4.1 BASR 05-25-2017 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The intent of setbacks is to provide reasonable distances between structures. Because the new proposed lot is not developed and is owned by the applicant, any future property owner will understand the proximity of the existing accessory building and can site their home accordingly on the 18+ acre parcel. The general purpose and intent of the ordinance are met. 2. Is consistent with the City of Elk River comprehensive plan. The variance would still keep within the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and rural residential land use designation. The property is not served by munitzpal sewer and water and the new home would still remain as a residential single family home. The parcel is guided residential and the variance is consistent with the City of Elk River comprehensive plan. Variances may be granted when the petitioner establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. Practical difficulties means that: 3. The petitioner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance; The closer setback is needed for access to the rear 18.5 -acres of my property. It will also hep blend the driveway grade to preserve the existing trees and natural features along the north fence line (property line by not having major alterations to grades under drip line of trees which will insure a low visual impact. lle have taken into consideration removing the 36 x 64 ,Quonset however that too is unique to the property. The building is structurally sound, with concrete floor, running water and insulated with closed cell spray foam. The building has been maintained and still has country charm. The variance would be cohesive with the surrounding neighborhood. It is reasonable to subdivide the parcel while maintaining the location of the existing accessory structures on the same parcel as the existing home. Including the Quonset on the new parcel would make it a legal non - conforming structure, something the city should try to avoid happening. 4. The plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the property not a consequence of the petition's own action or inaction; and ire purchased the proper its current condition. The concern is with an adjacentpropero that only has 66 ft of road frontage. If there was a cul -de -sac at the end of 207th it mould have allowed the adjacent property to have 160ft of road frontage as well as easier access to the rearparcel of our developmentplan. Given the current conditions, our plan would not detract from the surrounding neighborhood. The existing structure placement and previous platting of adjacent parcels was completed by others prior to the applicant owning the property. The circumstances are unique and are not a result of the petitioner. 5. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Surrounding parcels have acreage with multiple scattered accessory structures and driveways. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. N:\ Departments \Community Development \Planning \Case Files \V\V 17 -01 Robb -Carol G2ss \4Board ofAdjustments \V 17 -01 sr 5- 23- 17.docx