2026-10-13 - Zoning Board of Appeals

01:38Appeals meeting is coming to order.

01:41I will give you the

01:47wrong now it's working.

01:50The commissioners on my far right is

01:53David. My near right is Greg. My far

01:58left is Paul and my near left is Eric

02:02and I am Robert Shepard, the chairwoman.

02:08[clears throat]

02:09Item C1,

02:12381 Bishop Avenue, west side of Street,

02:16600 feet south of Barnum Avenue, seeking

02:18a certificate of location approval

02:21pursuant to section 11.120

02:24to establish a motor vehicle upholstery

02:27workshop within a former tire storage

02:29building in the industrial zone.

02:41I don't see the applicant.

02:51>> 381 Bishop Avenue.

02:54381 Bishop Avenue.

03:03He's not He didn't come.

03:1039th district.

03:13We went over and tooured the building

03:17and it is in such bad condition. It's

03:20out of compliance. The fire marshals

03:25put a sticker on it for, you know, until

03:27they get this work done.

03:30Um, so I'm asking you all not to approve

03:32it because it's it's not even operable

03:37for what they want to use. And I took a

03:39tour with Councilwoman Martinez

03:42uh of the Bishop Avenue

03:45>> and um the fire marshals, all of them

03:48gave it a thumb down

03:52>> and she's here so she can also speak.

03:54But um from my understanding

03:58the fire marshalss had closed it down

04:02until there is a lot of work that has to

04:04be done.

04:07>> I actually sent some documentations over

04:10to Nick so that he can send it to you

04:12all. So yeah. Yeah. So um they're still

04:17in operation. I stopped by there this

04:19weekend. In fact, I stopped by there

04:21yesterday. They had a full house there

04:23still operating. So, it's a never mind

04:25to them whether zoning approves them or

04:26not. So, I see that they didn't show up

04:29today. So,

04:31um it's left into your hands. So,

04:36yep. But thank you all. There isn't

04:38anything else. The proof is in the

04:39pudding of their violations. So, fire

04:42marshall has shut them down. Sean Massie

04:45shut them down. Um Sergeant Kerry has

04:47been over there towing all the cars that

04:49they've had parked over there with uh no

04:51license plates. Um,

04:55so

04:57guess you all have to do what you have

04:58to do. Thank you. Appreciate you all.

05:02>> You're welcome.

05:11>> Maybe just speak into the record that

05:13you're giving, you know, a chance for

05:15the applicant to rebut and if they're

05:17not here.

05:20>> 381 Bishop Avenue. 381 Bishop Avenue. I

05:24gave you time to rebuttal.

05:28All right,

05:30matters closed.

05:35Second item on the agenda is C2, 650 and

05:39670 Nolton Street, east side of the

05:41street, 72.28

05:44ft south of Stillman Street, seeking a

05:47variance of section 3.170.8

05:508 to legalize the permanent placement of

05:53two storage containers exceeding the

05:55maximum allowed area of 180 square ft in

05:59the RX1 zone.

06:02Chairman, members of the commission, my

06:03name is Raymond Rizzio. I'm happy to be

06:05before you tonight um with regard to 650

06:08and 670 Nolton Street. This is a

06:10variance and request that's born

06:12strictly out of your regulations. This

06:15is a very old building. It's over 50

06:16years old. It used to be in an

06:18industrial zone. The zones were changed

06:20to an RX1 zone. Under your current code

06:23is what's called a workshop type

06:25building. Workshop type buildings are

06:28not permitted in an RX1 zone. What's

06:31interesting though, in a workshop type

06:34building, you're permitted outdoor

06:36storage. So you could in effect store

06:39things outside, but you can't store them

06:43in a container. It's this is one of

06:45those things because of the change of

06:47zone, because of all the pre-existing

06:48conditions, you end up in a situation

06:50where everything just doesn't mix and

06:53you have so for example in an RX zone,

06:56you're permitted to have a commercial

06:59general type building, a small building,

07:01general building type, a civic building

07:04type, and a commercial building type.

07:07And in all those buildings, you're

07:09permitted to have temporary you're

07:10admitted to have you're permitted to

07:12have what would be storage containers

07:15outside the building, but you're not

07:17permitted

07:19outdoor storage. In this instance, we

07:21have a situation where we have a

07:23building

07:24workshop type which is pre-existing

07:27non-conforming, but in a workshop type

07:29building, we're permitted to actually

07:31store things outside. Our client would

07:34like to store his these things in these

07:38two containers. Um the other issue is

07:41and I'll as I take you through it, these

07:43are basically the containers.

07:46They're first of all be they're screened

07:48from the road. These are two containers.

07:58They are screened from the road at night

08:00and whenever property's closed for

08:02business. One of the big issues we have

08:04with the property is if we were to build

08:06an addition we would lose basically our

08:09parking and the ability to have any

08:11parking on the site. My client has been

08:13there for a number of years. He

08:15basically deals with he is a warehouse

08:18and air facility for local decorators.

08:21decorator has furniture.

08:24Work with him and get

08:27work with him. He's he's very talented

08:29and does very well. Um there's there is

08:33one house that's to the side of it. Um

08:36on the corner, as you can see, there's a

08:38large fence that's been erected there.

08:40Um either you look at the property, you

08:44will see that is very well

08:48very well screened from the residential

08:50property. And honestly, what I think

08:52would be worse is if you had outdoor

08:54storage.

08:56So this has the property does not the

08:59containers do not sit within the

09:00setbacks as I'll show you in the

09:04site plan.

09:05The site plan as you can see

09:08storage containers are second

09:13oriented for you. The storage containers

09:17sit

09:22They sit here and they sit sit over

09:26here. Yes. Right. They're close to the

09:28build. One's close to the building.

09:32Here it is.

09:42storage containers sit

09:48as you can see

09:51one right next to the building screened

09:54the other one next to is not next to the

09:56building he has this lot so you saw all

09:58those cars parked and he uses this extra

09:59additional lot for parking

10:02so

10:04we

10:05we're in a quandry where we're in an RX1

10:09zone

10:10four building types that are permitted

10:12in the zone allow this type of storage

10:16but they don't allow outdoor storage.

10:18Worktop workshop type building is not

10:21allowed in this

10:23permits outdoor storage but not

10:27contained storage. Um therefore our hard

10:31and this is these this was formerly an

10:32industrial zone. You go up and down the

10:35street, it's an industrial. It's Milton

10:38Street, especially south of here, it's

10:40pretty much all industrial.

10:42Go throughout the neighborhood and if

10:44you drive up and down neighborhood,

10:47you'll see these containers

10:49pretty much everywhere. Um that's just a

10:52few few of them, but none of them

10:54actually, believe it or not, as well

10:56screened as ours or in as good a

10:58condition as the ones that we have. Um

11:02so the two variants we have

11:04you would be entitled to one

11:07storage container.

11:09They're supposed to be um I think let me

11:12give you the number

11:15180 ft square feet. Give me one second.

11:19I'm sorry. 180 square feet. Um our one

11:23of our cons is 160 square feet and the

11:26other one is 200 I think 60. So there's

11:30a longer one and a shorter one.

11:40So requested variance is

11:43we'd like to have these basically be

11:45allowed to store two storage containers

11:48storage containers and one of the

11:50storage containers is larger than is

11:51permitted and our hardship is clear.

11:54It's you have a pre-existing property a

11:58non-conforming property. If we were to

12:00build an addition, your regulations

12:03strictly prohibit expanding

12:07non-conforming buildings, which is what

12:09we would have to do in this instance.

12:12And we have the the containers are far

12:14enough away from the neighboring

12:16property. There's actually a whole lot

12:17in between and they're well screened at

12:20night when the business.

12:23That's our argument. Right. This is a

12:25this is a variance that's driven out of

12:27the change in the regulations, not out

12:30of any financial reasons or any other

12:32type of reasons. It's an industrially

12:35zoned property. They changed the zone

12:37when they did the zone changes and they

12:39put an RX which which makes it kind of

12:41residential, which it never has and

12:43never will be.

12:45um and allows in the four type of

12:48buildings in the zone permit this type

12:49of storage,

12:51but they don't permit it this type of

12:53building. And in this type of building,

12:55what's crazy is we're permitted to put

12:57outdoor storage. So, he could he could

13:00pile material out there and there in a

13:03workshop building and there would be no

13:04issue with that. And I think it's far

13:07better to we would agree to a condition

13:09that would prohibit any other outdoor

13:11storage except for the two storage

13:13containers. So you you take away the if

13:16he pulls these out, you know, he has the

13:18right or somebody down the future would

13:20have the right to store material

13:22outside, which I think would be less in

13:25keeping with the regulations and the uh

13:28master plan of development, which is

13:30basically to try and clean these

13:31industrial properties up

13:35that I I I know it's kind of kind of

13:37confusing because these regs, we went

13:39from a very simple regulation code, I

13:42don't know if a lot of you remember

13:43that, which is this was an industrial.

13:46This is what your uses are. This is what

13:48you can do to now having zones and then

13:51building types within those zones which

13:54each have all different types of

13:56permitted uses.

13:58Had this been an industrial zone and

14:00which is what it should be,

14:03this wouldn't I don't think this would

14:04be an issue at all. And and it's

14:07historically been from this corner all

14:09the way down. You look it's industrial

14:11all the way down.

14:16permission to leave those existing

14:18containers in place, not to build

14:20permanent buildings in their place or

14:22anything.

14:22>> Correct.

14:23>> Okay.

14:23>> Right.

14:30>> 2000.

14:32>> What's that?

14:32>> January 1st2.

14:34>> 22.

14:35>> Yeah.

14:36>> Yeah. Everybody was asleep during CO and

14:37we let these things go through.

14:40>> And the containers have been there since

14:41then.

14:44probably he had other containers there

14:46that he cleaned up and put new ones

14:47there. Yeah.

14:50>> The issue is then when you go to

14:51different switch building types versus

14:53before that there's not a problem,

14:55>> right?

14:56>> Industrial property. Now you change the

14:57zone, change the building type, the

14:58building type's not permitted.

15:00>> Nick says, "Well, you know, my hands are

15:02tied. Your building type doesn't permit

15:04it. So you either go for a change of

15:06zone, but the board that they don't they

15:08don't want to you know they're trying to

15:11keep the

15:13I frankly I think the commission changed

15:15a lot of zones to RX which were

15:18historically res commercial industrial

15:20will always be industrial.

15:24>> Do you know what's in the containers?

15:26>> Yes, I was in there today and inspected

15:28it myself. There is um some furniture.

15:31There is some equipment like he like the

15:34uh snowb blower, leaf blower, um

15:37equipment that would use to service the

15:38property that's not left outside and

15:41frankly um

15:44you

15:45anything valuable you really don't want

15:47to be storing outside. Additionally, you

15:49know, also um you're really looking for

15:52secure storage. So that's the crazy

15:54thing is we can we can store materials

15:57or inventory outside but we can't store

16:00them in safe containers.

16:02>> And we would agree to a condition that

16:03there be no no storage no any kind of

16:07outdoor storage other than these what

16:09would be contained in these two

16:10containers.

16:13So we're kind of taking away something

16:14we're permitted. But it doesn't make any

16:16sense anyway to have anything that's

16:19valuable stored outside. So, it's it's

16:22it's really this once you change the

16:25zone, change the regulations and then we

16:27have a it's been always my beef. Those

16:30the regulations are fabulous for a town

16:32in Iowa that's about to be built that's

16:34flat and nice grids and everything else.

16:37But in a city that's 99.9%

16:39developed to turn all a lot of it

16:44pre-existing non-conforming just makes

16:46us spend a lot of time in front of you

16:48guys.

16:52two

16:53>> two containers three

16:54>> two

16:57existing I've showed pictures of them

16:59they're

16:59>> well in the picture

17:01>> and I I I go by there every day

17:03>> y

17:04>> in the picture you show one container

17:08and you show one on the other uh

17:10>> other end but when you're going in there

17:13it looks like there's two side by side

17:16right smack in the middle and then the

17:17cars are parked on the left What happens

17:19is he has his delivery days. So the

17:24trucks come in between the containers

17:26and then delivery base.

17:29So

17:31trucks come

17:45the same.

17:47>> Okay. I I

17:49Like I said, I drive by there. I don't

17:51see this container, but I do see it

17:54looks like two containers

17:56side by side.

17:57>> No, there's only one.

17:58>> Okay.

17:59>> There's one. And then the truck goes in

18:01between.

18:07>> Yeah. Okay. So, maybe two. Okay.

18:13>> Does that make sense?

18:14>> Yeah. Makes

18:15>> I probably should have given you a

18:16better head on, but

18:19This is the same truck facing the

18:21building. This is on the right side of

18:22the building against the

18:24>> That's This is the one you don't see.

18:26>> This is the loading B. You don't You

18:28don't really see this.

18:29>> Yeah, this is the one you don't see.

18:30>> I frankly passed the property before I

18:33really saw anything. It's the

18:36room to move this over.

18:37>> Yeah, cuz it's on the curve. So,

18:39>> yeah, exactly.

18:42>> Let's see. Let's see. It's So, those are

18:45three. Okay.

18:50that make does it make sense now?

18:51>> Yeah.

18:55>> And as I said, they're screened when

18:57when when when uh

19:01at night and early mornings.

19:09It it's look these these qu these things

19:11are never easy but the regulations are

19:15extremely difficult on non-conforming

19:18properties. So you have non-conforming

19:19building type

19:22the building type allows something which

19:23I think is worse which is outdoor

19:25storage

19:27versus having these storage in

19:28containers and we'll agree to a

19:31condition that there'll be no out

19:32outdoor storage except for in these

19:34containers. So you don't have to, you

19:36know, this way at least everything

19:38that's on the site is contained.

19:43>> Storage that is allowed.

19:46>> No, it's it's a with workshop building

19:49type. The the idea is that you know

19:50you're a workshop building, you're going

19:52to put you're put your inventory and

19:54stuff outside. For example, if you

19:56wanted if you were a tile guy or a um

20:01woodworking shop, you'd be able to store

20:04your your some you'd be able to store

20:05your inventory.

20:06>> You could tile it as high as you wanted

20:07>> to pallets. No, there's I'm sure there's

20:09height restrictions and

20:10>> but in the end they have it has to be

20:13screened, but it's permitted outside.

20:28respectfully request the commission

20:30grant this application. This is a

20:32variance that's born out of the

20:34regulations and born out of pre-existing

20:35nonconformity to a building that has

20:38historically been industrial.

20:47>> Is there anybody in favor?

20:52Is there anybody that oppose?

21:04Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. My

21:06name is Marianes Vaj. I reside at 561

21:10Brook Street and I am the council member

21:14of that district where these two storage

21:20containers

21:21is being proposed. I have to be honest

21:24with you, I didn't get a chance to look

21:28at the um what this is all about. If I

21:32were before you and say let's not do

21:37this um because of X Y and Z, I'll be

21:40lying to you. But I again I need to be

21:43honest. Um not know what these

21:46containers will contain

21:49the mere fact that it is saying that it

21:52is exceeding

21:55the maximum allowed

21:59questions.

22:01Why and why? If

22:04these if if permission is seek if

22:08someone is seeking a variance,

22:11why would you put two containers that

22:15exceed

22:17the maximum allowed? The other thing

22:19that I would like to share with you is

22:21not too long ago

22:24uh one of uh of a a a known individual

22:28who's seeking to expand her daycare

22:31center to the area and I believe I don't

22:36know if she came before you just yet but

22:39she wanted to expand her daycare and

22:43it's about maybe a block and a half from

22:46from where this is being proposed and my

22:50answer to her was do not do it. And now

22:55as I see here again

22:58containers being proposed in an area and

23:03it's larger than expected. I just hope

23:06that you give our council uh Neves and

23:10myself time to look at this before you

23:14give this approval please.

23:22Why you tell your friend not to expand

23:25her um daycare center?

23:30>> Not until that area gets um

23:34paid attention to because again there's

23:38a lot of illegal activities going on

23:41there. Um also it's just I felt that if

23:47If I had a child, which I mean I do have

23:50children, but I would not allow

23:54for my grandkids

23:56to attend a daycare where I feel that

24:01there's attention must be brought to

24:05that area and clear certain things out

24:09of the area before a daycare can be

24:13proposed.

24:17Thank you.

24:20>> Rebuttal.

24:22>> I'm not really sure there's much to

24:23rebut. Well, I will highlight what the

24:25council person said is that security is

24:27of an utmost concern. Obviously, if

24:30that's a concern of the council person,

24:32it's a concern of us as why we would not

24:34want to have outdoor storage.

24:36It's permitted. We think these two

24:40containers with the condition that there

24:42be no other outdoor storage except as

24:44contained in this in these containers.

24:46I've gone for the record. I've walked in

24:48the containers today. There is he's a

24:51furniture. It's it's either furniture or

24:55um equipment that's to be used in

24:57upkeeping the property. Um this really

25:00makes makes a lot of sense. It's the

25:03variance is born out of the regulation.

25:05It's born out of the non-conforming. If

25:06we want to put an addition up, we can

25:08put an addition up. We can't put an

25:10addition up because the addition says

25:11you can't expand in non-conformity. So

25:13the workshop building ties our hands. We

25:16think this is the best solution. Adding

25:18the conditions so that you know that you

25:20don't that you're not going to end up

25:21with junk outside and that Nick would be

25:23able to enforce should anything else be

25:25store any other equipment or anything be

25:27stored outside that that would be a vi

25:29that would be that would be a violation.

25:30So we're we're I'm offering that up as a

25:33condition and I think that really clears

25:35everything up. It's well buffered as you

25:37can see the fencing from the homes.

25:40A testament to its buffering is that you

25:42thought there was only one there. Um

25:43there are two there, but it's be they're

25:46they're narrow and they're they're

25:47buffered from the street. So given the

25:50fact that they would this would be

25:51permitted in four other building types

25:53in this zone, but not permitted in the

25:58building type that isn't permitted in

26:00the zone. It's just it's it's it's a

26:03regulatory mess as relates to this

26:05property. So, it's not that this zone

26:07wouldn't permit

26:10outdoor this type of storage. It's the

26:12pro the fact that because this building

26:14type is non-conforming,

26:16it doesn't permit this type of storage.

26:19So for all those reasons I would respect

26:22this is this is clearly a variance

26:23that's born not first of all not

26:25self-created not b and not born out of

26:28uh it's born out of basically the uh the

26:31change in the regulations and the

26:33pre-existing non-conformity that exists

26:35on site. There's no variances that are

26:37required with regard to setback. There's

26:39no variances with regard to height and

26:41we're eliminating anything that would be

26:44with regard to um any other additional

26:46outdoor storage. you'll be able to

26:48contain, which is if you go up and down

26:50some of the properties on Nolton Street,

26:52they're not there's there's a ton of

26:54material out there. They're not properly

26:56screened. I [clears throat] showed you

26:56the pictures. This would be able to keep

26:59keep the property except for the

27:00vehicles that are parked there. It would

27:02keep the property in in a clean manner.

27:05For all those reasons, I respectfully

27:06request this commission grant this

27:08application, and I appreciate your time

27:09and patience.

27:12The councilwoman I think had an

27:15objection to the increase in size you're

27:17asking for.

27:18>> What's that?

27:19>> I think the council woman had an

27:21objection to the oversized container. So

27:24just take me through the two containers,

27:27how big they are.

27:29I think you said there's only one of

27:31them that is oversized.

27:33>> Correct.

27:33>> And it's oversized by

27:35>> No, stick with me. It's over It's

27:37oversized by 20 feet. It's 160 foot

27:41container.

27:42>> Let me get you the exact number.

27:58>> Yeah. One's uh 8 by 40 ft. So it's 320

28:02ft. The other one is only is 160 ft.

28:07>> But which one's out of compliance?

28:09What's that?

28:10>> Which one is the one that is bigger than

28:13it's supposed to be?

28:14>> Complant size is this business building

28:17here,

28:17>> which is how big?

28:18>> Which is 160.

28:21>> And how how much too big is it?

28:25>> How much? What?

28:26>> How much too big is it?

28:29>> This one would be basically this should

28:32be this would this is oversized. This is

28:34320

28:35>> and it should be 160.

28:36>> Okay.

28:38But once again,

28:41it it allows everything to be maintained

28:43in in a in a in a contained area.

28:46>> I just wanted to deal with what she was

28:48saying about size,

28:49>> right? And I and I don't think it'll

28:50have any it has any negative impact. And

28:52the fact that we get the condition to

28:54basically say now you got to keep your

28:56property clean and you can't store

28:58anything outside, I think outweighs the

29:00having the the larger the larger because

29:02otherwise he has the whole lot that he

29:03>> Yeah. You have the footprint to put it

29:04on.

29:05>> Yeah. So, we're limiting any kind of

29:07storage that we have to a contained

29:09area.

29:11Does that make sense? In other words,

29:15you take the you take the containers

29:16away and somebody else comes in, they

29:18can store pallets of bricks, everything

29:22else out there, and and they have the

29:23whole lot to use except for setback

29:26areas. This we're willing to give up

29:29outdoor storage in exchange for these

29:31two containers. So, we're limiting our

29:34basic storage amount to 480 square ft

29:37all contained. So, I think it's it's a

29:40it we're reducing the amount of outdoor

29:42storage on the property drastically from

29:44what is permitted under the regulations.

29:46Does that make sense?

29:47>> Yeah.

29:50>> But on here it says that you wanted to

29:52do it permanent, but I just asked you

29:54and you said no. So, is it

29:56>> these would not be temporary. These

29:58would be permanent but as I was with the

30:01condition of no outdoor storage

30:05as long which which to me is really you

30:09got they're screened they're outside the

30:11setbacks and you have the ability to

30:14make sure that nothing litters or

30:15dirties up that property. So you got

30:18parking in these two containers. It's

30:20probably the best you can do in a

30:22workshop type building versus having

30:26using the using whatever you want on the

30:27lot to store whatever materials you

30:29have.

30:31To me, the condition take the condition

30:33of no other outdoor storage to me is is

30:36of a great benefit for the city and the

30:39neighborhood because that when you take

30:41this pre-existing non-conforming

30:43building, that use to me is more

30:46detrimental than two very clean storage

30:49containers that are self that are

30:51contained and screened and buffered.

31:05They're already there.

31:06>> What's that?

31:07>> The containers. They're already there.

31:09There's items in the containers.

31:13>> And once again, you you said they're

31:15going to be permanent.

31:16>> What's that? He didn't I will tell you

31:18my client didn't realize that they were

31:20not until he heard from zoning that he's

31:23got to get permit from them. He thought

31:24he was in an industrial zone in the in

31:27these zones. He's a he he repairs

31:30furniture. He stores furniture. He

31:32doesn't read the zoning code. Came in

31:33and saw us and we filed uh Nick we we

31:37then we immediately filed for an

31:38application.

31:42It's as you can see as I trace as I take

31:45you through the regulations this is not

31:46something a labor and this code is very

31:50you've looked at the code. I mean, it's

31:52it's a very detailed cross-fitting code

31:56that um you know, he's got an industrial

31:58building. He sees containers up and down

32:01the street and um he didn't think it was

32:05going to be an issue. He thought it was

32:06better than storing stuff outside. And

32:08frankly, from a security purpose, he

32:09feels better having it stored in the

32:10containers.

32:15things will tend to walk off.

32:20>> I know, Chairman, you're wishing the

32:22young guy was here, right? A little

32:24quicker.

32:26>> I'd ask him the same questions, but I'll

32:28ask you.

32:31>> I I'd be happy to answer any. These are

32:33these are difficult things that

32:34unfortunately

32:36because we have very detailed

32:38regulations

32:40on non-conforming properties you folks

32:42are dealing with. But I think the

32:43condition of no other outdoor storage to

32:45me knowing that if this is an industrial

32:47building that your storage can be in a

32:50in a clean contain contained building

32:53outside the setbacks that are really

32:54buffered to me outweighs and and the

32:57fact of the matter is we'd have to be

32:58before if if we said okay well we're

33:02going to build an addition to the

33:03building. Now we lose parking spaces and

33:05we can't do it anyway without your

33:07consent because the workshop type

33:09building can't be workshop type

33:11buildings can't be expanded without a

33:12variance and regulations say

33:15nonconformity shall not be expanded.

33:18So I frankly have a better argument as

33:20to as to legitimacy of a variance versus

33:24come back before you and say we just

33:25want to expand it. We need more room.

33:29Is the maximum allowed area 180 square

33:32ft in this uh zone?

33:34>> What's that?

33:35>> Is the maximum allowed storage area

33:40180 square ft in this?

33:41>> So our variance we're asking for is to

33:43allow two versus one and to increase the

33:46size of one of them from 180 to 320.

33:56And

33:57if you're looking at it, I mean, because

34:00they're because they go back toward the

34:02property, they're against buildings. I

34:04mean, 18 180 or 320. I mean, you really

34:08to me, other than giving more, it gives

34:10more capacity, which I think, as I said,

34:13goes into the condition of no other

34:15outdoor storage. That is not a lot of

34:17storage, 480 square feet total for uh

34:21for a

34:23for a facility of this type.

34:27Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but um

34:30what the code allows is 180 square feet.

34:33>> What's that?

34:34>> The code allows 180 square ft and you're

34:37asking for 320 + 160 480

34:43480.

34:44>> We're asking for two. They're asking a

34:46container. A container can't be bigger

34:48than 180 ft. So, one of our containers

34:50is 160.

34:51>> Okay. Now we're asking for a second

34:53container.

34:54>> Is that allowed?

34:56>> Well, I could say what's that?

34:57>> Is that allowed?

34:59>> No, but

35:00>> the second container.

35:01>> What's that?

35:02>> The second container.

35:03>> No, but that's why we're seeking the

35:04variance.

35:05>> Okay.

35:08>> That's the variance is for the size and

35:10for the additional additional

35:14thing. But I'd be back here for one

35:16square foot of an additional building.

35:20And regulations are pretty

35:24pretty strong and state law is pretty

35:25strong on the fact that there's no uh

35:28expansion of pre-existing

35:29nonconformities.

35:31In this instance,

35:34any other building type, this is not a

35:36problem.

35:38An outdoor storage isn't a problem,

35:40which to me is more troublesome than two

35:42storage containers.

35:50I'd be happy to answer any other

35:51questions.

36:03>> Thank you.

36:07>> Hold on. Okay. Uh, do you want me to

36:09continue Pemrook now?

36:12>> Just in case anybody's in case anybody's

36:14here.

36:14>> Leave that open. 650 for now. Are you

36:16going to close it?

36:17>> No.

36:21>> The matter of 650 670 Nton Street is

36:24closed.

36:27>> Okay. We move on to uh item D1 on the

36:29agenda. Um 11:08 to 1110 Pemrook Street,

36:34south side of the street, northeast

36:36corner of Arctic Street.

36:40Uh seeking use variance of section

36:433.60.9 60.9

36:45to allow the construction of two

36:47additional apartments within the

36:49pre-existing mixeduse building which

36:52currently contains groundf flooror

36:54commercial space and eight residential

36:56units above in the NX2 zone.

37:00Sure,

37:01>> members of the commission, our firm was

37:02retained today. Um we'd like to continue

37:04this matter to the next hearing. I I

37:06think if we open it, we have time. So

37:08I'd like to open this matter

37:09respectfully continue it so we can make

37:11a presentation at your next hearing.

37:37Thank you.

37:42Okay,

37:43moving on. Um, item number one, 200

37:48Birmingham Street, north side of the

37:50street, 100 ft west of Wayne Street,

37:52seeking a variance of section 3.100.5

37:58to allow for parking in the front yard

38:00located in the N2 zone.

38:15>> [clears throat]

38:29>> Good evening,

38:31Nick. I don't think we submitted the

38:33green cards in the mail. If you don't

38:34have those,

38:44Good evening, members of the board. My

38:46name is attorney Josh Padra Cohen and

38:48Wolf PC, 11:15 Broad Street here in

38:51Bridgeport. Uh, appearing on behalf of

38:53the applicant, 290 Birmingham Street

38:55LLC, regarding the property located at

38:58290 Birmingham Street. Um, my client is

39:01actually in attendance here in the

39:02audience. Uh, the applicant respectfully

39:05requests a variance from section 3.100.5

39:08of the Bridgeport zoning regulations,

39:11which requires surface parking to be

39:12located no closer to the street side lot

39:15line than the principal building. Uh,

39:17the property is improved with new

39:19construction. This is actually an

39:21application after the fact, just to be

39:23clear. Uh, and I do have the drawings up

39:24here as well as a picture to accompany

39:26the current conditions. Um, as I said,

39:29it is it has been improved with new

39:30construction, specifically a two-story

39:32single family residence, house B type

39:35located in the N2 zone. Um, so obviously

39:39subject to the House B building type

39:40standards. The applicant recognizes

39:43those requirements and is seeking

39:44limited relief from the parking location

39:47restriction because of the unique

39:48physical conditions of this particular

39:50property. the property and the

39:52improvements are otherwise fully zoning

39:54zoning compliant but for this issue with

39:56the driveway so we're clear specifically

39:59the grade of the property um is

40:00significantly steep it becomes

40:02significantly steeper as you move

40:03towards the rear of the property and

40:05again that's that's depicted and

40:06illustrated um in the picture there um

40:09in addition to the steep slope there is

40:12ledge present in the area where the

40:13parking stall would otherwise need to be

40:15located uh these conditions

40:18substantially constrain the usable area

40:20of the

40:21um and essentially makes it impractable

40:23impracticable to locate the uh parking

40:25stall in line with the principal

40:27building in compliance with section

40:293100.5.

40:31Uh so the requested variance would

40:33essentially allow the parking stall to

40:35be located within the front yard area

40:37where you'll see it depicted in the uh

40:38picture there. Um in in addition to um

40:42excuse me um in addition to that, I just

40:45want to make sure I got a clear view

40:47here. Um,

40:50excuse me. Um, the request is

40:52essentially driven by the physical

40:53characteristics um that we indicated.

40:56Um, it originally was anticipated for it

40:59to be in line with the house. You see

41:01this here? I just want to make sure I

41:02call it out there. That's the parking

41:04stall. It's depicted here uh on the

41:06plans. Um, so instead of being in line

41:08here, it is shifted essentially um

41:10closer to the street as indicated.

41:13You'll see you'll see the significant

41:14slope. Um, but what you can't really see

41:16obviously because underground because

41:18there's significant ledge here. So, um

41:20the parking stall was to be located

41:22here. Um but obviously given the

41:24conditions, that's why it's located in

41:26the uh the front yard area. Um the

41:30applicant obviously could have done

41:31without the parking, right? I mean, the

41:33parking brakes do not require that. Um

41:35but in light of the emphasis on parking

41:36in the city and the fact that a lot of

41:38you know new developments uh do not have

41:40parking um you know given the state of

41:42the regulations and the fact that it's

41:43not required um he did make a point of

41:46um you know instituting and and uh and

41:49uh adding the driveway there. This also

41:51this also I think is a neighborhood

41:53where there are significant rentals um

41:55you know so there's a lot of bedrooms

41:56there's a lot of uh sacred heart kids

41:58you know etc. So, uh, he wanted to

42:00accommodate the parking even though it

42:02was not required obviously in the

42:03construction. That's when he ran into

42:05the issue. He could not locate the

42:06parking stall um where it was intended

42:09to be. Hence, you'll see on the asbuilt

42:11plan where it's located as well as the

42:13picture. Um, so the applicant's not

42:15asking the board to disregard the house

42:17be uh standards or the purpose of the N2

42:20zone. Um, he's just asking the board to

42:22recognize, you know, that steep grade um

42:24in the ledge, you know, which

42:25essentially created a practical

42:26difficulty in complying with um the

42:29parking location requirements. So again,

42:31to be clear, construction is complete.

42:33It's otherwise zoning compliant. Um he

42:35is a Mason by um by trade. So you'll

42:38see, you know, he kind of went above and

42:39beyond um you know, with the stonework,

42:41the concrete, etc. Um obviously

42:44financial hardship is not something that

42:46um can drive this. Um but, you know, it

42:47just is a fact on the background there

42:49that, you know, he did kind of go above

42:51and beyond um with those paper those

42:53paper stones, etc. So, um really this is

42:56just driven by the um you know the

42:58significant um steep grade there in the

43:00ledge. It's just not practical. It was

43:02impossible um for him to implement it

43:04there. He also had to put the UI meter

43:06there. It was supposed to be on the

43:07other side of the house, but that was

43:08required. Um and if you'll see the

43:10neighboring property there, um that's

43:13kind of in line with where that basement

43:15area is. It it just the layout makes it

43:18significantly different. So, his house

43:20is kind of lower. You'll see that

43:21basement area is kind of above where the

43:24is here on the first floor. Um so it's

43:26just impractical but again he wanted to

43:27try to implement the parking you know

43:29just given the characteristics of the

43:31layout of the property was just

43:32impractical. So um we're just seeking a

43:34variance um of that particular section

43:36of the regulation.

43:44>> Are there other properties along this

43:46street that park in the front yard?

43:51So, uh, what I did take note of, um, was

43:54actually the property in the middle. So,

43:56I'm not I I believe there was, but I

43:58didn't I didn't I'm not specific on the

44:01specific addresses. What I focused on

44:03was actually the property in between

44:05because if you'll see on the agenda,

44:06we're actually going to do this back

44:08toback essentially. So, my client

44:09purchased two lots, 290 and then um 310.

44:13So, it's the same exact property. The

44:14property in the middle has no um has no

44:17prop has no driveway probably for that

44:19issue. Um, so I can't speak to specific

44:21properties that have um, parking in the

44:24front yard, but I did take I did go out

44:25there. I did take pictures. I did note

44:27that the property in the middle of it

44:28uh, there was no parking probably for

44:31that reason. I do believe that that uh,

44:33the owner of that property is here

44:34tonight as well and we'll be speaking

44:52other properties

44:54that did have front yard parking out

44:57there, but I I was there two weeks ago,

45:00so I'm not 100% sure, but I drove a

45:03couple blocks and I believe there are

45:05just couldn't identify specific

45:06addresses, but I did see I did see that

45:08and that's probably just because it

45:09predates rags and those are all older

45:11homes. Um, so I I can I can say the

45:14same. I just can't identify specific

45:16addresses. That's all.

45:22>> So So like I said, the owner of the

45:24property in between, which we actually

45:26purchased from um has printed out

45:28driveways that are actually in the front

45:30yard, and I can I can approach I can

45:32hand that that's before

45:44So it is within the character of the

45:46neighborhood at least.

45:49>> Oh yeah.

45:54>> Okay.

46:21supposed to park in the back.

46:24>> So, they have to have a driveway to get

46:26back there.

46:35Yeah, this this particular property has

46:37a elevation problem.

46:40>> Yeah, but you can park there anyway.

46:42>> Yeah, they probably do. I'm so someone

46:44who did.

46:45>> No, I'm just saying everybody's just

46:47can't go this far back,

46:48>> right?

47:02Is there anybody in favor?

47:12My name is Marcia Medu. My address is

47:162989 Broadbridge Avenue in Stratford and

47:19I'm the owner of the house between those

47:22two houses, 300 Birmingham Street.

47:26I came I think I'm absolutely in favor

47:30to this driveway is I think is a first

47:33of all is a safety for the people who

47:37going to live in the house and for

47:40convenience and also because is is not

47:45changing the character of the street. As

47:48I print out, we have five consecutive

47:51houses with driveways in the front on

47:55the right side of him. So, it's going to

48:01maintain the character of the street and

48:04it's going to help. We have to remember

48:06even though I don't live on the house

48:09that I own, but I have tenants and I

48:12have to think about the safety, the

48:15convenience, if they have kids they have

48:18to

48:20go with stroller

48:23uh everything to the house and the same

48:25is with his house is he did a beautiful

48:28job

48:30beautiful job and it was absolutely

48:33impossible for him to go all the way to

48:35the back because it's only stones there

48:39I I had followed the whole process

48:42because my house is right in the middle

48:46so had machines breaking stone for two

48:49months consecutive

48:52to be where he could do. I think he did

48:55the best that he could do to improve the

48:58city and to bring those two beautiful

49:01houses to our community.

49:04Thank you.

49:05>> Where do the people who live in your

49:06house park?

49:08>> On the street.

49:10>> On the street?

49:11>> Yes.

49:12>> Is there a driveway on your property?

49:15>> Not yet.

49:16Because my house, I have the same

49:19problem, but my house was built on 19

49:24something all the way in the back.

49:28Unless I turned down the house, I cannot

49:32have a direct

49:34because that is no space. I only have

49:36five feet on each side.

49:40So, and that is something that I I'm

49:44feeling. I see my tenants feeling this

49:48huge problem because I had a tenant

49:52before with baby and they had to park on

49:57the street on his no day with stroller

50:00with everything

50:02and

50:04so is a most of all I think is something

50:08that provide more safety for our

50:24Is there anybody else for favor?

50:28Is there anybody that oppose?

50:38This is from

51:17He seems to be in favor of it.

51:20Okay. The matter of

51:23290 is closed.

51:33Item number two.

51:54So again, just for the record at least,

51:57um, attorney Josh Padrera, Cohen and

51:59Wolf, PC, 11:15 Broad Street in

52:01Bridgeport. Um, appearing on this matter

52:04on behalf of 300 Birmingham Street LLC,

52:08although for the property at 310

52:10Birmingham Street. Um so again this is

52:13identical um just a separate property um

52:16seeking a variance of section 3.100.5

52:19of the regulations which require surface

52:21parking to be located no closer to the

52:24street side lot line than the principal

52:25building. Um so this is exactly pretty

52:28much identical to the last application.

52:30Um twotory single family residence house

52:33B type located in the N2 zone and then

52:35obviously subject to the house B

52:37building type standards. Um, so just so

52:40you get an understanding of how this is

52:41laid out, we have 290. We have the woman

52:44who spoke in support of the application

52:45in the middle at 300. And then this

52:48property is um 310. So you'll see the

52:50driveway on the left. Again, the grade

52:53remains the same through the rear of

52:54that property. So um the applicant

52:56encountered um the same exact um issue

52:59here. So you will see the parking stall

53:01located in the front yard. It's just

53:04impractable impractical um to get it to

53:06the rear yard. Um you'll see the I mean

53:08the as built here um reflects where the

53:11parking stall was in fact located. So um

53:14again I won't reiterate everything I

53:15said but we just encountered the same

53:18restrictions unfortunately given the

53:19given the layout and the nature of the

53:21property given the uh ledge that exists

53:23there as well as the significant slope.

53:26Um you know the driveway just would not

53:28be practical. That'd be uh extremely

53:30steep. Um and then there's just um you

53:33know the applicant encountered a lot of

53:35ledge but the layout is the same. The

53:37house is the same. You'll see a similar

53:38retaining wall, similar material, etc.

53:41It's pretty much just a replica of 290.

53:43Um the only difference is this is 310

53:46essentially new construction. He ran

53:48into the same issues. So again, without

53:49reiterating everything, um you know, um

53:52we're just dealing with the same

53:53constraints here. Unfortunately,

53:59[clears throat]

54:02>> for formality purposes, is anybody in

54:06favor?

54:14My name is Marcy. I live on to 989

54:18Broadbridge Avenue in Stratford and I

54:21own the house on 300 Birmingham Street

54:24which is exactly in the middle of the

54:26two house. The on the picture you can

54:29see is the white house that is between

54:32those two lots. This is a picture from

54:34the computer.

54:36I'm in favor. I think it's a great idea

54:40to have a driveway is a safety and

54:44convenience

54:45for the people who's going to live

54:48there.

54:50It complies with the neighborhood. Like

54:54I said, we have five houses straight

54:58with driveways in the front.

55:03I would like him to have the opportunity

55:06to to make this good thing for the

55:09people who's going to live there.

55:12I don't live on my house. I rent out and

55:16I see the struggle that is not to have

55:20especially in a single family and the

55:23area that the houses we are in a great

55:26area and we pay a lot tax a lot of tax

55:31and

55:33I think uh we should give back to people

55:38the safety, the convenience that they

55:41need for their

55:50Is there anyone that opposes?

55:59>> Birmingham is closed.

56:06Item number three on the agenda,

56:09122 Arctic Street, south side of the

56:12street, 160 ft west of Williams Street,

56:16seeking a variance to section 3.170.3H,

56:21to allow for an accessory hoop

56:24greenhouse that exceeds the 2% site

56:26coverage at the existing community

56:28garden located in the P2 zone.

56:32>> Good evening everyone. I'm Chad Booksher

56:33and I run the sustainability office for

56:35the city of Bridgeport and also serve as

56:36the tree warden. Um we're seeking the

56:38zoning variance regarding the lockum max

56:42long day regarding the lot maximum

56:44coverage um at 122 Arctic Street for the

56:46outbuildings in a P2 zone. Um the city

56:49of Bridgeport's health department in my

56:50office applied for a grant to the US

56:52Conference of Mayors back in I think

56:54late 2025 um to construct a greenhouse

56:57at a cityowned community garden to run a

57:00intergenerational greenhouse program. um

57:03with the lighthouse program at the

57:04Barnum Waltersville School and then the

57:06East Side Senior Center. Um when we

57:08obviously went to go apply to construct

57:10the greenhouse, um we noticed that all

57:12of the outbuildings within a P2 zone

57:14have a maximum lot coverage of about 2%.

57:17Um all of the community garden lots in

57:19the city of Bridgeport are zoned as

57:21parkland and open space. As you can

57:23imagine, that's your Beardsley parks,

57:25your seaside parks with hundreds of

57:26acres all the way down to these tiny

57:28little infill lots that are about less

57:30than a half acre to a third of an acre.

57:32All the community gardens are infill

57:34lots on residential streets in most

57:36cases. Um, so 2% of a of a very small

57:39infill lot basically restricts any

57:40outbuilding from being constructed,

57:42including a greenhouse. Um, that's

57:44obviously an approved use in a parkland

57:45space, but in the in the implementation

57:48of it in the community garden sense,

57:49we're unable to do so because of the

57:51maximum lot coverage. Um, so we're

57:53seeking a zoning variance to to allow

57:55for an expanded amount of that max lot

57:57coverage um to accommodate the

57:58construction of the greenhouse.

58:05you want to construct. What is the

58:08square footage?

58:09>> It's a 16 by 48 foot um which covers a

58:12little less than half of the lot. Um not

58:15substantially affecting most of the lot

58:17there. It is already a shed on the site.

58:20Um and there would be a few community

58:21garden beds that would need to be

58:22removed to to accommodate the

58:24construction of the greenhouse. Um but

58:26it would it would expand the capacity of

58:28the greenhouse to support community

58:29gardeners as well as the surrounding

58:30neighborhood

58:34>> shed on that property which far exceeds

58:372%. That I assume that's the primary

58:40building on that property, right?

58:42>> Yes.

58:42>> And

58:44if that weren't there, the greenhouse

58:47would be the primary building on the

58:48property, right?

58:52If I understand

58:52>> I I think we could get into a runaround

58:55on that maybe I

58:56>> It's an open outdoor site there. Yeah,

58:58that is No, the open areas that is the

59:01privacy

59:02>> it being an open.

59:03>> Okay. They consider the Okay. I'm sorry.

59:05>> So, this is an accessory structure to

59:07the open site.

59:08>> Yeah. Okay.

59:29Do everybody in favor?

59:41>> We have to say my name again.

59:46Maria Vaj 561 Brook Street. I am the

59:49against council for that district. Um I

59:53am in favor of this even if it says it

59:57exceeds 2%. You know why? This is a

1:00:00classroom an outdoor classrooms for

1:00:04youth

1:00:05and also for our seniors.

1:00:08I run a senior center on the east side

1:00:11and our seniors will be participating in

1:00:15these classrooms along with youngsters.

1:00:19This young man right here

1:00:26hard worker, he loves his community and

1:00:29he looks out. So again, in comparing

1:00:33when you're putting a storage that

1:00:36overpasses whatever and you're asking

1:00:38for a a uh a

1:00:43educational greenhouse, I say please

1:00:46allow for this to happen in our

1:00:48community. Thank you.

1:00:56>> Is there anybody that oppose?

1:01:08Okay. No matter what way to RX Street is

1:01:10closed.

1:01:16>> What

1:01:28the

1:01:31Hey,

1:01:58All

1:02:25right.

1:02:27account you guys estimated.

1:02:30>> No, I know. What I need is the date of

1:02:34November because he wants to continue to

1:02:37November. So, I just want to do that

1:02:39first and get it out of the way. Can't

1:02:42find my phone.

1:02:47>> Now, I find it.

1:02:49>> Okay.

1:02:54>> November.

1:02:55>> Yeah.

1:03:13Are you ready?

1:03:15So, we're going to continue 11:08

1:03:191110 Pin Brook Street until November

1:03:2310th.

1:03:27I make a motion that we continue

1:03:34>> 11:08.

1:03:50[clears throat]

1:03:55What should we do about 381?

1:03:56>> Bishop

1:04:03>> and this is their second or third

1:04:05continuing.

1:04:06>> I guess they can reapply.

1:04:22I'll make a motion that we

1:04:27>> I'm sorry. I make a motion that we deny

1:04:33381 Bishop Avenue.

1:04:40>> What? Repeat that. It's either denial or

1:04:43prejudice.

1:04:50>> So without prejudice they have

1:04:53>> allows them to come back

1:04:56>> with prejudice.

1:04:57>> Regular denial. They have to wait.

1:05:01>> Regular denial. Yeah. Regular denial.

1:05:03Yes.

1:05:04>> They haven't responded to us at all.

1:05:06Haven't back in six months.

1:05:08>> Yeah. Regular denial.

1:05:10>> Yeah. without

1:05:15>> Why are we Why are we dragging this on?

1:05:18>> We're not.

1:05:20>> I made a motion. We're not

1:05:22>> motion to deny.

1:05:24>> I'll second that.

1:05:28>> All in favor?

1:05:29>> I

1:05:36show

1:05:42No show. Three uh two times. Um

1:05:51>> okay. Um

1:05:56>> you're right.

1:06:01for um

1:06:02>> an absolute riot that we're sitting here

1:06:04talking about that little miserable tire

1:06:08storage location that they want to make

1:06:10into a full-scale upholstery shop with

1:06:12cars going in and out of it and so

1:06:14forth. And in the very next thing on the

1:06:16agenda is a couple storage buildings

1:06:19where

1:06:21a big adequate workshop doesn't have

1:06:23enough storage and we're talking about

1:06:24giving the guy more storage space and we

1:06:27have uh

1:06:29you know the one we're denying uh

1:06:31telling us oh no we got uh plenty of

1:06:34parking for what we do and nobody just

1:06:36parks here or anything like that. Uh

1:06:39that's enough reason to deny though.

1:06:52Whatever you want.

1:06:55>> Inadequate unauthorized.

1:06:58Um,

1:07:00from what I see here, let me read it

1:07:02real quick.

1:07:04>> Inadequate for the requested purpose.

1:07:06>> Yeah.

1:07:08>> Yeah, that's what I was trying to get.

1:07:13building

1:07:13>> inadequate building and lot size for the

1:07:17requested purpose in that zone.

1:07:25>> Yeah.

1:07:32>> Yeah. For the use or well like they say

1:07:35here unities

1:07:37>> unauthorized occupancy.

1:07:52Birmingham

1:07:57>> did have it.

1:08:00>> Oh no.

1:08:11Sorry.

1:08:13>> 650 Nolton.

1:08:16>> The two storage containers.

1:08:17>> Storage containers.

1:08:19>> I didn't hear a real objection.

1:08:24>> I argument. What is the

1:08:25>> the objection was it was something

1:08:27having to do with fairness, not really a

1:08:29problem with the request.

1:08:32So you want

1:08:34>> Yeah. The question is what is the

1:08:35hardship though? What is the hardship?

1:08:38>> They already have they already have

1:08:39storage there.

1:08:40>> Yeah. But the size

1:08:43>> Yeah. I think of all the buildings on

1:08:45that street, their storage uh

1:08:48>> is the only one outside which

1:08:50>> well their facility is probably the best

1:08:53kept facility along there. I mean I

1:08:56think uh counselor brought that up in

1:08:58his presentation. Uh it is well

1:09:00contained. it's concealed behind a fence

1:09:02and so forth. So, it's not harming

1:09:04anybody. And I I I agree it's it's

1:09:07difficult to identify the actual

1:09:09hardship other than the change of the

1:09:11zoning regulations. Uh which, you know,

1:09:15we've kind of said right along is very

1:09:16difficult to do. Um

1:09:19so I I think we're kind of put between a

1:09:21rock and a hard place here. Uh you say

1:09:24your alternative is to go to a different

1:09:25location or something like that or

1:09:28because you're doing something that is

1:09:31le how do you how do you say it? Less

1:09:34objectionable than the current use or

1:09:36other use that could be made of it. Um

1:09:40>> I mean

1:09:42>> well when you it's the least bad

1:09:44solution

1:09:47>> I mean what I can see

1:09:58>> right

1:10:03there won't be any

1:10:08All I can say.

1:10:09>> Yeah. So, but it wouldn't be what's

1:10:11really what's accomplished with a

1:10:13denial.

1:10:14>> I would say the condition is no outdoor

1:10:18storage.

1:10:20>> Yeah. Right.

1:10:24>> Yeah. We're Yeah.

1:10:30>> Did Dave make a a motion?

1:10:32>> Make a motion.

1:10:35>> To approve.

1:10:36>> To approve. While we we have the

1:10:39>> I said Yeah.

1:10:42>> Yes. No outdoor storage.

1:10:45>> No outdoor storage

1:10:51>> and and no more containers.

1:10:53>> Containers.

1:10:57And I'll second that.

1:11:06No additional containers. No additional

1:11:08outdoor,

1:11:09>> right?

1:11:10>> Yes.

1:11:11>> Well, no outdoor storage. There is none.

1:11:13Then there won't be any.

1:11:15>> There's not additional ones.

1:11:19>> There's none. There's no outdoor storage

1:11:20permitted.

1:11:24>> I

1:11:42So, we're at

1:11:4829.

1:12:04290 Birmingham.

1:12:05>> Yes.

1:12:06>> Yeah. He's got a hardship. Let's see.

1:12:08>> It's actually the one of the best

1:12:11presentations I've seen since I've been

1:12:13on the on the commission. They

1:12:15definitely have a hardship. So,

1:12:17>> what's the hardship?

1:12:19>> The there's a ledge that the the

1:12:22elevation it rises 20 feet in the

1:12:24backyard.

1:12:25>> The land doesn't permit compliance.

1:12:28Why couldn't you just get rid of the

1:12:30parking the driveway and park in the

1:12:32street?

1:12:35>> Well, he can't. Of course, the house

1:12:38>> and they're making the house more

1:12:39livable by providing the off streetet

1:12:42parking, making actually it's more

1:12:44livable for the entire neighborhood

1:12:45because they're taking a car off the

1:12:47street in each of these properties. Uh,

1:12:50and I'm certain everybody's contending

1:12:52for the parking spaces around there.

1:12:54>> No, [clears throat] they're not. That

1:12:55That street isn't busy. I'm right down

1:12:57the street. That's not a busy street.

1:13:01>> I don't know. I was there a couple weeks

1:13:03ago and there were a lot of cars around.

1:13:04It wasn't like some streets are. You're

1:13:06absolutely right. But uh it did seem to

1:13:09be a good number of cars.

1:13:10>> I have a daughter that has exactly the

1:13:13same situation.

1:13:15>> And she and her husband both have cars.

1:13:17Uh the son who just turned 16 is getting

1:13:19a car. So, they're going to have three

1:13:21cars to park and their property in the

1:13:24back goes up. So, they can't possibly

1:13:26build a garage back there and they park

1:13:29in what amounts to a driveway. Uh, so I

1:13:33have sympathy for them, I guess.

1:13:36>> Yeah. By code, he's allowed to

1:13:40have have a driveway

1:13:42>> and to have a park in the backyard.

1:13:44>> Yeah. But you got to get to the backyard

1:13:47because of the nature of the lot.

1:13:50>> That's the hardship. I mean,

1:13:51>> but

1:13:53>> it's like if it has a river running

1:13:54through it,

1:13:57>> it's something about a ledge is back

1:13:58there.

1:13:59>> I understand that. I understand all

1:14:01that. But

1:14:04>> it was known it was it was known of this

1:14:08situation when the house was built. But

1:14:10you still built my my issue is you still

1:14:13built

1:14:15a driveway hoping that this this

1:14:19group here will

1:14:21>> I'm assuming that the hardship would be

1:14:23accepted,

1:14:24>> right?

1:14:25>> I mean, if you took it to court

1:14:26>> and that's my

1:14:28>> You think so?

1:14:28>> Yeah. Yeah.

1:14:30>> Well, and the garage doesn't opinion,

1:14:33but [laughter]

1:14:34you may have a different opinion.

1:14:35>> I I hear what you're saying.

1:14:38>> If there was a garage, it wouldn't

1:14:40change the nature of the driveway.

1:14:43The two houses across the street from me

1:14:45have circular driveways and they always

1:14:48have cars parked in the and that's their

1:14:50front yard

1:14:52>> just because they can afford a circular

1:14:54driveway instead of just a straight in

1:14:56thing.

1:14:56>> I think that

1:14:57>> I can't I can't the house in the middle.

1:15:00I would I would have probably did that

1:15:02in the house in the middle.

1:15:05>> It doesn't Okay,

1:15:07>> I make a motion that you approve

1:15:09>> second.

1:15:16I

1:15:17>> I

1:15:18>> I

1:15:22don't have time to

1:15:23>> Yeah,

1:15:27>> stay. Yeah, I don't

1:15:31>> No, I'm staying.

1:15:33>> Yeah, because it already

1:15:38>> Yes.

1:15:38>> Right.

1:15:42reasoning.

1:15:45The land doesn't permit the land doesn't

1:15:47>> topography is

1:15:49>> the land the land doesn't permit

1:15:51compliance

1:16:07>> 310

1:16:11Ditto.

1:16:15>> Make the motion.

1:16:16>> I move we uh

1:16:19agreed to give them a variance

1:16:21>> due to the topography of the backyard.

1:16:30>> Topography of the backyard makes it

1:16:34difficult, makes it impossible.

1:16:40>> I

1:16:41Hi.

1:16:42>> Hi.

1:16:42>> Hi.

1:16:54>> 122 Arctic Street.

1:16:56>> Did I miss

1:16:59>> the one we deferred?

1:17:00>> Yeah.

1:17:02>> Yeah, we deferred. Yeah.

1:17:04>> Thank heavens. [laughter]

1:17:06>> That's not going to be a fun.

1:17:09>> No.

1:17:22I move we approve 122 Arctic Street.

1:17:26>> I move we approve 122 Artic Street.

1:17:35>> Yes.

1:17:37>> Second.

1:17:39Did you go by there?

1:17:41>> Yeah.

1:17:42>> Yeah.

1:17:49>> Do we have any discussion?

1:17:59>> Um

1:18:01I know the the code is at 2% but um

1:18:05it's a greenhouse. it uh and it's for

1:18:10educational purposes. So I think it's

1:18:12it's justified.

1:18:22>> He said 48 by 16. So it's a pretty good

1:18:26size greenhouse when I show pictures.

1:18:41Oh,

1:18:42>> P for park.

1:18:58And the 2% is probably to preserve the

1:19:00nature of the park.

1:19:04>> No, I'm just saying but if the whole

1:19:05idea is to preserve the nature of the

1:19:07park, this does not step in the way of

1:19:10the nature of the park.

1:19:14>> What would be an example of a accessory

1:19:18building?

1:19:21>> A greenhouse.

1:19:24Yeah, you could build a party room want

1:19:27to build a party room.

1:19:28>> I mean, but what what

1:19:36>> So the the code is anticipating that the

1:19:40greenhouse size would be no more than 2%

1:19:42of the acreage of the property.

1:19:46>> Well, I you could say it that way, but I

1:19:47think

1:19:50>> I was just trying to the

1:20:04tenth of an acre.

1:20:09>> That's all,

1:20:10>> right? And this will still And this will

1:20:14>> It's like a ball field with a dugout.

1:20:18>> Yeah.

1:20:19>> Yeah. And this will still be a park.

1:20:21>> It'll be a

1:20:24No, it'll still be a park. It's used as

1:20:25a park.

1:20:26>> It's a community garden.

1:20:28>> Community garden. Well, I'm just Yeah.

1:20:30>> And in recognition of what our weather

1:20:31is usage is there's nothing being cut

1:20:34out of

1:20:35>> almost have to have a greenhouse to do

1:20:36gardening throughout the winter.

1:20:38>> Yeah. And it is an educational and it's

1:20:40a u they have the students interacting

1:20:43with the seniors which is certainly a

1:20:46good sociological type thing that we

1:20:47would want to promote even if we're

1:20:50creating waves in the

1:20:53intended zoning. I'm not sure

1:21:04>> you have a second.

1:21:05>> Yeah.

1:21:06>> Okay. I'll vote yes.

1:21:20the children and seniors can interact.

1:21:23>> Yeah.

1:21:25>> Throughout the year

1:21:28because I got a sneaking suspicion it

1:21:29would be coming to an end in another

1:21:31month.

1:21:41It broadens usage. It broadens usage. It

1:21:44doesn't limit usage.

1:22:04I believe these minutes are misated. I

1:22:06think

1:22:08>> says August 12th and it actually is

1:22:10September 9th.

1:22:36September.

1:22:38>> Oh yeah.

1:22:47I move we approve it with uh Nick making

1:22:50the uh

1:22:51>> correction to the date.

1:22:53>> I second it. Okay.

1:23:06All right.

1:23:08All

1:23:10>> right.

1:23:23is 7:25

1:23:25October 1326

1:23:29board of appeals meeting is over

1:23:32>> and I'd like to con commend the staff at

1:23:34city hall because we have the correct

1:23:37time on the clock here and I will wager

1:23:39you dollars to donuts that our next

1:23:42meeting will not