Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity/County Planning Board Minutes 09.03.2015 MINUTES LAUREL CITY-OUNTY PLANNING BOARD SEPTEMBER 3, 2015 10:00 AM COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Kathy Siegrist, Chairman Dan Koch, City Rep. Judy Goldsby,County Rep. Lee Richardson, County Rep. Greg Nelson, City Rep. OTHERS PRESENT: Monica Plecker,Contracted Planner Cheryll Lund,City Secretary CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Siegrist called the meeting to order at 10:00 am. ROLL CALL: Members present were Koch,Goldsby, Richardson, Nelson and Siegrist. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: A motion was made by Judy Goldsby and seconded by Dan Koch to approve the minutes of August 6, 2015 as written. Motion carried by a 5—0 vote. NEW BUSINESS: Public Hearing: Olson Variance. Chairman Siegrist opened the public hearing at 10:03 am and asked Contract Planner Monica to present her findings. STAFF REPORT: DESCRIPTION/LOCATION: Chris and Faith Olson have submitted an application for a variance requesting their property located at 208 East 11th Street be built upon without completing street improvements on 150' of East 11th Street which abuts the north edge of the property. This will require the alley to act as the primary access to the property. The property is currently zoned R7500. STAFF FINDINGS: 1. The property owners have submitted a variance asking for the lot to be built upon without completing the 150' of East 11th Street on the north edge of the property,therefore,the alley will act as the primary access for the property. 2. Typical improvements to an undeveloped street include water and sewer lines,curb,gutter and road improvements needed to serve the newly constructed building. 3. LMC 17.08.080 states an"alley means a public way which affords only secondary access to abutting property." 4. The alley located to the west of the Olson's property is 20', East 11th to the north is a 100' right of way and Colorado to the east is a 30' right of way. 5. If the alley were to serve as primary access,all international fire codes are met therefore, adequate fire and safety services can be provided. 1 6. Staff research concludes that the City owns an easement where East 11th is platted. 7. The property was annexed into the City in 2005. The adjacent public right of ways were not included in the annexation but should have been as the original resolution refers to MCA 7-2-42. This regulation requires the municipality to include the full width of any public streets or roads, including right of ways that are adjacent to the property being annexed. To correct the oversight, an amended resolution went before City Council April 17, 2012 to specify the rights of way that are to be annexed with the property. 8. The previous property owner signed a waiver of protest for the City to form a special improvement district. The waiver relates to the property even in the event of a sale. 9. The 2003 Bicycle-Pedestrian Plan identifies a proposed off-street trail which follows the portion of the Nutting Drain adjacent to the Olson's property. 10. The attached exhibits are copies of the variance application request; a letter from the Olson's which addresses the criteria by which a variance can be granted, an aerial of the property, and minutes from the 2012 City Council recommendation. 11. As per the requirements of LMC 17.72.070, a public hearing on the matter shall be held before the zoning commission before being heard by the Laurel City Council. As per B. of the section, public notice was published in the Laurel Outlook and adjacent property owners were notified by certified mail more than 15 days prior to the public hearing. VARIANCE HISTORY: 1. The Planning Board reviewed an application submitted by Sam Robertus in April of 2012. In May the Planning Board made a recommendation to the Council to approve the variance. The conditions included: a. The house will face north towards E. 11th Street in a normal fashion; b. The Variance only be approved with the 30'easement adjacent to Colorado Ave.; c. Make it known during the permitting process that the City intends to complete E. 11th in the future by creation of an SID which this lot will participate in. d. The variance will be good for 3 years from approval on unimproved property; e. The applicant shall apply for a building permit; f. Property shall be kept free of noxious weeds; g. The owner shall comply with Public Works Standards for connection and improvements to city water and sewer services; and h. All stormwater must be kept on site. 2. The Olson's have been required to reapply for the variance since the property was not improved upon within three years. 3. The Olson's letter attached to the variance application states they are mostly in favor of the conditions of approval previous identified by the City Council, however,they would like reconsideration of the condition which requires the house to face north towards East 11th Street in a normal fashion. The letter which accompanies the application states: "A variance was granted to the previous owners and the terms of this variance should be relatively the same. The only significant change requested is the positioning of the direction the residence faces. We propose that we have the option of facing the residence in a northwesterly position as seen on the attached drawing or to face the residence in the northerly direction as was required in the previous variance. At this time, as best we understand,the City of Laurel has no immediate intentions of developing that section of East 11th Street which runs adjacent to this property. By forcing a residence to face that section of undeveloped footage would be facing what is 2 currently being used as a dumping ground for someone's grass as well as a sizeable amount of tall grass/weeds." ZONING COMMISSION CONSIDERATIONS AND RECOMMENDATION: The Zoning Commission shall review and make determinations on the following chapters and sections of the Laurel Municipal Code(LMC): 1. According to Chapter 17.60.020 of the LMC the Zoning Commission may not recommend granting a land use variance: 1. Unless the denial would constitute an unnecessary and unjust invasion of the right of the property; 2. Unless the grant relates to a condition or situation special and peculiar to the applicant; 3. Unless the basis is something more than mere financial loss to the owner; 4. Unless the hardship was created by someone other than the owner; 5. Unless the variance would be within the spirit, intent, purpose, and general plan of this title; 6. Unless the variance would not affect adversely or injure or result in injustice to others; and 7. Ordinarily unless the applicant owned the property prior to the enactment of this title or amendment. 2. As per LMC 17.72.060 the Zoning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council to: 1. Deny the application for amendment to the official map; 2. Grant action on the application for a period not to exceed thirty days; 3. Delay action on the application for a period not to exceed thirty days; 4. Give reasons for the recommendation. STAFF SUGGESTED CONDITIONS: If the Planning Board recommends approval of the land use variance,the following conditions are suggested: 1. The variance shall be good for 3 years from approval on unimproved property. 2. The applicant shall apply for a building permit. 3. Property shall be kept free of noxious weeds. 4. The owner shall comply with Public Works Standards for connection and improvements to city water and sewer services. 5. All stormwater must be kept on site. 6. The house will face north towards E. 11th Street in a normal fashion. 7. The Variance only be approved with the 30'easement adjacent to Colorado Avenue* (*with the original variance in 2012 the easement was never filed so Colorado Avenue currently only has 30 feet. An easement would have to be obtained for an additional 30 feet of right of way) 8. Make it known during the permitting process that the City intends to complete E. 11th Street in the future by creation of an SID which this lot will participate in. 3 challenging because it does have a ditch that runs right through it. The question comes up as to if it's fair for one single property owner to bear the burden of having to construct the full 150 feet of street and right of way when it benefits many other properties in the area. Monica addressed the question of what opening up this alley will bring to the neighborhood and whether or not the shop they are proposing to be built on their property will be opened up for a commercial business. Residential 7500 zoning is exclusively for single family dwellings but as a secondary use it allows a shop for homeowners use but it does not allow any commercial businesses. The Homeowner can apply for a home occupation to allow a business but there are rules,such as no traffic or customers coming to the home,that have to be followed prior to the approval of a home occupation. Monica addressed Darrel Magnus's question about how Colorado Avenue will affect him in relation to his statement that there were survey error's done on Colorado. He is on the east side of Colorado and on the north side of E. 11th Street. He accesses his property off of E. 12th street.The 30 foot easement that is being talked about is on the west side of Colorado on the south side of E. 11th Street. There is an established 60-foot easement on Colorado above E. 11th Street. The 30 foot easement on the Olson's property will not impact Mr. Magnus's property. Monica talked about a proposed SID to build the road as there was a question as to whether or not it would affect Mr. Magus. In the future when the city decides to develop the road on E. 11th Street Mr. Magnus will likely have to participate in that SID which means he could be affected in the future. While Mr. Magnus does not have a waiver on file to protest his participation in an SID the City Council does have tools available to force the creation of the SID and petition for the creation of a SID. By utilizing an avenue like an SID it allows proportional sharing in the cost of those street improvements that all of the property owners will use. Monica stated that as far as the"survey errors" that Mr. Magnus mentioned this variance will not fix any of the alleged errors and it has no bearing on this particular lot and access. Any survey errors should be investigated outside this request. Monica stated that a question has been raised as to whether the house placed on the property will be a manufactured home or a stick built home. The City of Laurel has zoning regulations that clearly do not allow manufactured homes to be placed on a lot zoned R7500. Manufactured homes are only allowed in Residential Manufactured Home zones. However, modular homes are allowed in R7500 zones because they are built to the same standards as a stick built home. Modular homes have to be placed on a permanent foundation and inspected by the building official. Modular homes and Manufactured homes are built to two completely different building codes. Monica mentioned that the building official Gary Colley could answer any questions regarding the difference between Manufactured Homes and Modular Homes but stated once again that Modular Homes meet stick built building codes and Manufactured Homes do not. Monica stated that there were comments and concerns related to the letter submitted by the Olson's citing tall grass and weeds as a reason for needing to reposition the home. Monica stated that in the staff suggested conditions staff did suggest maintaining the lot face northerly in an orderly fashion. This is also substantiated by the fact that weeds and tall grass can be maintained. If weeds and grass are not being maintained on E. 11th Street then the City can talk with Public Works about keeping it 6 maintained. The burden should not be on the Olson's to maintain that right of way; it is the job of the City Code Enforcement official. Monica addressed the comment on what this variance could do to future development. Monica stated that this variance is only being requested for this one piece of property and it does not open it up for future lots. Monica suggested that the Planning Board could add another condition which states the variance shall only apply to the lot as legally described and shall not apply to any subsequent lots. Monica stated that as far as building a garage and a shop; code does allow detached garages and shops as long as the residence is built first. No commercial businesses are allowed within this Residential zone so a business cannot be run out of the proposed shop,as was questioned by an opponent. Chairman Siegrist asked the board if the all of their and the audiences' questions were answered. The board agreed the questions were satisfactorily answered. Chairman Siegrist closed the public hearing at 10:50 am. Chairman Siegrist reminded the board that this variance is strictly on an access issue. She went on to say she feels strongly that an additional condition of approval which states the variance shall only apply to the lot as legally described and not apply to any subsequent lots should be added as condition#9. Dan Koch asked if the lot is large enough to subdivide. Monica stated that this lot is a certificate of survey and it could be subdivided but legal access and physical access is required for each lot which she doesn't think would be feasible until both E. 11th Street and/or Colorado Avenue are developed and some sort of internal access is provided. A motion was made by Judy Goldsby and seconded by Greg Nelson to recommend approval of the variance for 208 E. 11th Street with 7 criteria of LMC 17.60.020 having been met, along with the 8 staff conditions of approval below as presented with the addition of condition#9 that the variance shall only apply to the lot as legally described and not to any subsequent lots: 1. The variance shall be good for 3 years from approval on unimproved property. 2. The applicant shall apply for a building permit. 3. Property shall be kept free of noxious weeds. 4. The owner shall comply with Public Works Standards for connection and improvements to city water and sewer services. 5. All stormwater must be kept on site. 6. The house will face north towards E. 11th Street in a normal fashion. 7. The Variance only be approved with the 30' easement adjacent to Colorado Avenue* (*with the original variance in 2012 the easement was never filed so Colorado Avenue currently only has 30 feet. An easement would have to be obtained for an additional 30 feet of right of way) 8. Make it known during the permitting process that the City intends to complete E. 11th Street in the future by creation of an SID which this lot will participate in. 9. The variance shall only apply to the lot as legally described and not to any subsequent lots. Lee Richardson asked why the house cannot be faced at a northwesterly angle as there are several homes in the area that are placed at an angle. 7 Monica stated that the condition to face the house in an orderly, normal fashion is because that area is divided up into traditional city blocks. All of the city blocks in Laurel traditionally have square lots with houses that face directly to the street. In some of the newer subdivisions there are some houses sitting at an angle but in her opinion requiring the house to face north does not seem like a hardship. However if the board wanted to provide some flexibility in facing the garage towards the alley they could do so. But she feels that the house is better suited to face north. Chairman Siegrist stated that condition#6 in the motion states the house will face north. Judy Goldsby pointed out that in the Olson's letter they stated they would be fine if the house had to face north. At this time Chairman Siegrist asked for board discussion on the 7 criteria required by LMC 17.60.020. The Olson's addressed the 7 criteria in their letter of application for the variance. LMC 17.60.020: #1. Unless the denial would constitute an unnecessary and unjust invasion of the right of the property; Olson's statement: #1. "Since development of this property is dependent on access to the property and currently the only access to the property is via the alley,the alley will be the primary access until such a time when the 150'of E. 11th Street,which abuts the northern edge of this property, is developed. Without alley access,we would be unable to make this property our residence complete with housing and other developments to this property to make it appealing to the City of Laurel." Chairman Siegrist thinks the Olson's have a point because their property is being taxed as city property without any benefit of being used as a city residential property. Board members Nelson, Richardson, Goldsby and Koch agreed with Chairman Siegrist'statement. LMC 17.60.020: #2. Unless the grant relates to a condition or situation special and peculiar to the applicant; Olson's statement: #2. "Due to the undeveloped section of E. 11th Street on the northern edge of the property identified as 208 E. 11th Street,alley access is the only means of access to the property. The previous variance recognized this as a special situation to this property." Greg Nelson stated he remembers when the board started talking about this piece of property. Everyone agreed that by allowing the alley access this piece of property would be developable and the neighborhood could proceed as it should. So even though this may be putting the cart before the horse this is the step that needs to be taken to get the neighborhood headed in the right direction. Chairman Siegrist added that the fact that the property owners are granting a 30 foot easement is significant. Judy Goldsby agreed with both Nelson and Siegrist' statements. 8 , LMC 17.60.020: #3. Unless the basis is something more than mere financial loss to the owner; Olson's statement: #3. "We wish to have this property become our residence and establish our living quarters,attached garage and detached garage/shop at this location. We are planning on beautifying this lot by establishing residence and making various improvements to give all surrounding residences a positive appearance of this location. The City of Laurel will benefit by having a permanent residence as the lot has been primarily grass and weeds for many years." Board members Goldsby, Nelson, Koch and Siegrist agree with the Olson's statement that this would be a benefit to the City of Laurel as it will no longer be used as a dumping ground for weeds and grass. LMC 17.60.020: #4. Unless the hardship was created by someone other than the owner; Olson's statement: #4. "Due to the undeveloped section of E. 11th Street on the northern edge of the property identified as 208 E. 11th Street, alley access is the only means of access to the property. We understand that this may be completed in the future but at the time of this request,the only access remains the alley access." Monica stated that this lot was created by a Certificate of Survey. It is a tract of record which makes it unlike other subdivisions. Currently on any new subdivisions the City can require means of off-site improvements, if they are warranted. This lot, because of the way it was created through a certificate of survey, did not have to go through such a process and given the fact that it was legally created with the fact that it was going to get access through a platted street as opposed to a constructed street is something that happened prior to the Olson's ownership of the property. Any re-creation through the lot whether it is further divided will have to go through the full subdivision review process and off-site requirements would come into play as far as requiring those subsequent lots to build out. This is not anything new as this property has been created this way for several years. Judy Goldsby stated that an opponent made the statement that the alley is used by teenagers and others and yet also stated that it was a dead-end. Monica stated that it is not a dead end.You can access the alley through E. Maryland Land up the alley and take a right into the Olson's property. You can also go down E. 11th and access their property. Judy Goldsby stated that this is a pre-existing condition not caused by the Olson's. Members Koch, Richardson, Nelson and Siegrist agreed with Judy Goldsby's statement. LMC 17.60.020: #5. Unless the variance would be within the spirit, intent, purpose, and general plan of this title; Olson's statement: #5. "It is our intent to make this property pleasing not only to the City of Laurel but to the surrounding residences. By positively developing this property, it will increase surrounding property values and effectively make this a win-win situation for all parties involved." 9 Chairman Siegrist stated she agrees with the statement because she feels the board was hoping that this lot would be built on by granting the variance in 2012. Monica added that because this lot is zoned for a residential single family it was the hope of the board that this would become a residential home. Granting the variance wouldn't detract from what the city already identified as the best use for the property. Judy Goldsby agreed as did Koch, Richardson, Nelson and Siegrist. LMC 17.60.020: #6. Unless the variance would not affect adversely or injure or result in injustice to others; and Olson's statement: #6. This variance request will not adversely affect anyone involved. Currently the alley access is being used for all residences west of the alley as those garages require alley access to get to them. This will not increase traffic or have any effect on safety/emergency devices such as fire or ambulance vehicles. We will assist in clearing snow as it is important to us to have clear access for emergency vehicles. Chairman Siegrist stated she does not think that granting one access would adversely impact anyone. Greg Nelson thinks it could be helpful to have one more residence monitoring the activities of the teenage drivers using the alley. Chairman Siegrist stated that the problems brought up on this proposed variance were deemed not relevant to the approval of the request. Monica stated that since 2012 when this variance was originally approved by the city council things have not significantly changed. The condominiums are still there,George Metzger's property is still there and the ditch is still uncovered. There has been no change in the environmental features. There are no new structures that have been built or more traffic than was currently was there in 2012. Monica went on to say that as a general statement everyone needs to understand the whole idea of a right of way as the public's use of the space. While there are safety concerns related with public use that will come up within the right of way there are ways and means of dealing with those issues through either the Police department for traffic enforcement or the Public Works department for weed and grass complaints. But it is clear that nothing has changed with this property and its situation since the original variance was approved in 2012. Judy Goldsby stated that as the property was in 2012 and what it is now,the condo property owners use the alley for access. The addition of one more residential property accessing the alley is the only change. Everything else has stayed the same since 2012. A discussion was held on whether or not an SID to construct E. 11th Street is warranted at this time. In 2012 the City Council passed Resolution No. R12-36 with the condition#3 that states"Make it known during the permitting process that the City intends to complete E. 11th Street in the future by creating an SID which this lot will participate in." 10 J As far as functionality goes Monica feels that putting in 150' of E. 11th Street has some obstacles to overcome prior to its construction. The ditch needs to be connected over into Iron Horse Subdivision, and more right-of-way needs to be acquired for Colorado Avenue and E. 11th Street prior to being able to construct E. 11th Street. Lee Richardson stated it would be extremely costly for the Olson's to put in 150' of street. Greg Nelson asked if the ditch would be filled in or covered. Monica stated that culverts will be put in but the ditch will remain intact and its flow won't be obstructed. Board members Koch, Goldsby, Richardson, Nelson and Siegrist agreed the construction of E. 11th Street should not be required at this time. All board members agreed that criteria#6. LMC 17.60.020: #7. Ordinarily unless the applicant owned the property prior to the enactment of this title or amendment. Olson's statement: #7. We did not own the property prior to the enactment of this title or amendment(Prior code 17.08.015). Board members Koch, Goldsby, Richardson, Nelson and Siegrist agree with the Olson's statement regarding criteria#7. The Board agreed that all seven (7) criteria have been satisfactorily met. At this time the motion to recommend approval of the variance with the 9 staff conditions was voted on and passed by a vote of 5—0. Monica told the audience that there will be a second public hearing held before the City Council on this variance request. All neighboring property owners who received a notice for this public hearing will receive another notice regarding the date and time of the second public hearing. OLD BUSINESS: Discussion on Sign Code. Monica reminded the board that at the last meeting it was decided to do just a few language changes to the Sign Code and have the final draft to review at this meeting and then make a recommendation to go ahead with a public hearing at the October meeting. After some thought it was decided that more discussion needs to be done on the sign code. Monica suggested that instead of using the blanket approach the board needs to re-evaluate how they look at the sign code. Her idea is to put the code into an easily readable table like what has been done with the zoning uses, lot coverage, maximum height, etc. Monica went on to say that by separating each type of sign out you could and add maximum height,size and how many signs can go in which zone. 11 • Monica also suggested the table could identify areas where certain types of signs will work or won't work. They could talk about signs best suited for the downtown area, 1st Avenue (north and south ends) and SE 4th Street and E. Railroad Street. This will be put on the agenda for the October 1, 2015 meeting as a discussion item. MISCELLANEOUS: There will be an October 1, 2015 meeting. The Sign Code will be discussed. The City has hired Joe Holzwarth as the new City Planner. He starts on September 8th. PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS: There was no public comment. A motion was made by Judy Goldsby and seconded by Dan Koch to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 11:50 am. Respectfully submitted, Cheryl Lund,Secretary 12 ti I ,. t. : L Laurel Variance Request Application This application covers appeals from decisions of the Planning Department (and sometimes other officials) and for requests for variances concerning setbacks, structures, heights, lot coverage, etc. The undersigned owner or agent of the owner of the following described property requests a variance to the Zoning Ordinances of the City of Laurel as outlined by the laws of the State of Montana. 04 1. Name of property owner: i,___,H R L 3 r ' `FA' i 'j-4 . i L a l 2. Name of Applicant if different from above: 3. Phone number of Applicant: 411 Dec- 6-,6?-,...1.117q 4. Street address and general location: (---qORF. / I c� J1=-f t,1 L T 1 „5-90`i7 qy 5. Legal description of the property: ' '9 -7--0,7,5} 01 Lt' , C_ s`,q' '3 P, Ac,a 14_4 , /4--f4-ffl ,Jj1R 6. Current Zoning: x .;34 n?t,r---/4..1 '1ST `" Z RS-1 ' 7. Provide a copy of covenants or deed restrictions on property. I understand that the filing fee accompanying this application is not refundable, that it pays part of the cost of process, and that the fee does not constitute a payment for a variance. I also understand I or my agent must appear at the hearing of this request before the Planning Board and all of the information presented by me is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. - y r l signature of Applicant: Lam. -) 1? 1 e:t- -7-- ' , x,� . • To, IT 1'L Date of Submittal: 11 f. 43- i--) , o-"j=- , 7 , 9 c- 15- v- .44-g/-4,c2.--- DATE: JULY 28, 2015 TO: CITY-COUNTY PLANNING BOARD CITY OF LAUREL LAUREL MT 59044 FROM: CHRIS M & FAITH M OLSON 12705 MEDICINE MAN TRAIL MOLT MT 59057 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE PROPERTY LOCATION: 208 E 11TH STREET LAUREL MT 59044 We, Chris M. and Faith M. Olson, current owners of property located at 208 E. 11th Street, Laurel MT, also known as Mountain View hereby submit a request for a variance on said property. A variance was granted to the previous owners and terms of this variance should be relatively the same. The only significant change requested is the positioning of the direction the residence faces. We propose that we have the option of either facing the residence in a northwesterly position as seen on the attached drawing or to face the residence in the northerly direction as was required in the previous variance. At this time, as best we understand, the City of Laurel has no immediate intentions of developing that section of East 11th Street which runs adjacent to this property. By forcing a residence to face that section of undeveloped footage would be facing what is currently being used as a dumping ground for someone's grass as well as a sizeable amount of tall grass/weeds. At the time of requesting this variance, we have researched Yellowstone County records extensively and have found no recorded easements on file. Having said this, we as owners of this property, have no objections to the terms of the previous variance with the exception of the positioning of the residence. We understand that all 7 items are required to be addressed concerning Chapter 17.60.020 of the zoning requirements for the City of Laurel which is defined as: Land use variances issuance and denial---Determination procedure. We will address each one separately: 1. Since development of this property is dependent on access to the property and currently the only access to the property is via the alley, the alley will be the primary access until such a time when the 150' of East 11th Street, which abuts the northern edge of this property, is developed. Without this alley access, we would be unable to make this property our residence complete with housing and other developments to this property to make it appealing to the City of Laurel. 2. Due to the undeveloped section of East 11th Street on the northern edge of the property identified as 208 E 11th Street, alley access is the only means of access to the property. The previous variance recognized this as a special situation to this property. 3. We wish to have this property become our residence and establish our living quarters, attached garage and detached garage/shop at this location. We are planning on beautifying this lot by establishing residence and making various improvements to give all surrounding residences a positive appearance of this location. The City of Laurel will benefit by having a permanent residence as the lot has been primarily grass and weeds for many years. 4. Due to the undeveloped section of East 11th Street on the northern edge of the property, identified as 208 E 11th Street, alley access is the only means of access to the property. We understand that this may be completed in the future but at the time of this request, the only access remains the alley access. 5. It is our intent to make this property pleasing not only to the City of Laurel but to the surrounding residences. By positively developing this property, it will increase surrounding property values and effectively make this a win- win situation for all parties involved. 6. This variance request will not adversely affect anyone involved. Currently the alley access is being used for all residences west of the alley as those garages require alley access to get to them. This will not increase traffic or have any effect on safety/emergency devices such as fire or ambulance vehicles. We will assist in clearing snow as it is important to us to have clear access for emergency vehicles. 7. We did not own the property prior to the enactment of this title or amendment. (Prior code 17.08.015) Thanks in advance for your consideration in granting this variance. We look forward to becoming residents of Laurel and in serving the community of Laurel in a very positive manner. Sincerely, Faith Chris M. & Faith M. Olson Page 1 of 1 ........, I._ I— i kvAt.4 . 4- .. o- ---- t,,, E.:'........ r --1 ./ L.' l . .., --- , f I ... 1 - I , ] —I I 1 .. 1 I : f i :_.. // 1 1, i : . aro 4. I : > i ri H LI -, t 11111 , _____. 1 i . , 11 y,t , , .4 HI i I it.,_1 f '1.--1 l : I : . . I onoud,.108 770 I amude 45 682 Mat,Man,X.Y 676876 476 159418 689 Legend Results Number of features 44 Parcels Roads Structures PLSS FIRE RSIDs ZONE School Elections Levy Traffic Counts Census Parks Water Sources TAX ID Tax Geocode Owner r Detail Address Legal r i Export to CSV 1 B01797 03082109117010000 OLSEN,CONNIE H Tax 115 E MARYLAND LN \M-IITFIELD SUBD SO9 TO2 S,R24 E BLOi Detail 9A,AMND LT 9-10 11 870SC)FT Tax VVHITFIELD SUBD SO9 TO2 S B01798 03082109117020000 ERB,CHRISTOPHER V 1006 MONTANA AVE Detail 10A &LT 11 12770 SO FT(07)R24E,BLOI VVHEATGRASS S S2 S B01800M 030821091 17047000 VVHEATGRASS TOWNHOMES MONTANA AVE TOVVNHOME09,.T0 ,. ---. ) r (-I / i S http://www.co.yellowstone.mt.gov/mapping/webgis.asp 7/13/2015 t k ., ) . Z., . , y I . f 'a's�$ i » E 4 m.as E' `.r x. ! Y$ •- :Y _ *mk -` ' .„ h ,, 4 w ss .„ , } a. ,.. s I 4 x .ww t / ; Mt _� 4j 0 L . LAUREL CITY-COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Laurel City Council FROM: Monica Plecker, Contract Planner RE: 208 East 11th Street HEARING DATE: September 3, 2015 DESCRIPTION/LOCATION: Chris and Faith Olson have submitted an application for a variance requesting their property located at 208 East 11th street be built upon without completing street improvements on 150'of East 11th Street which abuts the north edge of the property. This will require the alley to act as the primary access to the property. LMC 17.08.080 states that alleys are secondary access. The property is currently zoned R7500. STAFF FINDINGS: 1. The property owners has submitted a variance asking for the lot to be built upon without completing the 150' of East 11th Street on the north edge of the property, therefore, the alley will act as the primary access for the property. 2. Typical improvements to an undeveloped street include water and sewer lines, curb, gutter and road improvements needed to serve the newly constructed building. 3. LMC 17.08.080 states an "alley means a public way which affords only secondary access to abutting property." 4. The alley located to the west of the Olson's property is 20', East 11th to the north is a 100' right of way and Colorado to the east is a 30' right of way. 5. If the alley were to serve as primary access, all international fire codes are met therefore, adequate fire and safety services can be provided. 6. Staff research concludes that the City owns an easement where East 11th is platted. 7. The property was annexed into the City in 2005. The adjacent public right-of-ways were not included in the annexation but should have been as the original resolution refers to MCA 7-2-42. This regulation requires the municipality to include the full width of any public streets or roads, including rights-of-way that are adjacent to the property being annexed. To correct the oversight, an amended resolution went before City Council April 17, 2012 to specify the rights-of-way that are to be annexed with the property. 8. The previous property owner signed a waiver of protest for the City to form a special improvement district. The waiver relates to the property even in the event of a sale. 9. The 2003 Bicycle-Pedestrian Plan identifies a proposed off-street trail which follows the portion of the Nutting Drain adjacent to the Olson's property. 10.The attached exhibits are copies of the variance application request, a letter from the Olson's which addresses the criteria by which a variance can be granted, an aerial of the property, and minutes from the 2012 City Council Recommendation. 11. As per the requirements of LMC 17.72.070, a public hearing on the matter shall be held before the zoning commission before being heard by the Laurel City Council. As per B. of the section, public notice was published in the Laurel Outlook and adjacent property owners were notified by certified mail more than 15 days prior to the public hearing. Variance History 1. The Planning Board reviewed an application submitted by Sam Robertus in April of 2012. In May the Planning Board made a recommendation to the Council to approve the variance.The conditions included: a. The house will face north towards E. 11th Street in a normal fashion; b. The Variance only be approved with the 30' easement adjacent to Colorado Ave.; c. Make it known during the permitting process that they City intends to complete E. 11th in the future by creation of an SID which this lot will participate in. d. The variance shall be good for 3 years from approval on unimproved property. e. The applicant shall apply for a building permit. f. Property shall be kept free of noxious weeds. g. The owner shall comply with Public Works Standards for connection and improvements to city water and sewer services. h. All stormwater must be kept on site. 2. The Olson's have been required to reapply for the variance since the property was not improved upon within three years. 3. The Olson's letter attached to the variance application states they are mostly in favor of the conditions of approval previous identified by the City Council, however, they would like reconsideration of the condition which requires the house to face north towards East 11th Street in a normal fashion. The letter which accompanies the application states: "A variance was granted to the previous owners and the terms of this variance should be relatively the same. The only significant change requested is the positioning of the direction the residence faces. We propose that we have the option of with facing the residence in a northwesterly position as seen on the attached drawing or to face the residence in the northerly direction as was required in the previous variance. At this time, as best we understand, the City of Laurel has no immediate intentions of development that section of East 11th Street which runs adjacent to the this property. By forcing a residence to face that section of undeveloped footage would be facing what is currently being used as a dumping ground for someone's grass as well as a sizeable amount of tall grass/weeds." ZONING COMMISSION CONSIDERATIONS AND RECOMMENDATION: The Zoning Commission shall review and make determinations on the following chapters and sections of the Laurel Municipal Code (LMC): 1. According to Chapter 17.60.020 of the LMC the Zoning Commission may not recommend granting a land use variance: 1. Unless the denial would constitute an unnecessary and unjust invasion of the right of property; 2. Unless the grant relates to a condition or situation special and peculiar to the applicant; 3. Unless the basis is something more than mere financial loss to the owner; 4. Unless the hardship was created by someone other than the owner; 5. Unless the variance would be within the spirit, intent, purpose, and general plan of this title; 6. Unless the variance would not affect adversely or injure or result in injustice to others; and 7. Ordinarily unless the applicant owned the property prior to the enactment of this title or amendment. 2. As per LMC 17.72.060 the Zoning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council to: 1. Deny the application for amendment to the official map; 2. Grant action on the application for a period not to exceed thirty days; 3. Delay action on the application for a period not to exceed thirty days; 4. Give reasons for the recommendation. STAFF SUGGESTED CONDITIONS: If the Planning Board recommends approval of the land use variance, the following conditions are suggested: 1. The variance shall be good for 3 years from approval on unimproved property. 2. The applicant shall apply for a building permit. 3. Property shall be kept free of noxious weeds. 4. The owner shall comply with Public Works Standards for connection and improvements to city water and sewer services. 5. All stormwater must be kept on site. 6. The house will face north towards E. 11th Street in a normal fashion; 7. The Variance only be approved with the 30' easement adjacent to Colorado Ave.; 8. Make it known during the permitting process that they City intends to complete E. 11th in the future by creation of an SID which this lot will participate in.