![youtube image](https://i.ytimg.com/vi_webp/tYtmoGRYelU/mqdefault.webp)
►
From YouTube: BOA & Plan Commission Meeting 01 05 2017
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
A
C
A
B
You
Melissa
many
requesting
to
alter
the
large
arrays
in
existing
non-conforming
672
square-foot
24
by
28,
an
attached
garage
located
on
a
thirty
six
thousand
seven
hundred
seven
square
foot
parcel
in
the
Arwen
single-family
residential
district
could
see.
Experience
relief
to
allow
said
non-conforming
structure
to
remain
in
its
current
location,
setting
as
close
to
five
feet
from
the
easterly
property
line,
where
nine
feet
is
required
and
one
feet
northerly
for
the
20
foot
setback
is
required.
B
What
this
is
all
getting
down
to
is
existing
right
there
and
he
basically
sits
one
foot
from
the
west
and
five
foot
from
the
north.
This
is
an
existing
garage.
It
has
a
low
ceiling
in
at
seven
or
eight
foot.
He
wasn't
able
to
put
his
vehicles
in
anymore,
so
all's
he
requested
to
do
is
take
the
roof
off,
build
it
up
to
ten
foot
two,
which
is
our
standard
allowed,
detached
garage
height
and
put
the
roof
back
on.
I
was
contacted
by
one
adjacent
neighbor.
Mr.
B
B
A
No
one's
here
to
speak
in
the
public
hearing,
I'll
close
the
public
hearing
ask
for
a
motion
in
a
second
for
discussion
washing
by
mr.
Arnold
second
by
mr.
Dahle
any
discussion
in
questions
on
it.
Nothing,
nothing
left
nothing
on
the
right.
All
in
favor,
say:
aye
opposed
motion
carries
in
the
old
business.
Can
new
business
never
mind
I
need
a
motion
to
adjourn
motion
by
mr.
Stein
singing
by
mr.
McGuire.
All
in
favor,
say:
aye
opposed
motion
carries.
A
E
D
A
F
A
G
You
mr.
chairman,
members
of
the
Commission
I,
bring
before
you
today
a
concept
that
was
originally
articulated
by
Mayor
Thorson
and
as
soon
as
he
brought
up
the
concept,
I
thought
right
away.
It
makes
complete
sense
and
in
doing
some,
just
basic
research
at
the
outset
came
to
find
that
what's
being
proposed
here
today,
exists
in
in
substantial
form,
with
our
math
use
model
ordinances,
so
other
jurisdictions
have
adopted
similar
language
really
to
account
for
two
themes:
two
qualities,
the
first
being
the
evolving
nature
of
the
workplace
in
our
country.
G
The
fact
that
more
and
more
individuals
are
telecommuting,
and
so
potentially
more
and
more
individuals
can
fall
under
our
chapter
2170,
permitting
process
on
home
occupations
and
the
concern
really
was
a
practical
one.
Should
they
need
to
have
these
permits
or
seek
these
permits
before
the
Board
of
Adjustment
in
order
to
operate
as
telecommuting,
employee
or
for
that
matter?
What
about
those
businesses
that
are
actually
conducted
out
of
the
home
that
do
not
have
any
discernible
impact
upon
the
neighborhood?
G
G
You
know
outlandish
uses
from
being
put
into
neighborhoods,
where
that
could
damage
the
property
values
of
those
there
who
have
an
expectation
of
being
able
to
live
quietly
being
able
to
live
with
a
lot
without
a
lot
of
traffic
being
able
to
live
without
large,
bright
signs
and
and
the
like.
So
what
this?
G
G
E
Not
really
Justin
I
was
just
trying
to
get
it
up
on
the
board,
so
everybody
has
a
chance
to
see
what
you're
talking
about,
but
it
did
come
up.
You
know
guys
where
there's
so
many
people
that
are
doing
their
business
at
home,
whether
it
be
like
first
premier
folks,
they're
doing
a
lot
of
their
business
at
home,
just
a
lot
of
internet
work
that
should
be
easily
handled
by
Kenny
out
of
the
office
rather
than
common
and
asking
you
guys
for
help.
E
G
One
final
item,
I
would
add:
is
that
and
I
think
I
make
reference
to
it
in
the
memorandum
here
that
there
is
an
internal
practice
within
our
building?
Well
with
our
building
official
with
others
on
second
floor,
where
individuals
might
inquire
about
whether
or
not
Houma
patience
apply
to
them,
whether
or
not
they
need
to
get
a
permit,
and
the
building
official
has
done
a
great
job
of
basically
taking
these
concepts
and
saying:
well,
that's
basically,
what's
proposed
to
being
21700
3
and
saying
now
you
don't
need
to
come
before
the
board,
because
you.
G
B
H
A
D
G
A
B
Those
things
can
be
that
basically
we're
looking
for
some
kind
of
impact
on
the
neighborhood.
If
you
know
you're
gonna
have
a
bunch
of
cars
coming
to
you.
If
they're
delivering
packages
all
the
time
we're
gonna
have
customers
coming
back
and
forth
to
the
door
all
the
time.
Those
things
that
are
gonna
have
some
kind
of
impact.
B
In
our
mind
that
we
think
it's
going
to
cause,
you
know
no
impact,
but
you
know
a
slight
impact
or
more
then
we
want
to
get
the
buy-in
from
the
rest
of
this
council
and
the
neighbors
and
let
them
all
know
okay.
This
is
what's
proposed
to
go
there.
If
you're,
not
even
gonna,
know
it's
gonna
be
there.
If
I
don't
tell
you,
then
we're
not
gonna
make
you
come
through
the
process.
Okay,.
A
B
A
A
D
D
D
D
D
A
D
B
E
Really,
looking
for
those
comments
from
you
folks,
when
you
look
at
this
part
of
town,
you
know,
are
you
comfortable
with
60-foot
I
would
think
you
would
be
in
my
opinion,
but
there's
really
nothing
that
I
see
is
going
to
happen
further
north
of
this
particular
building,
but
I
think
bill.
If
that's
not,
is
that
kind
of
what
you're
looking
for
is
just
a
little
bit
of
comfort
from
the
board?
F
That
you
ready
to
go-
and
the
purpose
was
to
discuss
here
with
the
with
the
things
that
we're
gonna
have
to
do.
One
is
the
variance.
We
know
that-
and
we've
talked
to
Kant
about
that.
So
that's
you
know
pretty
clear.
Second,
then
the
streets
themselves.
What
are
we
going
to
do?
What
do
we
have
to
put
down
because
we're
going
to
reap
lat
that
whole
area
now
we're
thinking
we're
gonna
do
so
that's
coming
before
you.
A
J
No
he's
I'll
say
this:
the
right
away
in
the
adjacent
subdivision
is
60
feet
and
we
recognize
that
so
normally
we
request
sixty
six
foot.
He
probably
has
a
plan
that
can
accommodate
the
60
foot
right
away.
The
street
widths
here
are
a
little
bit
narrower
than
we
normally
would
see
in
a
commercial
district.
J
But
in
our
discussions
through
the
design
review
team,
we
would
be
fine
with
this
street
widths
that
he's
proposing
as
long
as
he's
accommodated
all
of
his
off
street
parking,
which
he
he
has
a
plan
that
that
does
that
we
wouldn't
allow
parking
on
the
street
in
this
district
with
a
60
foot
right
away
in
the
in
the
street.
With
that
he's
proposed.
J
A
Bill
on
that
Quality,
Inn
and
Suites,
where
you
had
a
side
yard
setback
that
now
because
of
the
road,
it's
a
front
yard
setback
and
you
you
were
compliant
now
you're,
not
what
phases
that
Street
there's
any
parking
over
there
there's
really
not
a
lot
of
ingress
and
egress
on
that
side
is
there.
So,
even
though
it's
now
a
front
yard,
it's
still
used
as
a
side
yard.
A
F
A
J
I
had
a
comment
to
that.
Basically,
the
reason
we
talked
about
a
variance
or
not
a
variance
is
that
the
only
other
way
for
him
to
accommodate
that
and
create
a
compliant
40
foot
setback
would
be
to
move
35th
Street
to
the
west
and
he
has
enough
room
to
to
potentially
do
that,
but
it
compromises
this
fit
of
his
plan
for
what
what
could
go
into
that
proposed
a
lot
for.
J
So
we
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
everybody
recognize
this
as
the
plat
would
come
forward
or
the
plan
that
we
did
have
that
discussion
on
the
20
foot
versus
the
40
foot
setback
and
that's
what
really
impacts.
What
he's?
What
he's
doing
and
that's
why
why
he's
before
you
today
is
to
get
make
sure
that
you
all
know
that
we
as
staff
had
that
conversation,
but
we
also
asked
staff
recognized
that
we
don't
vote
that
it's
the
Planning
Commission
and
ultimately
the
council
that
carries
the
vote.
J
So
we
wanted
to
make
sure
that
that
conversation
was
had
here
for
you,
folks,
in
your
consideration
on
anything
that
comes
forward
out
of
this,
and
we
just
wanted
to
be
clear
with
that.
I
don't
want
you
to
have
any
surprises.
I
don't
want
mr.
focus
to
have
any
surprises,
and
that's
why
we're
here
in
this
conversation
at
this
level
in.
A
A
Questions
concerns
on
left-right
being
else
you
want
to
discuss
on
it
yeah,
it's
just
general
discussion
as
to
it
yeah
I,
think
I
think
the
areas
where
that
variance.
We
talked
about
the
60
versus
66
and
the
parking
limitations
it
might
be
on
a
narrower
road.
As
long
as
everybody's
on
the
same
sheet
of
music,
there
I
think
we're
probably
okay.
J
So
we
anticipate
that
they'll
come
forward,
whether
it's
the
next
meeting
or
the
meeting
after
that,
with
the
petition
to
annex
the
portion,
that's
in
the
county
and
zone
that
will
get
that
on
track
and
then
at
some
point
to
they'll.
Come
forward
with
a
preliminary
plan
and
plat
with
the
remainder
of
the
work.
So
just
want
to
make
sure
that
everybody
was
comfortable
with
some
of
the
minor
concessions.
A
J
A
E
E
E
D
D
Then
we
have
the
next
discussion
item
of
increasing
the
sidewall
for
the
residential
garage
district,
and
the
the
background
to
this
discussion
was
the
idea
of
an
increased
maximum.
Sidewall
height
was
brought
to
staffs
attention
which
prompted
the
initiation
of
this
discussion.
The
desire
would
be
to
have
a
16
foot
maximum
sidewall
height,
so
a
14
foot
door
could
be
installed.
This
proposed
amendment
would
only
be
applicable
to
the
RG
district.
D
The
stated
purpose
of
the
residential
garage
district
allows
for
the
construction
of
a
residential
garage
on
a
lot
that
does
not
contain
a
residential
dwelling
unit
and
therefore
becomes
the
primary
structure
the
permitted
uses
or
the
permitted
use
for
the
residential
garage
district
is,
as
stated
in
Section
2120
302,
which
I'll
pull
up
there
and
then
to
protect
the
nature
of
the
residential
district.
The
current
requirements
of
the
residential
garage
district
would
remain
the
same
unless
otherwise
discussed
so
and
Dennis.
If
you
want
to
any,
if
you
want
to
add
anything
to
that,
go
ahead.
I
H
I
Oh,
it's
been
a
couple
of
weeks
ago
and
now
I
suppose,
but
I
think
we
made
a
good
step
when
we
went
to
the
r2
district
for
garages.
You
know
people
can
have
garages
to
put
their
things
away,
and
the
one
thing
I
believe
that
we're
definitely
short
on
is
that
we
don't
allow
them
to
get
the
kind
of
things
in
there
that
need
to
be
in
there
most
all
of
your
your
bigger
pieces
of
equipment,
even
some
of
your
pontoons
and
things.
I
But
all
of
your
campers,
most
all
of
your
campers
are
gonna-
have
to
have
a
14-foot
door
to
get
them
in
and
that's
been
a
concern
around
town.
All
these
things
are
sitting
outside,
but
we
won't
let
them
build
anything
big
enough
to
put
them
in
so
they
have
to
rent
them
from
someone
else.
So
the
16-foot
sidewall
would
would
certainly
help
that
and
I
think
if
it's
done
upright,
like
we've
talked
in
a
pass.
I've
had
a
lot
of
conversation
about
that
too.
I
So
after
visiting
with
Brandi,
she
said
that
she
would
take
a
look
at
it.
Talk
to
the
staff
and
talk
to
the
mayor
and
see
if
there
was
an
interest
and
bringing
it
forward
and
evidently
there
was
and
I'm
real
happy
that
there
was
so
now
it's
up
to
us
I
guess
to
decide
what
we
want
to
do
with
it.
So
do.
A
D
A
That's
about
it,
you
know
we
kind
of
always
envisioned
them
to
be
on
the
fringe
of
some
of
these
developments,
where
people
are
close
to
their
house
couple
blocks
three
blocks
away
kind
of
some
of
the
lower
line,
land,
the
less
valuable
land
that
they
would
use
them.
This
is
kind
of
Dennis's
wheelhouse
as
a
builder
over
most
the
rest
of
us
in
the
RG
district,
they
have
to
be
built
with
building
materials.
Can
that
conform
to
that
neighborhood?
A
H
H
A
Specifically,
what
Dennis
had
talked
about
you
know:
we've
we've
I
go
back
to
some
of
the
bigger
ones
that
we've
allowed
where
we've
at
the
time
of
permitting
we've
requested
Wayne's
Code
we've
requested
shingles
kind
of
things
like
that.
What
can
I
agree
that
I
think
the
sidewall
heights
are
an
issue
and
I
think
there's
ways
with
overhangs
and
windows
and
dormers
and
jogs
and
walls,
and
things
like
that
they
can
make
them
look
not
so
boxy.
A
I
B
B
B
B
J
I
just
peruse
through
the
our
GIS
and
as
of
right
now,
the
only
RG
districts
that
I
can
find
are
along
the
west
side
of
the
lake,
there's
two
distinct
ones
that
were
down
over
there.
I
wasn't
here
when
the
RG
concept
was
developed
and
implemented
here.
But
one
thing
that
I
would
kind
of
think
of
is
that
we
always
talk
about
having
an
adequate
buffer
between
the
various
zonings.
You
know
like
not
having
the
r1
next
to
a
c3,
for
instance
or
cc1.
A
Because
I
mean
when
we,
when
the
concept
came,
that's
kind
of
what
we
thought
is
you
know,
instead
of
going
r1,
r2
r3
commercial,
it
was
you
could
go.
R1
r2
are
G.
You
know,
as
you
work
your
way
outside
those
developments
that
that's
where
we
I'm
surprised
that
we
haven't
had
more
pop
up
to
be
honest,
and
maybe
the
ten-foot
sidewall
is
a
big
enough
limitation
in
there
that
it's
preventing
some
of
that
development
from
from
happening
to.
I
I
H
D
Would
be
and
granted
this
this
is
in
the
industrial
zoning,
and
it
is
it's
done
nice,
but
all
the
residents,
the
RG
district.
You
would
have
to
resemble
the
building
materials
of
the
house
more
also
with
the
RG
district.
There's
the
size
limit
or
the
you
need
so
much
frontage
and
like
an
acre
over
an
acre,
so
they
won't
necessarily
be
able
to
pop
up
as
easy
a
residential
district.
A
A
I
know
the
discussion
from
the
board
when
we
put
that
what
was
it
would
be
nice
to
get
a
hundred
percent,
but
we
realize
that
you're
not
always
gonna
get
a
hundred
percent,
and
that
would
allow
for
the
board
to
make
that
concession.
I
just
wanted
to
bring
it
up
again.
So
it
was
still
in
the
public
record
that
that
hundred
percent
wasn't
a
stoned.
It
was
just
a
starting
place
for
us
to
to
see
because
we
weren't
sure
how
this
was
going
to
evolve.
I
have.
I
One
other
question
Brandie
and
and
on
the
second
page
there
under
the
structure
item
F,
I,
know
why
that
was
put
in
there.
So
these
don't
become
buildings
have
living
quarters
in,
but
it's
also
nice
and
some
of
these
nice
or
buildings
like
we're,
expecting
to
be
able
to
have
a
bathroom
and
if
the
sewer
is
available
there,
if
it's
not
available,
is
not
available.
I
I
A
I
A
A
Have
a
bathroom
yeah
and
that
that's
evolved,
where
we've
allowed
in
a
detached
structure
on
premises,
we've
allowed
for
bathrooms
to
go
in
there
correct,
but
not
living
sleeping
quarters
or
kitchens
or
kitchens.
So
this
kind
of
goes
along
with
that
that,
if,
if
you
were
gonna
put
needed
to
put
a
bathroom
in
there,
you
put
a
bathroom
in
there.
E
A
I
I
I
B
I
B
A
A
J
Thing
I
mean
the
RG
if
I
recall,
also
requires
a
300
foot
frontage,
so
we're
not
doing
it
on
a
lot
by
lot
basis
and
that
that
potentially
could
throw
more
than
four
neighbors
in
to
a
discussion
or
not
depending
on
how
it
aligns
with
the
adjacent
properties.
But
I
do
know
that
the
300
foot
right
away
frontage
is
also
one
of
the
limitations
of
an
RG
district.
G
What
one
thing
one
thing
I
would
add
from
a
legal
perspective
just
in
terms
of
consistency,
regardless
of
what
you
decide
to
do:
policy
wise
with
regard
to
the
sanitary
sewer
issue,
we
define
accessory
use
residential
dwelling
for
accessory
use
purposes
elsewhere
in
our
zoning
ordinances
as
referring
to
sleeping
and
eating
or
preparation
of
food.
There
isn't
a
reference
made
to
plumbing
or
bathroom
bathing
facilities
per
se,
so
for
consistency
purposes.
There's
there's
a
strong
argument
to
be
made
there
that
sanitary
sewers
into
my.
J
Interpretation
of
the
meaning
for
them
not
to
allow
sanitary
sewer
specifically
because
I
mean
it
doesn't
refer
to
water
utilities
and
etc,
is
that
there
may
have
been
a
concern
that
somebody
would
put
an
RV
in
one
of
these
RG
structures
and
attempt
to
live
in
that.
So
you
may
have
to
refine
some
type
of
oversight.
I
mean
make
that
RV
restriction
for
plumbing,
in
accordance
with
the
same
thing
of
your
living
quarter,
living
quarters,
type
thing
or
food
preparation,
but
yeah.
G
B
I
C
A
H
E
A
You
know
I
think
well,
we'd
want
Brandi
is.
If
we
can,
the
idea
would
be.
Is
yeah
I
think
we
can
go
to
a
we're,
an
agreement
that
a
higher
sidewall
is
something
we
probably
want
to
take
a
look
at,
but
there's
we
need
some
modifications
to
the
height
and
length
of
those
side,
walls
as
to
aesthetically
how
we
want
them
to
look.
A
If
you
can
bring
something
back
to
us
at
the
night,
what
about
the
percentage
you
know,
I
I'm,
I'm,
leaning
more
to
a
75,
you
know
Jason
mentioned
well,
should
it
be
50
and
it's
like
well,
when
you
zone
a
garage
district,
you've
stopped
the
development
of
residential.
From
that
point.
If
you've
got
us,
if
you've
got
a
four
block
area,
that's
all
are
one,
and
somebody
comes
in
says:
I
want
to
switch
it
to
garage
district.
You
no
longer
are
gonna,
have
any
more
r1
development.
That's
the
buffer.
A
Shane
talked
about
you
know,
so
it's
pretty
significant.
When
you
in
we,
when
we
wrote
the
ordinance,
we
said
300
feet
frontage,
we
didn't
mean
300
feet
total.
When
you
add
both
sides
of
the
road
like
over
here,
they
have
they
front
both
sides
of
a
road
they
front,
north
Lake,
Drive
and
antelope
lane.
Well,
now
we're
adding
300.
They
can
have
a
hundred
and
fifty
feet
on
each
side
of
the
lot
and
we're
calling
it
300.
A
The
intent
was
300
front
feet
on
one
side
of
the
road,
but
the
last
couple
times
it's
been
interpreted.
It's
been
interpreted
differently
than
it
was
intended,
but
it
happens
to
be
in
an
area
where
doesn't
really
matter.
It
makes
sense
to
allow
that
development
there
anyway,
but
you
know
if
you,
if
you
had
if
this
was
a
large
housing
development,
you
put
an
RG
district
right
in
the
center
of.
C
C
I'm
kind
of
leaning
towards
50%
that
way,
so
he
you
know,
if
there's
somebody
a
couple
of
doors
down
that
so
keeps
the
minimal
of
people
that
be
the
people
are
gonna.
Be
impact.
Are
your
neighbors,
not
people,
two
doors
down,
they're
the
one
they're
the
ones
gonna
have
to
look
at.
So
that's
why
I'm
kind
of
leaning
towards
50%
well.
J
I
H
A
We
still
have
the
do.
Do
we
not?
We
still
have
the
when
it
comes
to
us
to
say
we
want
to
do
this
as
an
RG.
We
still
have
to
say
it's
appropriate.
That's
are
not
appropriate
for
that
land
use.
It's
still
a
land
use,
you
know,
planning
and
zoning
is
land
use.
We
could
look
and
go
now.
Our
G's
not
appropriate
that
close
to
the
center
of
development.
It
needs
to
be
somewhere
else,
even
if
they
have
the
signatures
and
everything's
there.
We
could
say
that
it's
not
appropriate
for
that
development
there
anyway.
A
D
J
E
You
know
we
had
colors,
we
had
certain
building
designs
that
could
be
used
out
there
and
since
we
had
different
businesses
come
out
there
with
certain
colors,
we
had
to
bring
that
for
the
council,
you
get
approval,
but
then
the
council
actually
turned
that
and
said
to
Ken.
You
know
we.
We
appreciate
the
work
you're
doing
on
it.
You
can.
You
know
we
understand
that
some
of
these
colors
have
to
be
different,
so
we
cut
it
through
that
back
on
on
his
plate,
and
he
has
that
authority
for
us.
Do.
A
E
Can
I
say
just
once
the
event
a
Monday
night,
just
if
any
of
you
are
are
wanting
to?
We
are
going
to
have
open
discussions
about
different
ideas
for
Lake
Camp
Eska.
This
will
be
handled
by
Roger
foot
out
to
the
Upper
Big
Sioux
offices.
That's
at
the
zoo,
there's
going
to
be
discussion
about
marinas,
there's
going
to
be
discussion
about
dredging
and
because
what
can
we
do
for
Lake
competição?
It's
gonna
be
open
discussion.