My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 09/10/2024
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2024
>
Agenda - Council - 09/10/2024
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/13/2025 10:33:04 AM
Creation date
9/11/2024 11:55:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
09/10/2024
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
367
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Commissioner Anderson asked if everything were brought back to the five-foot mark, would that <br /> address the fire protection issue. <br /> Building Official Schreder replied that would satisfy the Building Code and no other modifications <br /> would be needed. <br /> Commissioner Van Scoy asked if gypsum is appropriate for that type of protection. <br /> Building Official Schreder commented that could be part of the fire resistance but that would be <br /> vulnerable to the elements and therefore would need a water-resistant barrier and exterior covering. <br /> Planning Manager Larson referenced statements within the applicant letter that would address the <br /> variance criteria. He explained that only one practical difficulty needs to be met, although the <br /> more that are met, the higher the request would rank. <br /> Commissioner Van Scoy commented that with the width of the lot, there would not be any <br /> additional space to place this type of structure and would think that could be a difficulty in this <br /> case. <br /> Brian Nagel, 6920 148th Lane, referenced the discussion from the Commission about whether the <br /> structure should be reduced in size, as that would still be within the five foot area. He asked why <br /> one would be better than the other as they would both be variance requests. He stated that from <br /> his perspective the only downside would be for the property owner that would need to cut concrete <br /> and move footings to only gain a one-foot difference essentially on paper. <br /> Commissioner Van Scoy replied that in his opinion the difference would be that he would prefer <br /> to limit the scope of a variance to the least degree. <br /> Motion by Commissioner Bauer, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, to close the public <br /> hearing. <br /> A roll call vote was performed: <br /> Commissioner Anderson aye <br /> Commissioner Van Scoy aye <br /> Commissioner Bauer aye <br /> Commissioner Peters aye <br /> Commissioner Heineman aye <br /> Chairperson Gengler aye <br /> Motion Carried. <br /> Chairperson Gengler closed the public hearing at 8:39 p.m. <br /> Commission Business <br /> Planning Commission/July 25, 2024 <br /> Page 14 of 20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.