Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />January 24, 1995 <br /> <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />floodway district. The property is zoned R 1 a (Single Family Residential). Mr. <br />Froland began construction of the accessory structure in 1994 without a building <br />permit. He was issued a stop order by the Building and Zoning department. <br />Construction continued without a permit and a second stop order was issued. <br />Denial of the variance and/or conditional use permit may require removal of the <br />addition. The proposed addition is 3D' by 3D' for a total of 900' square feet. The <br />existing and garage and accessory structures total 1,793 square feet. With the <br />proposed addition, the total accessory strucutre area would be 2,693 square feet. <br />This amount exceeds the current limit of 2,000 square feet by 693 square feet. <br />Also, Mr. Froland's proposed addition would be located within the floodway <br />district. His existing home and accessory buildings are also located within the <br />floodway, but were on the property before the current floodway map was <br />adopted. The DNR recommendations regarding this request are included in <br />staff's recommendations. Troy Langer expressed staff's concern for the creating <br />a potential precedent, in light of the fact that Mr. Froland did not take the <br />necessary steps to obtain approval before starting construction. He added that <br />Mr. Froland owns 40 acres, which the applicant states is divided into two 20 acre <br />parcels because of mortgage requirements. Troy stated that staff is <br />recommending approval of the variance and conditional use permit based on <br />the facts and conditions outlined in the report to the Planning Commission dated <br />January 24, 1995. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Anthony Froland stated that when he applied for a permits for the two existing <br />accessory structures, he was told that based upon his acreage, the permits were <br />approved at no charge. He stated the inspector told him that the City merely <br />wanted to be informed of what he was doing. He stated that at the time he <br />applied for a permit for the 3D' by 3D' building, he informed staff that his intention <br />was to have a 3D' by 60' building but that he could not afford to build it at that <br />time. He added that the one end of the building was constructed of wood so <br />that he could add on to it in the future. He stated that he felt the problem was <br />that the regulations changed in March of 1994 and he was not aware of the <br />changes. <br /> <br />Vice Chair Kreger opened the public hearing. No comments were received from <br />the audience. Vice Chair Kreger closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />Commissioner Minton asked for clarification on the DNR requirements. Troy <br />Langer stated that Mr. Froland would only be allowed to put siding on the <br />addition from the top down to the flood elevation and would have to remain <br />open at the bottom to allow flood waters to pass through. Mr. Froland asked if it <br />would be permissible to place material along the bottom that could be easily <br />removed. Gary Schmitz stated that he felt that would be acceptable. <br />Commissioner Kreger stated that the letter from the DNR specified that the <br />exterior siding allow the free flow of water below the 1 DO-year flood level. Mr. <br />Kreger added that he would interpret that to mean that no siding could be <br />placed on the bottom but that chicken wire or similar material could be used. <br />Mr. Froland explained that only one end of the building would be in the 1 DO-year <br />flood level, approximately 16 inches up from the ground level. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Chair Minton stated that he was in favor of approving the variance since Mr. <br />Froland is actively farming the land, with the stipulation that the building be <br />dismantled if the property were subdivided into smaller lots in the future. Steve <br />