Board denies front-yard setback variance at 1255 Annex Avenue; denial without prejudice 3-2

The Board of Adjustment Panel C on Monday denied a variance request for 1255 Annex Avenue, voting 3-2 to deny the applicant’s request without prejudice. The motion to deny without prejudice—meaning the applicant may refile—was made by Jarrett Slade and, after amendment on the floor, carried by the required majority.

Neighbors who live adjacent to the property told the board the proposed building line would sit in front of the neighborhood’s established building line. Dennis Harrison, who said he and his wife Susan live next door at 1207 Annex Avenue, told the board their building line is 21 feet and that the applicant’s plan provides a 20-foot-1-inch setback. "They're asking to be basically a foot closer to the street than we are," Harrison said.

Susan Harrison added that allowing the reduced setback would block views from her windows and said she opposed the request on aesthetic grounds. Jim Anderson, vice president of the neighborhood association and a city historic-preservation planner by profession, said packet materials included elevations that appeared to violate the Residential Proximity Slope (RPS) standards; staff later told the board that the site plan in the docket showed the 20-foot-1-inch setback but that staff’s revised plan complied with RPS for the 26-to-36-foot range and therefore staff determined no RPS variance had been requested.

Board members debated whether to deny with prejudice (preventing an immediate refiling) or without prejudice. Several members said they were reluctant to permanently bar an applicant who might have an acceptable justification for absence from the hearing; others cited the opposition testimony and absence of the applicant as reasons to deny. Slade said opponents had established a public-interest showing and suggested denying with prejudice. After discussion, Slade amended his motion to deny without prejudice and the amended motion carried 3-2 (Jarrett Slade, Roger Sashington and Vice Chair Robert Agnich voted yes; Michael Milliken and Michael Dorn voted no).

Staff clarified that the board could not grant a variance to height/RPS in this hearing because no request for RPS relief was before the panel. The board’s denial applied only to the front-yard setback variance; staff noted the site plan in the official posting showed the 20-foot-1-inch setback and that plan would be the document stamped if an approval had been granted. The record also includes neighbors’ statements that the applicant’s site elevations that appeared in the packet were not the versions staff had on file.

Because the denial was without prejudice, the applicant may reapply; any future application that again requests variance relief would be a new hearing and a new record. The board’s action was procedural and did not resolve the RPS/elevation questions flagged by neighbors; those remain subject to staff review and permit review processes.