Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Variance Frontage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves frontage variance for Montgomery subdivision despite staff recommendation to deny
Summary
The Linn County Board of Adjustment granted Variance PV250001, allowing a proposed lot with roughly 24.99 feet of road frontage where the ordinance requires 50 feet. Staff recommended denial; the board found the lot’s shape and other conditions created a hardship and voted 3-0 to approve.
The Linn County Board of Adjustment voted Feb. 26, 2025, to approve Variance PV250001, allowing Tracy Montgomery to subdivide a property on Williams Boulevard with road frontage short of the ordinance minimum. The motion to approve was carried by roll call: Hoover — yes; Alden — yes; Price — yes.
Brad Weiland, planner, presented the variance request and explained the ordinance requires newly created lots to have at least 50 feet of road frontage. He stated the proposal would create a lot with roughly 24.99 feet of frontage at the Williams Boulevard access point and that staff believed two of the variance standards were not met: a finding of unnecessary hardship and that the variance would not impair the ordinance’s purpose. "We believe 7 of those [standards] are met. The 2 that we have concern with is that, we believe that an unnecessary hardship or practical confiscation of the property is not happening in this case. The hardship seems more self created in this instance," Weiland said.
Applicant Tracy Montgomery addressed the board in support of the variance, saying she seeks to place a home closer to family because she is coping with a progressive medical condition. "I'm affected by neuromyelitis optica, which is an extremely rare condition. About 1.54 people in a hundred thousand are affected by this incurable disease," Montgomery said, adding she expects future caregiving needs and that subdividing the property would lessen a potential financial hardship on her family.
A neighbor and easement-holder, Ray Mosbeck, testified he had discussed access arrangements with the applicant and said his concerns were alleviated; he said he had no objection to the subdivision. "Those concerns being alleviated, I have no concern with the property being subdivided or putting a house on it or the variance to me is up to the county," Mosbeck said.
Board discussion focused on the unusual shape of the lot and whether that shape created a hardship. One board member noted the parcel is "wedged" between more conventionally shaped lots and that the lot shape can create a practical difficulty for development. Several board members said that, while the shortfall in frontage is small in measurement, the unique lot configuration supports granting relief.
Staff noted the Iowa DOT indicated the frontage road can accommodate another lot and that if a permanent remedy such as a new septic system is pursued, appropriate state reviews would apply. Board members referenced the distinction between a variance and a special exception; staff said that even if the width were 25.01 feet (making it eligible for a special exception under local rules), staff’s recommendation would have been the same.
After deliberation a board member moved to accept the board’s findings and approve Case PV250001; the motion was seconded and passed on roll call: Hoover — yes; Alden — yes; Price — yes. The staff report recommending denial was entered into the record and noted in the action. The decision includes language that reflects the board’s findings of hardship based on lot shape and the applicant’s circumstances.
