Laserfiche WebLink
Motion by Commissioner Bauer, seconded by Commissioner Musgrove, to approve the consent <br />agenda as presented. <br />Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Gengler, Commissioners Bauer, Musgrove, Anderson, <br />Lubarski, and Rudack. Voting No: None. Absent: Commissioner VanScoy. <br />6. PUBLIC HEARINGS/COMMISSION BUSINESS <br />6.01: Public Hearing: Consider a Variance Request Related to Accessory Structure <br />Setback Regulations (Project 25-106); Case of Dean Strande <br />Public Hearing <br />Chairperson Gengler called the public hearing to order at 7:02 p.m. <br />Presentation <br />City Planner Martin presented the staff report stating that staff recommends approval of the <br />variance. Items discussed within the staff report included a brief history of the property, a review <br />of the site plan, and a review of the variance criteria submitted by the applicant. <br />Commissioner Bauer commented that the structure is practically on the side of the house, not the <br />front of the house. He stated that the structure is ten feet from the property line, where five feet is <br />required. He noted that if the address were on Nowthen Boulevard rather than the side street, it <br />would appear a variance would not be needed. <br />City Planner Martin confirmed that is true. <br />Commissioner Musgrove stated that she drove by the property and believes that this will look good <br />in the proposed location. She noted the narrative that the structure in the back would be removed <br />and asked if the white structure on the property would remain or be removed. <br />Dean Strande, applicant, commented that those structures would be removed. <br />Commissioner Musgrove commented that she believes that this will help to contain other items on <br />the property. She agreed that this is a unique property, and the proposed location seems ideal. <br />Councilmember Peters commented that he drives past the property twice a day and has noticed the <br />improvements. He commended the property owner on their efforts. <br />Commissioner Rudack appreciated the forethought and thoughtfulness of the applicant. <br />Commissioner Anderson asked what was redacted in the letters. <br />City Planner Martin replied that the telephone numbers were redacted. <br />Planning Commission/ May 22, 2025 <br />Page 2 of 13 <br />