00:00:10,000	OK, it’s 5 o’clock on April 3rd, 2025. I’d like to call the board of adjustments to order. Um, first, I’d like to welcome Chair Clark, uh, she is on Zoom tonight. Can you hear us, Jen? I can. Thank you. First start of business is to approve the minutes of the March 6th meeting. Mr. Wangler.

00:00:44,730	Read through and on page 7 of 41 down at the bottom, I think it’s just a typo, but it says they were asking for an additional, 16 square feet. And then I get 16. Laynar feet. is what they were looking to move out.

00:01:04,630	That’s just, uh, I, I think it’s just a type of air there. OK. But it’s not the 60 and with that, change, I would move to approve. All right. I have a second. Second And he had a discussion besides the Amendment Don’t call a roll. Board member Wangler board member Janssen. Board member Wolf. Yes.

00:01:41,370	Board member Clark? I think that was tabled at the last meeting, uh, the Water’s 7th edition, block 3 lot 1 variants and Jenny. Thank you, Vice Chair Seifert.

00:02:01,470	Board members, um, Grant Helm is requesting a variance from section 140437 of the city code of ordinances are are our 5 residential front yard requirement for his property on Lot 1, block 3 Wachters 7th edition to reduce the required front yard setback. The proposed variance is located in South Bismarck, south of East Bismarck Expressway and west of South Washington Street in the southeast, um, quadrant of the intersection of Cologne Drive in South Reno Drive.

00:02:21,630	at your meeting last month, you tabled the variance request to reduce the front yard setback from 25 ft to 16 ft for this property in order to provide the applicant additional time to review building plans and reduce or negate the proposed variants. The applicant has confirmed with staff that he has altered his building plans and is proposing to reduce his initial variance request.

00:02:42,200	The revised request is to reduce the required front yard stepback located on the, along the north side of his property from 25 ft to 20 ft. The public was notified of this request and 48 postcards were sent to the owners of nearby properties on February 21st, um, since that time, we have not we

00:03:00,000	received just the one phone call prior to the meeting last month, just an inquiry, no, um, One said they were not in favor and the other said that they had no preference, um.

00:03:19,630	Pursuant to Section 140602 of our code of ordinances, you may, uh, very adjust the strict application of any of the requirements in the zoning ordinance in case of an irregularly Um, an exceptionally irregular or narrow shallow or steep lot or exceptional physical or topographical conditions by reason of which the strict application of the provisions of the zoning ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship that would deprive the

00:03:38,730	owner of a reasonable use of land or building involved, but in no other case. No adjustment in the strict application of any provisions of the zoning ordinance shall be granted by the Board of Adjustment unless it finds the following, that there are special circumstances or conditions that apply.

00:03:54,200	to the land or buildings that do not apply generally to land or buildings within the neighborhood and have not resulted from any act of the applicant. That the strict application of the provisions of the zoning ordinance would deprive the applicant of a reasonable use of said land or building that granting the variance is necessary for the

00:04:15,100	reasonable use of land or building and that the variance as granted by the board is the minimum variance that will accomplish the relief sought by the applicant that the grant of this variance will be in harmony with a general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance and will not be

00:04:29,000	injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. The applicant has submitted a written statement of hardship that identifies their anticipated hardship and explains why they believe the variant should be granted. This document was included in your packet.

00:04:46,730	If you choose to approve the variants as proposed, Staff asks that you identify a hardship and modify the review standards or findings outlined in your staff report to support your decision. Do you have questions? Any questions for Is one. I guess not. Thank you. Thank you. And I believe this is a public hearing. Is anyone? Wishes to speak on this or against it.

00:05:10,730	Has the owner got any more to add? I I’m Grant Helm, the owner, um. I guess because it’s a really narrow lot, we did move the variance idea down.

00:05:38,470	This would still give us very adequate usage of The garage For the means of what we’re trying to do without trying to do a third stall, so this was kind of the maximum. we would need to do it? So that that is the uh. The idea behind it, I guess. So that’s why the variance was changed down to 5. So Do you have any questions for me on it? Any questions for Mr. Um, yeah, still I’m assuming you’re still putting a second level. Yes.

00:06:00,470	Over this part and over the garage? Yes. OK. And we’re trying to avoid going into the backyard because we really want having that yard 4 or 3 kids, and because it is so narrow, that’s kind of why we’re still trying to go this direction because it is a very

00:06:16,470	narrow lot and it’s nice having that for the kids that do like to play soccer and things like that, so it’s kind of what we use it for in the summertime. Second question, um, I’m assuming that the trees will stay in place. Yes. Even with this addition. Yes. Any other questions for Grant.

00:06:42,730	It’s not or Rick, yeah, um, do you know the, the depth of your lot? How actual depth that direction. Yeah, from the front to the, to the back property line. I mean, from, I guess, what street would that be? We Yeah. A clone.

00:07:04,100	from the, from the sidewalk over to the house is 25 ft. And from that, from the other side or the full, full length? Well, the full depth or, or, you know, I guess what I’m really curious on is, is the, the depth from the back of your house to the property line.

00:07:17,730	It’s probably gonna be right around that 25 30 ft. OK. But it’s that way along the entire house, so that’s why it’s nice having that as a soccer field without building back into it and shortening how much room the kids actually play in that area the most. Yeah. So that’s what I’m trying to avoid. Good.

00:07:40,100	I made board members, um, just a quick measurement from the rear property line along the east side of the property or the side yard we could call it. It’s about 30 ft to the home. Thank you. Any other questions, sir, Mr. Ho. I guess not. Thank you. Thank you.

00:08:03,470	Anybody else wish to speak on this public hearing. Seeing none allo will close the public hearing. With the wishes of the For. Mr. Wangler. I think we discussed this last, uh, at the last meeting your microphone down, please.

00:09:22,630	I think we discussed this at the last meeting, but If that house Or when that house was built, it could have gotten to within 20 ft of that. North side because that was considered the the setback on a side yard.

00:09:47,770	Is that true? For men board member Wrangler on the property was plotted in 1978, um, that requirement, um, that you had mentioned that a side yard adjacent to a street that is not the main front yard is would be the setback would be 20 ft. However, the house was built in 1979, so it’s kind of a little bit of overlap there. OK. And then, but it, but I think it also says that With the Let’s see. If there was adjacent properties built closer to the standard 25.

00:10:15,730	The contextual setback could be used, but none of the other houses are. At 20 ft going down. What is it, Cologne? Sure. Thank you, board member Wangler. That is an excellent, um, question.

00:10:36,730	You’re right, um, since the property was plotted prior to 197079, they could use the contextual setback if there was a little bit of deviation between properties adjacent to. However, when we looked and measured that those properties are roughly at 25 ft as well. Mhm. Thank you. And if I could make a correction in my statement, the property was plotted in 1976, not 78, um, my age probably makes me need to get bifocals soon, so. OK Mhm.

00:12:50,800	Mm Mr. Wohl We’ll need emotion either way. I, I guess for, for sake of this discussion. Or or move to Approve Based on An unusually Shallow Lot depth from the from the front to the uh. Care.

00:14:00,730	that Be in harmony with the Neighborhood and It Yeah, I, I, I think we, I think we, we struggle a little bit with the Um Provisions from the the contextual We’re in contacts with with the surrounding structures, but I think, I think it’s in general har harmony with the with the neighborhood, yes. OK. I would second that motion. OK.

00:14:24,200	We have a motion to approve in a second. Any other discussion from the board. Seeing none, we will take roll. Board member Windler. Yes. Board member Janssen. Yes. member Wohl? Yes.

00:14:56,000	Board member our agenda, Is uh Trillium, 3rd edition, 2nd Replat block 12. Um Credit unit, Jenny. sign. Thank you, Vice Chair, board members, Railway Credit Union is requesting a variance from section 1403.0108.

00:15:31,630	3D of the city code of Ordinances, signs, commercial zoning district standards for on-premise advertising signs to increase the allowable area of an electronic message center sign from 32 square feet to 45 square feet. The proposed variance is located in southeast Bismarck, south of East Bismarck Expressway in east of 26 south 26th Street in the southeast quadrant of the inner section. of Rock Island Place in Burlington Drive.

00:15:50,200	The zoning ordinance makes provisions for EMC signs or electronic message center signs, according to Roadway type and visibility from roadways. This request is located on a property that is at the intersection of two local roadways, Burlington Drive and Rock Island Place. The maximum area of an EMC sign located to these types of roadways is 32 square feet.

00:16:09,000	This limit has been in our zoning ordinance since approximately 2008. The public has been notified of this request. postcards were mailed to the owners of nearby properties on March 21st. We received one phone inquiry, neither for or against or just curious about the project.

00:16:27,130	The applicant’s consultants are here this evening and have additional information to present to you, but before they do, we’ll go through um the findings outlined in your staff report. Reminding you that no adjustment in the strict application of any provisions of the zoning ordinance shall be granted by the board unless it finds the following that there are special circumstances

00:16:42,370	or conditions that do not apply generally to land or buildings within the neighborhood and have not resulted from any act of the applicant that the strict application of the provisions of the zoning ordinance would deprive the applicant of reasonable use of said land or building, the granting of the variants is necessary for the reasonable

00:16:58,800	use of land or building and that the variances granted by the board is the minimum. that will accomplish the relief sought by the applicant that the grants of the variances will be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to public welfare.

00:17:16,730	Again, the applicant did submit a written statement of hardship that anticipates their hardship and explains why they would like the variance granted. That document was included in your packet.

00:17:36,630	If you choose to propose, uh, excuse me, if you choose to approve the variants as proposed, Staff ask that you identify a hardship, modify the findings or standards contained in your staff report to support your decision. Again, the applicants and their consultants are here this evening, should you have additional questions. Thank you.

00:17:56,200	Any questions for Jen? I guess I have one, so no matter where they would put that sign, it still wouldn’t be in compliance on the property. Um So the, the request this evening is the size, so they could place it throughout the property, the size is the Any other questions? Thank you. Uh, is the applicant, anyone here to speak on behalf of the State your name and Um, my name is Dan Schaff.

00:18:27,000	I’m with HTG Architects and Representation of railway Credit Union. Um, there has been some new developments that have arisen in the last couple of days, um, we would ask of the board to table this until next month. There’s a few things that have come up that may decide or change the size of that message center now.

00:18:45,830	Um, so that’s our request at this point is if you could table it for a month, um, we have some things to work out yet that we thought we had worked out. Um. If that’s a possibility, and we apologize for your time. Um Yeah And in the delay with this.

00:19:02,000	OK. And that’s something. Board members, yes, if you choose to table, that would be fine. We would hear it again next month. OK. Thank you. Thank you, um. Wishes of the board. We’d have to have motion Mr. Chair? Yes, yes.

00:19:26,370	Is there any other member of the public there to testify? Is there anybody else here that would like to speak on this. seeing none Jen. OK, thank you. I would move that we table this until a future meeting. We have a motion in a second to table.

00:19:54,100	Any discussion? Hearing none member Wohl. Yes. Board member Clark. Yeah, and Chair Seifert. Yes. We’ll see you next time. OK. With that, is there any other business, um, Of any of the board members. Seeing then