►
From YouTube: September 17, 2020 Zoning Board of Adjustment
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
Good
afternoon,
everyone
welcome
to
this
live
broadcast
of
our
virtual
meeting
today
september
20th,
I'm
sorry
september,
17th
2020..
This
meeting
includes
the
remote
participation
of
members
as
authorized
under
minnesota
statutes,
section
13d
.021,
due
to
the
declared
local
health
pandemic
for
the
record,
my
name
is
matt
perry
and
I'm
chair
of
the
zoning
board
of
adjustment.
D
C
B
E
B
B
C
B
E
C
F
B
Mrs
cooper,
you
this
is
for
the
agenda,
so
you
can
vote
on
this.
It's
the
next
item
on
approval
of
actions
that
you'll
have
to
abstain
from.
B
F
B
B
B
Communications,
chair
perry,
members
of
the
board.
There
are
no
petitions
or
communications
this
evening.
Thank
you.
Okay,
let's
review
the
agenda,
I'm
going
to
read
the
agenda
number
and
the
address
of
the
project
and
state
whether
it's
slated
for
consent,
continuance,
withdrawal
return
or
discussion
and
I'll
just
talk
briefly
about
what
consent
items
are
and
what
discussion
items
are.
B
Consent
items
are
those
items
that
will
be
passed
without
discussion
by
the
board.
We
will
be
adhering
to
the
staff
recommendation
found
on
your
agenda
under
these
items
recommended
motions
section,
any
applicable
condition
will
be
listed
in
the
same
section.
If
you
agree
with
this
recommendation,
including
any
applicable
conditions,
you
need
to
do
nothing
and
the
board
will
pass
it
as
recommended.
B
Please
check
in
with
a
staff
member
assigned
to
that
item.
If
you
have
questions
following
the
decision,
if
you
disagree
with
the
recommendation,
please
indicate
you'd
like
to
speak
against
that
one
item.
When
I
ask
and
we'll
put
it
on
the
the
discussion
agenda
discussion
items
these
are
items
that
the
board
will
take
public
testimony
deliberate
on
and
make
a
decision
after
the
public.
Testimony
has
been
heard
for
each
particular
discussion
item.
I
will
close
the
public
hearing
for
that
agenda
item
once
I
close
the
public
hearing
for
an
item.
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Let's
review
the
items
on
the
agenda
that
are
being
recommended
for
consent,
they
are
agenda
items
number
five,
six,
seven
and
eight.
Is
there
a
motion
to
adopt
these
items
on
consent
so.
B
G
Thank
you,
charitarian
members
of
the
board.
This
item
is
a
request
for
a
variant
to
construct
a
fence
exceeding
the
maximum
height
of
six
feet
in
required
interior
side
and
rear
yards
at
the
property
at
5825,
logan
avenue.
South.
This
property
is
located
in
the
r1a
zoning
district,
including
the
next
slide.
Please,
this
is
a
photo
showing
taken
from
the
front
yard.
It's
a
single
family
dwelling,
one
story
with
a
detached
garage
in
the
rear.
G
Previously,
the
the
property
had
a
wooden
fence
measuring
six
feet
tall
along
the
north
interior
side,
lot
line
primarily
in
between
the
house
and
the
garage,
but
the
applicant
has
removed
the
existing
fence
and
begun
the
process
of
replacing
it
with
a
new
wooden
fence
measuring
to
a
maximum
height
of
eight
feet
tall,
and
they
also
constructed
a
a
new
portion
of
the
fence
measuring
those
same
specifications
which
would
extend
within
the
required
rear
yard
as
well,
could
be
advanced
to
the
next
slide.
Please.
Thank
you.
G
This
is
a
site
plan
prepared
by
the
applicant
which,
which
includes
some
highlights
added
by
staff,
showing
the
the
two
sections
of
the
fence
which
have
begun
to
be
installed
by
the
applicant.
So
again,
there
is
a
initial
length
constructed
within
the
required
north
interior
side
lot
line,
that
is
on
the
top
right
portion
of
this
plan
and
then
a
new
section
within
the
required
rear
yard
to
the
bottom
left
again,
both
of
these
fences
are
are
constructed
of
wood
materials,
measuring
100,
opaque
and
with
a
maximum
height
of
eight
feet.
G
Please
again,
this
is
another
photo
taken
from
the
front,
and
on
that
left
side
you
can
show
a
portion
of
the
new
fence
which
construction
has
already
has
already
begun
in
the
next
slide.
Please
another
photo
this
time
taking
from
the
rear
yard
of
the
subject
property
showing
again
the
new
fence
for
which
construction
has
already
begun
in
the
next
slide.
G
Please
this
is
taken,
and
I
believe
this
is
showing
from
the
rear
yard
showing
showing
the
in-progress
photo
of
the
proposed
fence
again
within
the
required
interiors
or
within
the
required
rear
yard.
Excuse
me
on
the
right
side
of
this
photo.
You
can
see
a
portion
of
a
different
fence
which
actually
is
on
the
property
of
the
adjacent,
it's
on
the
adjacent
property
to
the
south
and
is
not
the
subject
of
of
this
and
variance
request
stay
on
this
slide
for
the
rest.
B
Mr
colas,
I'm
sorry
for
interrupting,
but
just
for
the
sake
of
contacts,
can
you
take
a
guess
at
how
high
that
fence
is
behind
the
one?
That's
under
construction
is.
G
The
maximum
height
of
an
opaque
fence
require
permitted
by
the
zoning
code
within
required.
Interior
side
or
rear
yards
is
six
feet,
and
the
applicant's
request
in
this
case
is
to
lawfully
establish
the
the
proposed
fence
for
which
construction
has
already
begun,
an
opaque
wooden
fence
with
a
maximum
height
of
eight
feet
within
these
required
yards
to
talk
about
the
findings.
G
The
first
required
finding
regarding
practical
difficulties
in
complying
with
the
ordinance
because
of
circumstances
unique
to
the
property
staff
finds
that
this
is
not
met.
The
subject.
Property
is
approximately
40
feet
wide
and
a
little
over
5
100
square
feet
in
lot
area.
These
are
both
typical
for
residential
properties,
including
single
family
dwellings
in
minneapolis,
and
the
location
of
the
house
in
the
garage
on
their
property
are
also
fairly
typical.
G
The
subject
property
appears
to
be
relatively
flat,
with
no
significant
grade
changes
which
would
substantially
impact
visibility
to
or
from
the
subject
property
and,
furthermore,
the
the
new
fence.
The
proposed
fence
would
be
installed
by
the
applicator
in
excess
of
the
maximum
fence
height,
which
replaced
an
existing
fence
along
the
within
the
required
north
interior
side
yard.
Of
the
subject,
property
for
the
second
required
finding
regarding
reasonable
use
of
the
property,
in
keeping
with
the
spirit
and
intent
of
the
ordinance
in
the
comprehensive
plan
staff
finds
that
this
is
not
met.
G
The
zoning
ordinance
further
restricts
fence
heights
to
a
maximum
of
six
feet
for
fences
which
are
sixty
percent
or
more
opaque
and
located
within
required
interior
side
or
rear
yards,
and
this
is
disallowance
is
provided
that
the
neighboring
dwellings
are
set
back
at
least
five
feet
from
the
shared
lot
line,
which
is
the
case
for
the
adjacent
property.
G
In
this
case,
the
spirit
and
intent
of
these
of
this
ordinance
is
to
promote
the
public
health
safety
and
welfare,
to
encourage
an
aesthetic
environment
to
allow
for
privacy
and
to
maintain
access
for
light
and
air,
even
though
the
applicant's
proposed
eight-foot
fence
would
allow
for
substantial
privacy
in
the
rear
yard
of
the
subject.
G
Property
staff
finds
that
it
is
not
in
keeping
with
the
spirit
and
intent
of
the
ordinance
to
balance
the
need
for
privacy
on
the
subject:
property,
with
concerns
for
visibility,
aesthetics
and
safety
for
adjacent
properties
in
the
public
right
of
way,
including
the
alley
within
required
yards
near
adjacent
properties
in
the
public
right-of-way.
The
presence
of
larger
structures
is
often
more
apparent
for
users
of
those
adjacent
spaces
due
to
its
its
proximity
and
these
taller
taller
fences
more
substantially
limit
visibility
in
these
areas
as
well.
G
The
applicant
could
construct
a
fence
to
a
height
of
eight
feet
in
their
required
yard,
without
a
variance
if
it
consisted
of
open,
decorative
and
ornamental
materials
and
was
less
than
sixty
percent
opaque,
as
the
increased
light
and
visibility
facilitated
by
such
a
design
would
mitigate
potential
impacts
due
to
the
increased
height
for
the
third
finding
regarding
the
essential
character
of
the
locality
and
potential
for
injury
or
detriment
to
the
subject,
property
or
nearby
properties
staff
finds
that
this
is
not
met.
The
essential
character,
essential
character.
B
B
Is
the
applicant
on
on
the
phone.
D
Chair
perry,
members
of
the
board,
we
are
still
trying
to
contact
the
applicant.
Our
part
of
our
tech
support
team
has
just
reached
out
to
him
on
the
phone,
so
we're
he's
not
with
the
meeting
yet,
but
we
hope
to
get
him
in
soon.
B
B
Is
this
something
that
sent
out
a
couple
of
days
a
week
when,
when
does
this
happen
for
applicants.
D
Sheriff
perry,
members
of
the
board,
the
meeting
invite
us
pulled
from
the
website
about
an
hour
before
the
meeting
so
at
3
30
this
afternoon,
and
at
that
point
the
applicant
had
not
yet
signed
up.
So
he
contacted
the
planner
mr
kolhas,
and
between
myself
and
mr
cole
house,
we
were
able
to
put
him
in
touch
with
it
to
get
him
signed
up
for
tonight's
meeting
and
to
get
the
call-in
information.
D
But
since
in
that
time,
in
the
last
since
about
3
45,
we've
been
working
with
him
to
try
and
get
him
into
this
meeting,
and
it
still
has
not
yet
come
to
fruition.
D
No,
it's
I'm
trying
to
get
clarification.
Hang
on
one
moment.
A
Okay
yeah
see
chair,
perry,
yeah
like
like
rachel
mentioned.
He
had
missed
the
the
deadline
to
get
into
the
meeting,
so
we
sent
him
the
credentials
to
contact
and
get
into
the
meeting
via
phone,
and
apparently
that's
not
working
for
him.
So
I've
reached
out
to
our
I.t
person
to
reach
out
to
him
directly
to
see
if
we
can
get
him
into
the
meeting
via
phone.
B
All
right,
so
he
missed
a
deadline,
and
now
there's
some
in
in
missing.
The
deadline
means
that
there
is
has
to
have
been
a
special
process
to
to
get
into
participate,
and
there
are
some
hurdles
that
are
being
trying
to
overcome
in
doing
that.
Right
now
is
that
about
it.
D
B
And
I
see
from
the
chat
that
the
applicant
is
trying
to
call
more
progress,
good
I
just
reached
out
to
the
applicant.
He
should
be
calling
in
momentarily.
B
B
B
Well,
let
me
officially
open
the
public
hearing.
It
sounds
like
somebody
just.
F
F
F
Yes,
I
was,
I
was
watching
you
guys
online
and
I
guess
what
do
you
need
more
information
about?
Why
we
like
the
taller
fence.
B
So
you
can
give
your
case
why
you
think
those
findings
are
met
and
we
should
approve
the
variance
you
have
the
ability
to
to
to
do
that.
If
you
would
like.
F
They
feel
unsafe
with
a
lower
expense,
because
the
neighbors
are
very
nosy
and
kind
of
watched
them,
and
you
can
see
them
looking
through
the
windows
and
looking
into
the
backyard,
because
their
their
house
sits
higher
up
and
the
fence
on
the
side
where
it
is,
I
believe,
it's
seven
feet,
eight
inches
and
then
the
one
in
the
back
on
the
alley
is
only
six
feet,
seven
inches,
so
that
the
the
yard
actually
slopes
down
from
where
the
house
is
to
the
alley.
F
So
when
you
build
a
six
foot
fence,
you
can
see
directly
over
it
and
I
can
see
directly
into
the
other
people's
house
and
they
can
see
into
my
house
also
the
the
people
that
live
there.
They
have
a
special
needs
kid
and
they
don't.
He
does
not
feel
comfortable
out
there
when
he
sees
people
staring
in
at
him.
You
know
doing
his
games
or
whatnot.
They
just
don't
feel
comfortable
in
their
own
home
because
of
the
privacy,
the
lack
thereof,
privacy.
F
B
Yes,
and
also
there
has
to
be
something
unique
about
your
property
that
make
it
impossible
for
you
to
use
it
in
a
reasonable
way.
F
Well,
it's
for
me,
it's
it's
called
you
know.
Safety
of
these
don't
feel
safe
in
their
own
home,
so
to
create
privacy.
For
that
you
build
a
taller
fence
and
that's
the
only
thing
I'm
trying
to
do
is
create
a
safe
environment
for
them
to
live
and
not
feel
like
they're
being
watched
by
everybody
around,
and
so
I
guess
you
know,
that's
that's
just
the
whole
reason
of
building
a
taller
fence
is
to
make
them
safe
and
feel
comfortable
in
their
own
home.
B
Okay,
thanks
for
that
testimony,
people
might
have
some
questions
for
you.
Are
there
any
questions
of
mr
doge.
D
Yeah,
just
out
of
curiosity,
how
tall
are
the
surrounding
houses
near
this
property.
F
They're
the
typical
store
and
a
half
house,
there
is
a
couple
of
ones
that
have
been
enlarged
to
two-story
houses,
but
it's
really
the
gentleman
that
is
directly
next
door.
He
is
made
it
quite
like
they
want
to
get
to
specific
names
of
people,
and
you
know
because
I
still
they
still
live
there.
F
You
know.
So
I'm
not
he's
just
he's,
just
not
a
very
nice
and
appropriate
person
and
that's
why
I'm
kind
of
just
trying
to
block
him
out
of
it.
B
I
don't
think
there
are.
Is
there
anybody
else?
So,
thanks
for
that
testimony
is
there
anyone
else
on
the
line
that
would
like
to
speak
in
favor
of
the
application
or
against.
E
Thank
you,
chair
perry
and
thank
you
to
the
applicant
for
calling
in,
and
thank
you
to
the
city
team
for
making
that
happen
in
reviewing
this
and
and
looking
at
just
you
know
for
us
the
the
narrow
definition
of
items
that
we
need
to
find
for
in
order
to
approve
a
variance,
I'm
certainly
struggling
to
come
up
with
specifics
of
the
property
that
would
lend
itself
to
granting
this
experience.
E
I
certainly
am
sympathetic
to
the
issues
being
faced
by
the
applicants
or
the
and
the
family
that
is
living
at
this
place.
I
wish
there
was
a
an
easy
solution
for
this,
but
granting
a
variance
stays
with
the
property,
regardless
of
who's
living
in
that
property,
regardless
of
who
the
neighbor
is
and
building
eight
foot
fences
throughout
the
city.
I
I
don't
think
is
in
conjunction
or
is
in
direct
desire
of
what
the
city
is
looking
for
as
part
of
their
plan.
E
I
didn't
hear
anything
or
read
anything
in
there
that
specified
anything
specific
to
the
property
itself.
That
would
lend
itself
to
the
need
for
this
higher
fence.
So
I
I
would
be
interested
and
am
open
to
hearing
any
additional
comments
from
my
fellow
board
members.
But
from
from
what
I've
reviewed
and
heard
to
this
point,
I
would
be
in
favor
of
city's
position
in
denying
the
request
for
the
variance.
B
Question
with
that,
I
would
say
I
would
entertain
a
motion.
E
Thank
you,
chair
perry,
then,
without
further
comment.
I
would
move,
make
a
motion
to
move
for
staff
findings
and
denial
of
the
variants,
as
requested.
B
F
D
D
B
B
So
with
that
and
without
objection,
I
will
declare
this
meeting
adjourned.
Our
next
meeting
will
be
october,
1st
2020..
Thank
you.