KEVIN O’KEEFE presented the following exhibits:

A. City of Clayton Code of Ordinances & Master Plan

2

B. Application for Zoning Review & Zoning Review Denial Letter C. Application for Appeal D. Property Survey Site Plan, and elevation submitted by applicant E. Staff Report

CHAIRMAN SOULE – Asked if the applicant had any objections to the City’s exhibits

RK – No objections.

CHAIRMAN SOULE – The City’s exhibits A – E will be included in this record. Asks for applicant or representative to come forward and begin by stating name.

RK – I am looking to get a variance, two foot, on the side of my yard over top of the garage to do an add on bedroom for a disabled sister-in-law that currently lives with us to add some space and hopefully add to the neighborhood that is currently seeing some nice additions happening.

CHAIRMAN SOULE – Anything else right now you’d like to tell us about your project?

RK – Uh, no. It’s basically trying to add another bedroom, taking the small one she is currently in, and making it into a closet and laundry room (10x10) and making this addition her room.

CHAIRMAN SOULE – Do any of the members have any questions?

CHAIRMAN SOULE – Scott, is it true that, to the best of your knowledge, that there are at least four other homes in this immediate neighborhood that have had the same second story addition completed in the past?

SCOTT DEDERT – Correct.

CHAIRMAN SOULE – Scott, does the staff anticipate any significant detrimental effects on public safety and welfare associated with approving the requested variance?

SCOTT DEDERT – No.

CHAIRMAN SOULE – Scott, does the City know of any negative impacts that would be associated with the granting of the requested variance?

SCOTT DEDERT – No.

CHAIRMAN SOULE – Mr. Kliefoth, I see that, on your application and on the staff report, you didn’t provide any alternatives for this project, is there a reason for that?

RK – No, I’m not sure the structure of the building, the way it is set up, I don’t know of another alternative.

Kliefoth, I see that, on your application and on the staff report, you didn’t provide any alternatives for this project, is there a reason for that? RK – No, I’m not sure the structure of the building, the way it is set up, I don’t know of another alternative.

3

CHAIRMAN SOULE – I thought I saw somewhere, maybe on the application or the appeal that there was an issue about the weight bearing, is that right?

DK – The only questions that I know was that the compaction of the soil underneath the existing structure which is the existing garage. What we did was take out a chunk of concrete and then we did a soils test to make sure it was standard and would hold the weight of the addition. The garage is existing so we wanted to make sure all the bases were covered and we had no structural issues.

CHAIRMAN SOULE – As I understand, looking at the appeal, on page 3 it talks about the bearing walls dictate second floor addition with first floor wall. Because if you were to move the second floor addition, the two feet in so you didn’t need the variance, it wouldn’t work in terms of the load bearing.

DK – Correct which is why we are stacking directly on top of the existing exterior wall.

MARY DEBENEDETTI – I have a question, it looks like you are going to do the roof continuous from the front to the back, there is a chimney there.

DK – It misses it by about a foot and a half.

MARY DEBENEDETTI – Do we worry about that or not?

Scott Dedert – No.

MARY DEBENEDETTI – Then you are going to use matching roofing?

DK – We are doing architectural shingles?

MARY DEBENEDETTI – The whole roof?

DK – No the existing roof is clay tiles and the addition will be architectural shingles like the rest of them. I’ve done the other ones in the neighborhood and I’ve done the same thing each time.

CHAIRMAN SOULE – Mr. O’Keefe does the City have anything further to add to this matter?

Kevin O’Keefe – No Mr. Chairman.

LIZA STREETT – I MOVE TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE LOCATION OF A NEW SECOND STORY ADDITION OVER AN EXISTING GARAGE TO ENCROACH 2 FEET INTO THE REQUIRED SETBACK OF 5.02 FEET PER SECTION 405.1900.A.3.

MARY DEBENEDETTI - SECOND

MOTION PASSES 5-0. APPEAL GRANTED