4.3. SR 10-12-1998"y of
MEMORANDUM
Item
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Mayor and City Council
Scott Harlicker, Planning Assistan~/~'
October 12, 1998
Request by Irwin and Margaret
Olson for Waiver to Fees
Request
Consider a request by Irwin and Margaret Olson for a waiver to the park and
recreation fee and the stormwater management fee.
Background
On August 17th the Council considered and approved a request by the Olsons
for an administrative subdivision. The Olsons owned three lots in
Countryside Acres. At the time the Olsons bought the property they were
three separate lots. They combined the three lots in order to reduce the
amount of taxes paid on the property.
The administrative subdivision involved sphtting off one of the three lots to
sell as a separate parcel. Two conditions of that approval were the payment
of the park and recreation fee and the stormwater management fee for the
one new lot. For additional information on the administrative subdivision see
the attached staff report.
Countryside Acres was approved in 1978. At that time no park and recreation
fees or stormwater management fees were paid. The current park and
recreation fee is $ 650 per lot and the stormwater management fee would be
$61.80 per lot. For a two lot administrative subdivision where one of the lots
has an existing house on it, the applicant is responsible for paying the fees
for the newly created undeveloped lot.
Recommendation
Since no park and recreation or stormwater management fees have been paid
on the lots involved in this administrative subdivision, it is difficult to justify
waiving those fees. It is recommended the Council deny this request to waive
13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · TDD & Phone: (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
park and recreation and stormwater management fees for the newly created
undeveloped lot.
s:\planning\scott\olsonfee.doc
ity of
River
Item #4.3.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Mayor & City Counci~-~ /
Pat Klaers, City Adm~trator
October 12, 1998
Olson Request to Waive Fees
In addition to Scott Harlicker's memo regarding the Olson request to waive
fees, the City Council should review the attached material which outlines the
lot size variance request which was approved by the Board of Adjustment in
July 1998. Staff recommended denial of this variance because of a lack of
hardship and the existence of no special conditions regarding this property.
The applicants combined the property for tax purposes, and in July wanted
the property subdivided. The requested subdivision did not comply with the
existing ordinances or with the ordinances that were in place when the lots
were purchased in 1982.
13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · TDD & Phone: (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
'ity of
~r TO:
FROM:
Item # 4.1.
MEMORANDUM
Board of Adjustments
Stephen Wensman, Planner
DATE:
July 28, 1998
SUBJECT:
Request by Irwin and Margaret Olson
for a Variance, Public Hearing Case
No. V 98-6
Request
Consider a request by Irwin and Margaret Olson for a variance of the
minimum lot size requirement in the Rla zone (Countryside Acres).
Location
19761 Gary Street, Elk River, MN (Lots 4,5 and 6, Block I, Countryside
Acres)
Zoning/Land Use
Rla (Single Family Residential) / LR (Low Density Residential)
Attachments
· Location map
· Subdivision'plan
· Letter from applicant
Overview
In 1982, the applicant purchased the lots 4,5 and 6 in Countryside Acres
(approximately 4 total acres) and built a house on lot 4 and a portion of 5. Lot
six is free of structures and all woods at this time. All three lots were
combined as one lot at the time of building and tax purposes by the applicant.
The applicant requests the variance because he intends to sell lot 4-5, and
sell lot 6 as a separate buildable lot
The applicant claims a hardship because he feels selling such a large lot will
be difficult when the lots surrounding are so much smaller. Furthermore,
13065 Orono Parkway * P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · TDD & Phone: (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
Memo to Board of Adjustments/V 98-6
July 28, 1998
Page 2
when he combined the lots, he says he wasn't informed of the potential
ramifications of the joining the lots, as he has now discovered.
Zoning Ordinance
At the time the applicant purchased his lot, in 1982, the property was in the
Rla district and the minimum lot size was already 2.5 acres. Countryside
Acres consists of lots of roughly I acre.
Currently, The Elk River Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum lot size of
2.5 acres in the Rla zone. If the variance was granted, lot 4-5 would be
approximately 2.5 acres and lot 6 approximately 1.6 acres. Lot six would not
meet the minimum lot size.
Variance
Staff refers the Board of Adjustments to Section 900.40 of the City of Elk
River Code of Ordinances for the five standards to consider when reviewing a
variance. A variance may be granted only if it meets the following five
conditions:
1. Literal enforcement of the ordinance will cause undue hardship.
The hardship is caused by special conditions and circumstances which are
peculiar to the property and the structure involved and which are not
characteristic of, or applicable to, other lands or structure in the same
area.
The literal application of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive
the petitioner of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same district
under the terms of this ordinance.
4. The special conditions and circumstances are not a consequence of the
petitioner's own action or inaction.
The variance will not be injurious to or adversely affect the health, safety
or welfare of the residents of the City or the neighborhood where the
property is located and will in keeping with spirit and intent of the
ordinance.
The applicant feels the literal enforcement of the ordinance will cause him
undo hardship because selling such a large lot with so many smaller lots
around will make the sale difficult. Lot 9, block 1, of Countryside Acres is
approximately 6 acres and the only other lot in the subdivision that meets
\\elkriver\sys\shrdoc\planning\stevewen\pcmmo\v98-6.doc
Memo to Board of Adjustments/V 98-6
July 28, 1998
Page 3
the 2.5 acre minimum lot size. The applicant does have the option to sell his
lot (4,5 and 6) as it and meet the minimum lot size requirements.
The special conditions or circumstances which are peculiar and not
characteristic of, or applicable to, other lands or structure in the same area is
that the Olsons' three lots combine to form second largest lot in the
subdivision.
Since the majority of the lots in this subdivision are approximately 1 acre in
size, it could be said the literal application of the ordinance would deprive the
Olsons of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same subdivision.
The special conditions and circumstances are a consequence of the
petitioner's own actions, even though he did not know the ramifications of
joining the lots and was not informed of this situation. The applicants action
to combine the lots was a necessity in order to build on lot 4 and 5.
Most of the subdivision of Countryside Acres is non-conforming with the
current City Ordinance, however at the time the subdivision was plated it
was conforming. It is questionable whether or granting the variance would be
in keeping with the overall spirit and intent of the City Ordinance.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Board of Adjustments deny this request for a
variance from the minimal lot size requirements in the Rla zoning district
based on the following findings:
LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL NOT CAUSE THE
APPLICANT UNDO HARDSHIP BECAUSE THE LOTS 4,5 AND 6 CAN BE SOLD
AS ONE LOT.
2. THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES ARE A CONSEQUENCE
OF THE PETITIONER'S OWN ACTIONS.
\\elkriver\sys\shrdoc\planning\stevewen\pcmmo\v98-6.doc
ORONO
THE W~LD P~K
~'~/ '~ ZONING
, ~, o~,~ MAP
[Elli River
, ~o~ O~o,o ~,,,~ · ~.o. ~o× ~o CASE: V
~'W'~q ~ I.[~_RGARET OI.$ON
19761 G;Z%Y ST
To: Mayer Hank Duitsman ~
Elk River City Coum. sel
Sept. ih, 1~98
item No.
Property to be considerd.
Lots 2,5,6 in Countryside acres.
e
Request.
That you do not consider Lot 6 a new lot subject to paz~ient
of the follow~g 2 charges.
A. ~ 650.00 Park dedication fee.
B. ~ 61.80 Surface water management fee.
The Board of AUjustment at the July 28 public hearing
allowed separation of lots h,~,6 into 2 parcels as follows:
A. Parcel 1 (Lots h & 5)
B. Parcel 2 ( Lot 6 )
The City Counsel at the August 17th public hearing accepted
the Board of Adjmst:nents reco~endation of Lots h,[,6 into
two parcels.
Reason for reqUeSt. (Item #2 above)
Wecpurchased the '3 lots in 1982 and ~e were never notified
persona!y or ~ublica!y that our lots were reclassified as a
~ acre parcel'and thus subject to the 2½ acre building rule.
Sv~ary.
A. The ~oard of Adjustments based their decision to
separate the lots into parcels because for the past
16 years we were never notified that our lots had
been reclassified into acreage.
B. Lot 6 is not a new lot even though it has been
separated rrm lots h &5. We have always owned it.
C. We are asking the City Counsel to wave the two
charges requested by the Staff. (Item #2 above.)
cc. THE ~%a£f , Scott & Steve
33
ORIGINAL SUBDIVISION
ID P
-/
'o
4
q
4,14,,,,
_ .- t'szq.q5
30.00
r;
,i
'- I
EXISTING CONDITIONS
I qq'T~4 wy-., Ay ¢_...
'~.om t b'l. FJ Z~ o
"Oe
75'1.
4
q
4.&G..mt..
__ ~-5 z.q. q5
'T Jt
:.._'LO
c
[2 -I'~ ~ Gill . .~
~"~- 'J -
ION
REQUESTED SUBDIVL~
G
~u.~.ff~' "~
.05--
~
~ ~!:~ t .......
t o -7, ;'~
.:J;
4
'3
.~_~
x