[0:15] [ GAVEL ].

[0:17] >> GOOD AFTERNOON. THIS IS

[0:20] THE JUNE 26, 2025ZONING BOARD OF

[0:22] ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING. MY

[0:23] NAME IS MATT PERRY, I'M CHAIR OF

[0:25] THE BOARD. I WILL NOW CALL THIS

[0:28] MEETING TO ORDER AND ASK THE

[0:30] CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL SO THAT

[0:32] WE MAY VERIFY THE PRESENCE OF

[0:35] QUORUM.

[0:35] >> BOARD MEMBER CALLAHAN.

[0:37] >> PRESENT.

[0:39] >> EICHOLZ.

[0:40] >> HERE.

[0:40] >> GRANS KORSH.

[0:42] >> HERE.

[0:43] >> HUTCHENS IS ABSENT. INGRAHAM.

[0:45] >> AYE.

[0:46] >> PERRY.

[0:48] >> HERE.

[0:49] >> SMRIKAROVA.

[0:50] >> HERE.

[0:50] >> WANG.

[0:51] >> HERE.

[0:52] >> WE HAVE SEVEN MEMBERS

[0:53] PRESENT.

[0:53] >> LET THE RECORD SHOW WE HAVE

[0:55] QUORUM. WITH THAT, WE'LL PROCEED

[0:56] TO OUR AGENDA. A COPY OF WHICH

[1:00] WAS POSTED FOR PUBLIC ACCESS TO

[1:03] THE CITY'S LEGISLATIVE

[1:08] MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AVAILABLE AT

[1:10] LIMS.MINNEAPOLISMN.GOV, IS THERE

[1:10] A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS AGENDA?

[1:12] >> SO MOVED.

[1:13] >> IS THERE A SECOND?

[1:15] >> SECOND.

[1:15] >> IT'S MOVED AND SECONDED. IS

[1:17] THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE

[1:19] MOTION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN

[1:20] FAVOR OF THE MOTION INDICATE BY

[1:23] SAYING AYE.

[1:23] >> AYE.

[1:23] >> ANY AGAINST?

[1:26] >> --

[1:27] >> OKAY.

[1:28] >> IS THERE ANYONE WHO IS

[1:30] AGAINST? HEARING NONE. AND WITH

[1:32] THAT, THE MOTION PASSES. AND WE

[1:36] HAVE AN APPROVED AGENDA. I

[1:38] BELIEVE ALL THE BOARD MEMBERS

[1:40] HAVE SEEN A COPY OF THE MINUTES

[1:42] FROM THE JUNE 12, 2025, ZONING

[1:44] BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING. IS

[1:45] THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE?

[1:46] >> SO MOVED.

[1:47] >> SECOND.

[1:47] >> IT'S MOVED AND SECONDED. IS

[1:49] THERE ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING

[1:52] NONE, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION

[1:55] INDICATE BY SAYING AYE.

[1:56] >> AYE.

[1:57] >> ANY AGAINST INDICATE BY

[2:00] SAYING NAY. ANY ABSTENTIONS?

[2:03] >> ABSTAIN ON THIS ONE.

[2:05] >> OKAY. SO WE HAVE ONE

[2:11] ABSTENTION. WITH THAT, THE

[2:13] MOTION PASSES. THE MINUTES ARE

[2:13] APPROVED. AND SO SOME GENERAL

[2:27] INSTRUCTIONS. A REMINDER TO

[2:28] APPLICANTS AND OTHERS IF YOU'RE

[2:29] GOING TO SPEAK AT THE PUBLIC

[2:32] HEARING, PLEASE SIGN IN ON THE

[2:34] SHEET AVAILABLE FROM THE CLERK

[2:35] AND SPEAK CLEARLY INTO THE

[2:37] MICROPHONE. IF YOU HAVE NOT

[2:38] SIGNED IN, YOU CAN DO SO ON YOUR

[2:40] WAY OUT. ALSO TO APPLICANTS AND

[2:42] OTHERS, PLEASE CONTACT STAFF

[2:44] AFTER THE HEARING WITH ANY

[2:45] QUESTIONS REGARDING YOUR

[2:49] PROJECTS. I WILL READ THE AGENDA

[2:52] NUMBER ADDRESS OF THE PROJECT

[2:54] AND STATE WHETHER IT'S SLATED

[2:55] FOR CONSENT, CONTINUANCE,

[3:00] WITHDRAW, CONCERN OR DISCUSSION.

[3:02] LET'S LOOK AT THE RECOMMENDED

[3:03] DISPOSITION OF OUR ITEMS. WE

[3:05] HAVE ONE LAND USE REQUEST AGENDA

[3:09] ITEM TODAY. IT'S 5344 YORK

[3:12] AVENUE SOUTH, AGENDA ITEM 4.

[3:15] STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THIS ITEM

[3:17] FOR CONSENT. IS THERE ANYONE

[3:18] HERE TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS ITEM?

[3:22] DO ANY BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY

[3:23] QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS ITEM?

[3:26] >> BOARD MEMBER PERRY, I HAVE

[3:28] TWO QUESTIONS OF CLARIFICATION

[3:29] FOR STAFF.

[3:29] >> SURE.

[3:31] >> IN THE STAFF REPORT, ONE OF

[3:33] THE FINDING, ADDITIONAL FINDINGS

[3:35] FOR THE SHORELAND OVERVIEW

[3:38] DISTRICT INCLUDE VISIBILITY OF

[3:40] THE WATERWAY I BELIEVE FROM THE

[3:43] SITE. AND THEN IN THE STAFF

[3:44] REPORT IT SAID THAT THERE WERE

[3:46] NO IMPACTS ON VISIBILITY. ONE OF

[3:48] THE PUBLIC COMMENT LETTERS THAT

[3:49] WAS ATTACHED WITH THE REPORT DID

[3:52] NOTE THAT THERE WERE VISIBILITY

[3:54] IMPACTS DUE TO THE PROPOSED

[3:56] WORK. CAN YOU JUST ADD SOME

[3:58] POINT OF CLARIFICATION. THERE

[4:00] WEREN'T ANY PHOTOS INCLUDED IN

[4:01] THE REPORT SO IT'S HARD TO KNOW

[4:04] WHETHER THAT'S SOMETHING TO

[4:06] CONSIDER.

[4:06] >> SURE. CHAIR PERRY, BOARD

[4:09] MEMBER, THE ADDITIONAL FINDING

[4:15] FOR THAT SPECIFIC VARIANCE

[4:17] REQUEST RELATES TO VISIBILITY

[4:19] FROM THE WATERWAYS. IF I

[4:22] REMEMBER CORRECTLY, THE COMMENTS

[4:25] SUBMITTED WERE IN REFERENCE TO

[4:27] THE VISIBILITY FROM THEIR

[4:27] PROPERTY TO THE WATERWAYS.

[4:29] >> I BELIEVE THE LETTER

[4:32] REFERENCED VISIBILITY BOTH WAYS.

[4:33] BOTH FROM THE WATERWAY TO

[4:37] UPWARDS IN TERMS OF SPECIFICALLY

[4:39] LIKE THAT THE PROPOSED WORK ON

[4:42] THE NORTHERN OR SOUTHERN -- THE

[4:44] EDGE OF WHERE IT MEETS THE CREEK

[4:46] WOULD IMPACT BECAUSE YOU WOULD

[4:47] SEE THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT THEN

[4:48] FROM THE CREEK.

[4:51] >> YES. THANK YOU. CHAIR PERRY,

[4:53] BOARD MEMBER, THE STAFF'S

[4:56] POSITION ON THAT WAS THE

[4:59] VISIBILITY FROM THE CREEK ISN'T

[5:00] INCREASED BY THE NEW

[5:01] DEVELOPMENT. THERE'S ALREADY AN

[5:02] EXISTING TWO-STORY STRUCTURE ON

[5:04] THE PROPERTY. SO IT DOESN'T --

[5:07] THE ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE IS

[5:10] PERMITTED ON THE PROPERTY. IT

[5:11] DOESN'T EXCEED THE MAXIMUM LOT

[5:14] COVERAGE OR IMPERVIOUS SURFACE

[5:18] REQUIREMENTS. IT'S NOT EXCEEDING

[5:20] MAXIMUM HEIGHT. SO IT WOULD BE

[5:22] PERMITTED NOTWITHSTANDING THE

[5:27] SHORELINE REQUIREMENT. SO WE

[5:29] FIND THAT'S MET. THERE'S NOT --

[5:31] IT'S NOT CONFLICTING WITH THE

[5:33] DEVELOPMENT OF THE SURROUNDING

[5:34] AREA.

[5:39] >> CHAIR, BOARD MEMBER.

[5:40] >> YES.

[5:40] >> IF I COULD ADD ON TO THAT A

[5:42] LITTLE BIT.

[5:43] >> PLEASE.

[5:44] >> THERE'S ALREADY DEVELOPMENT

[5:45] IN THIS AREA THAT IS VISIBLE

[5:46] FROM THE WATERWAY. THIS NEW

[5:49] STRUCTURE WOULD NOT BE ANY MORE

[5:51] VISIBLE THAN ANY OF THE OTHER

[5:54] STRUCTURES. THERE WILL BE NO

[5:56] CHANGE WHATSOEVER BUT THAT IT'S

[5:57] NOT GOING TO BE MORE IMPACTFUL,

[6:01] YOU KNOW, VISIBLE FEATURE THAN

[6:03] THE EXISTING SURROUNDING

[6:04] DEVELOPMENT.

[6:04] >> OKAY. THANK YOU. CAN I ASK

[6:08] JUST A GENERAL QUESTION ABOUT

[6:11] THE SHORELAND OVERLAY DISTRICT.

[6:12] ONE OF THE COMMENTS IN THE STAFF

[6:14] REPORT TALKED ABOUT THAT THIS

[6:16] ISN'T IN VIOLATION OF THE

[6:20] IMPERVIOUS SURFACE VIOLATION.

[6:20] I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THE OVERALL

[6:22] DECISION OF THE ZONING CODE OF

[6:25] WHY THERE'S NOT SEPARATE

[6:27] PROVISIONS FOR PROPERTIES WITHIN

[6:29] THE SHORELAND OVERLAY DISTRICT

[6:30] GIVEN THAT, YOU KNOW, IMPERVIOUS

[6:34] SURFACE CAN OFTEN LEAD TO MORE

[6:36] RUNOFF AND PROBLEMS WITH

[6:38] EROSION. TWO THINGS THAT THIS

[6:40] OVERLAY DISTRICT IS CONCERNED

[6:41] ABOUT. SO I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT

[6:42] THAT IN TERMS OF JUST A BROADER

[6:45] ZONING DISCUSSION OR IF THAT'S

[6:49] BEEN CONSIDERED.

[6:49] >> I WILL JUMP IN ON THAT AGAIN,

[6:51] IF THAT'S ALL RIGHT, CHAIR. THE

[6:53] CITY'S REQUIREMENTS FOR THE

[6:56] SHORELAND OVERLAY DISTRICT WERE

[6:57] ESTABLISHED BY THE STATE OF

[6:58] MINNESOTA. OUR ORDINANCE IS

[7:01] BASED ON STATE STATUTE AND IS IN

[7:03] COMPLIANCE WITH THAT. SO WE HAVE

[7:05] CHOSEN NOT TO HAVE A MORE

[7:07] RESTRICTIVE STANDARD THAN

[7:08] REQUIRED BY STATE ORDINANCE.

[7:09] >> GREAT. THANK YOU.

[7:11] >> ANY OTHER -- DOES THAT

[7:12] ADDRESS THE QUESTIONS?

[7:13] >> YES. THANK YOU.

[7:14] >> OKAY. GREAT. DOES ANYBODY

[7:17] ELSE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF

[7:19] STAFF WHILE WE HAVE MR. CARRIER

[7:21] UP? OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THERE

[7:29] WAS NO ONE WHO WANTED TO SPEAK

[7:31] AGAINST THIS ITEM. SO LET -- AND

[7:34] THAT IS OUR ONLY LAND USE ITEM.

[7:36] SO LET'S REVIEW THE ITEMS ON THE

[7:38] AGENDA FOR CONSENT. THEY ARE

[7:40] ITEM NUMBER 4. IS THERE A MOTION

[7:43] TO ADOPT THIS ITEM ON CONSENT.

[7:47] >> SO MOVED.

[7:47] >> IS THERE A SECOND?

[7:48] >> SECOND.

[7:49] >> IT'S MOVED AND SECONDED. ALL

[7:53] IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION INDICATE

[7:55] BY SAYING AYE.

[7:57] >> AYE.

[7:59] >> ANY NAYS? ANY ABSTENTIONS?

[8:03] THAT PASSES. YOUR LAND USE

[8:04] REQUEST IS APPROVED. GOOD LUCK

[8:06] WITH YOUR PROJECT AND THANKS FOR

[8:08] COMING DOWNTOWN.

[8:09] >> THANK YOU.

[8:09] >> OKAY. ARE THERE ANY UPDATES?

[8:13] >> CHAIR PERRY, MEMBERS OF THE

[8:15] BOARD, I WILL UPDATE YOU ON TWO

[8:17] ITEMS THAT WERE HEARD AT YOUR

[8:20] JUNE 12TH HEARING WHICH HAVE

[8:22] BEEN APPEALED.

[8:23] THE FIRST IS FOR 4640 17th

[8:25] AVENUE SOUTH. THIS WAS A SETBACK

[8:28] VARIANCE REQUESTED TO ALLOW

[8:31] ARTIFICIAL TURF FOR A SCHOOL.

[8:32] THAT ITEM HAS BEEN APPEALED. THE

[8:36] OTHER WAS EDMUND BOULEVARD. THAT

[8:39] ITEM HAS ALSO BEEN APPEALED.

[8:40] THOSE WILL GO TO THE JULY 15TH

[8:45] BHZ HEARING.

[8:45] >> JULY 15TH. OKAY. ANY

[8:48] QUESTIONS OF MR. VERCODA? I SEE

[8:51] NONE. THANKS FOR THOSE UPDATES.

[8:52] WITH THAT, WE'VE COMPLETED ALL

[8:54] THE ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA FOR THIS

[8:57] MEETING. OUR NEXT MEETING IS

[9:01] JULY 17TH, 2025. AND I'D

[9:02] ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN.

[9:04] >> SO MOVED.

[9:04] >> SECOND.

[9:05] >> SO MOVED AND SECONDED. ALL IN

[9:07] FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE.

[9:09] >> AYE.

[9:09] >> WE ARE ADJOURNED.

[9:12] [ GAVEL ]