FAIRMONT– On Monday the Fairmont City Council revisited the appeal of a denied variance request at 2319 Albion Ave. in Fairmont. The council first discussed the appeal at its March 14 council meeting and after tabling it, ultimately voted to grant the appeal on Monday.

In November 2021, the Board of Zoning Appeals had received a request from Troy and Jadee Menke to place a shipping container on an area of land which is part of their residential parcel at 2319 Albion Ave.

The shipping container would be set against the bluff of Hall Lake -2 ft. from the ordinary high water level of the lake where 50 feet is normal required and 0 ft. from the Albion Avenue right-of-way where 30 feet is normally required.

The Board of Zoning Appeals held a public hearing in December 2021 and at that time tabled discussion in order to provide time for the Menkes to apply for a separate Department of Natural Resources permit for the proposal’s deck to overhang the public water. At the February meeting, the board unanimously denied the request because it did not meet the standards which the city is required to ensure by state statue.

At the March 14 city council meeting, Troy Menke further explained the request and said they would like to place a 40 ft. shipping container with the side cut out which will fold down for a patio. On the inside there will likely be a bar, ice cream shop, fryer and bathroom. He also said that they need to replace their steps going to the lake and would like to do this project at the same time.

Peter Bode, Planner & Zoning Official for the city of Fairmont, was present at Monday’s meeting. He said that the request was overwhelmingly in conflict with the purpose and intent of the shoreline management ordinance.

“No structures quite like have been granted since the city adopted its modern shoreland management ordinance in the 1980s,” Bode said.

He said that staff have approved two resolutions at council’s request, one granting the appeal and one denying it. He said that staff recommends against the resolution granting the request as it fails to completely evaluate the parcel as a whole, including land away from the bluff where the structure could be built.

Dan Girolamo, an area hydrologist with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, was also present to speak on behalf of the DNR’s recommendation to deny the request.

“I think that resource protection should be a paramount concern and priority for the city and I hope that is the case,” Girolamo said.

He said that the DNR has classified all 10,000 plus lakes in the state and that the Chain of Lakes in Fairmont are classified as general development, which provides the least protection of any.

Girolamo said they suggest no structures are built in the shorleand impact zone and that the proposal encroaches into the shoreland impact zone. He recommended that the city and the property owner look into alternative options.

Council member Randy Lubenow asked if the city were to approve the appeal, if the DNR had legal action to fight it.

Girolamo said the DNR does have the right to appeal or challenge the decision, but that their attorneys are busy so it would be a matter of if it was a priority to them.

Lubenow asked about expansion projects done at Channel Inn and Marina Lodge, which are also establishments set close to the lakeshore. Lubenow said he fears they have set a precedence by allowing these projects.

The council had discussed the two establishments at the March 14 meeting as well. At that time Bode said that the variance for Marina Lodge was granted at 48 ft. where 50 ft. is normally required.

Council Member Britney Kawecki said she supports all growth and opportunity in the city and has nothing against what the other two establishments have done.

“If we’re going to do something for one. We can’t sit here as a council and say we’re not going to do it for another. I understand that there are risks, but there were the same risks with the Chanel Inn and Marina,” Kawecki said.

Girolamo said that the date that the shoreland ordinance was adopted is critical. He said they have a lot of grandfathered structures that pre-date the ordinance and that they’re usually maintained and repaired in the current footprint.

Kawecki made a motion to grant the appeal of the Board of Zoning Appeals decision. Council Member Michele Miller seconded the motion.

Council Member Randy Lubenow said they’ve set a precedence and it’s difficult to say no to a business but it’s important to consider water quality and other potential impacts, such as to the road and infrastructure.

Miller pointed out that there are a lot of other steps that need to be made after the variance is approved.

In a roll call vote council members Kawecki, Miller and Lubenow approved to grant the appeal and council members Wayne Hasek and Bruce Peters voted no and the motion passed.