Laserfiche WebLink
Motion by Commissioner VanScoy, seconded by Commissioner Nosan, to approve the following <br />minutes as presented: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated August 7, 2014. <br />Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Levine, Commissioners VanScoy, Nosan, and Bauer. <br />Voting No: None. Absent: None. Abstain: Brauer and Maul. <br />5. PUBLIC HEARINGS/COMMISSION BUSINESS <br />5.01: Public Hearing: Consider Request for a Variance to the Setback from the Ordinary <br />High Water Mark and Bluff Line of the Rum River and the Front Yard Setback for <br />the Property Located at 16601 Fluorine Street NW; Case of Michael Musenbrock <br />and Kimberly Barry <br />Public Hearing <br />Chairperson Levine called the public hearing to order at 7:01 p.m. <br />Presentation <br />City Planner Anderson presented the staff report stating the City has received an application for a <br />Variance from Michael Musenbrock and Kimberly Barry to construct a detached accessory <br />building that would encroach on the required setbacks from the Ordinary High Water Mark <br />(OHWM) and bluff line of the Rum River as well as to the required front yard setback on the <br />property located at 16601 Fluorine Street NW. The property is adjacent to the Rum River and is <br />within the Scenic River Land Use District and therefore, in addition to the general standards for <br />detached accessory buildings, is also subject to the standards found in City Code Section 117-256 <br />(District Provisions) related to the Scenic River Land Use District. Staff reviewed the request in <br />further detail with the Commission and recommended denying the request for a variance due <br />primarily to the proximity of the bluff line and the reduced front yard setback. It was <br />recommended the applicant pursue an alternative location that would minimize the need for <br />multiple variances. This recommendation was also in part due to the response from the DNR, the <br />agency tasked with oversight of the Wild and Scenic Rules, which responded that the DNR was <br />not supportive of the request. <br />Citizen Input <br />Michael Musenbrock, 16601 Fluorine Street NW, explained he purchased his property and has <br />since found several hardships. He reported the proposed garage would allow him to improve his <br />property while also allowing him to fit his vehicles inside the structure. <br />Commissioner Bauer asked if the garage could be shifted to the side of the property to alleviate <br />some of the variance issues. <br />Planning Commission/September 4, 2014 <br />Page 2 of 11 <br />