10-25-2016 BA MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Board of Adjustments Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 2 Chair Johnson opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Johnson closed the public hearing. The Commissioners discussed the criteria for granting a variance. It was the consensus of the Board of Adjustments that the request meets all five criteria. Motion by Commissioner Konietzko and seconded by Commissioner Feinstein to approve the request by Progressive Builders for a 12 -foot wetland setback variance, Case No. V 16-11, based on the finding that all five criteria can be met, and the following reasons: 1. The general purpose and intent of the ordinance are met. 2. The property has a land use of residential and the use is consistent with the comprehensive plan. 3. The proposed use is reasonable and is permitted in the zoning ordinance. 4. The plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the property not a consequence of the petitioners own action or inaction. 5. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. And with the following conditions: 1. The area within the 25 foot wetland buffer strip is not to be maintained as yard area (no mowing, no planting, no landscaping) and must be left to grow naturally. 2. The 25 foot wetland buffer strip area must be signed to identify the buffer edge and note that maintenance is not permitted within the area. Motion carried 5-0. 4.2 Michael and Rosie Reger - 19538 Albany Street NW • Side Yard Setback Variance, Case No. V 16-13 The staff report was presented by Chris Leeseberg. Staff recommended denial of the request based on the finding that #1, 3 and 4 of the criteria for granting a variance cannot be met. Chair Johnson asked if staff had discussed the criteria with the applicant. Mr. Leeseberg stated that he discussed the wetland setback regulations and process, but not the specific criteria. Chair Johnson opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Johnson closed the public hearing. It was the consensus of the Board of Adjustments that Criteria 1, 3, 4 and 5 cannot be met. Motion by Commissioner Konietzko and seconded by Commissioner Larson -Vito to deny the request by Michael and Rosie Reger, Case No. V 16-13, based on the finding that the criteria cannot be met. Motion carried 7-0.