[0:02] Good evening. I'd like to call the um
[0:05] July 9th regular meeting of the city of
[0:08] Webster Gross Board of Adjustment to
[0:10] order. Um
[0:13] Randy, would you please uh
[0:17] » Roll call?
[0:18] » All right, I will. Uh Randy Sprag here.
[0:21] Uh Debbie Sberg
[0:22] » Here.
[0:23] » Uh John Bur here. Uh Jennifer Gates
[0:26] » Here.
[0:26] » And Andrew Path
[0:28] » Here.
[0:29] » Thank you. you. In addition to the board
[0:31] members tonight, we also have the acting
[0:33] city attorney, Peter Buntreger, and the
[0:35] uh city planner, Evan Winkler. We have
[0:40] one hearing tonight. So, what we will do
[0:42] is we will the city will present their
[0:46] case and then the and then you because I
[0:49] assume you are the petitioners uh will
[0:52] will be able to present your uh your
[0:55] request. We will may ask questions of
[0:59] the city staff or you. Then we will ask
[1:01] if there's anyone in the audience else
[1:04] in the audience who'd like to speak and
[1:07] anyone online who'd like to speak either
[1:10] in favor or in opposition or with
[1:12] concern. Um then we will close the
[1:16] public session and move to executive
[1:19] session where we will uh make probably
[1:22] make a decision tonight. you're you do
[1:26] need four pop four votes in favor to
[1:29] approve a variance
[1:31] and um we do ask you not to be redundant
[1:34] or repetitive in your comments but you
[1:36] know chances are you the uh would you
[1:39] please Randy would you please read the
[1:41] powers relative to variations
[1:43] » Uh when by reason of expect exceptional
[1:46] narrowness shallowness or shape of a
[1:48] specific piece of property as of
[1:50] September 20th 1956
[1:53] or by reason of exceptional
[1:55] topographical conditions or other
[1:57] extraordinary exceptional situation or
[1:59] condition of a specific piece of
[2:02] property which condition is not
[2:04] generally prevalent in the neighborhood.
[2:06] The strict application of the area
[2:08] regulations of this zoning code would
[2:10] result in particular and exceptional
[2:12] practical difficulties to or exceptional
[2:15] and undue hardship upon the owner of
[2:18] such property. The board is hereby
[2:20] empowered to authorize upon an appeal
[2:23] relating to such property a variation
[2:26] from strict application as to relieve
[2:28] such difficulties or hardships.
[2:31] » Thank you. Would you please read uh
[2:33] docket 2439 into record?
[2:36] » Will uh docket 2439 is an application by
[2:39] John and an Piaza. Am I correct?
[2:43] Property owners of 28 Elm Place. The
[2:46] property is located within the A4 7500
[2:50] ft² residence district. The applicant is
[2:53] requesting a variance from municipal
[2:55] code section 53.078
[3:00] N in order to build an accessory
[3:03] structure/swimspa
[3:06] 2.5 ft from the side of the lot line or
[3:09] west property line.
[3:11] » Thank you, Mr. Bontriger.
[3:14] Uh yes, for uh testimony, I would like
[3:17] to ask that exhibits one through 10 be
[3:20] included as part of record. That's nine
[3:22] paper exhibits that will be
[3:26] » Thank you.
[3:28] Um who's who's here?
[3:31] » We call
[3:33] » Mr. Winkler, would you please raise your
[3:34] right hand? Do you solemnly swear that
[3:36] the testimony you're about to give is
[3:37] the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
[3:38] but the truth?
[3:39] » I do.
[3:40] » Thank you. Please go ahead.
[3:41] » State your name for the record. Evan
[3:43] Winkler.
[3:43] » Are you employed by the city of West
[3:45] Gro?
[3:45] » Yes.
[3:46] » What's your position? Uh
[3:47] » City planner.
[3:48] » And what are your duties as a city
[3:50] planner?
[3:50] » Uh to review uh building permits, uh
[3:53] presentations for board of adjustment as
[3:54] well as presentations for planning
[3:56] commission.
[3:56] » Through your work with the city, are you
[3:58] familiar with uh 28 Elm Place?
[4:02] » Yes.
[4:02] » Is that property within city limits?
[4:04] » Yes.
[4:04] » In which zoning district is it located?
[4:06] » A4 7500 ft residence district. What is
[4:10] the applicant's request in docket number
[4:12] 2439?
[4:13] » The applicant is requesting a variance
[4:15] to uh the 5yard foot uh setback for
[4:18] accessory structures uh for a leviance
[4:22] of 2.5 ft.
[4:23] » And which code section applies to that
[4:25] request?
[4:26] » Uh this section is section 53.078N.
[4:31] » Can you describe the current condition
[4:33] of the property? Yeah, the current
[4:35] condition is um there's a single family
[4:37] dwelling um that was recently remodeled
[4:40] as well as having a detached accessory
[4:43] garage constructed. Um and uh it's at
[4:47] the end of a culde-sac um which I can
[4:49] get into more during the presentation.
[4:53] Uh are there any existing variances on
[4:55] this property that you're aware of?
[4:57] » No.
[5:00] And uh as part of the current condition
[5:02] is the the request that's being made is
[5:04] that pursuant to an already existing uh
[5:08] um project something that's been
[5:09] completed or not yet?
[5:11] » Correct. It is completed.
[5:14] » Can you explain the uh how the variance
[5:16] uh would would allow this to be come
[5:19] into compliance?
[5:20] » Yeah. So uh currently the swim spa is
[5:23] set back at 2 and 1/2 ft from the
[5:25] sideyard. Um so providing a variance um
[5:30] essentially alleviates that fiveyard
[5:31] setback requirement.
[5:33] » Do you have anything else to add?
[5:35] » Um I do. I have a presentation.
[5:38] » Um it's not the right time. Go ahead.
[5:39] » Okay.
[5:45] [cough and clears throat]
[5:46] All right. So again, this is um case
[5:48] 2439 located at 28 Elm Place.
[5:55] Um and again as has already been stated
[5:57] the board powers are um they have the
[5:59] ability to grant exceptions to the code
[6:02] uh based on exceptional narrowness sha
[6:04] shallowess or shape of a specific piece
[6:07] of property um as well as exceptions uh
[6:10] related to topographical conditions um
[6:13] or conditions of a specific piece of
[6:15] property.
[6:18] uh this property or the request of the
[6:20] appellant is to um have a 2.5 ft
[6:24] sideyard setback for their accessory
[6:27] structure. Uh it's located in the A4
[6:29] 7500 dwelling district. Um and the
[6:33] section uh requesting of or requested of
[6:36] the variance is section 53.078N 078N uh
[6:39] which is the development standards for
[6:41] accessory structures
[6:42] » And and that is the 2.5 ft is in lie of
[6:45] what
[6:45] » In lie of five feet
[6:47] » Is it five but for an accessory
[6:48] structure six for a primary structure
[6:50] » Correct
[6:50] » Okay thank you
[6:51] » Yep
[6:53] » So the reason we treat swim spas as an
[6:56] accessory structure is because of the
[6:58] building code so the 2015 international
[7:01] swimming pool and spa code uh there was
[7:03] amendments made and explicitly states
[7:06] that swimming pools and spa shall comply
[7:08] with accessory structure setbacks uh
[7:10] required of the zoning code. Um it also
[7:13] addressed lot coverage. Um swimming
[7:15] pools and spas are not included um in
[7:18] the total foot uh footage coverage of um
[7:21] accessory structures.
[7:22] » I'm sorry. Is that a building code
[7:24] requirement or our requirement?
[7:25] » Well, so it's a building code that
[7:27] references uh the need to follow the
[7:30] zoning code. Okay.
[7:31] » So the zoning code does not require the
[7:34] swimming pool to be counted as a lot as
[7:36] lot coverage. Correct.
[7:38] » Thank you.
[7:38] » Yep. And so flat work which this swim
[7:41] spa sits on all can actually go all the
[7:44] way to the property.
[7:46] » Yes.
[7:48] » All right. So for some site context, um
[7:51] this property is located in the central
[7:53] Webster historic district. Um you can
[7:56] see from the aerial um it's
[7:57] approximately 7,900 ft property. Um it's
[8:01] at the end of the culdeac. They also
[8:04] abut um some type of public rideway. It
[8:08] looks like maybe a path at one time um
[8:11] on the northwest portion. Uh it's kind
[8:13] of angular in shape along the front
[8:16] front edge of the parcel because it's at
[8:18] the end of the culde-sac. Um so this was
[8:21] actually built in 1915. Um but in 2025
[8:25] um the homeowners uh started a
[8:28] significant renovation of this structure
[8:30] uh the dwelling single family dwelling
[8:32] and also built a detached um accessory
[8:36] garage in in the back.
[8:40] Now this is kind of where some of the
[8:43] confusion came in and why the swim spa
[8:45] exists. Um there was a couple of
[8:47] addendums
[8:49] uh applied for um for the detached
[8:52] garage as well as the swim spa. Um the
[8:57] swim spa
[8:59] was given an email approval by a past
[9:02] staff person. Um although the permit was
[9:06] never issued. However, these other
[9:08] addendums were being granted and were
[9:11] issued um which caused some of the
[9:14] confusion as to what work could actually
[9:17] be completed under which permit. Um,
[9:22] so I guess some other things to kind of
[9:25] highlight is that uh part of
[9:29] construction of a detached garage
[9:31] requires a storm water management plan
[9:33] and part of that storm water management
[9:35] plan was uh a significant swale which
[9:38] I've highlighted here um to move water
[9:41] behind the garage towards the easement
[9:44] uh the MSD easement um to kind of a
[9:47] catch basin. Um, so that really does
[9:50] take up a decent amount of yard. Um, in
[9:53] the images I've tried to highlight
[9:56] essentially where that swale is and
[9:57] where the water is moving.
[9:59] » Now, the swale was required because of
[10:01] the detached garage.
[10:03] » Correct. Yeah. So, our municipal code
[10:06] requires a storm water management plan
[10:08] with uh certain impervious improvements.
[10:12] » And this is just for the lot. This is
[10:14] not like the community neighborhooding.
[10:18] » You're right.
[10:19] » Whale. This is their own person like
[10:21] » Yes.
[10:22] » Because of the calculations for their
[10:24] own lot.
[10:25] » Correct.
[10:25] » Perfect. Okay.
[10:30] » Um so this is this you can see the plans
[10:32] for the addendum. They have you know the
[10:34] swim swap bubbled out um a 4in concrete
[10:38] slab. Um and so this is what was tied to
[10:41] the email approval. Um, and then the
[10:44] image essentially is showing
[10:47] where that property line is currently.
[10:50] Um, and then neighbors, that's actually
[10:52] the neighbors garage. Um, would be an
[10:55] existing non-conforming garage that was
[10:58] there.
[10:58] » The the garage that's needs to be
[11:01] painted or I mean I mean
[11:03] » Strange.
[11:04] » Yes.
[11:05] » Oh, I see. So that that's actually on
[11:08] the neighbor's property,
[11:09] » Correct?
[11:10] » Oh, okay.
[11:11] » That's the neighbor to the west. I see.
[11:13] I see.
[11:14] » That's not the
[11:15] » No.
[11:16] » No.
[11:18] » Well, then old new.
[11:19] » Correct. [laughter]
[11:22] » All right. So, with that, I guess are
[11:24] there any questions from the board?
[11:30] » So, that that it your arrows make clear
[11:34] that the swale is outside the footprint
[11:36] of that concrete pad.
[11:38] » Yes.
[11:39] And therefore the bearings is needed
[11:43] because if the swale wasn't there
[11:46] » The drainage
[11:46] » They could scooch it further east and
[11:50] meet the sideyard setback.
[11:52] » Right. So if they would move it further
[11:53] east it would be impeding the drainage
[11:56] swell.
[11:59] » So okay would defeat the purpose of the
[12:01] soil and the drains and all the Yes, I
[12:03] get it.
[12:07] Does anyone else have do you have any
[12:09] question Sam? The
[12:11] » So you mentioned something about an
[12:14] email approval. Can you
[12:17] » Give a little more information on that?
[12:20] » Yeah, I mean we we do have document of
[12:22] this email. Um I didn't include it. I I
[12:25] don't know. But um so a former staff
[12:28] person uh who was reviewing for zoning
[12:32] explicitly states that the zoning is
[12:34] compliant and that it would move on to
[12:36] the building plan reviewer um for
[12:39] building code compliance. Um that
[12:42] portion never
[12:45] it didn't meet code yet. So it never got
[12:47] completed but there were other permits
[12:50] like also open and being worked on. Um,
[12:53] and so when inspectors went out there
[12:55] and gave approvals, they were giving
[12:56] approval for things like the detached
[12:58] garage and these other amendments, um,
[13:00] not explicitly this swim spa, which is
[13:03] kind of how it came to our attention.
[13:05] Um, I see.
[13:10] » And unfortunately, that former staff
[13:11] person was wrong in the the zoning was
[13:16] not. Yeah.
[13:19] » Does anyone else have any questions for
[13:20] Mr. Winkler before we move on?
[13:23] Who's here in favor of docket 2439?
[13:26] » John and
[13:27] » Okay. So, I need I need you to do it one
[13:30] at a time. Come up to the podium.
[13:33] [laughter]
[13:36] [clears throat]
[13:38] [snorts]
[13:39] » Please raise your right hand. Do you
[13:40] solemnly swear that the testimony you're
[13:42] about to give is the truth, the whole
[13:43] truth, and nothing but the truth?
[13:44] » I do.
[13:45] » Thank you. Please go ahead. Um, describe
[13:47] your request. My my name is John Piaz
[13:49] and we're residents uh and owners of 28
[13:52] Elm Place and Evan did a pretty good job
[13:55] of describing the property. It is a very
[13:58] limited property. It's a beautiful place
[14:00] now, but there's not a lot of room with
[14:03] the 20 foot MSD easement and then
[14:06] there's an additional diagonal easement
[14:08] and that forced the garage to be shoved
[14:11] forward and into the center of the yard.
[14:14] And then with the garage and the
[14:16] driveway and the impervious materials
[14:18] that required the water mitigation plan
[14:20] which has a swale through the property
[14:23] to a detention pond behind the garage.
[14:27] All those things basically limited where
[14:30] we could put it. Um and we thought we
[14:33] were doing everything according to the
[14:34] book. We've done a big project here and
[14:36] we've had an architect and a GC and
[14:39] we've done all the permits and we but
[14:42] this fell outside my GC's project and he
[14:45] said just go up and put in a swim spa
[14:48] permit and I did that. Um and it was
[14:52] Pashant Peoples back at that time. She
[14:55] required that I get a notorized
[14:56] statement uh saying that I recognize the
[14:59] fact that my concrete being on the MSD
[15:02] easement if they needed to remove it
[15:04] they weren't going to pay me for that.
[15:06] Right. And I I did that and notorized it
[15:08] and and she did it via email say that
[15:10] okay it's zoning's approved. It'll go to
[15:13] planning for review and if there are any
[15:15] questions Jim Bailey would reach out.
[15:18] He didn't. Um, and I guess shame on us,
[15:22] but that's just our lack of knowledge on
[15:24] on the procedures perhaps, but
[15:26] everything was moving forward, right? We
[15:28] we built the garage and a lot of
[15:30] inspections and uh and everything. So,
[15:33] we thought everything was okay until May
[15:35] and we realized it wasn't okay, but it
[15:37] is there. [laughter]
[15:39] And uh I think in your packet you'll see
[15:41] that email from Pashant and hopefully
[15:44] you'll also see that the neighbor whose
[15:46] property we if you want to call it
[15:48] encroach we're not encroaching on their
[15:49] property but on the setback they they've
[15:52] signed a a simple document saying hey
[15:54] they have zero issues at all with that.
[15:55] They're they're in support of it. Um and
[15:59] if you look at where we positioned it
[16:01] it's probably the most uh unobtrusive
[16:04] place to have it right. just behind
[16:06] their garage and and and it is humorous
[16:08] that their garage is only 2 feet off
[16:10] that property line. So, and I have
[16:12] another garage that's that's exactly on
[16:14] my property line. So, I'm quite
[16:16] accustomed to things being very close to
[16:18] my property, but here I am with a a
[16:21] silly swim spa that is causing me this
[16:24] problem. But um
[16:27] we wouldn't I don't know that we could
[16:28] have found another way to position it
[16:30] without interfering with uh the the
[16:34] swale and the water mitigation and
[16:36] everything. Um so here here we are. I
[16:41] think that's
[16:43] that's probably all I I can add to this
[16:45] and much of it is redundant and a
[16:47] repeat. Evan, I'm sorry for that.
[16:50] So,
[16:51] » I don't know about anybody else, but
[16:52] when I drive down Elm Place, I always
[16:54] feel like everything's very, very close.
[16:57] It's all very tight.
[16:58] » It is. Yes, ma'am.
[17:00] » That little subdivision. [laughter]
[17:02] Um, does anyone have any questions for
[17:04] uh
[17:06] So, so
[17:08] the
[17:10] So, you don't you're not you're
[17:12] confident that MSD is not going to have
[17:13] to dig this up much?
[17:15] » Well, let's say I'm hopeful. I I I
[17:18] purposely though my the electrical is
[17:21] all on my property. It's only concrete
[17:24] on on theirs. Well, it's my property,
[17:26] but on their easement of my property.
[17:28] So, I I you know, we we pulled it
[17:30] forward just enough that
[17:32] » I could keep about a foot well, it's
[17:34] about a foot of the concrete on on our
[17:36] outside their easement and the
[17:38] electrical is outside their easement.
[17:40] So, if they required to dig, it's, you
[17:42] know, it's I'm going to spend some money
[17:44] moving a spa out and I'll lose some
[17:46] concrete. But uh I'm hopeful. I don't
[17:49] know about confident.
[17:53] » Does anyone have any questions for
[17:57] Mr. Piaza?
[17:59] » Real quick, did you say you have your
[18:00] neighbors? Um
[18:04] » Yeah, Emily Emily and Chase.
[18:06] » Yeah, it's
[18:07] » It's in the last page.
[18:10] » Okay. Yeah, it's on the last
[18:12] » I mean they've indicated here where they
[18:14] live in relation. They are appear to be
[18:16] the affected neighbors.
[18:18] » So basically, can you describe this uh
[18:21] swim spa? I mean, how far above grade is
[18:24] it?
[18:24] » It sits about a 4T It's about four feet
[18:27] tall and it's uh 7 feet by 14 ft. So
[18:30] it's think of it as a double uh hot tub
[18:33] and one end is a hot tub effectively.
[18:35] It's
[18:36] » Got jets and the other end is for
[18:38] swimming and exercising.
[18:40] » Okay. So it's so it's like it you're
[18:42] swimming against cur
[18:43] » The jets, right? the Jet against the
[18:45] Jets. And it's uh and for us,
[18:48] we didn't realize the structure side of
[18:50] that being considered a structure,
[18:52] right? I think I would have known, okay,
[18:53] a garage or whatever, but but we didn't
[18:56] at the time realize that when we first
[18:58] started the process, we didn't realize
[18:59] it was subject to the same setbacks.
[19:04] » John, do you have any question?
[19:06] » I have a question.
[19:07] » Um
[19:08] Miss Piazu, do you want to come up and
[19:10] speak
[19:11] » Or or do you think he's he's made the
[19:13] points? Okay. All right.
[19:15] » Is there um anyone online?
[19:21] » Okay. Um is that per Is there anyone in
[19:25] in the audience or online who'd like to
[19:27] speak in favor of docket 2439?
[19:32] They're not raising their hand.
[19:36] » If you're able to raise your hand or
[19:39] » Well, yeah, you can you can
[19:40] » I think you can see it.
[19:42] » Oh. Ellen.
[19:45] » Ellen, can you hear us? If if you would
[19:46] like to speak, um,
[19:49] » You're going to I'm going to have to
[19:50] swear you in, but if you'd like to
[19:52] speak, this is the time.
[19:55] » Okay. Um, do you solemnly swear that the
[19:58] testimony you're about to give is the
[19:59] truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
[20:00] the truth?
[20:01] » Yes.
[20:02] » Okay. And, um, you're Ellen and
[20:06] do can you tell us where, um, what's
[20:08] your interest in this request?
[20:10] » I live at 16 Elm Place. Okay.
[20:13] » Um,
[20:15] I would be not in favor of it. Um, we
[20:19] live in a historical district.
[20:22] Um, I think that
[20:25] 28 Elm Place has taken
[20:29] have gone above and beyond not following
[20:33] the rules and so I'm against it.
[20:40] » Okay. Does anyone have any questions
[20:43] for Miss Brook?
[20:49] Do you want to Do you want to um uh do
[20:53] you want to what what what what do you
[20:55] believe they've not followed the rules
[20:56] about? I'm just curious.
[20:59] » Um
[21:01] there's I think there was some issue
[21:03] about the detached garage.
[21:07] um
[21:11] you know that it's oversized that it's
[21:13] has an apartment above
[21:16] a lot of things that I think were
[21:19] maybe shoved under the rug that you know
[21:21] maybe I was not aware of as much and so
[21:26] again I think you're putting a spa
[21:31] and it's you know
[21:35] not 5 feet or six feet away from
[21:38] property. Why wouldn't you put it closer
[21:40] to your house?
[21:45] » Okay. Thank you.
[21:46] » Okay.
[21:47] » Anything else you'd like to add?
[21:49] » Uh, I don't think so.
[21:50] » Okay. Thank you. Um, Evan, do you want
[21:53] to speak to the whether the the issue of
[21:56] the garage? I did notice there was a
[21:58] half, you know, there was there was some
[22:00] it looked like there was a second story
[22:03] or partial second story.
[22:05] So that is permitted by our zoning code.
[22:07] Um that project went to the ARB twice I
[22:11] believe. Uh first for the original plans
[22:14] but then also for an addendum. Um now
[22:17] our code does restrict uh like dwellings
[22:20] above a detached garage pretty heavily.
[22:22] So they're not permitted to be rented
[22:24] out. It could only ever be like if
[22:27] people were living in it only. It could
[22:28] only ever be two people. They have to be
[22:30] related um or employed by um the owner.
[22:35] » Servants quarters.
[22:36] » Servants quarters. I've heard them use
[22:38] those nanny's quarters too. Um but yeah,
[22:42] so um it it is compliant. It has been
[22:44] through appropriate approvals.
[22:46] » Okay. And it did not need to seek any
[22:49] variances through this board.
[22:50] » Not that I'm aware of. Yeah.
[22:52] » I mean I I
[22:52] » I mean I to me it's not relevant to this
[22:56] case,
[22:57] » Right? I'm just I just want to important
[23:00] part like true
[23:01] » There's a problem with this variance
[23:03] that's what the discussion should be
[23:05] » That is true
[23:06] » Related to anything else
[23:07] » Okay
[23:10] » Before we move to u ex to close session
[23:13] does anyone I mean executive session
[23:15] does anyone want to make any uh want to
[23:18] ask any any additional questions of the
[23:21] either the staff or the applicant
[23:27] » Okay I'm good
[23:28] » We have a motion to move into executive
[23:31] into executive session.
[23:32] » So moved.
[23:34] » Second.
[23:35] » Second.
[23:35] » All in favor say I.
[23:37] » I.
[23:38] » Do we um can we get a motion regarding
[23:41] 2439 so we can start discussion?
[23:44] » I move approval of uh of u uh
[23:49] » 2439
[23:50] » 24 of docket number 2439.
[23:52] » Second.
[23:53] » I'll second.
[23:55] » Any discussion?
[23:57] I mean, I I think the circumstances of
[23:59] this lot are unusual
[24:02] uh with the easements and the drainage
[24:04] swale and the shape of the lot overall.
[24:08] And I think that merits a variance.
[24:12] » See, I would I would say that the
[24:14] drainage flail and the MSD easement make
[24:17] it re create a hardship. I'm not sure
[24:21] that, you know, there's lots of lots
[24:23] that aren't a whole lot wider than this
[24:26] in Webster Groves. You know, I think I
[24:27] live in one. Um, but
[24:31] » Like the aperture to the right away is
[24:33] » Well, but but that's not really that's
[24:35] not really an issue in this variance,
[24:37] you know.
[24:38] » No.
[24:38] » Um, I mean, it's the
[24:41] [laughter]
[24:43] » Does anyone else have any
[24:45] » No, I I would absolutely concur. I think
[24:47] the the geography, the shape of the lot,
[24:50] uh the fact that uh MSD has an easement
[24:52] there that is that is not common. Um has
[24:56] really precluded
[24:58] uh the the owner's uh ability to put
[25:02] this where they might like to have it. I
[25:04] think it's a clever decision. Um, I'm
[25:06] sorry that there was misunderstanding
[25:08] and that's unfortunate that of course I
[25:10] don't think you know if misunderstanding
[25:12] isn't the issue here but the issue is
[25:15] that I think there is a hardship here
[25:17] and that I think the request is is very
[25:20] reasonable.
[25:21] » Andrew, do you want to make any
[25:23] comments?
[25:25] » Yeah, I I guess where I struggle with it
[25:27] is the the swale isn't something that
[25:30] was an existing condition, right? It was
[25:32] something they created um because of
[25:35] their improvements that were
[25:38] constructed.
[25:39] So they've created their own hardship.
[25:45] True.
[25:48] But they would have had to have a they
[25:51] would have had to have off- streetet
[25:52] parking because there's no way they
[25:54] could park um you know park park on the
[25:58] street or um
[26:02] » The swale and the detention pond were a
[26:05] condition of having the garage.
[26:06] » Right. Right. True. But I think he's
[26:08] he's you know,
[26:10] » Well,
[26:10] » And while they wouldn't have had don't
[26:12] necessarily have to have a garage, they
[26:14] would have had to pave that back area
[26:17] and have some area for for parking
[26:20] » Vehicles to park.
[26:21] » Yeah. I I mean, I agree with that, Deb,
[26:23] but
[26:23] » Parking space behind the building.
[26:24] » You know, I guess what I'm saying is
[26:28] to build the structure that was
[26:31] permitted, they were required to build
[26:33] the swale.
[26:36] those things were in place and that was
[26:39] a stipulation of being able to build the
[26:42] garage. And so
[26:45] if that does not leave room for other
[26:48] things on their property,
[26:50] that was a hardship created by their
[26:52] decision to build the garage.
[26:56] » Look at it that way.
[26:57] » Can you talk about the email on October
[27:01] 21st? How much does that
[27:04] play into decision making?
[27:06] » Well, so the reality is that um the only
[27:09] way of of variance could be requested to
[27:12] through the process. That's why we're
[27:13] here.
[27:14] » Um the email itself can't grant a
[27:17] variance. It's not a staff decision. Now
[27:20] that said, um you know, we're we I think
[27:23] we consider that when we're considering
[27:24] hardship in this situation. um you know,
[27:27] somebody's attempted to do this the
[27:29] right way and and towards I think at the
[27:31] very least it shouldn't um
[27:35] you shouldn't be considering the fact
[27:37] that this is an already done thing as a
[27:39] negative towards the applicant because
[27:40] it was only done because
[27:45] » I would agree.
[27:47] I mean, I would be more aligned with
[27:50] that as kind of the hardship of like
[27:53] they believe they had approval and they
[27:56] went ahead with the construction and now
[28:00] it exists.
[28:07] » Are we ready to to vote on this?
[28:13] » All in favor of docket 2439, please say
[28:16] I. I
[28:17] » I
[28:17] » All opposed.
[28:19] » Uh, could you please pull the board?
[28:21] » I will. Uh, Debbie Selberg,
[28:23] » I.
[28:24] » Uh, John Bur,
[28:25] » I.
[28:25] » Jennifer Gates,
[28:26] » I.
[28:27] » Uh, uh, Andrew Potz,
[28:29] » I.
[28:29] » And Randy Sprag, I
[28:31] » Your variance request has been has been
[28:34] approved. Please see city staff during
[28:36] regular business hours for your next
[28:38] steps.
[28:40] » Thank you. Is there any other business
[28:42] before the board tonight? Uh,
[28:44] » No additional business.
[28:47] Do you have a inkling of whether we'll
[28:48] have an August meeting or not?
[28:50] » It doesn't look like we will at this
[28:51] point. Yeah,
[28:53] » That wouldn't be the end of the world.
[28:55] We have a mo. Are we ready for
[28:57] » I move we adjourn?
[28:59] » Second. All in favor?
[29:01] » I.
[29:02] » Thank you very much.