Audio check for our captioners. This is an audio check. Test one. Test two. Audio check for the captioners. Test one. Test two. Audio check. 1 2 3 4. Audio check. 1 2 3 4. Audio check. Test one. Test two. Audio check for the captioners. Test one, test two. 1 2 3 4. This is an audio check for the captioners. Test one, test two. Audio check. Test one, test two. Audio check, test 1 2 3 4. This is an audio check for the captioners. Test one, test two. Thank you so much. Hey folks, we start at uh 4:30, but we need quorum, which is five, and so we're one short. So, one more person, we can get going. Voice check. Uh, one minute. Sounds good. Thank you. Oh boy. >> There were a lot of people on it at all. Hello everyone. My name is Matt Perry. I'm chair of this board. Uh this is our um June 18th regularly scheduled meeting. As I told you before, we need five people to have quorum. We don't have quorum. So um I'll go through the steps of what we can do without quorum and um we can take it from there. So first I want to call the meeting to order and see if we can if we have quorum. So could the clerk please call the meeting to order? Board member Callahan is absent. Board member Iikold is absent. Board member Hutchkins >> here. >> Board member Ingram is absent. Board member Israel >> present. >> Board member Shannon is absent. Board member Smear Carva is absent. Vice Chair Wang >> here. >> And chair Perry >> here. >> There are four members present. >> So we do not have quorum which means we can't call them. we can't conduct business. And uh what that means is we will continue each of the items on today's agenda to the next meeting of this body which is on July 9th. We can a bunch of you have gone to this now twice and I really apologize for that. Um, I I can't tell you how sorry I am for that. Um, I appreciate your persist your persistence, but what we can do is open the public hearing and let you speak. you have come down and um I can go through the items that are um um we have for public hearing and you can speak to those items if you would like and you could speak again on the 9th or you could not speak on the 9th. Your testimony would be taken from today and used on the 9th. So, those are the two options you have. So, would anybody given that I know this is kind of odd, but given that uh would anybody like to speak to any of the items that are on the agenda today? Uh, come on up. Give your name and address for the record. I should say this, too. So, if you have something like this, could you turn it on silent? >> Yeah. Is it okay? My notes are on here. >> Yeah. I I just don't want it go ringing. >> Deal. >> Great. >> Um, >> and your name and address? >> My name is Jaclyn Hager. My address is 4327 Blazedale Avenue. >> And your project? >> Uh, I am opposing a project for 4331 Blazedale Avenue. >> Okay. >> All right. I'm going to read um my written objection uh just because uh this isn't personal to us or this is deeply personal to us but we have deeper respect for our neighbors and so I'll read it that way I can stick to the uh item at hand. So good afternoon members of the board. My name is Jaclyn Hager and I'm the longtime owner of the home located at 4327 Blazedale Avenue which is adjacent to the subject property at 4331 Blazedale Avenue. I'm here today to object to the requested variance. The applicants are asking this board to reduce the required interior side yard set back from 5T to 3 feet so they can build a two-story addition extending from the rear of their home. This addition would bring a two-story structure to within approximately 3 ft of our shared property line towering over my one-story home and blocking natural sunlight that my home currently receives. Under the variance criteria, the board must first find that the proposed variance will not be injurious to the use or enjoyment of the property in the vicinity. I respectfully submit that this finding cannot be made here. A two-story structure built 3 ft from our property line will cast a shadow over my property and diminish the light that enters my home. This is a direct injury to my use and enjoyment of the property. What is particularly telling is that the applicant's own project description acknowledges the importance of sunlight. They describe the proposed sun room as a sunny retreat with south and east expanses of double hung windows that transforms above. They are asking this board to grant them a sunny retreat unfortunately at my expense. The sunlight they wish to capture through those southacing windows is the same sunlight that currently reaches my property. the requested variance would injure my own enjoyment of my property in the sunlight it currently receives. I also want to note that the spirit and intent of the setback ordinance is in part to provide adequate light, air, and open space for neighboring properties. Granting this variance would undermine that purpose. As a homeowner in South Minneapolis myself, I understand that the applicants face design challenges with their home. I've faced them, too. But their own submission acknowledges that alternative configurations exist, including an addition offset to the south or a different massing approach. The fact that those alternatives may be less convenient or less aesthetically preferred by the applicants does not justify shifting the burden of loss of some light onto my property. Design preference is not a hardship that warrants a variance at a neighbor's expense. I respectfully ask this board to deny the variance or require a redesign that maintains the 5- foot setback and preserves my property's access to natural light. I thank you for your time and consideration today, even without the quorum. Uh in your packet, you will find a letter and drawing supporting uh my objection. >> Thanks for your testimony. >> Thank you. >> Would anybody else like to speak? >> Sure. if you come up and give um same sort of drill, your name and address and whether you're speaking for or against in which project. >> Uh I am uh Isaac Larson. I am co-owner of 4331 Blazedale Avenue South. >> I am Susie Stman. I am owner of Ellia Healey, the contractor and designer of the project. >> Okay. So um we uh basically heard Jacqueline's um thing but what we want to say is we went to great extents to design and keep in mind making the least obtrusive piece that met the client's need um on the property. And we I I don't know how to use your overhead projector, but I can certainly I can >> I think a clerk can help you out. Um we the house was built in 1906. Um the neighboring house was built in 1956. The um house is currently about 2'4t from the north property line which is common for that particular block. Almost everything is very tight to the north line. Um and uh we have the recommendation of the zoning staff. Um there >> yeah the preview screen right there. >> Okay. And is that showing? >> Mhm. >> Okay. Cool. I used to use these when I taught but um so we really went to be as unobtrusive to that property as possible. So the property that we're looking at, this is the neighboring property. This is the property we're looking at. This is the um the survey obviously the black line here is what are we're proposing here and um what I wanted to show is that other things that we were considering had a much deeper profile and when it went deeper it also had a higher pitch roof. We made two major moves that we wanted to just be really cognizant of what we were doing on that space. One was to keep it very shallow. So, we made it only like 9'6 in depth, which currently the neighboring house comes back about 4 feet past. So, we're only going less than 6 ft further past their house. Um, and we also put a hip roof on the back rather than the steep 1212 pitch roof that goes on the house to keep that line down so that they could get as much light as possible. Um, so I think that's mainly uh if we did have to redesign to that five foot line. So, the reason we're here is because we designed to a the line of the house and the line of the house ended up too close to the property. So, we had to bring it back to something that we could ask for a variance on and still have windows on that side. Um, if the house had been in that 3 to 5 foot zone, it would have been approved. But, um, if we pull it back to the 5-ft mark, [snorts] um, we have to redesign and go further back. Um, and I think essentially that's that's basically what we have to say. >> Okay. >> Um, I'm just going to show you one more image, uh, which has to do with >> there. We do have a question. >> Yeah. >> Hey, just a quick question. Thanks for coming down again. Sorry, this is a quorum issue. Uh, clarification. There is no way you expand the back of the house even a foot without taking some of the sunlight of a neighbor. Right. That's just right. because of how >> right >> the structures are oriented. Okay. Just making sure. Okay. Thanks. >> Yes. And I guess my my concern about that is that if we did because basically if [snorts] we >> if we go from the 3-foot variance to the the five foot variance in order for us to fit everything that we want to do with our bathroom and our upstairs bedroom in there, we have to bump it out further. And I don't know if that is better or worse for sunlight to be four to six feet. >> Yes. Yeah. Yep. >> And I just put a little image of what if we went further, the roof line would look like. >> Uh, okay. >> Okay. Thank you. >> I assume that got in the record. So, >> Yep. >> Okay. Super. Thank you. >> All right. Would anyone else like to speak? >> Yes, sir. Your name and address and the project you're speaking for or against? >> Um, Edwin Bell. um speaking for uh 3730 West Benet Makuska Parkway. >> Yeah. >> Um I'm the neighbor across the street and I'm here to support it. Um and I will be back on the in July. But I think more than anything else um there is a kind of a conflict because of the blocks that we go from uh Xerxes over to Sheridan. They're short blocks. >> Yep. And I if you've gotten the packet and understand it, there are some alleys that have been put in. So there's access for the homes. There's no access for the parkway for utilities um etc. Um, I've been in the area since, um, I'm a realtor and architect and served on the variance variance board while we, uh, practice downtown architecture and over riverplace. And, um, I understand the zoning code, but the front door is on the Parkway. It's not on Washburn. And there is no other way to get into the house. and the need for this and and again I've been involved in that area since 1995 and we sold it I sold it three times and bought it myself in 2008. Um I would not park overnight on the street. I mean, it's it's a transient area from the beach and it it the neighborhood changes at 8:00 and so I support the overall request. It's a very handsome design and it's very sympathetic to the neighborhood and sympathetic to the number of garages on the street and they do need access. Thank you. >> Okay. Thanks for coming down and giving your testimony. Anyone else want to speak? As I said, you can speak today and I'll give you an opportunity to speak um on July 9th as well. >> Sure. Oh. Um >> hi. Hi. >> Thank you for hearing us out. Um, my name is Megan Lquist and I'm here to discuss 2754 Thomas Avenue South, the Bardwash family. Um, I'd just like to say that this is our second deferral. Um, and I am here with with the homeowners, Joy and Satch Um, and we've taken our time now twice to to do this process. Um, >> I I apologize for that. >> Thank you. I appreciate that. Um, and we can't have the a dialogue about this project with a board that's not fully present. So, um, we we won't be discussing the project today. Um, but given that we submitted our application on April 15th, um, and we have surpassed our 60-day limit, I'm asking for a process where our variance is approved, um, as planned. Is that possible? >> So, I would have to ask staff where we are on the on the clock on that. Who who owns that uh, project? Our staff member um was Miles Campbell and Ben Carrier is here instead. >> Yeah. So Ben, do you know? >> I I'm I'm familiar with what you're requesting. I just I don't know. I don't have the packet in front of me. >> Absolutely. >> The 60day decision period is June 14th and the 20day decision period is August 13th. >> Okay. So, you are requesting it be approved because of the 60-day >> That's correct. >> being exhausted. Um Mr. Ellis, >> Chair Perry, members of the board. Um we'll look into that. Um I have the the staff member who um is part of this is unfortunately not available today. I mean, it would be automatically granted if he failed to send an extension letter. It was my understanding that he did send an extension letter to the 120 due to the continuences, uh, the unfortunate continuences. Um, but if if so, as long as that letter went out, uh, we the city would still be within its time to make a decision on that action. So, >> okay. Um, and then knowing that knowing that we have this 120day, um, we would ask for an alternate process maybe where we could, um, go before the city council or have our city council representative, um, stand in to grant approval for this project before July 9th. >> That we can't do. we have to follow the process that we're following because there um are legal requirements that hold us to that process. >> Okay. >> But it it it was worth asking. >> Yeah. Thank you. I appreciate your time. >> Thank Thank you. And I apologize again for having to come down twice. Anyone else like to speak? Yes, sir. Hello. Uh, I am here on as the designer of [snorts] 30 1543rd Street West. My name is Pat Mackey. I'm at 5200 Washburn Avenue South in in Minneapolis. Mhm. >> Um here speaking uh in favor of uh item six uh uh variance request to reduce the increased front yard on at uh 315 44 43rd Street West. Uh good evening members of the board. Thank you for your time. We are requesting this variance to allow the homeowners to build a seasonable seasonal screened front porch. This is in our mind a mod modest and reasonable request. Theirs is the only house on the block without a porch and the proposed porch would help the home fit more closely with the established character of the block. A front porch is how is part of how neighbors interact in Minneapolis, especially on warm summer evenings like these. The practical difficulty comes from an unusual condition on this side of the block. The front yards are extraordinarily deep uh roughly two and a half to four times the standard depth for the for the uh designated zoning. Because of that, the front yard increased rule creates a self-reinforcing setback that makes it difficult to add the kind of porch that is otherwise common, almost ubiquitous in the neighborhood. An open porch of this side of an open porch of this size would be allowed without a variance. The variance is needed only because the homeowners would like screens mainly for mosquitoes and longer seasonal use and because they do not want to flaunt the the uh the regulation. >> Sir, I I have just been advised that um I I' I've made an error. Um, you can make general comments, but specific presentation comments >> can't be made because the staff member >> Very good. >> Hasn't made their presentation. So, if you have some general comments, >> that's it. I just thought >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thanks for coming down. >> Not at all. >> And I apologize for that error. >> Understandable. Thank you. >> Okay. Given that, does anybody else want to say anything? Yes. >> Hi there. My name is Kate Getsy. I also live at 4327 Blaze Avenue >> and I'm here in opposition of the addition of 4331. >> Uh wanted to just make two brief comments. >> Yeah. Uh, one, um, board member Hutchkins, I noted your point that all additions create light issues on property, and that's well taken. I wanted to note that by our estimation, this will mean only 2 hours of light on our property um, in the wintertime in the back of our house. It's also our living quarters in the house. It's our kitchen and we only have two windows on that side. This would fully block one of those windows. Um, so I'd like to ask if the we could also consider additions that look at other options. Um, particularly looking at southern [snorts] side of the back of the house options where the where the home is not nearly as close to the property line as it is on our side. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you for your testimony. Anyone else? Okay. I'm going to close the public hearing. Um, as I said, you are invited back to speak uh in more detail. Uh, and again, I want to give my uh deep apologies for having you have to come down, which is no easy feat, um, and give testimony twice for some of you. And um we look forward to having quorum next time and having a meeting where we can conduct business. So yes, ma'am. >> You said that this has been deferred like twice. Is getting quorum a common issue that you've been having? >> Uh I'm glad you asked that. I have [laughter] I've served on this board for 21 years. >> Uhuh. uh which you can tell from my gray hair. And uh we had one uh meeting that didn't have quorum and that was the last one and this is the second one out of 21 years and we meet every two weeks. >> Wow. >> Okay. >> Say that again. >> It's been a turbulent time in Minneapolis. It's just Sir, you had a question? >> Yeah, I was just I was just curious. Uh, so if the next meeting is in three weeks, then I assume >> Yeah, because of July 4th. >> Is there any any reason any way that there can be a >> Mr. [clears throat] Chair and I I appreciate the the comment. We have to end our broadcast if we're not holding a meeting. If you'd like to ask questions of members, if you ask them after the meeting is done for clarifications or from staff, you can do that. staff specifically. >> I'll just I you started that I want to finish with your question and take that under advisement. It's the July 4th week and so council doesn't meet. Our calendar follows the council calendar. That's why. Okay. Um we didn't we closed the public hearing. We didn't start a meeting. So, we can't end one. I'll just wish everyone a uh safe ride home and a happy weekend. Thanks.