Laserfiche WebLink
Board of Adjustments Minutes Page 3 <br />June 28, 2016 <br /> <br />----------------------------- <br />5.2 Thomas and Kristin Gannon Ï 17875 Concord Street NW <br />Variance to wetland buffer setback, Case No. V 16-07 <br /> The staff report was presented by BrieAnna Simon. Staff recomme <br />request based on the findings listed in the staff report. <br /> Chair Johnson opened the public hearing. There being no commen <br />Johnson closed the public hearing. <br />The Board of Adjustments reviewed the five criteria for the variance requests as follows: <br /> <br />1.Is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinan <br />Motion by Commissioner Feinstein and seconded by Commissioner Larson-Vito <br />that the request meets Criteria #1. Motion carried 6-0. <br /> <br />2.Is consistent with the City of Elk River comprehensive plan. <br />Motion by Commissioner Larson-Vito and seconded by Commissioner Thiel that <br />the request meets Criteria #2. Motion carried 6-0. <br />3.The petitioner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the <br />zoning ordinance <br />Motion by Commissioner Feinstein and seconded by Commissioner Larson-Vito <br />that the request meets Criteria #3. Motion carried 6-0. <br />4.The plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to t <br />consequence of the petition's own action or inaction. <br />Motion by Commissioner Larson-Vito and seconded by Commissioner Nicholas <br />hat the request meets Criteria #4. Motion carried 6-0. <br /> <br />5.The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. <br />Motion by Commissioner Thiel and seconded by Commissioner Nicholas that <br />the request meets Criteria #5. Motion carried 6-0. <br />-------- <br />Motion by Commissioner Larson-Vito and seconded by Commissioner Crook to <br />approve the request by Thomas and Kristin Gannon for Variance encroach 13 feet <br />into the required 45-foot wetland setback, based on the following findings: <br /> <br />1.The general purpose and intent of the ordinance are met. <br />2.The property has a land use of residential and the use is consistent with the <br />comprehensive plan. <br />3.The proposed use is reasonable and is permitted in the zoning ordinance. <br />4.The plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the property not a <br />consequence of the petitioners own action or inaction. <br />5.The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. <br />