Loading...
7.3. SR 07-15-2013 City of Elk=' Request for Action River TO ITEM NUMBER Mayor and City Council 7.3 AGENDA SECTION MEETING DATE PREPARED BY Public Hearings July 15, 2013 Chris Leeseber , Park Planner-Planner ITEM DESCRIPTION REVIEWED By Variance: Solid Rock Church Appeal to Allow Platting of Three Jeremy Barnhart,Deputy Director, Lots of Less Than Required Minimum Lot Size in the R1a CODD Single Family Zoning District, Case No. V 13-0 REVIEWED BY Action Requested Staff recommends denial of the appeal to the Board of Adjustments decision granting a lot size variance for Solid Rock Church, for the following reasons: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance. The ordinance strives to have lot sizes all at a minimum size to promote consistency in neighborhood design and character. The proposed lots exceed the size of a majority of the surrounding lot sizes in Brentwood,unvaried lots more so. 2. The request is consistent with the City of Elk River Comprehensive Plan. It has a Public/Semi- Public land use designation in the middle of a rural residential area. These lands designate parcels used for governmental (city, county, school district) and institutional (church) purposes. The residential structures are accessory uses to the principal use. A future residential unit is consistent with the neighborhood. 3. The property is proposed for use in a manner in size, scope, and character of the existing neighborhood (Brentwood subdivision) and similar to what was platted in 1994. 4. In 1994, Sherburne County requested that all the lots be combined for ease of records. The applicant's bank has requested that they put their two existing homes on separate lots from the church property. 5. The variance,if granted,will not alter the character of the locality. It again will have lot sizes in line with what was originally platted in 1994 and the proposed lots exceed a majority of the surrounding lot sizes in Brentwood. Background/Discussion The Board of Adjustments (BOA), following staff's recommendation,granted a lot size variance to the Solid Rock Church at their June 11, 2013, meeting. The variance criteria and analysis for their decision can be found on the attached BOA memo dated June 11, 2013. With approval, the issue is not forwarded to the City Council on automatic appeal. Any other person has 10 days to appeal. Appeal Staff received a written appeal on June 18, 2013, to the BOA decision to grant the variance. The appellant will be in attendance to present their reasons for why the variance should not be granted. P O W E R E D BY NaA f RE] Attachments • Narratives from Lisa Benson, dated June 18, 2013 • Narrative from Lisa Benson, dated July 8, 2013 • Board of Adjustments packet dated June 11, 2013 N:\Public Bodies\Agenda Packets\7-15-2013\Final\x7.3 sr Appeal Solid Rock Church V03-13.docx Lisa Benson 11886 195th Ave NW Elk River, MN 55330 June 18, 2013 Jeremy Barnhart Deputy Director Community Operations & Development Dear Jeremy Barnhart, My name is Lisa Benson and I recently purchased a home in the city of Elk River. The reason I am writing this letter is in regards to the variance that has been granted to Solid Rock Church. The variance would allow the plotting of three lots less than the required minimum lot size in the Rla single Family zoning District, Case No. V 13-03. I believe this variance was granted in error due to many reasons. The main issue with granting this variance is with the wildlife in the area. Wildlife preservation is highly valued in Minnesota. The lot in question is a valuable area to the local wildlife. The city of Elk River should take pride in the fact that there are deer in this area and that it is fostering a growing population. The lot in question has allowed the local deer population to graze, frolic, and give birth to new life. With Solid Rock Church being granted this variance, the wildlife will suffer. The local deer population will diminish, if not, cease to exist, if the land is ever developed on due to disrupting their habitat with further human development. This lot also holds multiple old trees that house a vast array of birds, insects, and nocturnal creatures. It would be a shame to tear down these trees that are appeasing to the eye and provide cleaner air to the city of Elk River, thus reducing pollution. Please consider the affect this variance would have on wildlife even down to the smallest creature. What the city may feel is a minor change to the land, could vastly affect the food chain and ecosystems in the area. Elk River should conserve the wildlife areas, not decrease them further. Second, I chose to buy this home because this area has already been developed. It is a quiet neighborhood. Zoning codes are in place to protect neighborhoods. These codes prevent new structures from being built that will compromise the integrity of the neighborhood. This neighborhood is built around nature and the wildlife. This neighborhood permits the lives of humans and nature to intertwine. It allows people to feel like he/she is living in the country, but still have access to all the amenities of town within minutes. Allowing a new home to be built on this newly created lot would take that aspect away from our neighborhood and depreciate the home values in the area, hurting the greater good, rather than benefiting us. Home values would not be the only item affected. Changes in property taxes and city improvement projects would also arise due to further development. Construction crews and increased traffic would cause the streets in the area to deteriorate at a more rapid rate pushing city improvement projects to need to be done sooner than anticipated. Streets in the area already lack attention. There are multiple, large potholes on the area streets that need to be fixed, but are not a priority due to lack of funding. Developing this lot would increase pollution, too. Greenhouse gases are already on the rise, increasing construction in this neighborhood would unnecessarily add to this local and global problem. Noise pollution would increase, although temporary, would disrupt the lives of the neighborhood. For instance, I am a registered nurse and work varied shifts at an area hospital. My stress level would increase dramatically and my ability to sleep during the day would be disrupted with construction crews working during the day, which could possibly affect my ability to care for patients at work. This is unsafe and unnecessary. Please take the time to thoroughly review this letter in regards to the variance that has been granted to Solid Rock Church. The integrity of the neighborhood relies on this decision. The city of Elk River should not allow detrimental and unnecessary changes to occur due to hopes of increased profit. The decision should benefit the greater good, the neighborhood, the wildlife, not profit. Thank you for hearing my voice in this matter. Sincerely, Lisa Benson My name is Lisa Benson and I recently purchase a home in the city of Elk River. The reason I am writing this letter is in regards to the variance that has been granted to Solid Rock Church. The variance would allow the plotting of three lots less than the required minimum lot size in the R1 single family zoning district, Case No. V 13-03. I believe this variance was granted in error due to many reasons. The variance granted to Solid Rock Church is not conducive to the general purpose and intent of the ordinance regarding lot size in the Brentwood neighborhood. The city of Elk River has set the requirement for lot sizes in the Brentwood neighborhood at 2.5 acres. If the church were to create a four lot split, only one of the lots would meet this requirement. The argument made by the church that numerous lots in the Brentwood neighborhood do not meet this requirement should not give additional support to their case. Homes have already been built on the other lots based on past lot requirements. No changes are being made to those lots. However, the church is attempting to meet their bank's new requirements and therefore, should have to comply with the new requirements imposed by the city of Elk River as well. The changes that the church wants to make will affect the present and future, not the past. Furthermore, there are no practical difficulties for the church to comply with this zoning ordinance being economic considerations do not apply. In the letter that Dr. Bill Matthews wrote to apply for this variance he listed two reasons, one of which was due to changes in the banking and lending requirements that have been made due to the economic turndown. This is not a circumstance unique to the property, but to the loan. The loan requirements have been altered by the Bank of Elk River. The second reason listed in the letter was to build an additional staff home on the property, which violates the city of Elk River's comprehensive plan, but I will discuss that at great length later on in this letter. All information obtained from the City of Elk River Comprehensive Plan Building the Future of Elk River,August 2004 Page 1 The variance granted to Solid Rock Church is not consistent with the city of Elk River's comprehensive plan. The comprehensive plan is based on the foundation of"Building for the future". "Building for the future" means considering the past, present, and future. "Natural, cultural, and historic resources of the community are essential ingredients to Elk River's identity"was a statement that resonated through my mind when I read the intent of the variance requested by Solid Rock Church. Solid Rock Church states the variance will not alter the character of the locality because the proposed lots will exceed a majority of the surrounding lot sizes in the Brentwood neighborhood. The size of the lot may not affect the character of the neighborhood, but the plans for the lot will. Elk River states in the comprehensive plan that rural, undeveloped areas are part of the environment and that built and natural environments should coexist with one another. The Brentwood neighborhood is the essence of this component of the comprehensive plan because the neighborhood has been built around nature and the wildlife. It permits the lives of humans and nature to intertwine. It allows people to feel like he/she is living in the country, but still have access to all the amenities of town within minutes. Allowing Solid Rock Church to build on parcel C would eliminate this; it would eliminate an open, natural area, eliminating a natural environment, and in the end all that would remain are buildings. This would not be in harmony with the city of Elk River's comprehensive plan to "be sensitive to existing residential developments, environmental areas, wetlands, existing public parks, and open spaces when building new, expanded, or improved roadways". I understand this statement is intended for roadways, but it also applies to residential development in my mind. Wildlife preservation is highly valued in Minnesota. The lot that Solid Rock Church is planning to build a future staff home on is a valuable area to the local wildlife. The city of Elk River should take pride in the fact that there are deer in this area and that it is fostering a growing population. The local deer All information obtained from the City of Elk River Comprehensive Plan Building the Future of Elk River,August 2004 Page 2 population graze, frolic, and give birth to new life on the lot in question. I have included with this letter,pictures that I have taken of the some of the wildlife. The wildlife will suffer if the variance is granted to Solid Rock Church. The local deer population will diminish, if not, cease to exist, if the land is ever developed on due to disrupting their habitat with further human development. This lot also holds multiple old trees that house a vast array of birds, insects, and nocturnal creatures. It would be a shame to tear down these trees that are appeasing to the eye, providing habitats to numerous creatures, and providing cleaner air to the city of Elk River, thus reducing pollution. Furthermore, tree preservation is a component of the comprehensive plan. It states in the comprehensive plan, "Establish tree preservation and protection standards to maintain the integrity of the City's natural vegetation". There are numerous components of the city of Elk River's comprehensive plan that do not support this variance. As it appears in the comprehensive plan, as a member of council, you need to "Evaluate all proposals for industrial development in order to minimize the impacts on municipal and natural systems". It is your job to uphold the vision of the comprehensive plan. Therefore, please consider the affect this variance would have on the trees and wildlife, even down to the smallest creature and/or plant. What the city may feel is a minor change to the land, could vastly impact the food chain and ecosystems, not just in the Brentwood neighborhood, but in the surrounding areas as well. Open, natural spaces should and need to be preserved. The city of Elk River needs to uphold the vision of the comprehensive plan and"Develop,preserve and protect environmental resources within the area, such as forest, wetlands, water bodies and shorelines, with respect to open space, recreational uses, water and air quality, and natural ecosystems" and "Require that development plans demonstrate a compatibility with natural features and systems". Furthermore, developers should strive to preserve open spaces to execute the Greenway concept. The city of Elk River All information obtained from the City of Elk River Comprehensive Plan Building the Future of Elk River,August 2004 Page 3 developed the comprehensive plan with the environment in mind. The vision is to protect, promote, and expand the natural areas in this city, not to decrease or destroy them to build a single home. Please take note that on March 29, 2013 a proposal was made to update the comprehensive plan and through my research, I understand that it is being updated at this time. The proposal request highlights that the new comprehensive plan should address these issues: Pockets of native landscapes are declining. The Comprehensive Plan will address conserving and protecting those already in place. Identify methods to maximize land values while conserving or preserving critical or important natural and agricultural areas. Therefore, with this in mind, the city of Elk River definitely values natural spaces, so please conserve the natural space that is currently present on parcel C and deny the variance to Solid Rock Church for the natural vegetation and wildlife depend on it. Solid Rock Church intends to build a residential structure, a future home. In the criteria analysis from the meeting in June, it stated"The residential structures are accessory uses to the principal use". However, staff does not need to live on/near the church. It would not be an accessory. It has no impact on the church and/or its principal use. The church lot may be public/semi-public; however, the rest of the Brentwood neighborhood is not. I chose to buy this home in Elk River because this area has already been developed. It is a quiet neighborhood. Allowing a new home to be built on this newly created lot would cause home values in the area to depreciate, hurting the greater good, rather than benefiting us. Home values would not be the only item affected. Changes in property taxes and city improvement projects would also arise due to further development. In addition, as I have previously mentioned, the integrity of the Brentwood neighborhood would not be maintained if the Solid Rock Church is granted this variance. This violates the city of Elk River's comprehensive plan due to the fact that it states All information obtained from the City of Elk River Comprehensive Plan Building the Future of Elk River,August 2004 Page 4 residential housing standards and regulations should be reviewed regularly to ensure that neighborhoods maintain integrity and avoid deteriorating market value. My fellow neighbors are obviously concerned if this variance is granted as well. This is seen by the multiple phone calls staff on the Elk River Board of Adjustments received in opposition to the variance request. One neighbor emailed Jeremy Barnhart due to the fact he was unable to attend the meeting in June. He wrote, "...All they want to do is sell them cheaper and spoil the area. Do not allow this to happen...". Therefore, please review and uphold the vision of the city of Elk River's comprehensive plan, because it will show that the variance is not consistent with it. rot. f w r - • r . 1 il' .. r-iY-_ +* •d _ Tip' All information obtained from the City of Elk River Comprehensive Plan Building the Future of Elk River,August 2004 Page 5 �""�����,..�rr�''...`• ���I � 'fix,,••` �. 4 *Photographs taken by Lisa Benson in the summer of 2013 All information obtained from the City of Elk River Comprehensive Plan Building the Future of Elk River,August 2004 Page 6 ��i tyof REQUEST FOR ACTION .� River TO ITEM NUMBER Board of Adjustments 3. AGENDA SECTION MEETING DATE PREPARED BY Variance Chris Leeseber ,Park Planner-Planner ITEM DESCRIPTION REVIEWED By Consider Request by Solid Rock Church for Variance to allow Jeremy Barnhart,Director of CODD platting of three lots of less than the required minimum lot size REVIEWED BY in the R1 Single Family Zoning District, Public Hearing—Case No.V 13-0 ACTION REQUESTED Staff recommends the Board of Adjustments approve the variance request. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The subject property is part of the Brentwood subdivision which is zoned R-1a. This zoning district has minimum lots sizes of 2.5 acres. The average size of the lots in Brentwood is 2.00 acres. Any lot that is below the required lot size is a legal non-conforming lot. The subject property containing the two residential structures and the church facility was originally plated as eight lots in the Brentwood subdivision. In 1994,the eight lots were combined into the one parcel as it is currently today. The applicant wants to subdivide the property into four lots. Three lots, one for each existing structure and one vacant lot for a future residential structure. • Parcel A would be 1.85 acres, existing home • Parcel B would be 1.65 acres, existing home • Parcel C would be 1.50 acres, future home • Parcel D would be 8.06 acres, existing church building Variance Criteria A variance may be granted by the Board only if it finds that: 1) The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance. 2) The variance is consistent with the City of Elk River Comprehensive Plan. Variances may be granted when the petitioner establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. Practical difficulties means that: 3) The petitioner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance; P0wER10 0Y C:\Users\cleeseberg\Desktop\council\V 13-03.docx ` � 4) The plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the property not a consequence of the petitioner's own action or inaction;and 5) The variance,if granted,will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to,inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Criteria Analysis 1. The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance. The ordinance strives to have lot sizes all at a minimum size to promote harmony. The proposed lots exceed the size of a majority of the surrounding lot sizes in Brentwood. 2. The request is consistent with the City of Elk River Comprehensive Plan. It has a Public/Semi- Public land use designation in the middle of a rural residential area. These lands designate parcels used for governmental (City, County, School District) and institutional (church) purposes. The residential structures are accessory uses to the principal use. 3. The property is being proposed to be used in a manner in size, scope, and character of the existing neighborhood (Brentwood subdivision). It would be similar to what was already platted in the past. 4. In 1994, Sherburne County requested that all the lots be combined for ease of records. The applicant's bank has requested that they put their two existing homes on separate lots from the church property. 5. The variance,if granted,will not alter the character of the locality. It again will have lot sizes in line with what was originally platted in 1994 and the proposed lots exceed a majority of the surrounding lot sizes in Brentwood. Public Comment Staff received several phone calls in opposition to the request and one email stating it is "Not fair unless we all can do the same." Any resident can ask for a variance to reduce their lot size,in this case the request is not asking for lot sizes any smaller than what is already in the subdivision and is consistent with the original plat. ATTACHMENTS • Location Map • Applicants Narrative • Lot Size Exhibit • Email • Proposed Survey • Original Plat Action Motion by Second by Vote Follow Up C:\Users\cleeseberg\Desktop\council\V 13-03.docx PRO MIN d tit.. Case Number V 13-03 Location Map SOLID ROCK CHURCH IP*A,i" SOLID ROCK CHURCH and World Outreach Center Dr. Bill Matthews, Pastor May 28, 2013 Elk River Board of Adjustments City of Elk River 13065 Orono Parkway Elk River, MN 55330 Dear Elk River Board of Adjustments: Solid Rock Church is requesting a variance to be granted on the 2.5 acre requirement for a lot size for two basic reasons. 1) With changes in banking and lending requirements, since the economic turndown, our lending institution,The Bank of Elk River, has requested that we put our two existing staff homes on separate lots from the church property. When the Brentwood edition was originally platted,the property the church owns, Brentwood Block 9, Lots 1-8, were all separate lots. In 1994 the county requested that all the lots be combined for ease of records, since we owned all of lots in Block 9. 2) Additionally, we would like to build an additional staff home on the property, which would be a single family dwelling. We are asking for a variance because the City of Elk River has changed the requirements for a lot size. All of our lots were originally 2 acres or under, with three being under 1.5 acres. Now the current requirement is 2.5 acres. We are proposing a four lot split of the church property as follows: Parcel A would be 1.85 acres, existing home Parcel B would be 1.65 acres, existing home Parcel C would be 1.50 acres,future home Parcel D would be 8.06 acres, existing church building What we are proposing is in harmony with the Brentwood neighborhood and with The City of Elk River's plan when the lots were originally plotted. This variance would also be in harmony with The City of Elk River's comprehensive plan. Sincerely Bill Matthews Pastor/President 11800 196th Avenue NW * Elk River, MN 55330 * 763.441.2816 * Fax 763.441.1053 www.srchurch.org Existing Lots Smaller •' _ -OW WWI- than Proposed Lots i 1 2.04 .46 T- .24' j 3, 1 1 1 -.62 1 .89 / 1 .65 1 .36 SAR i 1 .51 1 .54 Y 2.03 - r r. 1 .31 f' ."��` - • . - , � .o � �� 1 .42 o © 1 •62 • > 2.85 e.23 .. 1 .4 - 3 f * ,,� 1 .64 - ' 1 .37 o5 Q 1 .2 P7- 1 . 17 ' . ` It ; - - 00 f , 1 .374 1 .7 .• 0.93 JOV+ ,sir 'lit its IA .; Y ,w0ab ` "' . 94f�� 'i 1 so` ; r• ,' ' Sri: i� . -�i r . M .'��ic `• ` ; Leeseberg, Chris From: Barnhart, Jeremy Sent: Monday, June 03, 2013 1:53 PM To: Leeseberg, Chris Subject: FW: Solid Rock Church FYI Best regards, Jeremy Barnhart, AICP I Community Operations and Development-Deputy Director 763.635.1034 w 1763.635.1090 f 13065 Orono Parkway Elk River MN 55330 � 0W I B , Rk er From: Al Fischer Sent: Monday,June 03, 2013 1:30 PM To: Barnhart, Jeremy Subject: Solid Rock Church I am unable to be at meeting next Tuesday re reducing size of lots etc. on above. Not fair unless we all can do the same. All they want to do is sell them cheaper and spoil the area. Do not allow this to happen. Please advise me of outcome. R.AIIan Fischer 11946 196th circle, Elk R. 1 0 bab9 ON 3, sZ a oN 11 oZ a s :a,oa H�2lf1H0 NOON 4110S s/d'woie w a1la 11�'4»�wN�o�piios :LK31 -{rLf:aan1ou61S wroavwnt]nMmm \ Z1ildS0i-68b9 :MMO ZM ~, V' [P#(04)J-ZLOZ-IM(E914 �210J 036tld3tld 91Na ::.9 Q3NJ3NJ OEM ra:N'—I Vg-r-Y -(TORS NN'd Aid N13 a}o}s a41/o '^ a,�apunsacRZw�ns 9Z a6uoa•ft Eiysum.I•LZ Jfe :;.9 NMtlaa pro/ as�a��Z ti p o wo ,oNt sup—ldP—2w"K2u lwo•aWR><SP� Q00M1N3i19'6 N�019 3svd/NOOe vuo X0,61°/aa�i�a�,v Rw/apu�/0 .auj Buuaauj8ug=y Sujdan.Ens.raajjo NVId H013NS Noi/diaas3a 3/va A38 eioa a s aiva via xz„�s�1u,/ou,„/n,ao��aa�,au MN 133aLS eVNNNj ' 9Yf=b,1, 6Z'L51®'H1a0N _ io o o m/,dbdo.n=v a o, 1 o, i 0,, a 1 � w so3 o � m m w w N so 3 a sa _°_ '� I I I = N� ZS WI BZ bLZ ` ^5 0/ / nu .,6YZ I --L9'992 W 3„OO,Of,INo--�--------- 1 � � W Z AN 13381ST / s�0�����a � w � 1 I / \ v/ -/� I ( � r.a v.W Iv. •u.M�u.Mf I �wn�- •LC aLaa a\Wia \ \��N.\}lfr. u.MK �", I(M�SE'`I I 12 \ '��•�\ �-2 .. a /3 \ t 14 Y a f / A( lY t gt 6 � 'toe •v..,.w.. — .— - — �� � y 7 2 C7ow If Ao a. -�_ I 9 • 4t a._',; �; - �,.���'�ti_ � !F� �: ,� l ,,,,x •,� —�--Z. �aft 9 .\ I � 7 B j Q/g7N7 van Hr:.s�> i- , .14 am — @ .. .r�.. Y 13 4a �� td s 16 T It /B 21 20 /9 ) 6 � , a — 7 g gig 22 4� - ,�,.w i T.(4 .r ED!3 �l��N• ,. ..Ir�;�f «N N;�r_". « �s'T �„ •w Wt — ,��� I I .. �l u -'- NOYYiaE E—la6lrvANaa-3a2M P.VY-- +•' �."' i��✓��I