BOONE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT

BOONE COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER

801 E. WALNUT ST., COLUMBIA, MO.

Thursday, March 27, 2003

 

 

Chairperson Rootes called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Boone County Commission Chambers having a quorum present.

 

Chairperson Rootes read the procedural statement stating that this Board is appointed by the Boone County Commission to consider specific application of the zoning and subdivision regulations.The Board is empowered to enter rulings that may give relief to a property owner from the specific application of the Zoning and Subdivision regulations. Generally, variances can only be granted in situations where by reason of shape, topography or other extraordinary or exceptional situation or condition of a specific ordinance would result in peculiar and exceptional difficulties to or exceptional and demonstrable undue hardship upon the owner of the property as an unreasonable deprivation of use as relating to the property.A variance from the strict application of this ordinance can be granted provided the relief requested will not substantially impair the intent, purpose and integrity of the zoning regulations.

 

Notice of this meeting has been published in accordance with our by-laws for the proper number of days.All decisions of the Board are based on the zoning or subdivision regulations for Boone County, Missouri, and they are hereby made a part of the record of this meeting.

 

This Board is comprised of five members, with three members constituting a quorum.An applicant must receive at least three votes in order to receive the relief that they have requested from the Board.Any applicant appearing before this Board has the right to be heard by all five members.At times that all five members are not present, the applicant, and only the applicant, may choose to wait until such time as all five members are present to hear their request.

Roll call was taken:

 

Present:††††††††† Linda Rootes, Chairperson

Tom Trabue

Matthew Thomas

††††††††††††††††††††††† Cindy Bowne

 

Absent:†††††††††††† Gregory Bier

 

†††††††††††††††††††††††

 

Also present:†††† Bill Florea, Staff

††††††††††††††††††††††† Paula Evans, Secretary†††††††††††††

†††††††††††††††††††††††

 

Minutes of the February 27, 2003 meeting were approved no corrections.

 

†††††††††††

 

 

REQUEST

 

 

Case Number 2003-003

1.       Request by Wayne Hilgedick to construct an agricultural building (grain bin) in the designated floodplain located at 1500 E Hartsburg Bottom Rd., Hartsburg (Floodplain Regulations Article 4. A. 6.).

 

Planner Bill Florea gave the staff report stating that this property is zoned A-1.The adjacent property is also zoned A-1. There is a residence and other agricultural structures on this site. The requested variance is to permit to build a grain bin on the site, which is located within the designated floodway. The original zoning for this tract is A-1. There have been no other requests submitted on behalf of this site.A variance from the floodplain regulations to allow construction of a 3600 square foot warehouse structure was granted in May of 2001. The requested variance is from the zoning regulations, Flood Plain Management Ordinance, Article 4, A.6. In formulating its decision the Board must consider the criteria contained in article 5, sections D, E, and F of the Boone County Flood Plain regulations.Staff notified 8 property owners.

 

Present:Terry Hilgedick, 5220 E. Dee Woods Road, Ashland.

Mr. Hilgedick stated that his family are farmers in the Hartsburg river bottom and have been for a long time.The base of operations is located at that address and has been the base of operations for 68 years. All the applicants are requesting is to add some grain storage and the applicants will comply with the appropriate regulations. There has been an engineering survey done; staff probably has that survey.It was prepared by Joe Gibbs, an engineer, in terms of the FEMA regulations.

 

Open to public hearing.

 

No one spoke in favor of or in opposition to the request.

 

Closed to public hearing.

 

Member Trabue stated that the new grain bin is going to be a 48 foot diameter.Member Trabue asked what the height was on that building.

 

Mr. Hilgedick stated that it would be 6 rings to the eave of the roof so that would be about 21-feet then the peak would be another 6 or 8 feet.

 

Member Trabue asked what structures were there before.

 

Mr. Hilgedick stated that information is on the engineering report that was submitted.

 

Member Trabue stated that it was a little unclear.There was one grain bin and one 30 by 30 structures or were there two other structures there.

 

Mr. Hilgedick stated that there were two other buildings there within 100 to 200 feet of the site.

 

Chairperson Rootes read the following:

 

In passing upon such applications for variances, the Zoning Board of Adjustment shall consider all technical data and evaluations, all relevant factors, standards specified in other sections of this ordinance, and the following criteria:

 

The Board members addressed each of the following items.

 

1.The danger to life and property due to flood damage;

 

Member Trabue stated that he didnít believe there was any concern about this.

 

2.The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands to the injury of others;

 

Member Trabue asked the applicant how close to the road the new bin would be located.

 

Mr. Hilgedick stated about 250-feet from the County Road. It would be built on an earth and mound as described by the engineer.

 

Member Trabue stated that he is not concerned about this item.

 

3.The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owner;

 

Member Trabue stated that he didnít think that was a necessary concern. There are no occupants.If it is constructed properly there is not much susceptibility to flood damage with it being elevated unless there was some erosion.

 

Mr. Hilgedick stated that it would be built to the 100-year flood mark as described by the engineer.The contents would be grain.

 

Chairperson Rootes stated that she assumes the applicants family is aware of the situation.

 

Mr. Hilgedick stated that the applicants have been through 8 or 10 floods and are aware of the risk.

 

Member Bowne asked how many bushels this bin will be.

 

Mr. Hilgedick stated it would be 40,000.

 

Member Bowne asked if the applicants carry insurance on that.

 

Mr. Hilgedick stated that the grain contents would be covered by crop insurance.

 

4.The importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the community;

 

Member Trabue stated that this area is a farming community and these types of agricultural structures are extremely beneficial to the Hartsburg Community. That requirement is satisfied.

 

5.The necessity to the facility of a waterfront location, where applicable;

 

Member Trabue stated he didnít that was applicable except that the building is in the vicinity of where it is needed for the farming operation.

 

6.The availability of alternative locations, not subject to flood damage, for the proposed use;

 

Member Bowne stated that she believed the entire farm is in the flood plain.

 

Mr. Hilgedick stated that is correct.Due to convenience; if you away from the base of operations you can run in to theft or vandalism.

 

Member Trabue stated that he believes the applicants satisfy the criteria.

 

7.The compatibility of the proposed use with existing and anticipated development;

 

Member Trabue stated that this is satisfied as well.

 

Mr. Hilgedick stated that the applicants have been farming a long time and will continue to do so.

 

8.The relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan and floodplain management program for that area;

 

Member Bowne stated that this doesnít change the activities; this area has been agriculture for many years.

 

9.The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles;

 

Member Trabue stated that is not applicable.

 

Mr. Hilgedick stated that he doesnít know why any emergency vehicles would come to the area.

 

10.The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise and sediment transport of the flood waters, if applicable, expected at the site; and,

 

Member Trabue stated that based on the engineering report, this is such a minor area compared to the entire flood plain.This building would not have any impacts on the floods in the area.

 

Mr. Hilgedick stated that is the same conclusion the engineer came to.

 

11.The costs of providing governmental services during and after flood conditions, including maintenance and repair of public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems; streets; and bridges.

 

Member Bowne stated that this does not apply to a grain bin.

 

Member Trabue stated that since it was established that there wonít be any impact on the road and that is the only government facility there.

 

SECTION E. CONDITIONS FOR APPROVING FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT VARIANCES

 

1.Generally, variances may be issued for new construction and substantial-improvements to be erected on a lot of one-half acre or less in size contiguous to and surrounded by lots with existing structures constructed below the base flood level, providing items 2 through 6 below have been fully considered.As the lot size increases beyond the one-half acre, the technical justification required for issuing the variance increases.

 

Chairperson Rootes stated that this does not apply.

 

2.Variances may be issued for the reconstruction, rehabilitation, or restoration of structures listed on the National Register of Historic Places, the State Inventory of Historic Places, or local inventory of historic places upon determination.

 

Mr. Florea stated this item does not apply.

 

3.Variances shall not be issued within any designated floodway if any significant increase in flood discharge would result.

 

Member Trabue stated that he reviewed the engineering report and his conclusions.Member Trabue stated that the reason he asked about the types of structures that were there before to figure out the square footage that was already built above the flood plain in that area and the new square footage is similar or less.Member Trabue stated that he is satisfied by the engineers report.

 

4.Variances shall only be issued upon a determination that the variance is the minimum necessary, considering the flood hazard, to afford relief.

 

Member Trabue stated that he believes that criteria is satisfied.

 

5.Variances shall only be issued upon (a) a showing of good and sufficient cause, (b) a determination that failure to grant the variance would result in exceptional hardship to the applicant, and (c) a determination that the granting of a variance will not result in increased flood heights, additional threats to public safety, extraordinary public expense, create nuisances, cause fraud on or victimization of the public, or conflict with existing local laws or ordinances.

 

Member Trabue stated that the applicants meet all three of the requirements.

 

6.A community shall notify the applicant in writing over the signature of a community official that (1) the issuance of a variance to construct a structure below base flood level will result in increased premium rates for flood insurance up to amounts as high as $25.00 for $100.00 of insurance coverage and (2) such construction below the base flood level increases risks to life and property.Such notification shall be maintained with the record of all variance actions as required by this ordinance.

 

Member Trabue stated that this does not apply because the building will be built above the flood plain.

 

SECTION F. CONDITIONS FOR APPROVING VARIANCES FOR AGRICULTURAL STRUCTURES

 

Any variance granted for an agricultural structure shall be decided individually based on a case by case analysis of the building's unique circumstances.Variances granted shall meet the following conditions as well as those criteria and conditions set forth in Article 5, Sections D and E of this ordinance.

 

In order to minimize flood damages during the 100-year flood and the threat to public health and safety, the following conditions shall be included for any variance issued for agricultural structures that are constructed at-grade and wet-flood proofed.

 

Member Trabue stated that the building will be above the flood plain elevation.The only part that will be below the flood plain is earth and fill.

 

Mr. Hilgedick stated that when you build above the 100-flood mark then you donít have to do the flood proofing.

 

Chairperson Rootes asked if that meant the entire section does not apply.

 

Member Trabue stated that he believes that is correct.Member Trabue stated that the only comment he had was to make sure the earth and fill was protected properly against erosion because of the rising flood waters.

 

Mr. Hilgedick stated that it would be seeded as it is put in place.

 

Member Trabue stated that it would be similar to a levy type construction.

 

Mr. Hilgedick stated that is correct.

 

Member Trabue stated that none of the conditions in section F would apply since the structure will be build above the flood plain.

 

 

Member Trabue made and Member Bowne seconded a motion to approve a request by Wayne Hilgedick to construct an agricultural building (grain bin) in the designated floodplain located at 1500 E Hartsburg Bottom Rd., Hartsburg(Floodplain Regulations Article 4. A. 6.).

†††††††††††

 

Chairperson Rootes†††††† Yes††††††††††††††††† Member Trabue††††††††††††††††††††††† Yes††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† ††††††††††† Member Bowne††††††††††††††††††††††† Yes††††††††††††††††† Member Thomas†††††††††† Yes

 

†††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††

††††††††††† Motion to approve request carries unanimously.†††††††††††††† 4†† Yes††††††††††††

 

 

 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 

 

Case Number 2003-004

2.       Request by Richard J. Morris for a permit for a mobile home as a second dwelling on 3.74 acres, located at 11451 Old No. 7, Columbia (Zoning Regulations Section 15. C. 4. d.).

 

Bill Florea gave the staff report stating that the current zoning of the property is A-2 agricultural, all adjacent property is zoned A-2.The site is located on county road Old Number 7 approximately 6 miles north of Columbia near the intersection with State Highway VV.There is a modular home on the property occupied by the applicants.The applicant would like to place a mobile home on the tract for his mother to live in due to health reasons. The original zoning for this tract is A-2.This 3.7 acre tract was created as a lot through the family transfer provisions of the subdivision regulations in 1987.At that time the original 13.8 acre tract was split in to three tracts with two tracts transferred to family members.The Board considered a previous request by the applicants for a similar request in July 2001. The requested variance is from the zoning regulations section 15.C.4.D.Staff notified 20 property owners.

 

Present:Richard Morris, 11451 Old Number 7, Columbia.

††††††††††† Margaret Morris, 3501 Clark Lane, Columbia.

 

Mr. Morris stated that his father passed away January 17, 2003 and his mother lives at Creekwood Estates.Mr. Morris stated that he had a letter from his motherís doctor. Mr. Morris presented the letter to the Board.

 

Chairperson Rootes read the letter dated March 11, 2003 in to the record which stated:

 

ďDear Boone County Planning and Zoning.This is to certify that I have been taking care of Mrs. Margaret Morris for systemic lupus with vasculitis as well as osteoporosis.The patient is on chronic immunosuppressive therapy, i.e. her immune system is chronically depressed, to control her disease process. She also suffers from osteoporosis.It is my opinion that the patient would be safer living near her son for the above health reasons.She has limited abilities for self care as well as care of her home and surrounding area.Please allow Mrs. Morris to mover her house trailer to her sonís property.If there are any further questions, please feel free to contact me.Best regards, Daniel L. Jost, M.D., Rheumatology.Ē

 

Mr. Morris stated that his mother is purchasing a new 16 by 60 trailer to put on his property.Due to health reasons and with his father passing away his mother is not able to take care of the house.Financially, his mother canít afford lot rent. The applicants will be taking the extra money from selling the house she lives in now and putting it in the bank so his mother can live on it. Mr. Morris stated that he has a home of his own and taking care of two places is pretty hard to do.Having his mother on his property would make it easier on him because he can watch her and make sure nothing happens and do the best he can to take care of her.

 

Mr. Morris stated that he knew there were concerns with the sewer system and having enough room for that.Mr. Morris stated that he has talked to the neighboring property owner and they will grant an easement for the lagoon if the applicants ran in to problems.Mr. Morris stated that he measured it and thinks they will be okay.Mr. Morris stated that the neighbor will grant an easement or may sell Mr. Morris a half-acre of land right beside his land.

 

Mr. Morris presented a survey of the property and pointed out the location of his property and the neighbors property.

 

Open to public hearing.

 

No one spoke in favor of or in opposition to the request.

 

Closed to public hearing.

 

Chairperson Rootes asked staff if they had heard from any of the neighbors.

 

Mr. Florea stated no.

 

Member Trabue stated that the property that Mr. Morrisí parents lived on previously has been sold and belongs to someone else now.The request that the Board visited two years ago has nothing to do with this request at all.

 

Mr. Morris stated that this is just for his mother.

 

Member Trabue stated that he wanted to make sure that was clear to everyone.

 

Mr. Morris stated that before the request was to help take care of his parents.But now there are different circumstances; his father is no longer here so Mr. Morris has to take care of his mother.

 

Member Trabue stated that the applicant recognizes that there may be issues with the sewer and those will obviously have to be worked out but that is something that can be handled from a regulatory point of view.

 

Mr. Morris asked Mr. Florea if there was any problem if Mr. Morris were to buy the 1/2 acre from his neighbor.

 

Mr. Florea stated that there wonít be any problem with locating the trailer.In order to purchase the property it would have to be legally subdivided from the neighbor and attached to Mr. Morrisí property.It can be made to work.

 

Mr. Morris stated that if he could buy the land it would work out better for him.

 

Member Bowne asked how many acres the neighbor owns.

 

Mr. Morris stated 3.14 or 3.25 acres.He will have to keep at least 2 1/2 acres.

 

Member Trabue stated that the applicant still has some hurdles to jump through.

 

Mr. Morris stated that he still has to sell his mothers house and get the approval before they can go forward at all.

 

Member Bowne made and Member Thomas seconded a motion to approve for a period of two years a variance for Richard J. Morris for a permit for a mobile home as a second dwelling on 3.74 acres, located at 11451 Old No. 7, Columbia (Zoning Regulations Section 15. C. 4. d.).

†††††††††††

Chairperson Rootes†††††† Yes††††††††††††††††† Member Trabue††††††††††††††††††††††† Yes††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† ††††††††††† Member Bowne††††††††††††††††††††††† Yes††††††††††††††††† Member Thomas†††††††††† Yes

†††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††

††††††††††† Motion to approve request carries unanimously.†††††††††††††† 4†† Yes

 

 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 

Case Number 2003-005

3.       Request by Bottomline Investments, Inc. for a variance from the 50í building setback for an existing building located at 18630 Albert Rd., Hartsburg (Zoning Regulations Section 10. A.)

 

Bill Florea gave the staff report stating that the current zoning of the property is A-2 all adjacent property is also zoned A-2.The site is located on Albert Road approximately 1 1/2 miles north of Hartsburg off of Christian School Road.There is an accessory structure on the site.The structure encroaches in to the required 50-foot building setback.The original zoning for this tract is A-2 the site was platted as lot G of Al-Don-Al subdivision in 1977.The applicant is in the process of replatting this lot in to two lots.The existing building is located inside the required building line.The requested variance is from the zoning regulations section 10.A.Staff notified 19 property owners.

 

Present:Daryl Woods, P.O. Box 285, Ashland.

†††††††††† Bill Crockett, 2608 N. Stadium, Columbia.

 

Mr. Woods stated that the applicants purchased the property in late November with the intentions of looking at replatting it in to two lots.It is in a rural subdivision south of Ashland and it is in a modular home subdivision.The applicants intention was to purchase the property which has been vacant for years and develop it.In the process of platting; the applicants discovered that an existing ag structure was encroaching in the building setback in regards to the County road. The building has been there since about 1987 or 1988 and from the nature of the way the land lays it was a surprise.

 

Mr. Crockett stated that what the applicants is a variance from the 50-foot setback requirement along Albert Road and along Donna Court.The lots are three acres plus in size and the building is located in the corner of the intersection of the two streets.It is located slightly over 39-feet from Albert Road and is slightly over 36-feet from Donna Court.The building seems to be sitting right up on the road but it is just the opposite because the operating level of the building is 5 to 8 feet below the road so it doesnít project much above the eye level on the road.It is a building that is about 32 by 44; a typical type pole building of wood frame with a metal skin.It is a fairly new building in good shape and is too good to be removed from the site.This lot can front on either Donna Court or on Albert Road, either one of these two roads have about 300-feet of frontage.This building is sitting right in the corner that is less than 50-feet from either one.It doesnít obstruct much of the lot at all.The applicants are not requesting a variance for the entire 50-foot building setback along either street, the applicants are requesting it from the southern 100-foot along the west side and the westerly 60-foot along the south side. If this building was to ever be removed and replaced, the new building would have to adhere to the normal setback. The applicants are only asking a variance for the existing building.

 

Mr. Woods stated that Donna Court has never been developed and it is a rather severe, steep drop off and canít see where Donna Court would ever be graveled for personal use it is too severe and doesnít see where it would ever be usable.The tract that Donna Court was going to feed is in a ravine and it is being served off of Christian School Road.

 

Open to public hearing.

 

No one spoke in favor of or in opposition to the request.

 

Closed to public hearing.

 

Member Trabue asked how this ended up.Member Trabue asked if there had been a change in the regulations regarding the building setbacks or did this building just happen to get built and no one caught it.

 

Mr. Florea stated that there has not been a change.Staff did a search in the building permit records and was unable to find a building permit for this structure.Staff was unable to date the building and donít know what regulations would have applied at the time.It could be that when it was built it didnít require a permit and no inspections would have been done anyway.

 

Mr. Crockett stated that his opinion on what happened is that these tracts were originally described by the surveyor from the centerline of the roads and maybe that was the way the building was located. Mr. Crockett stated that he has no knowledge of that but the earlier description of the tracts were to the centerlines rather than to the lot lines.

 

Member Trabue stated that the survey showed the road right of ways but they described the tracts to the centerlines.

 

Mr. Crockett stated yes.

 

Member Trabue stated that he has seen that happen before and that would make sense.

 

Chairperson Rootes stated that she noticed that most of the homes there were modular dwellings and it is a very rural looking area.The building did not look out of place and it is lower than the road so it is not a real in your face kind of thing.Chairperson Rootes asked the applicant if he assumed that modular homes would be placed there.

 

Mr. Woods stated yes.

 

 

Member Trabue made and Member Thomas seconded a motion to approve a variance for Bottomline Investments, Inc. for a variance from the 50í building setback for an existing building located at 18630 Albert Rd., Hartsburg (Zoning Regulations Section 10. A.).

†††††††††††

Chairperson Rootes†††††† Yes††††††††††††††††† Member Trabue††††††††††††††††††††††† Yes††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† ††††††††††† Member Bowne††††††††††††††††††††††† Yes††††††††††††††††† Member Thomas†††††††††† Yes

†††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††

††††††††††† Motion to approve request carries unanimously.†††††††††††††† 4Yes

 

 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 

 

Case Number 2003-006

4.       Request by Meek Lumber Yard, Inc. for a variance from the 50í building setback for an existing building located at 5551 E Hwy 163, Columbia (Subdivision Regulations, Appendix B. 1.8.2).

 

Bill Florea gave the staff report stating that section 1.9.2 of the subdivision regulations requires that the Director make a recommendation on requests for variance from the provisions of the regulations.The Board may grant a variance only if it finds after public hearing and upon competent and substantial evidence that the applicant meets the criteria for grant of a variance required by these regulations.No variance from any requirement contained within Appendix A or B of these regulations shall be granted unless the Board finds: (a) the applicant will incur unreasonable and unnecessary hardship if a variance is not granted and the variance is not sought primarily to avoid financial expense in complying with the requirements of these regulations (b) grant of a variance will not endanger the health, safety or welfare of the public, and (c) grant of a variance will not hinder, thwart or circumvent the general intent or any specific purpose of these regulations.All applications for variances shall be filed with the Director and after review thereof the Director shall make a recommendation to the Board to grant or deny the application and state the reasons for his recommendation.

 

The applicant owns land that is zoned M-L (light industrial) near the intersection of State Highway 163 and Highway 63.Land zoned M-L has a front setback of 25-feet.A building permit was issued for the building shown on the sketch in 2002, and was properly issued with the building being physically located 25-feet from the front property line.Subsequent to the completion of the building, the owner sought to plat the land.The problem arises because Appendix B.1.8.2 requires that platted lots adjacent to a state highway must provide a 50-foot building line.The existing building encroaches in to that area.

 

a.)    The applicant will incur unnecessary hardship if this variance is not granted.The problem exists due to their desire to complete a subdivision plat of the land.This does not create any additional lots in this area.Relocating this building would constitute and unnecessary hardship.

b.)    Granting this variance will not endanger the health, safety or welfare of the public.The building already exists on private property that has adequate circulation and access.

c.)    Granting this variance will not thwart or circumvent the general intent of the regulations.

 

Staff recommends that this variance be granted.

 

Present:Neal Slattery, 500 Morgan Drive, Ashland.

 

Mr. Slattery stated that he is here on behalf of Meeks Lumber.Mr. Slattery stated that he was hired to do some additional design work for a future warehouse facility on the northern portion of the land they own.Mr. Florea summarized the conditions at the site very well.The existing building is not in violation of the current zoning ordinance but going through the platting process it will be in violation.Since the building was constructed as per approved site plans and as per an approved building permit in May 2002 no mistake was made. It is mainly due to a conflict between the zoning ordinances and the current subdivision regulations.This is why the applicants are asking for a variance.

 

Chairperson Rootes asked Mr. Slattery to describe the building.

 

Mr. Slattery presented a site plan. Mr. Slattery stated that it was a lumber storage facility it is open with a canopy on top. It is approximately 30-feet off the right of way.It was building in the correct position as per the 25-foot requirement under the zoning regulations. All the applicants are proposing to do on the platting process is to plat a 50-foot building line except in the area immediately around where the building will be in violation.

 

Member Bowne asked why the property is being platted.

 

Mr. Slattery stated that the client has requested that the layout of the lots be reconfigured.Currently there is a total of 16 acres and it consists of two separate lots.The client has requested that the property lines be reconfigured on those two lots. Since the two lots will be under 10 acres, which is one thing that moved the applicants in to the platting process, another item is that there is a future building which is planned to the north that will straddle the old lot line.That also constitutes that the applicants reconfigure the shape of the lots.

 

Member Bowne stated that now there are two lots and when it is platted there will still only be two lots.

 

Mr. Slattery stated yes.The way it exists there is a 6 acre lot where all the existing buildings are located then there is a ten acre lot to the north that will be developed in the future.The proposed building is going to straddle the north line of the six acre tract.What is going to happen in the future under the new subdivision of that tract will be approximately two 8 acre lots.

 

Open to public hearing.

 

No one spoke in favor of or in opposition to the request.

 

Closed to public hearing.

 

Member Trabue made and Member Bowne seconded a motion to approve a variance for Meek Lumber Yard, Inc. for a variance from the 50í building setback for an existing building located at 5551 E Hwy 163, Columbia (Subdivision Regulations, Appendix B. 1.8.2).

†††††††††††

Chairperson Rootes†††††† Yes††††††††††††††††† Member Trabue††††††††††††††††††††††† Yes††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† ††††††††††† Member Bowne††††††††††††††††††††††† Yes††††††††††††††††† Member Thomas†††††††††† Yes

†††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††

††††††††††† Motion to approve request carries unanimously.†††††††††††††† 4†† Yes

 

 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 

 

Case Number 2003-007

5.       Request by William Brandel for a variance from the minimum lot depth of 250í on property located at 6500 Lloyd Hudson Road, Hartsburg (Subdivision Regulations, Table A).

 

Bill Florea gave the staff report stating that section 1.9.2 of the subdivision regulations requires that the Director make a recommendation on requests for variance from the provisions of the regulations.The Board may grant a variance only if it finds after public hearing and upon competent and substantial evidence that the applicant meets the criteria for grant of a variance required by these regulations.No variance from any requirement contained within Appendix A or B of these regulations shall be granted unless the Board finds: (a) the applicant will incur unreasonable and unnecessary hardship if a variance is not granted and the variance is not sought primarily to avoid financial expense in complying with the requirements of these regulations (b) grant of a variance will not endanger the health, safety or welfare of the public, and (c) grant of a variance will not hinder, thwart or circumvent the general intent or any specific purpose of these regulations.All applications for variances shall be filed with the Director and after review thereof the Director shall make a recommendation to the Board to grant or deny the application and state the reasons for his recommendation.

 

The applicant owns 70 acres in southern Boone County on Lloyd Hudson Road.The road is situated such that 3.46 of land are located south of the road right-of-way, and the remainder is located on the north side of the right-of-way.The triangle of land on the south side of Lloyd Hudson Road is too narrow to comply with the minimum depth requirement of the subdivision regulations.

 

a.)    The applicant will incur unnecessary hardship if this variance is not granted, as it will result in a piece of land that exists due to the location of a road.The owner cannot relocate the road, or acquire additional land from an adjoining property owner.

b.)    Granting this variance will not endanger the health, safety or welfare of the public.This lot exists now as it was technically created at the time that the road was located.This is an old county road which has been in existence for many years.

c.)    Granting this variance will not thwart or circumvent the general intent of the regulations.

 

Staff recommends that this variance be granted.

 

Present:William Brandel, 22140 Westbrook Drive, Hartsburg.

 

Mr. Brandel stated that he was approached by a neighbor that lives south of his tract because he wanted to buy this tract of land.His neighbor wanted to have two lots instead of one and buying the applicants lot would enable him to have two lots.Mr. Brandel asked the neighbor if he were to survey the property then would the neighbor buy the property. The property owner stated yes.Mr. Brandel stated that since that time the neighbor backed out. Mr. Brandel hasnít paid his surveyor yet and it will probably be a substantial amount. At this time Mr. Brandel stated that he doesnít know if he is going to sell the property or what he is going to do with.By surveying the property he lost 4 tenths of an acre of land and it is just a tract of land that the applicants doesnít need; it is separated by a road. Mr. Brandel stated that if this request is approved he may just sell the property and give the money to his children; if the request isnít approved it will go in to a trust with the 70 acres and he will keep the 4 tenths of an acre that the applicants wonít give to the County.

 

Mr. Brandel stated that years ago he tried to get the County to widen this road.Ameren UE cleared the land and they took the trees and took the wood home, which was alright, got the line cleared to relocate the light poles and one of the neighbors came and put a stop to it.

 

Open to public hearing.

 

No one spoke in favor of or in opposition to the request.

 

Closed to public hearing.

 

Member Thomas stated that this is one of those cases that is going to be governed by the existing topography it is not a case of the applicants trying to circumvent the system at all.

 

Chairperson Rootes asked staff that in order for the applicants to sell this to the neighbor the applicant has to go through this process and have it surveyed and subdivided.

 

Mr. Florea stated yes. Mr. Florea stated that he is not sure what the other persons intention was, whether it was to consolidate with his property and create two lots or whether this would have been a discreet lot itself.

 

Mr. Brandel stated that this would have created two lots versus the one lot. Mr. Brandel stated that his neighbor thought that there was 2 1/2 acres there and wanted Mr. Brandel to quit claim it.Mr. Brandel stated that he called Boone Title and asked if they would give a quit claim deed and title insurance on it and they said yes.He called the County and they said no; the property has to be surveyed.

 

Mr. Florea stated that the property would have had to be divided in this manner or surveyed as part of the neighbors property and it could have been subdivided from there.

 

Member Bowne stated that zoned as A-1 this is not a building site.

 

Mr. Florea stated that the zoning district boundary is the southern property line of this property so if it had gone to the neighbor he probably been required to apply for rezoning for this tract.But since this is the only portion of the property that the Brandelís own that is south of the road, it is isolated, it is not legally separate because currently there is no change in ownership under the road all there is is a prescriptive easement that the County has to maintain that road.So the property ownership carries under the road.When it is platted the right of way is dedicated to the County and it creates this lot as a discreet tract.The answer is probably yes; the County would probably allow this lot to be built on if it was platted and that is why a variance is required in order to make sure they meet the minimum depth. The subdivision can not be approved unless the variance is granted.

 

Member Bowne stated that if the variance is granted and the subdivision can be created will it still be zoned A-1 or it will have to have another allowance made or it will have to be rezoned.

 

Mr. Florea stated that it will still be A-1.The zoning regulations say that lots existing when the zoning regulations go in to effect are legal building lots even though they donít meet the minimum size requirements.Even though there is no change of ownership underneath the road there is a physical barrier that prevents the property from being part of a larger 10 acre piece.

 

Member Bowne stated that it would be treated as an existing lot.

 

Mr. Florea stated yes.

 

Member Bowne asked how short of 250-feet the lot is.

 

Mr. Florea stated that at the east it is 265-feet then it goes down to about 17-feet on one end.Primarily it ranges in the 200-foot depth range.When you take a 50-foot setback off the front and rear that still leaves adequate building area within that lot.

 

Member Thomas made and Member Trabue seconded a motion to approve a variance for William Brandel for a variance from the minimum lot depth of 250í on property located at 6500 Lloyd Hudson Road, Hartsburg (Subdivision Regulations, Table A).

†††††††††††

Chairperson Rootes†††††† Yes††††††††††††††††† Member Trabue††††††††††††††††††††††† Yes††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† ††††††††††† Member Bowne††††††††††††††††††††††† Yes††††††††††††††††† Member Thomas†††††††††† Yes

†††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††

††††††††††† Motion to approve request carries unanimously.†††††††††††††† 4†† Yes

 

 

NEW BUSINESS

 

None.

 

OLD BUSINESS

 

Member Bowne asked about the request that was before the Board for the trailer addition to the house on Dripping Springs Road.Member Bowne stated that the request was denied and asked if the trailer had been removed.

 

Mr. Florea stated no. The trailer is still there and the zoning officer is actively working to try and get that resolved otherwise it will be forwarded to the Prosecuting Attorney.It is much quicker to work with the owners and put pressure on them to voluntarily remove the trailer than it is to go through the Prosecutors Office. Once it goes over there the Planning Department loses all control and it is up to Mr. Crane as to when it gets prosecuted and these cases are not high priority.Mr. Florea stated that the Planning Department works with the applicants until they just have to give up.

 

 

ADJOURN

 

Meeting adjourned at 8:15p.m.

 

Respectfully Submitted,

 

 

 

Paula L Evans

Secretary

 

Minutes approved this 24th day of April 2003.