're not approving car ports and the two front yards at the corner of.

I

A property you know this, it is different, it is. It is a feature that maybe just.

I

Doesn't fit on this particular site and so then it'll be able to you guys to.

I

Decide if that's because the de situs site is so unique that that's something.

I

That they should be allowed to do as customarily incidental, okay and one more.

D

Question as this is zoned residential multi-family right, I just want to make.

D

Sure I usually say: multifamily yeah, yes rm and we were talking about the use of.

D

The property, so I give me a second here to find it.

D

Okay, decks are a common building feature on residential properties, but they're.

D

Incidental, when you say residential properties they're, do you also include.

D

Rental properties, multifamily properties or does that imply single-family.

D

Residential for us just always patience. Okay,.

D

As an appraiser, I've noticed there's actually a line on an appraisal form for.

D

Whether or not there's a deck or a porch or some type of structure and your value.

D

Does change based on that and it's particularly important to rental use to.

D

Have some type of outdoor recreational space as almost every one of those other.

D

Properties do in the neighborhood, so I'm wondering if there's and I think most of.

D

Them are rentals, I know we don't know which ones are and which ones aren't. But I wonder if there also might be some consideration for the fact that it would.

D

Affect the value of a rental property by not being able to have a deck, and I.

D

Think, that's all my questions and we often have that question about value or.

B

Something that's injuries to the homeowner, because a drop in value or a.

B

Lack of added value, but monetary hardships to the homeowner or the.

B

Property owner are not something that we can take into consideration when we make.

B

A decision, otherwise people would build extremely expensive items onto their.

B

Home and then say hey well, this is too expensive and so you she give us a.

B

Variance so well, I appreciate that sentiment. It is it well, it may add value.

B

To the home, that's not something that we could consider in terms of approving the.

B

Petition, however, I do have a question about this particular structure, which is.

B

There's you had mentioned that stairways are not part of the figure.

B

Of determining the square footage, what of this structure would actually be.

B

Allowed the steps in a small landing, a small landing of some size, no landing at.

B

All wasn't: what exactly could this home owner a property owner make available to.

B

The person coming into this door in terms of a safe, ingress and egress so.

E

The building is at the 22 foot setback, so steps would be allowed to encroach.

E

Six feet so he could have steps as long as they were covering the already.

E

Impervious impervious area, okay, but I do want to take one more leap here, which is.

B

Steps are allowed is their definitions as to how big the final step may be.

B

Before you enter the door, because I understand what the homeowner is.

B

Attempting to provide which is a safe and secure entry and exit from the home.

B

So do we have a regulation for that there is no regulation. Okay, thank you.

E

The typical definition of step is what we would consider standard tread yeah.

B

It's a standard death standard with. Yes, thank you. Okay, um anyone from the public.

A

Like to speak to this petition, mm-hmm is anybody here would like to speak to this.

A

Petition please step to the lectern and tell us your name. My name is james ford.

K

Do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Yes,.

K

Ma'am, okay, with five minutes, I live in high point, which is the neighborhood.

K

Just north of this, this is that the juncture between hunter edition in the.

K

Original cottage grove this house was put up in the 1890s by the way and the.

K

Tax purposes they sometimes have the wrong years. This house originally did.

K

Have a porch it has been taken out or it had been enclosed and is now used for.

K

Rental property, so there would have been a landing at the top of the original.

K

Steps where they would have stepped on to it would be a significant change to.

K

Restore that original porch and that original porch had two doors one to the.

K

Main room and one to the parlor you'll notice that many houses in the.

K

Neighborhood do retain the original porch. A porch and a deck are different.

K

And yes, I think it's nice to have a porch. My house has a porch and I have.

K

Two front doors front door into the parlor in defense of the property owner.

K

The house next door to it just south of it, is an egregious violation with that.

K

Staircase going up the front, it is, it is old, it's been there a long time and if.

K

He were not aware of any other regulations and looked at that and said.

K

Well, the mine is much less offensive than that. It's fine, but just because.

K

Somebody down the street is violating something doesn't, in my mind, doesn't.

K

Give license to you to violate a regulation. There's been a reference to a.

K

Deck on washington street a block away the original of property owner there.

K

Made a larger deck, we complained to the city and he was forced to take it back.

K

These are the only two properties in the entire neighborhood, where there's been a.

K

Problem with decks or with this staircase, so the idea that many.

K

Properties in the neighborhood have such constructions is incorrect. In my mind, a.

K

Deck, I'm not an attorney by the way. So if I use a word wrong, I'm sorry.

K

In my mind, a deck is something that belongs in the back of a house, for you.

K

To enjoy your backyard, of course, not everybody has a backyard, but a porch is.

K

Something for the front yard, I don't know about sight lines, I walk and ride.

K

My bicycle, so it doesn't affect me. What does affect me is the fact that there.

K

Are many properties in the neighborhood? Ninety over ninety percent are student.

K

Rentals and we, the property owners, have to be continuously vigilant to make sure.

K

Rental properties don't get more and more party accessible, and this when I.

K

First saw this going up, I was struck, I was concerned. I am the one who.

K

Originally called it was not, the deck was not up, they had delivered the wood.

K

And I called the county building, I said: did they have a permit for this? They.

K

Said we don't know, we'll, go out and we'll check on it. So I don't know that.

K

This property owner contacted them. They may have contacted him after my initial.

K

Complaint, the formal complaint that was made to the city was done by another.

K

Member another resident of the neighborhood, who is an attorney, and he.

K

Knows about these things all the things I wanted to say, and I forgotten all of.

K

Them I hope that the property owner considers redoing this, because it looks.

K

Tacky and I'm really envious of west sixth street.

K

I remember 30 years ago it was a dump and now it's beautiful and it's because.

K

People have stuck to code and tried to make it a neighborhood, and I'm always.

K

Hopeful that, over the years in the future that slowly, these houses will.

K

Maybe become more neighborly rather than marketable to students and renters. Maybe.

K

If this we're more symmetric, I might not be so offended by it. Maybe if it weren't.

K

So close to cottage grove and yes, it is too close to cottage grove, but that's.

K

When the house was built actually cottage grove's was a little bit further.

K

Away originally in the 1890s, I guess I have no more to say, except that I I.

K

Think it looks terrible the way it is, and I don't know about improving.

K

Surfaces, I think impervious surfaces are ones where plants can't grow and if you.

K

Cover it with a deck, maybe water can trickle through, but there's no sun and.

K

There's no plants, so it does seem to be an impervious to light, if not impervious.

K

To water, the other comment was out that backs again that's more of a legal.

K

Thing I don't really understand it, so this is more of a stylistic complaint. I.

K

Have- and I hope you I don't even know if you can consider that in your.

K

Deliberations, but I hope that you do if you can. Thank you. Thank you.

A

You have to write to my name. Thank you. Anyone else from the public who would.

A

Like to speak to this petition, okay, I will wait a moment.

A

I don't know how much time a petitioner has remaining two minutes 45 seconds if.

A

You have any final comments, one one minute 14. I think I already need one.

J

Minute, I'm glad that the standards for various aren't dependent upon subjective.

J

Aesthetic considerations because he finds it tacky, I think it looks great.

J

But neither one of our opinions on that are really relevant to your your.

J

Decision so that's side, and it's probably lucky that we have a nortis, has.

J

Specific definitions, because the previous to one person is different than.

J

What some produce to janke, which is different than what the ordinance says.

J

Which says blocks or hinders- and this doesn't endure sorts in the water. It.

J

Allows the absorption of water- this were flushed to the ground, different story.

J

But it isn't and which those matters are not problems, and as for the just the.

J

Overall issue, you know well again: okay, I'm not gonna, repeat myself, so I'll, just.

J

Stop with, if you look at the property, it does no harm. If that added to value to.

J

The property not for this, just for the sake of the property owner, but its.

J

Improvement to the property, I think the neighborhood, but again now we're get.

J

Back there subjective things again, but it does no harm. It does no injury and.

J

Nothing to be done, you heard ryan say that front of the building is just.

J

Trying to feet, nothing can be done to the property other than steps without.

J

Without a variance, thank you, okay, we are now back to the board for action. I want.

A

To I want to just make a comment first, and that is, I find this to be a.

A

Particularly unfortunate case, because I think in the right circumstances,.

A

Variances for this property, I think, could be granted.

A

The petitioner called the building department and unfortunately that was.

A

The wrong body to make an inquiry about this type of project, so I do. I do feel.

A

For the petitioner, because I do fit you know, sometimes people come to us and.

A

They didn't make any phone calls, so I completely recognized that I have to say.

A

That the issue of the deck is not a small one, because our code specifically.

A

Allows encroachments of decks on the side and in the back and not on the.

A

Front because I think it says that decks are not appropriate in the front yard. We.

A

Happen to be in a core neighborhood, a historic neighborhood and given the.

A

Context, I think that it's my opinion is that it's particularly not appropriate.

A

Here so well, I think that there is a project that could that would allow for.

A

A and a modest entry that would not impede views, etc. I don't think that this.

A

Is it and the process of a variance and working through that with staff, where.

A

You can get guidance so that you can meet the the spirit and and the the.

A

Intention of the code was unfortunately didn't happen here. It was circumvented.

A

That process did not happen, and so we are left with a a deck that is not.

A

Conforming and has some potential safety issues with it, so I wanted to say that.

A

Because I find that this is kind of an unfortunate circumstance and the way.

A

That this came to be so, in any case, that's kind of my starting point and why.

A

I we'll support the the recommendation.

A

From with based on the written findings, as they are.

G

hmm I don't entertain a motion if anybody's ready to do that. One way or.

A

The other okay, I move for the denial of b, 44 19.

B

Based on the findings presented to us by staff, do I have a second I'll? Second, it.

A

Okay, discussion sure yeah. As it's been said, this is obviously a difficult case.

C

And I think, I think very borderline in a lot of ways. As I look through the three.

C

Criteria, one the approval- will not be injurious to the public health safety.

C

Morals and general welfare- the committee- I I don't see this- I can disagree with.

C

The staffs finding here I mean they're there. The staff is stating that the.

C

Injury here is due to its impacts on on pedestrian traffic. I think I don't see.

C

How the encroachment impacts pedestrian traffic and I think in a lot of ways.

C

This you know the the the the connection to people that you have from having this.

C

Structure on the front creates a better sense of place. It makes it more walkable.

C

I mean the the the previous entry really makes. This feel like a place. That is.

C

Very uninviting, then you wouldn't want to walk best when, when you see old.

C

Concrete stairs that are sinking in its this, do you have no sense of place and.

C

The pedestrian experiences is is diminished, so I think, with regards to.

C

You know the question of injury, it's really about the impervious surface. I.

C

Think there's some question as to whether this really is impervious. I mean.

C

Obviously the staffs position has been consistent. I've consistently disagreed.

C

With heavy that opinion over the years so, and even if you do consider this to.

C

Be impervious we're talking about a difference of three percent and I'm not.

C

Sure that that really creates injury. So, on the second question, the use and value.

C

Of the area jason, the property will not be affected in an adverse manner by the.

C

Granting of this variance- and I doesn't seem to be much argument on that- it's.

C

There's not really adverse impact to the neighborhood. By this again, I think you.

C

Could make an argument that it's improving the experience in the.

C

Neighborhood and then finally, the the strict application of the you do will.

C

Result in practical difficulties, so I mean I think it does right. I mean I.

C

Think we've we've kind of established that there isn't much that the homeowner.

C

Could do here to make this entry more safe without violating the udl they're.

C

Really, just I mean the only thing they could do is essentially cover up the.

C

Existing steps, which I don't think would be safe and certainly wouldn't be.

C

Appealing so I'm kind of leaning in favor of the variance.

C

Although it is, I think, clearly a judgment call on on just about all three.

C

Of the points here, if any of my colleague mr. whistler, I mean, I think.

B

That it's a very difficult decision, so I think it's well said. Thank you.

D

Anything present yeah. I have trouble with finding any injury with either the.

D

Impervious surface or the setback issues and the deck encroaching into the.

D

Right-Of-Way, especially considering the house is already further than that. I.

D

Agree with staff on number two, I think the issue is in number three and I do.

D

Think there are practical difficulties with this particular property and if he.

D

You mentioned even going back and trying to work with staff to find something.

D

That would fit, and I think brad's right there that there's really nothing else.

D

That they could do that would fit. Based on my understanding of what the.

D

Regulations are here so yeah. I would have trouble denying the petition.

B

I'll call question there: okay, so a vote for is denial. No, yes,.

C

No yes, so with a split vote. That means that the.

A

Petition is denied correct. Sorry, no action, no action.

I

Oh, it's automatically continued. You can okay, my mistake. We could still consider.

C

Another okay: it means someone can do another motion.

I

If you are going to move to approve it, you need findings to do that, because you.

I

Don't have any right step right, so you can direct us to modify the findings. We.

I

Have- and we could adopt them after the next petition if we can work on them.

I

During that or if you have proposed proposed findings for the decision that.

I

You're, suggesting that would be helpful- that's right will mean is that, if we're.

I

Going to move to so, if you want it, if somebody wants to move at this time.

A

Otherwise, it would just be continued: okay, okay, my apologies mm-hmm.

A

I should have known that cuz that happened before so does somebody want it.

B

You can you can you can move to continue before my apologies? I'm sorry also, if.

I

You think you're gonna go to 2 on the next vote. Yes, we can just continue to.

I

The next hearing, right until we have 5 members what you've done in the past, yes.

I

This which we might yeah, I'm gonna, move to continue yeah, that's second, that okay.

A

Okay, so um please call roll bret.

G

Yes, yes, yes, yes, okay, so the petition is.

A

Continued to our next meeting, thank you and sorry again for that miscue, okay,.

A

What time do we have feels late? Do we need a break? Are we doing okay, huh pera.

A

Through ok, we're on to petition number three.

A

Just let us know when you're ready.

A

Okay, thank you uh staff report. Please great.

I

The next petition tonight is an administrative appeal. The property is.

I

Located at 520 east second street, the case number is a a 45 19 and the.

I

Petitioner is tariq kahn. The petitioners requesting administrative appeal of the.

I

Issuance of a notice of violation, the notice of violation was for work done.

I

Outside of an approved certificate of zoning compliance, so the property is.

I

Located at the southwest corner of henderson and second streets, it is zoned.

I

Rm, residential multi-family, there is one structure on the lot and it is listed as.

I

Contributing in the current bloomington city, historic sites and structures.

I

Survey, a notice of violation was issued for non-compliance with a certificate of.

I

His owning compliance, though it was issued for work to be done on the building and the petitioner appealed the notice and that's why we're here so a.

I

Certificate of his owning compliance is basically a planning permit. That is.

I

Required for many building permits that go through the monroe county building.

I

Department and a certificate of zoning compliance was issued for this site on.

I

November 16th of 2018, it listed six conditions on the permit and the first.

I

Three were related to limitations of work on the property, so that is relevant.

I

Because the property is listed as contributing so work over a certain.

I

Threshold would have required a demolition delay review by the.

I

Bloomington historic preservation commission before planning, could release.

I

The certificate of zoning compliance so the three conditions I mentioned, the.

I

First is, and this is in your packet as well, this permit authorizes the interior.

I

Remodel, as shown in the building permit number two, the only exterior change is.

I

Permitted to the structures to replace existing boards on the porch. This does.

I

Not permit expansion of the porch and number three, no new windows or door.

I

Doors are permitted, no changes to the footprint of house are permitted, so the planner at the time is louis included. Those.

I

Particular conditions, one because we just try to be clear on the certificate.

I

What is being asked in what is being permitted and two? Because if those.

I

Thresholds were those established. The threshold that had we known work was.

I

Going to go over those those allowances than we would have required, the.

I

Demolition delay review because of the listing in the survey the property would.

I

Be subject to partial demolition, and this is in your packet as well, but in.

I

The definition of the bloomington of partial demolition in the municipal code.

I

Any work resulting in the obscuring from view of 40% or more of the exterior.

I

Facade on a structure or removal or destruction of an exterior facade of 40%.

I

Or more of an area of any exterior facade on the structure and then or.

I

Replacement of any one newer door where the window or door opening is enlarged.

I

Or obscured from view those two, those two details are listed in the definition.

I

Of partial demolition- and that is what happened at the site, and so we would.

I

Have required demolition delay, so I have included the papers here for the.

I

Application, so this is mr. cons certificate. I'm excuse me building.

I

Permit application that we received from the building department on november 1st.

I

It just says under scope of work, please see attached and then you can see at the.

I

Bottom, that staff identified this yes, this is contributing on both on both.

I

Historic preservation lists- and that is a note to the planner to say: hey if this.

I

Work meets definition for partial that demolition you're going to have to do.

I

Demolition delay, but mr. kahn included a list of items to be done here on the.

I

Second page of the application, and none of the I.

I

Included would include exterior changes beyond the floorboards mentioned in the.

I

Ccc so it's all interior work again reflected here on page 3 of his submit.

I

All, except for except for the boards that were to be replaced on the porch, so.

I

This is an image of the house before work began and another image here and.

I

Then the main main issue that we had worked on outside of the bounds of the.

I

Ccc is the southern wall which you can see circled here in red three existing.

I

Windows before work was done. We received a complaint from a member of the public.

I

Who is also on the historic preservation? Commission, so me knew that this property.

I

Just based on its characteristics would very likely have to go through.

I

Demolition delay, if the type of work that you see here was being done, so you.

I

Can see this is the western side of the property, with all of the siding removed.

I

In this area, and then this is the corner as well, you can see the roof has been.

I

Taken off to be reshingled and then all of this siding was removed as well.

I

Unclear about whether or not the supporting walls underneath were removed.

I

But this is the southern wall, where the three windows previously were that I.

I

Showed you complete, apparently completely removed and rebuilt, and you.

I

Can kind of see that here in the next picture as well- and there was some.

I

Question about whether or not this window opening had been changed when we.

I

See received the initial complaint so we've reached, we did a stop-work order.

I

With the monroe county building department to say, like hey, let's put the.

I

Brakes on this work and kind of figure out, what's going on the seems to be.

I

Beyond the threshold of what you were approved to do, mr. cohn called.

I

Immediately and I with him- and he indicated that no, he did.

I

Not feel that he was doing work outside of the bounds of the ccc. I hadn't.

I

Visited the site myself yet beyond just driving past it, so he had new tenants.

I

Moving in in less than a week, so we told him: okay, we'll lift the stop work order.

I

So that you can finish because demolition delay, it is unlikely, it was.

I

Unlikely that demolition delay would have recommended a designation for this.

I

One house, I was just a it- was a process that needed to be done, but we felt that.

I

The work had already been done to the house and it was going to go to.

I

Demolition delay review if the complaint was accurate, with the work already being.

I

Completed so we told mr. kahn, he could keep working and we would verify that.

I

Whether or not he had gone over what the ccc allowed so then we went out and saw.

I

Families found the house and the state and we did issue a notice of violation.

I

Which you can see in the email that I sent to mr. kahn on august 16th, that we.

I

Were pretty clear about what would happen if it did turn out, in fact that.

I

He was working outside of the ccc and then he went ahead and is appealing that.

I

To you so / bloomington municipal code in the unified development ordinance.

I

Chapter, excuse me: title 20 chapter 10.04 zero. We can assess fines of $25 per day.

I

With a second or subsequent violation should be twice the previous fine in.

I

This instance, we did not continue doubling the fines, we did a fine amount.

I

That would be equal to two hundred and fifty dollars a day from the day we.

I

Received the complaint to the day that he could have gone to the historic.

I

Preservation, commission for demolition delay review. He had to wait an.

I

Additional two weeks because they didn't have quorum, but that was not something.

I

He could control that's how he came to the amount I mention.

I

Now, because I'm assuming that that will kind of come up, though the amount of.

I

Violation is not the purview of this board; that is something that would have.

I

To be contested in court, so he is, he is appealing the fact that.

I

We issued a violation that we issued the notice of violation that he had done.

I

Work outside of the bounds of certificate of zoning compliance, so we.

I

Think that it's clear that he did and we hope that you will deny the.

I

Administrative appeal and based on the findings in the report.

I

Thank you, okay, petitioner! Please, if you could step to the lectern, didn't hear me.

L

My name is tariq khan. Do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and.

A

Nothing but I do okay with up to 20 minutes. Okay,.

L

Yes, so this is one of the houses that I have done. I have done many many houses.

L

And in this case it was a very unique situation. House was in a very bad.

L

Condition we did not know as well be going into it and as the things.

L

Progressed the monroe county department, people did come and I showed it to them.

L

Of course they saw the situation and they said that. Yes, it's a pretty bad.

L

Situation and you need to you, can go ahead and.

L

Keep doing what you're doing, and these were several times a different.

L

Inspectors came and the game, and there was no problem and I personally thought.

L

That if there was a problem proceeding, then they would have told me to go and.

L

Contact some other department and get this thing fixed, but no such mention was.

L

They didn't mention any such thing, so we kept going. The problem was that all the.

L

Places that they are telling they are, she has shown you. The siding, was either.

L

Burned or totally destroyed the whole band of the house was there the joists.

L

Are connected, they were dangling from the ceiling and there were no connection.

L

So the house is in a very bad bad condition, was in the bad condition and.

L

There was no reason for me to take the siding off unless I had to do that and.

L

Apparently they had been taking pictures. They would have been perfectly fine if.

L

They had told me and told me to come in and talk to them. Nobody told me any such.

L

Thing, except for the very end they they called me and sent me this inspector has.

L

Just come in only half an hour before and he came and gave me a stop-work.

L

Order- and I said you were here just now and he said oh yeah, it's not. I have.

L

Nothing to do with this- this is the coming from the building department.

L

I said, that's very strange and he said yeah, I I don't know I don't have any.

L

Control over that either that's when I called jackie so any anyway, the the.

L

Condition was that the siding I took off was either they were some. Some of it was.

L

Burnt and the only thing that I had was in internal panic,.

L

Joist, which were curved original word probably, and then you had plastic.

L

Outside no insulation, nothing in between, so I was compared to do those things I.

L

Abide by, I took care of everything and all the windows were put back. The thing.

L

That I was accused were that the window was not in line because the floor. This.

L

Second window on there on the left, this one- it is actually is optical thing from.

L

Outside inside the window cannot go any further down because there is a flow.

L

Right there, so we had to raise it a little bit so and the back side. You.

L

Should the back side, the only thing that I did not put that window back, that I am.

L

Telling the I have not put the window in yes when on the right was after putting.

L

The new floor, it was so close to the flooring that it was in the past. There.

L

Have been two incidents in the past five years that people have basically broke.

L

Through that window and one guy was drunk and and he was lying in the bed.

L

Cut out in a girl's bed, so it first david only that was the only reason I.

L

Did not discussed the window in question. I did not put it back in because of the.

L

Security reasons and in the past that I have other sites that I had worked, that.

L

Nancy houston told me if the houses, if the windows or anything, is in the back.

L

We are not about that. Only the one that, in the.

L

Front, if you do them and if they cannot be moved or anything so that keeping.

L

That in mind, I did not put that window back and that's the only window that the.

L

Other two windows, those were the windows I had put them.

L

Some time back and I didn't know there is going to become such a big deal and.

L

The top window also the third on the top small one that I also I put that put.

L

That in some time back, I have this house for about 15-20 years. So that's the only.

L

Defense I have that is that that window was too close after the new floors were.

L

Put in that, it was actually presenting itself as a more security situation.

L

Other than that, all the other windows were put back where they belong.

L

So I think those penalty is pretty stiff for what one window, if they really.

L

Wanted I can put the window back, although it is not a very good situation.

L

Because the window will be presenting itself again as a security risk. Thank.

A

You, okay questions for staff or petitioner. I have one to start and.

A

Jackie, when you showed an earlier photograph of the front of the building.

A

At the corner, there was a second entry there on the on the left side and now.

A

There isn't one did the when was that? Do we know was that alteration made as part.

A

Of this- yes, I believe so, but mr. khan could probably speak to mr. khanna- could.

A

You please clarify that, for us did that second entry go away. Yes, it is very.

L

Dilapidated situation here, that is why I had taken.

L

Four things down over there because there was a artificially the sometimes.

L

The door was added, it was lopsided to be when they took this handling out off it.

L

Was in a they had cut the in such a way that it was creating a very bad.

L

Situation, the house was tilting in that direction and it was not a good support.

L

And the door was, could never open closed properly and it was never used as a.

L

There were already two doors in the front: the three quality three doors in.

L

This house, this is the fourth door and in such a small house, a fourth door, not.

L

Serving any purpose water is going in there and all the stairs are fitting to.

L

The right-hand side to the to the body of the house- and there was a very bad.

L

Situation and you door would not open and close properly, and it was added at.

L

Some point I don't know when, but that was a a problem, then that door was added.

B

Before you purchased the home, yes, okay, so this door was not added after you.

B

Purchased it no okay, so this the building permit that was issued. This is.

B

To staff stated that this door had to be had to stay. Is that correct, correct, okay,.

B

And that was clearly stated, I believe in in the document that was given to the.

B

Petitioner, yes, okay and now back to the petitioner. When did you go back and ask.

B

To have that waved I didn't know, I just had the building department, people.

L

Coming to get that, it was that's okay, so you had the building department. Tell you.

B

Did you were you present when you received the stipulations on the.

B

Construction, initially you you were given that document by which department.

B

Gave it to a building department, so we issue the certificate of zoning.

I

Compliance, it goes back to the building department.

I

The petitioner receives his building permit. It comes with a copy of our.

I

Certificate as well, okay- and I do not know if there were conversations had.

I

With miss lewis about clarifying what was going to be in that before, so to.

B

Step in and you did not follow up and go back to your own building department.

B

Personnel and ask if these conversations were accurate. Oh I'm sorry, miss lewis.

I

Was a planning staff member she's no longer in the department? We did not ask.

I

Building department, I'm sorry, can you repeat that? Well what I'm trying to.

B

Understand is the petitioner has stated that he did make. Did inquire with.

B

Building personnel building department personnel- I'm just trying to find out, we.

I

Did not ask that would be typical, so they they are not going to weigh in on.

I

Planning issues so because this is an issue that our contestants a to.

I

Petitioners, you don't need a permit from us, but you should call planning because they don't know our regulations in inspection, inspection situation. They.

I

Would not that's not always going to happen into the petitioner? We've talked.

B

A lot about the outside and you talked about the floor, moving the floor being.

B

Higher, how inside the walls in question the door in the windows, how much did you.

B

Change the interior layout of that building that you on the home was it.

B

Substantial or it was at exactly the same and you just covered up the window.

B

In the door, okay, when we started out it was the only back third of the house, the.

L

Floor was buckling and all the walls were twisted mm-hmm. So I said in the.

L

Very beginning, in the end of my appeal that new drywall throughout the house, I.

L

Have said that so do if you're gonna take that inside paneling off and there.

L

Is no such installation and all you can see the plastic the there were burnt.

L

Areas and there was a chimney- the whole side was burned.

L

And the wood was gone so previous owner at some point did not fix anything. They.

L

Just put the plastic outside and there was a paneling inside. That's all there.

L

Was to it so when I take that everything down the.

L

Back third of the house that I was going to change the flooring that was all.

L

Buckled up and pretty bad shape, especially that door that there that was.

L

Buckling up like this, so there was a reason that the water was not coming in.

L

From this, from the top and inside and trees had fallen on top desire, so that.

L

Well, I appreciate and understand the issues you had with the walls. What I'm.

B

Asking is: did you make any changes to the interior layout of the home during.

B

This construction practically the same thing, that's the only thing is that.

L

Changes maybe reduce the size of the kitchen. That's all I have done that's it.

L

Okay, change; okay! So this this piece right here, jackie that you're showing me.

B

So this is what's the change there that I'm with it. This is the site interior.

I

Cycling that mr. khan submitted with his building permit and he's showing that.

I

He's expanding this bathroom, the width of the bathroom and reducing the width.

I

Of the kitchen, and does that room itself have any connection to the door or the.

B

Window, that's been so the windows are along this back wall, okay, and so this is.

I

A southern wall, alright, so the window, that's no longer.

B

There, where would that window now be if it was to be replaced? Let me show you.

I

Hold on still be kitchen, okay, but I'm saying on the floor plan I'm trying to.

I

Get a 16 e as to why the window wasn't replaced whether it was big in this area.

I

And the other side, the bedroom, not too large, yeah. Yes, so there was a window in the bedroom. That's the one that he's talking about being very close to the ground. Then there's a double window that was.

I

Smaller and higher up that in the kitchen and then there's a third.

I

Very small window quite raised that would have been in the bathroom right.

L

Around the kitchen, I put those windows here, the dot is, I understood, those two.

B

There, yes, that the wall moves from the dotted line. It moved over to the left to.

B

The solid line correct yes, thank you. We do that here on.

L

The other side, thank you so, jackie from this from the report. It.

A

Says that you spoke to mr. khan, but so there was a stop work order because.

A

Because there was acknowledgement that work was being done outside the bounds.

A

And bounds of what was had been approved previously and that mr. khan called the.

A

Department, after the stop order, was put in place. That was one week before the.

L

Whole thing and then he and then at that time he insisted that no changes would.

A

Be made to the exterior yes, so I yes, we spoke on the phone and then I emailed.

I

Him the nice stages, so there would be record of you know what we talked about.

I

And that's in your packet here: yes, he stated no exterior changes outside of.

I

The approved cdc work had been done. That seemed incredibly unlikely to me from.

I

The pictures that had been submitted by the member of the public- but you know.

I

Knowing that the timeline that he was under and the that the repercussions of.

I

What he had done would be the same whether or not he finished the work right now or in three months. That's why we decided to assurances. Yes, you decided.

A

To to to basically release the work order, yeah, it was a combination of.

I

Things we knew he had parties moving in run again, that we would still be able to.

I

Issue a nano v-word that to ended up being untrue. Okay, I was pretty sure it.

I

Was untrue, it will be untrue, but they intended like five days left of work.

I

Okay, something along those lines decided at that point just to let him finish.

A

Yeah not worth it to hold up finishing to go through the demolition delay.

I

Process which, because of the time of year and did end up happening to mr.

I

Kahn, sometimes they cancel those meetings for lack of horror to not have.

I

That all be hinging on okay, help me to understand and place your questions in.

D

The right order in my head- this is my first administrative appeal. I've been on.

D

So I'm really trying to understand what our role is here and what I mean by that.

D

Is it sounds like he clearly violated the ccc? However, there was an obvious.

D

Misunderstanding I can see how, if the person who's delivering the is it a ccc.

D

Am I saying that right, huh the person who's delivering it is then.

D

Also, coming back and saying, oh, this is fine. This is fine. This is, I can see how.

D

There could be a misunderstanding there. So are we just supposed to decide.

D

Whether there seems reason that it was okay that he did what he did or are we.

D

Just saying no obviously he violated it and therefore sure so mr. roker can.

I

Clarify if I say this incorrectly, but my understanding is your role is to he is.

I

Appealing that that should not that we should not have issued that notice of.

I

Violation that he did not violate his ccc, and so you are either agreeing with.

I

Us or disagreeing with us, we are saying he violated his ccc. That's what the.

I

Notice of violation says and then it's your role to agree or disagree. I guess.

D

What is the criteria? Where would we have room to disagree? Well, michael rooker, on.

H

The city attorney for the city, you have the authority to do that on any basis.

H

You would feel as appropriate, so you can't modify. As jackie said, your goal is.

H

Not to modify the fines or change the fines that are assessed, that's something.

H

That would be done subsequently, but other than that do the administrative.

H

Body reviewing this, this nov in the appeal of the nov, so.

H

You have a great deal of authority, so, unlike the other types of cases that we.

D

Hear there are no set criteria for deciding whether or not there was right.

I

So, there's not a set group of findings, so the notice of violation that he was.

I

Issued there is a a table in the code about what violations we can issue for.

I

And his was for failure to comply with his ccc, and so he is saying that no, he.

I

Did comply with it and you would be deciding whether or not you agree with.

I

That administrative appeals are wide-reaching, so this type you know like.

I

If you there may be others where there may be, you might feel you had more.

I

Discretion on, if someone was appealing a decision that we made to in from staffs.

I

Point of view this is pretty cut. This one is pretty cut-and-dry, but obviously.

I

Mr. kahn would hope that you would disagree with that. Okay, thank you.

D

Anybody who has had some experience with this one away in.

C

The I guess question for for mr. khan yeah you were you delivered this.

C

Certificate of zoning compliance prior to your construction. I'm sorry did you.

C

Receive this? Yes, sir, because of sodium on yes and you ran, you read it yes and.

C

In number two, it says the only exterior changes permitted to the structure is to.

C

Replace existing boards on the porch, how did you read that and still come to the.

C

Conclusion that you could mention of the expansion of the porch, I didn't expand.

L

The porch, no, it says the only exterior changes permitted to the structure is to.

C

Replace existing boards on the porch, I would read that to mean you can't make.

C

Any changes to the exterior of the home except to replace those boards. How did.

C

You interpret that, to give you permission to move windows and replace.

C

Siding just one window in the back and that I was understanding I thought, was.

L

That it's in the back and it's not gonna, make any difference. Because in the past.

L

I have done many many houses in which they did not care about the back windows.

L

Of the door- and it was what about the door door? Yes, there's two things: okay,.

B

Yeah, I grant you, they were not count counting doors.

L

So I didn't bring it up, but that's fine, no siding it's at all. Sorry, huh oh sight.

L

Exciting I had to change the siding I mean I take it off, but I put the siding.

L

Back as weird as it was exactly same exact, same place and yeah.

L

This that the joists are not connected, and they are just dangling in the air.

L

And the band is rotted out completely in sort of fix that I have to take the.

L

Siding off then I put it back and it was back to where it I understand. I.

C

Understand why you thought you needed to do the word right? What I don't.

C

Understand is why you thought you could do it without violating this. This is the.

L

Gap that between I thought that when I'm talking to a building department and.

L

They say you do what you have to do and they have been five different visits. So.

L

I understood that they is just one body, okay and they are the ones I got the.

L

Permits from their command first and they're, going to stop me if they had to.

L

Do that, so your understanding was that the word of the building department.

C

Inspector on site superseded whatever was a very strange situation. We did not.

L

Anticipate that I did not anticipate that all everything would be rotten and.

L

That burnt understand, I understand, I understand why you thought you didn't do.

C

The work I just I want to understand why you thought you had permission to do the.

C

Work, the way we talk to them and they told us to do what to do and mark what.

L

How much wood to be used, and how did you know there have been many many into.

L

Visits, so that's what I understood that I am complying with everything: okay, she.

D

Was delivered by the same personnel in the building department, who were doing.

D

The inspections it's not delivered so when, when a building permit, is prepared.

I

In the building department has to wait for our ccc to be issued and.

I

They contact the petitioner, who comes and picks it up at the building.

I

Department and pays for it there at the bill. That is accurate. I mean mrs. mr.

I

Kahn said himself here tonight: he has many many properties in town. He is very.

I

Familiar, I would say just from my work in this department, with both departments.

I

That's why I, as early you know, wanted to mention. I wish I could know whether or.

I

Not miss lewis had spoken to him. That would be common in a case where we were.

I

Worried about whether or not something in a demo delay and wanted to clarify.

I

With the petitioner, what work was to be done.

I

You know I've spoken to mr. kahn about numerous sites in my five years. It's not.

I

Like we're not like a ghost behind the curtain and no one knows where they're.

I

And it's just the building department working with them. They are the ones who.

I

Physically hand, the paper to the petitioner when the building permit is.

I

Issued, thank you so jackie. Is it your understanding or belief that the the.

A

Remediation works that apparently was necessary to make this structure.

A

Habitable and safe could have been done without violating the cdc did not have.

I

The impact I I think the work so what should have been happening? Tell your.

A

Wedge and ultra, it should have included the amount of work that was going to be.

I

Done if you open up a site and find that more work needs to be done, this happens.

I

To all the time in very contractors, all over town you stop and call and say: hey.

I

I need to you, know, do x, y and see more. Do I need to do something different? You.

I

Might need to amend your permit in this case, he would have had to have gone to.

I

The historic preservation commission to do much of the work that he did remove.

I

The doors remove the windows even taking that siding off. You know we are not a.

I

Body that we do not staff the historic preservation commission, I can say from.

I

My experience in the department that I don't think it would be likely that they.

I

Would designate this one house, but for all I know it's the most historic house.

I

In the city- and they would have done that, had they known that these types of.

I

Changes were going to be made, you know, originals, there was original siting.

I

Underneath we did get pictures from the complaint and above that and that all.

I

That stuff at our move, that's something that they consider so had. He known had.

I

He opened it up and realized more work needed to be done. He should have contacted the department that would have put him behind. He would have had to have.

I

Wait to do waited to do that work so that may not have worked with the time.

I

Line that he wanted to have done, we could would have tried to work with him.

I

Obviously, of course, if that was possible, but he would have had to have gotten to.

I

The historic preservation commission in the summer during the working season.

I

Right so that, just to underscore the this kind of thing happens, all the time.

A

Especially with old houses, you open things up, you find things are not what.

A

You think they are yes and, and so it's a very reasonable procedure to have to.

A

Check in again with hpc, yes, so to get directions, and we and that's why, in this.

I

Case the planner tried to be clear that what you've asked to do is fine, but.

I

There is I'm saying you know, I'm limiting that to what you've asked to do.

I

And I think she did a good job of doing that and the conditions that she.

I

Included, I don't think they're, I don't think they're unclear. Okay. Thank you. The.

A

You'll have an opportunity to speak in a little while anything else.

A

Yes sure, actually I do have a question for it's a question for you. So in your.

D

Experience with properties before then have you dealt with the hpc and gone in.

D

Front of them and gotten permission and all say and sorry, it was always very.

L

Smooth, it was never a problem like this ever I have done many many houses, okay,.

L

And demolition delay was given, it was clear from the get-go okay, this time the.

L

The people who came to see me it may be very clear to her and in their.

L

Department and the whole structure how the person should move if this happens.

L

They should come here. It's not clear to me how. How is it different this time.

L

This time it was, the house was in a far worse condition that I've ever seen.

L

Before and along that all along.

L

Inspectors had been coming and I was under the impression that everything is.

L

Okay, because I had never had to go back to do anything ever in between.

L

Once the permit was given, we finished the job and they approved it. I just six.

L

Or seven just across the street, I did it it's a far bigger house, ten bedroom.

L

Houses, I didn't have to go through that. I didn't go in-between anywhere. We said.

L

We need to fix this house, they gave a permit. The respecters came it's just too.

L

Smooth 10th street three houses- I did never had.

L

This problem for 18 years, nine never had this problem serendipity. I.

L

Created and I had a building created, never had this problem. I do not know.

L

That I had to go back. I did not know that on the other ones. Had you gone.

D

Through demolition delay on any of those some in some- yes, but it wasn't a smooth.

L

Process I didn't have to go in after I got the permit and I had to do this, but.

L

Van nuys was a untenable situation and the inspectors came and they said, go.

L

Ahead and do what you have to do so I thought that I don't have to. I can do.

L

Whatever needs to be done to save this house, it's a disaster complete disaster.

L

And the house was, I had a budget for only $20,000. I spent over $100,000.

L

Fixing the house, thank you.

A

Are we done with questions? Okay, it's anybody in the public here who would.

A

Like to speak to this petition, seeing no one, we are back to the petitioner, you.

A

Have some time remaining how much about about 15 minutes? 15 minutes? Okay, you.

A

Have up to 15 minutes for any last comments? In my opinion, the stiff penalty.

L

They're put on me, it should be either removed or mitigated, because I did not.

L

Understand the procedure- and I did to the what it was best for this house to.

L

Be stable and not be in the situation that it was in before too I didn't.

L

Anticipate- and I was I guess I was misguided- I'm I know now that that that.

L

If this kind of thing happened, you have to go back, but well how I got misled was.

L

But by the inspectors they said you got to do you need to do what you need to do.

L

We are fine with it and they're, not one time all this time, I thought they will.

L

Report or if they need to be these guys, could have. There was a long period of.

L

Time if they think I was violating in month after one month, I started two.

L

Months I have started they could have. It was a very very last moment they called.

L

Me and did the work work stopped work on our stove totally flabbergasted. That's.

L

All okay, we're back to of the board for action.

A

I will entertain a motion if anybody has anything they'd like to discuss for them.

A

B

Motion soundtrack: do I make a motion, no I'll go ahead and put a motion out there.

B

That we can discuss that I'll recommend denial of a a 45 19 based on the.

B

Based on the report provided to us by staff and I'll second that and then that.

B

Will allow us to discuss further yeah now what I'll I'll jump in.

B

I think, what's what's interesting and should be considered in this light. Is.

B

That we have an experienced developer, someone who's done this before and there.

B

Is an unwritten code in town, which is just do the work? Do it the way you want.

B

To do it, no one's ever gonna check on you. They come back and find it later.

B

That it's very unlikely you're gonna have to do anything about it. So it's.

B

That idea, if don't ask questions, don't ask permission, do it and ask forgiveness.

B

Later and I I think that that's what this situation here, based on the.

B

Petitioners own words of I've done many homes, I've done many houses and he.

B

Should know better so I'll lay that out there.

C

Yeah, I think that it's very clear that the work done here was a violation of.

C

The ccc there's almost no question about that. I think the the only thing that.

C

That gives me pause and gives me. Sympathy in this case is that I can see.

C

How it would be confusing I if, if there is a you, know, government inspector.

C

Standing on the site saying continue the work. I can see why that would be.

C

Confusing it is true that an experienced developer should know better and should.

C

Know the difference between the building department and the city planning.

C

Department as well so yeah, tough one yeah and that's a point well made. I.

B

Think that I think that it again to go back to the kind of way things work on.

B

The street is yes the question someone says you had to give me a permission. I.

B

Mean I could ask a neighbor hey. Can I make that change to the house? A neighbor said it was ok. So I asked somebody, that's that's the distinction. I'm.

B

Drawing if this was an inexperienced, if the petitioner were inexperienced in.

B

These matters, I would say that, there's a valid issue.

B

To look at here that there was some confusion, I think the the reason that.

B

I'm leaning towards actually building for my own motion is that the petitioner.

B

Has made it very clear that their inexperienced renovator it, regardless of.

B

The amount of money or the time this is someone who has done in my opinion, what.

B

Many developers will do, which is they got the permit, they did whatever they.

B

Wanted and hope that nobody found out no jackie, we are only options, are yes and.

D

No, we can't modify anything and has mr. khan been in this situation before that.

D

You know of when there was a violation like this, that he did not follow the cccc and then later got an appeal, or I do not believe.

I

He's administratively appealed before you'd have to ask him to verify that and.

I

I would say you probably have to ask him to verify on the violations as well. Okay,.

I

I yeah if we lost our opportunity to ask those questions of the petitioner. We are.

D

We passed that point now, I'm just I just since mike isn't here I that may be.

I

Germane to you, but I do think I think it's kind of isn't. I don't think it's.

A

Relevant, I will say, I think demolition delay is an important process and and.

A

The historic preservation commission has a role to play, while this is a.

A

Contributing structure it's on a very, very prominent corner and we have seen.

A

Some architectural elements removed after planting staff had direct.

A

Communications with the petitioner and asked them and received assurances that.

A

That, though, that windows and doors and such we're not going to be removed, so I.

A

Feel like whether? What who knows what the historic preservation commission.

A

Would have done, but I think that the work was clearly in violation of what.

A

Was issued in the scope, which was laid out in plain language and just the fact.

A

That the petitioners, the communication, was misleading to to staff who was whose.

A

Job it is to follow up on these things and and and look at compliance. I I have.

A

A hard time with so for me if this is a very clear case, and I will be voting for.

A

Denial does anybody have any other okay, so.

A

We'll call please.

A

So, yes is, for done? Yes, yes, yes, yes, so the administrative appeal is denied and.

A

We are adjourned.

G