08-09-2011 BA MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Board of Adjustmerns August 9, 2011 Page 2 Chair Ives asked if the acreage change makes a difference in this request. Mr. Leeseberg stated that if • the parcel were still 20 acres, the applicant would be allowed up to 16,000 square feet. He stated that a variance would still be required due to the number of structures. Mr. Hendrickx explained that the properrywas previouslya large working farm, hence the number and large size of the accessory structures for storage of hay and large farm equipment. Commissioner Anderson asked if they are can-ently using all the buildings. Mr. Hendrickx stated that they use the buildings for storage of their travel trailer, threshing show equipment, and antique tractors. Commissioner Scott asked if the applicant would be allowed to replace the structure with a building of the same size. Mr. Beck stated yes. Commissioner Anderson asked if two buildings were taken down could a larger structure be built near the home. Commissioner Westberg asked for clarification on the proposed variance change. Mr. Beck explained that the change only affects the hardship criteria. Commissioner Westberg asked if the Planning Commission essentially has their hands tied at this point. Mr. Beck stated that the current ordinance states that if there is a reasonable use of the property, a variance cannot be allowed. He noted that the ordinance being presented to the Council next Monday is consistent with the one the Planning Commission recommended for approval at their previous meeting. Commissioner Andelson stated that if the request does not meet the existing criteria, he cannot support approval. Chair Ives concurred. Commissioner Anderson noted that he has seen variances approved in the past due to parcels being reduced in size by right of way issues, but there is also the number of structures to consider. Commissioner Lemke asked if the cites ordinance was changed prior to the legislature change. Mr. • Beck stated no. He stated he did not have a concern with the number of buildings, but did not feel he could support the request based on the current ordinance. Commissioner Scott stated he would be in favor of passing the request onto the City Council for their review He agreed that there are other options for the applicant to consider and he did not support it. Commissioner Westberg stated that he concurred that the Planning Commission needs to look at the request based on the current ordinance and could not support it. Commissioner Johnson agreed. MOVED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON TO DENY THE REQUEST BY JEROME AND JEAN HENDRICKX FOR A VARIANCE TO THE SIZE AND NUMBER OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, CASE NO. V 11-01, BASED ON THE FINDING THAT THE REQUEST DOES NOT MEET THE VARIANCE CRITERIA SET FORTH IN SECTION 30-635 OF THE CITY'S ORDINANCE. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. Paul Johnson, Purpose Driven Builders, asked if the maximum square footage accessorystnrcture limit for this property is being based on 10 or 20 acres. Mr. Leeseberg stated that the information submitted by the applicant states the property is 18.28 acres. Mr. Johnson stated that he has re- measuredthe accessory structures and found them to be less than what was submitted. Mr. Johnson asked what recourse the applicant had if the variance is denied bythe City Council Mr. Beck stated that the decision could then be appealed to district court. •