Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning board approves 93‑square‑foot setback variance for 104 South 10th Street
Summary
The Saginaw Zoning Board of Appeals approved a roughly 93-square-foot setback variance for 104 South 10th Street to add a community room and reconfigure a deteriorating foundation; the vote met the board's 'option 3' minimum-variance test and passed unanimously.
The Saginaw Zoning Board of Appeals voted to grant a setback variance for 104 South 10th Street, allowing a roughly 93-square-foot addition intended to create a community room and foyer.
The motion to issue the variance was approved unanimously; the chair characterized the decision as meeting "option 3," the board's standard for the minimum variance necessary to provide reasonable use of the land or structure. The board cited existing site conditions, including a deteriorating concrete foundation under the building's brick exterior, as part of its rationale.
Aaron Comstock of Austin Associates Architects and Planners, the applicant's representative, told the board they were "looking to add an addition on for a community room and kind of a foyer and entrance to the building," and said the design would "square off" an existing footing to keep congregants from exiting directly into the street. Comstock said the bump-out is limited to the footprint of an existing footing and estimated the project at about 93 square feet.
During deliberations board members referenced a historic plat labeled the "Conrad Schwanson subdivision," which appears in the application materials and was read aloud during discussion; a date on the plat was cited as 1865. One member noted the addition would provide winter shelter and improve pedestrian safety for the congregation.
The board conducted a roll-call style vote in which members indicated support for the motion under "option 3." The chair announced "unanimous approval of variance with setback." Under the board's rules discussed earlier in the meeting, an affirmative vote of two‑thirds of the board or three votes is required to decide in favor of an appeal; the board's recorded votes met that threshold.
The board did not record a detailed construction timetable or permit conditions on the record during the meeting. The action of the board is final for zoning purposes; the chair noted that the only relief from a board decision is through the courts.
The applicant was thanked for attending; the board moved on to other business.
