►
From YouTube: December 9, 2021 Zoning Board of Adjustment
Description
Additional information at
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
A
C
Good
afternoon,
everyone
welcome
to
this
live
broadcast
of
our
virtual
meeting
today
december
9th
2021.
This
meeting
includes
the
remote
participation
of
members
as
authorized
under
minnesota
minnesota
statute,
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.
C
E
D
C
F
C
H
H
C
D
Apologies,
fair
perry
that
was
just
feedback
from
people
we
recently
admitted
to
the
meeting.
My
apologies.
C
I
H
C
F
H
C
J
C
C
I
will
describe
what
discussion
items
are.
These
are
items
which
will
be
heard
by
the
board
and
will
take
public
testimony
deliberate
on
and
make
a
decision
after
the
public.
Testimony
has
been
heard
from
each
particular
discussion
item.
I
will
close
the
public
hearing
for
the
that
agenda
item.
Once
I
close
the
public
hearing
for
an
item,
no
additional
public
testimony
will
be
taken,
but
staff
may
be
asked
to
address
board
questions
after
the
public
hearing.
For
an
item
is
closed.
C
C
C
K
Good
evening,
chair
perry,
members
of
the
board.
This
item
is
being
requested
for
continuance
by
staff.
We
received
communication
from
several
neighbors
of
2222
grand
avenue
south
that
the
public
hearing
notification
they
received
in
the
mail
was
for
another
item
on
today's
agenda
and
they
were
not
notified
of
the
hearing
for
the
subject
property.
K
This
appears
to
be
an
error
that
was
made
during
the
printing
and
mailing
process
because
we
received
that
communication
with
insufficient
time
to
re-notice
for
tonight's
hearing.
We
are
requesting
this
continuance
to
have
the
ability
to
resend
the
public
hearing
notifications
to
all
the
neighbors
for
that
january.
6
2022
board
of
adjustment
hearing
to
ensure
compliance
with
state
statute.
C
Okay,
does
the
board
have
any
questions,
ms
roman,
on,
why
the
continuance
is
being
requested.
C
Okay,
so
let's
move
on
is
there
a
motion
to
continue
the
land
use
request
for
2222
grand
avenue
south
to
our
january
6
2022
meeting.
A
I
H
C
And
then
motion
passes
so
the
land
use
application
for
2222
grand
avenue
south
will
be
continued
to
january
6
2022
zoning
board
of
adjustment
meeting.
Let's
move
on
to
our
next
agenda
item:
this
is
agenda.
Item
number
six,
it's
5550
clinton
avenue
and
miss
brandt.
Take
it
away.
L
Good
afternoon
share
prairie
members
of
the
board
agenda.
Item
number.
Six
is
a
set
of
variance
applications
for
5550
clinton
avenue.
This
is
a
middle
of
the
block
parcel
between
diamond
lake
and
interstate
35w.
L
L
There
is
a
what
we
would
call
a
paper
alley
behind
the
property,
which
is
an
alley
that
exists
but
isn't
actually
functional.
So
the
the
alley
is
approximately
four
parcels
in
length
and
doesn't
connect
to
any
other
right
of
way.
So
the
the
subject
property
has
a
garage
which
is
accessed
from
clinton
avenue
via
a
shared
drive
it
with
their
neighbor.
L
L
Next
slide,
please!
So,
as
a
bit
of
a
background
on
this
project,
this
came
out
of
a
building
permit
application
for
a
side
rear
addition
to
the
existing
house.
The
site
plan
that
was
submitted
for
that
permit
showed
the
addition
at
nine
feet
to
the
property
line,
which
is
in
compliance
with
that
seven
foot.
Minimum
setback
requirement.
L
However,
during
the
construction,
the
applicant
submitted
a
revision
to
that
permit,
showing
a
new
setback
of
six
foot
eight,
not
because
that
they
had
changed
the
design
of
the
edition.
But
my
understanding
is
that
when
they
went
to
stake
the
property
lines
for
the
building
inspector
when
they
re-measured
it
came
in
at
six
foot
eight.
So
they
resubmitted
for
new
approval,
at
which
point
it
was
flagged
that
a
variance
would
be
necessary.
L
They
did
have
the
property
surveyed
as
a
standard
requirement
for
a
variance
to
a
yard
requirement,
and
that
survey
came
back,
showing
3.1
feet
from
the
addition
to
the
property
line
so
substantially
less
than
what
was
shown
on
the
initial
site
plan.
While
staff
was
reviewing
the
yard
variance
application
materials.
L
For
completeness,
we
became
aware
that,
in
addition
to
the
the
setback
issue,
there
is
also
some
discrepancies
with
the
site
plan
in
a
larger
context
that
resulted
in
the
impervious
surface
coverage
at
61.7,
and
these
discrepancies
were
a
larger
garage
and
driveway,
as
well
as
a
pool
and
the
associated
pool
decking,
both
of
which
were
lawfully
established
by
building
permits
pulled
in
2003.
L
next
slide.
Please.
So
this
slide
shows
at
the
top
is
the
survey
that
they
had
prepared
for
this
application,
and
then
the
bottom
is
the
initial
site
plan
that
they
had
submitted
for
the
building
permit.
So
you
can
see
where
some
of
those
discrepancies
were
related
to
the
the
property
line
and
the
impervious
surface
coverage
next
slide.
L
There.
There
are
no
practical
difficulties,
unique
to
this
site,
related
to
the
request
for
the
yard
or
impervious
surface
coverage,
variances
the
provision
of
inaccurate
permitting
materials.
Even
if
it's
not
intentional
to
deceive
staff
is
not
does
not
constitute
a
practical
difficulty,
as
it
is
a
condition
which,
by
its
very
nature,
is
created
by
the
applicant
and
is
substantially
economic
in
nature
most
times
next
slide,
please,
with
regards
to
the
second
finding
again,
neither
variance
meets
the
spirit
and
intent
of
the
ordinance
or
of
the
comprehensive
plan.
L
Expansion
of
a
non-conforming
wall
is
something
that
is
allowed
under
certain
circumstances.
However,
this
project
does
not
meet
those
circumstances.
L
L
In
this
case
the
non-conforming
plane
that
they're
extending
is
20.68,
which
is
quite
a
bit
short
of
that
60
threshold.
The
intent
of
this
is
that
houses
which
are
substantially
non-conforming
are
allowed
a
little
bit
of
flexibility
to
expand
it.
It's
not
intended
to
allow
houses
to
add
building
bulk
off
of
a
small
non-conforming
piece
of
massing
like
a
like
a
bay
window
with
regards
to
the
impervious
surface
maximum.
L
However,
given
that
this
property
is
larger
than
6
000
square
feet,
it
does
not
qualify
for
that
exemption,
so,
in
order
to
it
does
not
meet
the
stated
intent
of
the
ordinance
generally.
Additionally,
the
property
is
in
the
shoreland
overlay
district.
So
these
sorts
of
ecological
concerns
are
of
greater
impact.
L
Additionally,
the
property
has
met
the
requirement
for
the
findings
in
the
shoreland
overlay
district
due
to
the
the
grading
of
the
site
and
the
distance
from
the
lake.
No
erosion
control
measures
beyond
standard
practices
are
necessary
for
a
project
of
this
nature.
The
addition
is
not
visible
from
the
protect
water.
It
is
not
anticipated
to
generate
any
additional
watercraft
onto
the
lake,
so
given
that,
for
both
finding
or
for
both
variances
findings,
one
and
two
have
not
been
met.
Staff
recommends
that
the
board
of
adjustments
deny
the
requested
variances.
C
I'm
not
hearing
or
seeing
any
so,
let's
move
on,
let's
open
the
public
hearing
and
we'll
call
people
in
order
of
their
registration,
since
it
looks
like
the
people
who
are
in
the
queue
for
collin
are
the
applicant
and
their
team.
I
do
want
to
say
that
we
have
received
your
material
and
I
would
ask
you
to
try
and
keep
it
to
10,
to
15
minutes
in
length
and
to
not
repeat
what
the
previous
person
said
so
that
we
can
move
things
along.
M
Okay,
I'm
sorry
I'm
recovering
from
a
cold,
so
my
voice
is
a
little
scratchy,
but
thank
you
for
this
opportunity
and
and
for
hearing
this
information
about
our
property
and
our
project.
I
did
send
in
a
brief
powerpoint
if
everyone
could
take
a
look
at
that,
I
can
walk
through
that
here
quickly.
M
M
M
We
absolutely
fell
in
love
with
an
1885,
victorian
style
home.
That's
now
our
home,
and
so
we've
lived
here
for
over
eight
years.
Since
then,
our
family
has
now
grown
to
a
total
of
seven.
You
can
see
our
five
kids
there
in
the
picture.
Our
youngest
was
born
in
july
of
2020
and
also
since
the
pandemic
has
started
both
jason
and
I
have
begun
working
from
home.
M
We
love
and
enjoy
south
minneapolis
and
our
community
so
much
that
we
really
wanted
to
stay,
and
so
we
pursued
adding
space
to
our
home
rather
than
exploring
a
move
to
the
suburbs
in
order
to
accommodate
our
growing
family
and
all
the
additional
activities
that
were
now
taking
place
within
our
home,
including
work
and
schooling.
M
And
after
proceeding
with
building
the
structure
including
the
framing
the
roof,
the
windows,
the
insulation
and
the
electrical
work.
We
were
shocked
and,
frankly
devastated
to
learn
that
we
had
built
within
the
setback
required
by
the
city
of
minneapolis.
M
We
can
assure
you
that
this
was
an
honest
mistake
and
we
hope
that
by
providing
you
with
all
the
details
surrounding
our
property
and
the
support
that
we
have
from
our
neighbors
that
were
able
to
obtain
an
approval
for
a
variance
if
you
look
at
the
next
slide,
I'll
go
off
through
this
quickly,
as
the
list
already
mentioned.
M
But
how
we
got
here
was
this
was
a
site
plan
that
was
in
our
possession
from
the
previous
owners
of
our
home
and
again
was
an
honest
mistake
and
didn't
realize
the
inaccuracies
that
that
it
presented.
So
that's
that's
how
we
got
here.
The
terms
set
back
and
and
variants
are
are
new
to
me.
M
They
were
not
part
of
my
vocabulary
just
a
few
months
ago,
so
I'm
certainly
learning
as
I
go
and
again
this
was
a
very,
very
honest
mistake
and
obviously
one
that
that
I
would
undo
if
I
could
it's
our
understanding
that
these
setbacks
have
changed
over
the
years
and
until
the
last
few
years
it
was
six
feet,
but
for
our
house
it
doesn't
change
to
seven
feet
due
to
the
width
of
our
lot.
M
I
know
the
city
recognizes
that
many
of
these
older
homes
in
minneapolis
are
built
within
the
required
setback
and
as
staff
and
melissa
have
noted,
they
include
a
cause
that
allows
structures
that
are
non-conforming
to
not
seek
a
variance
if
the
building,
while
being
expanded,
is
at
the
same
distance
as
the
majority
of
the
existing
building.
M
The
blue
square
in
the
bottom
right
hand,
corner
is
the
proposed
addition
or
the
addition
that's
existing,
and
so,
if
you
look
at
the
bottom
of
the
page,
you
can
see
that
the
bottom
line
of
the
addition
is
no
further
than
the
furthest
point
of
the
house,
which,
as
alyssa
mentioned,
is
about
3.1
feet
from
the
property
line.
M
We
understand
that
this
this
point
within
the
existing
house.
That's
the
maximum
width,
does
only
represent
21
or
22
percent
of
the
current
total
length
of
the
house,
and
so
therefore
it
does
not
comply
with
this
part
of
the
ordinance
ordinance
because
it
falls
short
of
the
majority.
M
I
think
it's
important
to
note
that
the
staff
included
this
in
the
report.
We
also
noted
that
the
ordinance
does
show
that
the
city
has
created
a
release
valve
for
recognizing
the
impacts
of
applying
current
setback
on
homes.
That
did
not
have
those
same
setbacks
when
they
were
built
and
that
the
city
has
recognized
that
some
additions
and
required
setback
are
okay.
M
So
again,
our
our
audition
follows
the
3.1
foot,
current
setback
of
the
existing
building
wall,
and
we
contend
that
this
variance
is
keeping
with
the
spirit
intent
of
the
ordinance
and
due
to
the
design
of
the
house
and
its
location,
that
there
are
practical
difficulties
and
complying
with
the
ordinance.
M
The
other
thing
that
I
just
want
to
point
out
on
this
page
four
and
with
the
arrows
in
the
addition,
this
addition
was
done,
was
done
with
the
intent
to
add
a
multi-functional
space
to
the
back
of
the
house,
as
you
can
see
at
the
current
rear
of
the
house
on
the
right-hand
side
of
the
drawing
the
kitchen
and
then
are
very
narrow,
and
there
is
a
very
narrow
walkway
to
get
back
there,
which
creates
quite
a
bottleneck
within
the
house,
and
we
spend
about
90
percent
of
our
time.
M
I
always
note,
and
so
the
addition
allowed
for
an
eat-in
kitchen,
a
study
and
work
area
to
help
me
get
out
of
my
office
for
the
work
throughout
my
bedroom
for
the
work
day
in
an
office
space
as
well
as
opening
up
that
den
and
the
kitchen
for
the
modern
family
and
everything
that
goes
into
raising
five
kids.
These
days.
M
Moving
on.
We
fully
understand
that
in
respect
that
the
city
establishes
these
yard
setbacks
for
several
reasons.
But
the
core
of
this
is
to
minimize
the
impacts
from
one
property
to
the
next
and
and
to
respect
the
privacy
of
our
neighbors,
and
that
is
super
important
to
us.
I'm
now
going
to
move
on
to
page
five
of
the
powerpoint
sent
over,
so
our
neighbors
to
the
north,
mike
and
jen.
M
The
people
most
impacted
by
this
edition
have
been
a
part
of
this
process
from
the
very
beginning,
even
before
we
ever
certainly
envisioned
having
to
to
ask
for
a
variance.
We
made
sure
that
they
knew
about
the
project
and
were
in
full
support
of
everything
that
we
were
looking
to
do.
M
They
have
submitted
a
a
level,
a
letter
of
support
for
the
project,
knowing
that
we
are
now
being
asked
to
apply
for
this
variant,
and
I
have
included
that
on
page
six
of
the
powerpoint
or
excuse
me
page
seven,
but
looking
at
page
five,
the
edition
is
not
visible
from
the
house,
looking
straight
on
as
alyssa
mentioned
as
well,
and
that's
represented
in
that
in
the
upper
right
hand
photo
and
then
in
the
bottom,
left-hand
photo
just
showing
that
the
addition.
M
If
you
look
at
slide
six,
I
want
to
share
a
little
bit
about
the
practical
difficulty
of
adding
on
to
a
house
as
unique
and
special
in
my
mind
as
this
one
is,
but
in
the
in
the
upper
right
hand
corner
you
can
see
a
picture
of
the
house
from
the
south
side,
and
so
the
red
circle
just
shows
the
other
side
of
the
house
and
the
practical
difficulty
associated
with
adding
space
to
the
other
side
of
the
house
is
that
there
is
an
air
conditioner.
M
There
is
also
a
parking
pad
and
there's
also
the
garbage
receptacles,
along
with
a
shared
driveway
with
with
our
neighbors
on
the
other
side,
and
so
that
whole
page
page
six
of
the
powerpoint
just
shows
various
views
depicting
how
that
would
be
impractical
to
add
on
to
that
side
of
the
house.
M
The
next
slide
slide.
Seven
then
talks
a
little
bit
more
about
our
neighbors
and
so,
like
I
mentioned
in
the
upper
right
hand,
corner
just
a
letter
of
support
from
jen
and
mike
stated
back
in
october,
signed
after
the
existing
structure
was
built
and
and
once
we
had
the
understanding
that
that
we
would
be
coming
forward
and
asking
for
the
variance
the.
As
we
mentioned,
the
the
addition
does
not
extend
any
further
than
the
furthest
point
of
the
existing
house.
M
And
I
I
realized
this
photo
was
taken
after
it
was
demolished,
but
it
was
basically
a
terrace
or
a
patio,
and
there
we
had
our
grill
and
a
small
seating
area
along
with
stairs
down
and
so
there's
quite
a
bit
of
activity
in
that
space
which,
as
you
can
see,
is
immediately
adjacent
to
to
mike
and
jen
property,
and
so
a
lot
of
activity
and
traffic
coming
out
those
patio
doors.
M
If
you
look
at
the
picture
with
the
edition
the
picture
in
the
middle
of
the
page
and
the
new
sliding
glass
doors,
the
traffic
would
now
come
out,
the
back
and
so
from
a
privacy
standpoint.
There's
much
less
traffic
crowds
commotion
on
the
part
of
the
house-
that's
that's
very
near
to
where
mike
and
jen
have
their
own
patio.
M
So,
while
there
are
windows
out
that
northern
side
of
the
addition,
the
traffic
coming
out,
the
backside
we
feel
gives
them
much
more
privacy,
which
was
very
important
to
them
and
also
very
important
to
us
and
again
just
want
to
recognize
their
letter
of
support
for
for
this
edition,
as
they've
been
taken
along
every
step
of
the
way
in
this
project.
M
In
addition
to
the
setback,
we'd
also
learned
about
the
the
other
variants
requested,
as
alyssa
mentioned,
we're
approximately
one
percent
over
the
required
60
lot
coverage
or
impervious
coverage.
Another
word
that
was
not
part
of
my
vocabulary
just
a
couple
of
months
ago.
M
We
are
seeking
variance
approval
for
this
regulation
as
well,
but
I
will
note
we
are
very
willing
to
invest
in
alternative
solutions
such
as
reducing
the
size
of
the
south
parking
pad
by
approximately
200
square
feet,
installing
a
rain
garden
to
capture
storm
water,
replacing
the
front
sidewalk
leading
up
to
the
house
again.
I
I
work
at
target.
My
has
been
the
salesman.
M
We
are
by
no
means
experts
in
in
this
space,
but
we
are
more
than
willing
to
work
to
come
up
with
with
creative
solutions
to
ensure
that
that
we're
obtaining
you
know
and
then
sticking
with
the
the
intent
of
of
this
regulation.
If,
if
unable
to
get
a
variance,
so
in
closing
it's
it's
our
intent
to
continue
raising
our
now
large
family
in
south
minneapolis
and
this
home,
and
this
community
that
are
so
near
and
dear
to
our
hearts.
M
We
have
a
school
and
a
church
in
the
community
and
are
very
involved
in
those
super
involved
in
in
the
neighborhood
and
certainly
want
to
keep
the
aesthetic
and
the
intent
of
everything
intact.
When
we
bought
this
house,
we
were
fascinated
to
learn
from
the
previous
owner.
He
was
a
self-proclaimed
history
enthusiast.
M
He
even
has
photos
of
the
home
from
sometime
in
the
early
1900s
that
he
passed
on
to
us.
He
shared
with
us
that
it
was
originally
a
lake
home
for
people
who
lived
in
and
worked
in
downtown
minneapolis
and
on
the
weekends
they
would
ride
their
horses
horses
south
to
their
second
home
fast
forward.
M
136
years
from
the
time
the
home
was
built,
we're
now
looking
to
update
the
home
for
our
modern
family,
with
both
of
us
working
from
home,
five
kids,
conducting
their
studies
and
their
activities
from
home
and
we're
all
learning
to
deal
with
the
quarantines
that
have
become
a
part
of
our
new
normal
life
in
this
post-pandemic
era.
M
Our
intended
to
accomplish
these
goals,
while
respecting
and
honoring
our
neighbors
rights
to
privacy
and
our
mutual
interest.
Like
I
said
in
us,
in
maintaining
the
aesthetic
appeal
of
the
home
in
in
this
beloved
minneapolis
neighborhood.
C
Thanks
for
your
yep,
thanks
for
your
testimony,
are
there
any
questions
of
ms
peterson.
C
Not
seeing
any
so,
let's
move
on
to
actually
I
do
have
a
question
before
we
go
on
to
other
speakers
and
it
looks
like
someone
else
says
too.
Let's
say
you
had
the
right
survey
from
the
start
that
showed
that
you
were
going
to
be
putting
your
project
into
the
required
side,
yard
setback
and
you
would
be
over
compliance
and
in
impervious
service.
What
would
you
have
done.
M
Yeah,
that's
a
great
question
to
be
honest.
We
we
wouldn't
have
added
on
to
the
house
at
all.
I
go
back
to
slide
four.
It's
showing
the
traffic
pattern.
A
key
component
of
this
project
was
the
the
traffic
flow
that
goes
from.
What's
called
the
living
room
on
the
site
plan
and
into
the
existing
addition
and
having
that
other
entryway
into
the
back
part
of
the
house,
I
mentioned
the
bottleneck
that
goes
to
the
back
of
the
house
where
we
spend
90
percent
of
our
time
in
10
of
the
house.
M
It
was
very
important
to
have
that
and
if
we
had
to
have
four
less
feet
on
the
addition,
we
wouldn't
be
able
to
have
that
that
walkway,
through
from
the
living
room,
and
so
we
wouldn't
have
solved
on
the
bottleneck
and
traffic
flow
issue.
M
Additionally,
we
wouldn't
have
been
able
to
have
the
the
sliding
glass
doors
off
the
back
and
which
was
also
key
to
us
when
we
thought
about
having
visibility
to
our
backyard
and
our
pool
and
making
sure
that
we're
properly
supervising
the
activities
that
go
on
in
the
backyard.
M
So
those
are
all
key
components
and
key
tenets
of
of
the
design
that
we
put
a
lot
of
thought
into
and
so
again
the
the
addition
wouldn't
have
made
sense
for
us
and
the
needs
of
our
family
without
the
four
additional
fees.
H
C
I
see
okay
thanks
for
answering
my
question.
Mr
johanneson
has
a
question.
E
Yes,
thanks
jeff
perrian,
thanks
for
your
presentation,
was
the
work
completed
by
a
contractor
that
you
hired
or
was
it
completed
by
yourselves.
N
Thanks
chair
perry
and
thanks
the
apple
again
too
question
for
you.
It
looks
like
the
survey
that
you
would
worked
off
of
shows
an
11
foot
from
11
foot
setback
from
your
say,
the
front
of
your
home
to
the
right.
If
you're
standing
on
clinton
avenue,
am
I
correct
in
looking
at
that.
M
N
M
Yeah,
I
think
the
confusing
part
is
that
we
were
always
told
and
again
this
is
you
know,
probably
something
in
hindsight.
M
We
should
have
validated,
but
our
neighbors
had
looked
into
putting
a
new
fence
in
and
they
had
told
us
that
the
fence
wasn't
actually
on
the
property
line
that
that
the
fence
was
that
our
property
line
was
actually
on
their
side
of
the
fence
and
they
had
actually
asked
us
if
we
wanted
to
move
the
fence
so
that
we
were
taking
advantage
of
our
entire
yard,
which
we
declined
and
said
there
was
no
need.
We
didn't
have
a
use
for
that
space.
M
Yeah
and
we,
this
was
a
conversation
we
had
a
couple
years
back
like
I
said
they
were
looking
into
scoping
into
getting
a
new
fence
and
we
were
kind
of
coordinating
on
that
and
so
didn't
have
anything
to
do
with
this
edition.
But
that
was
where
we
had
gotten
that
notion
that
oh,
we
do
have
an
additional
couple
feet,
because
that
was
what
we
had
heard
from
them
and
obviously
didn't
validate
our
sources.
M
They
were
surprised
to
hear
what
the
survey
came
back
with
as
well.
I
Yeah
hi
this
is
this-
is
jason,
I'm
I'm
here
next
to
christy.
I
just
put
in
my
name
just
to
be
sure
that
we
were
heard.
I
really
don't
have
anything
to
add
with
this.
At
this
time,.
C
Okay,
thank
you
and
lastly,
on
our
cue
is
mr
mike
higgins.
Mr
higgins,
if
you
cross
stair
six,
you
can
unmute
your
phone
and
you
don't
need
to
repeat
anything.
That's
been
said
already,
but
if
you
have
other
stuff
that
you'd
like
to
add,
please
do
so.
I
Yep,
can
you
hear
me
yep?
Okay,
thanks
for
taking
the
time
thanks
for
you
guys
service
to
the
community.
I
appreciate
that
I
am
the
contractor
on
the
job
and
I
just
want
to
start
with
an
apology
for
misinformation
that
I
was
presented
with,
that
I
had
no
no
way
to
move
or
try
to
build
enough.
In
addition,
within
a
setback,
my
approach
was
not
to
get
a
job
and
then
build
it
and
then
ask
for
an
apology.
Instead
of
getting
permission
on
the
front
side,
that
was
not
my
intent.
I
I
it's
stressing
me
out
really
as
a
contractor.
It's
not
where
I
want
to
put
the
peterson's
family
into
this
position.
I
So
I'm
sorry
for
my
lack
of
due
diligence
on
my
end
to
make
sure
it
was
all
figured
out
before
starting
the
process
and
as
far
as
the
impervious
surface,
I
never
thought
we'd
be
even
close
to
that
number,
and
so
I
didn't
look
further
into
all
of
the
structure,
the
pool
or
the
decking
around
that
and
then
yeah.
It's
already
been
stated,
but
we'll
do
what
we
need
to
if
you
pass
the
one
variance
to
make
sure
that
the
impervious
is
taken
care
of.
I
I
think
the
only
other
things
I
thought
about
would
added
would
have
any
value
on.
This
would
be
the
probably
lack
of
parking.
The
practical
difficulty
of
parking
as
well.
Certain
minneapolis
streets
can
be
difficult
and
with
the
new
ordinance
in
multi-unit
housing.
I
If
more
parking
is
taken
from
the
peterson's
yard
to
park
on
the
street,
it
will
cause
congestion
for
the
neighborhood.
I
think
that's
a
consideration
probably
come
up
in
the
future
and
with
the
with
the
neighbors
house
being
further
off
of
the
property
line.
The
this,
the
the
distance
between
the
two
properties
will
still
be
seven
seven
feet
per
property
14
feet,
they'll
still
be
14
feet
apart,
so
it'll
still
be
or
look
or
appear
as
if
they're,
both
houses
are
seven
feet
apart.
I
And
that's
that's
all
I
have
thank
you.
C
All
right,
thank
you
for
your
testimony.
Mr
higgins,
I
don't
think
there's
anyone
else
in
the
queue,
and
so
with
that
I
will
close
the
public
hearing
and
ask
for
forward
comment
or
question.
Mr
johannesson,
you
have
a
question.
E
Yes,
I
do
makes
your
presentation,
mr
higgins,
and
your
discussion
is
this:
the
first
addition
in
the
city
of
minneapolis
you've
done.
E
I
I
C
Okay,
as
I
said,
the
public
hearing
is
closed,
so
let's
move
on
board
comment
or
questions
to
staff.
If
you
have
any.
F
Yeah,
thank
you,
chair
perry
with
this
situation,
I'm
having
trouble
finding
any
argument
against
staff's
findings,
I'm
wondering
if
there
are
any
other
remedies
to
this
situation
that
might
include
replanting
the
lot
with
their
neighbors
to
acquire
some
of
the
property
that
would
allow
the
allow
this
edition
to
exist
without
violating
the
zoning
ordinances.
L
Approximately
three
two
and
a
half
three
years
ago,
the
city
council
enacted
a
maximum
lot
size
to
kind
of
parallel
the
minimum
size
for
a
lot,
and
this
property
is
already
over
that
maximum
lot
size
so
buying
four
feet
of
land
from
the
neighbor
and
moving
that
property
line
is,
is
not
something
that
would
be
feasible
to
have
approved.
H
I
too,
I'm
sorry.
This
is
a
comment.
I
too,
I'm
finding
it
hard
to
move
from
staff
binding.
It
sounds.
It
sounds
unfortunate
that
it
occurred
after
after
the
error
was
discovered,
but
I
can't
think
of
a
practical
difficulty
or
another
finding
for
number
two.
I
look
forward
to
hearing
board
member
comment.
H
C
You
miss
mccarva,
mr
sophie.
B
Thank
you,
chair,
perry
and
thanks
to
everyone
for
the
presentations.
I
really
appreciate
mr
sandberg's
out
of
the
box.
Thinking
with
the
minor
subdivision
idea,
it
is
unfortunate
that
sounds
like
it
couldn't
work,
but
maybe
the
applicant
can
can
pursue
that
avenue
anyway,
or
at
least
explore
it
more
deeply
with
staff.
B
But
I
agree
with
everyone
else
so
far
as
unfortunate
as
this
is
as
idiosyncratic
and
beautiful
as
this
neighborhood
is
with
with
large
houses
of
various
types
and
shapes.
I
I
agree
with
staff
finding
and
I
can't
find
any
reason
to
deviate
from
that.
C
And
it's
been
seconded
by
mr
softly,
I
believe,
and
so
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
before
us.
Is
there
any
discussion
on
the
motion
and
the
motion,
as
mr
johannes
said,
is
to
adopt
staff
finding
for
to
deny
both
variants
requests.
H
H
C
That
motion
passes
and
to
the
petersons
you
can
see
staff
about
what
your
options
are
going
forward.
There's
already
been
one
board
comment
recommendation,
but
I
strongly
suggest
you
talk
to
staff
to
ms
brant
about
what
your
options
are
going
forward,
and
so
with
that,
I
would
like
to
bring
up
some
new
business.
C
C
C
C
J
Ellis
cheer
prairie
members
of
the
board
I
do.
I
do
just
want
to
comment
yeah.
This
is
our
last
meeting
of
the
year,
the
first
meeting
of
next
year.
I
believe
we've
talked
about
it,
but
I
just
want
to
reiterate
january
6
will
be
in
this
same
format.
It
has
yet
to
be
determined.
What
will
what
the
next
format
will
be?
If
council
doesn't
take
any
action,
it
will
have
to
be
in
person.
J
There's
noticing
requirements,
I
mean
our
noticing
requirements.
Will
change
there's
a
lot
that
will
go
on
by
that
about
that,
so
we'll
try
to
keep
the
board
apprised
off
cycle,
since
you
know
it
would
have,
since
the
notices
are,
would
have
to
go
out
early
enough
that
we
would
have
an
idea.
J
Hopefully
then
you
know
before
january
6th,
but
that
would
help
the
board
under
you
know
the
earlier
we
can
give
you
notice
as
to
whether
you
would
have
to
be
downtown
to
council
chambers
on
january
20th
or
whether
you'd
be
able
to
do
it
in
your
current
method.
I'm
sure
you
would
like
to
know
as
soon
as
possible.
So
as
soon
as
we
can
find
out
that
information-
or
I
have
a
definite
answer
for
you-
we
will
relay
that.
E
I
have
a
question:
this
is
johannesson.
Is
there
any
updates
on
the
members
that
had
to
apply
for
repositions
or
new
positions.
J
J
So
you're
at
the
committee
of
the
hole
for
the
city
planning
commission,
then
it
will
go
to
the
first
meeting
of
the
city
planning
commission,
as
I
understand
it
on
january
3rd,
and
then
you
would
go
to
whatever
committee
is
the
appropriate
committee
as
decided
by
council
at
the
time.
You
know
it's
traditionally
been
zoning
and
planning
committee.
It's
been
the
business
inspections,
housing
and
zoning
committee
recently,
I'm
not
sure
how
the
council
will
structure
their
committees
going
forward.
J
I
have
a
feeling
they'll
maintain
some
form
of
the
current
structure
for
a
little
bit,
there's
been
a
lot
of
council
turnover
and
I'm
not
sure
how
they'll
be
handling
that,
but
of
course
that
will
be
completely
decided
upon
by
council
as
to
their
committee
structure.
So,
sometime
in
january
late
january,
I
imagine
late
january
early
february.
We
should
be
completed
through
that
cycle,
but
you
have
the
the
the
three
board
members
have
already
been
submitted
to
the
city
planning
commission.