Yeah, I can't say must have noticed it, but it never really registered.

Registered, yeah.

I seriously am not always been up there, so maybe you're not an elements.

Justin DeShazzo, Heidi Rosenleaf, Garrett Craig, Lexi Murphy, and Shanna Adams will be joining us shortly.

Uh the staff is Aidan Denigy, Joella Thomas, and Julia Crane, planning director, and Becky Roll.

Uh the first item on the agenda tonight is the variance 2508.

Does the applicant present okay?

Uh is there a presentation from SCAF.

Yes, Vice Chair McEwen.

Uh, we have a prepared uh presentation for this evening.

Um would you put the the screen down to block the light?

It didn't work for Charles.

Oh, it wouldn't work.

Over on that side, the we're good.

I'll just do this.

Okay.

Uh thank you, uh Chairman McEwan.

Thank you members of the board.

Uh tonight we're here to discuss variance 258, which is a project proposed on the 400 block of East Park Street.

Um, and this is a variance um by applicant Lizzie Load LLC seeking a variance to develop a multifamily development on a nearly 16,000 square foot parcel on East Park Street.

The development features two 1,539 square foot three plexus and one 2,052 square foot fourplex.

A little background about this proposal.

East Park Street area of Butte, uh generally the area east of Main Street near the Berkeley Pitt was a neighborhood that featured a mix of commercial and residential development dating back to the turn of the century.

Much of the historic neighborhood has been lost due to fire demolition and mining expansion throughout the 21st century or the 20th century.

The proposal before the board is an info housing project adjacent to existing utility infrastructure and is proposed density similar to the historic development pattern of this area of Butte.

The proposal requests to build three multifamily buildings, which are not permitted normally in the R2 zone.

The project requires variances for the front and side and rear setbacks and is also requesting a variance for the provision of accessible parking.

You can see here the plan view.

Zoning is used to segregate lands that are intended to prevent conflict between those uses.

Following much of the deindustrialization in Butte, this area was seeing a very rapid decline and demolition of its properties.

And to not only slow that demolition but to provide improvements to land, there was a proposal to increase the density of housing in this area.

In 1995, Butte Silverbow, following the adoption of then growth policy, established the East Butte RRA, a tax increment financing district, which contributed tax increment funding to the redevelopment of East Butte.

It led to the development of many of the commercial properties that you see in that area today, and generally encouraged and contributed to the trend away from residential development toward commercial development that we have seen in the last 25 years.

Then in 2021, the Butte Silver Bow Council of Commissioners adopted the 2021 Comprehensive Plan, which set the future land use map for Silver Boat County, indicating that the East Park Street area and much of the area surrounding it would be called the Uptown Edge Place type, which was designed to provide a transition from the heavily dense central business district to the less dense neighborhoods that are adjacent to the uptown area.

And this would facilitate the incorporation of commercial and multifamily development.

In terms of public interest, the proposal does appear reasonable and consistent with the 2021 comprehensive plans goals and the intent of the place type as well as the intent of the R2 zone to encourage multifamily development and to slow sprawl.

The historic development pattern provides no consistently observable setbacks, but most recent development adjacent to the property is situated on front of lot line with some accommodation for side lot lines to meet building code.

In the code, we have the opportunity to average the front lot lines of those neighboring businesses.

And when we look at both the historic development pattern on the block as well as the new commercial development that has occurred in that area, there is no observable consistency between front, side, or rear setbacks.

But rather, in this particular instance, the average would allow for a minimum or a map a minimum of a seven-foot front yard setback.

And so the request to vary to eight feet rather than 20 feet does seem reasonable.

The proposed setbacks on the side and rear lot line help to accommodate the grade significant debris that is on the site from previous fires and demolitions.

And do and are so requested to accommodate not just building maximum to the lot line, but also to account for the integration of the stormwater drainage pipe infrastructure, the stormwater detention pond, the landscaping and the parking requirements that are required for commercial development of this scale.

The reintroduction of neighborhood density emulating historic development necessitates potential conditions to ensure the integration of historically compatible architectural features.

Within the growth policy or the comprehensive plan, the infill that is required in this area should emulate the historic development pattern and the architectural features of those buildings.

And so we have requested two conditions, one of which requests a variegated parapet, which is kind of the customary step-up, step-down parapet at the top of the building, and also the incorporation of brick and brick-like veneer on the facades of the buildings to allow for integration and complementary infill, as well as historically appropriate balustrades and balusters to emulate the historic design of multifamily developments in the area.

The parking that is proposed on the site is private and solely private and will be assigned, and should the variance be granted, certain conditions are appropriate in that event.

Those conditions should indicate that there is no public parking on the site, and that that public park that the provided parking is assigned by unit and is not variable or cannot be shared or borrowed by others.

Here's some information as it relates to just giving you an idea of the historic density pattern.

On the right hand side, you can see the 1951 sandborne maps, which were the fire insurance maps.

The parcel that you see highlighted in orange is actually shown and illustrated with the 1955 tax card photograph on the left hand side.

So you can see that there was quite a dense pattern of development in what we would know as FinTown, which is essentially showing you and illustrating the density pattern that was present historically.

Hardship is the criteria that is provided by the Montana Supreme Court.

Hardship must result from a condition unique to the property.

The quality must prevent the developer from meeting the requirements of the zone.

As we all know, mining expansion has led to fairly haphazard topography in Butte due to poor demolition and debris sort of disposal and also the expansion of mining and its haphazard placement of mine waste and overburden.

There are also several elements of wall and debris that are present on the site that do pose development challenges.

In addition, the 11% slope of the Butte Hill impacts elevations that are required for meeting the development requirements, including parking and also the stormwater drainage.

But the applicant has proposed not too wide of setbacks, but setbacks that would allow for the applicant to achieve the stormwater and parking requirements while also infill providing infill development for housing.

The slope does constrain the location and size of the stormwater controls and the associated drainage facilities.

From a perspective of conclusion of law, the conditions unique to the property do constitute a hardship in the grade of the site, the presence of debris, the slope of the hill, and the challenges are not created by the applicant themselves.

So it may be reasonable to allow for multifamily residential development in the R2 zone consistent with the historic mixed use development pattern.

You can see a photo here of what is uh Kivilla taxidermy or the right drug, and this is a property that is on the east side of the parcel in question.

You can see also images of this same parcel from looking to the north on East Park Street back in the tax photos from 1955.

The intent of zoning is to permit reasonable use of private property while restricting practices that may infringe upon the rights of adjacent landowners.

The establishment of the East Butte RRA catalyze significant commercial development, resulting in a transition from sort of the mixed-use residential development that was customarily seen in the late 50s, 60s, and 70s, and then in the 90s began to transition to solely commercial, which generally has become the prevailing land use in the area with some historic buildings remaining.

The proposed project supports the intent of the comprehensive plan uptown edge place type, and the proposed variances would retain the protections intended by the code's design standards, primarily ensuring that the site is developed to allow for emergency services access, including fire and ambulance, provision of waste pickup, and also code compliance from adjacent buildings.

Under International Building Code, a setback of five feet is the minimum side setbark that is necessary.

The rear setback does not impose a challenge as there is no vehicular access to the rear lot due to private property ownership and no through alley being present in this particular location.

So the provision of compatible infill meeting the parking landscaping and stormwater requirements is possible with the proposal before you.

Conclusions and recommendations.

The proposed infill development does not appear contrary to public interest.

Infill development, affordable housing, and greater density emulating historic density are priorities of the 2021 comprehensive plan.

Conditions unique to the property create a hardship.

The proposal will be required to meet building code standards to maintain safety while allowing development of the non-conforming lot.

And granting the variance provides relief from requirements that may otherwise prevent development enjoyed by others in the district.

However, alternatives are available to the board to deny the application based upon the findings presented, or continue public hearings on this matter at a future date.

Thank you, Director Crane.

Do any of the board members have questions of Director Crane?

Could the applicant please step forward?

I had to remove the gun on the device, but not to put it on my nose.

If you could just state your name and address.

Okay.

And uh do you have anything to add to the presentation?

No, I uh I first of all I want to thank uh uh Julia's department uh is as far as looking at and considering the uh uh the project that we have and uh thank the board members stay for uh hearing us out.

Uh I've done a couple different projects in Subbow County, and the one thing that anyone knows is we try to do everything first class, do it right, and make the county and and and residents of Silverbow County proud of us.

Uh this project right here, uh we definitely know it it fills a need, and I can promise you when it's done, uh it'll be first class and it'll be something that you guys will be proud of.

Um if you have any questions of me, you can ask.

I can sit down if you need to call me back up.

I'm I'm happy to, but uh we're excited to continue working uh you know with uh with Silverbow County.

And so you know, even though it has a Reno address, I'm a Butte boy.

Uh matter of fact, uh and I won't tell you what year because they'll make me sound old, but uh uh, you know, born at St.

James baptized at America Conception, and I live here in Butte part-time in uh uh in Northwest Montana as well.

So we have different companies, so I don't want anyone to think you have an out of state developer coming running and gunning uh because you hear that often, but uh uh we're uh proud again to try to put uh another class project uh uh in Subboe County.

So again, if you have any questions, feel free, and otherwise I'll sit down or you can call me back up.

Have you had an opportunity to review the conditions of approval?

I have, and we agree and concur uh uh with her department as well.

Okay.

Uh do any of the board members have any questions?

No.

Uh is there anyone present that would like to speak against this proposal?

Anyone in the audience?

Without that, is there a motion to approve?

Any second?

Okay.

Uh since it has been moved and seconded, the board can now move on to a vote.

And again, thank you so much.

I'll sit down unless you'll meet the standard.

No, you can you can't.

The application has unanimously passed and been approved, and I believe you will be receiving a letter from the planning staff to that effect.

Thank you.

Is there a presentation from the staff?

Yes, there is, Vice Chairman.

Awesome.

This is for special use 25-17.

The applicants are Hey Kids LLC, and it's Lucy Hansen and Heidi Gray.

The proposal is the applicants are requesting to amend a special use from 2024, special use 24-1 to broaden the existing language of the approved permit to allow greater flexibility in the types of tenants permitted without requiring approval from the zoning board for each tenant.

The intent is to streamline the process and prevent delays in leasing the space in a timely and reasonable manner.

The property is located in an R1 or single family residence, and it's legally addressed as 2951 Baird Street here in Butte.

Professional office space, art studios, physical and medical therapy services, recreational uses, daycare facilities are all recognized as special uses in any residential zone, provided that the prescribed use is in harmony with the other uses permitted in the zone and not found to be contrary to public interest.

The special use process provides for review of public input and measures of the potential impacts of the proposed use on the surrounding neighborhood and compatibility of the proposed use with the adjoining neighborhood.

To provide the board with information about the proposed special use, the applicants and planning staff have responded to the 20 questions here.

Again, this um the zoning district is in an R1.

It's on the corner of Sheridan, Cornell, and Baird Street.

Here's an overhead view of the property.

The location and character of the property and surrounding area.

And sometime in the mid-80s, a preschool was established in this building.

The property is bordered to the north, south, east, and west by other single-family residences.

The Southeast once operated as a ski house and a cyclery, and it is currently operating as a daycare facility.

The property is approximately 23,940 square feet in size, and it has a 9,000 square foot commercial building.

The applicants in their previous application 24-1 did say that they were going to put up a four four-foot chain link fence, which has been installed on the property to the east and south sides of the yard, and the landscaping has remained intact.

The building has existing parking areas with adequate square footage to accommodate vehicles for the uses of the property.

The conditional use seeks permission for mixed occupancies section 1740-80.

Off-street parking mixed occupancies requires calculating parking based upon the total space of each use.

However, Butte Silverbow Municipal Codes section 1740 100 off-street parking also allows for joint uses of space for any off-street facilit off-street parking facilities for churches, auditoriums, for uses primarily of daytime nature.

Therefore, the church and the preschool use would be grandfathered in.

The proposed new uses of office space, daycare center, art studio, medical therapy, recreational uses, those would all require additional parking as those would require additional parking as required by Butte Silverbow Municipal Code 1740-900.

The office space requires a minimum of four parking spaces, and the daycare parking requirement would be based upon the number of employees and children registered with the daycare.

Any other uses that may go into the building would need to be calculated on the use and the square footage that's being utilized.

In this case, the parking available to the church in the existing off street parking lot fulfills the conditions described in this chapter.

The use conforms to objectives of the comprehensive plan and purpose of the ordinance.

The property is designated as a traditional neighborhood place type in the comprehensive plan.

While the primary land use within this place type is generally intended to be single family residential, traditional neighborhoods are designed to support mixed use, higher density housing, and proximity to local services such as parks, schools, and other public uses.

The comprehensive plan's future characteristics for this place type identify both public and private amenities, such as active recreation areas, ball fields, swimming pools, and tennis courts, trailheads and greenway connections.

Additionally, educational facilities and institutional uses are listed as appropriate secondary land uses.

The proposed use of the existing building for the professional office space, recreational activities, daycare services, and other similar community serving uses aligns with the intent of the traditional neighborhood place type.

These uses contribute to a walkable service-oriented neighborhood consistent with the objective of the comprehensive plan and the purpose of the zoning ordinance.

The use classification will not adversely affect nearby properties or the occupants.

The proposed projects maintain compatibility with surrounding neighborhood and adjacent structures.

The building is not changing.

It has been operated as a place of worship with interior office space for over 30 years, along with an established preschool.

The applicants are just requesting an amendment to the special use 24-1 to allow more flexibility in the permitted uses, removing the limitation for sole proprietorships and expanding the allowable office space to include the basement area rather than restricting it to the previously approved 450 square feet.

No exterior modifications to the building are being proposed.

The physical structure will remain compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, and the internal uses are not expected to alter the building's compatibility with the neighborhood in terms of appearance, scale, or function.

The conditions of approval, any future daycare center shall be required to register with the Department of Public Health and Human Services.

Any remodel of the existing structure performed to accommodate the proposed mix of businesses will be required to meet all applicable zoning building code fire and health code requirements as required by Butte Silverbow Building Fire and Health Departments, as well as DPHHS respectively.

All necessary approvals must be granted prior to applicants receiving final business license approval.

The applicants must meet Chapter 17.40 off-street loading and parking requirements to ensure that there's adequate parking.

The applicants shall be limited to the co-occupancy levels as determined by the Butte Silverbow Code Department and the Butte Silverbow Building Code Department as well as the fire marshal.

The occupancy level shall be determined prior to final business license being approved.

In conclusion, based on the information provided in the application, staff's analysis of the review criteria and any public opinion as it relates to the criteria, the board must determine if the applicant has presented evidence to the satisfaction of the board that said undue detriment will not result from granting of a special use for daycare center or office space.

Section 1738-160 special or conditional use decision of the board requires staff to refer the applicant to the board within 15 days of receipt of the application and all requested information.

The board shall within 60 days deny or approve the application.

Thank you.

Thank you, Joela.

Do any board members have questions of the staff?

Could the applicants please step forward?

State your names.

Please.

And I'm Heidi Gray.

Do you have anything additional to present to the board?

I don't think so.

I think our big thing tonight, we were here last year, right?

Some of you probably remember.

I think for us, we took on this giant building.

We are legitimate just trying to rent wasted space to maintain it, right?

It's very expensive to do that.

We were going to put a daycare center in the basement prior.

Um, Shannon, I know you were here for sure.

That just didn't pan out.

Our our other tenant wanted to move into the bigger space, um, which made it easy on us, and then we could re-rent the smaller office.

So I honestly, I think what we're asking is could we just have the flexibility to rent the space instead of waiting 60 days, right, to get on an agenda and come?

Um, we were very upfront with Joella.

Like our tenants out, we need to re-rent the space.

Is this okay?

And so we're good about that.

And we're very careful who we rent to.

We have a lot of little kids up above, obviously, so we we are very particular of who gets to come in and different things like that.

So we shouldn't upset the neighborhood.

Right.

And that's the goal.

The neighbors are good to us, right?

Besides the 60 kids.

Right.

They plow our snow, they take care of us, we take care of them.

We're not trying to create a headache.

We we are good for it.

Um we just want the flexibility of who we can rent to and basically not have to appear every time when we have a new tenant.

Please and thank you.

Thank you both for that.

Do the board members have any questions of the applicants?

Uh is there anyone present who would like to speak for or against the proposal?

See none.

Uh is there a motion to approve?

Second.

Yeah, I second it with the conditions of approval outlined as well.

Absolutely.

Did you receive a copy of those uh conditions of approval?

Yes.

And you are they agreeable to you?

Yes, yes.

Okay.

Thanks, Garrett.

Uh we can the board can vote.

All right.

You have the uh permit special permit use permit has been unanimously granted, approved, and you will be receiving a letter from the planning staff to that direction.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The third item on the agenda is special use permit uh 2513, which is an application for a special use permit to locate a short-term rental in an existing residence located at eleven sixty-six Evan Avenue.

Is the applicant present?

And is there a presentation from the staff?

Yes, there is.

Awesome.

All right.

So the property in question is located at eleven sixty-six Evans Avenue for special use 25-13.

The applicant is Nicole Stewart.

The proposal is to locate a short-term rental in an existing residence per section 1738-180.

Special use is allowed per the Butte Silverbow Municipal Code.

Um the property again is located at 1166 Evans Avenue in Bute.

Um the two images above on the left.

You can see our zoning map with the parcel highlighted in the red square.

It is in the R2 zoning district.

On the right is an image of the outside of the property.

Location and character of the property and surrounding buildings.

The property is located in an R2, two family residential zone.

The surrounding area consists primarily of residential uses with few commercial uses in close proximity, including the downtown post office, a self storage facility, and a bank.

The property in question is located within the traditional neighborhood place type of the comprehensive plan.

Proposed vehicle access circulation and parking.

Vehicle access to and from the property is acceptable for the proposed use.

Access to the front of the residence is provided via off-street parking on Evans Avenue.

Off-street parking appears to be the primary parking option in the area.

Additionally, there's also a private, there's are also private parking options behind the house accessible via the alleyway.

There appear to be no handicap specific parking areas.

Planning staff recommends the applicant provide detailed description of the parking accommodations in their rental listing.

The proposed use will not adversely affect the nearby properties, their occupants, or the aesthetic of the existing neighborhood.

When considering the low impact commercial nature of the proposal, planning staff believes it would have minimal impact on adjacent properties and their owners.

Staff recommends the applicant should clearly communicate rules and expectations to guests and confirm their understanding prior to confirming bookings.

The applicant also stated there will be no changes in appearance to the outside of the property to accommodate the short-term rental.

Conditions of approval.

Any remodels of the residents performed to accommodate the proposed business, but will be required to meet all applicable building code and health code requirements as required by the Butte Silverbow Code and BSB Health Department.

All necessary approvals must be granted prior to the applicants receiving final business license approval.

The property address must be visible, including past dark, and entrances must be clearly identified.

The applicants shall be limited to the occupancy level as determined by the Butte Silver Bow Building Code Department and Butte Silverbow Fire Marshal.

The occupancy level shall be determined prior to the business license approval.

The applicants will be limited specifically to the business as stated and approved.

Any further business expansion, changes in business or building expansions will require further review with the zoning board of adjustment.

The applicant will be required to acquire Butte Silverbow business license for the short-term rental.

In conclusion, based on the information provided in the application, staff's analysis of the review criteria and any public opinion as it relates to the criteria.

The board must determine if the applicant has presented evidence to the satisfaction of the board that said undue detriment will not result from the granting of the special use permit for a short-term rental.

The board within 15 days of receipt shall make a decision and within 60 days deny or approve the application.

And that is the conclusion of this presentation.

Thank you, Aiden.

Do any board members have any questions of staff?

Could the applicants please step forward?

Please state your name and uh address.

I'm Nicole Stewart.

This is my husband Brady.

Sorry, go ahead.

Um do you have anything to add to the presentation from the staff?

Um I have a letter from my neighbor.

Um you guys want to see that he uh enjoys it being an Airbnb solely because we keep up our property.

Um, all my neighbors do have our phone number in case they have any problems with any guests, they can call me and I'll be there right away.

Do you want to read that letter and sure?

Um to whom I may concern.

We are writing to express our support for Nikki Stewart's Airbnb located at 1166 Evans Avenue in Butte.

We live at 1160 Evans, right next door to Nikki's house.

We have never had any problems with any of the people who have stayed at the house.

And Nikki has open communication with us so that we have no problem.

That we are if we have a problem that we can contact her.

She keeps the property in excellent condition and has allowed us access to her property to make repairs to our property when needed.

We are glad to have Nikki and her business as our neighbor.

We ask that you allow her to continue to allow her to continue to run her Airbnb in the neighborhood.

Please feel free to contact us with any questions with this matter.

And they give you her phone number.

Thank you.

Have you been provided with a copy of the conditions?

Um I believe so via email.

Do you are they acceptable to you?

Yes.

Okay.

Do any board members have questions of the applicants?

Is there anyone present that would like to speak for or against this proposal?

I think we had one letter that was emailed in.

Okay.

Um, the board had an opportunity to look at that.

Board members.

Okay.

Uh is there a motion to approve.

Mr.

Chairman, I think similar to the you know, rest of the special use short-term air Airbnb.

Um don't have any particular reservation to it.

So if no other board members have any other points, I would make a motion to approve special use 25-13 with the conditions of approval as outlined.

Thank you, Mr.

Craig.

Is there a second?

Second.

All right, we can now the board can vote on this matter.

Thank you.

After a vote by the board, the application is unanimously approved.

Uh you will be receiving a letter from the planning staff to that effect.

Thank you both.

The next item on the agenda is the matter of special use permit 2514, which is to locate a short-term rental in an existing residence located at 1925 Sampson Street.

Uh is the applicant present.

Okay.

Is there a presentation from staff?

Yes, there is.

Awesome.

Thank you.

Um 1925, or do we have it up?

Okay, perfect.

Um, this is for 1925 Sampson Street, special use 25-14.

Um Nicole Stewart is applicant as well for this one to locate another short-term rental in an existing residence per section 1738 180 um special use is allowed.

The property is legally addressed as 1925 Sampson Street in Butte.

Um here is an aerial of our zoning map.

Um the property in question is located in the red boundary, and it is located in the R2 zoning district.

Um, this is an image.

Um, the image on the left is of the same, they're both the same house.

Um, I believe it was taken off of the 2021 Google Maps imagery that was there.

Um the image on the right is what the property looks like today.

Location and character of the property in the surrounding buildings.

The properties located in the R2 two-family residential zone.

The surrounding area consists primarily of residential uses with few commercial uses in close proximity.

Um again, including the downtown post office.

It's also in close proximity to um Harrison Avenue.

The property um is located within the suburban mix place type of the comprehensive plan.

Um proposed vehicle access, circulation and parking.

Vehicle access to and from the property is acceptable for the proposed use.

Access to the front of the residence is provided via off-street parking.

Um there's a type of that should say Samson Street.

Um street parking appears to be the primary parking option in the area.

There appears to be no handicap specific parking areas.

Planning staff recommends the applicant provide detailed description of the parking accommodations in the rental listing.

Um the proposed use will not adversely affect nearby properties, their occupants, or the aesthetic of the existing neighborhood.

When considering the low impact commercial nature of the proposal, planning staff believes it would have minimal impact on adjacent properties and property owners.

Staff recommends applicants should clearly communicate rules and expectations to guests and confirm their understanding prior to booking conf prior to book confirming bookings.

And the conclusion is also the same.

So we'll leave it to the board to determine within 60 days to approve or deny the application for this proposed short-term rental.

Nikki, do you guys want to come back up to perfect?

Just for the record, give your name and address one more time.

Sure.

Brady Stewart.

1925 Samson.

Okay.

And do you have anything to add to the presentation from the board?

Um I do have another letter from our neighbors across the street, and she also said that our other two neighbors were very supportive of us as well across the street.

Do you want to just read that into the record real quick?

Sure.

We are writing this letter to express our thoughts on the house on Samson Street, which is an Airbnb.

This house doesn't bother us at all.

It's nice to see lights on in the evening.

The people using it never bother us.

It is clean and well kept.

And my neighbors as well have uh my phone number too.

I forgot to ask the board if they had any questions of staff before I brought the applicants up.

Do you have any questions for the applicants?

Any board member?

No.

Have you received a copy of the conditions of approval?

No.

And are you agreeable with those?

Yes.

Okay.

Um present who would like to speak for or against you can come to the front and please state your name and address.

My name is Holly Hamilton.

I live at 1935 Samson Street, which is directly next door to this property.

Um Sturt has been hosting a short-term rental on Airbnb for the past year.

Couple months ago, she approached us about splitting the cost of replacing the shared fence.

We declined.

Since she then asked if we would regulate our dogs to avoid barking at their guests.

I told her no, I will not change my dog's schedule to accommodate her business.

Since that moment, our lives have changed and not for the better.

We have faced repeated harassment and disruption that has created stress, anxiety, and tension in our home.

We no longer feel safe or comfortable enjoying our own property.

Here's what we have experienced.

One guest threw objects, including a pig ear in our yard at our docks and making one of my dogs sick.

Another hosted a party that filled the entire street with cars, blocking driveways and leaving no parking.

A guest deliberately antagonized our dogs by lifting their own dog over the fence.

We believe Nicola has used her title as a police officer to influence law enforcement presence.

Officers have driven slowly past our home, and one parked in front of her property to stare at our house, claiming our security cameras were pointed at her windows, to which are none on that side of the house.

We had to speak with a sergeant just to defend our right to protect our property and to stop the harassment.

We've received unfounded calls to animal control about our dogs, despite living in a neighborhood full of dogs and having no violations.

Nicole built a second fence about a foot inside of her property line, leaving a gap where vegetation has grown unchecked.

We believe this could become a fire hazard due to a lack of maintenance.

Nicole doesn't live in this neighborhood.

She isn't there when these incidents happen, yet we're the ones who have to deal with the fallout based on assumptions, complaints, and retaliation.

We've had to install security cameras, document every interaction, and consult a lawyer.

Instead of investing in our home, we're spending money just to protect ourselves.

We are first-time home buyers.

This was supposed to be a place of piece of pride and of possibility.

Instead, we live in fear of what Nicole might do next.

Every time she gets a bad review, we brace ourselves for another complaint.

We feel watched, targeted, and silenced in our own space.

We respectfully ask the city to consider the real impact this short-term rental has had, and not just on our property, but on our well-being.

We oppose the permit.

Thank you.

Sure.

My name's Michael Gabbard.

I live at 1935 Sampson Street.

I have pictures of horror of her fence that wasn't on there for you guys.

Um if you want to pass my phone around and go ahead and go at the vegetation growing.

Our yard, we haven't done much to it because we were waiting approval to have the soil checked.

So in spring, we're gonna clean it up.

Uh because it came back, you know, good, but that fence is she's not she's not cleaning anything up.

The weeds are now actually like if this is the ground, they're like the be here.

You know, I've been fighting those lilacs that you saw on the property ever since we moved in, and now they're just growing right back in that foot zone that I can't I can't maintain that.

That's her property.

So I really don't want this thing going on anymore.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Do we have any questions from the board?

Um, Mr.

Chairman, we also received um an additional email today of a letter in opposition.

Um that was emailed to um you guys today.

Um we also brought a hard copy, should anyone want to um read it or did not get the chance to read it.

Um let you have that.

For sure.

Yeah.

Um I'm happy that Michael uh that Holly and Michael arrived today to speak on my property.

Please know we have had problems with Michael and Holly, but not because the property is an Airbnb.

I hope that perhaps hearing their behavior read out loud will help them realize their actions have become harassing in nature.

Please allow me to speak on the actual reason why my neighbors are here today.

On June 30th, 2025, I message Holly via Facebook to talk about her fence that separates our properties.

Please note the fence that separates our property is Michael and Holly's fence.

Also note the fence is not complete.

In the rear of the yard, their fence stopped.

There is about a three there was a there was a gap about three feet long.

Michael and Holly placed what appeared to be chicken wire to complete the fence.

The chicken wire was about two feet tall.

The chicken wire c came up to my knees.

Holly the Michael's dog uh have I'm sorry.

I don't like public speaking.

Holly and Michael have two large dogs.

One large is very or one dog is very aggressive.

I advise Holly that the people who I rented my house have had multiple complaints on her dogs.

The complaints included that the dogs are constantly barking and show aggressive behavior, and I have multiple of those um reviews too.

I also advised Holly that their lab had bitten my husband Brady.

I then asked Holly that since their fence is not complete and that their dogs are very aggressive if they would like to go in on a fence with me so that our property is protected by their fence.

I have pictures of what the fence looked like too.

Um she is not interested in investing in a fence or going in on one with me.

Holly then proceeded to tell me what I could and could not build per the county ordinance, and that I need to be aware of the property lines when building the fence.

Holly educated me on Butte Silverbow's ordinance, but yet they have chickens and roosters in their backyard.

Holly did say that she has done her part with her dogs constant barking, but she believed that my guests should have to expect the everyday sounds of life, including dogs in a fenced yard.

Holly said it is not fair for her to change her everyday life for a short-term rental.

Let me elaborate on my husband when he was bitten by their lab.

My husband loves labs.

Brady, my husband used to walk over to their fence and pet their dog.

The dog used to be super friendly.

The lab is a puppy, but it's fully grown.

One day, as Brady did, walked up to their dog to pet her.

The dog bit Brady.

Since then, Brady has stopped petting the dog.

Sadly, the dog's aggressive behavior has gotten worse.

I would walk up to my yard, I would walk into my yard and the lab would lose her mind.

The lab started to bark with her hair straight up.

I have videos of that too.

The dog would jump up on her on their fence while attempting to lunge at me.

I do not know how how the dog had become so aggressive.

The lab used to be so very sweet.

It is very alarming to think what is going on in the neighbor's house that made the dog so mean.

Please note, while both dogs are outside the poodle attempts to, and I'm excuse me, mount the lab all day.

It is very disturbing.

That in their yard smells very strong like dog feces.

This is a continued reason why my asked my neighbors for a for the fence.

Asking your neighbor to go on on a fence to separate your yard as normal.

As a matter of fact, at my other property, my neighbor asked me to go on on a fence with him, which I plan on doing so.

When I walk my garbage to my alley where the fence was not complete, the dog would lunge at me to bite me, all while aggressively barking.

When I mo and I have videos of that too.

When I mow my yard, the dog lunges at me to bite me.

Multiple guests have messaged me and left bad reviews due to their dogs, so Holly was right.

I thought everything was fine when asking about a fence.

I guess I made Holly and Michael mad because they started harassing my Airbnb guests.

On July 4th, 200 on July 4th, well, Holly uh said that the parking became very bad.

This is the incident for that.

On July 4th, uh a guest asked if she could have her family over for the 4th of July dinner.

The guest was pregnant and her husband was in the military.

The guest and her husband were being shipped out of the military for out of the state for military purposes.

I have a large, beautiful yard that I worked very, very hard on.

I have cameras outside of my property.

I logged into my cameras multiple times throughout the event to check on the property, so I I agreed to let her have her family over for dinner.

I saw children playing in the yard.

I saw adults sitting in lawn chairs watching the children play.

The guests did not even like fireworks.

The family dinner was shut down by 6 or 7 p.m., and that's on the 4th of July.

The guests messaged me to advise me that my neighbors were recording her children in my yard and making fun of her because her family had a car with California plates.

Holly and Michael made inappropriate comments to the guests about not liking my Airbnb because that they they think their dogs should not have to learn new people every day.

The guests said that Holly's and Michael's behavior was so different that they believed that they were on drugs.

That guest actually made a police report.

Several days after the 4th of July event, Holly and Michael called Airbnb to make a complaint on my property due to the guest event.

The complaint included a parking complaint, noise complaint, and a drug complaint.

The vehicles were parked in my front of my house per my cameras that I have that I've logged in to multiple times to check on.

The guest was pregnant and her husband in the military.

I do not believe there were drugs involved.

The noise complaint was ridiculous considering it was the fourth of July.

My guests did not even have fireworks.

Holly and Michael were believed to be intoxicated on some step substance and were lighting off fireworks.

This was the beginning of their behavior.

On June 7th, 17th, Michael and Holly sat in their backyard and recorded me.

I have a video of that as well.

Their cameras doing a 90 degree angle to record me in my backyard.

They set up security cameras that attached to their house.

The cameras turned 90 degrees in order to face the rear of my house and directly to where I was sitting in my backyard.

I or not sitting, where I was in my backyard.

I was mowing my yard at the time and the cameras proceeded to follow me throughout my yard.

I was in my shorts and felt violated.

I bent over multiple times to empty my gr my bag of grass.

Michael and Holly recorded me bending over in my backyard.

I called the police to make a police report.

Um recording people where they have expectation of privacy is illegal.

Michael decided to call my work, the police station to make not one but two complaints on me to two different supervisors because I called the police for help when they were recording me in my backyard.

I am a police officer with Butte Silver Bow.

I have every right to call the police for help when I am acting as a normal citizen in my yard.

I guess Michael disagrees.

Michael said that I was sending my police friends to harass him.

I simply do not wish to be recorded in my backyard while bending over.

Michael called the planning department to make a complaint on me about my permit about my Airbnb not being permitted.

Um August 1st, 2025, I was in my yard mowing when Michael sat in his front yard with a speaker, playing, excuse my language, fuck the police, by a rapper named Easy E.

I listened to the lyrics of the song when I left my house.

The song rapped about killing the police.

On August 6, 2025, I had a guest check in that I had a bad feeling about.

I decided to drive by my house to make sure the property was okay.

I drove in the alley, but could not drive through there as there was a truck block in my exit.

I had to reverse out of the alley.

Michael ran out of the alley and stared at me the whole time while I was reversing.

Michael was attempting to intimidate me simply because I drove by my property.

Please know every time Michael attempted to bully or intimidate me, my husband was not present.

My husband has been to the property multiple times.

Michael intimidates me when my husband is not with me.

Um 7, 8, 2025, and I'm sorry they're not in order.

I had a contractor come to my property to ride provide a bit on my fence.

The contractor parked on the street in front of Michael's house.

Michael ran outside and yelled at the man, Alan, the contractor, moved his truck in front of my house.

That was not good enough for Michael.

Michael stormed at Alan while Alan was standing in my yard, waiting for me to arrive.

Michael had his arms puffed out as if he was going to fight Alan.

I can speak on Michael's behavior because I drove up to my house as Michael was storming after Alan.

Michael saw me, turned around and walked back in the house.

On multiple occasions, uh Michael and Holly let had let their dogs out on purpose when I walked close to the fence to intimidate me.

A good example was when I had a different contractor provide provide in a bid for a fence.

We were in the rear of the house where the chicken wire was located.

Holly waited until I walked to the chicken wire and let her dog outside.

The lab charged after me, barking aggressively with its hair straight up.

My heart dropped because I thought he was going to attack me.

That contractor wanted to charge me an extra fee for a hazard due to their dogs.

I had multiple bad reviews from guests because of the dog's aggression and constant barking.

Bad reviews about the dogs outside all night barking.

I have had constant harassment from Holly and Michael solely because I asked for a fence to protect myself and my guests from their dogs.

Holly and Michael must understand that if their dog learned to jump the chicken wire and bit me or a guest, they would be subject to a lawsuit.

If a guest had a small child that walked too close to their fence or chicken wire and they were bit, again, they will be subject to a lawsuit.

I paid $1,700 for a fence to protect myself and my guests from their dogs.

I have not received one thank you, and I probably never will.

Not to interrupt, but one more minute.

I have made two complaints to animal control regarding their dogs without any solution.

Holly and Michael are not here because they disapprove of the house being operated as an Airbnb.

They're here solely due to me fighting with them over their dogs.

I know roosters are very aggressive animals.

I know chickens are very dirty and stink.

I should not have to deal with an aggressive rooster and their dogs.

Their yard smells strong like dog feces.

I should not have to smell their dogs and now chickens.

I have contacted a lawyer and started the process of a civil lawsuit between Michael and Holly due to their dogs and harassment.

My lawyer's Tim Dick, and I actually have a letter from him today, too.

Please know just on 9-12, 2025, recently, Holly harassed my contractor that was installing the fence.

Holly proceeded to threaten the man that the fence better not be encroaching on her property, or they'll have problems.

Even after the demand lender was sent, Michael and Holly cannot stop.

Every time I'm in my yard, I'm your minutes up.

No, we have you're on the record.

Is there any other comments?

I have a picture of their what their fence used to look like.

That's why I was asking for a fence.

And I have a recording of their dog too.

It's a normal request.

Thank you.

Board members have any questions.

I have a question for the opponents.

One of you guys could come back up with us.

So of all the conditions that it takes to get an Airbnb or verbo to get going, and the conditions that they have placed from the zoning board.

Um is there are there conditions that you disagree with?

What would make it okay for them to have this business in your neighborhood and to be your neighbor?

Her stop of harassment, majority of what she said is slander.

It's we our lab had botched surgery when she was spayed, and so she has to go outside more frequently than an average dog.

Our dogs are diapers inside the house.

In the neighborhood.

I've got video.

I have video of Joe leaving the last complaint, and our dogs are outside.

And our dogs are only outside when we're home.

I'm gonna just ask that we limit this to discussion about the split application, not the person.

You see, there's it there's dogs all over the neighborhood.

The last complaint about barking wasn't even from our dogs.

As to the conditions is uh commission.

Yep.

Board member uh Heidi Rosenleaf asked.

We don't want parties, we don't want people parking in other residents' areas.

And I believe you might have an email about that, a complaint from that.

Um we don't want people bringing their dogs and holding them over the fence because they want to meet our dogs.

I mean, as to the conditions and and uh Ms.

Wilson Lee's question if those conditions are met, is there still an issue?

There will only be an issue if we are constantly harassed.

Yeah.

That's the our only issue.

Okay.

The we are at a point.

Is there a motion?

Mr.

Chairman, maybe just briefly for board discussion.

Absolutely.

You know, I guess my feeling on this, you know, not to dismiss either party's concerns is looking at this from a special use permit for a short-term Airbnb, and like how you said, with the conditions or approval outlined.

To me, this is a dispute between two private landowners.

I personally don't see really any difference if this is a short-term Airbnb, a long-term rental, you know, you utilize as a primary residence.

I think, you know, this tension, this dispute still gonna exist.

Um, and that's way outside the purview of this board, in my opinion.

You know, it's a civil matter.

Um, so in my opinion, I don't see any any issue with approval of this special use permit.

Thank you for that.

Uh explanation, Mr.

Craig.

It's appreciated.

Is there a second to the motion?

Okay.

Uh now the board can vote on the matter.

After a vote by the board, the permit special use permit is approved.

Uh you'll be receiving a letter from the planning staff to that effect.

Next on the agenda is the matter of special use permit uh to locate a short-term rental.

It's uh twenty-five fifteen, and it's to locate a short-term rental in an existing residence located at five seventeen South Clark Street.

Uh is the applicant present.

Is there a presentation from the staff?

There is Vice Chairman.

Thank you.

This application is for five seventeen South Clark Street, and it's special use twenty-five-fifteen.

The applicant is Mary Jennifer Callahan, and she resides at five twenty-one South Clark Street.

And the proposal again is to locate a short-term rental in an existing residence per section seventeen thirty-eight one eighty special uses allowed in BSBMC.

Um the property is legally addressed as five seventeen South Clark Street.

Here is an aerial view of the property outlined here in Maroon.

It is in an R2 or two family residential zone.

Um here's a couple properties or a couple pictures of the property.

Um to the right is the construction being done.

I believe that was from a 2021 photo, and this is what the home looks like today.

Um, an aerial view.

Again, this is in a residential zone.

Again, this is in a residential zone, primarily single-family homes in the area, as well as some commercial businesses, the hospital, some health care clinics, big sky diagnostic is just to the south.

A dental facility right off platinum, a block to the I'm sorry, to the that's to the south.

The big sky diagnostics is to the west.

The location and character, um, the surrounding area does consist primarily of single-family residential uses.

Um healthcare facilities are in the close proximity.

Um again, Southwest Montana Clinic and St.

James Community Hospital.

This property is located in the economic driver place type.

This includes areas with light and heavy industrial, educational and health care institutions, rail and transportation infrastructure, and the general conditions associated with the economic driver areas include intensive development, noise odors, significant traffic, and campus-style environments.

Despite these intensive primary uses, the comprehensive plan identifies several opportunities and future characteristics for this place type, including mixed-use development, diversification of commercial and industrial uses, access to infrastructure that supports higher intensities, such as expansion of broadband, public water, sewer, and stormwater facilities, notably mixed residential and lodging uses are explicitly listed as appropriate future characteristics within the economic develop within the economic driver.

The proposed short-term rental operating within an existing single-family residence aligns with these future land use goals by introducing low-impact lodging into an area intended for diverse mixed-use growth.

Planning staff believe that the proposal is consistent with the intent of the zoning ordinance to allow for reasonable and compatible uses of private property.

Proposed use will not adversely affect nearby properties or their occupants.

When considering the low-impact commercial nature of the proposal, planning staff believe it would have minimal impact on adjacent properties and property owners.

The proposed use will not adversely change the use of the property in question.

The established character of the existing neighborhood would not appear to be impacted by this proposal.

There would be no changes to the aesthetics of the surrounding area.

Conditions of approval are standard for all Airbnbs, so I'm not going to read through these.

They're the same as the two that Aidan just went over.

As well as your conclusions, the board would have 15 or sorry, the board would have 60 days to either approve or deny this proposal.

Thank you.

Thank you, Joella.

Do any of the board members have questions of the staff?

Could the applicant please step forward?

State your name and address.

Okay.

And do you have anything to add to the presentation?

No, my wife and I on our owner home directly next door to the proposed Airbnb property.

Renovated it and took it from a shell to a pal.

So that's pretty much it.

Do any of the uh have you received a copy of the conditions?

Do you agree with us?

Do any of the board members have questions of the applicant?

Is there anyone present who would like to speak for or against the proposal?

Yes.

You can step up, sir.

Please state your name and address.

John and Jean Printy.

I don't think your mic's on, sir.

They can't hear you.

Okay.

So say that.

John and Jean Printy.

Trustees of a property at 509 South Clark, which is adjacent to 517.

The concern that we have, and the clinic has next door, is we already have a tremendous parking problem.

The clinic has patients trying to park.

He has people living in 527 that consists of about three or four cars.

We have no idea he was putting this in.

We've had two conversations in the last month.

In the first one, he asked me if I'd move our vehicle forward so his staff could park.

And then the second one, I uh contacted his wife by telephone and ask if they could move their rental car back so we could park.

Because the alley is very narrow.

It drops off to the north.

And it's very difficult to get into the property from the back side.

Board members have any questions.

Thank you, sir.

Okay.

Do you board members have any questions?

The opposition.

I just have I just have one quick question.

Absolutely.

And it can be answered by either of you.

I'm wondering about the parking in front of both your place and their place.

Is there room for one car in front of each residence?

Is that what the room is I couldn't tell from the pictures?

Thank you.

Sure.

Andy Durkin.

I'm at 514 South Clark, almost directly across the street from the property.

And I think Joel's presentation was great.

I would also share a little bit of the parking concerns.

However, I would say that probably 99% of the parking issues are a result of the clinic.

And those parking issues will probably be there regardless of whether or not there's a short-term rental.

Secondly, as far as the character of the owners, um, Jen and Keith are great neighbors.

They look out for the elderly in our community in our neighborhood.

They're eager to shovel sidewalks early after it snows, so they're just great to be around.

Secondly, I think as far as evaluating a variance for a short-term rental, I think that this location provides a pretty unique opportunity for Butte.

Um in the fact that it's three doors down from St.

James Healthcare.

You know, St.

James serves a seven county region.

We often have patients that might come in from NS or anywhere else that have procedures.

So an opportunity for a short-term rental three doors down could definitely alleviate some concerns and provide some additional value to the community.

So I would just recommend your support for this uh variance approval.

Thank you.

Thank you for that input.

Um I just have a question.

I'm not sure who can answer.

Do we know if the clinic is like 24-hour operation or is this an eight to five clinic?

Does anyone know?

I I don't think it's 24 hours, is it?

I just took my daughter up there.

I believe the Southwest Clinic is just like eight to five.

It's just a general practitioners.

Um I believe they are open for labs at 7 a.m.

Um, but other than that, they are typically closed at 5 or 5:30.

Thank you.

Do we have a motion?

Um I guess just one quick comment.

You know, I don't want to dismiss the parking concerns, but I think all of Uptown Butte has a parking problem and probably isn't specific to short-term rentals.

Um I guess I'll stop short of making a motion if anyone else has any other comments.

But if not, I would make a uh motion to approve special use 25-15 with the conditions as outlined.

And second.

I'll second.

Thank you.

We can now vote.

My list is getting tired.

Just watching.

After votes, the application has been approved, and you will be receiving a letter from planning staff to that effect.

Thank you.

Leave the last item on the agenda is variants twenty-five seven.

And the applicant is proposing to build a single family dwelling on a vacant lot zoned commercially within the C2 community commercial district.

Uh is the applicant present.

Is there a presentation from staff?

There is.

Thank you, Jaw.

This is for variance number 25-7.

Um this property is not addressed.

It's on West Porphyry.

Um the applicant for this property is Big Fish LLC or Buddy Fisher.

Um the applicant is proposing to construct a 1,550 square foot single family residential dwelling on a vacant lot located within the C2 community commercial zone in Uptown Butte.

This proposal seeks to vary from multiple provisions outlined in section 1724 of the BSBMC, including permitted uses, minimum lot areas, minimum lot width, front, rear, and side yard setback requirements of the zone.

A little background on this um proposal.

Within the C2 zone, residential uses are limited to multifamily dwellings and residential units located on the second floor of a commercial business.

Single family residential uses are not permitted, and the minimum lot size for a development is 8,000 square feet.

The applicant is seeking approval to construct a 1,550 square foot single family dwelling with a garage space on the ground level of an existing substandard lot within the C2 zone in Uptown Butte.

The applicant is seeking variances from the minimum lot size, minimum width front, rear side and rear setback requirements.

Making the request fifteen feet a fifteen foot setback would be less intensive than what would be outright permitted.

The rear yard setback, they're asking for a reduction from 25 feet to 615 feet.

Because this side adjoins a community zoned property or commercially zoned property.

This is a visual of the site plan that the applicants proposing.

The 15-foot it would be off of porphyry.

And then the two side and the rear is 16.

Here's some visuals of what the historical neighborhood looked like.

The sandborn map from 1916 shows that a lot of these structures were dwellings at one point.

And these two buildings, these buildings were gone in 1977, but those were the buildings that were on the property in question.

This is an aerial view of the area.

To the north is subway and some other commercial properties to the east.

You have Butte High School, Emma Park.

To the south are all multifamily units, and right across the alley to the east are single-family dwellings.

Some visuals looking east down porphyry towards Butte High School.

And this one is looking west towards St.

James Hospital.

This is looking north, and this would be looking south at the multifamily buildings directly across porphyry.

Montana Code Annotated and Butte Silverbow Municipal Code grant powers to the Board of Adjustments to grant variances in instances where all review criteria are met.

Three review criteria were being presented here and were reviewed by staff.

The first criteria is that it will not be contrary to public interest.

The proposed single family dwelling constitutes much needed residential infield development.

The South Montana and West Porphyry Street area are primarily characterized by mixed-use development consisting of single and multifamily residential, commercial businesses, and vacant lots.

In this case, the additional the addition of a single family dwelling would not alter the existing character or capacity of the surrounding area.

As such, the proposal does not represent an unreasonable increase in density compared to what the area historically supported.

The proposal is consistent with what's described in the North Corridor place type of the comprehensive plan.

The North Corridor place type, future characteristics, primarily and appropriate land use development, are envisioned to support a variety of residential and mixed-use developments, including live work, apartments, condominiums, town, and townhomes.

The site design characteristics of this place type would include building facades built close to or at sidewalk property line.

The potential adverse impacts associated with the proposal would most likely be mitigated through conditions of approval imposed by the zoning board of adjustments.

Therefore, with appropriate conditions applied, the proposal would not be contrary to public interest.

The second criteria is unnecessary hardship.

The proposed lot is only 4,872 square feet in area, which is 3128 square feet less than the required 8,000.

That is the minimum requirement for a C2 zone.

This substandard lot size is not unique to the parcel in question.

Most lots on the block do not meet minimum lot size standards, thereby creating site-specific hardships for new commercial development.

Furthermore, the lot does slope to the east and south, adding additional design and access challenges.

These constraints collectively limit the feasible development potential of the site under the current zone requirements.

The third criteria is spirit of the zoning ordinance observed.

The applicant's request to construct a single-family dwelling within a C2 district on a substandard lot that's 4,872 square feet, is unlikely to negatively impact public health safety or general welfare of surrounding property owners.

Historically, this area of Uptown Butte has exhibited mixed use character with single and multifamily residential dwellings coexisting alongside commercial businesses, often on the same or adjacent lots.

This historic precedent supports the compatibility of the proposed development.

Substantial justice.

Would literal interpretation of the provisions of this chapter deprive the applicants of rights commonly enjoyed by other tracts in the same district?

It would appear literal interpretation of the provisions of this chapter would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other tracts in the same district.

Would approving the variance request grant the applicants any special privileges that are denied by this chapter to other land in the same zoning district.

A unique set of developmental circumstances exist when the designated zoning for a specific area opposes existing features, in this case, residential dwellings in the C2 zone.

Facilitating infill development consists with existing uptown development patterns, would not be providing special privileges denied to other existing developments in the same district.

Conclusions and recommendations.

Granting the variance provides relief from the requirements that may otherwise prevent development enjoyed by others in the district.

Staff believe that all three of the criteria were met with this application.

And the recommendation would be to approve the variance based on written findings of facts and describe in the staff report with appropriate conditions.

Alternatives would be to deny or continue public hearing.

Thank you.

Thank you, Joella.

Does the board have any questions for staff?

Could the applicant please step forward, state your name?

And do you have anything to add to the presentation from the board?

No, I'm trying to discuss push the button.

Oh, they won't sell it.

I've tried for a couple of years.

We originally, I bought this piece of property to try and get the other part so I could put a commercial building there.

Well, that didn't work out.

They won't sell.

But I am working on a lease with them so I can go in there and landscape that whole area so it cleans up the whole corner.

Do any of the board members have questions for the applicant?

Have you been given a copy of the conditions of approval?

Yes.

And are you agreeable with those?

Yes.

I appreciate you stepping up.

But is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak for or against this proposal?

I'm for it.

Yeah.

James Maddison, 116 West Silver Street, and uh it's been a weed patch, hobo camp, whatever you want to call it for 25 years.

So my wife and I support the project as well as two of the other neighbors are in support.

How can you not be?

Great.

Thank you.

Is there a motion to approve?

I'd make a motion to approve.

Second.

Having been moved and seconded, the board can now vote.

Thank you, Lexi.

Unanimously approved.

Congrats, and you will be receiving a letter from the planning staff to that effect.

Thank you.

I believe that is all the business for tonight, and this meeting is adjourned.