The meeting’s most debated topic was the variance request for a property located on Tyler Street Northeast. The applicant sought to reduce the rear yard setback from 10 feet to 5 feet for a detached accessory building in an R1 zoning district within the Hidden Haven Country Club Estates. Mr. Burke, presenting the application, detailed that the Planning Commission needed to evaluate practical difficulties unique to the property to justify the variance. According to Mr. Burke, the property had 85 feet of rear yard space available, which could accommodate the structure without a variance. He emphasized that the variance should only be considered if strict ordinance enforcement created undue hardship without altering the locality’s character.

Despite these points, the discussion among commission members revealed differing opinions. Some questioned the necessity of encroaching into the easement and suggested that the building could be positioned closer to the house. One member expressed skepticism about the applicant’s reasoning for wanting to push the building back five feet, noting it could be positioned within the utility easement without requiring a variance. Ultimately, a motion to deny the variance was made and approved unanimously. The recommendation to deny was forwarded to the City Council for further consideration on August 12th.

Another agenda item involved a conditional use permit application from Randy Crumpler of Grumer Properties LLC and Boatworld. The application sought to allow exterior storage on a newly acquired parcel at 21125 Highway 65 Northeast, adjacent to the existing Boatworld property. The B2 zoning district permits certain uses, but exterior storage related to boat sales is a conditional use only in a B3 zone. Crumpler’s plan to expand storage onto the new lot was complicated by the absence of a legal non-conforming designation, which would have allowed inconsistent use with current zoning regulations.

Crumpler expressed a desire to keep the two parcels separate for financial reasons. During public comment, he presented a drawing outlining proposed storage areas and fencing plans. The commission discussed the necessity of screening and containment for the proposed storage area. Crumpler clarified intentions to maintain a six-foot fence with barbed wire for security and visibility. Concerns about expanding non-conforming uses within the city’s zoning framework were highlighted, alongside discussions about the implications of approving such a permit.

The conversation turned to the technicalities of zoning laws, particularly concerning the association of exterior storage with the business operating on the parcel. A motion was made to approve the conditional use permit with specific alternative conditions, including proposals for fencing and storage flexibility. However, the complexities of zoning regulations and the potential precedent it could set were acknowledged, leading to further deliberation. Ultimately, a revised motion was passed without opposition, and the matter was forwarded to the city council meeting scheduled for August 12th, postponed at the applicant’s request.

Additionally, the commission examined a variance request for a detached accessory structure on a property exceeding five acres with nearly two acres of wetlands. The existing structure’s location did not comply with current zoning regulations, necessitating a variance for a new structure closer to the road. The property owner argued that the proposed location was most viable due to wetland constraints. The Planning Commission assessed the request using a three-factor test for practical difficulty, considering the reasonableness of the request, the property’s unique circumstances, and potential neighborhood impact. Standing trees between the proposed structure and the road were noted as a natural screen, potentially mitigating visual impact.

After public hearing input and consideration of zoning code compliance, a motion to approve the variance request was made and supported unanimously. The Planning Commission members referenced past approvals of similar variances that included screening from the road due to existing tree growth, leading to a recommendation to the city council.

In other business, a variance request for reducing the side yard setback for a detached accessory structure on a property in The Meadows of Fish Lake subdivision was also discussed. The request was driven by topographical challenges and septic system placement, with the commission ultimately recommending approval based on the neighborhood’s character and lack of opposition from neighbors.