Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

Three.

All right, we ready. Okay. All right. Well, welcome everybody to the uh January meeting of the board of zoning appeals for Leewood. Can I have a roll call? Members Penn here. Dirkson here. Dun here. Fington here. Hawk here. Busing. We have a quorum.

Thanks very much. First item of business, I believe, is the approval of the minutes from um well, this is from the December meeting. Do I Are there any changes or additions anybody needs to make? I move approval of this. Second. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor, please say I. I.

Opposed? It's been approved. All right, let's see. Well, we we have a moderately large agenda. Welcome all of you. Um, I know this is an important uh night for everybody who's here with an item on the agenda. The the way we run this typically is we already have a packet of information here. You'll you'll be called up to the podium to present your case. Anybody who's here to speak on a case will get an opportunity to do that. If I forget to ask, just raise your hand. I'll make sure you get a chance to talk. Um, so but we ask you to kind of limit your presentation today. Uh, don't want to stop you, but we've we'll I guarantee you everything that needs to be said will get said before we decide the case. So, um, anyway, that's what we've got. Our first item of business is the case 1-20269610 high drive request for a variance to the front setback. Does staff have a report?

The applicant has proposed an addition that will be placed 136.8 ft from the front property line at its closest. The front build line for this lot is 162.6 is 6 ft. Based on the average front formula, a variance of 25.8 ft is needed to build the addition as proposed. And this looks fairly familiar. Is this a piece of property we've dealt with before, Ron, or is it just the area that's the same? Uh, the area runs some of the same shapes. Thank you. Um, all right. Is the applicant here? Yes, Charlie Russell. Thank you for having us. Um, and your address, sir? my personal address.

Yeah, just for the record, please. Sure. 19 West Concord Avenue. Thank you. Please proceed. Thank you. So, this uh while the site plan doesn't look straightforward, the variance is rather straightforward in that the if you take the code language and you apply it strictly to this lot, the shape uh essentially creates a big curve for the front setback. And that curve uh is behind the front of the home itself, the existing original home. And so what's happening here is that the irregular shape of the lot does not fit what the code intends for it to do.

We really don't have an ability to draw off of neighbors uh for front setback. We've done that in terms of measuring. So we have measured what's going on side to side to arrive at this road calculation. So, what we're doing is proposing an addition to this home on two sides. One side is going to be a garage addition set back from the front of the home and the other is going to be uh a reforming of the front entry and an addition of a primary suite to the left. And both of those things would be non-compliant as would the original home itself. And so, what I've tried to do as an architect is make sure that we're not projecting in front of the original home any more than it already does. uh because what we're trying to do after all is uh really abide by the original uh shape and vision of the house that's there.

Okay. Um, Ron, could you point on to this the areas that that are at issue that uh the highlighted yellow areas are in the are the addition and the parts of the addition that are in front of the build line. The curved dotted line is the front build line and right uh behind it there the solid the dotted line that's straight across the rear or parallel to the rear that is the rear build line. So anything

and everything behind that that U straight dotted line behind that would be too far back. Is that correct? Mhm. So which we're not hitting that area right there. Not to oversimplify this, but it looks like um under the current code, they there isn't a lot of space to build a house. Correct. Okay. All right. I just wanted to make sure I'm seeing it correctly. Okay. Yeah, it's rather dramatic. Okay. Mhm.

All right. Um well this is a variance and it being a variance we have the specific criteria we have to consider and make sure that it meets that criteria and the two criteria that cause us the most difficulty are uniqueness of the property and hardship. Could you address those two for us?

Sure. Uh so the uniqueness of the property is its lot shape. Um, and that's just is what it is because that's driving the way that this calculation is kind of irregular. Um, and as far as hardship, this provides a hardship because anything that this owner wants to do to this home would be non-compliant. And furthermore, it would be non-compliant in a way that doesn't match with the original vision of the existing structure. Um, it's sort of a not imaginary, but it's a a a code line in a big arc. And anything that gets built would have to abide by that shape. If you look at the home from the street, it's not at all what the home does. After all, most of the home doesn't fit within the ark as it exists right now. So, someone would have to, I don't know, tear down the home and build another one in the corner or something like that if they wanted to make this compliant.

So, what the owner is trying to do is keep the home. And in an effort to do that, they want to add on to it uh in a way that fits with the spirit of the home. But we do need to address this first. Well, just just then to tell you what I heard is what I what I hear you saying is that you the uniqueness is really the shape and size of this lot. Uh particularly in light of the new code that requires these measurements to be made and the hardship is that if we were to apply it strictly, you'd have a difficult time using this residential lot for residential building. Yes, that's correct. Is that correct?

Okay. Um any questions from the board for staff or the applicant? Is there anyone here who wishes to speak on this um application? All right. Well, then we're going to consider our five criteria. You're welcome to stand there if you want, but unless you've got something else, we're just we're going to be considering the criteria now and voting on them. All right. Thank you. Okay. So the first criteria as as you all know is uniqueness of property. Does anyone want to comment on uniqueness before we vote?

Mr. Chairman, I'll comment on uniqueness of property. I think just by being at the end of the culde-sac and the irregular nature of the shape of the lot makes the build lines turn out very strangely as we observed in the diagram. Um and that unique shape makes it so the actual buildable area would be very small. So I do think this criteria is met. Thank you. Anyone else? All those who believe it's met the uniqueness criteria, please say I. I. Oppose. Nay. The next criteria is rights of adjacent property owners. Ron, I assume notices went out.

Correct. And there was one call and that call was in favor of. Anyone up here want to comment on rights for Jason property? All those who believe it's met that criteria, please say I. I. Oppose. Nay. Hardship. Any comments on hardship. All those who believe it's met that criteria, please say I. I. Oppose. Nay. Public safety and general welfare. Any comments? All those who believe it met this criteria, please say I. I.

Opposed? Nay. And then finally, spirit and intent. Any comments?

I'll speak on spirit and intent. I I would like to say that um with the irregularity of the lot and then the setback um the requirements to meet that obviously it's non-conforming with the existing structure. So it' be really hard to do that. Spirit intent I would like to commend um on the design. And this is an older an older Leewood home. And the design that is instituted here is taking into consent this in in consideration the neighborhood and and and keeping it in line with the spirit and intent of the other homes. Um not building something that's out of character. You're building it from the actual property, the front of the property and back. So, I just want to um just kind of take note of that and and thank you for for looking at that.

Okay. All those who believe it's met spirit and intent, please say I. I oppose. Nay. Having gotten a positive response on all five criteria, we can um entertain a motion to approve this request for a variance. Mr. Chairman in case 01 2026 9610 high drive request for a variance to the front setback in accordance with the LDO section 16-2-5.3D in R1 district. I move approval. Second. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor, please say I. I.

Oppose. Nay. It passes. You'll be notified in writing. Thank you for coming in. Our second case is 2-2026 30003 West 83rd Terrace. Request for a variance to the placement of a permanently installed generator. Was does staff have a report? The applicant has proposed to place a permanently installed generator in the sideyard of the home. Permanently installed generators are required to be in the rear yard by code. Any questions for staff? Is the applicant here? Come on up. Please give us your name and address for the record.

Hi, my name is Guy Swanson under the 3003 West 83rd Terrace. Do you mind if I put a PowerPoint presentation?

Of course you may. I hope you know how to use that because if you ask me, I won't be able to help you there. Thank you. So, we are here to ask for a variance for a permanently placed generator at our house. We live in the Clostersh, and the lots are um somewhat small. They're a third of an acre. We're a closed community, 103 houses. The houses are a third of an acre. Our lot is a trapezoidal lot. It's a very, very odd shape. What did you what kind of lot did you sell?

It's like a trapezoidal.

Oh, trapezoidal lot. And our house sits on an angle in that lot such that the side of our house, the east side is effectively the back of our house. So a generator place in the back of our house is really really close to our neighbors as opposed to the east side of our house which is essentially the back. So that's why we are asking for a variance or put the generator in that location. So, that's the map of the Cloysters. It's a maintenance-free community. It's a great place to live. And we're at the very end of a culde-sac. Um, and we back up to the culde-sac on Cherokee Lane. So, that is our house with a little blue dot there. And then this is a little bit of a closer up. So, the neighbors right behind us are quite close. This is the back of our house. And this neighbor is really close. And this neighbor's really close. However, the east side of our house is effectively the back of our house. And it's a long ways down about 50 feet to the dead end culde-sac of Cherokee Lane. And there's no houses on this side of that culde-sac.

This is the front of our house and we're proposing to put the generator over here. And this is a picture standing down at the Cherokee Lane culde-sac looking back up at our house. It's quite a slope down and that would be the location of the generator where the red X's and this is standing where the generator is going to be looking down that hill. There's 50 ft down there. There's nobody on our side of the culde-sac. That's kind of the effectively the back of our house. That's a bigger picture of it. It's pretty open back there. The east side of our house currently has three air conditioning condensers, our gas meter, and burning bushes that surround everything. And we would take out one of those burning bushes and put the generator right there where the gas line is and everything else. So, that is the proposed location. Obviously, it was a lot warmer when we took this picture. And so, we'd pull one or two of those bushes and put the generator right there. Expand the landscaping around there and add more burning add more burning bushes, excuse me to block it. And these bushes are great in the summertime. It really protects our house. This is the back of our house. This is standing on my neighbor's deck looking at our house. Houses are quite close together at the back. the way our house sets, it's really close and there's no if I put a generator back here, it's really going to be an ice. No really good way to screen it. And this is standing again looking down the hill. It's quite a ways down there. This is one of my neighbors right here, Joanne Curry. And if I stand on my patio and look, her house is right there. So that'd be a bad location because it would just be right

there in front of her. There's no good way to screen it. On the other side of our patio, this house is within about 20 25 ft of our house. And that's really, really close as well. And then I'm standing on their patio now looking back at my house. It's literally just right there. So there's just the back of our house is really not a great location. The transfer switch would be over on the west side. We have a large driveway and that's where our g our electrometer comes in and the transfer switch would go right there. So again, that would be the location way up there on the east side of our house, which is effectively the back of our house. That's why we're asking for a variance.

Okay. Thank you. Would you show us again the exact proposed location? I've seen so many pictures I'm confused. Sorry, say that again. Where where you propose the generator be placed.

It'll be on the east side of our house, which is effectively the back of our house, right there where that red X is. Can you see that red X? This is 50 ft down to the Cherokee Lane Culdeac that's behind our house. And that neighborhood is outside the cloysters. As you heard from the prior case, since we're we're dealing with a request for a variance here, we have five specific criteria we have to meet. And the difficult ones for us are uniqueness and hardship. And I I think you've you've touched on the the your reasons why you think it's unique and what the hardship would be, but would you articulate those for us again just so we know what what your position is? That's fine. Sure.

Go ahead. Well, I'm done with my question. I'm asking you to articulate what what that your why you believe this is unique and what what what the hardship would be if we didn't allow this variance. Like I said, our lot is this weird kind of trapezoidal shape and the house sits at an angle on that lot. And this is prior to when they built the house in 73. So, like I said, the back the east side of our house is effectively the back side. And so, if I put it on the actual back of our house, it's a hardship because it's going to be right by our neighbors. And I don't think they want that. And I don't want that for them either. Okay. Any questions for the applicant from here?

All right. Well, if you're finished, then we'll consider the criteria and vote. Thank you for your consideration. Appreciate you all. So the first one is uniqueness of the property. Would anyone like to comment on the uniqueness criteria? Oh, I'm sorry. I forgot to ask. Is there anyone else here? Anyone here who wants to speak on this for or against? Come on up. No, no, don't be sorry. It's my my mistake for forgetting.

No, you're fine. So, we're um I'm Q with the generator cover. installing for uh Guy and Mary Swanson. Um it's the other part of it that is difficult is the back side of their home has a lot of windows. There are certain codes and regulations in installing the generator that makes it so that we can't really do that unless we move the generator 5t away from the home which then there's another variance on the generator being too far away from the home. So really the east side of the home is the only in case we can place the generator. Thank you. Ron, do you want to comment on that or is that

Yeah, the manufacturer does determine how far you have to be from operable and inoperable windows. I see. We would we do allow though like you know the LDO says it has to be five feet within 5T of the house. A lot of times um the gener the generator specs are going to say it has to be at least five feet from an openable window. We would consider that we've always considered that a compliant location right at 5T to meet safety but to meet the intent of the LDO. So but again it would have to be set out five feet um from the home in the back there in many locations. That's correct. Okay.

Did that generate any questions for up here? All right. Well, then um let's vote on our criteria. We have uniqueness. Any comments on uniqueness? Mr. Chairman, I'll comment on uniqueness. I think due to the irregular shape of the lot, um again here this factors met as we saw from the overhead images. Um it does essentially make the sideyard the backyard in terms of which yard has the most space and the most different the most space between neighbors. Um so I do think that factors met here. Any other comments? All those who believe the uniqueness criteria has been met, please say I. I. Opposed? Nay.

Rights of adjacent property owners, uh, notices have gone out. Ron, no calls or concerns. Any comments from up here? All those who believe it's met this criteria, please say I. I. Oppose. Nay. Hardship. We've heard the applicant's description as well as his contractor. Is there any comments from up here on hardship? Uh, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to comment. Staff did note that the compliant locations at the rear are hardcaped. So, that would also cause a hardship for placement along with the the distance that would be needed to be away from the house being very close to the property line and other neighbors as well.

Thank you. Any other comments? All those who believe the hardship criteria has been met, please say I. I. Opposed? Nay. Public safety and general welfare. Any comments. All those who believe that this criteria has been met, please say I. I. I. Oppose. Nay. And then spirit and intent. Um I'm not sure that when this statute was originally drafted and they said spirit and intent that we even had generators at the time, but but we do now. So, um, all those who believe it's met the criteria of spirit and intent, please say I. I oppose. Nay.

All right. Well, we have positive responses on all five. So, we can entertain a motion to approve this request for a variance. Do I have such a motion? I move to approve case 02-2026 uh 30003 West 83rd Terrace. request for variance to the placement of a permanently installed generator in accordance with the LDO section 16-4-1.3 parent A parent 7 par D parent in an R1 district have a motion and a second all those in favor please say I

I oppose nay it's passed you'll be notified in writing and uh thank you very much for your very thorough presentation we appreciate All right. Our next case has been uh withdrawn. Correct. Correct.

Okay. So, we're moving on to number case number 4-2026 12720 Pony Lane. Request for a variance to the rear yard setback. Does staff have a report? The applicant has proposed to replace an existing legal non-conforming deck with a new deck that will be placed 15 feet from the rear of the property. The stairs of the new deck will encroach 4t further than the existing deck. The rear yard setback for the lot is 30 ft. The open deck can encroach five feet into the rear yard. A variance of 10 feet is needed to build the deck as proposed.

Any questions for staff? So, just just so we're clear, the existing deck is 19 feet from the build line. Is that correct? Correct. And this one would be 15 ft from the build line because of the addition of the stairs. Moving the stairs from from that from that location to out on the end. Okay. will encroach four feet further than the existing deck. But either way, it would be here for variance.

Any other questions for staff? And I see you standing there. I assume you're the applicant. I am the applicant. Yes. If I could have your name and address. Uh, Philip Sanders 12720 Pawn A.

Thank you. Would you please proceed? I um when we took pulled the permit for the original to do the remodel on that particular property, the staff made me aware that there was an open permit from 18 that had not been closed out because it was it had failed original final inspection. And I see why. And I actually tried to repair it, ended up taking the the deck down prior to not even being aware of the fact that we were not in compliance. So, I I just I need to put a deck back on the back of the on the back of the house. Um, it is a fairly straightforward yard, fairly fairly u small setback from the house to the to the property line. The property to adjacent to it. I don't know if we have that you have an aerial of that whole piece is a is a trapezoidal lot that has considerable back behind my property right here that would sit right behind. That makes sense.

Yeah, I believe so. So the the only true variance to the variance was that I wanted to add the staircase to the back of the of the deck opposed off the side. And I I I want to I I apologize if I said variance. I think believe it's an exception that we have for this. Is that not accurate?

Oh, I'm looking at the wrong case. I'm sorry. I apologize. My fault. It is a variance. I forgot that the other one was withdrawn. I apologize. Go ahead. Never mind. design originally when it got presumably out the landing and the steps. The steps I guess as I as I understand from Tommy don't uh matter by encroaching in the in that in that setback. It's that landing piece plus the whole thing is four by ft beyond I'm saying that right? The the build line's that dotted line behind the house and in front of the stairs

that runs through the middle of the existing deck. Correct. Okay.

Are you finished? I'm I'm finished. Okay. Any questions? Any questions about it? Well, that's I'll ask. Any questions for the applicant? Well, as as you've heard uh from the prior cases, um the difficulty we have in these cases is you need to stay up here because I'm going to ask you to answer my question. All right.

Uh the difficulty we have is addressing the uniqueness and the in the hardship criteria. And I'd just like to make sure we understand your position regarding uniqueness and hardship. So, if you'd elaborate on those, I would appreciate it. Well, the uniqueness is that it just has a sliding door going out to that back deck that needs to be replaced. It was put on improperly. That's why it didn't pass its original inspection when it got got permitted, the original 18 inspection uh permit and just needed to be fixed and repaired and it needs to have a deck on the back of the house. And the the nice thing about that particular backyard is it the backyard does not interfere with the neighbor's backyard, if you will, because of their trapezoidal shape. Is that it?

That's it.

Okay. Any any questions from up here for the applicant? Is there anyone here who wishes to speak on this application for or against? No. Okay. Well, um if there isn't anything else, did I miss something wrong? No. Okay. uh then we have to cons consider the five criteria. First is uniqueness of property. Anyone wish to address the uniqueness criteria? I will I will just point out so we all are aware of this is that this is one of these situations where we already have a legal non-conforming deck in this location. Um, and I I Travis, was what you were saying that if they they weren't asking for the additional four feet, we'd be dealing with an exception?

No, it would still be a variance. Still be a variance. So, okay. And the and the stairs are would be would be here for a variance, too, even if the rest of it was compliant. So, yeah. Okay. So, this is just one of those that because of the u because of our laws and because of the year this was all built we've just got an existing structure that isn't legal but it's well it's legal but it's non-compliant and and essentially to turn this down they'd have to get rid of the deck essentially. Okay. I think the applicant is only asking for a mod modification of an existing structure. Oh, that's true.

So, I don't I can't see that there's any any concern.

Well, I I I mean, I I don't have any concerns with the plan either, but I but I'm curious as to whether anybody has has any thoughts on whether this meets the uniqueness criteria. As I've said many times before, our I wish our job were as simple as saying we think that's a good plan, but that's not our job. Our job is to say whether it meets legal criteria or not. And I I I would just so you all know I would consider um favorably the idea that uniqueness can can arise from the year this property was built and the fact that this was built in in a compliant manner at the time that it was done. And it's the change in our laws that puts it into a non-compliant status at this point. Um if he was repairing the deck, we wouldn't be having this discussion, but he's replacing the deck.

Yeah. There's some other things, Mr. Sherman, I'd like to point out, too. If you look at some of the photos, this um was actually built prior to the the current uh rules that we're looking at. So, there's old trees. You can see in the photo where it shows the move moving of the stairwell. the uniqueness could be in the fact of the age of the property and then where it it sits adjacent to an an irregular shaped there's a a fence or a hedge line if you look at the trees that are there in the photo. Um so really it's just replacing what is been built there before and just moving the stairs to adapt actually with the trees and the ground that you know it's just an old older older lot. So I would say it would be unique in that. Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. All those who believe it's met the uniqueness criteria, please say I.

I. Oppose. Nay. Rights of adjacent property owners have um notice has gone out. No calls or concerns. All those who believe it's met this criteria, please say I. I. Opposed? Nay. Hardship. Any comments? Mr. Chairman, I'll comment on hardship. Um, as we could see from the overhead, the deck would be considerably smaller if the variance was not granted and um and it wouldn't make much sense to um to sort of negatively affect the applicant based on their wish to make a newer um fresher deck. So, I do think that factor has been met.

Any other comments? All those who believe the hardship criteria has been met, please say I. I oppose. Nay. Public safety and general welfare. Any comments. All those who believe that criteria has been met, please say I. I. Opposed? Nay. And finally, spirit and intent. Any comments? Everyone who believes that criteria has been met, please say I. I.

Oppos? Nay. Having gotten five positive responses on the criteria, um we can entertain a motion to approve this request for variance. Mr. Chairman, I'll move to approve case 04-202612720 Pony Lane request for a variance to the rear yard setback in accordance with the LDO section 16-2-5.3 Parend D Parin in an R1 district. Second. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor, please say I. I.

Opposed? Nay. It's passed. You'll be notified in writing. Thanks for coming in. Our next case is the exception I was looking for before. It's uh case 05-2026 4849 West 150th Terrace. request for an exception to the maximum allowable square footage on a lot in accordance with the LDO. Does staff have a report?

The applicant is proposing a 440 foot addition that will bring the total square footage to 4,811. The maximum square footage allowed by ordinance on this lot is 4,517. An exception of 294 ft, which is 6.4% 4% above the maximum is needed to build the home as proposed. And I forget, Ron, what what's the what's the level that is covered by the exception? Is a 20%. 20. Okay. So, so anything less than 20% over the maximum allowed square footage is comes under an exception. Correct.

Why we're considering on that basis? Okay. Are there any questions for staff? Is the applicant here? come on up. Um, good evening. I'm Gerald Little, the owner of the home and the applicant, and I've got an architect I'm working with, Weston Cobble, Weston Cobble, with ESC Architects. Okay. Whoever wants to speak, speak.

Um, my wife and I are the original owners of the home. We've had it for 25 years and raised three kids there. And as our family's grown and we have grandkids, uh we would like to update the uh kitchen area. Right now there's a small breakfast area and a hearth room. We would like to uh replace the breakfast area with the larger uh great room. Uh the great room would, like I say, replace the breakfast area as well as replace a patio area. And then off to the side would be a covered uh smaller porch area. And to allow us to get the space that we would like uh to be more modern floor plan, we would have to get the 6 and a half% overage u exception.

And and just just we've got this nice picture up in front of us. Can can one of you point to the proposed addition and tell us what's what from what you just described? Um the the lines uh I guess kind of red here um that are not shaded in is the proposed outline of the existing home. What we're proposing is to incorporate this is the breakfast room.

Um and we would we would propose to uh incorporate that into the overall um room where it says proposed addition. And then the area here to the side that is shaded is uh not calculated in that square footage, but that is the additional um covered grill porch and sitting porch off to the side of the home. Okay. Are there any questions? All right. Well, um as I've said, this is an exception, not a variance. And our analysis is two factors. We have to assure that it's not more than 20% increase in the maximum allowable square footage, which we know it's not. And the second criteria, which is the one that generally comes up, is would would this remodel or rebuild reflect continue to reflect the character of the surrounding dwellings in the neighborhood. So, uh, is there anyone here who would like to speak on this one way or another, this application? Okay. Um, did I ask whether you'd gotten any calls? I don't think I have. Did you get any calls on this?

No. No calls or concerns and letters went out, I assume. Correct. Okay. All right. Are there any questions from up here for the applicant or for staff? All right. Well, is there a motion? Mr. Chairman, I would move to approve K05-2026 4849 West50th Terrace request for an exception to the maximum allowable square footage on a lot in accordance with the LDO section 16-2-5.3 Parent Farn 2 in an R1 district. Second. Have a motion and a second. All those in favor, please say I. I.

Oppose. Nay. It's been approved. You'll be notified in writing. Thanks very much for coming in. Thank you. Which brings us to our final case, which is final case for the evening, I should say. Um, it's 06-20261516 Cedar Street. Request for a variance to the sideyard setback. Does staff have a report?

The applicant has repo proposed to replace an existing legal deck with a new deck that will be placed 13.5 ft from the rear of the property. The rear setback for this lot is 20 ft. However, a deck may encroach 5t into the rear yard. A variance of 1.5 ft is needed to build the deck as proposed. We've got this picture in front of us, Ron, and and part of it says covered deck. Is that the existing deck?

Correct. Then just the new deck will extend out to the 13.5 on that corner and 19 on the opposite. Okay. Any questions for staff? Is the applicant here? I know you're here. Come on up. Good evening. Good evening. Can you give us your name and address, please? Yes. Muriel Rosenberg, 11516 Cedar Street, Leewood.

I think you can pull that microphone down a little bit if it be easier for you. Thank you. Um, okay. Well, this is your opportunity to present your case to tell us why we should grant this request for a variance. So,

well, the old the old one I don't have anything here, but Ron and Scott could perhaps answer. The old one was totally rotten and falling down. We bought the house 10 years ago and it's was very narrow and that's all you could put was a little table with two chairs on it and we'd like to be able to have a table with four chairs on it. And the roof is over the part that was rotten and we took down

and we just want to make it the six feet wider so that I'm sorry. Oh, we just want to make it wider so that we can put a table for four people up there. So, so you basically have to rebuild the deck regardless of whether you make it bigger or not. Is that accurate? Yes, it was totally not good. Okay. Totally. Yeah, that's pretty good description for a lot of decks I've seen. Um Okay. You said you have somebody else here that you do you want them to speak on this? Yeah, the builder. Okay, come on up. Good. Give us your name and address if you would please.

Hi metal, 9225 Farley Lane, Oland Park, Shiny Mission West, class of 1981. I grew up with Leewood. A lot of friends, Tain Smith. We love Leewood. I've done a lot of fun things over here. Basically, the tent is right behind here, too. If we could pull your shades down, we can look right at it. So the it's an empty lot and we're backing right up next to it. And to my understanding, the fence is not exactly the boundary line anyway. Right. So I'm all I'm doing is trying to give her some extra feet so she could put her girl out there and have some nice Kansas City barbecue because she's from Massachusetts

and to make her deck a little bit bigger. She'll pay a little bit more money on property taxes in the long run. Everybody wins. I own Hokan Handy Service. been doing it 44 years and uh have a lot of friends like I said in Leewood and uh you look slightly familiar. I'm sure I've seen you around here some. Yeah, the Hocanettle family. We're pretty big and we're all related with name like Hocanettle. As a matter of fact, if you could say it perfectly the first time, you'll be my my future cousin like three seconds. That's funny. But the unique uniqueness of this also is the lot to the north of it is a half lot owned by her. Ah

so that one's were beautiful on the distance and uh the other one uh it's just uh our neighbor we brought I have both neighbors and we'll give them an opportunity to speak as soon as you both are finished. Yes. Okay. I just hope you guys help us out and give us a thumbs up and we'll make it really nice for you guys. Okay. Any questions for the contractor while he's up here? Thank you. Thank you. Nice to talk to you. Nice to talk to you.

I have the homes association, the president from Edgewood here and also the neighbor that's on the other side of us. But we and you can see with what he had up before, we have the house is on two lots. Mhm. So, and they're both go with our house. Okay. So, that there's nobody else right there. Does Does anybody else up here want to see this to so we understand what she's talking about? It was Didn't you Is it Does this show it, Ron? What you got up there? Ron has g

I'm sorry. Can you use the picture to help us understand what you're talking about as far as ownership of the lots? The walking path comes up to the back of the house to the gate. This here is all this is the the extra lot that they own. See how this one here, the property line's real short? The old property line's like right there. They got half the lot there. Oh. So that's there's really no uh distance uh we make we meet the minimum requirements on that by far. Is that half lot buildable?

Um I I'm asking our staff I'm asking our staff. No, it is no longer platted and it wouldn't meet the requirements. No. Okay. So it's it's going to stay open. Correct. It will just stay Yeah. It's it will stay as just the sideyard for the house. Very good. Very good. Well, you said you have your the homeowners association representative here. Would you like to come on up? And I have the neighbor on the other side where the house has a neighbor on one side. I I'll get to them. We're just going to take them one at a time. Okay. Okay.

Hi. Thank you. Good evening. I'm Dr. Donna Newman and I'm the lucky president of the Homes Association of Edgewood and I'm just here to give approval and support from the HOA for her renovation. We really appreciate you taking the time to come up and do that. Thank you. I'm thoroughly enjoying this. As a matter of fact, it's very interesting. Not all HOAs would do that. We appreciate you doing that. Thank you. Thank you. You have somebody else here to speak. Neighbor one. Great. This is Donna.

Hi, Donna. Hes 11512 Cedar Street, which is on the opposite side of Mimi. Uh, beside that, I mean, the other lot is that open area. I'm on the other side. And I literally just flew in from Las Vegas. That's where we really live as well as live here. But I wanted to come and support her. I mean, she's one of the nicest people in the world. Um, and loves flowers. So, I'm sure it's going to be an absolutely beautiful deck and will be a nice addition. We appreciate you coming in very much. Yeah. Do you have anybody else here to speak? No.

Okay. Well, that that's enough, but but if you if you did, I don't want to miss them. Okay. All right. Um, are there any questions for for the applicant? All right. Well, we're going to consider our criteria and we'll then we'll take a vote. Thank you very much. uh uniqueness of the property is would anybody like to comment on this? Mr. Chairman, I'll speak about uniqueness. Um this property is actually I feel that it does meet a uniqueness in the in the size shape, the fact that it's like a lot and a half and it sits right adjacent to the trail and row which is a main artery through the city. So, um I feel like that this does meet uniqueness.

Okay, any other comments? It's not a lot that's going to be built on. There's no no chance for any future development. Right. So, all those who believe it's met the uniqueness criteria, please say I. I. I. Opposed? Nay. Rights of adjacent property owners, um, notices have gone out, Ron, and you've not gotten any negatives. No calls or concerns. All those who believe it's met this criteria, please say I. I. I. Oppose. Nay. hardship. Any comments on hardship? Mr. Chairman, I'll comment on that one. Um that the deck would be considerably smaller if the variance was not granted. So I do think that factor is met. Any other comments?

All those who believe this criteria has been met, please say I. I. Opposed? Nay. Public safety and general welfare. Any comments. All those who believe that criteria has been met, please say I. I. And oppose? Nay. and then spirit and intent. Um, all those who believe this criteria has been met, please say I. I. I knew you were going to get a word in before we were done.

All those opposed? Nay. Okay. Then all f having met all five criteria, we can entertain a motion to approve this request for variance. Do I have such a motion? Chairman, I I move to approve case 06 202611516 Cedar Street request for variance to the rear yard setback in accordance with the LDL section 16-2-5 parenthesis D parenthesis and an RP-2 district. Do I have a second? Second. I have a motion and a second for approval. All those in favor, please say I. I

oppose. Nay. It has been approved, you'll be notified in writing. Thank you all for coming in. We appreciate it. Thank you. Thanks. And seeing no further items on our agenda, do we have a motion? Oh, forgot the most important thing. We are saying goodbye tonight to Dana Fington, who's been on this committee longer than any of us can remember. Exactly. She's moving on to the planning commission, which is a a uh much more difficult job than this. I'll tell you from from my prior experience. So, good luck to you, Dana. We will definitely miss you. Going to miss you guys. Thank you.

We're here. Do I have a motion to adjurnn? Okay, we are