►
From YouTube: May 18, 2023 Zoning Board of Adjustment
Description
Additional information at:
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
Submit written comments about agenda items to: councilcomment@minneapolismn.gov or https://www.minneapolismn.gov/government/meetings/public-comment/online-comment
A
Softly
I'm,
the
vice
chair
of
this
board,
I'm
chairing
the
meeting
tonight
in
the
absence
of
chair
Perry.
This
is
a
regular
meeting
of
the
Zoning
Board
of
adjustment.
Thursday
May
18th
will
the
clerk
please
call
the
roll.
B
As
you
said,
board
member
or
a
chair,
Perry
will
not
be
here.
Also
board
members
will
be
absent
with
that
board.
Member
Callahan
is
absent.
Grant
squash
here
Hutchins
here
Ingram
here
Johannesen
here
softly
aye
Wang.
Here
we
have
six
members
present.
Okay,.
A
Thank
you.
Have
all
the
members
reviewed
the
agenda
and
does
anyone
have
any
adjustments
to
make
to
the
agenda
before
we
seek
approval,
entertain
a
motion
to
approve
the
agenda
so.
A
All
in
favor,
please
say
aye
all
opposed,
say,
nay,
any
abstentions.
Oh
hearing
none,
the
agenda
is
approved.
We've
got
the
minutes
from
last
meeting.
April
20th
2023
do
I.
Have
a
motion
to
accept
those
meeting
minutes.
A
B
A
Been
a
motion
in
a
second
all
in
favor
of
approving
prior
meeting
minutes,
say
aye
any
opposed,
say,
Nate,
any
abstentions.
A
Mr
Ellis:
are
there
any
petitions
or
communication
or
Mr
Ellis
isn't
here
right
now?
Oh,
is
that
the
diocese
are
there
any
petitions
or
Communications
from
the
last
cycle.
C
Vice,
chair
softly,
we
have
one
communication
this
evening.
The
appeal
of
the
Uptown
Theater
Windows,
2910,
Hennepin
Avenue,
went
to
the
business
committee
earlier
this
week.
C
The
the
committee
granted
the
appeal
on
the
findings
that
the
use
is
a
large
entertainment
venue
or
theater
presents
a
practical
difficulty
in
terms
of
its
use
and
that
light
would
intrude
on
events
in
the
building
in
one
area
and
that,
if,
if
we,
if
the
window
opened
on
the
other,
would
just
be
looking
into
a
stairwell,
the
other
finding
finding
two,
the
historic
portion
of
the
theater
is
unable
to
be
modified
and
does
exceed
the
maximum
window
coverage.
C
A
Terrific
thank
you.
Thank
you,
okay.
Well,
that
brings
us
to
the
business
portion
of
our
meeting
tonight.
This
is
a
public
hearing.
We
have
two
items
on
the
agenda.
We
have
item
number
five
is
2111
Drew
Avenue
South
item
number:
six
is
4901
17th
Avenue
South
agenda
item
number
six
is
scheduled
for
consent.
A
Is
there
anyone
on
the
board
that
would
like
to
discuss
agenda
item
number
six
or
remove
it
from
consent?
Okay,
an
agenda
item
number
five
is
scheduled
for
discussion
before
we
move
into
the
consent.
Voting
on
consent
items
I
just
want
to
go
over
a
quick
reminder
to
everybody
here
in
the
room
that
the
meeting
today
is
a
public
hearing.
A
If
you
do
come
up
and
speak
speak
clearly
into
the
microphone
so
that
we
can
all
hear
you
make
sure
your
devices
have
been
turned
off
or
silence
so
that
they
don't
disturb
the
recording.
If
you
are
going
to
speak
and
testify,
please
record
your
name
in
the
book
on
the
table
near
the
door
and
then
make
sure
to
articulate
your
name
and
your
address.
When
you
begin
your
presentation,
the
consent
items
are
going
to
be
approved
without
discussion
from
the
board
will
adhere
to
the
staff
recommendation.
A
That's
listed
in
the
staff
report,
including
any
conditions
that
are
stated
therein,
and
if
you
have
any
questions
about
an
application
after
approval
or
denial,
you
can
work
with
the
staff
member
aside
assigned
to
your
project
with
that.
Do
I
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
items
on
consent:
number
6,
4901,
17th,
Avenue,
South,.
D
E
Thank
you,
foreign.
Thank
you,
Vice,
chair
safely,
and
members
of
the
board
before
you
today
is
a
variance
request
to
increase
the
maximum
fence
height
for
the
property
at
2111
Drew,
Avenue
South.
This
property
is
in
the
R1,
multiple
family,
District,
the
interior,
one
built
form
overlay
district
and
the
Shoreland
overlay
District,
it's
a
little
difficult
to
see
with
the
the
color
saturation,
but
on
the
screen
you
can
see
the
the
front
view
of
the
property.
It's
an
existing
single
family
dwelling,
the
yard
at
the
front
of
the
property.
E
E
This
is
a
site
plan
prepared
by
the
applicant
and
some
photos
of
the
area
in
in
questions,
so
you
can
see
the
the
house
and
garage
and
on
the
property
and
other
improvements
like
a
deck
behind
the
house
and
various
yard
spaces
around
the
property.
The
Proposal
is
to
install
fencing
around
a
lot
of
the
property.
E
The
proposed
fence
would
be
six
feet
in
height
all
all
the
way
around
in
all
areas,
though,
some
of
the
other
specifications
for
the
fence
would
be
changing
in
different
parts
of
the
property,
so
I'll
go
over
those
those
particular
changes
in
a
minute.
I'll
just
know
much
of
the
proposed
fencing
for
a
lot
of
this
property
would
be
in
compliance
with
applicable
zoning
code
requirements
for
things
like
maximum
fence,
height
and
and
opacity.
E
It
is
only
the
portion
of
the
fence
that
would
be
in
the
required
front
yard
setback
area
that
needs
the
variance
in
this
case
that'll
be
the
focus
of
what
we're
looking
at
the
minimum
required
front
yard
setback
is
20
feet
from
that
front
property
line
and
in
that
required
front
yard
setback
area.
The
maximum
fence
height
is
three
feet
for
an
opaque
fence
or
four
feet
for
an
open
or
a
decorative
fence.
E
So
the
The
Proposal
in
this
case
for
the
the
area
in
question,
starting
looking
at
the
the
side
yard
of
the
property,
which
is
at
the
bottom
of
the
site
plan
that
is
a
six
foot,
opaque
fence
that
would
more
or
less
run
along
that
side.
Property
line
as
it
runs
towards
the
front
of
the
property
and
enters
that
that
front
yard
setback
area.
The
fence
would
remain
a
six
foot
tall
privacy
fence
in
in
that
area.
E
E
Property
is
7868
square
feet
in
an
area,
so
it's
a
little
bit
on
on
the
larger
end
for
a
low
density,
residential
property
in
Minneapolis,
many
of
which
are
closer
to
around
5000
square
feet,
an
area,
the
housing
garage
and
the
property
up
here,
typical
in
in
their
size
and
location
generally,
and
there
are
some
existing
yard
spaces
and
and
other
semi-private
outdoor
Gathering
spaces
like
like
the
deck
behind
the
house.
E
There's
significant
portions
of
the
property,
which
can
be
enclosed
by
a
six
foot,
opaque
fence
without
the
need
for
variants
and
staff,
doesn't
see
anything
unique
about
the
property
itself.
That
creates
a
practical
difficulty
in
complying
with
the
fence
site
requirements
which
are
more
strict
in
in
the
required
front.
Yards
staff
finds
that
that
finding
is
now
met
for
the
second
finding
regarding
reasonable
use
of
the
property
and
spirit
and
intent
of
the
ordinance
staff
also
finds
that
this
is
not
met.
E
The
spirit
and
intent
of
the
ordinance
regarding
maximum
fence
Heights
are
generally
to
allow
for
privacy,
while
maintaining
access
to
light
and
air
to
encourage
an
aesthetic
environment
and
to
promote
the
public
health
safety
and
Welfare
in
in
required
front
yard
setback
areas.
The
fence
height
requirements
are
the
most
strict,
as
those
are
intended
to
be
the
most
public-facing
portions
of
properties
there's
the
least
expectation
of
of
privacy
in
those
areas
and
intended
to
to
sort
of
create
a
more
inviting
landscape
environment
in
the
in
a
front
yard.
E
That's
near
the
the
public,
right-of-way
fence,
height
requirements
and
other
zoning
requirements
for
fences
also
relate
to
the
principles
of
Public
Safety
through
environmental
design,
which
is
a
component
of
some
of
the
comprehensive
plan
policies
related
to
to
to
fences
and
and
site
design.
E
A
lot
of
the
fence
that's
being
proposed
here
would
be
an
open
and
decorative
design,
as
it
goes
across
the
front
yard,
so
it
wouldn't
necessarily
be
a
visibility
concern
necessarily,
but
there
is
that
portion
of
Defense
along
the
side,
property
line,
which
is
still
on
the
front
step
back,
which
would
be
opaque.
It's
at
the
top
of
that
slope,
which
kind
of
enhances
the
screening
effect
of
an
opaque
fence
there
and
again
the
intent
of
the
code
is
pretty
plainly
to
require
shorter
fences
in
front
yards.
E
A
staff
mindset
this
finding
would
also
not
be
met.
The
third
required
finding
regarding
essential
character
of
the
locality
and
potential
for
injury
or
detriment
staff
finds
that
this
is
met.
In
this
case.
There
are
also
some
additional
findings
specific
to
the
Shoreland
overlay
District,
which
is
properties
located,
and
staff,
finds
that
those
findings
would
all
be
met.
E
I
can
go
through
those
in
more
detail
if
the
board
is
interested,
but
in
the
interest
of
time
I
will
conclude
Again
by
reiterating
that
the
staff
recommendation
is
for
denial,
based
primarily
on
those
two
findings
which
staff
found
would
not
be
met.
I
would
note
if
the
board
is
inclined
to
Grant
this
variance
request
staff
would
recommend
a
condition
of
approval
that
the
applicant's
prepare
and
submit
an
erosion
control
plan
following
best
management
practices,
is
something
we
require
for
a
lot
of
development
proposals
in
the
in
the
Shoreland
overlay
district.
E
There
were
a
total
of
three
public
comments
which
were
received
I
believe
they
were
all
in
support
of
the
applicants
requested
variants.
Those
should
have
all
been
made
available
to
you
and
the
applicant
is
in
attendance
during
this
hearing.
This
concludes
my
presentation,
but
I'll
stand
for
questions.
Okay,
thank.
A
F
Good
afternoon,
Dane
stimart,
the
property
owner
and
Alex
has
been
terrific
And
Timely
to
work
with
so
just
wanted
to
put
that
out.
There
I
wouldn't
have
filed
this.
If
I
didn't
have
neighborhood
support
and
I
know,
some
people
sent
them
in.
One
of
them
actually
is
is
very
in
in
support
of
it
because
it
also
give
privacy
to
their
backyard,
which
is
a
reverse
corner
lot.
That's
they
were
the
six
foot.
Privacy
section
would
be
in
the
report.
F
F
And
then,
when
you
take
out
our
garage
and
put
it
in
our
gravel
parking
way
and
then
add
the
slant
of
the
Hill,
there
really
is
no
backyard
and
then
kind
of
in
the
design
that
was
up
before
the
house
is
completely
offset
to
the
alley.
So
really
the
only
flat
spot
is
kind
of
that
side
then
going
into
the
front,
and
so
that's
really
where
we're
hoping
just
to
maximize
it.
F
That
will
completely
cover
this
fence
and
everything
in
that
path,
as
well
so
going
from
four
to
six
feet
and
the
front
is
really
important
just
so
that
you
can
have
animals
and
pets
out
there
that
aren't
supervised
24
7
when
they're
out
there,
and
so
that's
really
why
I'm
looking
for
that
extra
bump
I
did
bring
in
just
a
few
more
angled
picture
views,
because
I
think
it
does
make
a
difference
for
able
to
add
that
camera
on,
and
so
this
this
bottom
image.
F
It's
not
coming
up
super
clear,
but
it's
just
showing
you
actually
how
far
up
that
close
house
is,
and
so
their
house
line
is
actually
further
up
than
where
I'm
even
proposing
to
put
this,
because
it's
a
reverse
corner
lot
and
then,
as
you
scroll
down,
you
can
kind
of
see
like
how
close
that
house
really
is
to
the
street
that
upper
right
side
and
so
I,
just
don't
think
like
what
I'm
proposing
is
necessarily
exacerbating
or
limiting
the
safety
or
Viewpoint
for
Neighbors
and
without
you
know,
calling
out
any
other
addresses.
F
Half
a
block
down
the
street.
There's
a
six
foot
privacy
fence
that
goes
feet
from
the
street
I'm
suggesting
14
feet
from
the
street.
For
me
as
well
as
you
can
see
on
the
right,
there's
multiple
10-foot
garages
that
are
feet
from
the
street
and
they
have
fences
on
top
their
garage,
so
I'm
just
trying
to
show
that
I
guess
what
I'm
putting
in
is
actually
in
spirit
with
what
is
in
the
neighborhood
of
obstructions
in
front
of
the
streets
and
I
actually
think
buying
is
significantly
less
from
from.
What's
out
there.
F
F
Neighbors
have
the
retractable
leash
and
they
let
their
dogs
actually
come
up
to
this
fence
and
dogs
are
protective,
and
so
we
are
very
concerned
she
could
jump
over
and
no
kids
of
our
own
yet,
but
that
will
definitely
be
a
bit
of
a
concern,
but
our
dog
is
capable
of
going
over
a
four
foot
fence.
A
D
Hutchins
thanks
Vice,
chair
sobly:
where
is
the
city
at
with
the
Practical
difficulty
of
that
slope,
creating
kind
of
a
safety
issue?
The
forefoot
fence
is
not
necessarily
adequate
to
prevent
like
a
animal
or
a
child
like
that,
like
the
applicant
said,
is
there
any
consideration
for
practical
difficulty?
There.
E
Vice,
chair
softly
board,
member
Hutchins
I
can't
think
of
any
examples
where
that
has
been
the
case.
I
don't
know
if
Mr
Ellis
can
think
of
any
specific
examples.
In
this
case,
I'm.
E
The
Beyond
existing
conditions-
I
mean
the
slope-
is
already
there.
This
flat
yard
space
is
is
already
there,
so
it's
it.
They
could
still
have
a
shorter
fence.
In
that
location,
a
three
foot
fence
would
be
allowed
either
three
foot
opaque
fence
or
a
four
foot,
a
four
foot
open
decorative
fence
would
be
allowed
in
that
area
without
a
variance
without
moving
the
actual
location
of
that
portion
of
the
fence.
So
the
height
of
the
fence,
extending
beyond
what
the
zoning
code
allows
that
wasn't
a
practical
difficulty.
D
E
That's
correct
and
my
understanding
from
the
plans
that
have
been
submitted
is
right.
Now
that
fence
would
be
I,
think
14
feet
from
that
front
property
line.
So
essentially
they
if
they
moved
it
back
an
additional
six
feet
from
where
it's
shown
on
the
plans,
then
it
could
be
a
six
foot
tall
privacy
fence
if
they
wanted.
Thank.
A
D
Thanks
Vice,
chair
I
would
agree
with
Miss
Joy
Anderson
I,
don't
see
a
practical
difficulty
for
moving
the
fence
back
six
feet.
Yeah,
you
always
want
the
bigger
flat
yard,
but
I
don't
see
how
this
one's
any
different
than
any
other
yard.
They
want
more
space
inside
of
a
fence,
so
I
would
I
would
move
staff
findings.
A
Okay,
if
there's
no
other
comment
from
the
board,
I
might
take
that
as
a
motion
from
Mr
Hutchins.
Is
there
a
second.
G
G
This
is
fundamentally
appreciate
the
fact
that
you
know
you
did
the
opaque
and
then
the
transparent
fence
and
I
thought
that
made
a
lot
of
sense
and
I
see
seeing
these
new
photos
that
were
given
to
us,
showing
existing
garages
are
past
the
line
and
seeing
the
existing
houses
pass.
The
line
I'm
struggling
with
this
one
and
I
get
it.
G
You
know
the
difference
of
of
a
few
feet,
but
I
just
want
to
commend
you,
because
I
think
you
did
a
really
good
job
and
I'm
sorry
that
that
it
might
not
go
through.
A
D
C
A
Well,
I
abstain
as
this
is
Jerry,
but
with
that
it
appears
the
motion
has
passed.
The
board
is
approved,
staff's
position
and
denied
the
variance.
If
you
have
any
questions,
you
can
speak
with
Mr
kolhas
about
what
your
options
are
moving
forward.
Thank
you
for
coming
down
today
and
again
make
sure
that
document
is
received
by
staff.