08/24/00 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Community Development Director Frolik stated that currently the code references a minor variance and major variance, but could not determine the difference between the two. She also noted that in Subdivision 5 the code states that the variance becomes null or void if it is not used within 12 months of its issuance and questioned if that should be removed from the code. Hoisington Koegler Consultant Gordon replied that a time limit standard is very common. Councilmember Hendriksen stated that the City should notify the individual of the lapse of time, because not everyone may be aware of the time limit. Hoisington Koegler Consultant Gordon noted that the applicant only needs to begin the project in 12 months, not complete it. The Committee discussed at length as to whether or not the City should be responsible for notifying an applicant that the 12 month time limit is approaching and what should occur if there has been a substantial change made to the property within the 12 months since the variance was granted. Consensus of the Committee was to include in the code that the City will notify the applicant 60 days prior to the expiration of the variance and allow for a two year time period to initiate use of the variance. Hoisington Koegler Consultant Gordon stated that in section 9.03.07 there are inconsistencies between Subdivision 1 and 6: allowing the City Council to overrule the Board of Adjustment and Appeals in Subdivision 1 then allowing a court to serve as the appeal body in Subdivision 6. Commissioner Dempsey suggested taking the language from Subdivision 1 and adding it to Subdivision 6. Community Development Frolik noted that there needs to be two appeal processes. One for an applicant who thinks they were wrongly denied a variance by the Board of Adjustment and secondly for a resident who feels that City staff has wrongly interpreted City Code. Hoisington Koegler Consultant Gordon stated that section 9.03.01 needs to be reviewed by City Attorney and 9.11.01 Subdivision 2 needs to be reviewed by the Building Official and City Engineer/Public Works. Councilmember Hendriksen questioned the wording in section 9.11.04 because he had the understanding that the City did not require a conditional use permit for a home occupation as long as it was not involving excessive traffic into the home. Community Development Director Frolik replied that that is City policy, but has not yet been included in the code. Chapter 9 Committee/August 24, 2000 Page 2 of 4