Good afternoon.

It is 103.

Let's call this meeting to order.

Welcome to the City of Tulsa Board Adjustment Meeting number 1384.

June 9th, 2026.

But before we begin, we're gonna have some comments from the city.

To conduct the public hearing in an orderly manner, we ask that you follow these rules and procedures.

Staff will announce the case and read the action requested.

The chair will ask if the applicant is present and if there are protestants or interested parties.

The applicant will be given time to present the case, not to exceed 15 minutes.

The board will then hear from interested parties or protestants.

Each party will be given time to speak, not to exceed five minutes.

Please do not repeat comments of previous speakers.

After the board is heard from protestants or interested parties, the applicant may be allowed time for a rebuttal not to exceed 10 minutes.

If you wish to speak in support or opposition to a case, please sign in before speaking.

There is a sign-in sheet located here at the front desk.

Exhibits given to the board will be kept and made a part of the permanent record.

During the hearing, the board may ask questions of the applicant or interested parties at any time.

Staff reports for each application are available as PDFs on the Board of Adjustment web page at TulsaPlanning.org.

After the presentations, the board will vote to approve or deny the application.

If you are approved, staff will give you a copy of your case report following the hearing for your records.

You will need to submit this documentation to the permit center as a revision to your current permit application or include the documents with your submittal for a new permit application.

If you submitted your permit through the online portal, please submit revisions in the same manner.

When addressing the board, please state your name and address for the record.

Please direct all comments into the microphone.

A video of these proceedings is also being recorded for future airing on TGO of Channel 24 Cable TV.

We ask that you please silence all electronic devices.

And today I have one additional minor comment.

So if at any point you have a question about an exhibit that is being referred to by the board or you want to direct them to a specific exhibit, there is a paper packet on the podium that has all of the agenda materials in it.

If you are observing and you're not at the podium, there are TV screens on this center column that will show the exhibits that the board are looking at.

Or if at any point you're up here and you need to ask us to see something that's being referred to, just just please let us know, and we're gonna limp our way through the meeting without our projectors.

So if there are not any questions, Mr.

Chair.

All right, Nathan.

Thank you for those details.

She should be here probably within five to ten minutes, but we're gonna get started.

We agenda item number one, which is the minutes of meeting a thirteen eighty three.

And I'd like to suggest a continuance because I think we got the draft this morning.

That is, I mean that's at your discretion.

So if you all haven't had a chance to review them, that's totally right.

Yeah, we got the draft this morning.

I haven't got a chance to review it.

Okay.

So just it continues to the next agenda meeting.

Mr.

Boyd Chair, I make a motion that we accept uh your request to have a continuance until we can read the minutes from the last meeting.

Um the last meeting is just for the records.

May 26th.

June 23rd will be your next second.

Yeah, it will be June 23rd.

We'll be the next meeting.

Is what you're continuing then to June 23rd, 2026.

Okay, we got a motion.

Do we have a second?

Second.

We got a motion, we got a second.

Ms.

Stalfur.

Yes.

Mr.

Hill.

Yes.

Mrs.

Williams?

Yes.

I'll also want to say yes.

So this agenda item has been continued.

So let's move on to agenda item number two, which is BOA 24050.

BOA 24050.

Location is 913 South Boulder Avenue.

Applicant Brian Elliott is requesting a special exception to allow a large indoor assembly and entertainment use in the central business district to permit a music venue and a special exception to allow low impact manufacturing and industry in the CBD to permit a vinyl record press.

All right, is the applicant press in?

Okay, please come up to the mic and please provide your name and address, please.

Good afternoon.

Uh my name is Brian Elliott.

My address is one six three two South Cheyenne Avenue, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 74119.

Yeah, so uh we purchased the first former first Christian church at 913 South Boulder as part of our project plan.

Um the uh the north end of the building, the uh 1919 and 1920 sanctuary would like to convert to a uh up to a 1300 person music and entertainment venue.

Um, working with some uh qualified venue operators that are gonna lease back the uh that portion of the project, um, including the basement.

There'll be a vinyl record press.

So a person could uh uh take a recording of the show, they could purchase a recording of the show on vinyl record.

Uh I think it's the only one certainly in Oklahoma, um, probably in the region.

Uh excited about that.

Uh again, those are it's uh operated by a third party.

Um in the in the center building built in 1938.

Uh we're gonna do uh workforce apartments, 31 apartments there.

Um and then on the uh the south end of the uh chapel, the 1960 chapel there um on the south end of the property is going to be uh wildflower cafe.

Uh they've relocated from 11th and Peoria up to this uh this chapel.

Uh we're very close to having them move in uh probably by the end of this month.

So we're getting through a couple uh fire permit issues, but uh we were just right there.

Thank you, Mr.

Earlier.

How many people are you expecting on those uh concerts?

Uh I believe the venue, the the building itself will have a capacity of thirteen hundred.

Okay.

How about parking?

Parking, we have uh we have another half block of parking adjacent to the to the property, and then we have another half block adjacent to TCC.

So we we own a block and a half um at that at in that area.

How do you have from the neighbors?

Um yes, sir.

I I sent a note out to to the neighbors, um, holy family reached out for an in-person meeting.

Uh we visited and had a good chat, and nothing came of that.

I think he may have submitted a letter or something as well.

Right, yeah.

Yes, we receive a letter from the Holy Family Cathedral.

Any questions?

Your mic is off.

Are you expanding the sanctuary seating or are you just using kind of what has already been there?

So on the uh first floor of the seating, we're gonna remove it'll be a standing room there, kind of a tiered standing room, and then the second floor will remain as is.

Can you talk us through the process of what the vinyl pressing looks like?

I mean, it seems pretty minimal from an impact standpoint, but just so we have an idea.

Yep, it's uh it's about 200 square feet, maybe a little bit less will be dedicated to the vinyl operation.

It's in the furthest northeast corner of the building on that first floor.

It's kind of a half basement kind of, yeah.

So it um it um there's no fire separation requirements for the F use.

I think I'm I'm speaking out of out of my out of out of turn here a little, but um it um it's run off typical boiler.

Um it's yeah, very low impact.

Any more questions to the applicant?

No question.

All right, thank you, Mr.

Edward.

Thank you.

All right, so case BOA 24050.

Do we have anyone that would like to speak on this case?

See, no, let's move on to discussion.

This this to me this seems like a very appropriate adaptive reuse project.

Um I'd be in sport.

Yes, and you just before we got a letter from the Holy Family Cathedral, and you all have a copy.

Yep.

Looks like they're in support and they uh appreciate the development of the good work and thinking to help bring further life to the cathedral districts.

Uh, and it looks like they're uh one of the main points they're making is that they are running a school across the street, which I assume that the venue concert venue would be a different hours than the school is operating.

So that would be really nice use across the street.

So I also in support, this seems like a really great mixed-use project and exciting for downtown.

Yes, it is.

So that we have a motion.

I'll make a motion.

Goodness.

Mr.

Chair and Board of Adjustment 24050.

I move to approve a special exception to allow a large greater than 250 person capacity indoor assembly and entertainment use in the CBD to permit a music venue and a special exception to allow low impact manufacturing and industry in the CBD to permit a vinyl per vinyl record press per conceptual plan shown on pages 2.11 of the agenda packet.

The board finds that the special exception will be in harmony with the spirit and intent of the code and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.

Okay, we got a motion.

Do we have a cycle?

Second.

We've got a motion we're going to cycle Mrs.

Williams.

Yes.

Yes.

Mr.

Hell?

Yes.

Also when I say yes, your application has been approved.

Alright, let's move on to agenda item number three.

BOA24051.

BOA 24051.

Location is 5150 east 101st Street South.

Applicant Brian Parker with Visioneering Studios Architecture is requesting a special exception to amend a previously approved site plan for religious assembly use in the AG district.

Is the applicant present?

Okay.

Please come up.

Please provide your name, Another S.

Brian Parker's the applicant.

I'm the project architect.

My name is Tony Torres.

My office is located at 106 West 4th Street in Santa Ana, California.

Okay.

What would you like to do?

Um so I'm representing River Oaks Presbyterian Church.

And they're uh constructing a 5,000 square foot addition to their religious education building.

Um they're doing this because their facilities are aging and small for what they need, and so this is not increasing any kind of parking capacity, it's not increasing any kind of worship capacity.

It's just in addition to their religious education building.

Okay, how do you hear from the neighbors?

Yes, there were two meetings that took place on May 13th and May 17th, of which no issues were brought up during those meetings.

I mean stuff.

And the I see the latest.

I mean the association of source support.

Yes.

Do you know roughly how long the church has been in operation in this location?

Uh I don't have that information.

They've been there a number of years.

What are the hours of operational?

Those new auditions.

So those operate during worship services.

So they have several worship services on Sunday morning.

Um, so that's primarily the hours of operation.

They're not really using it for any other purpose but religious education.

Are there any large trees that they're gonna have to be removed in order to do those expansions?

There are a couple of trees that have to be removed, and we've been working with the building department to plant new trees in the area.

I have the landscape architect here that can talk about those trees if necessary.

Okay.

I don't have any more questions.

No.

Alright, thank you.

All right, case BOE 24051.

Do we have anyone that would like to speak on this case?

See, no, let's move on to discussion.

I mean, this is a very proactive case.

I mean, I was reading through and I know they have a couple of meetings, and they talk to the president of the homeowners association around this neighborhood.

And I don't see anyone you know, pose, I mean, opposing to this expansion.

So I'm in support to it.

Yeah, I agree.

Uh the church has been in operation since 81.

It sounded like their expansions going in the direction towards the commercial, not the residential district.

So as long as I mean it sounds like they're not adding a parking and there's plenty of open space, so I'm fine with this.

Agreed.

All right.

So we're all in agreement.

So do we have a motion?

I can make a motion, Mr.

Chair and Board of Adjustment Case 24051.

I move to approve a special exception to amend a previously approved site plan for a religious assembly use in the AG district.

Per the conceptual plan shown on pages 3.11 through 3.17 of the agenda packet.

The board finds that the requested special exception will be in harmony with the spirit and intent of the code and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.

We have a motion.

Do we have a second?

Second.

And a motion we got a second, Mr.

Hill.

Yes.

Ms.

Williams?

Yes.

Stoffer?

Yes.

Also when I said yes.

The supplication has been approved.

Let's move on to agenda item number four.

BOA 24052.

BOA 24052 location is 2629 North Columbia Avenue.

Applicant RCJ Designs is requesting a special exception to permit a detached house in the CS district.

Hi everyone.

Jesse Stringer with 8 Point Creative 1428 South New Haven Avenue.

All right.

This property was rezoned.

We successfully rezoned this property from IL to CS back in March of this year.

The main goal of rezoning was to build a very modestly sized detached single family home in this area.

This property, we understand the general intent of what the city was trying to develop here, but the property has remained vacant for years.

So we believe that this proposal will be modest.

It'll definitely be a less intense use than if it were an industrial structure, not a lot of parking needed, that type of thing.

But that is the avenue we took to rezone to CS, so we could get to this point of requesting a special exception to build in a CS district.

So the CS who started that.

Chainfall IL to C one side of the CD or uh so we were in discussions with the applicant when they approached us about the rezoning, and there were a number of reasons why just rezoning to residential wouldn't have been appropriate.

Um primarily the residential district would have levied new setbacks on the adjacent industrial properties that would have put some of their buildings out of compliance.

Um the residential zoning also wouldn't have conformed to the comprehensive plan for the area, and so it was decided that a compromise would be to pursue a commercial district which would at least give them this path to to move forward with an exception for a single-family home.

Does your client own the IL to the north?

That lot.

I believe so, yes.

The property just to the north.

Yeah, that's still still IL or um, yes, that is IL.

My zoning map is not loading anymore.

There we go.

I see that.

And this property is only one story.

Correct.

Just one story.

Any any more question to the applicant?

Thank you.

All right, case uh boa 24052.

Do we have anyone that would like to speak on this case?

See, no.

Let's move on to discussion.

I don't have an issue with no, I mean, I think for the most part it's fine.

It's it could potentially create a conflict down the road if that IL was developed as IL, uh, some kind of industrial use.

Um, but I mean, I'm not gonna hold it back just on that.

Yeah, but who knows what that would be.

Right, the scope of residential homes to the north and also to across the north.

Yeah, I'm I'm fine.

Same.

I can make the motion.

Okay.

Mr.

Chairman, in case BOA case 24052, I move to approve a special exception to special exception to permit a detached house in the CS district for the conceptual plan shown on pages 4.11 through 4.17.

The board finds that the requested special exception will be in harmony with and the sp with the spirit and intent of the code and will not be injured to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public.

We got a motion.

Do we have a segment?

Second.

Second.

We got a motion, we got a second, Mr.

Hill.

Yes.

Ms.

Dumas.

Abstain.

Ms.

Williams?

Yes.

Ms.

Stoffer?

Yes.

Also, when I said yes.

This application has been approved.

I'm gonna have to recuse on the next one.

That's right.

I have to recuse on this next one.

And that's the proper reserved by this, so I'll say that.

Alright.

So let's move on to agenda item number five.

BOA 24053.

BOA 24053.

Location is 262 North Yukon Avenue.

Applicant Tina Johnson is requesting a special exception to permit an accessory dwelling unit in the RS3 district.

Hello, my name's Isaiah Coleman.

I'm the project manager on the project, and my address is 1234 East 20th Street.

Tulsa Oklahoma 74120.

And we are requesting a special exemption to uh in an RS3 district to make a ADU.

It is in Owen Park, so normally it could be by right, or you it would be covered in the overlay, but because it's an over park and they made that vote, we have to come before you, and so everything is in place.

The property, it is the property is adjacent to an existing property, and all we are looking to do is get the approval so we can put the AD into the place into the district.

Is that already a detached building?

Yes.

So are you guys gonna run away that one?

Yes.

Basically, okay, and turn into ADU.

Yes.

And what's the vote that you mentioned?

There's a vote that so Owen Park, you can't just automatically do an ADU by right or with the new overlay, it still has to come before the Board of Adjustments.

So, Aaron, if you'll go to the zoning map, you'll see that the overlay boundary wraps around Owen Park.

They were originally in the proposed boundary, but their neighborhood um kind of opposed being included, and so ultimately it was taken out of the overlay, which would have allowed ADUs by right, but because it's not inside that boundary that's just two lots to the west, it's still required to get an exception.

Yeah, and okay, so it's not in the overlay.

Yeah, that's all and there is one that has just been done one two houses over.

So it is still acceptable to the neighborhood.

It's just they don't want them all to just pop up out of nowhere.

Thank you.

Yeah, thank you for that background.

Of course.

So have you hear from the neighbors?

Nothing directly.

Uh, just I know we talked to a couple people.

We talked to a person who did the ADU for sure, and their support, but nothing against or for really.

It's just been more.

Let's see how it goes.

Um, what are the plans on the ADU?

Is there gonna be like a short-term rental?

So, it'll be dependent on so it is already certified to do section eight uh OFA, so also, but the goal is to help uh veterans kind of get on their feet, get out of home.

So getting them into a place so then they can get the other services that they need to kind of get on their feet and take the next step forward.

And I assume during the renovation, you all want to keep the same style, the same.

Yes, the structure of the property won't change on the outside.

Everything is gonna stay in place, and then we're just gonna renovate the inside.

It's already has parking spots for the place.

We're going to uh tap the existing waterline for the existing property so we don't have to tap into the city for a new sewer line or anything like that.

So everything is already in place for us to continue.

Okay, I know we're kind of see that, but I don't know.

5.4 is the building that we have uh in question.

Oh, yes.

I'm sorry.

I was looking at the yes, yes.

Okay, so it doesn't have any windows here.

So, assuming that you're gonna be adding windows, you will find that.

Right, we want to look at that.

So from 5.11, you're just adding one window.

Is that over the scene?

Yes.

Okay, what's the score footage on that?

482.

It's 82 or 83.

I always get them mixed up, but it's 482 or 43.

Okay.

Any more questions to the applicant?

No.

All right, you may have a half a sip.

Thank you.

All right.

Case BOE 24053.

Do we have anyone that would like to speak on this case?

See no.

Let's move on to discussion.

Okay, I'm good with it.

Yeah, it appears there are quite a few accessory buildings.

Of course, I don't know how many of those are ADUs and or just you know, storage, but it looks like there's quite a few in the neighborhood, and this isn't out of place.

Um, I think that there's a thoughtful plan here.

Right.

Also, they're reusing the same structures.

It's not like a building, something much bigger or anything like that.

So I'm in support to that.

If anyone would like to do the motion, it's like we're looking at you.

No, I'm saying do you want to have anything you want to say?

So that's what I was looking at.

I'm happy to make a question if you like.

Go for it.

I just wanted to give you a chance to speak.

Okay, okay, great.

Um I'm just finding the motion one moment.

I went the wrong direction.

Okay, uh, Mr.

Chair and Board of Adjustment Case.

24053.

I move to approve a special exception to permit an accessory dwelling unit in the RS3 district per the conceptual plan shown on page 5.11 of the agenda packet.

The board finds the requested special exception will be in harmony with the spirit and intent of the code and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.

We have a motion.

Do we have a cycle?

Second.

We got a motion, we got a cycle.

Ms.

Dumas?

Yes.

Ms.

Williams?

Yes.

Ms.

Stolfa?

Yes.

Also, and I'll say yes.

This application has been approved.

Let's move on to agenda item number six.

BOA 24054.

BOA 24054.

Location is 3105 South Gary Avenue.

Applicant Bell Land Use Robert Bell is requesting a variance to reduce the rear street setback requirement in the RS1 district.

Is the applicant present?

It's cool.

You're a members of the board.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

You're the first variance of the day, sir.

My name is Robert Bell.

My address is 101 East Aquarium Place in Jinx, Oklahoma.

Um, and I'm gonna use I missed the screen, I know that.

So I'm gonna use um page 6.14.

Okay.

Um I think it it helps us a little bit to understand what the issues are on this.

This property is on the north side fronts, 31st Street, on the um west side fronts, uh Gary Avenue, and then on the east side fronts, Gary Court, and our issue is with Gary Court.

So we're complying with the setbacks on the Gary Avenue side, and on the uh uh off the arterial at 31st Street.

The part of the problem was Gary Court only goes for about a property and a half.

That's it, and then it then that dead ends into not cold-sacks but dead ends into other properties, and can never be extended in the future at that point.

Gary Court is only 30 foot wide, so the property is it is set there where the property line is at by code the the code determines that it should be 50 foot wide, it can never be 50 foot wide, it was not intended to be 50 foot wide, it was there to access for the properties that are on the um the east side of uh of this the the lots on the east side are in a different subdivision, they're the ones that access off Gary Court or originally accessed off Gary Court, so because the code even so the code has a pretty large uh setback from a right-of-way in the RS1 zone of 35 feet, but because it's only 30 foot wide, it adds another 10 feet on there, so it's 45 feet from the property line, is what the code is, and that's what we're at.

We're seeking the variance from so the next door neighbor to the to the uh to the south.

I he's set back about 30 the 35 feet that I can tell, but across the street across Gary Court, they're set back 20 feet from the road, so there's kind of a mixed podge in there.

And I I say all that to say that we're not out of the norm for the area.

What the owner wanted to do was because of the setbacks and because of what was going on, he elongated this building so it didn't all pile up on the on the on the ownership to the south.

So he they could have put this building five feet from that south property line, and instead that's where they created the backyard and created the separation from that property, which forced uh there's two two-car garages associated with this, and what they did is and if you'll see that that that area that's gets into a more of a a traditional setback, that's a side load garage.

So, versus having a separate building in there with a separate with a separate driveway, the attached that got it as far away from the road as possible, which is only 20 feet uh on that um, and I wish I had a pointer, but I I'm I'm guessing you're following me so the uh so this the side load garage allows us to have one driveway coming off Gary Court that area in there is probably uh uh a setback that would be uh normally requested be a 15 foot uh variance but we're the way this is set up this is a 25 foot variance because we've got an additional 10 feet because the right of way is not wide enough at that point even though that right away is not gonna change the purpose of that with the code is and I'll let Nathan correct me if I'm wrong the purpose of that with the code is is that if the city ever decided to build the right of way in completely the the building wouldn't be in the way at that point.

But this road can't go any further because it goes in to the next lot and stops and then goes into people's backyards at that point.

So um definitely because of three three roads on three sides of this property there's a hardship in here it's hard to comply with all this I think he's doing a trying to be a a good neighbor to create space between the property owner to the south now Miss Woody lives across the street the other way I've talked to her um there's no issue I've tried to talk to Mr.

Donahue in this I'm not sure he understands he's on a mission out of the country he wanted me to talk to him on WhatsApp I don't know what that is so so that communication's not been but I think if he would understand the purpose of this was to try to not have a house right up against his driveway at that point so anyway if you guys have any question I hope I'll have to explain that it's kind of complicated without a screen to look at so yeah that's an interesting lot I mean just being surrounded by three streets and I see there's a lot of big trees there.

So the plans have to remove those trees or they're gonna plant new trees.

Um I I tried to the a lot of the trees though that are long 31st street will stay in place I think um and and the there's some large trees that are in that last 20 feet um I I don't the there the I'm not saying there won't be some removed but I think there'll be still some I think it's a benefit to that property and to the owners of the property also.

What is the square foot of the house that we're looking at?

It's big sure yeah that's kind of what we gather it looks like total living it says total living is 4,356 square feet.

Is that outdoor space or is that it is just I just looked at total living.

So the builder's performance here and I pointed at them and it shook his head yes so okay so in an area of the city that that that you that is changed over time and the houses are getting bigger and bigger in that area, so that's the value and that raises the value for all of them.

So and I'm gonna ask to the architects here.

Do you see I mean true hardship here.

Yeah, we're asking you.

Oh we're not in discussion yet.

I don't think I think that's a discussion item.

No, I mean if you feel clear, if you're clear with a hard shape, before he was I mean, I'm sure.

Okay.

With the stated one, yeah.

So to make it code compliant, if you were, it seems like you probably looked at that.

You in order to do that, what you're doing is you're moving that garage that kind of juts out there over to the south and connecting over there, which does put you right up on the driveway of the neighbor.

Is that is that kind of what I'm hearing?

Shh no, no, no.

So if you see where that is closest to 31st Street, that's the garage that's being added on the back side of the property.

Right.

So the option here, two options.

One, I think we can do a detached garage, and we still have an issue with setbacks in that that we'd have to deal with, but we could also move that garage to the other side.

We've got all this space over here.

If we move the garage, it's gonna be right on the five-foot line uh of the neighbor through the south.

And I that's what I was trying to the information I wanted to get to him and talk to him.

Said the only option we have in here is we either apply the variance or we move this and take away and build red next to it, which we couldn't do.

So the hardship is obviously we're talking about 80 feet of setback, 45 in the back and 35 in the front, that's still a lot of area, and and trying to create a separation between those houses and and to have backyard in that area versus the backyard on the other road, which is not in the best interest of that owner because if you put the backyard on that road, then they have a street in their backyard.

So they're moving the backyard to their side yard is what they're doing, and in doing so, they're elongating the house even longer to where it's encroaches into a part of the eighty-foot setback between the front and back.

That might have been an easier way to explain it to start with.

No, I think he got there.

So how how far back?

So we do have a letter from um Mr.

Donahue that was emailed in.

Sounds like he's out of country.

He is the neighbor to the south.

Is that right?

That's correct.

And like I said, I called him several times.

I got you.

We we missed communication.

I didn't know he was gonna write that letter.

In fact, I saw it today at 1238.

That's what it was emailed to me.

I I wish we could have connected because I I I don't know that what he's asking is in his best interest, yeah.

At that point, because if we didn't do this, the variance to the setback on the on the garage, that's a side load garage, so we just keep one driveway off of Gary Court, then that building would have to move to his side of the property, and and then there's no there's no greenery between this building and this driveway.

How far does his house sit back, roughly?

So his house sets back 35 feet from his backyard back line, as far as I can tell.

Uh he's in compliance with the front at 35 feet.

Um, and then his driveway, when they built that, they they he was the first one that went to Gary Court for access, and so he comes off of Gary Court.

Now, Gary Court didn't go all the way through his property and stops in in that area at that point.

So the properties on the other side of Gary Court, they're not set about 20 feet from the road.

Yeah, it looks pretty close on that side.

Okay.

Thank you.

And I said that because I know that Mr Donnie you said our neighborhood set up to be this but it's it's not just those lots Susie Woody who owns the duplex across the street sh she's close to that to our property line.

Across the street big across Gary Avenue.

Okay.

And this is only a two-car garage.

He said two two car garages.

Two two car garage is what it is.

Yeah the one that is encroached.

But it's set up on the same driveway.

So there's not two driveways.

It's just size on a garage and they design that to reduce the impacts to Gary Court is what they were trying to do.

And is it accurate you the designer could also just reduce the size of the house.

Great.

Okay.

Just want to make sure like I how contracts and all that stuff gets involved on it.

And I don't know that information at that point.

But and I don't know what they have in the property.

Banks require five times the amount of land on a house and that's really what's impacting that whole area in there because they the the price of the land has gotten so high in there and the banks require you to have a five times the amount on the on the building versus the price of the land.

So if the lot was three hundred thousand dollars which is common then that's a 1.5 million dollar house or the banks won't want on it.

So that's part of the issue that's kind of outside the any more question all right thank you.

Okay on case BOA 24054 do we have anyone that would like to speak on this case.

See no let's move on to discussion.

Well that's what I was asking the architect said do you see a way that that could be reconfigured so it wouldn't meet all the requirements I'm still maintaining the square footage.

I defer to Mr Hale you gonna put it on me we wouldn't at all technically an architect so there is a way to do it but I mean he's correct in this application what he was stating I mean it pushes it the only way to kind of do it that I would see would be pushing it closer to you move it over so it's more or less four car combined but that pushes it right up on the adjacent neighbor um I mean there's I see a hardship but it's also self-imposed could be done what do you think Mr.

Mouse you asked about square footing size and yeah if you could continue to say in square footage and um grey range the location of the garage so it would be the setbacks.

I I will say it is a unique the the size of the lot is unique or the the shape of the lot's unique and then it's frontage on three sides does does make it different.

It's a dead end street.

Yeah it's a dead end street that we're talking about um it would be different if it was if it weren't if it were a through street.

Um so that to me does make this different and does contribute to the hardest.

So scare record, I mean it's Lord Narrow.

And it's a big lot, they're meeting open space.

So I mean, who are we to decide how big the house should or shouldn't be?

No, yeah, for sure.

I think that's what I was trying to say in my mind.

I think I'm saying it's less us deciding how big and should or shouldn't I be, and more so the zoning ordinance uh providing guidance and regulation on what uh can and cannot be done.

But you know, there's still um the outlet of a variance, and so if we feel that or that there is a uh hardship net that's not self-imposed, then you know that's fine.

If they were overbuilding to the point they were having to ask for open space, then I would feel differently.

But it is a unique shape of a lot with frontage on three sides and with a dead end street, and I'm ultimately um, while I might have personal opinions, I on how it could be configured.

I I think that it's fine, it's within reason is my personal thought.

Uh sure.

One second.

Okay.

Um Mr.

Chair and Board of Adjustment Case 24054.

I move to approve a variance to reduce the rear street setback requirement and the RS1 district from 35 feet to 10 feet per the conceptual plan shown on pages 6.14 through 6.22 of the agenda packet.

The board finds the hardship to be um a unique lot shape with frontage on three sides, and greening the variants.

The board finds that the following facts favorable to the property owner have been established.

A that physical surroundings shape or topographical conditions of the subject property would result in unnecessary hardships or practical difficulties for the property owner as distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations were carried out.

That literal enforcement of the subject zoning code provision is not necessary to achieve the provisions intended purpose.

See that the conditions leading to the need of the requested variants are unique to the subject property and not applicable generally to other property within the same zoning classification, but the alleged practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship was not created or self-imposed by the current property owner.

E that the variance to be granted in the minimum is the minimum variance that will afford relief, f that the variance to be granted will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood in which subject property is located, nor substantially or permanently impair use or development of adjacent property, and G that the variance to be granted will not cause substantial detriments to public good or impair the purpose of spirit and intent of the zoning code or the comprehensive plan.

Okay, we got a motion.

Do we have a second?

Second.

We got a motion, we got a cycle.

Mr.

Hill.

No.

Ms.

Dumas?

No.

Ms.

Williams.

Yes.

Mrs.

Stalver?

Yes.

And I want to say yes.

Your application has been approved.

Let's move on to agenda item number seven, BOA 24055.

BOA 24055 location is 7447 East 101st Street South.

Applicant Tanner Consulting LLC is requesting a special exception to increase the maximum allowable driveway width in the RS1 district and a special exception to increase the permitted fence height within the street setback.

Okay.

Scoma.

As a quick clarification for the board members, I forwarded you earlier a fence example, and I think I misnumbered it in the email.

It is actually this case, not the one after it.

So for everyone's information.

I was wondering where that was.

Yeah.

Good afternoon.

Derek McCall with Tanner Consulting, 5323 South Lewis Avenue.

Our client purchased this property.

It's a large property, right on an arterial road.

It's just under it's about 4.7 acres, I believe.

And the um the house or the property came with a a previous previous developer had already looked at the property, gone through IDP plans, and at that point he put in a sewer line, which cuts north to south on that property.

And when our client purchased the property, they knew they wanted to put a large single-family home on it, but it squeezed that house over pretty far onto the left side or pretty deep into the lot, which got a little bit steeper.

And so we submitted for building permit, and two special exceptions came back.

Uh one on the uh fence height in the front because he wanted to secure that with a taller fence, and the second was on the driveway widths, which we see and you guys probably see quite a bit when you do a circle drive and the house is up a little bit closer.

It's hard to make the the turns um and get the the correct width on the drives.

But the client would really like to um secure the property.

The I don't know if you can see in 7.4 of your packet, it shows the floodplain.

There's a lot of floodplain on this property, and there's some very steep walls, and he just wants to make sure that no kids on that street can climb over his fence and get back into this area.

So that's all I have.

Down the 74th East Avenue.

Are there any other tall fences?

There's one more on that street that's down on the west side at the end of the street that does have uh about a six foot fence toward down toward all the way towards the end.

All the way to the one dead end as well.

It does at dead end.

Yeah.

Okay.

Are there any columns?

I mean between binos.

Yeah, he's planning on doing some six and a half foot masonry columns and having uh vehicular gates in there.

One of the other reasons why on the driveway width were incredibly close to meeting the requirement, but when when we ran the truck radius in there for delivery trucks, it just couldn't make it, it was just really close.

So, Nathan I read in the package uh the six and a half foot columns, I mean design count as the maximum height.

That's right.

So the code allows um, I believe it's an actual additional 12 inches for columns.

So the fence height you're considering is just for the primary part of the fence, not the columns.

How do you hear from the neighbors?

I haven't heard anything negative or positive from neighbors or from the client saying they spoke with the neighbors.

Um, similar to the last one, it's a large house, and I I don't need a big house like that, but this clients decided that that's the size they want for this property.

Purchase the property because it was large enough to handle that size of a home.

At least you'd have a variance here.

Yeah, and you mentioned delivery trucks, well, single family home, Amazon trucks.

Sorry.

Oh, yeah.

I was thinking uh semi truck, where how big are we going?

What is it?

Or 18 wheels.

Very common in single family homes.

Okay, makes sense.

Yeah.

It's funny.

And the overall width that we're going off of for the right of way um frontage is the 340, right?

Not the not combined.

Is that the way that works, Nathan?

Because it's on it's on two streets, so I guess he doesn't get front edge on two streets, right?

Just the one that the house is facing.

Yeah, so the code already allows you to go up to a six-foot fence in a side street.

Yeah, set back.

So the one along the south would have already been covered by that.

The relief is really granted for the front of the house, and anything in that front street setback.

Okay.

Any more questions?

Thank you.

Right, on case VOA 24 C5.

Do we have anyone that would like to speak?

On this case, seeing no, let's move on to this question.

I mean, this seems fine to me.

The um, it's just weird that it caps out at 75 feet for the frontage, so I mean, that doesn't really take into consideration a lot this large with 340 feet.

Um, and I and as far as the actual height of the fence, I would totally feel different if this was a wood fence, but seeing how it's the ornamental see-through, columns, uh decorative fence.

It's pretty okay.

Okay.

We're also wants it at her house.

I do.

Um, I'm I'm tired of this.

Yeah, same.

Yeah, I don't have any issues.

Yeah, no questions.

Okay.

Do we have a motion?

Ms.

D chair and DOA case number two four zero five five.

I move to approve the special exception to increase the maximum allowable driveway from 30 feet to 32 feet in the street setback and 27 feet to 32 feet in the right of way in the RS1 district to increase the permitted fence height in the street set back from four feet to six feet for per the conceptual plan shown on page 7.13 and 7.14.

The board finds that the requested special exception will be in harmony with the spirit and intent of the code and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.

We got a motion that we got a second, second.

Yes.

Yes.

Mr.

Hill.

Yes.

Ms.

Williams?

Yes.

Also want to say yes.

This application has to be in approved.

Let's move on to agenda item number eight.

POA 2405.

I know.

BOA 24056.

Location is 11405 East 27th Street South.

Applicant Myra Ramos is requesting a special exception to allow carport in the street yard and street setback with modifications to the dimension and setback requirements.

Okay.

Please provide your name and advice.

So I was ex um I didn't know I need a permit, so I started my project and um I did my porch.

I guess it was five feet more than it's supposed to get it, do it.

Uh so that's what I was asking for is but you know, special permit for to keep that five feet more that I overdid it.

I just wanted protection for my truck from the weather and everything because it doesn't fit in my garage, and it's basically what it is.

Are there other car ports in this neighborhood?

That's what I was trying to ask.

Uh not close to my house, it's like more I wanna say five houses down the street.

I did reach out to my neighbors if they had any problems and they said no.

They actually thought it was really nice and how much I was spending to build all that.

So you mentioned the is already built or partially built.

Yes.

Partially.

Partial.

Okay.

Like I said, I didn't know I need a permit.

You know, I just bought my house like nine months ago, and the reality store told me I didn't need a permit to do anything to my house.

So then everybody was saying, No, you do need a permit if it's connected to the house, I was like, oh no.

So that I like I stopped.

So, realtors.

Okay, and we already were back up off at it.

You should have used me or Tom Oslo.

You're not the first one.

Okay, good.

Pretty much every meeting we have someone.

Okay, no worries.

How much of it is built?

I'm sorry.

How much of it is built?

It has built built, it has the metal roof on it, um, uh, but basically that's what it is.

It still needs to soft it, the lighting and all that, but it's you know, the structure is there.

Yes, yeah.

Do you have any pictures or anything?

Yes, uh I was gonna submit it, but they told me to wait until my hearings I could submit it.

But uh, yeah, so we can see what's being built up.

Well, maybe I think they can probably project the pretty good.

Oh, there we go.

Okay, well, we got that one.

Yeah, we got that.

So question on that one, I see in a structure on the right that he has some poles.

What is that?

Yeah, it's uh, I don't know why I didn't take a picture.

It's uh oh sorry.

Yeah, I'm not there.

I can't even read the right on the pay to show okay.

Just like a little porch.

Yeah, it's cute.

Yes, it's like a little porch on the side.

The window the window that's right there in the first window, that's my room.

So I wanted to put something there because my room is really hot when it gets in summer.

So I just needed something to cover it for the sun and all that.

So just make it a little bit.

So Nathan, are we also including that section there or just a carboard?

Just the carport.

Just a carboard.

Yep, okay.

That part's not part of the application, but helpful to know the context of where it all fits in.

I told it might be at all that, but I don't know what they put in the application.

Sorry.

Are you planning to put sidewalls on the carpool?

Okay.

Good answer.

Any more questions?

No question.

All right, thank you.

Thank you.

All right, case BOA24056.

Do we have anyone that would like to speak?

See?

No.

We'll move into discussion.

Let me uh asking for forgiveness.

It happens.

Yeah.

Um, it also is kind of interesting because the the amount here is a little bit skewed because there she's on a curve.

Right.

So that short, you know, that part is in shorter than it is on the other side.

Um, but in general, I think this is a a modest amount of relief, and uh I think that we see this quite a bit where the older houses have a one-car garage that can't fit a modern vehicle.

So I understand the intent behind it, and I don't think this is unreasonable, any more comments?

Williams?

I'm good with it.

Only if she uses me to buy a house for next time.

Nope, shouldn't have seen that.

I mean, maybe you know, if if there were uh if this was a four car garage, it might be a different uh situation, starting to build it and then asking for permission, but um this feels very reasonable when not uh out of harmony with the rest of the neighborhood.

Mr.

Mr.

Hill.

I'm good.

Do we have a motion?

I'm glad to do it.

I don't care.

Mr.

Chair and BOA case 24056.

I moved to approve a special exception to allow a carboard in the street yard and street setback with modifications to the dimension of allowable size from 20 by 20 feet to 21 by 25 feet, allowable height within 10 feet of the side property line from 8 feet to 13 feet, four inches, and allowable projection into the street setback from 20 feet up to 25 feet per the conceptual plan shown on pages 8.11 and 8.12.

The board finds that the requested special exception will be in harmony with the spirit and intent of the code and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.

Second.

And a motion we got a second room.

Ms.

Dumas?

Yes.

Mr.

Hill.

No.

Ms.

Stoffer?

Yes.

Ms.

Williams.

Yes.

Also gonna say yes.

Application has been approved.

Right.

Let's move on to agenda item number nine.

BOA 24057.

BOA 24057 located north of the northwest corner of West 71st Street and South Union Avenue.

Applicant Tanner Consulting is requesting a variance to reduce the required number of cottage houses arranged around a common open space and a variance to increase the allowable building coverage for cottage houses.

Okay, stabic up present.

You did receive an updated site plan hard copy for this one as well.

Derek McCall with Tanner Consulting 5323 South Lewis.

This is a really interesting one, maybe a little bit different.

I don't know if this has come up before, but I think I need to explain a little bit on the history of this site.

It previously was had a PUD on the property that was set up for I believe a pediatric use, big medical building, and the underlying zoning was commercial on the south end with multi-family, I believe, on the north.

And our client came to us and was interested in how to put townhomes on the property.

And so we met with the city, had a discussion, and at that time, the best way that was determined to move forward was to just rezone everything commercial, which allowed what we needed.

And so we went ahead and moved forward with that, created plans, we had meetings with Paige Belcher, we had a neighborhood meeting, met with the counselor for the area, and everybody's been helpful and I'm for the most part on board.

I don't know of anybody that's been against it.

When we jumped into the engineering and started to look at grading, we realized that we had 37 foot of grade change across the property, and we have 17% slopes, and townhomes became really complicated to step the footings down that and keep kind of the grades on the street we needed and fit in the detention.

And so the developer asked if we could figure out a way to break the units apart, and that would help with some of the grade change on the property and step the grades.

And so we we came up with the concept which at first reflected some of the other sort of this is all rental, by the way, it's all single lot of record.

And so we came up with the site plan first that reflected the look of some of the other rental communities where everything was the you know, all these little houses are 10 foot apart, they're all close to the street, they're all facing onto the street.

And we realized after talking to Nathan that that doesn't really fit, there's no building use that really works for us in the zoning code.

Um by right, we're allowed multifamily and town homes, but the closest that we could find was cottage, cottage use or cottage homes.

And so we took a stab at redesigning one more time, and we laid out the site to have those clusters of houses that face on open space, and the center of this, I believe that achieves the goal.

Um, but what happened on the outside edge is there just wasn't enough depth to get those three to five or three to ten clusters, and we tried our best to wrap two units together on that last plan.

There's a little sketch on the left that kind of shows how we can still get the required open space per those units when we have sort of two close to each other, two facing in, um, instead of the three.

And so we're asking for a variance to go from uh the minimum of three units down to two uh while still meeting the open space requirements, and then we're also asking for some of the units went slightly above the thousand square foot max that the cottage homes allow.

And so on this, I had there's this peach color that's three.

You can see it on kind of colored on the plans.

Those are 1,217 square feet, so it's a little above the thousand.

And it actually just came to my attention after I created this that the B units on here, which I believe there's 25 of those, they're slightly above.

They're 1,047 square feet.

Um so we're asking for a little bit of the variance on size because when the architects started looking at this, they were having a hard time getting some of the ADA accessibility needed into some of these smaller units.

Um, and they'd also really like to market these two families as well and not just have them all be uh smaller homes.

So we're asking for those two variances.

So can you go back again on the hard shape for various number one?

Which is uh the open space and the variance number two?

Um it's it's not on open space.

We actually have more open space on this, way more than what's required per the building the uh the cottage house use.

They only require 250 square foot per unit facing onto a common area.

It's the fact that they're supposed to be in clusters like the center design facing onto those.

So the hardship really be it was the grade, the grades on the property.

We just couldn't get the town homes to work, and so it forced us into this um other unit type or building type.

Um, and we looked at one option where we pushed the drive all the way to the outside perimeter, but what happened is from a fire standpoint we had to have hose lays, and we couldn't reach a fire hose all the way into the internal part of the property, it got very complicated from a fire safety standpoint.

And you also want to have a clubhouse in there, yes.

They they do want a clubhouse uh with a pool in the middle, and I talked to Felicity this morning, and she didn't believe that that had to fall under this same variance.

That's right.

The clubhouse would be like an accessory used to a multifamily development, it's not subject to the unit size requirement.

How many units total?

Um this one has sixty-five total.

The previous plan with townhomes had around 95.

So we've really gone down quite a bit.

So rentals, say it again.

I mean, it's all rental properties.

It's all rental, right?

Yeah, it's all uh one lot, um, one owner and rental properties.

So there was there was not a scenario you could work out to make the make their make those units work for three around a central open space.

You looked at various options.

I have this is site plan nine.

We have uh we've tried and trying to get the necessary parking and have that fire access around the outside, it it just we haven't found a solution yet.

There's also we thought we had a solution, and then we realized you can kind of see a a brown line on the northeast corner and on the southwest corner that's a retaining wall that we had to put in and it scooted everything back in, and so we um I'm afraid that even if I was able to somehow come up with a plan where I could cluster a few more of those on the outside, there's still gonna be a handful of them that that won't work.

So you if you would have built an apartment complex, you will still have the same issue on the gradient on the elevations.

Um we'd still have an issue with grades if we went with um with the town homes.

It's just that the stepping of the town homes um was uh was gonna get really complicated.

You have to start stepping your footing on every single unit to kind of make the grade and the way the buildings ran and the way the grades run are the same, so it was it just got too complicated from an engineering standpoint.

I'm not saying it's not possible.

We've all seen full house, so it's just here.

I guess it's that's what you'd end up with, not at that extreme, but the stepping of the townhomes down the street with the grade.

So we've we've talked about the variance and the hardship for the first one.

Um I don't think we've you mentioned it initially, but hardship for the square footage, just the accessibility trying to make it.

That's really the main thing.

The architect just came back and said they weren't able to get the accessibility they needed into the three bedroom units at that square footage.

Um, and so they wanted a thousand square foot, and so they'd like to try to go up to twelve, seventeen, um, because that's the size they were able to make it work.

I mean, I think the center port, the center part nails the cottage, right?

And then it seems like you're just forcing it on that perimeter, because that's not really a cottage development on the perimeter of it.

It just it doesn't feel like the rest of it.

Um it doesn't read through the zoning code and tent for a cottage on the on the perimeter.

So I struggle with the hardship on the perimeter ones, and I know that's what you're here for.

Um for me to be able to get a little bit more comfortable with that.

I I'd like to see some of the other options that were tried so that we could rule them out.

Um it's a large lot, and I don't I struggle to see how you couldn't have made something work and maybe maybe convince me a little bit more.

I know you probably don't have that on you today.

No, but um I know you can be an architect, you can imagine this if you take that loop road and we shifted it in, you ended up with a single row of buildings on the inside loop, um, and then we were able to get the cottage look on the outside of that main drive through the center, but we haven't been able to get the clusters on both sides of that that main road that has to cut through.

Yeah, because I mean I could see where on the um let me orient myself, you got your north up.

Um on the east side, if you pushed all of if you push the loop road closer to the road, you could get your cluster on the backside, and it's what you're saying that you can't get it because you still have to have a loop down to the other side without it being an L, does it have to be a complete loop?

Uh yeah, you well, unless we put some cold de sacs or turn or turnarounds for the fire trucks, but um it ends up being a fire again back to that sort of fire safety being able to pull a hose into the internal D parts of the site.

Um it just seemed like every time we would massage it and move things around, there was always gonna be a handful of areas that couldn't quite meet that three to five cluster.

Or three to sorry, I keep saying three to five, three to ten, I believe.

But you got a lot of them that don't meet that, like the entire perimeter doesn't meet that.

I mean, it seems like you're forcing a housing type on, or you're being forced on the housing type just because of the the way it was zoned, and you didn't really want to do this housing type to begin with is kind of the impression I'm getting.

I will clarify that they there is not other than cottage house, there is not a way under our current zoning ordinance to construct multiple single unit detached structures on a lot.

Um cottage house development is the only building type under our residential use classifications that accommodates that.

Uh and I think that it is something that we've proposed changes to, and in fact, the planning commission has already initiated a batch of amendments to the code to try and find a path that this is something that's not novel to this project but has come up several times.

There's an interest in doing I've just kind of been calling it horizontal apartment complexes.

I mean, it's multifamily, it's structured like multi-family, but the structures inside the development are individual units.

Um and so I I would anticipate in the future there will be some changes to our ordinance around that because as this project highlights, there isn't really a good fit for something like this, and that's I don't think intentional.

I think it's just the nature of how the code's written today.

But so while you're right, he's he's within the confines.

Yeah, well, you know, I need lunch.

Uh why he's within the confines of where he can be with the existing code.

Okay.

We did try to like on that northwest corner.

We did try to organize buildings to where they are kind of on a common open space.

It's not the traditional big lawn area, but they are kind of wrapped around two sides of it.

So where we could, it's just those sort of the two that face inward that really end up being tougher.

And we're thinking that just like that little sketch on the left side, maybe we could do some little patio spaces and open space in front that are tied together.

So you get the same, it's the intent of the cottage homes that that open space that you're fronting on.

So how many units are exceeding the 1000 square feet?

35.

35 units.

25 are only exceeding it by 47 square feet on their.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, case BOA24057.

Do we have anyone that would like to speak on this case?

Scene zero.

Let's move on to discussion.

Um I think with the first one, especially.

Um so that feels pretty clear to me.

Sure, yes, yes, just sorry.

What about on this size from thousand to twelve fifty?

Um to me it makes sense that there's a need for accessibility features in um family housing.

So um yeah, I don't have a lot of questions around the application itself.

Can you call me?

Yeah, I agree with that.

This falls in the category to me of trying to do something unique and different and it's not quite matching up with the existing codes, yeah.

And um that they're asking for the minimum relief to make something work, and um I appreciate the the spirit of adding housing and and what's desperately needed.

So I'm good with it as well.

Mrs.

Williams?

Yeah, I believe that there's an honest intent here to make it work.

Um I appreciate that you're considering safety because a lot of times in rental communities you may not necessarily get somebody thinking about that aspect or component of a living area, they're just putting up spaces, but you're really I think thinking of all of the things that could happen, and and you're and that that makes me feel good about it.

Makes me feel about it.

Mr.

Hill.

And if I could before Mr.

Hill, um, I can say one more thing.

I know I'm typically the stickler for following the zoning code, and I definitely believe that it's only about this as well.

There for a reason.

Um I don't take it lightly to go outside of it.

And um I also know coming from being in multiple public sector planning departments that there's not um a zoning code or ordinance can't account for everything.

And so that's where the options for uh variances are written in, and that's where I feel comfortable that um as Nathan has said that the zoning ordinance doesn't account for this high housing technology.

Thank you.

Hello.

Thank you.

Um yes, I am a stickler for the code.

Um and thank you.

No, I I get it.

Um still.

The intent of the cottage house is here.

Um whether or not you can actually get the two or the three to work out, I understand there's this is a hardship, but I mean generally the idea is there.

I for me to have been like further convinced I would have liked to have seen some exercises of like convince me how it couldn't work, right?

Maybe but maybe that's just the way that my mind works and I can't rule stuff out that I haven't seen doesn't work.

Um but you know, all that to be said, all my rambling.

Um I mean I could I could get on board with the idea that the intent is is really met here.

There's not there's not a way of zoning code um predicting every single type of design, so um, I'm not gonna tell you maybe if the community would have an issue with these, would have the room full of people.

That's right.

So I think the community at least sounds like everyone is seeing agreement to support.

So if anyone would like to do the motion.

All right.

Give me a second.

Just trying to make sure I got my examples.

Okay.

Um Mr.

Chair and Board of Adjustment 24057.

I move to approve a variance to reduce the required number of cottage houses arranged around a common open space from three to two and two increase the allowable building coverage for cottage houses from 1,000 square foot to 2500 square feet for the conceptual plan shown on 8.15 to 8.16 of the agenda packet.

The board finds the hardship to be the unique topography of the lot.

And granting the variance, the board finds the following facts favorable to the property owner have been established that the physical surroundings shape or topographical conditions of the subject property was raw and would would result in unnecessary hardships or practical difficulties for the property owner, as distinguished for my mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations were carried out, be that literal enforcement of the subject zoning code provision is not necessary to achieve the provisions intended purpose, that the conditions leading to the need of the requested variants are unique to the subject property and not applicable generally to other property within the same zoning class classification, that the alleged practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship was not self-created or self-imposed by the current property owner, that the variance to be granted is the minimum variance that will afford relief.

The variance to be granted will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood in which the subject property is located or substantially or permanently impair use or development of adjacent property and G, that the variance to be granted will not cause substantial detriment to the public good or impair the purpose, spirit, and intent of the zoning code or the comprehensive plan.

Oh, I was just gonna say, can we just uh read again the the change from uh for the number two from a thousand square feet to one thousand two two hundred fifty feet?

Oh okay.

Um do I need to redo the whole thing or just I think you just haven't just said twenty-five, I think you said twenty five hundred.

I said one thousand two hundred and fifty.

Yeah.

Oh, that would have been really happy about that.

Um increase the allowable building coverage from four cottage homes from one thousand square feet to one thousand two hundred and fifty square feet.

Right, we got a motion that we got a second.

Second.

I got a motion, we got a second.

Yes, Miss Williams?

Yes.

Yes, Mr.

Hill.

Yes, and I also want to say yes, this application has being approved.

All right, so that looks like this is the end of the agenda.

Do we have any additional comments?

Anything?

So it is 2 28 p.m.

So this meeting is at your own.

We may not know it or even see it.

But all the little things