Laserfiche WebLink
AUG U 4 2020 <br />Eric and Elizabeth Toth — Request for Variance Narrative <br />Eric and Elizabeth Toth, as owners of Lots 11 and 12, Block 2, Orono Lake Addition, are requesting <br />approval to achieve a simple lot split of Lot 12 (known locally as the "Garden Lot") as more fully <br />described on the attached "Certificate of Survey and Lot Split." This simple split will allow us to sell the <br />resulting Parcel B to our neighbors, Gary and Diane Stritesky (property ID 75-132-4100). We will retain <br />Parcel A, which will be attached to Lot 11. We have been informed by City staff that Parcel B cannot be <br />attached to the Stritesky property because their property was never platted (the Striteskys would own <br />Parcel B as a separate unbuildable lot). <br />Neither party has an interest in further development of the Garden Lot as a new residence, therefore we <br />do not see a need to create a buildable lot from this split (City staff have suggested that the Garden Lot <br />should be split into a buildable lot and an unbuildable lot). Rather, we believe the proposed split will <br />allow both parties to more fully enjoy the use of their respective properties while contributing desirable <br />greenspace to the community. The Stritesky property is bounded by roadways on three sides with <br />structures being effectively restricted to the western edge of the property; Parcel B will give them some <br />"breathing space." Our property includes a historic barn which we wish to protect as a cultural resource <br />for the community, thus our desire to retain a buffer to the east of the barn. <br />We believe the proposed simple split should be allowed as it serves the interests of the adjoining <br />property owners and is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. It is our understanding that the <br />intent of the Comprehensive Plan is to guide future growth, redevelopment, and improvement efforts in <br />the City. The five themes, and our statements regarding conformity, are: <br />• Maintain a distinct identity: Historic Elk River clearly has the character of "small town" <br />Minnesota; the newer parts of the City are more typical of suburban development elsewhere in <br />the region. Both the new and the old are important to the identity of our city; our neighborhood <br />is typical of the older development with larger, irregular lots exhibiting a wide variety of housing <br />styles and, in our specific instance, remnants of Elk River's agricultural heritage. The proposed <br />split allows us to maintain the distinct character of our immediate area by maintaining a space <br />that has not been previously built out. <br />• Create and maintain strong neighborhoods: We believe the proposed split will help maintain <br />this neighborhood as a desirable place to live (we have chosen to retire here) by retaining the <br />historic physical character and property values — desirable neighborhoods make strong <br />neighborhoods with engaged, connected, and concerned residents. <br />• Keep Elk River a "safe" place: In addition to the benefits of a strong neighborhood as it relates to <br />overall community safety, our proposal will eliminate the addition of an additional driveway <br />entrance on Orono Road. <br />• Preserve and maintain the environment: It is the intent of both parties to maintain the "Garden <br />Lot" as a green space in the city with its inherent benefits to aesthetic character, microclimate, <br />wildlife, stormwater management, etc. The retention of a building lot, which we have already <br />stated that we would not sell for a new residence, does not contribute to this goal. <br />