11-10-2009 Council Work Session Packet

Home Browse Search

1245 Arbor Tax Forfeiture November 4,2009 Page 2 May 2009 revisions to the State Statutes re: nonconformities in the Shoreland suggest that these parcels may have to be considered as two separate building sites (Attachment E). However, as individual parcels each has severe zoning limitations, in part due to their location in the Shoreland District. Each would require lot area and setback variances, and potentially variances for hardcover (250-500' zone allows 30% HC, x 14,000 s.f. = 4,200 sf allowed Hardcover) and structural coverage (14,000 sf x 15% = 2100 s.f. allowed Structural Coverage). The Statutes limit hardcover to 25%, more restrictive than the City ordinance, which yields about 3,500 sf. This is likely adequate to construct a small home & garage of 2000 sf footprint with 1500 sf far driveways, sidewalks, decks, etc.; but nothing more than this modest size home. (see Attachment F) I will have Soren review the Statutes and advise as to whether we are required by law to grant the area, width and setback variances needed to construct homes on each parcel. I do not believe we would be obligated to approve lot coverage or hardcover variances. The question at this time is whether we should release this property to the County with a stipulation that it be sold as a single 0.64 acre building site; or as two 0.32 acre building sites; or as unbuildable land only available for purchase by an adjacent owner. Some factors to consider: ► It is not adjacent to a park, but is surrounded by homes, and would not be conducive to retain for City parkland or open space. ► It is not topographically situated so as to be useful for stormwater management, and does not contain any wetlands or other features we would specifically want to preserve. ► While the property had just one house on it in the past, placing two homes on it would not be totally out of character with the neighborhood, as long as those homes are not overbuilt for the site. ► But, the City has held firm on not allowing the Crystal Bay neighborhood to get denser, which is why we never changed the 2-acre zoning to match the typical 1/2-acre lot sizes in the neighborhood. ► This would be a neighborhood where we might expect to be able to create some affordable housing; however, the assessed land value for virtually identically shaped/sized lots across the street is $160,000 for just the 100x 140' lot. By the time a home is constructed on one of these parcels, the assessed land & building value would likely be in the high $200s or more. The current "affordability" level is in the low $200s. ► Neighborhood reaction to allowing both parcels to be built on would likely be negative. ► Another option to consider is to allow the parcels for sale only to an adjacent owner. There are homes on each of the two adjacent lots to the north, each of which is about 0.24 acres in area. These adjacent owners might be interested in acquiring the parcels as additional land. Council is asked to discuss the issue and provide as much direction to staff as possible. We must respond to Hennepin County on this by December 7.