County Variance 301 – 547 S 56th St W – Section 27-903 Table 27-900.1 - A variance from Section 27-903 Table 27-900.1 requiring a minimum lot area of 10 acres per parcel to allow a proposed 1.8-acre parcel in an Agriculture (A) zone, on Parcels 4 & 5 of C/S 699, 20.1-acres of land. The purpose of the variance is to allow the division of the two parcels to create a small lot for an existing dwelling at 547 S 56th St W to be sold separately from the main parcel for White Aspen Ranch horse facility (481 S 56th St W).  Tax ID: D00472
Presented by: Karen Husman, Planner 1

Planning staff has reviewed this application and is forwarding a recommendation of denial based on the determinations for review within this report and the criteria outlined in Yellowstone County Zoning Regulations Section 27-1626.D.

OWNER: Dru Cederberg
AGENT: Darryl Magnuson, PLS -KLJ Eng.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Parcels 4 & 5 of C/S 699
ADDRESS: 481 S56th St. W
CURRENT ZONING: A - Agriculture 10 Acres and Over
EXISTING LAND USE: Residential and Agriculture
PROPOSED USE: Residential
SIZE OF PARCEL: 20.00 Acres

None

See attachments.

NORTH:	Zoning: A- Agriculture Land Use: Agriculture
SOUTH:	Zoning: A- Agriculture Land Use: Agriculture
EAST:	Zoning: C3-General Commercial Land Use: Commercial
WEST:	Zoning: A- Agriculture Land Use: Agriculture

This is a request for a variance from YC 27-903.A – Table 27-900.1, which requires a minimum lot area of 10 acres in an Agriculture (A) zone, to allow a lot area of 1.8 acres. The property owners have requested this variance to allow for the filing of a boundary line relocation between two parcels in the same ownership, both zoned Agriculture. The project would relocate the boundary lines of the adjacent parcel from the middle of the surrounding fields closer to the edge of the developed property around the home situated on the current tract. The applicant's letter does not state a physical hardship inherent to the land. 

Certificate of Survey 699 was originally recorded in June 1955, establishing 10.05-acre lots. In July 2024, a boundary line relocation application was submitted to create a parcel smaller than 10 acres. However, the application was denied due to the Agricultural zoning district's requirement for a minimum lot size of 10 acres. In June 2017, the Yellowstone County Board of Planning and staff initiated work on Project ReCode, a comprehensive update of the zoning regulations. As part of this effort, both the City and County updated their zoning maps to align the new zoning districts with existing land use and lot size. Given the subject parcels agricultural use and each being 10-acres in size, both parcels were designated as Agriculture – 10 Acres or more. This designation corresponds with its previous zoning classification as Agriculture Open under the former zoning code.The applicant intends to sell the entire property of the White Aspen Ranch equine facility and would like to sell the portion of land the single family home is on as a separate parcel.

The 10-acre minimum lot size is a standard requirement designed to support agricultural uses and preserve the integrity of the land. Reducing the lot size to 1.8 acres would not align with the district’s established standards and would introduce a significant level of non-conformity. Granting such a variance would provide the applicant with a special privilege that has not been extended to other properties within the district. While there has been one recent variance approved under the new zoning regulations—Variance 299 in August 2024, allowing a 2.37-acre parcel—this remains an exception rather than the typical. Previous variances granted before 2020 for parcels less than 10 acres were based on unique circumstances, including right-of-way acquisition (Variance 256, 2008), land use contrary to zoning for a junk vehicle yard (Variance 261), adjacency to a cemetery (Variance 264), topographical challenges (Variances 237 and 287), and a court-ordered settlement (Variance 283). Notably, Variance 256 was granted by the Board of Adjustment against staff’s recommendation for denial, highlighting its exceptional nature.  Additionally, there are also some smaller parcels that were created prior to the zoning restriction of 10 acres, 3 of which are tracts within Certificate of Survey 880, Certificate of Survey 1926, Parcel 1, Certificate of Survey 2975, Parcel 1 and one is unplatted. 

The Board of Adjustment shall make the following determinations prior to granting a variance:

Per Yellowstone County Zoning Code Section 27-1626(D); Board of Adjustment shall make the following determinations prior to granting a variance:

1. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, the lot or something inherent in the land which causes the hardship, and which are not applicable to other lands in the same district;

The property in question does not present inherent characteristics or conditions that are different from other lands in the same Agricultural (A) district. The hardship claimed by the applicant — stemming from the need to relocate boundary lines and reduce the lot size—reflects a standard zoning requirement rather than a specific condition of the land itself.  Yellowstone County Zoning Code Section 27-1626 specifies that variances are granted ‘because of special conditions with respect to the lot shape or topography, a literal enforcement of the provisions of the Code would result in unnecessary hardship.’ The applicant intends to sell the property and would like the sell the equestrian facility separate from the single family dwelling. Financial hardship is not considered an unnecessary hardship inherent to the land. 

2. That a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Chapter would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other tracts in the same district;

Denying this variance would not deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties within the Agricultural (A) district. The 10-acre minimum lot size is a standard requirement designed to support agricultural uses and preserve the integrity of the land. Reducing the lot size to 1.8 acres would not align with the district’s established standards and would introduce a significant level of non-conformity. Granting such a variance would provide the applicant with a special privilege that has not been extended to other properties within the district.

While there has been one recent variance approved under the new zoning regulations—Variance 299 in August 2024, allowing a 2.37-acre parcel—this remains an exception rather than the standard. Previous variances granted before 2020 for parcels less than 10 acres were based on unique circumstances, including right-of-way acquisition (Variance 256, 2008), land use contrary to zoning for a junk vehicle yard (Variance 261), adjacency to a cemetery (Variance 264), topographical challenges (Variances 237 and 287), and a court-ordered settlement (Variance 283). Notably, Variance 256 was granted by the Board of Adjustment against staff’s recommendation for denial, highlighting its exceptional nature.

3. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Chapter to other land in the same district;

Similar to 1 and 2 above, the zoning regulations mandate a minimum lot size of 10 acres in the Agricultural (A) district to ensure the preservation and effective use of agricultural lands. Allowing a reduction to 1.8 acres through this variance would confer a special privilege on the applicant that is inconsistent with the standard requirements applied to other properties in the district.

Staff is aware of other parcels that are also under 10 acres and zoned Agriculture in the Hubbell Acreage Tracts Subdivision. However, these lots were platted in 1959 and have not undergone any amendments since platting.

Although several variances have been approved in Yellowstone County for lots less than 10 acres in the Agriculture district, the circumstances of those variances are not similar to the one requested. County Variance 273 was approved in 2015 to allow for a boundary relocation in the Agriculture district, resulting in 8.365-acre and 3.290-acre lots. However, this lot had peculiar circumstances due to the shape and layout of the lots. Similarly, County Variance 278 was approved to allow a boundary line relocation resulting in a 7.62-acre lot zoned Agriculture. This lot also had peculiar circumstances, as the boundary relocation provided easier access to an adjacent subdivision to the west of the parcel.

While there has been one recent variance approved under the new zoning regulations—Variance 299 in August 2024, allowing a 2.37-acre parcel—this remains an exception rather than the norm. Previous variances granted before 2020 for parcels less than 10 acres were based on unique circumstances, including right-of-way acquisition (Variance 256, 2008), land use contrary to zoning for a junk vehicle yard (Variance 261), adjacency to a cemetery (Variance 264), topographical challenges (Variances 237 and 287), and a court-ordered settlement (Variance 283). Notably, Variance 256 was granted by the Board of Adjustment against staff’s recommendation for denial, highlighting its exceptional nature.

4. That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this Chapter and with the Growth Policy;

Granting the variance would not align with the general purpose and intent of the zoning regulations and the Growth Policy. The Agricultural (A) district is defined as: "The Agricultural (A) district is intended to protect and preserve agricultural lands for the performance of a wide range of agricultural functions. The intent is to limit the scattered intrusion of uses not compatible with an agricultural environment, encourage agricultural pursuits, and protect environmental concerns."

The requested variance would compromise these objectives by increasing the non-conforming lot size within an area designated for agricultural use. The intent of the Agricultural district excludes suburban residential uses to maintain its focus on agricultural preservation. This reduction could potentially disrupt the agricultural integrity of the zone and conflict with the overarching goals of the Growth Policy and Zoning Regulations.

Per Section 27-1626 (E): The following also apply:

1. Whenever the County Board of Adjustment grants an application for a variance, the minutes shall specifically state the criteria upon which the variance is granted.

2. In granting any variance, the BOA may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with this Zoning Code. Violation of such conditions and safeguards, when made a part of the terms upon which the variance is granted, shall be deemed a violation of this Zoning Code.

Staff has no conditions with a recommendation of denial; however if the BOA makes findings to approve the variance, staff has the following draft conditions prepared.

1. The variance is from YC 27-903.A – Table 27-900.1 requiring a minimum lot are of 10 acres per parcel to allow a proposed 1.8-acre parcel in a Agriculture (A) zone, on Parcels 4 & 5 of C/S 699, an 20-acre parcel of land. The purpose of the variance is to allow the division of the two parcels to create a small lot for an existing dwelling at 547 S 56th St W to be sold separately from the main parcel for White Aspen Ranch horse facility (481 S 56th St W). No other variance is intended or implied with this approval.
2. The variance is limited to Parcels 4 & 5 of C/S 699, 547 S 56th St. W.
3. The applicant shall complete the exempt plat process within 1 year from the Board of Adjustment approval date.
4. The applicant shall meet all other state and county code requirements with the exception of this variance.
5. These conditions of variance approval shall run with the land described in this authorization and shall apply to all current and subsequent owners, operators, managers, leaseholders, heirs and assigns.

3. The BOA shall prescribe a time limit within which the action for which the variance is required shall be begun or completed, or both. Failure to begin or complete such action within the time limit set shall void the variance.

No time frame is required with a recommendation of denial. If the Board chooses to approve the variance request, the recommended time limit is identified above in criteria number 2 as item number 3 which requires one year to complete the relocation.

4. Under no circumstances shall the BOA grant a variance to allow a use not permissible under the terms of this chapter in the district involved. A variance shall not be a grant of special privilege inconsistent with limitations placed upon other property in the district.

Approval of this variance will not allow a use that is restricted under the terms of this chapter. The "use" itself of residential is allowed in the district.