##VIDEO ID:Ke5w4ZmwG6Y## 2024 for the Planning Commission Board of adjustment meeting we will start with a call to order IR here Brisbane here Weaver here Ty here zeran here will everyone please stand and rise for the Pledge of Allegiance I pledge the allegiance to the flag FL of the United States of America and to the Republic for which stands one na God indivisible with liberty and justice for all thank you we'll start with approval or any amendments of the current agenda that we have in front of us do we have any amendments or a motion to approve I'll make a motion to approve the agenda for this evening we have a motion do we have a second second we have a second all in favor say I I I any opposed motion has passed and we will move on to the open Forum this is an opportunity for anybody in the audience who not is not currently on the agenda to come forth and share with us their information if you do so please state your name and address do we have anyone all right we're going to close the open forum and move on to approval of the November 12th 2024 Planning Commission minutes um if everyone has a chance to review them do we have anyone making a motion to approve I'll makeove I'll second that all in favor say I I any opposing motion has passed uh we'll move on to new business new business is a variance V 2413 and we will start by having a staff report Madam chair members of the commission variance application V2 2413 for Stewart and Paula pisc for 9813 Weavers Point Road is Zone R2 medium density residential un sewered the applicant has filed the appropriate application the applicant has paid the appropriate fee for the application public hearing of the notice was published in the in the legal newspaper and all Property Owners within 350 ft were nailed a notice of the hearing public public notice was given to the DNR as the property is in the Shoreland overlay district and the DNR declined to comment on the variance request the variance request is a request from the required 75t ordinary high water level on setback on a general development Lake Pelican and a variance from the required 10 foot setback and a variance from the maximum impervious surface coverage of 25% to construct a 5x14 addition onto an existing non-conforming residence located 71 ft from in the ordinary high water level and 9.9 ft from the property line at a 26.4 impervious total lot surface coverage summary of the property includes this property is unplatted land that was subdivided via meats and Bounds the property has now been surveyed as part of this process property is in a Lakeshore residential Zone area towards the end of Weaver Point Road the adjacent neighbors are similar yearr round homes and seasonal homes the property requires a 75 ft structure setback because these properties are on their own septic system so they do not have the 50ft setback their setback is 75 adjacent neighborhood properties are similarly developed with single family year round seasonal cabins the city has established structural setbacks within minimum residential structure size in the property proposed and the addition and the location selected appears to meet these standards however the residence itself is a non-conforming structure because it does not meet the lake setback or the property line setback and it also exceeds the allowed lot coverage and therefore requires variance approval if it is to be added to the existing building based on the information presented at this time in the applicant survey it appears the proposed addition is minimal in size and appears to be proposed in an area already covered with impervious surface coverage please see the impervious surface table in your packets on the site plan and the location of the proposed addition on the applicant's drawing aside from remove moving small parts of the deck and a part of the house that encroach there appear appears to be no other feasible remedies that exist that could be explored to alleviate the need for the variants due to the non-conforming location of the existing house but the applicant easily could remove some impervious surface coverage elsewhere to get the property in compliance with the impervious surface coverage allowance of 25% the applicant could also install engineered perious product in a small limited area that would also not require variance and also meet this standard as well there are many non-conforming properties that are bought and sold and have very limited or no expansion opportunities it is also the landowners responsibility to be aware of development limitations within their property as rules change over the time the proposed project in the application material submitted at this time appears to meet the spirit and intent of the ordinance by proposing the addition in an area meeting setbacks however staff fails to see any hardship or practical difficulty relating to the impervious surface request please keep in mind that granting a variance does not create a set of Precedence this Planning Commission Board of adjustment is the venue for deciding whether unique circumstances do exist to create a practical difficulty and justify variance approval the commission can also Grant a variance on one property not on another given they follow the proper procedure and adopt the appropriate findings this is based on prior case law and the findings of fact can be considered uniquely and applied to the subject property based on a different place and time under current review of the application staff recommends the commission consider approval based on the plan submitted in the application at this time with the proposed condition that the variance for the impervious surface allowance is not granted and that the applicant must submit a plan that requires approval from the city to meet the impervious surface coverage allowance before a building permit is issued that concludes the staff report if you have any questions please ask for the um how much would have to be removed from the decking to get us into the impervious coverage amount 1.4% lot coverage so I'll do that math quick there should be a setback chart or a impervious surface table um on the slides if we go down um keep going to the full certificate of survey there um next 26 on that certificate of surve yeah I can't read it um it's right p5% 26 I think it's on that one on the bottom left keep going to the left and up just slightly the other there it is okay that's easier to read the deck's currently at 0.5% can you move that up just other way down I mean then there there you are there we go one more4 so 20 20 I'll have that number in just one second so a Max buildout would put them at 5,578 Square ft so that minus what they have right now they're at 26.4 so that minus 5, 800 88 square ft they would need to remove 310 Square ft of pervious surface to get within compliance with current ordinance and just to give an idea in 310 Square ft that is roughly an area 17 ft by 17 ft but currently it looks like because it what is currently a deck it doesn't change the current impervious coverage it's exactly the same cor right yeah they're going over already existing so I maybe by like I think on his chart there they're technically going from 5,884 Square ft to 5,888 so they are already covering existing there' be like a no net increase and it's on the opposite side of the lake so for runoff any questions does anyone have any more questions all right well then we will invite the applicant up please approach the podium state your name and address and then share with us your request good evening Paula Pik and Stuart pek address you said 9813 Weavers Point Road Breezy Point and then just kind of walk us through what your request is we're just looking to bump our kitchen wall out the road side 5 by 133 it currently is it it not it in a red uh right red box there so currently it's it's not in line with the rest of the house so it's just kind of so we're going to bring it out so that the front of the house is all even so you're not even changing the roof line you just it's just going to kind of shed roof it out yeah so far as water run off it's it's going to go the same place it always was for do you need more time don't you guys need more time no thank you thank you and then we'll move on to a public hearing is there anyone here that has in the audience that would like to come up and approach the podium we'll move move on seeing no one um approaching we'll move on to commission deliberation and I will go ahead and kind of read through the notice of decision and findings of fact so the Planning Commission will consider the following in its decision and make written findings concerning the variance approval or the denial number one the strict interpretation of the ordinance would be impractical because of circumstances relating to lot size shape topographic or other characteristics of the property that was not created by the land owner and we find that yes the lot is over the allowed impervious surface coverage area Hardscape areas could be removed to meet the 25% impervious coverage the encroaching portions of the structure could be removed and the addition would not require a variance number two the deviation from the ordinance with any attached conditions will still be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance and we find that yes the proposed edition's location is not reducing or encroaching setbacks and the owner could remove and previous surface areas to meet the requirements number three the land use created by the variance is permitted in the zoning District where the property is located yes the residents addition are allowed in the zoning District Number Four The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality we find that the proposed request is residential similar in nature to adjacent neighbors and share similar setbacks number five the variance is not for economic reasons alone but reasonable use of the property does not exist under the ordinance and yes technically reasonable use already exists and the land is um and this addition is land owner preference without the variance the landowner could still add the addition it would require removing small areas of the deck and the house that are within the setbacks and the economics board to the applicant to do so however the current owners likely did not create this situation and the encroachments into the setback could be considered minimal and the size of the addition is so small that City would not gain much by requiring the applicant to remove the encroachments if the addition proposed was much larger then it would be more reasonable to require compliance with all the setbacks and look at the project from a more comprehensive view the economics here do not appear to be the only limiting consideration as we review the fightings 1 through five uh recommendation is the following condition that the variant request for impervious suff surface allowance is not granted the applicant would submit a plan that requires approval from City to meet the imper surface all es before a building permit would be issued so those are the current findings I guess this part of the deliberation I kind of look at this as it's really not altering the current conditions of the property um and I think I just agree with what Roger pointed out that it with the it's not facing the runoff situation really doesn't nothing's altered from a the reason why we have impervious versus previous coverage nothing seems to really be putting the property at risk for the things that we would look at if we were to approve this we don't the following condition we don't have to require them the must submit a plan that requires approval City to meet the we don't have to this just a recommendation recommendation right because it's already on that one plan does anyone have concerns with a request or anything that we would want to discuss debate deliberate no I think we have any motions I make a motion to approve v- 24-13 and I don't see the condition need being need it um it's already on the plan unless somebody else objects to that so well we have a motion do we have a second to that motion I'll second all in favor say I I any opposed motion has passed all right um we're going to move on let's see any old business see anything on the agenda so we can move on to staff reports the 202 Planning Commission meeting schedule so we have the date um we have the dates there set up for the 2025 um first Tuesday of every month uh the kind of curveball is always that Fourth of July holiday um we'd be looking for the board to ratify these dates um and then also we'd like some discussion if we could about times for the meetings uh uh we've been doing at 7:00 at night um I just would like to have the board members review that and see if it might be a good idea to move it earlier or to keep it at 7 o'clock at night me personally as staff I would appreciate it moving earlier but I'm just one person and I'm perfectly fine taking the time to go till 7 o'clock but just you know just if you guys are like oh actually we would rather have it at 5 or 6 or 6:30 or if you want it later you know so second whoos they have every month not the first right yeah I would I wouldn't have any 6:30 would work I mean maybe and you guys can change the time like if all s two months in that doesn't work you say we're going to roll it right back to 7 o' I think we kept seven cuz we figured people could make it but then and most people are done working by five does Lee does your are you able you know was that a time constraint for you yeah in the summer time we work till 4:30 but I mean 6:30 would be on the line you know okay and that would be consistent with City Council [Music] meetings so do we make a motion for that or just yeah yeah if you y if you guys want to um that's if you want to do it to 6:30 absolutely well I would make a motion to change the timing to approve the schedule and change the time to 6:30 p.m. for start time I'll second all in favor say I I any opposed all right motion passed thank you we do have a special report here so Joe would you please stand up for a moment ever since I've been on here you have been part of this commission and you've been inspirational and we just want to recognize and appreciate the service that you've done for the city of Breezy Point for its residents and for helping lead us through this so with appreciation we like to thank you present you with the certificate for completing this particular term and we hope that you will renew and continue on with us but thank you thank you very much just want to say it's been a privilege and an honor to uh serve on the bruy point planning commission and to serve with you good people is a great is a great group and it's an opportunity to bring someone new on the onto the commission so thank you so it means you're not coming back means this is my term uh expires the end of this month Jerry would you like to share just a little um I think I was here a year ago about this time and and I I really didn't get to thank you folks for what you what you do and and how much effort you put into this and it's a thankless job but it's necessary and you do a great job um I also need to say that I was lucky enough to be with Mr SS for his most of the duration of his his term start start to finish almost we had a little lapse in between the this year but other than that we're we're still together and thank you very much for your your time and your effort and your and your wisdom thank you um that said I'm here in a different uh setting than I was before sitting in a different chair but basically doing some of the same stuff uh thought i' bring you up to date on the fact that I'm here I think uh I can be a resource for you folks if you so wish um don't hesitate to come and and give me a call or Andor visit and I'm happy to to share whatever I can um we've hired a consultant to help us in the search for a new city administrator um we'll have a kickoff meeting be some of the staff starting on Friday uh we anticipate that this process will take 12 to 15 months don't know exactly what that's going to be so I'm probably still going to be around for another three or four months um maybe you don't want that maybe you do but I'm here to help if I can um that said uh the name of the firm is MGT uh we have a local representative who's uh his name is Mike Burton hor he is based out of Detroit Lakes and he you probably will see him around here occasionally um second consultant we've which happened before I came here but the the city hired HG Ki to do a rewrite of the zoning ordinance um they've taken because of all the stuff that's been happening they've been actually been kind of taken a little vacation and and now are getting ready to get back into full more talk about zoning ordinance and talk about Planning Commission uh the conversations that Pete and I have had with the Consultants um we're we're pretty much in agreement that we need to go back to the the probably the 2010 uh revisit the 2010 count plan and talk about some of the things that are there some of the things that today and um we need to do that in conjunction with any zoning rewrite because one supports the other and as they stand today the 2020 comp plan does not support our zoning ordinance today and or the new one so we're probably starting from scratch wow that said um my preference and I told the Consultants that um I thought one of the problems that we had in 2000 with the past comp plan was the fact that the Planning Commission was not involved and I think that was a big mistake quite frankly and and I I think this the new Planning Commission you folks are going to be pretty important in that whole process um so I know I don't want to scare you but uh we are going to be looking to you for some guidance um first exposure to the consultant and you folks is we're presently planning on doing a joint city council Planning Commission meeting on the 11th of February which should be your regular day hopefully we can do a lot of this stuff and in conjunction with your regular meetings and not have a lot of special meetings and and those type of things but we'll we'll work to to make it work um that said I I need to thank you again for your your patience and your your wisdom and your your your guidance and for the things that you do thank you thank you Joel thank you all right anyone else have any reports or comments so in addition to the staff report uh we will have a resoning application on the agenda for um our January meeting they have submitted for that and then we also will have a marina project for the January agenda as well and the haror is [Music] is it on ranch yet no piece of propery Ro sorry about that um there's a uh where County Road and nickel Road meet there's a triangular piece of property the person would like to subdivide that property down to 5 acre tracks they currently have 10 acres the current zoning class does not allow that size it requires a 10 acre tract so their only option is to propose a rezone in order to do that so um but those are things on the forecast um and again the the harbor project I imagine that probably will gain get a little bit of attention you know those tend to be more popular projects um so we'll see but I'll have those packets you know they'll be done in the next couple weeks and that information will be sent out to the board before that so you'll definitely have time to review everything um and as Jerry said make sure you please mark your calendars for the February 11th uh we're looking at doing a contractor uh Resort stakeholder meeting during the day on February 11th and then be presenting that same day with to the Planning Commission with uh with City Council Members available so um and again that's it for the staff report thank you very much Joe it's been a pleasure to get to know you and uh wish you luck on future endeavors so you know thank you any other comments all right meeting is adjourned but before everyone