Englewood board grants variance allowing shed at 4229 South Fox Street to remain, 5–1

The Englewood Board of Adjustment and Appeals voted 5–1 to grant a variance allowing a minor accessory structure at 4229 South Fox Street to remain within both the front and side setbacks.

Staff planner Will Charles told the board the shed sits inside the three-foot side setback and roughly 18 inches from the property line and that staff offered a split recommendation: approve a front-setback variance (with a condition limiting the structure to the average front building line of neighboring properties) but deny the side-setback variance. Charles told the board accessory structures under 200 square feet must also be 10 feet from the principal structure, and he outlined the city’s appeal and permit timing rules, including a 30-day appeal period.

Applicant Shauna Gordon, testifying under oath, said she is a first-time homeowner who bought the shed after moving in to securely store tools and items for her children, whom she said are autistic. “I was trying to find a solution that would be lockable,” Gordon said, and explained she had been told by the installer that no permits were required. Gordon told the board she could move the structure an estimated 18 inches if required but that doing so could damage the shed or its structural integrity and that costs ranged from about $750 up to the cost of rebuilding.

Neighbor Jeff Midenhol, who lives at 4221 South Fox Street, opposed the variance. He said the shed was installed Oct. 10, 2025, and described it as “12 feet long, 8 feet deep and about 10 feet tall,” resting about 18 inches from the property line. “Besides being a general eyesore on the block, it has taken a majority of the sunlight away from our lilac bushes,” Midenhol said, adding he was concerned about the permanence of the structure and potential future alterations that could affect neighborhood character.

A neighbor in support, Lily Smith (4210 South Fox Street), told the board she liked the shed and believed the owner should be allowed to keep it.

During deliberations, several board members cited the lot’s alley-house configuration, the limited and constrained backyard area (which houses HVAC and exhaust equipment requiring clearance), the safety and access needs described by the applicant, and the presence of a large tree and raised planter on the lot that would be harmed if the shed were moved. One board member said moving the structure the small distance required by the code would create an “eyesore” and could damage the tree. Chair Taylor dissented, saying the side-setback encroachment and the fact the structure was built before seeking approval weighed against granting relief.

On roll call the board recorded the following votes as read into the record by the clerk: Miss Ozels — yes; Mr. Frzen — yes; Miss Dickerson — approve; Miss Porter — approve; Mr. Lorden — approve; Chair Taylor — deny. The motion passed 5–1.

Under Englewood procedure noted at the hearing, any party aggrieved by the board’s decision may appeal to a court of record within 30 days; an approved variance becomes effective at the end of the appeal period and building permits for construction associated with an approved variance may not be issued until that period ends.

The application record and supplemental documents submitted to the board included neighbor photos and a cost estimate the applicant provided for moving or reconstructing the shed. The board did not place additional conditions beyond the standard timing and line-of-building limitations referenced by staff.