The Holland City Board of Appeals approved a variance for a shed at 806 Popeye Drive on a 5–1 vote, concluding the lot’s irregular shape and the applicant’s earlier permit work justified relief from the standard 3‑foot side setback.

Applicant Janie Sigmow (legal name Nancy Jane) told the board she had replaced an older shed and relied on available property mapping and the city’s permitting process before commissioning a new survey that revealed a sharply angled lot line intersecting a small corner of the new shed. "I respectfully request, you consider all these factors in your decision of whether to approve my application for a zoning variance," she said, noting the new structure was built "from the ground up" and that moving it would require full deconstruction.

Neighbors raised objections at the public hearing. Phil Baker, who said the property is owned by his brother‑in‑law, asserted the fence and hedge that had defined the boundary were on his family’s property and accused the applicant of removing mature pine trees while operating equipment onto the neighbor’s land. Robin Baker, speaking for Christopher Prinz and other nearby residents, said a hedge and fence that once stood on the line were removed without their consent and that the shed and prior yard work had affected their property.

Board members reviewed the variance criteria, including whether the lot’s shape and history created unique circumstances. Several members said the lot’s irregular, pie‑slice shape and the applicant’s due diligence—permitting and prior survey research—supported findings of uniqueness and that strict compliance would be unreasonably burdensome. One member noted questions about alternate placements discussed in a prior study session but agreed the permit limited relocation options.

A motion to approve the variance was made and seconded; roll call recorded five votes in favor and one against, with Chair Bedard voting no. The board noted that property boundary disputes such as pavers or hedges are civil matters outside the board’s purview.

The variance is effective the day of the decision; the board reminded applicants they may appeal to the circuit court under state law. Residents and the applicant were told they could contact Community and Neighborhood Services for the official results the next morning.

The board moved to the next agenda item after the decision.