Loading...
09-29-1998 BA MIN DRAFT • SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS HELD AT ELK RIVER CITY HALL TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 1998 Members Present: Vice Chair Cote, Commissioners Chambers, Kuester,Schuster and Thompson Members Absent: Chair Mesich and Commissioner Morris Staff Present: Scott Harlicker, Assistant Planner;Steve Wensman, Planner; Debbie Huebner, Recording Secretary aLl Meeting'To Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the meeting of the Elk River Board of Adjustments was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Vice Chair Cote. 2. .Consider 9129198 Board of Adi6ifilfents Agenda 3 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 29, 1998, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AGENDA. COMMISSIONER CHAMBERS SECONDED THE MOTION. • THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 3.1. Reauest by Midwest Building Components for Variance (King & Main Street Project), Public Hearing Case No. V 98-11 Staff report by Scott Harlicker. Midwest Building Components has requested a variance to the 10 foot parking setback requirement for property located at the northwest corner of King Avenue and Main Street. Staff believes the applicant can achieve the required setback on the north property line without a variance by placing the building five feet closer to Main Street. The setback on the west property line could be achieevd by making modifications to the layout of the parking lot. Scott indicated that staff recommends denial of the variance request, citing that three of the five findings for granting a variance cannot be met. Terry Veech, representing Midwest Building Components, explained that the building will be 3 stories high which will make it the largest in the downtown. He felt it would appear too imposing if it were placed close to the street. Commissioner Schuster asked if the architectural design of the building would fit in the downtown. Mr. Veech provided drawings of the proposed building, describing the columns and arched windows which will be included. Mr. Veech stated the building will appear to be the "oldest" new building in downtown. Commissioner Thompson indicated she did not feel a hardship exists. Vice Chair • Cote, Commissioners Schuster and Chambers expressed support for approval of the variance. Board of Adjustments Minutes September 29, 1998 Page 2 SVice Chair Cote opened the public hearing. There being no comments from the public, Vice Chair Cote closed the public hearing. COMMISSIONER KUESTER MOVED APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST BY MIDWEST BUILDING COMPONENTS, PUBLIC HEARING CASE NO. V 98-11, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, AND THE FACT THERE WAS NO OPPOSITION EXPRESSED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING: 1. LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL CAUSE UNDUE HARDSHIP. EXISTING BUILDINGS IN THE DOWNTOWN DO NOT MEET THE REQUIRED SETBACK. 2. 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. THERE ARE NO OTHER VACANT LOTS IN THE DOWNTOWN. THE LOCATION AS PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT WILL BE IN LINE WITH OTHER BUILDINGS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. 3. 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 CONDITIONS ARE DUE TO THE TRAFFIC PATTERNS AND STREET GRID IN THE DOWNTOWN. 5. 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. COMMISSIONER CHAMBERS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 4-1. Commissioner Thompson opposed. 3.2. Jon and Jill Varty Request for Variance, Public Hearing Case No. V 98-7 Staff report by Steve Wensman. Jon and Jill Varty have requested a variance from the maximum accessory structure area in the R 1 a zone. They recently purchased the 21.2 acre hobby farm located at 13192 192nd Avenue NW,with 6 existing greenhouses, a small detached garage, a pole building and house. All the detached structures are used for business purposes,which leaves the applicant without a garage for residential purposes. The property is a grandfathered agricultural use (produce farm) within the Rib zone. The applicant proposes to add on to the existing house and add a tuck-under garage. Staff recommends approval of the request based on the findings in the staff report. Vice Chair Cote opened the public hearing. Board of Adjustments Minutes September 29, 1998 Page 4 COMMISSIONER KUESTER MOVED APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST FOR A 20' FRONT YARD VARIANCE BY MICHAEL MCELHONE, PUBLIC HEARING CASE NO. V 98-8, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: 1. LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL CAUSE UNDUE HARDSHIP. 2. 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. 3. 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. 5. 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 BE IN KEEPING WITH SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE. . COMMISSIONER THOMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 3.4. Request by Applebee's for a Variance, Public Hearing Case No. V 98-9 Vice Chair Cote withdrew from discussion of this item due to a conflict of interest. Commissioner Kuester was appointed Acting Chair for discussion of Item 3.4. Staff report by Scott Harlicker. Applebee's has requested a variance to the sign ordinance to allow a fourth wall sign at 18891 Freeport Avenue. The proposed 66 square foot sign would consist of the Applebee's name and logo and would be located on the rear of the building facing Highway 169. Currently, there is a freestanding sign on Freeport, two wall signs on the front of the building facing Freeport and a wall sign on the south side of the building. Staff suggested that the applicant moved the signage on the south side of the building to the back facing Highway 169. Acting Chair Kuester opened the public hearing. There being no comments from the public, Acting Chair Kuester closed the public hearing. Commissioner Schuster expressed his support for the community efforts by Applebee's, but did not feel the request met the five findings necessary for granting a variance. COMMISSIONER THOMPSON MOVED DENIAL OF THE REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE BY 110 APPLEBEE'S, PUBLIC HEARING CASE NO. V 98-9, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: Board of Adjustments Minutes September 29, 1998 Page 5 • 1. LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL NOT CAUSE UNDUE HARDSHIP. THE APPLICANT COULD MOVE ONE OF THE OTHER SIGNS TO A LOCATION THAT IS MORE VISIBLE FROM HIGHWAY 169. 2. THE LITERAL APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE WOULD NOT DEPRIVE THE PETITIONER OF RIGHTS ENJOYED BY OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE SAME DISTRICT UNDER THE TERMS OF THIS ORDINANCE. OTHER BUSINESSES ALONG HIGHWAY 169 MADE A MARKETING DECISION TO PLACE ONE OF THEIR ALLOWED SIGNS SO THAT IT WOULD BE VISIBLE FROM HIGHWAY 169. 3. THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES ARE A CONSEQUENCE OF THE PETITIONER'S OWN ACTION OR INACTION.THE FACT THAT THE APPLICANT DID NOT FORESEE THE IMPACT THE RETAIL CENTER WOULD HAVE ON THE VISIBILITY OF THEIR SIGNAGE IS A RESULT OF THE APPLICANT'S INACTION. HOWEVER,THIS COULD BE ADDRESSED BY RELOCATING ONE OF THE EXISTING SIGNS. COMMISSIONER SCHUSTER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 4-0-1. Commissioner Cote abstained. 3.5. Linda Turner Request for Variance, Public Hearing Case No. V 98-10 Staff report by Scott Harlicker. Linda Turner has requested a variance to the shoreline setback and side yard setback variance to construct a 22' x 40' detached garage at 1854 Main Street. The proposed garage will replace an old ID storage building which has been torn down. Scott noted the applicant currently does not have a garage. Staff recommends approval of both variance requests based on the findings in the staff report to the Board of Adjustments dated September 29, 1998. Vice Chair Cote opened the public hearing. Scott distributed a letter from Linda Turner's next door neighbors, Mr. and Mrs. Harold Jude, expressing their objection to the requested 2 foot setback from their property line. Linda Turner, applicant, explained that if the garage were attached to her home she would not have access to her back yard without going through the garage and down some stairs. Also, the utility services would have to be relocated which would be very costly. Discussion followed regarding the side yard setback variance request. There being no further comments from the public, Vice Chair Cote closed the public hearing. COMMISSIONER KUESTER MOVED APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY LINDA TURNER FOR A VARIANCE TO THE SHORELINE SETBACK,AND,A VARIANCE TO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK, PUBLIC HEARING CASE NO. V 98-10, WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGE: - 1 FOOT SIDE YARD VARIANCE APPROVED, RATHER THAN THE REQUESTED 2 FEET. • BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: Board of Adjustments Minutes September 29, 1998 Page 6 110 1. LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL CAUSE UNDUE HARDSHIP IN THAT THE APPLICANT WILL NOT BE ABLE TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE. 2. 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. 3. 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. OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE DISTRICT HAVE GARAGES THAT DO NOT COMPLY WITH CURRENT SETBACK REQUIREMENTS 4. THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES ARE NOT A CONSEQUENCE OF THE PETITIONER'S OWN ACTION OR INACTION.THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS ARE A RESULT OF THE LOT DIMENSION AND PLACEMENT OF THE HOUSE ON THE PROPERTY. 5. 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. • 6. THE ZONING CODE REQUIRES A GARAGE WITH NEW SINGLE FAMILY. IT IS STAFF'S BELIEF THAT A GARAGE IS NEEDED FOR REASONABLE USE OF THIS PROPERTY. IT SHOULD ALSO BE NOTED THE PROPOSED GARAGE IS ACTUALLY SETBACK FURTHER FROM THE LAKE THAN THE ORIGINAL STORAGE BUILDING. 7. THE VARIANCE IS NOT BEING REQUESTED SOLELY ON THE BASIS OF ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS.THE APPLICANT,AS WELL AS MOST RESIDENTS IN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, HAVE A NEED FOR A GARAGE. 8. THE PROPOSED GARAGE WOULD BE IN CHARACTER WITH THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES AND WOULD HAVE SIMILAR SHORELINE SETBACK. COMMISSIONER CHAMBERS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 5. Adjournment,;; There being no further business, COMMISSIONER KUESTER MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. COMMISSIONER THOMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. he meeting of the Elk River Board of Adjustments adjourned at 7:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ,(0Je(e-ti /-it-e1/26--6} • Debbie Huebner, Recording Secretary