►
From YouTube: August 19, 2021 Zoning Board of Adjustment
Description
Additional information at
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
B
D
E
D
E
E
E
This
meeting
includes
the
remote
participation
of
members
as
authorized
under
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.
I'll
now
call
this
meeting
to
order
and
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
role
so
that
we
may
verify
the
presence
of
quorum.
F
F
G
F
E
H
F
E
G
F
F
H
F
E
I
E
If
you
agree
with
this
recommendation,
including
the
applicable
conditions,
you
will
need
to
do
nothing
and
the
board
will
pass
it
as
recommended.
Please
check
in
with
the
staff
member
assigned
to
this
item.
If
any
questions
following
the
decision,
if
you
disagree
with
the
recommendation,
please
indicate
you'd
like
to
speak
against
the
item.
When
I
ask
and
we'll
put
it
on
the
discussion
agenda,
discussion
items
are
those
items
which
the
board
will
take
public
testimony
deliberate
on
and
make
a
decision
after
public.
Testimony
has
been
heard
for
each
particular
discussion.
E
Item
I
will
close
the
public
hearing
for
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.
Board
members
will
then
discuss
and
act
on
motions,
and
only
the
chair.
The
chair-
only
votes
in
the
case
of
a
time.
E
So
with
that,
let's
look
at
the
recommended
dispositions
of
our
agenda.
Items
for
land
use
requests
the
first
one
has
a
number
of
addresses
associated
with
it.
So
bear
with
me.
It
is
599
701
and
717
25th
avenue,
south
606
and
16
616,
24th
avenue,
south
507
and
524
23rd
avenue,
south
2309
2216,
2200
2020,
and
you
get
20
and
2406
riverside
avenue
and
2500
sixth
avenue
street
south
and
2512
and
24-14
7th
street
7th
street.
I
hear
someone
talking.
Is
there
a
question.
E
E
E
E
J
The
surveyors
are
essentially
our
third
party.
They
risk
their
licenses
essentially
for
for
for
misusing
their
surveys
or
misrepresenting
survey
information,
and
so
we
did
discuss
with
the
park
board
to
see
if
they
were
comfortable
with
the
survey
as
they
were
provided
the
identical
survey
for
their
encroachment
permits,
and
they
were
so.
We
were
comfortable
proceeding.
E
E
E
G
E
G
F
E
I
Thank
you
chairperry
and
members
of
the
board.
This
item
is
a
request
for
a
variance
to
increase
the
maximum
size
of
a
projecting
sign
at
1718
through
1720
washington
avenue
north.
This
property
is
located
in
the
i2
medium
industrial
zoning
district,
as
well
as
the
production
built
form
overlay
district.
The
subject
property
has
a
lot
area
of
approximately
57
000
square
feet
or
just
over
1.3
acres
and
occupies
a
little
under
half
of
the
city
block.
I
The
west
side
of
the
property
is
frontage
along
washington,
avenue
and
immediately
west
of
that
is
interstate
94,
and
there
is
also
an
interstate
exit
ramp,
which
leads
more
or
less
right
to
the
southwest
corner
of
of
the
subject
property
so
connecting
to
17th
avenue
north,
which
is
on
the
south
side
of
the
property,
and
there's
also
frontage
along
18th
avenue
north
on
the
north
side
of
the
property.
Next
slide.
Please.
I
In
2020,
land
use
application
approvals
were
issued
for
construction
of
a
four-story
self-service
storage
facility,
which
would
include
an
off
street
parking
area
in
the
southeast
corner
of
the
property
and
that
parking
and
loading
area
would
be
accessed
from
17th
avenue
on
the
south
side
of
the
property,
and
this
photo
here
is
provided
by
the
applicants
for
this
variance-
and
this
is
a
construction
in
progress
photo
and
the
staging
area
you
can
see
in
the
foreground,
but
that
is
going
to
be
the
the
parking
and
loading
area
next
slide.
Please.
I
I
This
is
a
detail
sheet
showing
the
specifications
of
that
proposed,
projecting
sign.
It
would
be
48
square
feet
in
area
in
an
industrial
zoning
district.
The
maximum
size
of
an
individual
projecting
sign
is
20
square
feet.
So
the
applicants
are
requesting
this
variance
to
install
this
48
square
foot.
Projecting
sign
next
slide
please,
and
we
can
stay
on
this
slide
for
the
rest
of
my
presentation.
I
This
is
the
west
elevation
of
these
structures,
so
the
side
that
would
be
visible
from
from
interstate
94,
including
that
exit
ramp
towards
the
right
hand,
side
of
this
elevation
drawing
you
can
see
that
that
keynote
c
and
that
proposed
projecting
sign
which
again
would
be
attached
to
the
to
the
southernmost
facade
of
the
building,
but
the
actual
faces
of
the
sign
would
face
east
and
west.
So
it's
visible
from
this
west
elevation
drawing
and
you
can
also
see
on
either
end
of
the
building
itself.
I
They
have
those
they
have
two
two
wall
signs,
and
these
are
all
for
for
the
same
use
to
talk
about
the
practical
difficulties
for
for
this
and
staff
findings.
The
the
the
staff
findings
in
this
case
are
that
there
are
no
practical
difficulties
which
support
a
an
increase
to
the
maximum
size
of
a
projecting
sign.
The
subject.
Property
is
relatively
large,
it
occupies
almost
half
a
city
block
and
the
self
storage
use
that's
being
constructed.
I
It
is
a
large
building
with
expansive
expansive
building
facades,
even
though
individual
projecting
signs
are
only
allowed
up
to
20
square
feet
in
area.
The
zoning
code
generally
allocates
the
total
maximum
amount
of
signage
based
on
the
length
of
any
particular
building
facade.
So
on
this
building,
the
west
elevation
is
allowed
to
have
over
twice
as
much
wall
signage
as
what
is
proposed.
Similarly
for
the
south
and
east
elevations,
they
they
could
potentially
have
a
lot
more
signage
and
especially
wall
signage
in
in
total,
compared
to
to
what
is
being
proposed.
I
If
the
intent
of
the
proposed
projecting
sign
in
this
case
is
to
increase
the
visibility
of
the
site,
particularly
from
the
west,
and
from
that
that
interstate
exit
ramp
specifically,
the
applicant,
could
still
install
a
lot
of
additional
wall,
signage
on
the
west
elevation
or
multiple,
smaller
projecting
signs,
while
remaining
in
compliance
with
the
overall
maximum
sign
area
requirements
of
the
zoning
code.
The
issue
in
this
case
is
just
that
individual
projecting
signs
are
much
more
limited
in
size,
but
this
is
a
function
of
the
ordinance
itself
again.
I
Projecting
sign
also
note
that
the
property
owners,
who
are
the
applicants
for
this
variance,
were
also
the
applicants
for
the
original
land
use
applications
in
2020,
for
establishment
of
the
self
storage
use
and
for
design
of
the
building
itself,
which
has
an
impact
on
the
amount
of
signage
that's
allowed
or
the
next
required
finding
regarding
reasonable
use
of
the
property
and
spirit
and
intent
of
the
ordinance.
I'll.
I
Just
say
that
the
general
intent
of
the
of
the
ordinance
regarding
sign
requirements
is
to
allow
for
effective
signage,
appropriate
to
the
planned
character
of
each
zoning
district,
to
promote
an
attractive
environment
by
minimizing
visual,
clutter
and
confusion,
to
minimize
adverse
effects
on
nearby
property
and
to
protect
the
public.
Health
safety
and
welfare.
I
Regarding
staff
findings.
For
for
this
particular
variance
request,
though,
projecting
signs
are
limited
to
20
square
feet.
Each
individual
wall
signs
are
allowed
up
to
180
square
feet,
so
a
lot
larger
allocation
for
individual
wall
signs
and
again
that's
within
a
total
overall
maximum
size
allowance,
based
on
the
on
the
size
of
a
facade.
Projecting
signs
are
more
limited
in
size,
because
a
projecting
sign
can
effectively
serve
as
a
visual
expansion
of
a
building
facade,
whereas
wall
signs,
on
the
other
hand,
are
attached
to
that.
I
Existing
facade,
they're
covering
existing
building
wall,
and
so
they
don't
necessarily
have
the
same
visual
impact.
As
stated
previously,
the
projecting
sign
is
over
twice
the
size
of
a
of
the
maximum
allowed
for
an
individual
projecting
sign
in
an
industrial
zoning.
District
and
staff
finds
that
this
proposed
variance
would
not
be
in
keeping
with
the
spirit
and
attended
the
ordinance
to
limit
the
visual
impact
of
signage.
I
There
are
some
additional
required
findings
for
variances
related
to
signage
and
one
of
those
specifically
relating
to
sign,
clutter
and
consistency
with
the
purpose
of
the
zoning
district.
I'll
just
note,
generally,
that
industrial
zoning
districts
are
intended
to
allow
more
intensive
uses,
often
engaged
in
production,
processing,
manufacturing
or
other
uses,
which
are
more
likely
to
have
a
noticeable
or
negative
impact
on
neighboring
properties.
I
I'll
just
note
that
there
are
two
additional
findings,
one
for
all,
variances
regarding
essential
character
and
potential
for
injury
to
persons
or
property,
and
then
another
sign
specific
finding
regarding
the
specifications
of
the
sign
as
they
relate
to
the
building
and
the
property
staff
finds
that
these
two
findings
would
be
met
by
this
proposal.
I
can
speak
about
those
in
more
detail
if
there's
interest
from
the
board,
but
in
the
interest
of
time.
I
E
E
E
C
Thank
you.
I
just
want
to
say
thank
you
city
of
minneapolis,
for
letting
us
submit
our
variance
application.
Thank
you
to
alex
he's
been
wonderful
to
work
with
you.
Guys
are
great
okay,
so
I'm
going
to
get
started.
Obviously
we're
talking
about
1718
1720,
washington,
avenue
north,
which
is
going
to
be
a
cute
smart
brand
new
facility.
C
This
is
a
large
property
that
requires
signage.
That
requires
greater
than
20
square
feet
in
order
to
keep
an
appropriate
scale
with
the
building.
As
you
can
see,
we
have
it
on
17th
avenue
north
and,
if
you're
coming
down
the
street
from
either
of
those
four
that's
an
intersection
right
there.
So,
if
you're
coming
from
that
way,
the
reason
why
we
chose
the
projected
sign
here
is
because
it
would
be.
C
It
would
be
great
at
capturing
all
the
audience
and
we
have
the
main
entrance
located
in
the
back
of
the
property
off
of
north
2nd
street
and
7th
17th
avenue
north.
That's
why
we
chose
that
particular
location
for
the
projected
sign
and
we
have
it
sitting
between
the
second
and
third
floor
of
the
building.
So
in
terms
of
obstructing
visibility,
you
know
from
drivers
or
anything
like
that.
C
We're
not
going
to
be
bothering
visibility
on
the
roadway
just
for
the
signage,
so
it's
lifted
up
pretty
high
and
then
the
second
point
that
I
want
to
make
is
that
we
feel
that
this
wall
sign
is
not
out
of
character
for
the
neighborhood.
Nor
will
the
sign
cause
injury
to
public
health
and
safety
or
welfare.
C
There
are
a
number
of
they're,
actually
just
what
I
want
to
point
out
in
the
itu
district
along
north,
2nd
street
and
north
18th
street.
We
have
a
billboard
that
is
under
the
guidelines
of
chapter
544,
maximum
300
square
feet.
I
understand
that
these
are
two
different
chapters
in
the
sign
code
and
obviously
a
wall
sign.
That's
projecting
and
a
billboard
are
two
totally
different
signs
agreed,
but
we
do
have
a
billboard.
That's
right
there,
just
a
couple
feet
from
our
property
line.
C
E
E
K
H
K
E
K
Difficulties
in
regarding
the
signage
on
the
south
side
of
the
site,
as
christina
mentioned,
what
was
proposed
here
with
the
projection
sign,
we
felt
was
the
best
option
for
not
cluttering
that
wall,
which
we
believe
that
would
aid
in
the
practical
difficulties.
If
we
began
to
clutter
that
wall
with
either
wall,
signage
or
other
types
of
signage,
we
felt.
E
F
L
Yeah,
thank
you
very
thank
you,
mr
colas,
for
your
presentation.
Thanks
to
all
the
applicants,
so
I
live
in
ward
5.
I
get
off
on
that
highway
exit
constantly.
There
is
nothing
stopping
you
from
seeing
that
building
you
there's
no
obstructions
possible.
You
could
put
zero
signs
on
it.
You
can
see
it
from
space,
it's
so
large
and
up
up
up
on
the
corner.
I
I
see
no
reason
to
go
outside
the
norm
and
go
bigger
on
the
signage
on
that
side
of
the
road.
M
Thank
you,
chair
perry.
You
know,
I
agree
with
mr
hutchins,
I
think,
and
with
staff
report
in
particular.
I
I
do
appreciate
the
applicant
wanting
to
be
respectful
of
the
aesthetic
of
the
building
and
you
know
minimize
the
extent
of
the
signage
that
they're
going
to
use,
but
I
think
the
projection
sign,
as
pointed
out
by
staff,
is
inappropriate
for
this
location.
This
building
in
the
size
applied
for.
E
F
H
F
H
B
E
So
that
motion
passes
the
request
is
denied
to
the
applicants.
You
can
contact
mr
kohas
and
see
what
your
options
are
going
forward
again,
thanks
for
calling
in
and
giving
testimony
and
answering
their
questions.
Let's
move
on
to
the
next
item.
This
is
item
number
10,
3748,
west
bidet,
makaska
parkway
and
ms
roman.
G
J
So
item
number
10
is
for
3748
westbrook
mccaska
parkway,
the
subject.
Property
is
4
214
square
feet.
It's
an
interior
lot
located
in
r1,
multi-family
district
bfi,
one
interior,
one
built
form
overlay
district
and
the
sh
shoreland
overlay
district.
The
lot
has
a
single
family
dwelling
with
an
attached
garage
that
was
constructed
in
2014..
J
J
J
There
are
six
variants,
findings
that
are
required
for
this
application:
the
three
that
are
required
for
all
variances
and
then
the
three
that
are
specific
to
the
shoreland
staff
did
find
that
all
of
those
variance
findings
were
met
by
the
application.
So
we
found
in
the
affirmative
for
all
six,
I'm
happy
to
elaborate
on
any
of
the
six
findings.
J
If
there
are
questions,
but
as
such
steph
is
recommending
approval
of
this
application,
there
were
two
public
comments
received
one
neutral
from
the
park
board,
which
is
adjacent
to
the
existing
property
and
one
that
did
state
some
concerns.
These
were
distributed
to
the
board
and
I
will
take
any
questions.
E
M
M
J
M
Okay,
I
appreciate
that
and
then
a
quick
follow-up
question
if
you
will
again
looking
at
the
the
site
plan,
I'm
having
a
hard
time
kind
of
understanding
that
how
far
in
front
of
the
home
you
know
this
extends
and
where
that
is
in
relation
to
to
the
slope,
because
I
think
there
is
a
there's,
a
drop
of
five
or
six
feet
over
like
an
eight
foot,
ten
foot
run,
which
is
fairly
significant.
I
agree
for
that
short
period,
but
the
the
elevation
behind
that
on
the
home
side
appears
to
be
relatively
flat.
J
Thank
you
so
as
it
exists
today,
the
change
in
elevation
from
the
front
of
the
property
line
to
the
structure
itself
is
about
two
feet.
So
it's
not
significant,
but
it
does
pose
some
issues
in
terms
of
some
erosion
issues
that
they
were
having
some
water
issues
that
they
were
having
with
collection
on
their
steps
that
I
think
they're
trying
to
correct
with
this
retaining
wall
and
with
this
new
step
that
they're
creating.
G
E
G
I
I
guess
I
think
sarah
has
done
a
great
job
in
describing
what
we're
going
for
this
family
who
is
moving
in
there
would
really
they
bought
this
property
because
of
the
parkway
and
because
of
the
lake
view,
and
they
really
just
want
to
be
able
to
enjoy
that
and
the
fact
that
there
is
no
yard
in
that
area.
They
they
just
want
to
take
advantage
of
the
significance
of
this
property,
so
I
will
stay
on
the
line
for
any
questions.
Anybody
may
have.
G
E
A
Thank
you,
sir,
so
chairman
and
respected
members
of
the
zoning
board
of
adjustment,
thanks
for
allowing
us
time
today
in
your
agenda,
this
is
a
follow-up
to
the
email
my
wife
had
sent
already
on
the
10th
of
august
to
miss
rahman.
Thank
you,
mr
roman,
for
your
attention
and
it's
attached.
On
the
last
page
of
your
package.
A
Coordination
took
place
to
build
our
house
concurrently
with
37.48,
and
the
purpose
of
that
was
to
minimize
disruption
to
adjacent
properties
and
homeowners
spaces
tied
around
our
neighborhood
and
also
respect
the
fragile
environment,
which
is
first
in
line
to
the
lake.
So
whatever
happens
on
our
properties
likely
will
end
up
in
the
waters
of
democracy.
A
A
We
worked
very
closely
with
the
park
board
and
incurred
additional
expenses
to
architect
the
house
that
would
respect
setbacks
as
well
as
be
functional
and
fit
the
neighborhood
style.
As
a
result,
our
house
has
been
featured
in
star
tribune,
dwell
magazine,
artisan
tour
as
a
model
home
for
design
functionality
and
sustainability.
A
We
expect
significant
disruption
to
our
foundation,
the
natural
prairie
garden
and
our
dwelling,
as
well
as
the
proposed
trees,
main
feed
in
our
building.
We
just
don't
know
what
type
of
situation
that's
going
to
create
for
the
record.
The
pin
drop
that
you
have
on
page
13
is
not
accurate.
It
points
to
our
house,
not
the
property
in
in
question.
A
As
far
as
the
comments
on
the
yard,
there
is
actually
a
yard
in
front.
It's
actually
quite
a
bit
larger
than
the
yard
that
we
have
based
on
the
property
map
and
also
there
is
no
family
living
there.
That's
a
part-time
home.
These
are
the
words
of
the
the
owners.
This
is
their
part-time
cabin,
so
there
is
no
family
that
lives
there
full-time.
They
come
from
time
to
time.
A
Very,
very
scarcely
the
ultimate
intent
of
having
an
improved
landscaping
solution
can
be
achieved
without
retaining
walls,
respect
people's
right
to
do
what
they
can
with
their
property.
That's
fine,
but
when
you
start
building
retaining
walls
made
out
of
concrete,
it
creates
a
completely
different
situation.
So
there
is,
there
is
no
practical
difficulty
that
necessitates
a
retaining
concrete
wall
and
there
is
no
need
to
the
elevation,
as
you
pointed
out.
A
So
notwithstanding
all
these
issues,
the
lot
coverage
setback,
variances
distraction
of
existing
park,
property
park,
board
property
trees,
impeding
on
our
view
on
the
west
side
and
drainage.
We
don't
support
this
proposal
and
we
urge
this
board
to
decline
the
retaining
wall.
Part
of
the
variance.
Thank
you.
E
L
J
J
L
M
Do
thank
you
tripp
harry
thanks
to
everyone
else.
You
know,
as
I
listen
to
the
testimony
and
I
read
the
packet,
I
actually
find
that
this,
in
my
opinion,
fails
the
first
finding
and
the
third
finding
so
I'm
inclined
to
vote
against
the
application,
but
I'd
like
to
hear
what
other
people
have
to
say.
N
Thank
you,
terry
perry.
I
oh,
I
wouldn't
normally
go
along
with
staff
findings.
They
are
very
generous
in
this
case,
going
from
the
traditional
amount
to
going
from
feet
to
inches
as
as
the
variance
is
requesting,
but
the
comments
of
the
previous
testimony
paint
a
different
picture
and
it
does
seem
quite
dramatic,
not
that
you
know
an
award-winning
house
and
versus
a
sort
of
vacation
rental
need
to
come
into
play
as
far
as
a
practical
difficulty.
N
N
M
M
M
H
F
C
E
E
B
E
E
Is
there
anything
else
that
anybody
has
that
is
not
was
not
on
the
agenda
starting
new
or
old
business
from
mr
cole
haas,
if
he's
still
on
the
line,
nope,
no
new
or
old
business,
and
with
that
and
hearing
no
hearing
nothing
else
and
without
objection,
I
will
declare
this
meeting
adjourned.
Our
next
meeting
will
be
september,
2nd
2021..
Thank
you.
Everyone.