[A. Call to Order]
[00:00:06]
>>> GOOD EVENING. I'M CALLING TO ORDER THE ORDER ZONING APPEALS MEETING FOR MONDAY JUNE 22ND.
LET'S SEE. DO WE HAVE ANY REPORTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS. LEGAL COUNSEL REPORT FOR DEPARTMENTS FOR THE HEARING OFFICE MEETING?
[C.(V) Fiedler Patio Setback Variance.]
>> NO. >> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT WE'LL GO RIGHT ONTO THE PUBLIC HEARINGS.
AND OUR FIRST ONE IS PZ-2026-00114V.
WOULD THE PETITIONER FIEDLER PATIO SETBACK VARIANCE.
PLEASE COME UP TO THE PODIUM. AND JUST PUSH THE BUTTON FOR IT TO TURN ON AND YOU'LL BE ALL SET TO GO.
JUST MAKE SURE YOU SHARE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
>> DEREK FIEDLER. >> YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND PRESENT
WHATEVER YOU'D LIKE. >> YES, SO WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF TRYING TO BAILED PATIO.
OUR SCREENED IN PORCH I SHOULD SAY.
ON OUR EXISTING PATIO. THE EXISTING PATIO WAS BUILT PRYER TO US MOVING INTO THE LOCATION.
BY THE PREVIOUS RESIDENTS. WE MOVED IN IN 2015 AND EXPLORING THE OPTION TO BUILD THE PATIO, WE FOUND THAT THE EXISTING PATIO FOOTPRINT IS WITHIN THE EASEMENT.
ON THE SIDE YARD. SO WE'RE JUST LOOKING FOR A VARIANCE TO NOT EXTEND IT, BUT BUILD ON THE EXISTING
FOOTPRINT. >> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. >> IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOUR OF THIS PETITION? ANYBODY HERE TO SPEAK AGAINS IT? OKAY, WE'LL GO STRAIGHT TO THE CITY REPORT, PLEASE.
>> THANK YOU. THE PETITIONER IS SEEKING APPROVAL TO BUILD AN ENCLOSED SUN PORCH BUILDING ADDITION IN THEIR BACKYARD. HOWEVER THAT WILL ENCROACH AROUND 5'8" INTO A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT.
BUT THE PETITIONER HAS ALSO FILED CONSENT TO ENCROACH REQUEST WITH THE BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS AND SAFETY.
SO THAT'S GOING TO BE HEARD FAIRLY SOON.
THERE'S THERE IS QUESTION ABOUT THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION APPROVAL. IT'S KIND OF LIKE THE CHICKEN AND EGG SITUATION WHERE THEY DON'T WANT TO APPROVE IT UNTIL THE CITY HAS APPROVED THE VARIANCE AND THE CONSENT TO ENCROACH. SO AND WE'RE FINE WITH THAT AS WELL. BUT WE DO RECOMMEND POSITIVE CONSIDERATION OF THE VARIANCE WITH CONDITIONS OF BOARD OF PUBLIC WORK ACE PRUVL AND THE PETITIONER ADDRESSING ANY REMAINING REVIEW COMMENTS IN PUBLIC TALKS.
THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
SO JUST TO CONFIRM WITH THE PETITIONER STATED, THEY ARE NOT EXPANDING OUT. THEY ARE JUST BUILDING UP,
>> OKAY, THANK YOU. OKAY, THEN THIS PETITION IS APPROVED WITH THE CONDITION OF THE BPW CONSENT AND ALSO ADDRESSING ANY REMAINING COMMENTS IN PROJECT DOCKS ALONG WITH THE ADOPTION OF THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
>> GREAT, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.
[C.(V) Still Building Addition Setback Variance.]
ALL RIGHT OUR NEXT ITEM. THE STILL BUILDING ADDITION SETBACK VARIANCE. DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2026-00119V.>> ALL RIGHT. MY NAME IS MICHAEL STILL THE HOMEOWNER. EFFECTIVELY WE ARE WORKING TO ADD A HOME ADDITION TO THE BACK OF OUR HOUSE.
IT'S ABOUT A 20 BY 20 FOOT ADDITION.
TOP FLOOR WILL BE A BEDROOM AND THE BOTTOM FLOOR WILL BE OPEN TO OUR POOL. THERE'S A 35 FOOT SETBACK RULE AS OUR HOUSE IS ON THE EDGE OF THE NEIGHBOURHOOD WHERE THERE'S A BRICK WALL ON SMOKY ROAD. SO THE RULE IS 35 FEET.
WE'RE ASKING TO GO WITHIN 19 FEET.
AND THAT THE HOA HAS A SIMILAR RULE WHICH WE WILL WORK WITH THE APPROVAL PROCESS AT THIS TIME.
IT WILL REMAIN A RESIDENCE. COLOURS AND PAINT WILL MATCH
THE EXISTING HOUSE. >> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
ANYONE THEOR SPEAK FOR OUR AGAINST THIS PETITION? OKAY, THE DEPARTMENT REPORT PLEASE.
>> THANK YOU. AS A PETITIONER STATED, THEY ARE SEEKING A VARIANCE FOR THE SETBACK.
THIS PROPERTY IS A THROUGH LOT. SO IT HAS TWO FRONT YARDS.
AND ESSENTIALLY THEIR SECOND FRONT YARD HAS BEEN USED AS THE BACKYARD. BUT THERE'S STILL THE 35 FOOT SETBACK REQUIREMENT FROM THE STREET.
THERE'S ALSO A PLATTED 35-FOOT BUILDING SETBACK ON THE
[00:05:05]
SUBDIVISION PLAT. SO THE PETITIONER WILL ALSO NEED TO SEEK A RE-PLAT IN ORDER TO BUILD THIS BUILDING ADDITION. BUT PLANNING STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST FROM THE UDO FOR THE SETBACK WITH THE CONDITION OF THE PETITIONER ADDRESSING ALL REMAINING REVIEW COMMENTS AND PROJECT DOCKS.THANK YOU. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.
SO-- I APPROVE THIS. DOES IT NEED TO BE WITH THE
CONDITION OF THE RE-PLAT? >> YES, I THINK SO.
BECAUSE THE VARIANCES FROM THE UDO, BUT THERE'S STILL THE ISSUE OF THE SUBDIVISION PLAT. AND THE PLAT IS SETBACK.
>> OKAY. AND THEN THEY-- THE ADDITION MEETS ALL THE OTHER STANDARDS THAT WE HAVE?
>> THAT'S CORRECT. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT. THEN I'M PREPARED TO APPROVE THIS WITH THE CONDITION OF THE SUBDIVISION RE-PLAT AND ALSO ADDRESSING ANY REMAINING COMMENTS AND PROJECT DOCKS.
AND ALSO WITH THE ADOPTION OF THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
[C.(V) Pete Ground Floor Area Variance]
OUR NEXT ITEM. PETE GROUND FLOOR AREA VARIANCE. DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2026-00124V.>> I'M RANDY PETE. WE ARE LOOKING FOR A VARIANCE TO KEEP OUR SHED ON OUR YARD. WE JUST ARE IN THE PROCESS OF HAVING A GARAGE BUILT. SO WITH THE BUILDING OF THE GARAGE, THAT PUT US OVER THE 75% ACCESSORY BUILDING OF YOUR SQUARE FOOTAGE OF YOUR HOME, MAIN FLOOR, SO PART OF THEM APPROVING OUR GARAGE PERMIT SO THEY CAN START IT I HAD TO GET RID OF MY SHED BEFORE THEY WOULD GIVE FINAL APPROVAL ON IT. BUT GIKD FOR VARIANCE, THEY SAID TO BE ABLE TO KEEP MY SHED AND NOT HAVE TO GET RID OF IT.
SO WE'RE ASKING IF WE COULD KEEP OUR SHED IN ITS LOCATION.
>> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. ANYONE HERE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS PETITION? ALL RIGHTER, THE DEPARTMENT
REPORT PLEASE ANGIE? >> THANK YOU.
THIS WOULD BE A SLIGHT INCREASE IN THE TOTAL GROUND FLOOR AREA OF ALL ACCESS EHRIE BUILDINGS OR USES.
THE PETITIONER HAS LET US KNOW THAT THE SHED COLOUR WILL BE PAINTED TO MATCH THE HOUSE. SO EVERYTHING WILL HAVE A COHESIVE LOOK. AND THE PLANNING STAFF DOES RECOMMEND POSITIVE CONSIDERATION OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST ALONG WITH THE ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF FACT.
THANK YOU. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.
I DO HAVE A QUESTION. SO THERE IS-- IT'S AN 80.2% TO 84% REQUESTED OVER THE 75%. SO IS ONE OF THOSE NUMBERS THE ADDITION? AND IS THE OTHER NUMBER WITH THE SHED, ALSO? WHY IS THERE-- WHY ARE THERE
TWO NUMBERS? >> I THINK THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN DIFFERENT CALCULATIONS AND DIFFERENT PEOPLE. SO WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WAS CORRECT. SO WE WOULD GO WITH THE LARGER
NUMBER I GUESS THE 9% INCREASE. >> OKAY IF YOU WANT TO ADD
ANYTHING TO THAT? >> YEAH THE 84 IS THE CORRECT NUMBER. SO 80.2.
THE BUILDER NUMBERS THEY GAVE ME WERE-- NOT CORRECT FOR THE SIZE OF THE PAVILION AND THE SHED THAT THEY USED TO FIGURE IT OUT. SO IT'S 84%.
>> OKAY GREAT, THANK YOU FOR THAT.
ALL RIGHT, THEN THIS IS APPROVED WITH ADOPTION OF THE FINDINGS OF FACT. THANK YOU.
[C.(V) GradeX Sign Variance]
MOVING RIGHT ALONG. ALL RIGHT NEXT ITEM GREAT X SIGN VARIANCE. DOCKET NUMBER PZ2026-00126V.>> HELLO. THIS IS-- MY NAME IS JR KNIGHT I'M WITH I4 GROUP I'M A SIGN MANUFACTURER FOR THE PROJECT FOR GRADE X. GRADE X IS SEEKING A VARIANCE APPROVAL FOR A SIGN-- A SIZE AND MANUFACTURED THAT WOULD BE PERMITABLE IN ALL ASPECTS OUTSIDE OF THE LOCATION OF THE SIGN. THE CODE READS THAT THE SIGN NEEDS TO BE FACING A FRONTAGE. THE FRONTAGE WOULD BE ZOTECH DRIVE WHICH IS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THIS PROPERTY.
GRADE X IS ASKING TO LOCATE THE SIGN TO THE SOUTHWEST ELEVATION
[00:10:08]
OF THE BUILDING. ON THE SECOND STORYY OF THE BUILDING. AND NOTHING ELSE WOULD FALL OUTSIDE OF CODE REGULATIONS BESIDES LOCATION.>> OKAY, THANK YOU. ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOUR OR AGAINST THIS PETITION? ALL RIGHT, AND THAT DEPARTMENT
SO THE VARIANCE REQUESTED IS FOR THE SIGNAGE ORIENTATION.
NOT TOWARDS THE STREET FRONTAGE.
THE PROPOSED SIGN AREA WILL STILL MEET THE-- THE ALLOWED MAXIMUM SIGN SIZE. IT WILL NOT BE LARGER THAN THAT. ALSO SEPARATE BUT RELATED ISSUE IS BASICALLY MOST OF THE TREES ON THE SITE HAVE BEEN REMOVED WITHOUT APPROVAL. AND SO WE ASK THAT AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL OF THIS SIGN VARIANCE, THE PETITIONER WOULD BRING THE SITE INTO COMPLIANCE WITH LANDSCAPE PLAN REVIEW AND GET THAT APPROVED THROUGH THE ADS AMENDMENT THAT'S CURRENTLY BEING REVIEWED FOR THE SMART PERKING LA AS WELL AS LANDSCAPE CHANGES. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. I THINK I JUST HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS TO CONFIRM. SO THIS IS-- THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL SCIENCE. THIS IS ONE SIGN THAT ALREADY
EXISTS THAT'S BEING MOVED? >> I MEAN THERE ARE ADDITIONAL SIGNS ON THE SITE THAT ARE ALLOWED.
BUT THIS IS THE ONE-- IT WOULD BE ALLOWED TO FACE NORTH AND THEY JUST WANT TO FACE IT SOUTHWEST.
>> SO THEY ARE NOT EXCEEDING THE NUMBER OF SIGNS THAT CAN BE
AND ALSO THERE'S SOME DISCREPANCY ON SIZE IN THE VARIANCE. REQUEST THE SIZE OF THE SIGN BUT IT'S BY A COUPLE INCHES. SOY THINK THAT JUST HAS TO BE RESOLVED. I JUST WANTED TO STATE IT IN THE RECORD THAT I'M NOT CONCERNED ABOUT IT AT ALL.
BUT PROBABLY JUST NEEDS TO BE CLEANED UP.
AND SO I WILL APPROVE THIS. ON CONDITION THAT YOU COME INTO COMPLIANCE. THE PETITIONER COMES INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE LANDSCAPE PLAN.
AND THOSE REQUIREMENTS. AND THEN ALSO, ADDRESSING ANY REMAINING REVIEW COMMENTS AND PROJECT DOCS.
AND THE ADOPTION OF THE AMENDED FINDINGS EFFECT.
[C.(V) Pyle Pool Setback Variance.]
ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE ONE FINAL ITEM FOR HEARING OFFICER MEETING PYLE POOL SETBACK VARIANCE.DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2026-00127V. >> HI.
CAROLYN PYLE I'M THE HOMEOWNER. >> AND I'M KALE SCHNEIDER I'M
THE LANDSCAPE DESIGNER. >> WE STARTED A PROJECT LAST OCTOBER. KIND OF A PROJECT IMPROVEMENT.
WE HAVE A 40-YEAR-OLD POOL. AT LEAST.
THE WALLS AROUND IT WERE STARTING TO COLLAPSE BECAUSE THE GROUND ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING OR OF THE POOL WAS CAVING DOWN THE HILL. SO WE HAD A ROTTED-OUT TIMBER RETAINING WALL. WE REPLACED THAT WITH A SOLID
BRICK-- WHAT DO YOU CALL THAT. >> JUST A MANUFACTURERED BLOCK.
>> WITH A SHADOW BOX FENCE ON TOP OF IT.
ALSO PUT IN A FRENCH DRAIN TO PROTECT THE NEIGHBOUR.
HE HAD 40 YEARS OF WATER DRAINING INTO HIS BASEMENT.
THAT'S BEEN RESOLVED. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE WIDENED THE POOL DECK BECAUSE THE AREA PARTICULARLY IN THE CORNERS WHERE THE POOL WAS FAILING, THERE WASN'T A SAFE AMOUNT OF ROOM TO NAVIGATE AROUND THE POOL.
WE WERE AFRAID THAT SMALL GRANDCHILDREN OR ELDERLY PARENTS WOULD FALL IN. SO IT SOLVED A DRAINAGE PROBLEM, BUT IT ALSO RESOLVED A SAFETY ISSUE.
WE HAD NO IDEA-- WE KNEW ABOUT THE TEN FOOT SETBACK IN THE BACK. WE JUST THOUGHT THAT THE TEN FOOT EASEMENT APPLIED TO BUILDING A BUILDING.
AND WE HAVE APPLIED ALSO FOR THE RIGHT TO ENCROACH FOR THE ADDITIONAL THREE FEET. AND I BELIEVE THAT'S BEING HEARD TOMORROW BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT'S BEEN
APPROVED. >> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
IS ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOUR OF OR AGAINST THIS
[00:15:04]
PETITION? ALL RIGHT, THE DEPARTMENTI THINK THE PETITIONER SAID IT ALL.
THEY ARE SEEKING VARIANCE APPROVAL TO ENCROACH INTO A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT. THEY ARE-- THEY HAVE FILED A CONSENT TO ENCROACH REQUEST FROM THE BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS.
THEIR POOL PUMP EQUIPMENT WILL BE THE SAME THAT EXISTED PRIORER. WITH THE PRIOR OWNERS.
AND SO WITH ALL THAT, WE DO RECOMMEND POSITIVE CONSIDERATION OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST.
WITH THE CONDITION OF BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS APPROVAL AND THE ADOPTION OF THE FINDINGS OF FACTS.
OKAY I'M PREPARED TO APPROVE THIS ON THE CONDITIONS THAT WERER MENTIONED. SO THE BPW CONSENT TO ENCROACH APP APPROVAL.
R REVIEW BY THE CARMEL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT? OR THAT'S PART OF THE PBW PROCESS.
OKAY, SO ON THAT CONDITION THEN, IT'S APPROVED.
AND THEN ALSO WITH THE ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF FACT.
>> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER BUSINESS TODAY FOR THE HEARING OFFICER MEETING? OKAY THEN WE'RE ADJO
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.