WEBVTT

METADATA
Video-Count: 1
Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=N5jOOUxRYjU

Part: 1

1
00:00:00.080 --> 00:00:20.800
to our planning commission board of adjustment meeting for Tuesday, July 14th. We will begin with a call to order and we will then rise for the pledge of allegiance. >> I pledge the algiance to the flag of the

2
00:00:20.800 --> 00:00:39.040
United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you. >> All right. And we'll begin with a roll call.

3
00:00:39.040 --> 00:00:55.600
>> Marcy Weaver >> here. >> Joe Ayes >> here. >> Uh Teddy Ziran absent. Roger The >> here. >> And then Lee Brisbane >> here. >> All right. And our next item is the open

4
00:00:55.600 --> 00:01:13.400
forum. If there is an item on the agenda you want to speak to, those items will have their own open form. So, this is really for something that is not currently on the agenda. If you have something you'd like to present or a question, feel free to approach the podium, state your name and address, and proceed.

5
00:01:15.360 --> 00:01:31.439
All right. I don't see anyone approaching, so we'll go ahead with the agenda. The first item is approval of the June 9th, 2026 planning commission meeting minutes. Do we have any changes or a motion to approve? >> I move to approve.

6
00:01:31.439 --> 00:01:47.360
>> Do we have a second? >> I'll second. >> All in favor say I. I. >> Any opposed? Motion passed. Um, now we'll proceed with the public hearing for variance application fee 260001 Amber Pass, 8784 Breezy Point Drive in

7
00:01:47.360 --> 00:02:04.960
Breezy Point. Parcel ID is 10 210765. They are requesting a variance to increase the volume legal non-conforming use with the construction of a 20x 20 addition to the existing dwelling. This is zoned as R3. We're going to open the

8
00:02:04.960 --> 00:02:20.879
public hearing and we'll start with the applicant presentation. So, if you'd approach the podium, state your name and address, and just walk us through your request. >> Hi, I'm Amber Poss, and I'm here um regarding 8784 Breezy Point Drive. Um I

9
00:02:20.879 --> 00:02:37.760
am looking to put a sun room on the back, 20 by 20, and um for a few reasons. One, uh I'm going to be hopefully moving up here in a year. Two, because it would be more aesthetically pleasing. It's going to elevate the look

10
00:02:37.760 --> 00:02:53.360
of the home in comparison to the neighboring properties. Um, I'm on the golf course and I think it's going to be aesthetically pleasing from the golf course too with that addition. Um, the reason that I need the variance is

11
00:02:53.360 --> 00:03:11.040
because it of where it's located on the back of the cabin because it's a non-conforming structure where it was built. Um, but if I move it over, it's going to affect some really mature trees and their roots if I try to shift it over. Um, also strategically and where

12
00:03:11.040 --> 00:03:30.080
it look would look the best is where we have it placed. Um, my neighbors have spoke with them and they are 100% fine with that. Um, let's see what else here. Yeah. And basically um on that print

13
00:03:30.080 --> 00:03:47.599
there's a little bumpout for the fireplace and we're actually tucking that back in so that bumpout wouldn't even be on there. And I did bring my builder too. So if you have technical questions hopefully he can jump in too.

14
00:03:47.599 --> 00:04:06.720
>> Perfect. Do we have any questions for the applicant at this time? So, it's a four season screen. >> Um, no, it'll be glass. >> Okay. >> Yep. >> And it's going to be 10 ft from the

15
00:04:06.720 --> 00:04:21.759
property line or am I looking at that? >> No, cuz >> about 9 ft. >> The cabin is 5T from the line. >> I see that. >> So, it it would be adjacent in line just coming straight off the back of the house.

16
00:04:21.759 --> 00:04:46.560
>> Okay. And for example, like my neighbor who's on the right would be right at that other, you know, whatever 10 ft from his line. The way he designed his house is there's no windows or anything there anyways. Um, so it's just, you know,

17
00:04:46.560 --> 00:05:06.600
they'd be kind of adjacent to each other when you look out, but >> And it is attached to the existing house, right? >> Yes, we put it right on right on the existing home. >> Trying to figure out how that

18
00:05:07.039 --> 00:05:24.720
>> Did you have questions or any more time? >> Did you have any more? And you're going to take out part of the driveway is impervious. >> Yeah, that yeah, found that out after because of imperous surface. So, we'll take out some of that driveway and just do some nice landscaping up front, too,

19
00:05:24.720 --> 00:05:40.800
that looks more aesthetically pleasing. >> Okay. >> So, it looks like the impervious is going down from 34 to about 30, >> right? >> So, there's an improvement there with this. >> Thank you. >> All right. Well, if we have more questions, we'll bring you back up. Thank you.

20
00:05:40.800 --> 00:06:00.720
>> Okay. Thank you so much. Okay, moving on to staff review. >> This is variance number 260001. Applicant is Amber Pass. Property address 8784 Breezy Point Drive, Breezy

21
00:06:00.720 --> 00:06:17.039
Point, Minnesota, 56472. Property ID 10210765. Legal description is a sixth addition to Breezy Point. States lot 17 is zoned as R3 original neighborhood. Applicable

22
00:06:17.039 --> 00:06:36.400
city codes are 1533 15344 0453.120 and then 153007. request to construct a 20 by 20 proposed addition to the

23
00:06:36.400 --> 00:06:52.560
existing dwelling um which is considered a legal non-conforming use. Uh let's see. Property is located at 8784 Breezy Point Drive. The existing dwelling is 40x 28 singlestory dwelling. Front

24
00:06:52.560 --> 00:07:11.520
setback 47 ft. Rear setback is 61. side setback of eight and 4.9 feet. Uh the property abuts to a traditional golf course uh property serviced by municipal sewer. Dwelling was constructed in 1975.

25
00:07:11.520 --> 00:07:27.360
Variance was approved for a 5 foot sideyard setback. Current impervious coverage is at 34.6%. The owner is proposing to construct a 20x 20 addition to the rear of the existing dwelling 41 ft from the rear

26
00:07:27.360 --> 00:07:45.039
property lines, 4.9 ft from the side property line. Uh the owners proposed to replace approximately 550 square ft of driveway with lawn uh to yield impervious coverage of 30%.

27
00:07:45.039 --> 00:07:59.840
Um so and then 155.033 zoning of the properties R3 original neighborhood lot size uh requirements would be 10,000 square ft front uh

28
00:07:59.840 --> 00:08:19.520
setback would be 35 ft rear 35 ft and then the impervious uh coverage limit of 30%. Variance is legally permitted deviation as provided again Minnesota statute 462.357 uh as it may be amended from time to

29
00:08:19.520 --> 00:08:35.440
time from the provisions of this chapters deemed necessary by the board of adjustment when strict interpretation of the ordinance would create practical difficulty and be impractical because of circumstances relating to lot size, shape, topography and other

30
00:08:35.440 --> 00:08:51.920
characteristics of the property. And when the deviation from the ordinance with any attached conditions will still be in keeping with the spirit and the intent of the ordinance, variances cannot create a land use not permitted in a zone.

31
00:08:51.920 --> 00:09:09.839
Uh let's see variance review uh 153 120. Uh variances shall be decided within a reasonable time with considerations for the following. Strict interpretation of the ordinance would be impractical because of circumstances relating to lot size, shape, topography,

32
00:09:09.839 --> 00:09:25.440
and other characteristics of the property not created by the land owner. The deviation from the ordinance with any attached conditions will still be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. Land use created by the variance is permitted in the zoning

33
00:09:25.440 --> 00:09:43.360
districts where the property is located. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality and the variance is not for economic reasons alone but reasonable use of the property does not exist under the ordinance. Um under findings so uh the applicant

34
00:09:43.360 --> 00:09:59.040
contends the practical difficulty is and this is intentionally left blank so the applicant can uh state what their practical difficulty would be. The impervious coverage is proposed to be 30%. Uh the use is consistent with the character of the surrounding

35
00:09:59.040 --> 00:10:14.880
neighborhood. The the use is a permitted use. City attorney has advised that a variance is necessary to expand the volume of legal non-conforming use. The following findings effect may be used to support the denial of the

36
00:10:14.880 --> 00:10:31.040
request. The planning commission board of adjustment find that no practical difficulty exists and the following may be used to support approval of the variance. The variance for this structure uh the five five foot sideyard setback was approved in 1975.

37
00:10:31.040 --> 00:10:47.200
Proposed impervious calculations is 30%. The use is reasonable and consistent with the character of the existing neighborhood. Then uh if approved the following may be conditions of approval. Building permit

38
00:10:47.200 --> 00:11:04.800
to be obtained and building to conform to Minnesota state building code. all surface water to be confined to site and addition to be 10 feet from the side property lines and then any other conditions that the uh board would find.

39
00:11:04.800 --> 00:11:20.320
Uh planning commission board of review direction. So the board may be or may by resolution choose to approve, deny or modify the requested variance. Uh the resolution should clearly state the practical difficulty and reasons for the

40
00:11:20.320 --> 00:11:40.079
approval, denial or modification of the variance. That's it. >> Thank you. >> All right. So, one question I have is one of the things that you had put on here as a possibility is addition to be

41
00:11:40.079 --> 00:11:55.600
10 ft from the property line. It's currently slated to be 4.9. Is that correct? Based on um a previous uh what do you want to call a previous uh variance from 1975? Is that correct?

42
00:11:55.600 --> 00:12:14.720
>> Correct. Yeah. >> So that needs to be changed to 4.9. >> If we approve the 4.9, >> right? >> That was already a variance that was >> that would be part of the conditions. >> Yep. >> Okay. And from what I heard, the practical

43
00:12:14.720 --> 00:12:32.240
difficulty in part was the mature trees, the existing nature of the lot and the fact that there was already a variance approved for that 4.9 or 5% previously. >> We we could add the driveway, excuse me, the 30%.

44
00:12:32.240 --> 00:12:50.160
>> Right. That's a nice improvement to go at least with this to take it down to 30. That's >> correct. >> Adding to it. Does anyone have concerns or thoughts? All right, then let's move on to public input to see if there's anyone that would like to share some additional

45
00:12:50.160 --> 00:13:10.320
information for our consideration. If you're in the audience and would like to approach the podium, please state your name and address and share with us, please. All right, I'm not seeing anyone approach. So, we'll go ahead and close the public input portion um and move on to the official action for variance

46
00:13:10.320 --> 00:13:32.560
260001. Do we have any motions at this point in time? I would move the approval of the application with the conditions outlined in the uh city planners memo to us. >> Would you keep it at or would you change

47
00:13:32.560 --> 00:13:48.959
the 10% down to the 4.9? >> Correct. >> I'm sorry. 10 ft. 4 point. >> Can we add the driveway 30% impervious? >> Let's put that as D. 30% impervious.

48
00:13:48.959 --> 00:14:04.639
Just clarifying your motion. So, >> so if I'm understanding it correctly, your motion is to approve it based on the following conditions. A building permit to be obtained and building to conform to Minnesota state building code. B the surface water to be confined

49
00:14:04.639 --> 00:14:20.880
to the site. C addition to be 4.9 ft from the side property lines as previously um approved variance. And then adding D other would be impervious coverage to be reduced to 30%.

50
00:14:20.880 --> 00:14:40.399
Do we have a second? >> I would second this. >> All right. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Any opposed? Motion passed. >> All right. Moving on to public hearing. Variance application V260002.

51
00:14:40.399 --> 00:14:57.760
Uh, address 29473 Shore View Lane in Breezy Point, Minnesota. Lot 76778. That's part of the 17th addition to Breezy Point Estates. Construct addition to an existing dwelling that was a legal non-confirming use. That's 43 feet from

52
00:14:57.760 --> 00:15:15.680
the OW and 7.7 ft from the RO on shore view lane. Uh, impervious coverage is currently 33%. It is zoned in the medium density R2 zone. So, we're opening the public hearing and we invite the applicant to come to the podium. State your name and

53
00:15:15.680 --> 00:15:36.079
address and walk us through your request. >> Good evening. Um, I'm Regina Nelson. I'm representing my clients Gary and Janet Grailius who purchased this lake property um when their daughters were in high school. Um what has changed for

54
00:15:36.079 --> 00:15:54.399
them is Janet has um mobility issues now and um they want to continue um spending time at the lake but they need to have a handicap accessible bedroom and bathroom for her. So um we're here asking for

55
00:15:54.399 --> 00:16:11.040
that variance. And >> I'm Willie Iser. I am also here representing Gary and Janet Gervilius for the um addition of their home. Um I represent all the landscaping that they do at their house. So as part of to help get the impervious coverage down, we'd

56
00:16:11.040 --> 00:16:34.320
also propose that the concrete driveway be removed and we install permeable pavers and then do permeable pavers with the sidewalks as well. >> Okay. Do we need a moment to review or you have any questions for the applicant?

57
00:16:34.320 --> 00:16:48.320
>> Excuse me. Is that on the request right now that the removal of the the drive and the sidewalk? I know that the surveyor had mentioned that if they put in pvious surfaces, it would bring it

58
00:16:48.320 --> 00:17:05.679
down to I think it's 26% impervious with this addition. >> Okay? >> So, it actually by removing the impervious and putting in pvious or permeable, you're actually going to be having

59
00:17:05.679 --> 00:17:20.160
>> less runoff. >> Yeah. Less runoff. >> Okay. So currently it's within code at 23.8. Um the request in here said 33.1 but you're adjusting that to say that you would put in the driveway and those previous capabilities. So that would

60
00:17:20.160 --> 00:17:35.600
take it down to around that 25%. >> Okay. >> But if on the charts if you took the driveway off I don't think you'd get down to that, would you? Unless you took some of the the well landscaping towards the lake and make that >> Well, that's also saying like the

61
00:17:35.600 --> 00:17:52.160
sidewalk we had and remove that >> and put all permittial in. >> Adding it up, it looks like the house and the addition ended up being according to this document 20.9. If we don't add the pavers at 6.4 and

62
00:17:52.160 --> 00:18:08.720
the driveway at 4.4, for the sidewalk and I think there's one other piece on there was about 1.4. So that would keep it within >> Okay. But so the whole lake fire ring would be removed and put in pvious

63
00:18:08.720 --> 00:18:23.520
>> if we would have to. >> Okay. Well, that would help. But >> yeah, I think the CL they're willing to take out anything impervious um to make the addition work.

64
00:18:23.520 --> 00:18:46.080
>> Okay. Yeah. >> So, one thing we could look at is just stating to keep it in that 25% limit. >> Does anyone have any other concerns? It looks like the I'm reading this correctly. The side

65
00:18:46.080 --> 00:19:02.320
setbacks are >> side setbacks. It's the road setback. That's >> um another thing they were willing to do is to remove their little waterhed if that would help. >> Okay. >> That was a 1.4 I believe. >> Mhm. >> Remove that as well.

66
00:19:02.320 --> 00:19:37.200
>> That would still ft off the road. All right. 7.7 >> the right away. >> On the rightway. Have you looked at any design builds that would keep the right away around

67
00:19:37.200 --> 00:19:53.280
where it's at currently with the new addition? Just kind of looking. Have you looked at options for that? >> Yes. They they have an architect who did and because the the property is is kind of a arrow so it

68
00:19:53.280 --> 00:20:10.160
narrows down. So that's why it's it becomes 7 ft away but the current setback from the lake will we will not encroach any closer to the lake. So it it's it's a tricky piece of

69
00:20:10.160 --> 00:20:40.159
property that narrows. >> It's kind of a triangle shape. >> Yes. Yes. >> Questions. Any more questions more time? >> No. Okay, thank you. We may call you back up if we end up having more

70
00:20:40.159 --> 00:20:58.320
questions. Thank you. >> All right, let's move on to staff review. >> Okay, this is variance 26002. Applicant Gary Gallllius. Property address 29473

71
00:20:58.320 --> 00:21:21.200
Shore View Lane, Breezy Point. Uh 56472. Property ID is 10210794,795 and 796. 17th edition to Breezy Point Estates lot 76,77 and 78. This is zoned as R2 medium

72
00:21:21.200 --> 00:21:36.559
density residential. Applicable city codes are 153007, 032, 044, 045, and 1531 120. is requested to construct

73
00:21:36.559 --> 00:21:51.360
a 2,123 square foot addition to the existing dwelling. Uh the property is located at 29473 Shore View Lane, Pelican Lake Estate

74
00:21:51.360 --> 00:22:07.600
Shore. How do you pronounce that? Mouse Bay. Uh access to the property via Shore View Lane. Property is a triangular shape. Variance to construct the house, garage, and deck was approved in 1987.

75
00:22:07.600 --> 00:22:25.039
Variance to construct a 984 square foot addition. 22 feet from the OW issues denied in 2004. Existing dwelling located less than 50 ft from the OW is considered a legal non-conforming use. Existing dwelling

76
00:22:25.039 --> 00:22:40.720
located 10 ft from the sideyard and 30 ft from the right of way to Shore View Lane. Existing impervious coverage 23.8%. Applicants proposing uh a garage addition on the application

77
00:22:40.720 --> 00:22:58.320
of 416 ft, a porch addition of 248 ft and then a house addition of 1459 square ft. Proposed setbacks a sideyard of 10 ft, OW of 43 feet and 47 feet.

78
00:22:58.320 --> 00:23:16.080
right ofway setback of 21 feet and then 7.7 feet. The previous coverage um on the application proposed was 33.1%. Uh 153.032 032. Zoning of the property

79
00:23:16.080 --> 00:23:34.159
is R2. Uh medium residential with required setbacks, sideyard of 10 ft, OW with 30, right ofway 30, and then impervious coverage 25. variance uh legally a legally permitted

80
00:23:34.159 --> 00:23:51.520
deviation as provided in Minnesota statute 462.357 as it may be amended from time to time from the provisions of this chapter is deemed necessary by the board of adjustment when the strict interpretation of the ordinance would create practical difficulty and be

81
00:23:51.520 --> 00:24:08.000
impractical because of circumstances relating to lot size, shape, topography and other characteristics of the property. And when the deviation from the ordinance with any attached conditions shall be kept shall be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. Variances cannot create a

82
00:24:08.000 --> 00:24:25.039
land use not permitted in a zone. Variance review 153.1. Variances shall be decided within a reasonable time uh with considerations for the following. strict interpretation of the ordinance be impractical because

83
00:24:25.039 --> 00:24:41.840
of circumstances relating to lot size, shape, topography, and other characteristics of the property not created by the land owner. The deviation of the ordinance with any attached conditions will still be in keeping with the spared intent of the ordinance. Land use created by the variance is permitted

84
00:24:41.840 --> 00:24:58.799
in the zoning district where the property is located. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality and the variance is not for economic reasons alone but reasonable use of the property does not exist under the ordinance. Uh the findings the applicant

85
00:24:58.799 --> 00:25:14.320
contends that the practical difficulty is and again intentionally left blank for the applicant to state their purpose. Uh the impervious coverage uh was originally proposed to be 33.1%. Uh the use is consistent with the

86
00:25:14.320 --> 00:25:29.440
characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood. Uh the proposed additions encroach the right of way of 21 ft to 7.7 ft and the OW of 43 feet and 47 ft.

87
00:25:29.440 --> 00:25:44.000
The use is consistent with the character of the surrounding neighborhoods and the reasonable use of the property currently exists and there are surface runoff concerns. Um as well as um you know

88
00:25:44.000 --> 00:26:01.360
recommend the review of the size of the square footage for the construction as an additional factor. Uh the board may by resolution choose to approve, deny or modify the requested variance. The variance should clearly state the practical difficulty and

89
00:26:01.360 --> 00:26:17.440
reasons for the approval, denial or modifications of the variance. Um, and then I did receive one uh email I'd like to read into the record. This is from Chuck Severson. Um, and this was

90
00:26:17.440 --> 00:26:36.000
originally to Mr. Bon Sack. Thank you for providing the proposed Graalius Pelican Lake home expansion plan. The proposed plan is a very significant right-of-way uh expansion to the existing home and encroaches on the Shore View Lane rightway. Uh to minimize

91
00:26:36.000 --> 00:26:52.799
uh the impacts of the proposed plans, um I would have the following comments. a city review um the potential plan the existing right ofway uh or the existing row of bushes to the Grallius property

92
00:26:52.799 --> 00:27:09.760
um or comparable bushes in the future remain and be maintained along Shore View Lane to retain a vegetated buffer between the home. Uh and then um reviewing the storm water runoff um concerns

93
00:27:09.760 --> 00:27:24.960
uh related. Um and then over the last winter, we observed significant snow drifting at 2 to three feet across Shvy Lane. Since uh this is new since the owner removed the trees uh from the far

94
00:27:24.960 --> 00:27:41.600
lot uh the city uh condition additional row of bushes and vegetation buffer uh is requested for this area and I appreciate the city's considerations for our concerns. Charles Severson 29476

95
00:27:41.600 --> 00:28:09.240
Shore View Lane I got one question Anthony on the 153-032 the zoning property the high water you have it's 30 feet isn't it supposed to be 50 feet the OW

96
00:28:09.360 --> 00:28:24.159
50 feet is required from the OW under the ordinance >> right Um 50 feet is in that area because they're serviced by sanitary sewer, >> right? >> Uh if it weren't serviced by sanitary

97
00:28:24.159 --> 00:28:47.760
sewer, that would be a 75 ft OW setback. >> So the OW printed here is incorrect at 30. It should be 50. >> Correct. We'll make that change. My assumption is that the uh variance

98
00:28:47.760 --> 00:29:07.039
request was denied in 2004 was a result of the encroachment on the high watermark. We didn't find any reasons in the uh property file. I you could assume that but uh I do not believe that there was

99
00:29:07.039 --> 00:29:32.559
any reason stated. Okay. So, the city, what you just read, what couple of their recommendations, just to make sure I have that was um requested to have additional shrubs and bushes put along the property line to prevent from drifting with road. Was that that was one of them, right?

100
00:29:32.559 --> 00:29:47.840
>> Uh correct. So, the two that the neighbor had requested was uh to have um a vegetation buffer between the uh the home expansion and Shore View Lane

101
00:29:47.840 --> 00:30:03.200
and uh and then yeah, I'm assuming that it's the same the same area would then also prevent uh depending on what was used would also prevent the snow drifts. >> Okay. Okay. So, >> and was there something also mentioned

102
00:30:03.200 --> 00:30:20.760
in there in a water runoff plan? >> Uh, the neighbor would like um at least some type of review for storm water runoff just because we're creating a additional impervious surfaces.

103
00:30:21.039 --> 00:30:37.520
>> I think the application the applicant mentioned something about a a storm water plan too. So >> hope they do >> when they approached I wrote that down >> the replacement of the uh pvious or the

104
00:30:37.520 --> 00:30:59.279
impervious surfaces the driveway and the the back patio. Yeah. >> So kind of summing up what I think our considerations are. The impervious coverage was a concern with it being an increase over the limit, but it sounds like if we

105
00:30:59.279 --> 00:31:19.799
remove the pavers, the driveway that would reduce it down to meet conditions with the housey addition and then the if they wanted to keep the sidewalk that was.7 those would keep it within that 25%. %

106
00:31:21.440 --> 00:31:44.000
um being able to add the shrubs and bushes and the vegetation buffer would be a good improvement just because there is on that road always some drifting and things like that that would >> Oh, sorry. I thought we were just

107
00:31:44.000 --> 00:31:59.679
discussing like I'm kind of summarizing what we were talking through to see if we had more questions for him. >> Was there anything else that we had that were questions that we wanted to review with this?

108
00:31:59.679 --> 00:32:21.840
>> Well, I I'm just the runoff is a concern, but half of the addition of the new proposed is on the city right away. I mean, In other words, I'm thinking the house is definitely doesn't fit that triangle

109
00:32:21.840 --> 00:32:53.440
shot lot very well. It's >> Do we have any more questions or things as part of the staff review? >> Was there any kind of a watershed there now? you know, as far as the runoff that is there,

110
00:32:53.440 --> 00:33:15.200
>> I do believe there is a uh a neighborhood drainage covert on the uh opposite side of the street at least. Um to my knowledge, that's that's what's out there so far. So

111
00:33:15.200 --> 00:33:39.360
now that the garage is actually added, the driveway gets shorter, too. So is there a safety concern on I mean it's a pretty short driveway. Just seems like a lot to fit on a a

112
00:33:39.360 --> 00:34:06.679
triangle shape lot. Any other questions for staff? All right, then we will move on to the public input. So if anyone in the audience would like to share, please uh state your name and address and approach the podium.

113
00:34:10.399 --> 00:34:34.240
All right, not seeing any public input, then we will close out the public hearing and move on to official action for variance 26002. So I think the biggest concerns that we're going through is that road. How

114
00:34:34.240 --> 00:34:51.079
close it is to the road. Is that kind of what I'm hearing? >> The size and close to the road and the impervious which they addressed. But we still have the issue of being so close to the road, you know, with the driveway in

115
00:34:53.679 --> 00:35:13.560
Well, the driveway is existing. So did that really change? >> Yeah, actually >> right >> the driveway size itself is the same or I mean um >> correct but it's shorter if you look

116
00:35:13.680 --> 00:35:31.200
the driveway and then the addition is what is that 8 ft? Yeah, I think it was 7.7. >> Yeah. >> And I'm assuming that's the corner, the

117
00:35:31.200 --> 00:35:48.880
top corner, cuz there's like two corners. There's kind of like a little jagged edge that comes out. Oh, well, >> what I'm looking at is there's this set back and this one. >> Mhm.

118
00:35:48.880 --> 00:36:06.680
But now we've lost this. driveway. >> Yeah, but to me that's not really changing >> parking. >> Well, if they're parking inside the garage. >> Oh, that works. Well,

119
00:36:07.440 --> 00:36:27.440
>> I shouldn't be sarcastic about that. >> All right. >> So, what are you guys thinking as far as the those two corner points? This one and this one are the ones that will be closest to the road. >> They're both like seven,

120
00:36:27.440 --> 00:36:43.960
>> I'm guessing, because I didn't see that on there. Are both of the distances about that 7.7? Um, I don't have a way to point it out, but you know, the the two pieces that are the closest to the road, are those about the same distance?

121
00:36:47.200 --> 00:37:13.839
>> Are you asking us, Marcy? Are you asking us? >> I was seeing if it was on the diagram because it's just so small print on here. I can't tell. >> Madam Chair, yeah, it does appear that those points are about the same distance. >> Okay. I guess is it going to affect anything

122
00:37:13.839 --> 00:37:35.440
with snow removal? You know what I mean? Could you remind us why there is a 30foot uh rightaway setback rightway setbacks are are typical in all

123
00:37:35.440 --> 00:37:53.520
districts. Um number one's conformity. Some of it is sightelines. Some of it is uh snow. um landscaping, that type of thing. >> I would say >> separation from the road.

124
00:37:53.520 --> 00:38:14.520
>> Yeah, there's a safety issue, too. >> Yes. >> Someone were to drive off the road, um that would be a safety issue. >> Landscape. Should I go up there? >> Well, if we have questions, we'll call you up. Okay.

125
00:38:18.560 --> 00:38:50.800
So the hardship is the shape of the lot, right? It just boils down to do we think that those those two setbacks are going to create an issue? Is that what

126
00:38:50.800 --> 00:39:26.240
30 now? And this would move it to 21, which is losing seven feet. >> I can't really go back. to be I mean that could be an option. >> Madam chair, I have a question uh for the applicant. >> Would you would the applicant mind

127
00:39:26.240 --> 00:39:48.240
coming back up to the podium and addressing a question? My assumption is that you would consider uh the difficulty being the owner needs to make that addition

128
00:39:48.240 --> 00:40:04.960
handicapped accessible. >> Mhm. >> Correct. And >> and without encroaching on the high water mark, that's the only direction >> you can you can go with the condition. Because the other the neighbors the corner of the neighbor's property is

129
00:40:04.960 --> 00:40:20.720
only like four feet from the property line. >> Mhm. >> I mean it's >> I mean every piece of property in that culde-sac is probably not within compliance. So it's tough >> but the homeowners are keeping

130
00:40:20.720 --> 00:40:37.520
that end piece na that's going to be natural. It's just going to be planted as one of the emails concerns came in was a hedge going in that is actually in the plans to be going in in the very very near future to fill that back in with plants and prevent the wind put a nice windbreak in there and everything

131
00:40:37.520 --> 00:40:53.839
again. >> And then lot number 76 is going to be more natural. So, they're going to they're going to do what they can to maintain that lake natural feel, but they'd also like to be able to use

132
00:40:53.839 --> 00:41:09.040
their house. >> Can you tell us what will be done in that addition to make it handicapped accessible? >> Um, we will have um zero entry shower. >> Okay. we will have all of the handicap

133
00:41:09.040 --> 00:41:26.319
bars and the the seat and um so that Janet and maybe Gary someday can traverse that main floor. So the kitchen, the living room, their bathroom. Um yeah.

134
00:41:26.319 --> 00:41:42.880
Yeah. We're we've been working with Kevin Anderson out of Little Falls who's very mindful and very respectful of codes and >> um we we felt like this was the best plan for the homeowner >> and and for the difficulties working

135
00:41:42.880 --> 00:42:18.200
within these >> setbacks and so forth in the oddshaped property. >> Yep. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Do we have more questions or is anyone willing to present a motion?

136
00:42:22.880 --> 00:42:40.800
Now, is this like the only plan that um >> that you've for plan that you've kind of looked at? I mean, there may be some other options to get away. >> There wasn't there wasn't a lot of wiggle room because of um minimum 3 to

137
00:42:40.800 --> 00:42:55.359
four feet on each side of the bed. I mean, I think Kevin was very thoughtful about coming up with this and using up as little space as we could. Um, but the possibility of a wheelchair or having to

138
00:42:55.359 --> 00:43:44.319
have an assistant and things like that, you just >> Right. You need x amount of space. >> You need x amount of space. Yep. >> Yep. >> Okay. Anyone wish to make a motion

139
00:43:44.319 --> 00:44:09.440
to approve or deny? If I make a motion, it'll be to deny it. So, I'm not making a motion. >> Did you want to make a motion or >> No. >> Okay. I think there's other plans out there

140
00:44:09.440 --> 00:44:24.160
that would I've seen a lot of handicapped houses that could be worked out and I just don't see the being so close to the road. >> So, just kind of asking some questions

141
00:44:24.160 --> 00:44:38.720
here for consideration. If this wasn't here, that would move to this edge. If this was moved back, I don't know what the plan looks like, but that would >> right >> reduce it. >> That would help.

142
00:44:38.720 --> 00:45:12.359
Right. But if you look, it's bathroom and a closet. >> What is here? Um, bathroom. I think this Where did you see that on there? Right here.

143
00:45:13.040 --> 00:45:45.680
It looks like this was a closet here, a bathroom there. >> Two basically two bedrooms. >> Yeah. Bathroom. Right. >> Three bedrooms up. >> And I don't know enough about building

144
00:45:45.680 --> 00:46:06.240
code to know if they could remove this piece and this piece and reposition it inside of that so that it would be a little bit further on those two points. >> Right. my points. It's where did I highlight it where it shows how much of the addition

145
00:46:06.240 --> 00:46:36.640
is in the in the right away. So if they took this off and this that would really help. >> That's what I was thinking is just as a advice kind of thing. >> This was reposition because then we're

146
00:46:36.640 --> 00:46:54.240
talking we're basically getting back to similar to what it was. >> Exactly. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> What do you >> I'll share what we were just kind of discussing over there which was um basically this is a closet and this is a bathroom over here. If this

147
00:46:54.240 --> 00:47:11.200
wasn't there or repositioned and this was moved back then you would have a more consistent to where it's at like >> you know if it was remove back there then right away would >> we we we gain so it wouldn't be yeah a safety issue so that could be a denial

148
00:47:11.200 --> 00:47:27.440
but a recommendation to come back with a plan that would be similar to that >> I would agree that okay sounds good >> okay so I'm going to try to I'm going to try to summarize this um into a motion So the motion would be to >> Madam Chairman. >> Yes.

149
00:47:27.440 --> 00:47:44.880
>> Um I'm only speculating that you're trying to redesign this thing and you have some concerns about setbacks from the road and and that there should be other designs that are looked at rather than than doing that. I

150
00:47:44.880 --> 00:48:01.119
would recommend that the planning commission table the issue till you get a plan back from the applicant that addresses your issue so that you can adequately adequately approve a variance. >> Okay.

151
00:48:01.119 --> 00:48:20.079
>> I don't think that you should be in the design business. I think you can uh tell the applicant or meet with the applicant after a while and tell the applicant what your concerns are where there should be some revisions made and

152
00:48:20.079 --> 00:48:35.040
then act on the variance that way rather than trying to be the designer. >> Right. I think we were just trying to come back with some ideas on what we're >> right >> the reasons for why we're suggesting a redesign.

153
00:48:35.040 --> 00:48:52.559
>> I don't um what you have is a plan to to approve or or deny quite frankly, >> right? >> Um if you're going to look at other alternatives, you should be acting on those alternatives and not something that you're proposing.

154
00:48:52.559 --> 00:49:08.880
>> Right. So you're saying table not deny. >> Yes. And so it just be a motion to table it and review a alternative plan. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> I would make that motion. >> Have a second. >> I'll second. >> All in favor say I.

155
00:49:08.880 --> 00:49:25.119
>> I. >> I. >> Motion passed. >> 30 more days. A decision have to be made within 60 days of the application. So it have to go the next month. Madam chair, I can I can meet with the applicant after the meeting and talk

156
00:49:25.119 --> 00:49:49.839
over the next steps >> and you'll know what acceptable. >> Well, we'll I'll talk with the next steps after this. So all right, moving on to public hearing

157
00:49:49.839 --> 00:50:08.160
for the petition to reszone 260001 Holly Ro 6799 County Road 11 Breezy Point. Reszone the following. Describe property as east 300 feet of west 675 feet of the north 360 foot of the north

158
00:50:08.160 --> 00:50:25.599
east quarter of the northwest quarter. Section 18. It's containing 2.48 acres more or less. It's subject to county state aid highway number 11 rightaway. It's subject to easements, restrictions, and reservations of record. The current

159
00:50:25.599 --> 00:50:43.119
zoning is urban and the preso the proposed zoning is commercial. So we're opening the public hearing and we're going to invite the applicant to come to the podium and state name and address and walk us through the request. Yes. Uh I am Holly Rish and the address

160
00:50:43.119 --> 00:51:02.400
is 6799 County Road 11 Breezy Point. Um I am petitioning to reszone it. Um currently it's urban reserve. I'm not sure when it became urban reserve. I've been there for 20 24 years in the area

161
00:51:02.400 --> 00:51:18.720
for 30 years and um everything around me has gotten built up. I think everybody can agree on that. And I now um I've ran a lot of businesses um in my home and out of my home uh

162
00:51:18.720 --> 00:51:36.240
throughout the years. And now I have a small food trailer that is an extension of a brickandmortar store down in Baxter and that has raised the the question of doing commercial and I think it's just pushed to this point because everything

163
00:51:36.240 --> 00:51:53.920
else is either commercial or public. Um my neighbor across the road is still living residential. I really don't have houses around me. Um, but even though he's living in his house and it's residential and everything, his is also commercial now. Um, I'm not sure when

164
00:51:53.920 --> 00:52:09.040
that became commercial, but either way, um, because I have the food trailer there, um, it's it's being pushed to to make this uh, commercial instead of residential to make it all work. Um, so

165
00:52:09.040 --> 00:52:27.599
that's that's my request. Um, I do believe I have the people around me. It would coincide with what is going around me. I'm kind of the only one left. I have a gentleman next to me, but that's just land. Uh, Nicholls. So,

166
00:52:27.599 --> 00:53:07.680
um, that that's all I have to say. >> All right. Do we have questions for the applicant? All right. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And we'll move on to staff review. >> Thank you. So, uh, as far as staff

167
00:53:07.680 --> 00:53:26.240
review, um, for reszonings, um, what I provided in the packet or Jerry prepared is an excerpt from the comprehensive plan, um, showing that that area um was not sort of in the immediate future of

168
00:53:26.240 --> 00:53:41.760
planning for commercial. um under its current zoning. Uh it's intended for um the long-term urban growth of the city um while effectively planning for the growth by larger lot requirements to

169
00:53:41.760 --> 00:53:59.440
prevent occurrence of premature premature scattered urban development while in the meantime allowing a very low density of residential and agricultural uses and land use to promote or foster forestry. Um so those are the two things to consider. Um the

170
00:53:59.440 --> 00:54:16.720
other um thing to consider in this is that uh reszoning to commercial opens up uh to more uses than just um allowing for a food truck in this case. So, we would have to consider all of the uh

171
00:54:16.720 --> 00:54:41.280
commercial usages in a reasonzoning. So, as part of the staff review, I see that you had um the comprehending comprehensive plan land use goals and strategies. And it appears there's um four goals. Some of them are repeated, but one of the things that I noticed it

172
00:54:41.280 --> 00:54:59.200
said under goal four, number one, um direct commercial development to existing commercial nodes and areas served by adequate transportation and infrastructure and supporting of um mixed development, small and commercial spaces. But um one

173
00:54:59.200 --> 00:55:15.119
of the things that just kind of hit me was served by adequate transportation and infrastructure. I know along that road we've had a few other things that have been built up and that's been a concern with the speed and the >> turn lanes >> the turn lanes and that kind of thing. So that was one thing that as part of

174
00:55:15.119 --> 00:55:49.359
the the review document that kind of stood out for me. >> Mhm. And then I think strategy number four said plan for commercial and retail density at the identified nodes in already commercialzoned areas ensuring

175
00:55:49.359 --> 00:56:07.319
that development patterns support mixeduse walkable environment. Um I don't think this would be considered a walkable environment and it's not already in the zoned area. So, that was another thing that stood out

176
00:56:12.079 --> 00:56:47.680
would be a spot zone, which is another thing in itself. Did anyone else have questions on the staff prepared reports >> or you have anything else?

177
00:56:47.680 --> 00:57:10.720
>> No. >> All right, then we've completed the staff review. We're going to move on to public input. If anyone in the audience would like to share their thoughts, you please approach the podium and state your name and address. >> Good evening. I'm Gary Mitchell, 6944

178
00:57:10.720 --> 00:57:26.240
Nickel Road. I uh have the have land that borders Holly's and so um Holly has been a very good neighbor.

179
00:57:26.240 --> 00:57:44.640
However, I had no idea she had a a soft drink stand or whatever on her property. I a realizer told me I should talk to you people about putting some of my land up for sale because it runs all along

180
00:57:44.640 --> 00:58:01.359
County Road 11. I love that land. It's beautiful wildlife. Um I have no intent. However, I do have a purchase agreement from a a couple whose daughter is here and couldn't attend

181
00:58:01.359 --> 00:58:20.079
and uh to take ownership of the property by May 31st of 2027. It could happen quicker than that if we find a unit we want to live in and they their place is up for sale if it sells.

182
00:58:20.079 --> 00:58:38.799
I was very surprised to see this quite honestly. Um, I was looking here. Uh, Jerry gave me a list of urban reserve and the requirements and uh, quite frankly all across the road is

183
00:58:38.799 --> 00:58:55.599
commercial and my feelings are that if she wants to have a commercial business that she should sell her place and purchase land across the road. Um I uh the new owner I talked to him he

184
00:58:55.599 --> 00:59:11.760
couldn't make he and his wife could not make it tonight but he was against it and uh I have to say uh even though Holl's been a good neighbor and stuff I am against turning it in commercial to me it opens a whole bucket

185
00:59:11.760 --> 00:59:26.559
of worms. What's that land going to be? How you know if she decides to sell it? somebody can move in there and start a business that who knows what that business would be. And so because it's a beautiful

186
00:59:26.559 --> 00:59:47.119
area, um I love that woods and uh so I'm going to have to say I am against it and the new owner is against it. Remember that. Do you have any questions for me? >> No. Okay,

187
00:59:47.119 --> 01:00:13.280
>> thank you. >> Hi, my name is Sarah Love Choy, 7006 Nickel Road. And I also would just like to say I really do think Holly is lovely and I like their family and I've even been to their food truck. But as a

188
01:00:13.280 --> 01:00:28.240
person who lives right behind it, I'm concerned about the potential light pollution and noise pollution, not from the food truck, but from what else might take the place when she sells if it gets reszoned. So, if we could be guaranteed it would just be a food truck forever, that's one thing. But I know that's not

189
01:00:28.240 --> 01:00:53.839
a promise you can make us. So, unfortunately for Holly, I'm going to have to say I'm also against it. Thank you. >> Thank you. Sorry. Um Kenzie Stish, 7036 Nickel Road. So I'm also in the urban reserve neck of the woods. Um my primary concern

190
01:00:53.839 --> 01:01:09.440
I'm also going to say that I'm against it. My primary concern being that um on that side of 11. It's already kind of a turning nightmare and I don't want to see the road expanded. I don't want to see 11 turn into a four-lane road. I don't want to see Nickel end up with the same turn lanes that Ranchette has. We

191
01:01:09.440 --> 01:01:25.040
don't have the population that would require that. But if we start allowing commercial to encroach the opposite side, so the urban reserve side, um I feel like there probably wouldn't be a choice. We would have to add turn lanes. And then part of urban reserve is to reserve the area to protect the

192
01:01:25.040 --> 01:01:41.440
woodlands to um kind of be a steward of the land that's there. and any potential new encroachments from 11 would therefore encroach on the woods that we're all kind of working to protect in that area. Anyway, um our neighborhood's very very involved. You've heard us here

193
01:01:41.440 --> 01:01:59.079
many times before um but very very involved in preserving the land. So that's just this does not really like um promote the mission of of what it is currently zoned and I just don't think it's necessary. So thank you. >> Thank you. Yeah.

194
01:02:08.960 --> 01:02:23.119
All right, we're going to go ahead and close the public input portion and then move on to official action, which is to address whether we petition to reszone and recommend to city council or what

195
01:02:23.119 --> 01:02:43.280
our recommendation would be. I guess I'll share um first what I'm thinking is currently if you look at that zoning map everything on that side of County Road 11 is urban reserve which is the opposite in my opinion of commercial. It

196
01:02:43.280 --> 01:03:00.240
was intended for wooded residential um larger lots that type of thing. And I know from past experience when we've had other types of things coming up along the road, the traffic has been a an issue. And to note that, you know,

197
01:03:00.240 --> 01:03:16.240
there's no turning lanes. Um there's issues with speed and things like that coming into that area that I that would be a concern that I would have. Um, so the other concern that was brought up a few times, um, that I think has a valid

198
01:03:16.240 --> 01:03:33.760
point is that while the food truck might be something the neighbors would condone, we can't restrict it to just that. So if we make it commercial, any type of commercial business in the future could be there and you could have again more parking concerns, more drive

199
01:03:33.760 --> 01:03:48.400
concerns. Um, it's less like an urban reserve at that point. So those are kind of the summaries of what I heard and what I'm seeing as as our major points. >> Yes. Well, the safety concern is one of

200
01:03:48.400 --> 01:04:13.760
the and the biggest concern. So >> is there any other concerns or thoughts anyone has? >> And it would be a spot zone. So, >> so as a um so our goal here would be whether we recommend it to city council or we table I don't know if the word

201
01:04:13.760 --> 01:04:30.559
would be table but either recommend or or not proceed with that. Um kind of what I'm hearing is saying no to proceeding. >> No. >> Lee, what's your thought? >> I would say no. No. So, I think we have a consensus of saying um not

202
01:04:30.559 --> 01:04:48.599
recommending it to city council to approve a resoning at this point. Can >> you just speak about the traffic? >> No. >> At this point, do we need do we have any questions on that?

203
01:04:49.200 --> 01:05:06.000
>> Thank you. >> Do we need a formal motion? >> Do we? >> I don't think so. Do we? I would suggest you make a formal motion as far as a recommendation to the council. >> Okay. >> Um,

204
01:05:06.000 --> 01:05:22.799
in order for it to be finalized, it would have to the council would have to affirm or or go against the your resolution or your your your motion. >> Okay. Do we have a motion? >> I'll make a motion to deny it, I guess.

205
01:05:22.799 --> 01:05:38.319
>> Do we have a second? >> Second. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Any opposed? >> Motion has been approved. >> All right, moving on to staff reports. Do we have any new staff reports to

206
01:05:38.319 --> 01:05:54.000
cover? >> Uh, yes. So, as I have uh shown on the slide, there is a new planning and zoning administrator that started on July 7th. So, I'm I'm happy to be here and I'm looking forward to uh continuing

207
01:05:54.000 --> 01:06:10.559
to work with the city. Um, next, uh, an exerpt for the cannabis retail update. Uh, just wanted to inform that the council did approve the license, um, for the cannabis retail shop. So, you guys had previously made the the use

208
01:06:10.559 --> 01:06:28.559
approval and then they approved that license at the last meeting. Um and then lastly, just to make a reminder that the candidate filing um had started today. So, >> and that's all I had.

209
01:06:28.559 --> 01:06:41.240
>> All right. Any questions? >> No. >> All right. Any commissioner reports? No. >> All right. Meeting adjourned.