Zoning board approves variance for elevator enclosure at 4629 E. Lake Harriet Parkway

On July 23, 2026 the Minneapolis Zoning Board of Adjustment approved a variance allowing an elevator enclosure to rise to 33 feet at 4629 East Lake Harriet Parkway so the property owners can access a rooftop deck.

City staff had recommended caution, saying the proposal does not clearly meet the Shoreland Overlay’s required finding that the property has a unique condition. Staff noted the lot is zoned UN1 and sits in an interior-built-form Shoreland Overlay, and that exemptions for rooftop mechanicals and elevators that apply in other districts generally do not apply in the shoreland overlay. Staff presented neighbors’ input: three nearby residents and the Lyndhurst Neighborhood Association had submitted letters of support while the Minneapolis Park Board expressed general reluctance toward shoreland height variances and urged careful demarcation of parkway property lines during construction.

The applicant’s design team, represented by Colby Mattson of Charley and Company Design, and property owner Tom Borman argued the requested relief is limited in scale and necessary for accessibility. Borman told the board, “The elevator is needed because I can barely walk,” and said the alternative — raising gable roofs or adding a by-right dormer — would increase the home’s massing and impact views more than the small enclosed elevator area. Staff described that the elevator enclosure would be roughly 6 by 11 feet and that the decorative chimney-like enclosure would be proportionally small compared with other massing options.

Vice Chair Wang moved to support the applicant’s findings on the condition that the Park Board’s notes are accepted; the motion was seconded and carried by roll-call vote, recorded as five ayes and one nay. The clerk recorded votes from board members: Callahan (aye), Eicholtz (aye), Ingram (nay), Israel (aye), Srinagarva (aye), and Vice Chair Wang (aye). The board’s approval was explicit that the variance is tied to the specific proposal and that substantial changes to the design would require a new variance or amendment.

The decision allows the applicants to pursue building permits consistent with the approved design and any Park Board conditions related to right-of-way or construction use of parkway property. The variance runs with the land; the board noted that any materially different future proposal would require new review.