5.1. BASR 07-27-2021 Request for Action
Cir•ci
Elk -
River=
To Item Number
Board of Adjustments 5.1
Agenda Section Meeting Date Prepared by
Public Hearings July 27, 2021 Chris Leeseberg, Senior Planner
Item Description Reviewed by
James P. Rossman—404 Main Street NW Zack Carlton,Planning Manager
1'Parking Lot Setback Variance, Case No. Reviewed by
V 21-02
Action Requested
Approve,by motion,the front yard setback variance for the following
reasons:
1. The general purpose and intent of the ordinance are met.
2. The property has a land use of residential and the use is
consistent with the comprehensive plan. '
3. The proposed use is reasonable and is permitted in the zoning CR 33
ordinance.
4. The plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to
the property not a consequence of the petitioner's own action z'
or inaction. RR
5. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. _
and - cR 12
with the following condition: y
1. Any improvements located within easements are the
responsibility of the property owner.
Background/Discussion `
The subject property is zoned C2 (Office District) and is 0.27 acres in
size. The applicant is requesting a side yard parking setback variance to
Figure
allow their parking lot to be expanded to within one foot of the west
property line. Parking lots in commercial zoning districts are required to be setback 10-feet from property lines.
When the applicant built the structure on Main Street over 20 years ago,they met setbacks and parking
requirements.At that time,the available on street parking could be included in the calculations for the total stalls
required. About the time the building was completed, the city changed Main Street into a center turn lane street,
doing away with on-street parking, making their parking lot inadequate for the office building it supported.
The Elk River Vision P I I E R E I I Y
A arelcoming community avith revolutionary and spirited resourcefulness, exceptional [NAfUR
service, and community engagement that encourages and inspires prosperity. Updated.August 2020
Applicable Regulation
Variances may be granted when the petitioner establishes that the variance satisfies all five of the criteria described
below. The variance is:
7. Is in harmony n�ith the general purpose and intent of the ordinance, and
The general purpose and intent of parking setbacks is to allow areas for landscaping between properties,
provide access for possible easements, and general buffering. While the city has parking setbacks,it is not
uncommon for commercial parking lots to be up to a property line, often shared with a neighboring
property. The property has landscaping, and the city is not aware of any easements along the western
property line. The request is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance.
2. Is consistent nvith the City of Elk River Comprehensive Plan.
The property is guided as Mississippi Connections which supports the existing use and parking.
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;
Again,while the city has parking setbacks,it is not uncommon for commercial parking lots to be up to a
property line, often shared with a neighboring property. The petitioner proposes to use the property in a
reasonable manner.
4. The plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the property not a consequence of the petition's on.,n action or
inaction;and
The uniqueness of the property is that it had available (required) parking on Main Street but with the
changing of it to a center turn lane street,the property lost parking.
5. The variance, iifgranted, mill not alter the essential character of the locality.
There are various traditional commercial and residential properties converted to commercial in the area
and the city is working on a redevelopment project on the five parcels west of the subject parcel. The
essential character will not be altered.
Financial Impact
None
Council Meeting
If denied, or an appeal is made by any interested party by August 6, 2021, this item will go to the August 16, 2021,
City Council meeting.
Mission/Policy/Goal
■ Responsibly grow
■ Meet changing needs -Agile
■ Work with citizens to achieve goals
Attachments
■ Location Map
■ Applicant's Narrative
■ Site Plan
Jim Rossman Case No:V 21-02
E
Variance *Ve-r
7-6-21 Variance Request PID# 75-401-0151
This variance is requested for the extension of an existing
parking lot.
This narrative is intended to explain the request, in detail,
showing 5 separate criteria as to why the variance should be
granted.
1. This variance request is in harmony with the general
purpose and intent of the ordinance. As required by new
construction code for parking spots required for buildings
with and without on street available parking.
2. The variance is consistent with the city of Elk River's
comprehensive plan by making Main Street safer for both
drivers and pedestrians.
3. This petition proposes to use the property in a reasonable
manner not normally permitted by the zoning ordinance
4. This petition is asked for due to circumstances unique to
the property and is not a consequence of the petitioners
own action or inaction.
5. The variance, if granted will not alter the essential character
of the locality.
History
When I built the building on said property it met all
building and set back requirements as of the time that the
building permit was issued. Because, at that time, public
parking was permitted on Main Street in front of the
building fewer parking stalls were required on the
premises. Once the building was completed I was notified
that Main Street was ending the allowed parking on Main
Street while they added a third center lane for right and left
hand turns.
With this in mind our parking lot almost immediately
became obsolete as far having enough parking available for
the customers and employees that would come and go from
the premises.
One can see that when this happened it was not a problem
created by the petitioner.
We have had difficulty finding enough safe parking for
many years. At one time we had arrangements with the
owners of the property to west for overflow parking and
others would park across Main Street where it was allowed.
I have received reports of one employee slipping and
falling crossing the street while another said she had almost
been hit by a car on Main Street when crossing. With the
property to the west changing hands our over flow parking
has disappeared and requesting a cross walk sign be
installed has failed so the petitioner makes the request to
push 49' of the westerly side of the exiting parking lot to
the west by 9' thereby giving us an addition 4 parking
spots. By doing so the parking lot curb will be
approximently V from the property line on the west side,
but will not interfere with boulevard.
By granting this variance Main Street will be safer with less
people trying to cross for excess to more parking spots
while the parking lot will at last become adequate for a
building that doesn't have on street parking.
Thank yoq:�
James Rossman
Trustee/Owner
Rossman Family Revocable Trust
r
r
8612 CONCR I t�
CURB do GUR
10 FOOT PARKING SETBACK UNE
15' BUILDING SETBACK ----
WALL MOUNT ------------------ 1
LIGHT p
INSTALL INTEGRAL CONCRETE a o 1
t CURB & SIDEWALK o I
I
' I
-�ROPOSED \?�\
' HSC
40'x50'
a :K`'f3UIL•DING RAMP _
J
oF% 888.75 }
4 - ° p \• `1
WALL MOUNT "yD\ ° L4
-----= — - ---
151. BUILDING SETBACK LINE-•;-------------• .
WOOD .FENCE ENCLOSURE 10
V*#' CONCRETE PAD WITH GATJ;: PROPOSED
FOR TRASH ENCLOSURE 90 GALLON CgNTAINER " d ON WHEELS LIGHTED SIGN
' r
t I
I a.
p I
v SAWCUT EDGE 3 FEET RVIVI
I ° PROPERTY LINE I
.• I a i • p
a o
rue
-S I I -N E Is I
Ugio,jr. "�-
p�Lj
4 A-ete
Lot—
elkt
yo,
4DO
Sa
oy
.
.
. ................................. . .
-7j
n:
qo
ell
1 eol
4
zrl"j>
1 eol
4
- EASTEALY EXTEh6I0N OF 11E AOM .;NE X :0T 7
PIAT_ AAV MEASURED
S 99'57'0 E 196.00•
LL!
fe
1
'l3.21 ,�� 1r���•i0 •
GO--- - - - - - ,`�
i
ii
:I
CERTIFICA TE OF SURVEY
FOR
JIM ROSSMAN
0 20 10
rixav Aaam T Fuge
Parcel A
Lot 11 and that part of Lot 12 lying west of the East 4.50'9e4t of- scald
Lot 12, all in Block 1, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 5, Village of Elk
*Ivor, according to the recorded plat thereof, Sherburne County;
Minnesota.
Parcel B
The East 4.50 feet of Lot 12, Block 1, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 5,
Village of Elk River, according to the recorded plat thereof, Sherburne
County, Minnesota.
So -_..3r Yii4s-tlA* r�r�.ef..the.-Northwest Ouart_er of the Southeast
« ;--
1.
Quarter of Section 34, Township 33, Range 26, lyin(j east of Block l
rest of Block 2, northerly of the easterly extension of the south line
of said Block 1 and southerly of the easterly extension of tbo nofth
_ line of- Lot 9 of said 814mok -1 of kWVT'OR'S "O$3VIN10t -*0-
9 —
— — N 90 00 00 E 'A
954
1
196.00 PIAT EASrEAL Y EXWOZ OF AE SOUTH CINE OF Sd= ! {
12
I
09
So.
FT.
w
1
'l3.21 ,�� 1r���•i0 •
GO--- - - - - - ,`�
i
ii
:I
CERTIFICA TE OF SURVEY
FOR
JIM ROSSMAN
0 20 10
rixav Aaam T Fuge
Parcel A
Lot 11 and that part of Lot 12 lying west of the East 4.50'9e4t of- scald
Lot 12, all in Block 1, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 5, Village of Elk
*Ivor, according to the recorded plat thereof, Sherburne County;
Minnesota.
Parcel B
The East 4.50 feet of Lot 12, Block 1, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 5,
Village of Elk River, according to the recorded plat thereof, Sherburne
County, Minnesota.
So -_..3r Yii4s-tlA* r�r�.ef..the.-Northwest Ouart_er of the Southeast
« ;--
1.
Quarter of Section 34, Township 33, Range 26, lyin(j east of Block l
rest of Block 2, northerly of the easterly extension of the south line
of said Block 1 and southerly of the easterly extension of tbo nofth
_ line of- Lot 9 of said 814mok -1 of kWVT'OR'S "O$3VIN10t -*0-
9 —
— — N 90 00 00 E 'A
954
1
196.00 PIAT EASrEAL Y EXWOZ OF AE SOUTH CINE OF Sd= ! {
1
W
1
PARCEL.
B
to
>t 14629 70 SO. r.
4
LU
\
t
O
0
i
Q
O
13.1 2
� .
I MA
Z
'l3.21 ,�� 1r���•i0 •
GO--- - - - - - ,`�
i
ii
:I
CERTIFICA TE OF SURVEY
FOR
JIM ROSSMAN
0 20 10
rixav Aaam T Fuge
Parcel A
Lot 11 and that part of Lot 12 lying west of the East 4.50'9e4t of- scald
Lot 12, all in Block 1, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 5, Village of Elk
*Ivor, according to the recorded plat thereof, Sherburne County;
Minnesota.
Parcel B
The East 4.50 feet of Lot 12, Block 1, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 5,
Village of Elk River, according to the recorded plat thereof, Sherburne
County, Minnesota.
So -_..3r Yii4s-tlA* r�r�.ef..the.-Northwest Ouart_er of the Southeast
« ;--
1.
Quarter of Section 34, Township 33, Range 26, lyin(j east of Block l
rest of Block 2, northerly of the easterly extension of the south line
of said Block 1 and southerly of the easterly extension of tbo nofth
_ line of- Lot 9 of said 814mok -1 of kWVT'OR'S "O$3VIN10t -*0-
9 —
— — N 90 00 00 E 'A
954
1
196.00 PIAT EASrEAL Y EXWOZ OF AE SOUTH CINE OF Sd= ! {