10-15-2013 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2013 Page 4 of 8 Council’s findings should be directed towards the pertinent questions. Mr. Reeves is empathetic with many of the concerns, but wants to know where city should “hang its hat.” He would rather rely on the County, who is responsible for septics, on whether the septic is an issue. Mr. Brekken reiterated that County and City staff would have more expertise on details for septics, but there is state statutory structure. Council Member Bloyer asked about who is the authority for septics. Mr. Klatt said Washington County; however, variances that involve septics are the purview of the City. Mr. Klatt recalled the discussions regarding the size standards for septics. Council Member Smith again reiterated her opinion that the ordinance should be changed. She also has concerns about offending the same people who were involved in the water surface use debate. Mr. Pearson noted that the purpose of the variance is to vary from the code. It is his opinion that it is not prudent to amend code every time a variance is needed. Council Member Reeves reiterated his empathy. He believes that taking a stand would be looking at the rules and the fact before the Council. He is trying hard to apply fact and not emotion. He wants to follow rule of law. Ms. Smith noted she took a walk on property with Mr. Hanson. Great walk, but is basing her decision on what council has done in the past and apply the ordinance. She noted that the property is steep and the surrounding issues with the existing septics. Council Member Nelson asked about the motion to make. Council Member Bloyer stated he concurred with Mr. Reeves. Dean Dworak 12325 Upper Heather, Hugo: Variance applicant was in attendance. Paul Hansen 8024 Hill Trail North: Variance co-applicant and owner was also in attendance. MOTION: Council Member Bloyer moved TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2013-82, A RESOLUTION GRANTING THE VARIANCE REQUESTED AT 09.029.21.22.0025 (HILL TRAIL NORTH) TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON A LOT THAT IS NOT CONSIDERED A BUILDABLE LOT OF RECORD, BASED UPON MEETING ALL REQUIRED FINDINGS NECESSARY TO GRANT THE VARIANCE AS AMENDED SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. Council Member Nelson seconded the motion. Council Member Nelson asked about the staff conditions. Mr. Klatt said those conditions should be a part of the motion. Mr. Nelson asked Mr. Bloyer about a friendly amendment. Council Member Bloyer accepted the friendly amendment. Council Member Smith said that the Council should amend the ordinance if it wants to grant the variance. Mayor Pearson noted that he voted for denial last time based on a misunderstanding on the purchase situation. He has since received additional information. Mr. Brekken reminded council to consider that while the owner’s knowledge cannot be used solely to grant or deny but can be considered. Mayor Pearson said it does fit the neighborhood and is a reasonable request. Ms. Smith noted that the Hansons bought the parcels separately (4 and 2) and should have known it would not be buildable. Mayor Pearson also noted that additional conditions must be met. Mr. Bloyer asked about the plan itself. Mr. Klatt said planners have seen a site plan and general overview plans, but not specific house plans. Mr. Bloyer does not think it appropriate to consider the size of the house. Council discussed of what size is appropriate, and whether it fits the character of the neighborhood. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (SMITH – NAY). ITEM 13: ADOPT ANIMAL CODE AMENDMENT; ORD. 08-088, RES. 2013-88, ORD. 08-089