Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Board denies height variance for controversial property development

June 14, 2024 | Stearns County, Minnesota



Black Friday Offer

Get Lifetime Access to Full Government Meeting Transcripts

Lifetime access to full videos, transcriptions, searches, and alerts at a county, city, state, and federal level.

$99/year $199 LIFETIME
Founder Member One-Time Payment

Full Video Access

Watch full, unedited government meeting videos

Unlimited Transcripts

Access and analyze unlimited searchable transcripts

Real-Time Alerts

Get real-time alerts on policies & leaders you track

AI-Generated Summaries

Read AI-generated summaries of meeting discussions

Unlimited Searches

Perform unlimited searches with no monthly limits

Claim Your Spot Now

Limited Spots Available • 30-day money-back guarantee

This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Board denies height variance for controversial property development
During a recent government meeting, the Board of Adjustment addressed two significant variance requests concerning property development in Stearns County, Minnesota.

The first request involved a height variance that was ultimately denied. Board members expressed concerns that the variance was more of a desire than a necessity, with several members voting against it. The motion to deny was made by Amy and seconded by Rob, with unanimous support from the board.

The second agenda item focused on a request from Jason Smith, representing 5716 Walleye Road, LLC, to leave a shed as constructed and to build a new residential dwelling near Smarts Creek, a designated trout stream. The proposal included relocating an existing accessory structure and constructing a new home that would be situated 25 feet from the creek, significantly less than the required 200-foot setback.

Staff reports indicated that the existing dwelling on the property was non-conforming and could not be reoccupied due to its location in the floodway. The applicant argued that the new construction would be smaller and further from the creek than the existing structure, thus improving the situation. However, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) highlighted the ecological sensitivity of the area, recommending a buffer of native vegetation to protect water quality.

The board engaged in extensive discussions regarding the implications of the proposed variances, particularly the significant deviations from required setbacks. While the applicant sought to move forward with the project, board members emphasized the importance of adhering to environmental regulations and the potential impacts on the trout stream ecosystem.

Ultimately, the board's decision on the second variance request remains pending as they continue to evaluate the environmental considerations and the applicant's proposals. The meeting concluded with an invitation for the applicant to work with staff for further clarification and guidance on the next steps.

View full meeting

This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.

View full meeting

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Minnesota articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI