Board of Adjustment - Regular Meeting

I'd love to go to Ireland. My mom loved Ireland and she died before she got a chance to go and it was it was so cheap. The flight was only like 375 bucks. They say the countryside over there is absolutely just there's no people. Maybe it's just okay. We ready? Yes, sir. Okay. Okay. I'd like to call the meet board of adjustment meeting of for the city of St. City of Overland, Missouri to be held April 9th, 2025. Will now be called to order. Roll call. I will now conduct a roll call for the 817th public hearing of the board of adjustment. Dan Kipper here. Tim Jones here. Jay Fetch here. Jeff Okonnell here. John Seal here. Legal counsel Joseph Bond here. Community development Katie Sanders here. Approval of minutes. Has the board reviewed the minutes from the meeting held on Wednesday, March 12th, 2025? And if so, does anyone have questions or charges changes to be made to the minutes? No. Okay. Okay. I will now entertain a motion to approve the minutes of the March 12th, 2025. I'll make that motion. Board of adjustment hearing. Tim and I need a second. That was Jay. Oh, that was Jay. I'll second that. Don't Okay, Jay and Tim. Yeah. Okay. Pull the vote. Seal. Yes. Okonnell, yes. Kipper, yes. Jones, yes, sir. And Fetch, yes. Thank you. Okay. All parties present wishing to

partake in any discussion of the applications for variances or appeals submitted to the board, will you please step forward to be sworn in? Once you've been sworn in, you may take your seat. So, anybody that's wants to give any testimony, you need to come up to the microphone here and get sworn in. Anyone that's an applicant that's here to be before the board this evening needs to step forward. Thank you, Katie. I guess Yes, sir. Thanks for clarifying. Appreciate that. You want us to speak or not? We just want you to come up and all you guys come on up to the microphone. Not not at the microphone, but just around here. So, making a line. Make a line. Make a line. Stand in line. Okay. We're going to have you take the oath. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you will give at this hearing will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Yes. Okay. Thank you. You can have a seat. Period of validity and required votes. As per section 400.935, period of validity, unless, as otherwise, specified by the board of adjustment and their approval for an application, no variance granted by the board of adjustment shall be valid for a period longer than 180 days from the date upon which the variance is granted. Unless within such period, one, a building permit is obtained and the construction or alteration of the structure is commenced and pursued diligently towards completion. Or two, a certificate of occupancy is obtained and a use or occupancy commenced, the board of adjustment may grant extensions not exceeding 1880 days each upon written application without notice or hearing. As per section 400.940 approvals required vote, a concurring vote of four members of the

board shall be necessary to reverse any order, requirement, decision, or determination of any such administrative official or to decide in favor of the applicant on any matter upon which is required to pass under the article or to affect any variation in the chapter. First agenda item, 9908 Ivan Avenue. Would the applicant for the record please step to the podium and state your name and address? Um, last name is Black, first name is Kilia. It's spelled K E K L I A 9908 I Okay, can you take that microphone out and hold it? Oh, sure. Thank you. It's just sometimes it doesn't always pick up recordings real well. Thank you. Appreciate it. Okay. Do you have anything for the record? Do you have any items that you would like to have entered in as exhibits of evidence that you have not already presented? I guess it I this is my first time. I guess it depends on the questions. Um so I've presented everything um through email. Got to hold the mic up. I'm sorry. Through email except for um I don't know if you need this or not. Basically, I guess just in my um my want to continue to keep the structure, I just like printed out like all the houses that have the same thing that I got. I don't know if that or not. Um you can pass that around. You can give it to Katie and she can pass. And what we would do is it okay if we take a copy of that? I printed off seven. So I think I actually if you have a copy for everybody that'd be great. It's just we have to put it into the record. So um I just didn't be something that we

couldn't take. Yeah. I don't have a picture of the structure. It's on my phone. Okay. Thank you for Okay. Reading of the exhibits by title only A1 through A8. A1 through A9. I'll include this as exhibit. Okay. A9. Okay. Thank you. Thank you Katie for catching that. Exhibit A1. Agenda. Exhibit A2, application PZ25-00002. Exhibit A3, notice of public hearing. Exhibit A4, ordinance. Exhibit A5, staff report. Exhibit A6, GIS map. Exhibit A7, permit application and plan. Exhibit A8, permit denial letter. And exhibit A9 is the evidence submitted by evidence evidence submitted by the applicant. Okay. Are there any questions regarding the exhibits presented? If no questions, then exhibits A1 through A9 are now received into evidence as presented. Hearing progression order. Community development present the city's case. Thank you, chairman. On February 10th, 2025, the building safety coordinator placed a staff work order on the property due to the construction of a front porch cover being constructed without a permit. On the same day, a building permit was submitted, however, was subsequently denied due to the front porch exceeding the allowable size. The existing front por, excuse me, the existing front porch was constructed into the 30-foot front yard setback and measured 4t in depth by 8t in width. By code, a property owner may replace an

existing porch of the same dimensions with either like material or better by permit. The proposed front porch cover exceeds the original dimensions and causes further deviation from the code and was therefore denied. That's all I have. Chairman, thank you. Additional comments from the city attorney. I think Katie summed it up pretty well. This is um generally speaking, we've seen a lot of instances where people are essentially replacing in the same footprint. This is a slightly bigger footprint, but other than that, it's similar to what we've seen in the past. Okay. Thank you, Joe. Applicant, present your case in hardship. Um I guess so we were getting a roof and siding done and for when we first bought the house we had an aluminum I'm sorry aluminum porch covering which was the same width as the as what I got which is covering the the pro the porch but the one that Okay. So when we bought the house, that's how it was. But then uh when we got the siding replaced the first time, um it was damaged. It was old. So anyway, so we got we ended up getting a cloth covering, which was again um slightly smaller than what I replaced this with. So then now that we're getting sighting again, I decided um that I wanted it to cover the full porch and just to look like it it came with the house like it was built with the house if you know what I mean. So that it'll be siding and it'll be a roof and all that. It won't be like the it the first one was aluminum. So now it has like the peaks that the house has on it. I wish I had a picture of the house. I should have brought a picture of the house. I don't know why I didn't think about that. So anyway, um that's what we decided to do. So, um, I called a company. The people that are doing my roof, um, first I had them give me an

estimate. It was a little bit more than what I wanted to pay. So, then I called a company. Um, they were actually doing the exact same thing right around the corner. And, um, I maybe a month or two earlier. So, then they came and they did mine. And I asked them if I needed a permit. They said no. But I also looked and when I looked on the website um I saw like fence permits which we had had we did that like two years ago. But anyway, um so I was like oh I was okay with no I don't need a permit. So then when um Mr. Paige came by and he was like you know no you do need a permit. I was like okay. So he told me fill out all the paperwork and I did that. Um, basically I just I didn't know and I know that that's not an excuse, but I am. Thank you. Um, comments or questions from the board? Yes, your honor. You were in you were told by the contractor that you were told by the contractor you didn't need a permit. Yeah. Who's the contractor? Um, Randy Construction LLC. I have a telephone number for them. 314939. Miss Katie, have we had them do work? I don't know that off the top of my head. Jay, I'd have to go. 312. They actually did some work one, two, three doors down from me. Okay. Um, but that would have been about um maybe three years ago. Okay. um that I I don't know exactly all what they did, but I stopped and got their card when they were spray painting like painting the out the exterior of the house. I would always just recommend call us. Yeah, just call us and ask. We're here to help you and guide you through this. Okay. Yeah. Also, another

question is how much larger is this versus the old the existing? You know, I I meant we still have the the aluminum frame from the not when we bought the house, but from when we um replaced it and I meant to about 4 in. Okay. I Okay, thank you. D I have a question. So, the porch already sits out. This is only going to be where the porch is already sitting out of the 30 foot back that number, right? So, this wouldn't be anything more than what's already sticking out. Yeah. It's just a covering, right? It's just a covering in a roof. Yeah. Right. For an existing porch that's already out that far anyway. Mhm. So, just it's wider than it was. A little wider, but it's no closer to the street, right? For the setback. Is there a side set back, too? No, it doesn't violate the side setback. So, it only violates the front yard set. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions? Comments from the audience. Okay. I will now entertain a motion to approve a variance from section 400.180. D.4.8. I'll make that motion. When I get done, hang on the motion tight requiring not less than a 30 foot front yard setback specifically to allow for the construction of a 4 foot by 8x4 covered front porch in the front yard setback as presented within the applicant's plan and due to the practical difficulties as demonstrated by the applicant. Now, do I have a motion to approve? I'll make that motion, your honor. Okay, a second. I'll second that motion. Okay, Dan, pull the vote. Okonnell, yes. Kipper, yes. Jones,

yes. Fetch, yes. Seal, yes. Okay, you have your you have your variance. Get with her and she'll tell you about when you get Thanks for attending. Thank you all. Well, PP will contact you once it's been processed and you'll be able to come in and get the permit and then I'll then I can let my contractor know to go ahead and once you get the permit. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Second agenda item 9011 Page Avenue. Okay. Would the applicant for the record state your name and address? Uh Jason Buckton. I'm with Midwest Light and Sign in Farmington, Missouri. We're here on behalf of Aspen Dental at 9 911. What? 9011. 9011. Yeah. 911 page. Does the applicant, for the record, have any items you would like to enter in as exhibits for evidence that you haven't already entered? Don't think so. Everything's been submitted. Yes, sir. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Reading of the exhibits by title only. B1 through B8. Exhibit B1. Agenda. Exhibit B2. Application PZ325-00003 exhibit B3 application PZ25-00004 exhibit B4 notice of public hearing exhibit B5 ordinance exhibit B6 staff report exhibit B7 GIS mapping and exhibit B8 permit application plans denial letter. Are there any questions

regarding the exhibits presented? No. If no questions, then exhibits B1 through B8 are received into evidence as presented. Hearing progression order, community development present the city's case. Thank you, chairman. On January 16th, 2025, the applicant applied for four attached wall-mounted signs to be installed on each face of the building that is currently under construction as spendental, as Jason explained. Subsequently, three of the four applications were denied as per section 400.840.8.2. Only one attached wall-mounted sign is allowed by code. It's my understanding the applicant has since declared the attached sign to face the north, which would be at the back of the building, will not be installed. Therefore, there are two attached wall-mounted signs to face the east and the west uh elevations that violate the code. The attached wall-mounted sign to face the south, which would be at the front of the building, is the only allowed sign by code at this time. Katie, they do not exceed what would be considered the size. That's what I was They can be more detail. Correct. Right. Doesn't violate the size. It's the number of signs. We only allow one wall-mounted sign. Okay. So, thanks. Yes, sir. Okay. Additional comments from the city attorney. Um if you look at the property uh it's going to be kind of oriented in a way where I think a lot of the code when it was initially designed buildings would be oriented toward page but this is going to be set you know back a little bit. So and it might be unique from other you know businesses along page which have their you know sign facing directly out. Um, but other than that, I think Katie summed it up, you know, pretty well. Okay. Thank you. Applicant, you will

present your case and your hardship. Sure. That is the case. Um, like she said, we're only allowed one wall sign by the code. We're asking for two additional wall signs on the east and west uh elevation because right now we would just have a sign on the south elevation which like you said would be facing Paige. Um, from a sign person, that's dangerous to have to look sideways to look at a sign. So, if you're traveling east and west, we need those signs to be on each end of the building. There's no way there's no other way to advertised to the traffic going east or west without putting signs on those side of the building. We worked with uh Excel Signs and Total Access a few years ago uh to achieve the same goal because they were in the same situation of visibility, right? And those Okay. Thank you. Comments or questions from the board? I do, your honor. Um, there's an Aspen Dental over in Bridton, I believe, over on Do they have multiple signs? Most of them do. Most u most Aspen dentals try for four signs wherever they can get. Yeah, they want to be on all four sides. This one here, I kind of agree with there's no reason to have one on the back. You're facing res. I don't that would be just waste to me. Um, yeah. I will tell you a lot of the Aspen Dentls end up in strip mall parking lots and things like that. So, the traffic is all the way around them. This one's different because it is unusual, isn't it? For this one is a little unusual, but it's it's not bad, but you know what I mean? Without having the signs on the side of the building, you're not going to see it till you pass it. And are these illuminated for evening? They are. They are. Yep. Okay. Thank you, your honor. And question. Go ahead, David. So you said a couple other times you put multiple signs on a building. Was that in Overland? Yes, it was. The total access right right next door has the same. We went through the same situation years ago. It's not a precedent. It's set exercise. It's already been done. Yes. Yeah. We're not setting a new president that I'm not going to say the president's already been set, but it

it's been set. But I'm not an attorney. So I I I would add one of the things that we considered with uh total access urgent care is there's a dog leg there coming around off 170 to page. There's a curve and that was one of the things that was pointed out at that that intersection. It does make it a little more difficult to see things and it's a tricky intersection. You have a side road there. Not that I'm making his case for him, but No, but that that side of the street is tricky as opposed to the opposite side of the street where Five Below and Dollar General or Dollar Tree is. You can see those point of the day. These are here. Like she said, it's just tricky if you drove past it at all. I mean, you could understand why it was a rule because it'd be like somebody putting up so many signs. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No, I get it. I get it. And I see too also on your drawing that the signs are on the the two signs that we're talking about here, they're actually towards the the south end of the building. So, they're out to be seen. Yeah. They're as far forward as we could get them. So, yes. Yeah. Their building construction is is also a little different than other Aspens that you've seen. You know what I mean? A lot of them are more square. This one they've done what they can do to you. Yeah. We just want to keep the signs out of the neighborhood, you know, personally. I understand. Okay. Anybody else? Mr. there. Uh, also I I believe at the total access there was a groundmounted sign and I think we had some variance discussion about the groundmounted one and there was concern that it might be uh in the sight triangle and we had that discussion. I think that was like 18 months ago or something feels about right. Um, feels about right. So that's that was that case. So that's a little bit different but yeah I think this is orientation code any comments from the audience. Okay see hearing none I will now entertain a motion to approve a variance from section 400.840.8.2 two specifically to allow installation

of an attached wall mounted sign on the east elevation not to exceed 86.39 square ft specifically related to signage for Aspen Dentl as presented within the applicant site plan due to the practical difficulties as demonstrated by the applicant. Do I have a motion to approve? Motion to approve. Tim second. Nope. That was Jay J. Fetch. Yeah, you guys sound too much alike. Okay, I better start looking. All right, second. I'll second. Okay, pull the vote. Seal, yes. Okonnell's a yes. Kipper, yes. Jones, yes. Fetch, yes. Okay. I will now entertain a motion to approve a variance from section 400.840.8.2, two specifically to allow installation of an attached wall mounted sign on the west elevation not to exceed 86.39 square ft specifically related to the signage for Aspen Dental and as presented within the applicant sign plan due to the practical difficulties as demonstrated by the applicant. Do I have a motion to approve? Jay says approved. Thank you, Jay. Second. I'll second it. John, pull the vote. Jay, yes. John Seal, yes. Okonnell, a yes. Kipper, yes. Jones, yes. Okay, you've been approved. Thank you. Third agenda item, 9551 Woodson Road. Would the applicant for the record please step forward to the podium and state your name and address? 2551 2551. Yes, sir. Good evening gentlemen. Ladies and gentlemen,

state your name and address. Um, my name is Raja Kaparthi. Address is 2551 road. Thank you. Okay. Reading of exhibits by title only C1 through C10. Exhibit C1. Agenda. Exhibit C2, application PZ25-00006. Exhibit C6, application PZ25-00007. Exhibit C4, application PZ25-00008. Exhibit C5, application PZ25-00009. Exhibit C6, notice of public hearing. Exhibit C7, ordinancees. Exhibit C C8, staff report. Exhibit C9, GIS mapping. Exhibit C10, site plan, legal aerial. Are there any questions regarding the exhibits presented? If no questions, then exhibits C1 through C10 are received into evidence as presented. Hearing progression order, community development, present the city's case. K. Thank you, chairman. Due to a recent site plan review related to a conditional use permit, it was determined the building and coaches into the front sides, both north and south boundaries and rear yard setbacks. The planning and zoning commission approved the site plan contingent upon the approval of the variances that are being requested this evening. Please note the parking lot west of the subject parcel is currently a separate parcel and therefore the building encroaches into the setback. That's all I have. Okay. Thank you. Additional comments from the city attorney. Yeah. So, um, this came up as Katie mentioned in a recent cup. Um, we are in the process of trying to get a lot consolidation as well because they're both owned by the same person.

So, we're trying to kind of clean up some of these downtown lots in terms of, you know, subdivision that maybe is making less sense. So, the goal here is that these properties, um, the one we're talking about and the one directly to the west, which is lot 17 in the, uh, picture, that those will be consolidated, uh, sometime soon, and that would alleviate the issue with the rear yard setback as well, because we are going to have a lot more space. But, um, they still want to get in the building now, so that's why we're here for that piece of it, obviously. Well, they're actually in operating now, so we're trying to get everything ducks in a row to facilitate it. Yep. Thank you. Applicant, present your case in hardship. Uh, so there's no hardship meaning it's been there. The building has been there for very very long time. So we can't do anything. I mean, you can't set back front, side or rear as it is stated. And the other thing the other day K and I were talking about consolidating lot parking lot like Joe said we own I own the building also the parking lot that is the only hot okay thank you comments or questions from the board yes so just for I understand you're you're expanding is that what's going on no just that you want to consolidate is that yeah under a new ownership so so right now he has a business occupancy that that's attempting to gain their occupancy through conditional use permit and occupancy. It's Eagle Gym that's changed ownership a couple times. Unfortunately, the last owner of Eagle Gym failed to obtain the CUP and occupancy which has made it a little rougher for the new owner and so they

were subject to the site plan and all of that and we so we identified some issues that were wrong. I understand he can't buy building to the left or right of him. Yeah. To try to make the sideyard setbacks or the front. And of course, right now, he has to get a setback approval of a variance for a setback on the rear because we're just trying to get these people in there legally. Ideally though, he will be consolidating the parking lot with the front lot, which will eliminate that rear yard setback requirement, but he still has these other ones he can't do anything about. Okay. No, thanks for clarify. I was just trying to understand like what brought you here. Yeah. comments from the audience. Okay. I will now entertain a motion to approve a variance from section 400.230D.4 A specifically to allow the building to fully encroach into the 30-foot front yard setback as presented within the applicant site plan due to practical difficulties as demonstrated by the applicant. Do I have a motion to approve? I'll make a motion to approve. Tim second. Second. Jay pull the vote. Kipper yes. Jones yes. Fetch yes. Seal yes. And all counts are yes. I will now entertain a motion to approve a variance from section 400.230.D.4. B specifically to allow the building to fully encroach into the 12-oot sideyard setback on the north boundary as presented with the applicant site plan due to the practical difficulties as demonstrated by the applicant. Do I have a motion to approve? I'll make a motion to approve. Second Tim and J. Okay. Pull the vote. Jones, yes. Fetch, yes. Seal, yes. Okonnell's a yes. Kipper. Yes. I will now entertain a

motion to approve a variance from section 400.230.D.4.B specifically to allow the building to fully encroach into the 12T yard site setback on the side B south boundary as presented within the applicant site plan due to the practical difficulties as demonstrated by the applicant. Do I have a motion to approve? Motion to approve. Jay second. Make that motion. Dan. Okay. Pull the vote. Fetch. Yes. Seal. Yes. Okonnell's a yes. Kipper, yes. And Jones, yes. I will now entertain a motion to approve a variance from section 400.230. D.4 C. Specifically to allow the building to encroach 8 and 1/2 ft into the 25 ft rear yard setback as presented within the applicant site site plan. due to the practical difficulties as demonstrated by the applicant. Do I have a motion to approve? Motion to approve. J second. I'll sec I'll second that motion. Tim's got it. Pull the vote. Seal yes. Okonnell's a yes. Kipper, yes. Jones, yes. And Fetch, yes. You have your You have your variances. Thank you for Yeah. Thank you, gender. Thank you. Good luck. Thank you so much. Thank you. Appreciate it. Fourth agenda item, 2518 Woodson Road. With the applicants, for the record, please step to the podium and state your name and address. Uh Mike Chow for 2518 Woodson. Do you have anything for the record? Any items that you would like to be entered in as exhibits of evidence? Uh nothing additional. Thank you. I will now read the exhibits D1 through D14 by title

only. Exhibit D1 agenda. Exhibit D2 application PZ25-000010. Exhibit D3, application PZ25- Z0011 exhibit D4, application PZ25-000012. Exhibit D5, application PZ25-000013. Exhibit D6, application PZ25-000014. Exhibit D7, application PZ25-000015. Exhibit D8, application PZ25-000016. Exhibit D9, application PZ25-000017. Exhibit D10, notice of public hearing. Exhibit D11, ordinances. Exhibit D12, staff report. Exhibit D13, GIS mapping. Exhibit D14 site survey. Are the Are there any questions regarding the exhibits presented? If no questions in exhibits D1 through D14 are received into evidence as presented hearing progression order, community development present the city's case. Thank you, chairman. Um, again, due to a recent site plan review related to a conditional use permit, it was determined the building encroaches into all setbacks, front, sides, and rear. There's no landscape frontage, no interior landscape, and there's uh no landscape perimeter either. Lastly, there's no parking. Planning and zoning commission approved the site plan contingent upon the approval of the variances that are being requested this evening. Okay. Additional comments from the city attorney. Yeah. So, this is just another uh one of these downtown buildings

that's fairly old that um because we've had continuous use of it. Um we have kind of not ever really sight plan reviewed it in depth, but now that we have um obviously all these existing uh nonconformities um were, you know, front and center, so they needed to be rectified. So, that's really what we're looking at. It's just trying to fix up some of these properties. I there was a one point discussion of downtown district. I think that that has stalled a bit and we don't want that to get in the way of people using these buildings. So, thank you Joel. Okay. Applicant, present your case and hardship. Uh well, basically there's no land available anywhere to fit and experiences and um u like like Katie said, there's I'm surrounded by all sides. I have no land. Thank you. Comments from the audience. Okay. I'll now entertain a motion to approve a variance from section. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I do have a question. Sure. What is the um purpose? What are you going to use it for? Oh, uh martial arts studio. Oh, m Oh, martial arts. Okay, very good. Cuz she was saying that there was no parking. That's was my concern. Public parking. There's no parking on the lot, but he's right next to the city, right? I know, but I just I was wondering if if it was going to be like how many people in um about like 30 to 40 people. Okay. So, do you think that would accommodate your your guest? Yeah, we're currently in Overland Community Center right now. So, it's basically same actually smaller parking lot, so it should be very good. Thanks for answering. Aren't you up at uh Dave's Auto by Dave's Auto right now? Martial arts. Is that the studio or not? No, this is St. Louis Budakon. Oh, okay. And he he's been working out of the community center. Oh, that's right. That's right. Purchased this building

also and just trying to come into compliance so that he can operate. And the medicine shop is still staying there, right? Yep. Great. Yeah. He's got the public parking right next door. Yes, sir. Matter of fact, I think we still have electric on it. Okay. Okay. Now comments from the audience hearing none. I will now entertain a motion to approve a variance from section 400.230 D.1 specifically to allow the minimum size of the lot 14,298 square ft when the minimum size of a lot is required to be 20,000 square ft as presented within the applicant site plan due to the practical difficulties as demonstrated by the applicant. Do I have a motion to approve? I'll make that motion. Second. I'll second it. Pull the vote. Kipper, yes. Jones, yes. Fetch, yes. Seal, yes. Okonnell, a yes. I will now entertain a motion to approve a variance from section 400.230. D.4. A specifically to allow the building to encroach 18 ft into the required 25 ft front yard setback as presented with the within the applicant site plan due to the practical difficulties as demonstrated by the applicants. Do I have a motion to approve? Motion to approve. Second. Second that motion. Okay. And pull the vote. Jones. Yes. Fetch. Yes. Seal. Yes. Okonnell's a Yes. Kipper. Yes. I will now entertain a motion to approve a variance from section 400.230 D.4B, specifically to allow the building to fully encroach into the required 12 ft sideyard setback on both the north

and the south boundary lines as presented within the EPAN site plan due to practical difficulties as demonstrated by the applicant. Do I have a motion to approve? Motion to approve. Second. I'll second that. Okay. Pull the vote. Fetch. Yes. Seal. Yes. Okonnell are yes. Kipper, yes. And Jones, yes. I will now entertain a motion to approve a variance from section 400.230.D.4. C specifically to allow the building to fully encroach into the required 25- ft rear yard setback as required when commercial property abuts a residential property in the general commercial zoning district and as a as presented within the applicant site plan due to practical difficulties and demonstrated by the applicant. So I have a motion to approve. Motion to approve. J second. I'll second that motion. Okay. Pull the vote. Seal, yes. Okonnell's a yes. Kipper, yes. Jones, yes. Fetch, yes. Halfway there. I will now entertain a motion to approve a variance from section 400.450.8.2 specifically to allow for no landscape frontage as presented within the applicant site plan due to the practical difficulties as demonstrated by the applicant. Do I have a motion to approve? Motion to approve. Second. Second it. Pull the vote. Okonnell is a yes. Kipper, yes. Jones, yes. Fetch, yes. Seal, yes. I will now entertain a motion to approve a variance from section 400.450.8.4 specifically to allow for no interior landscape as presented with the applicant site plan due to the practical difficulties as demonstrated by the

applicant. Do I have a motion to approve? We'll make a motion to approve. Second. I'll second it. Pull the vote. Kipper, yes. Jones, yes. Fetch, yes. Seal, yes. And Connells are yes. I will now entertain a motion to approve a variance from section 400.450.8.11, 8.11 specifically to allow for no perimeter landscape buffer as presented with the applicants within the applicant's site plan due to the practical difficulties as demonstrated by the applicant. Do I have a motion to approve? I'll make a motion to approve. Second. Okay. Pull the vote. Jones, yes. Fetch, yes. Seal, yes. Okonnell, a yes. Kipper, yes. Okay. I will now entertain a motion to approve a variance from section 400.470B.2, specifically to allow for no parking stalls when a minimum of four parking stalls per each 1,000 square ft of the building area is required as presented within the applicant site plan due to practical difficulties as demonstrated by the applicant. Do I have a motion to approve? Motion to approve. Okay. Second. Oh, go ahead, Dan. I'll second it. Okay, pull the vote. Jones, yes. Fetch, yes. Seal, yes. Okonnell's a yes. And Kipper, yes. There you go. You're done. Yeah. Good luck. Almost $1,000 right on on the permit. Thank you. Good luck. Fifth agenda item. 9820 Lackland Road. Would the applicant for the record please step to the podium and state your name and address?

How you doing? Um my name is Lucia Patil and we representing 9820 L Road. Okay. Do you have anything you would like to add to the record? Any items that you would like to see entered as exhibits of evidence? My name is Gino Vivo Ree. I'm a contractor helping the client here to uh uh work the lot. Um no other further uh exhibits are provided other than provided so far. Reading of the exhibits by title only E1 through D7 exhibit D1 agenda. Exhibit D2 application PZ25-000018. That they are supposed to be E. I apologize. Oh E. Yes, sir. Okay, we'll back this up. Reading of the exhibits by title only E1 through E7 exhibit E1 agenda exhibit E2 application PZ25-000018 exhibit E3 yes notice of public hearing exhibit E4 ordinance exhibit E5 staff report exhibit E6 GIS mapping and exhibit E7 site plan. Are there any questions regarding the exhibits presented? No. If no questions regarding the exhibits, D1 through D7 are received into evidence as presented. Hearing progression order, community development, present the city's case. Thank you. Sorry about the error. I think I was just getting tired at that point. No problem. Glad you caught it. Yes, sir. Uh recently the city council approved a lot consolidation of 9818 Lackland Road and 9820 Lackland Road. The purpose of the lot consolidation was due in part to the property owner's interest in constructing a building addition onto the main structure at 9820 Lackland

Road, the convenience store also known as Ali's Market. The proposed excuse me, the proposed addition will encroach into the rear yard setback. The property owner has preemptively filed a variance application prior to submitting the building permit application as they are fully aware the proposed building will violate the rear yard setback. Nothing further. Thank you. Yes, sir. Any additional comments from the city attorney? Yes. So, as you can see, this is a unique uh kind of boomerang shaped lot. Um it based on the orientation of the building prior to the lot consolidation, this was likely a sideyard setback issue. And as you know, sideyards are usually a lot narrower than rear yards. Um but once this was consolidated, that is became a rear lot line which created a rear lot um issue. Encroachment. Yes, thank you. Um and obviously, you know, we had talked to the applicant prior to the consolidation about potential other options to orient this building. Um this was kind of what was settled on and a lot had to be consolidated to move forward. So this is kind of phase two of this whole application so to speak. So okay, applicant present your case in hardship. I'll speak. So the case as you mentioned this lot is you know at normal shape. So when we went through the process of consolidation we we were aware of what we were going to be running into potential uh setback you know clearance. Um but uh that's why we're applying for this and that's the case. We want to be get more storage into the store and get a better layout on the uh sales area because it's ran kind of tight a little bit there. So they're trying to get a lot of that storage out of that sales floor area at that addition. uh that would help inside the store, huh? Yeah.

Get the store looking a little more better because you know there's there right that that's the uh that's the case we're working with and um all hardship obviously we're trying to get you know better appearance for the customers as well and also security because they need to watch also people walking around tight spaces. Okay. Thank you. Comments and questions from the board. What about 9818? Is that stay in there? Yes. They use it as right now as a storage as well. So, it's is there and we've we've discussed with the applicant uh previously um if that were to ever be separately operated and rented, it would require a separate cup and probably some other conditions upon that operation. So, it didn't trigger any sort of zoning issue from our perspective because it was being commonly operated as a storage facility, but if they were to ever rent it out to be a hot dog stand or something else, um that would need to go through CUP and then we would kind of see what sort of traffic flow and go from there. If if that's the nature of the question. Well, they were adding on to 9820. I just wondered about 9818 if it was if it was going to stay there or what they were going to do with it. Yeah, right now I guess I'll let motion. Right now it's going to be stay at. Yeah. Okay. Any comments from the audience? Okay. I will now entertain a motion to approve the variance from section 400. 220D.4 4.C specifically to allow for a 6 and 1/2 ft rear yard setback in relation to new construction of a building addition

when a 25- ft yard rear setback is required as presented within the applicant site plan due to the practical difficulties as demonstrated by the applicant. Do I have a motion for approval? I'll make that motion. Second. I'll second the motion. Okay. Pull the vote. Kipper, yes. Jones, yes. Fetch, I must recuse myself. I am a neighbor of them from the Lions Club. I represent the Lions Club. Seal, yes. All counts a yes. Okay, your application has been approved. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah, good luck to you guys. Thank you. Okay, I need a motion to adjurnn. Motion to adjurnn. Second. I'll second the motion. All in favor? I I. All opposed? Eyes have it. We are adjourned. Maybe that's two meetings in the last four to 45 minutes. Bump. Oh, take it back. Yeah.