09-11-2017 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Letter to City Council September 5, 2017 Page 2 of 3 with such minimal impact on trees, vegetation and wildlife, while still meeting all other setback and hardcover requirements. The dilapidated home has already been removed. The City Staff made numerous findings that are without basis in fact, contrary to law and contrary to decisions made by this Council in the past. The City Staff found that this variance is not consistent with the comprehensive plan, but the Resolution of the Council approving the Birkland variance (File No. 17-3912) found, "Single family lots with a residential use is consistent with the comprehensive plan." These proposed single family lots for residential use are also consistent with the comprehensive plan. The City Staff also erroneously found that this variance will alter the essential character of the locality, but the law in Minnesota does not allow such a conclusion. The Minnesota Supreme Court held, "We have noted that unlike use variances, area variances `do not change the character of the zoned district."' In re Stadsvold, 754 N.W.2d 323, 329 (Minn. 2008). This area variance as a matter of law does not change the character of this district. The City Staff also distorted the number of lots in the neighborhood that are under one acre by arbitrarily excluding smaller lots from its analysis (see Staff Recommendation, p. 3, ' 3(c)). The City Staff's analysis ignores, among others, five lots across North Arm Drive that range from 0.51 acres to 0.82 acres, and the two smallest lots on Dahl Road at 0.4 and 0.52 acres. A review of properties in the immediate area shows there are numerous properties under one acre (See Exhibit A). The City Staff refers to preservation of the lake and natural environment and overcrowding on the lake to justify denial of the variance. The Property is approximately 150 yards from the lake, and allowing one more home to be built on the almost 2 -acre Property will have no impact on the lake. In approving the Birkland variance, the Council permitted an additional 1.28 acre lake -shore lot despite there being insufficient width at the ordinary high water level and the 75 -foot setback as required by the Code to support a new lake lot. A variance that creates an additional lake lot where none existed will certainly affect the lake, natural environment and overcrowding more than one slightly substandard lot 150 yards from the lake. There are some factual differences between the Birkland variance and this requested variance, but there are no legal differences in these applications. The only difference seems to be that the Birkland variance was granted for mainly economic reasons, whereas here, the applicant is seeking to improve the neighborhood in which he lives by eliminating a home in disrepair and hopes to prevent the maintenance issues that have plagued this Property for years, while also dealing with the issues outlined in the Practical Difficulties Documentation Form and Supplement. Further, this variance will have no negative impact on the health, safety or traffic conditions. Despite the City Staff's opposition to this request, JHG Properties is seeking to do something entirely reasonable with the Property. Both homes on the proposed parcels will be compliant with all setbacks and hardcover requirements and one lot will conform to area requirements, while the other lot will still be a substantial 0.67 dry, buildable acres. Based on the reasonableness of this request and prior decisions of this Council, we believe a court would find that denial of this variance is arbitrary and capricious.