03-11-2008 BA MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS HELD AT ELK RIVER CITY HALL TUESDAY, MARCH I I, 2008 Members Present: Chair Scott, Commissioners Anderson, ,Austad, Lemke, Staul and Westberg Members Absent: Commissioner Westgaard Staff Present: Planning Manager Jeremy Barnhart, Senior Planner Sheila Cartney, Planner Chris Leeseberg, Recording Secretary Debbie Huebner Call Meeting To Order Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the meeting of the Elk River Board of Adjustments was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Chair Scott 2. Consider Board of Adjustments Agenda MOVED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER AUSTAD TO APPROVE THE MARCH 11, 2008 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 3.1. Request by Thomas Bamford for a Variance to the Maximum Allowable Accessory Structure Standards. Case no. V 08-03 -Public Hearin Staff report presented by Mr. Leeseberg. He provided background information regarding the subject property which was the result of a parcel being subdivided into the 9.83 acre parcels. Mr. Bamford inquired how many square feet of accessory structure he was allowed to build on 10 acres. Since the property is actually less than 10 acres, a variance is required in order to construct the buildings Mr. Bamford has purchased materials for (6,100 square feet). Staff feels that the request does not meet #1 and #4 of the standards for granting variance and recommends denial. Chair Scott opened the public hearing. Tom Bamford, 22600 Meadowvale, applicant -Stated that he was hoping the city would consider the parcel as 10 acres. Commissioner Anderson asked when the materials were purchased. Mr. Bamford stated that he purchased the materials after inquiring from staff what the maximum allowed square footage was fora 10-acre parcel. Commissioner Austad stated that he could understand the applicant was not aware of the difference it made being the property was slightly less than 10 acres, but that he concurred with staff that the request did not meet #1 and #4 of the findings. He stated the applicant still has the opportunity to appeal the Board of Adjustments' decision at the City Council meeting.