the-compact
Zoning Board Of Appeals Wednesday, July 15, 2026 · 37 min

City of Birmingham Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting on July 14, 2026

Transcript

Click any timestamp to jump the video to that moment. Auto-transcribed; expect occasional errors on proper nouns.

  1. Good evening and welcome to the regularly scheduled meeting for the Board of Zoning Appeals. The BZA members are volunteers and receive no compensation. We are appointed by the City Commission for staggered three-year terms. Under state statutes, the BZA hears three types of appeals. Dimensional are non-use variances, including signed variances. We have two of those tonight. The appellate must show practical difficulty complying with the dimensional requirements of the ordinance. It requires four affirmative votes, and as I mentioned, both appeals we have tonight are dimensional. We also look at use and appeals of interpretations, and those don't apply this evening. Our procedure is all comments are to be addressed to myself, the chair. Please wait to be recognized. City staff will make a presentation regarding the appeal and take questions from the board members. The appellant is then invited to present their case. Only one person may speak on behalf of any particular appeal. I can't make exceptions if there's an architect or an engineer that we need more information. Members of the public are then invited to come forward, identify themselves, and provide comments to the board. The hearing is then closed. Motions by the board are entertained and acted upon. In all cases, this is not a popularity contest. Granting or denying a variance is based substantially on the appellant meeting their burden of proof. Can we please call the role of the board members? The board members? The board members? The board members? The board members? The board members? The board members? The board members? The board members? So we have a full board this evening. So as I mentioned, for a dimensional variance, you need four of seven. Four of remove votes. I'll call the roll of the two appeals tonight. Do we have someone here for 504-506 Townsend? Thank you. And do we have someone here for 1982 Hayes? Thank you. Besides the one or two correspondence we saw for Townsend, are there any other correspondence regarding the appeals? And the appellants have received copies of those? You've seen the support for your appeal? Very good. Before you gentlemen are the meeting notes from the last regularly scheduled meeting, do we have any amendments or do we have a motion to approve?

  2. Granting or denying a variance is based substantially on the appellant meeting their burden of proof. Can we please call the role of the board members? The board members? The board members? The board members? The board members? The board members? The board members? The board members? The board members? So we have a full board this evening. So as I mentioned, for a dimensional variance, you need four of seven. Four of remove votes. I'll call the roll of the two appeals tonight. Do we have someone here for 504-506 Townsend? Thank you. And do we have someone here for 1982 Hayes? Thank you. Besides the one or two correspondence we saw for Townsend, are there any other correspondence regarding the appeals? And the appellants have received copies of those? You've seen the support for your appeal? Very good. Before you gentlemen are the meeting notes from the last regularly scheduled meeting, do we have any amendments or do we have a motion to approve? Motion to approve. Motion to approve. Second. Do we have a second? Any comments about that? All in favor of approving the minutes? Aye. All opposed. Hearing none. The minutes are approved. Our first appeal tonight is case number 2617 4504-506 Townsend. And I believe Nick is coming on by Zoom. First yes good how are you very good thank you for accommodating me virtually today I will admit that Jeff told me he was a little sick of seeing me so he asked me to be virtual so I think that was pretty messed up but well since you haven't turned your video on could you also tell us where you're zooming from in your address sure I'm at 1360 Pine Quest in Ferndale and we're gonna come visit you I just want to know your address very good please tell us about this case sure thanks so I got a Corky site for you 504 506 Townsend I guess my tact is to split it up three ways I want to start with first this is a historic property it's the

  3. meeting, do we have any amendments or do we have a motion to approve? Motion to approve. Motion to approve. Second. Do we have a second? Any comments about that? All in favor of approving the minutes? Aye. All opposed. Hearing none. The minutes are approved. Our first appeal tonight is case number 2617 4504-506 Townsend. And I believe Nick is coming on by Zoom. First yes good how are you very good thank you for accommodating me virtually today I will admit that Jeff told me he was a little sick of seeing me so he asked me to be virtual so I think that was pretty messed up but well since you haven't turned your video on could you also tell us where you're zooming from in your address sure I'm at 1360 Pine Quest in Ferndale and we're gonna come visit you I just want to know your address very good please tell us about this case sure thanks so I got a Corky site for you 504 506 Townsend I guess my tact is to split it up three ways I want to start with first this is a historic property it's the historic Hostin Logan house I'm sure about when it was built but it looks to be early 1900s or very late 1800s due to that historic designation of course it did have to be reviewed by the Historic District Commission it was accomplished that on June 3rd 2026 just last month they were granted a certificate of appropriateness with a few conditions some relating to materials but if I may summarize the conversation related to the subject of this these variances tonight they were ultimately happy with the bulk the area the setback types they understand the challenge with the historic property and from historic perspective it's placed rather appropriately for an addition the other quirk is that this property was a duplex before it was recently purchased by the petitioners a duplex is actually not a permitted use in the r8 zoning district in which it's located but a single family home is which is what they're proposing to um transition into so it will now be a single family home in the r8 zoning district which kind

  4. three ways I want to start with first this is a historic property it's the historic Hostin Logan house I'm sure about when it was built but it looks to be early 1900s or very late 1800s due to that historic designation of course it did have to be reviewed by the Historic District Commission it was accomplished that on June 3rd 2026 just last month they were granted a certificate of appropriateness with a few conditions some relating to materials but if I may summarize the conversation related to the subject of this these variances tonight they were ultimately happy with the bulk the area the setback types they understand the challenge with the historic property and from historic perspective it's placed rather appropriately for an addition the other quirk is that this property was a duplex before it was recently purchased by the petitioners a duplex is actually not a permitted use in the r8 zoning district in which it's located but a single family home is which is what they're proposing to um transition into so it will now be a single family home in the r8 zoning district which kind of is the last quirk it's uh frankly surrounded by r8 if you're familiar with the site or if you drove by or walked by if you simply look to the left or right you'll get an idea of what r8 single family attached development is townhome row row house style development all of this has necessitated a few variances so the addition itself is about a thousand square feet it does stretch to the west a little bit to the north and a little bit to the east the first variance that is required oh i should mention forgive me because it's a single family home in an r8 district the applicants required to develop that single family property to the r3 single family zoning standards that has triggered the three variances you see before you which i'll kind of go over right now the first one is that there's a minimum distance between principal residential buildings difference sudan mommori so so lots of 14 feet or 25 percent of the total lot width whichever is larger in this particular case it would be required to be 19.5 feet distance between buildings the applicants proposing a distance between of 16.20 feet the

  5. um transition into so it will now be a single family home in the r8 zoning district which kind of is the last quirk it's uh frankly surrounded by r8 if you're familiar with the site or if you drove by or walked by if you simply look to the left or right you'll get an idea of what r8 single family attached development is townhome row row house style development all of this has necessitated a few variances so the addition itself is about a thousand square feet it does stretch to the west a little bit to the north and a little bit to the east the first variance that is required oh i should mention forgive me because it's a single family home in an r8 district the applicants required to develop that single family property to the r3 single family zoning standards that has triggered the three variances you see before you which i'll kind of go over right now the first one is that there's a minimum distance between principal residential buildings difference sudan mommori so so lots of 14 feet or 25 percent of the total lot width whichever is larger in this particular case it would be required to be 19.5 feet distance between buildings the applicants proposing a distance between of 16.20 feet the variance required here is 3.30 feet secondly again the r3 zoning standards the rear yard setback is required to be a minimum of 30 feet the setback proposed in the plans you see is 20 feet therefore they'll need a 10-foot variance lastly the r3 zoning district requires the combined front and rear setbacks in the r3 zoning district to be a minimum of 55 feet the applicants proposing a combined front and rear setback of 44.90 feet thus necessitating 10.10 feet variance ultimately I'm happy to answer any questions whether it be zoning related or historic related and I'll kick it back to you chair thank you thanks Nick so first question do any of these variances impact what could be done on the adjacent properties if those properties had the ability to build or expand and now they have these structures especially the distance between are they impeding the ability of the neighbors to use their property as they could use without variances

  6. buildings the applicants proposing a distance between of 16.20 feet the variance required here is 3.30 feet secondly again the r3 zoning standards the rear yard setback is required to be a minimum of 30 feet the setback proposed in the plans you see is 20 feet therefore they'll need a 10-foot variance lastly the r3 zoning district requires the combined front and rear setbacks in the r3 zoning district to be a minimum of 55 feet the applicants proposing a combined front and rear setback of 44.90 feet thus necessitating 10.10 feet variance ultimately I'm happy to answer any questions whether it be zoning related or historic related and I'll kick it back to you chair thank you thanks Nick so first question do any of these variances impact what could be done on the adjacent properties if those properties had the ability to build or expand and now they have these structures especially the distance between are they impeding the ability of the neighbors to use their property as they could use without variances I would say I don't believe so for a couple of reasons. One, especially the property of the west, both sites to the west and the east were fairly recently developed. So they were developed to those R8 standards. They meet the R8 setbacks, heights, et cetera. I think on the second hand, if I may call it such, there's usually actually a disadvantage to the last property to develop in a row of properties like that. Because they're the last to have to match that distance between standard. So I think that the petitioner is actually in the bad spot here. I don't think it affects the neighbors whatsoever. And I don't know if I'm missing some dimensions. I'm on one of the pages, but I don't see the dimension of like the kitchen and living room expansion. And I don't see the depth of the, I actually see the depth of the garage. Oh yeah, 26 by 22. I do see it. I'm just trying to determine if these variances are reasonable relative to the proportional sizes of the expansion. So I can look at that. Board members, any other questions for Mr. Kona? Yeah, if this was a R8 property and the changes were being made as proposed as an R8 property,

  7. I would say I don't believe so for a couple of reasons. One, especially the property of the west, both sites to the west and the east were fairly recently developed. So they were developed to those R8 standards. They meet the R8 setbacks, heights, et cetera. I think on the second hand, if I may call it such, there's usually actually a disadvantage to the last property to develop in a row of properties like that. Because they're the last to have to match that distance between standard. So I think that the petitioner is actually in the bad spot here. I don't think it affects the neighbors whatsoever. And I don't know if I'm missing some dimensions. I'm on one of the pages, but I don't see the dimension of like the kitchen and living room expansion. And I don't see the depth of the, I actually see the depth of the garage. Oh yeah, 26 by 22. I do see it. I'm just trying to determine if these variances are reasonable relative to the proportional sizes of the expansion. So I can look at that. Board members, any other questions for Mr. Kona? Yeah, if this was a R8 property and the changes were being made as proposed as an R8 property, the rear setback would not be applicable. Is that correct? I believe the rear setback in the R8 is 20 feet. I believe the rear setback is a little bit better at the center of this property. I believe it's going to be 1,000 feet. So if I'm just restating, yes, a variance would not be required if they were able to develop the R8 standards. But the side setback would still be the issue? If I'm not mistaken, I think that's correct. And if it's not the side, it would still be the distance between. That's what I meant, yes, correct. Thank you. Nick, can you just give us a little bit of clarity? Because I think that's an important question. They aren't governed by the R8 because the R8 is multifamily, right? And because those multifamily rules don't apply to a single-family home, that's why it reverts, for lack of a better description, to R3? That's exactly correct, yep. So the requirements, if you're building five units attached, they're a little bit more generous in those smaller setbacks because you're doing density. Yeah, we're looking for a different form, style of development in the R8 zone, yes. A little more dense, a little closer to the street, all that good stuff.

  8. Yeah, if this was a R8 property and the changes were being made as proposed as an R8 property, the rear setback would not be applicable. Is that correct? I believe the rear setback in the R8 is 20 feet. I believe the rear setback is a little bit better at the center of this property. I believe it's going to be 1,000 feet. So if I'm just restating, yes, a variance would not be required if they were able to develop the R8 standards. But the side setback would still be the issue? If I'm not mistaken, I think that's correct. And if it's not the side, it would still be the distance between. That's what I meant, yes, correct. Thank you. Nick, can you just give us a little bit of clarity? Because I think that's an important question. They aren't governed by the R8 because the R8 is multifamily, right? And because those multifamily rules don't apply to a single-family home, that's why it reverts, for lack of a better description, to R3? That's exactly correct, yep. So the requirements, if you're building five units attached, they're a little bit more generous in those smaller setbacks because you're doing density. Yeah, we're looking for a different form, style of development in the R8 zone, yes. A little more dense, a little closer to the street, all that good stuff. Right. So the requirement as a residential single-family home is no more stringent than any other R3. It's just because you're in the R8, it seems unreasonable, maybe. I think that's a fair statement, personally. Any other questions for Nick, please? Yes, Mr. Brue, you mentioned that this wouldn't have any effect on the neighboring property. Did the recent development of the property to the west, did that development have any... ...or... ... Thank you. does that have any effect on this distance between structures? If they had moved, if they had been slightly smaller, it might have allowed for more of a development on this for distance at 19 foot six inches and were proposed at 16.2. Would that, it would have mattered, would it not? So it's almost like whoever hurried to the finish line and got the better shake on the distance between structure. I agree 100%, as I mentioned before, the disadvantage usually lies with the person to develop last in situations like this. Okay, thank you. Which would be the petitioner in this case.

  9. A little more dense, a little closer to the street, all that good stuff. Right. So the requirement as a residential single-family home is no more stringent than any other R3. It's just because you're in the R8, it seems unreasonable, maybe. I think that's a fair statement, personally. Any other questions for Nick, please? Yes, Mr. Brue, you mentioned that this wouldn't have any effect on the neighboring property. Did the recent development of the property to the west, did that development have any... ...or... ... Thank you. does that have any effect on this distance between structures? If they had moved, if they had been slightly smaller, it might have allowed for more of a development on this for distance at 19 foot six inches and were proposed at 16.2. Would that, it would have mattered, would it not? So it's almost like whoever hurried to the finish line and got the better shake on the distance between structure. I agree 100%, as I mentioned before, the disadvantage usually lies with the person to develop last in situations like this. Okay, thank you. Which would be the petitioner in this case. Any other questions for Nick? Seeing none, sir, thanks. You mind staying on until the case is over? I assumed you were going to. Absolutely, yeah. Thank you. Who's speaking on behalf of the appeal? Please come on up, your name, your address, and then tell us why you think this appeal is reasonable. Sure, hi, my name's Mia Gordon, 504 Townsend Street. Nice to meet you all. Thank you, Nick, for setting the scene. Good evening, members of the board. My name is Mia Gordon, and my husband, Zach Lerner, and I, our owners and petitions. Just real quick, does there a green light on that? Does it look like this mic is on? Oh, yeah, it's on. It's just going to be low. All right, just want to make sure. Thanks. Can you hear, everyone can hear me okay? Yeah. yes we can hear you just hoping that whoever's watching if anyone okay hopefully everybody um yes mia gordon zach lerner my husband and our architect glenda meads are here with us tonight we fell in love with birmingham's vimer community and purchased this historic home with the intention of raising our family here for decades to come in fact we just welcomed our baby boy into the world last month making our commitment to building a long-term family home here all the more meaningful to add some context a family member and nearby r8 homeowner purchased this property as

  10. Any other questions for Nick? Seeing none, sir, thanks. You mind staying on until the case is over? I assumed you were going to. Absolutely, yeah. Thank you. Who's speaking on behalf of the appeal? Please come on up, your name, your address, and then tell us why you think this appeal is reasonable. Sure, hi, my name's Mia Gordon, 504 Townsend Street. Nice to meet you all. Thank you, Nick, for setting the scene. Good evening, members of the board. My name is Mia Gordon, and my husband, Zach Lerner, and I, our owners and petitions. Just real quick, does there a green light on that? Does it look like this mic is on? Oh, yeah, it's on. It's just going to be low. All right, just want to make sure. Thanks. Can you hear, everyone can hear me okay? Yeah. yes we can hear you just hoping that whoever's watching if anyone okay hopefully everybody um yes mia gordon zach lerner my husband and our architect glenda meads are here with us tonight we fell in love with birmingham's vimer community and purchased this historic home with the intention of raising our family here for decades to come in fact we just welcomed our baby boy into the world last month making our commitment to building a long-term family home here all the more meaningful to add some context a family member and nearby r8 homeowner purchased this property as an investment in 2024 it was a rundown vacant duplex its condition condition was such that it sat on the market for over a year before it was purchased the plan was to maintain the historical facade and utilize the current r8 zoning to maximize the entire lot footprint and turn it into an intense multi-family unit they had plans run up and had preliminary meetings with the city we saw a different potential and they agreed to sell we stepped in to save this historic home from extreme over development choosing instead to restore it back to a single family home but in doing the right thing for the neighborhood we are now bound by strict low density our three-dimensional rules which have triggered our physical site hardships and our requests for three-dimensional variances services we did not approach these requests lately nor are we attempting to maximize this lot for the sake of square footage every inch of this design was meticulous The garage is scaled to fit two vehicles in light storage, leaving a small, usable backyard.

  11. more meaningful to add some context a family member and nearby r8 homeowner purchased this property as an investment in 2024 it was a rundown vacant duplex its condition condition was such that it sat on the market for over a year before it was purchased the plan was to maintain the historical facade and utilize the current r8 zoning to maximize the entire lot footprint and turn it into an intense multi-family unit they had plans run up and had preliminary meetings with the city we saw a different potential and they agreed to sell we stepped in to save this historic home from extreme over development choosing instead to restore it back to a single family home but in doing the right thing for the neighborhood we are now bound by strict low density our three-dimensional rules which have triggered our physical site hardships and our requests for three-dimensional variances services we did not approach these requests lately nor are we attempting to maximize this lot for the sake of square footage every inch of this design was meticulous The garage is scaled to fit two vehicles in light storage, leaving a small, usable backyard. In addition, the design was reviewed last month at the June historic district commission meeting. The HDC approved the certificate of appropriateness for this project. While the HDC's approval is conditioned, the project has been previously thought out and held to this project. This project is primarily upon us obtaining these variances from this board, the physical footprint, scale, and setbacks of what we are showing you tonight have already been thoroughly vetted and deemed both reasonable and condemnable by your peer commissioners. In addition to the city's preservation approval, we have engaged with our immediate neighborhood, we've walked the block and shared our architectural drawings, explained exactly what we were looking for. Bringing you a design that has been both thoroughly vetted, enthusiastically supported by our surrounding neighbors, and formally approved in scale by the HDC, we're asking for the minimum relief necessary to build a functional, safe family home. Thank you for your time, your service, and your consideration to our petition. We are happy to answer any questions. So I guess my first question is with regard to the kitchen and breakfast expansion. I see you're adding 12 feet, and I think, maybe Nick can correct me, that's impacting the three-foot variance, right, Nick, the kitchen expansion. Thank you.

  12. The garage is scaled to fit two vehicles in light storage, leaving a small, usable backyard. In addition, the design was reviewed last month at the June historic district commission meeting. The HDC approved the certificate of appropriateness for this project. While the HDC's approval is conditioned, the project has been previously thought out and held to this project. This project is primarily upon us obtaining these variances from this board, the physical footprint, scale, and setbacks of what we are showing you tonight have already been thoroughly vetted and deemed both reasonable and condemnable by your peer commissioners. In addition to the city's preservation approval, we have engaged with our immediate neighborhood, we've walked the block and shared our architectural drawings, explained exactly what we were looking for. Bringing you a design that has been both thoroughly vetted, enthusiastically supported by our surrounding neighbors, and formally approved in scale by the HDC, we're asking for the minimum relief necessary to build a functional, safe family home. Thank you for your time, your service, and your consideration to our petition. We are happy to answer any questions. So I guess my first question is with regard to the kitchen and breakfast expansion. I see you're adding 12 feet, and I think, maybe Nick can correct me, that's impacting the three-foot variance, right, Nick, the kitchen expansion. Thank you. is part of that that's one that impacts it or is that the garage that impacts the distance between it would be the kitchen on the west side right so i i'm looking at that seeing the 12 foot expansion and seeing obviously it's a generous kitchen generous breakfast nook it's not inappropriate and it's not right or wrong right but if it were three feet smaller you would not need that barrier so i guess what's your response to that it is impacts the second floor to the bedroom with our the minimum about the minimum that we're you know is a normal size bedroom these days and i'm glenda can speak to the actual dimension well we'll let you know if we have lenda we'll let you know if we need your own okay yeah yeah um i don't have it in front of me the exact width but okay let me look at that and see what other board member questions gentlemen any other questions mr hart sir yes um if you could i'm looking at the second floor and you know the first floor it appears to be very well organized very um sensible not overdone i i think it's beautifully done uh the second floor though i have questions the laundry room and the new office in

  13. is part of that that's one that impacts it or is that the garage that impacts the distance between it would be the kitchen on the west side right so i i'm looking at that seeing the 12 foot expansion and seeing obviously it's a generous kitchen generous breakfast nook it's not inappropriate and it's not right or wrong right but if it were three feet smaller you would not need that barrier so i guess what's your response to that it is impacts the second floor to the bedroom with our the minimum about the minimum that we're you know is a normal size bedroom these days and i'm glenda can speak to the actual dimension well we'll let you know if we have lenda we'll let you know if we need your own okay yeah yeah um i don't have it in front of me the exact width but okay let me look at that and see what other board member questions gentlemen any other questions mr hart sir yes um if you could i'm looking at the second floor and you know the first floor it appears to be very well organized very um sensible not overdone i i think it's beautifully done uh the second floor though i have questions the laundry room and the new office in front the dimensions roughly um for the laundry room it's it looks uh it looks you know fairly really small to me what what are those dimensions um You, please. That's something we definitely need you for. Well, the new office is going to be 12-foot. Yeah, it's 12-foot wide. It's 12-feet addition that we're showing you on both the upper and lower floors. And with a six-inch wall thickness out there, that's an 11-and-a-half-foot room. And I did tell the Gordons, and Nick Dupuy also knows, we came into the historic board with something that was at 13 feet, or 13-6, I think, to try and get a 13-foot bedroom, you know. Beyond the main structural wall of the historic structure. And we took a foot and a half off to satisfy the historic board's wish of the balance of, you know, addition that you see. We also pushed it well back, which is another sort of feature that Nick didn't mention, but we were trying to preserve the front gable and the main side gable, and their requirements want additions to be as far as practical to the back. So that's, you know, another part of the puzzle. But so we reduced it by a foot and a half,

  14. beautifully done uh the second floor though i have questions the laundry room and the new office in front the dimensions roughly um for the laundry room it's it looks uh it looks you know fairly really small to me what what are those dimensions um You, please. That's something we definitely need you for. Well, the new office is going to be 12-foot. Yeah, it's 12-foot wide. It's 12-feet addition that we're showing you on both the upper and lower floors. And with a six-inch wall thickness out there, that's an 11-and-a-half-foot room. And I did tell the Gordons, and Nick Dupuy also knows, we came into the historic board with something that was at 13 feet, or 13-6, I think, to try and get a 13-foot bedroom, you know. Beyond the main structural wall of the historic structure. And we took a foot and a half off to satisfy the historic board's wish of the balance of, you know, addition that you see. We also pushed it well back, which is another sort of feature that Nick didn't mention, but we were trying to preserve the front gable and the main side gable, and their requirements want additions to be as far as practical to the back. So that's, you know, another part of the puzzle. But so we reduced it by a foot and a half, and I told Mia 11-and-a-half is really kind of a minimum bedroom. So, again, the laundry also, everything's modest. Right. It's three-and-a-half and four feet smaller than that room. The aisle widths upstairs, what are the hallway widths, roughly? So we are making the hallway widths three-foot-four, but those are all on this side of that main structural wall. Yeah. And when you loaf... where the stair comes up that's the structural wall holding up the rest of the house and our addition cleanly sits that way so you know we're making that other bath a little smaller to have a decent size hall well i yeah it's fine i've been in i've been in this house before so i know how tight it is um the the dimension the 12 foot the office that 12 foot is one dimension the other dimension is what nine six or something or what what's that yeah it's it's not just getting closer to the microphone so yes i'm sorry yeah so the office which um they both work from home we're looking for an office they're trying to make this historical house work today's standard so yeah we're getting a little office would you agree that any any dimension for a bedroom under

  15. But so we reduced it by a foot and a half, and I told Mia 11-and-a-half is really kind of a minimum bedroom. So, again, the laundry also, everything's modest. Right. It's three-and-a-half and four feet smaller than that room. The aisle widths upstairs, what are the hallway widths, roughly? So we are making the hallway widths three-foot-four, but those are all on this side of that main structural wall. Yeah. And when you loaf... where the stair comes up that's the structural wall holding up the rest of the house and our addition cleanly sits that way so you know we're making that other bath a little smaller to have a decent size hall well i yeah it's fine i've been in i've been in this house before so i know how tight it is um the the dimension the 12 foot the office that 12 foot is one dimension the other dimension is what nine six or something or what what's that yeah it's it's not just getting closer to the microphone so yes i'm sorry yeah so the office which um they both work from home we're looking for an office they're trying to make this historical house work today's standard so yeah we're getting a little office would you agree that any any dimension for a bedroom under 10 feet is really not a bedroom would you agree okay i really consider 11 understood okay thank you okay can i say one more thing that pertains kind of that i think or gets back to your previous question the r8 development that is comes up next to them um they don't meet their 25 of the lot width i wouldn't imagine i mean it's got to be a 300 foot lot the distance they were supposed to stay away from even this historical home is supposed to be 25 of their lot width yeah it just depends when it was built and what the ordinance were back then yeah but they're at their bare minimum um and i mean if that got torn down they you you you should have a 25% of their lot width requirement also. They would require that and they would require their NCL. Do you want to finish? That's it. Oh, you're done? All right, let's still come back up because we may have questions for you. And the last unique thing on this property is the- Honestly, you can't testify on behalf of other comments. We just need you for architecture, which is beautiful, by the way. I'm sorry. Question, Mr. Church. Yes. Is there a garage on the property right now? It's hard for me to see exactly from the picture. There is a detached garage, I will put in quotes, that's on its last legs.

  16. so yeah we're getting a little office would you agree that any any dimension for a bedroom under 10 feet is really not a bedroom would you agree okay i really consider 11 understood okay thank you okay can i say one more thing that pertains kind of that i think or gets back to your previous question the r8 development that is comes up next to them um they don't meet their 25 of the lot width i wouldn't imagine i mean it's got to be a 300 foot lot the distance they were supposed to stay away from even this historical home is supposed to be 25 of their lot width yeah it just depends when it was built and what the ordinance were back then yeah but they're at their bare minimum um and i mean if that got torn down they you you you should have a 25% of their lot width requirement also. They would require that and they would require their NCL. Do you want to finish? That's it. Oh, you're done? All right, let's still come back up because we may have questions for you. And the last unique thing on this property is the- Honestly, you can't testify on behalf of other comments. We just need you for architecture, which is beautiful, by the way. I'm sorry. Question, Mr. Church. Yes. Is there a garage on the property right now? It's hard for me to see exactly from the picture. There is a detached garage, I will put in quotes, that's on its last legs. I think it's on the first. Well, my question is pretty straightforward. Is it coming down? Yes, yeah, there's no, yeah. That's all I need to know. Anybody here? Any other questions for the appellant? Seeing none, thank you. Thank you both. Thank you, thank you very much. In the audience or on Zoom, anybody have any comments about this appeal that's not affiliated? With this appeal? The neighbor. The neighbor's okay. Please, come on up. Yeah, across the street. Come on up. Microphone, name, address, and tell us your thoughts. Hi, I'm Ann Feldman. I live at 505 Townsend right across from them. I've been staring at their house for five years. So, I'm super happy to have them put an addition on. And I think where the addition is on the house, because it's set back and it's on the side, you really still see the home, the historical. Thank you. that part of it so I think that's a good you know they're not changing the whole facade the whole front so you know driving let's say you're coming from the east you really don't see much like you know the addition it's more from the west side and yeah I just think it would really add some

  17. There is a detached garage, I will put in quotes, that's on its last legs. I think it's on the first. Well, my question is pretty straightforward. Is it coming down? Yes, yeah, there's no, yeah. That's all I need to know. Anybody here? Any other questions for the appellant? Seeing none, thank you. Thank you both. Thank you, thank you very much. In the audience or on Zoom, anybody have any comments about this appeal that's not affiliated? With this appeal? The neighbor. The neighbor's okay. Please, come on up. Yeah, across the street. Come on up. Microphone, name, address, and tell us your thoughts. Hi, I'm Ann Feldman. I live at 505 Townsend right across from them. I've been staring at their house for five years. So, I'm super happy to have them put an addition on. And I think where the addition is on the house, because it's set back and it's on the side, you really still see the home, the historical. Thank you. that part of it so I think that's a good you know they're not changing the whole facade the whole front so you know driving let's say you're coming from the east you really don't see much like you know the addition it's more from the west side and yeah I just think it would really add some value and look a lot better than does now and that garage is like didn't you say it's like it's much fall down I don't think you guys park in there do you yeah it's bad news so yeah and the surrounding neighbors I'm not speaking to them just making comments that you're the neighbors to the east of them they are all they were the everyone's in favor of it so yeah that's good so I'd say thanks for the people anybody online that would like to speak on behalf of this besides Nick seeing them will close public comment board members oh you see somebody good you don't see anybody right well all right so close public comment board members do we have a motion motion to approve excuse me 504 506 Townsend I believe granting the variance will result in substantial justice to the property owner and the general public it's a reasonable design

  18. know the addition it's more from the west side and yeah I just think it would really add some value and look a lot better than does now and that garage is like didn't you say it's like it's much fall down I don't think you guys park in there do you yeah it's bad news so yeah and the surrounding neighbors I'm not speaking to them just making comments that you're the neighbors to the east of them they are all they were the everyone's in favor of it so yeah that's good so I'd say thanks for the people anybody online that would like to speak on behalf of this besides Nick seeing them will close public comment board members oh you see somebody good you don't see anybody right well all right so close public comment board members do we have a motion motion to approve excuse me 504 506 Townsend I believe granting the variance will result in substantial justice to the property owner and the general public it's a reasonable design of this very unique historic property. The granting of the variance will also not be contrary to the spirit or purpose of the zoning ordinance and in no way be contrary to any public health, safety, or welfare concern. Enforcement, literal enforcement of the chapter results in unnecessary hardship, and that's due to the unique location and concerns of this site, not only being converted from a duplex to a single family, but the historical considerations and the surrounding properties. And because of special conditions applicable to this property in question, the provisions of the ordinance, if strictly applied, would prevent the property owner from using the property for its permitted purpose, and that's due to the being an appropriate single family residence here and complementing and enhancing the historic qualities of the home.

  19. of this very unique historic property. The granting of the variance will also not be contrary to the spirit or purpose of the zoning ordinance and in no way be contrary to any public health, safety, or welfare concern. Enforcement, literal enforcement of the chapter results in unnecessary hardship, and that's due to the unique location and concerns of this site, not only being converted from a duplex to a single family, but the historical considerations and the surrounding properties. And because of special conditions applicable to this property in question, the provisions of the ordinance, if strictly applied, would prevent the property owner from using the property for its permitted purpose, and that's due to the being an appropriate single family residence here and complementing and enhancing the historic qualities of the home. These represent unique hardships, and the zoning appeal here, I believe, is very reasonable to allow this home to... to function as a single family home again in this very unique uh unique location so i would tie an approval to the plans as submitted do you want to comment also in your motion about the existing garage do you want to tie anything to that statement that they're tearing it down since they're adding a new garage um i would let you add something on to my motion okay that would uh address that okay that's on the plans it's on the it's on the plans that it's being torn down okay yeah very good tying it to the plans i think addresses that okay yeah we have a motion to approve do we have a second so i can see it from mr kona do we have any comments seeing none let's call the roll we have a motion for appeal 2617 to approve the tom millet yes

  20. and complementing and enhancing the historic qualities of the home. These represent unique hardships, and the zoning appeal here, I believe, is very reasonable to allow this home to... to function as a single family home again in this very unique uh unique location so i would tie an approval to the plans as submitted do you want to comment also in your motion about the existing garage do you want to tie anything to that statement that they're tearing it down since they're adding a new garage um i would let you add something on to my motion okay that would uh address that okay that's on the plans it's on the it's on the plans that it's being torn down okay yeah very good tying it to the plans i think addresses that okay yeah we have a motion to approve do we have a second so i can see it from mr kona do we have any comments seeing none let's call the roll we have a motion for appeal 2617 to approve the tom millet yes i assume that was me yes congratulations you have your variance thank you enjoy the home's beautiful thank you our next case and our final case for the evening is case 2618 for 1982 hands andrew erickson andrew erickson here to present on appeal number 26-18, the owner of the property known as 1982 Haynes requests the following variance to construct a new home with an attached garage. Variance A, chapter 126, article 4, section 4.74C of the zoning ordinance requires that the minimum distance between principal residential buildings on adjacent lots of 14 feet or 25% of the total lot width, whichever is larger. The required is 14 feet on the east side, the proposed is 12.85 feet, therefore the variance of 1.15 feet is being requested. The applicant is requesting a variance for

  21. tom millet yes i assume that was me yes congratulations you have your variance thank you enjoy the home's beautiful thank you our next case and our final case for the evening is case 2618 for 1982 hands andrew erickson andrew erickson here to present on appeal number 26-18, the owner of the property known as 1982 Haynes requests the following variance to construct a new home with an attached garage. Variance A, chapter 126, article 4, section 4.74C of the zoning ordinance requires that the minimum distance between principal residential buildings on adjacent lots of 14 feet or 25% of the total lot width, whichever is larger. The required is 14 feet on the east side, the proposed is 12.85 feet, therefore the variance of 1.15 feet is being requested. The applicant is requesting a variance for the distance from the adjoining principal building on the adjoining adjacent lot. There was a variance granted for 1982 Haynes in March of 2024. The variance has expired. The minutes are attached. So Andrew, what's the width of this home? I'm looking, but I'm sure you might know if that's right. Is this less than 25 feet? 24. 24, okay. I don't have any questions. I just have a quick question. Please. Um, in the packet there's BZ minutes from 2005, was that? That was for the house on the other side. Okay. Okay. that all right we're done with asking the city questions who's coming on speak who's speaking on behalf of the appeal please come on up Paul Symartino 920 East Long Lake Troy Michigan I'm designing the house for Armando and we designed the previous home that was granted the variance as the owners they kind of change our tune and actually reduce the house just based on market and whatnot so we're basically coming back with a less impactful home

  22. the variance of 1.15 feet is being requested. The applicant is requesting a variance for the distance from the adjoining principal building on the adjoining adjacent lot. There was a variance granted for 1982 Haynes in March of 2024. The variance has expired. The minutes are attached. So Andrew, what's the width of this home? I'm looking, but I'm sure you might know if that's right. Is this less than 25 feet? 24. 24, okay. I don't have any questions. I just have a quick question. Please. Um, in the packet there's BZ minutes from 2005, was that? That was for the house on the other side. Okay. Okay. that all right we're done with asking the city questions who's coming on speak who's speaking on behalf of the appeal please come on up Paul Symartino 920 East Long Lake Troy Michigan I'm designing the house for Armando and we designed the previous home that was granted the variance as the owners they kind of change our tune and actually reduce the house just based on market and whatnot so we're basically coming back with a less impactful home that was approved then what was approved before 24 feet wide the property to the east which did get a variance you know we're kind of pinched we have a probably a future tear down to the west that's not conforming then we have the newer home to the east which is at six feet so we kind of get pinched on both ends so we positioned it where where we have it like you said we're 24 feet wide we're trying to keep it simple one car garage so that that's kind of where we're at all right any questions for it seeing none except in the audience or online anybody that would like to speak on behalf of this appeal that isn't affiliated we have a hand from Alex okay can you unmute Alex yeah hey Alex just tell us your we have your name alex montgomery can tell us where you're zooming from and then tell us your thoughts about this appeal yeah this is alpha gummary i'm here with rachel high song uh resuming from 1996 aint street uh the house uh next door to 1982. okay um we are new owners of the house

  23. on market and whatnot so we're basically coming back with a less impactful home that was approved then what was approved before 24 feet wide the property to the east which did get a variance you know we're kind of pinched we have a probably a future tear down to the west that's not conforming then we have the newer home to the east which is at six feet so we kind of get pinched on both ends so we positioned it where where we have it like you said we're 24 feet wide we're trying to keep it simple one car garage so that that's kind of where we're at all right any questions for it seeing none except in the audience or online anybody that would like to speak on behalf of this appeal that isn't affiliated we have a hand from Alex okay can you unmute Alex yeah hey Alex just tell us your we have your name alex montgomery can tell us where you're zooming from and then tell us your thoughts about this appeal yeah this is alpha gummary i'm here with rachel high song uh resuming from 1996 aint street uh the house uh next door to 1982. okay um we are new owners of the house we moved in about a month ago um so one we just wanted to see what this process was all about and it was very interesting so i appreciate you guys having me uh and then too uh you know we noticed that the previous variance was approved for the opposite side of the house um and the with the house coming closer to our house and it being a two-story home versus the current one-story home we do believe that it will impact our light that we received especially in the evenings we're in a nice room right now that's receiving light in the back of our house and we would not have that uh if we had a house that was you know closer and outside of the uh you know allowed 14 feet uh so i guess the the request would be that if if we're using the previous variance as um um as uh precedents that we would look to have that be used on that side of the house and go closer to that side of the house as opposed to our side of the house i understand we have it three

  24. from 1996 aint street uh the house uh next door to 1982. okay um we are new owners of the house we moved in about a month ago um so one we just wanted to see what this process was all about and it was very interesting so i appreciate you guys having me uh and then too uh you know we noticed that the previous variance was approved for the opposite side of the house um and the with the house coming closer to our house and it being a two-story home versus the current one-story home we do believe that it will impact our light that we received especially in the evenings we're in a nice room right now that's receiving light in the back of our house and we would not have that uh if we had a house that was you know closer and outside of the uh you know allowed 14 feet uh so i guess the the request would be that if if we're using the previous variance as um um as uh precedents that we would look to have that be used on that side of the house and go closer to that side of the house as opposed to our side of the house i understand we have it three this variance approved when the house was built many years ago, but that was because we are close to the, I understand it was because we're close to the road where the first house off the main road on Eden. So that would be a request with that, would be that it go back to the previous variance and that this is not approved due to our light privacy, air flow, and you could even argue some fire safety. Very good. I appreciate your feedback. So you realize this variance is for just over 12 inches, right? Yeah. Okay. I just want to make sure you understand that because, and I can ask the appellant to come up and address whether that one foot difference, if there's a reason, one way or the other, I believe he stated on the record that this home is more narrow than the previous home. So likely it's still probably a similar distance apart from your home, but I can get an answer to that. And we appreciate your feedback. Yeah, my understanding was that the previous variance was still 14 feet from our house. Right. And now it's going to be less than 14. Yeah, I appreciate it. It looks like 14 is what they're proposing, but let me find out and you'll hear it as we ask the question.

  25. this variance approved when the house was built many years ago, but that was because we are close to the, I understand it was because we're close to the road where the first house off the main road on Eden. So that would be a request with that, would be that it go back to the previous variance and that this is not approved due to our light privacy, air flow, and you could even argue some fire safety. Very good. I appreciate your feedback. So you realize this variance is for just over 12 inches, right? Yeah. Okay. I just want to make sure you understand that because, and I can ask the appellant to come up and address whether that one foot difference, if there's a reason, one way or the other, I believe he stated on the record that this home is more narrow than the previous home. So likely it's still probably a similar distance apart from your home, but I can get an answer to that. And we appreciate your feedback. Yeah, my understanding was that the previous variance was still 14 feet from our house. Right. And now it's going to be less than 14. Yeah, I appreciate it. It looks like 14 is what they're proposing, but let me find out and you'll hear it as we ask the question. Okay, thank you. Yep. Thank you. Can you come up and just comment real quickly on his comment about the previous variance? If you were 14 before, it looks like you're still 14. So maybe the- No, I mean, we're 12.85. For as distance between distance between yeah, I'm looking at a 14, but I'm not sure what that measurement is then Oh, it's the other side right side. We're 14. So that 12 inches. Could you shift from one way or the other and what's the difference? We we could we I just did the math real quick. Well, no, we could only shift It's point one six feet night. It's nine point one six is where we're at on the west side But that's a non-conforming house. That's probably it's a very old home. So they don't feel that way about it I'm seeing my area if in the Birmingham world that maybe is a future tear down that would have to conform to five feet, right? So if we went to nine Then we would be we'd be Would it? Well, we would be I think we would be under one foot on the east side the gentleman that just spoke So But I don't I don't have that you know in front of me the previous What was approved right to rely back and tell you exactly what it was all right?

  26. Okay, thank you. Yep. Thank you. Can you come up and just comment real quickly on his comment about the previous variance? If you were 14 before, it looks like you're still 14. So maybe the- No, I mean, we're 12.85. For as distance between distance between yeah, I'm looking at a 14, but I'm not sure what that measurement is then Oh, it's the other side right side. We're 14. So that 12 inches. Could you shift from one way or the other and what's the difference? We we could we I just did the math real quick. Well, no, we could only shift It's point one six feet night. It's nine point one six is where we're at on the west side But that's a non-conforming house. That's probably it's a very old home. So they don't feel that way about it I'm seeing my area if in the Birmingham world that maybe is a future tear down that would have to conform to five feet, right? So if we went to nine Then we would be we'd be Would it? Well, we would be I think we would be under one foot on the east side the gentleman that just spoke So But I don't I don't have that you know in front of me the previous What was approved right to rely back and tell you exactly what it was all right? Well, we appreciate the feedback. I mean what we can make a motion and then if If you're willing to exercise that and speak to the neighbor and adjust it based on what the final approval is That would be something you can work out with them. It isn't contingent on what he's saying But first you have to see how the board votes understood All right, anyone else on zoom that has any comments about this appeal Seeing I'm so Andrew do you agree that they're can only move it a 10% of that yeah it looks like it's there 14 if they shifted the house over they they would create a variance on the other side right yeah you'd require two variants so we won't want to try to make it one that's fair right okay I think we're good okay so we'll close public comment board members do we have a motion on this appeal it's ready mr. chairman I'd like to make a motion with regards to appeal 26-18 the property known as 1982 Haines Street I would move to approve the variance request and tie it to plans as submitted this is a previously approved variance that is this this property was subjected

  27. What was approved right to rely back and tell you exactly what it was all right? Well, we appreciate the feedback. I mean what we can make a motion and then if If you're willing to exercise that and speak to the neighbor and adjust it based on what the final approval is That would be something you can work out with them. It isn't contingent on what he's saying But first you have to see how the board votes understood All right, anyone else on zoom that has any comments about this appeal Seeing I'm so Andrew do you agree that they're can only move it a 10% of that yeah it looks like it's there 14 if they shifted the house over they they would create a variance on the other side right yeah you'd require two variants so we won't want to try to make it one that's fair right okay I think we're good okay so we'll close public comment board members do we have a motion on this appeal it's ready mr. chairman I'd like to make a motion with regards to appeal 26-18 the property known as 1982 Haines Street I would move to approve the variance request and tie it to plans as submitted this is a previously approved variance that is this this property was subjected to a previously approved variance and the owner and the appellant has come in with a slightly less request so they're obviously aware of the concerns here in addition we've granted many of these variances where we have the issue on the older homes on that particular side of town where the all the homes are affected by the nine and five dimensional setbacks so we have the typical circumstances here where if we were not to grant this variance they would probably not be able to build a suitable home on this property so I think that there's enough special conditions applicable to this property that if the zoning ordinance was CRC did not go initially they needed some that theасибо projeto was filtered applied it would reasonably prevent the appellant from building uh the home here and so for those reasons i would move to approve tied to the plans uh as submitted to the city previously we have a motion to approve do we have a second so mr kona again for the second do we have any discussion seeing none we have a motion to approve can we call the roll

  28. this is a previously approved variance that is this this property was subjected to a previously approved variance and the owner and the appellant has come in with a slightly less request so they're obviously aware of the concerns here in addition we've granted many of these variances where we have the issue on the older homes on that particular side of town where the all the homes are affected by the nine and five dimensional setbacks so we have the typical circumstances here where if we were not to grant this variance they would probably not be able to build a suitable home on this property so I think that there's enough special conditions applicable to this property that if the zoning ordinance was CRC did not go initially they needed some that theасибо projeto was filtered applied it would reasonably prevent the appellant from building uh the home here and so for those reasons i would move to approve tied to the plans uh as submitted to the city previously we have a motion to approve do we have a second so mr kona again for the second do we have any discussion seeing none we have a motion to approve can we call the roll yes yes richard louis yes john miller yes yes yes yes congratulations you have your variance alex if you can hear me online um it sounds like that they can move the house over you know a few inches and it's something they're open to considering that so if you want to come into the building department and speak to andrew he can communicate with them and see whether or not it's reasonable and whether or not you want them to explore that inch or two but if they go any further they would then need a variance on the other side and so it's much more difficult to get two variances in our board than it is one so um but they are they are willing to explore what you're asking as a as a neighbor so um you can talk to andrew at the city and then they can talk to the builder and see if uh they're open to you can talk to the builder and see if you're making that adjustment you but they did get their variants. So we appreciate your feedback. Thank you guys. Thank you, I appreciate it. Online or in the audience, do we have anything we'd like to discuss that is not related to the appeals tonight?

  29. yes yes richard louis yes john miller yes yes yes yes congratulations you have your variance alex if you can hear me online um it sounds like that they can move the house over you know a few inches and it's something they're open to considering that so if you want to come into the building department and speak to andrew he can communicate with them and see whether or not it's reasonable and whether or not you want them to explore that inch or two but if they go any further they would then need a variance on the other side and so it's much more difficult to get two variances in our board than it is one so um but they are they are willing to explore what you're asking as a as a neighbor so um you can talk to andrew at the city and then they can talk to the builder and see if uh they're open to you can talk to the builder and see if you're making that adjustment you but they did get their variants. So we appreciate your feedback. Thank you guys. Thank you, I appreciate it. Online or in the audience, do we have anything we'd like to discuss that is not related to the appeals tonight? Seeing none, do you have any more business for us, sir? No. All right. Motion to adjourn, anybody? Yep. Motion to adjourn. All in favor? Aye. We are adjourned. Good night. Good night. Good night. Good evening, everyone. Good morning, everyone. Thank you. Thank you. пол