Loading...
05-08-2007 BA MINMEETING OF THE ELK RIVER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS HELD AT ELK RIVER CITY HALL TUESDAY, MAY 8, 2007 Present: Chair Stevens, Commissioners Austad, Lemke, Scott, Staul and Westgaard. Commissioner Anderson arrived at 6:32 p.m. bets Absent: None St~ff Present: Planning Manager Jeremy Barnhart, Senior Planner Sheila Cartney, Planner Chris Leeseberg, Recording Secretary Debbie Huebner Call Meeting To Order 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 Chair Stevens. 2. Consider May 8, 2007 Board of Adjustments Agenda MOVED BY COMMISSIONER WESTGAARD AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE TO APPROVE THE MAY 8, 2007 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. Consider March 13, 2007 Board of Adjustments Minutes MOVED BY COMMISSIONER SCOTT AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE TO APPROVE THE MARCH 73, 2007, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 4. Consider Recluest by Kevin Anderson for Lot Size Variance Case No V 07-03 Public He- arm Planning Manager Jeremy Barnhart reviewed details of the request by Kevin Anderson including size and location of the property. He noted that there are a number of homes in the immediate area with lots less than 2'/z acre, and that there are no homes within 250 feet of the proposed building site. Mr. Barnhart stated that he suggested the applicant minimize the variance by splitting the property more equally, but this was not acceptable to the applicant. He noted that the southern portion of the property falls within the Wild & Scenic River District which requires 2.5 acres for non-riparian lots. In order to split the property, the applicant would be required to show where two septic fields could be located on each property. Mr. Barnhart reviewed the five criteria for granting a variance. Staff recommended denial of the variance due to the fact the request does not meet the criteria. Chair Stevens asked if the platted lots were also in the R1a zoning district. Mr. Barnhart stated yes, but that the lots were platted under the township rules before the area was included in the city limits. He stated that the lots are nonconforming and are allowed to remain as is. Chair Stevens opened the public hearing. Kevin Anderson, applicant, 9927 154th Avenue NW -Stated that there are a number of 1- acre lots in Otsego where he previously lived, and there was not a problem with septic systems. He stated that the portion of his property in the Wild & Scenic area would remain as it currently exists. He did not feel there would be any impact to the neighborhood. Mr. Anderson stated that He did not want to split the property in half because that would drive the purchase price up too high for his son to buy it. Jim Engelstad, 15488 Fillmote Street NW -Stated that he felt he was not able to sell his home because of the condition of the surrounding property values. He stated that there is a jeep, tires and tar paper in the woods on the lot proposed to be sold by the applicant. He questioned the value of the house to be built on the lot, if approved. Mike Anderson, son of the applicant - He stated that the price of the he proposed to build would be approximately $150,000, not including the value of the lot. Mr. Anderson stated he did not see how the cost of house had anything to do with his father selling his land to him. There being no one to speak further to this issue, Chair Stevens closed the public hearing. Commissioner Westgaard asked for clarification on the property boundaries for the proposed lot split. Mr. Barnhart provided this information. Mr. Barnhart stated that staff struggled with the issue, but they felt they had to recommend denial of the variance because of the failure to meet the five standards. Chair Stevens stated that he concurred with staffls recommendation for denial. He stated he may have felt differently if the lot was proposed to be split in half. Cotmmissioner Lemke agreed that if the applicant were proposing to split the lot into a 2.5- acre lot and a 2.19 acre lot, the request would be more acceptable, and he was not comfortable approving a .916 acre-lot. Mr. Barnhart stated that the applicant chose not to split the property more equally and staff felt it was a variance of convenience and not hardship, since the property already has a single family home. Commissioner Westgaard stated that he also struggled with this issue, but the request was a large deviation from the minimum lot size. Commissioner Austad concurred. Commissioner Scott stated he felt approving the variance would set a negative precedent. Commissioner Anderson felt the variance was unnecessary and was not in favor of approval. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCOTT AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WESTGAARD TO DENY THE REQUEST BY KEVIN ANDERSON FOR A LOT SIZE VARIANCE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: 1. THE REQUIREMENTS FOR LOT SIZE ARE CLEARLY DEFINED, AND NOT OPEN TO INTERPRETATION. THE APPLICANT HAS NOT DEMONSTRATED EVIDENCE OF A HARDSHIP. 2. THE LOT IS A RELATIVELY FLAT, CURRENTLY FARMED PARCEL RECTANGULAR IS SHAPE. THERE IS NO UNIQUENESS TO THE LAND WARRANTING A VARIANCE FROM THE LOT SIZE. 3. IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT THE APPLICANT CREATED THE ORIGINAL 4.69 ACRE PARCEL; IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT THE APPLICANT PURCHASED THE PROPERTY WITH THE INTENT TO SUBDIVIDE. 4. THE PROPERTY OWNER IS AFFORDED RIGHTS ENJOYED BY OTHER R- 1A PROPERTIES, NAMELY THE USE OF THE LAND FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE. THERE IS NO LOSS OF RIGHTS BY NOT ALLOWING SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY NOT MEETING MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS. 5. A VARIANCE WOULD ALLOW SUBDIVISION OF LOTS NOT MEETING MINIMUM STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY THE ZONING ORDINANCE, AND WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE ON SITE WATER AND SANITATION REQUIREMENTS, ITS NEGATIVE IMPACTS MAY BE NEGLIGIBLE, ESPECIALLY FROM A VISUAL STANDPOINT. THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED WITH THE CREATION OF ONE ACRE LOTS OR SMALLER SOUTH AND WEST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THESE LOTS DO RANGE IN SIZE FROM 20,000 TO 48,600 SQUARE FEET, WITH THE AVERAGE 29,000 SQUARE FEET. THESE LOTS WERE PLATTED IN 1974, AS PART OF THE TOWNSHIP, BEFORE INITIATIVES TO PROTECT THE RIVER AND SOILS, AND MAINTAIN A MAXIMUM DENSITY WERE DEVELOPED. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. Other Business -None 6. Adjournment There being no further business, MOVED BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCOTT TO APPROVE ADJOURN THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. The meeting of the Elk River Board of Adjustments adjourned at 6:50 p.m. Respe/ctfully submitted, Debbie Huebner Recording Secretary