Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division One Meeting - August 5, 2025
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division One Meeting - August 5, 2025
The Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division One met on August 5, 2025, at 6:00 PM. Chairperson Peter Nelson presided over the meeting with Members Andrew Catona, David Duncan, and Jennifer Witt present (Member Aaron McBride absent). Legal counsel Chris Steinmetz and planning staff were also present. The board approved the minutes from the July 1 hearing and a waiver of rules to expedite certain petitions. Several continuances were granted, and the board heard two full hearings after disposing of the expedited docket.
Consent Calendar
- Minutes Approval: The board unanimously approved the meeting minutes from the July 1, 2025 hearing.
- Waiver of Rules: A motion passed unanimously to allow the board to vote on all expedited petitions and adopt findings of fact without additional testimony from individual petitioners.
Special Requests and Continuances
- 2025 DV1034 (8760 Crown Point Road): Petitioner Brent Pennett requested moving the case to the expedited docket. With no remonstrators present and staff approval, the board granted the motion unanimously.
- 2025 DV1037 (Manal Holdings LLC property on Rockville Road): Petitioner David Gilman acknowledged additional commitments dated August 4, 2025, which the board accepted.
- 2025 DV1032 (7986 North College Avenue): Petitioner Misha Rabinowich requested a continuance to September 2, 2025, to present the case to the Nora Community Council. Granted unanimously.
- 2025 DV1029 (2062 Carrollton Avenue): Petitioner Jamila Mance requested expedited status, but staff recommended denial, so the case remained on the full hearing docket.
- 2025 UV1013 (11150 Mays Road): An automatic continuance to September 2, 2025, was acknowledged.
- 2025 DV1035 (6280 North College Avenue): An automatic continuance to September 2, 2025, was acknowledged.
- 2025 DV1026 (29 West Arizona Street): The petitioner withdrew the petition; the board acknowledged the withdrawal.
- 2025 UV1009 (5330 West Moore Street): Petitioner George Gonzalez requested a continuance to September 2, 2025, to address a fence height issue and provide proper notice. Granted unanimously.
Expedited Petitions (Voted En Bloc)
The board voted unanimously (4-0) to grant the following petitions:
- 2025 DV1030 amended (2110 Bloyd Avenue): Variance of development standards to allow reduced setbacks and encroachment within a clear sight triangle.
- 2025 DV1033 (5600 West Raymond Street): Variance to allow an unenclosed service area with a reduced side yard setback.
- 2025 DV1034 (8760 Crown Point Road): Variance for a building addition with reduced front and side setbacks.
- 2025 DV1037 (property on Rockville Road, Manal Holdings LLC): Variance for a building addition at an existing convenience market with a reduced front setback.
- 2025 UV1012 (property on Walnut Street, Mary Solano): Variance of use and development standards for a residential building addition with a reduced front yard setback.
Discussion Items
Case 2025 DV1029 amended – 2062 Carrollton Avenue
Petitioner: Breedy B LLC (represented by Jamila Mance) sought a variance to allow a two-story building addition with a 5-foot rear yard setback (15 feet required) and a 3-foot corner side yard setback from 21st Street (8 feet required). Staff recommended denial, stating the proposal constituted overdevelopment and did not match the surrounding context. Staff suggested a detached garage as an alternative, which could be placed 5 feet from the rear lot line. The petitioner argued the same owner also owns adjacent lots (2050 and 2054 Carrollton Avenue) and that the addition would improve aesthetics and provide a dedicated parking space. The board asked about a curb cut on 21st Street; the petitioner stated talks with DPW were ongoing and the owner agreed to any necessary sidewalk reconfiguration. After deliberation, the board voted 4-0 to grant the variance.
Case 2025 DV1036 – 8849 New Heritage Court
Petitioner: Heather and Joe Douglas requested a variance to install a fence within a platted drainage and utility easement. Staff recommended denial, citing city code that prohibits minor residential structures in platted easements (Chapter 743, Article 3, Section 6A4D). The easement was created by the subdivision plat. The petitioner noted that many neighbors have fences in the same easement, some obtained via encroachment permits (which were issued in error). The petitioner emphasized safety concerns for three children, including two wards of the state, near a pond. Neighbor Gary Bellby (8841 New Heritage Court) spoke in support. The board noted that approval of the variance does not guarantee an encroachment license from BNS, and any party with easement rights could require fence removal. The board voted 4-0 to grant the variance, allowing the petitioners to pursue the encroachment license.
Key Outcomes
- Minutes and procedural motions: Approved unanimously.
- Continuances: 2025 DV1032 and 2025 UV1009 continued to September 2, 2025; others acknowledged or withdrawn.
- Expedited docket: All five petitions granted unanimously.
- Full hearing cases: Both 2025 DV1029 and 2025 DV1036 granted by 4-0 votes.
- Next meeting: The board announced a future hearing date of September 2, 2025.
Meeting Transcript
So I have been named for any of every time I was going to read the same thing. Good afternoon, everybody. Going to call this meeting to order. This is a public hearing of the Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals, Division One. I am Peter Nelson, Chairperson of Division One. Other board members present are Andrew Catona, David Duncan, and Jennifer Witt. Uh member Aaron McBride may be showing up here in a bit. If he does, you'll see him sit down. Uh to my left here. Uh legal counsel for the board today is Chris Steinmetz. Staff members present today from the division of planning are Eddie O'Neill, current planning administrator. Robert Ulenhaik, senior planner, Noah Stern, Senior Planner, Michael Weigel, senior planner, and Marty Weistie, Senior Board Specialist and Secretary to the Board. The board has copies of the zoning ordinances that will be incorporated by reference into the record of each case heard today. Those who intend to testify will please remain standing and be sworn. Petitioners should be on your left and remonstrators on your right as you face the board. Those who testify will state their name and address for the record before beginning to testify. Petitioners and persons appearing in support of the case being heard shall have a maximum of 15 minutes for the presentation of evidence, statements, and arguments in support of the petition. Remonstrators and persons appearing in opposition to the petition shall have a maximum of 15 minutes for the presentation of evidence statements and arguments in opposition to the petition. Staff will then present the administrator's comments regarding the petition. The petitioner will then be allowed five minutes for rebuttal and a summation of the case. Rebuttal must be limited to the subject matter, the initial presentations. Remonstrators will then be allowed five minutes for rebuttal of the petitioner's rebuttal evidence and a brief closing statement. No further evidence, statements, or arguments will be heard unless it is at the discretion of the board. Please limit your testimony and evidence to matters covered in the statutory requirements, which must be met in order for the board to be to grant a variance. If the petitioners have failed to comply with all notice requirements as stipulated by the board's rules of procedure, including posting of the notice sign on subject property at least 23 days prior to the hearing, the board may continue the petition. Anyone at this hearing who thinks complete and proper notice is not been given and would like the petition continued due to lack of proper notice must bring this matter to the board's attention at the beginning of the hearing. The board may impose various conditions or commitments as amendments before reaching a decision on certain petitions. The installation of landscaping and screening, the paving of parking area, and the dedication of rights away are examples. These conditions and commitments are an integral part of the board's decision and must be met for a granted variance to be valid. Compliance with conditions imposed by the board must be proved by an affidavit of compliance submitted by the petitioner within 30 days of completion. Unless otherwise specified, an improvement location permit must be obtained prior to the establishment of the authorized improvements. Failure to comply with any conditions or commitments of a variance grant is a violation enforceable by the Department of Business and Neighborhood Services. A person may file a written request to receive notice of the filing of a petition for judicial review of a decision of the board. The written request must be filed within five days of the board's decision and must include the person's full name and correct mailing address and a reference to the board's petition number. Forms are available and may be obtained from the board secretary. Please be advised that contacting members of the board regarding a matter pending before the board outside of this public hearing process is prohibited. Please be courteous and orderly at all times, and please be sure all cell phone ringers are turned off. I will note that since currently there are only four members present today. So if we have a split vote, a two-two vote, um, your petition will be receiving an indecisive vote, and it will be automatically continued to the September 2nd hearing. We will take this into consideration when hearing requests for continuances. Uh board members, you have been provided meeting minutes for a July 1st hearing. Um if there are no additions or deletions, I will take a motion for their approval. So moved. Wit. And a second. Duncan second. All right, motion and a second. Call for a vote. Duncan. Duncan, yes.
openpublica.com