Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 2016-084i # WW# IWO Aglumagun . L-1 am I DK#m A RESOLUTIONAPPROVINGA VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUMLOT SIZE REQ UIREMENTS OF THE R URAL SINGLE E A MIL Y ZONflVG DI S II ICT A AD FR OM THE MAXIMUM TIME FOR WHICH A VARIANCE IS VALID WHEREAS, the City of Lake Eftno is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Suzanne Horning, 8991 Jane Road -North, (the "Applicant") has submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo (the "City") for a variance from the minimum lot size requirements of the RS — Rural Single Family Residential zoning district and to waive the one- year deadline for completion of the work proposed under the variance for the property described as Lot 9 of Krause's Addition to the City of Lake Elmo, Washington County, Minnesota (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, notice has been published, mailed and posted pursuant to the Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance, Section 154.102; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a public hearing on said matter on September 12, 2016; and 2016, and NOW, THEREFORE, based on the testimony elidW and information received, the City Council makes the following* 1) That the procedures for obtaining said Variance are found in the Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance, Section 154.109. 2) That all the submission requirements of said Section 154.109 have been met by the Applicant. Resolution 2016-84 3) That the proposed variance includes the following components: a) A variance from the ininimurn lot size requirements in the IDS — Rural Single Family Residential zoning district. The subject lot is 0.785 acres in size and the minimum required size to be buildable is 0.9 acres. b) A variance to waive the one-year deadline for completion of the work proposed under the variance. 4) That the Variance will be located on property legally described as follows- Lot 9 of Krause's Addition to the City of Lake Elmo, Washington County, Minnesota. PID 09.029.21.11.0015. 6) That the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, SpecificJindings: The Applicant's Property is unique due to forinerplatting and continued classiJication of the Property as a buildable lot, lip until the City adopted new zoning regulations. The Applicant purchased the Property with the understanding that a house could someday be built on the Property; City records have been verified and indicate this to be true. Other battles on neighboring smaller lots were constructed prior to the adoption of the Cit)l "s zoning regulations and therefire are legal non-confir", ing uses. . 7) That the proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the locality in which the property in question is located. Specific findings:: The Applicant's lot is larger than several riparian lots in the surrounding neighborhood and is close to the ininilnum size needed to be considered buildable. All other surrounding lots within 1000feet have Resolution 2016-84 2 houses on thent. Therefore, constructing a house on this lot would not alter the essential character of the locality in which the Property is located. It should also be noted that because the variance will expire within about two and a hatfyears, a house would need to be built on the lot sooner than if a variance from the time requirements to build was granted. Allowing the variance to be granted in perpetuity, with the outlined conditions would allow adjacent Property owners more time to enjoy the open space the lot provides. 8) That the proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to property adjacent to the property in question or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Specifiefindings: No itapacts above and beyond those considered normal./or any other single-family lot in the surrounding neighborhood would be expectedshould the variance be granted. Granting the variance in perpetuity with conditions wouldprotect the subject Property's value for the future while allowing neighbors to enjoy the open space in the interim. Additionally, granting the variance in perpetuity with conditions will better inform future potential Moyers that the lot is potentially buildable. They will not be surprised whenlif a variance is grantedfrom the ininilnuln lot site standards in the future. Based on the foregoing, the Applicant's application for a Variance is granted, subject to the following conditions: 1) The driveway for the future home of the lot shall access Jane Road North. Driveway access to Jamaca Avenue North shall be prohibited. 2) The Applicant shall provide a drainage easement for the portion of the lot that collects storm, water runoff from the subject Property and adjacent parcels before a building permit is issued for the site. The specific location of the drainage easement shall be approved by the City Engineer. 3) The variance shall be valid until any one of the following;events occurs, whichever occurs first: the Property's Planned Land Use changes in the City's Comprehensive Plan; the C, Property is rezoned; any changes are made to the City's zoning regulations for the RS — Rural Single Family zoning district that would make the lot more non -conforming including but not limited to an increase in minitnum lot size requirements; or an increase in minimum lot width requirenients. 4) A grading, erosion control, and storm water management plan shall be submitted in conjunction with,a building permit for the Property and approved by the City Engineer. 5) The Applicant shall secure any required permits from the Valley Branch Watershed District prior to commencing any grading or construction activity on the site. 6) The Applicant shall submit a letter from Washington County that an approved septic system can be located on the site prior to the issuance of a building permit for the site. 7) The Applicant shall submit a Right of Entry Agreement to the City so that it may access the Property for repairs to the drainage pipe on the Property if need be. Resolution 2016-84 8) All other City, zoning, and development regulations must be satisfied before a building permit is issued. 9) The owner shall pay a fee comparable to the assessments levied against other homes in the neighborhood for the 2012 Jane Road North project if the City finds that this has not yet been done. Passed and duly adopted this 0' day of October, 2016 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota, Michael Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: J4ohns—on, i Jerk Resolution 2016-84 4