Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
5.c Boyles Variance - PC Packet
Date of Meeting: July 11, 2023 To: Chair Loeffler and Planning Commission Members From: TJ Hofer, Consultant City Planner Re: Variance for PID 34.032.20.24.0022 Applicant: Eric S Boyles & Mickie S Dent Zoning: RR-N, SM-O, FP-O Owner: Eric S Boyles & Mickie S Dent Future Land Use: Agricultural Core Location: PID 34.032.20.24.0022 Review Deadline August 7, 2023 The applicant is requesting approval of a Variance to construct an addition that encroaches into the setback for the ordinary high-water level and to construct an accessory structure within the ordinary high-water level setback in the rear yard. BACKGROUND The existing structure is a legally nonconforming structure that was approved through a variance by a document recorded with the County registrar with the recording number 1024003 (Recorded Document 1023004), recorded on March 18, 1993, that allowed for the construction of the dwelling with a 42 ft. setback from the ordinary high-water level (OHWL) of Big Marine Lake. Since the dwelling was constructed, the OHWL of Big Marine Lake has fallen so that the existing structure now sits 50 ft. away from the OHWL. The previous approval does not allow for expansion based on the change of OHWL. EVALUATION OF REQUEST Existing Conditions The existing lot is a legally nonconforming lot in the Rural Residential Neighborhood (RR-N) base zoning district, the Shoreland Management Overlay District (SM-O), and the General Floodplain Overlay District (FP-O). Lot standards are detailed below. Changes from the existing conditions to the proposed are underlined. Table 1: Zoning District Standards RR-N SM-O Existing Conditions Proposed Conditions Minimum Lot Size (ac.) (Existing Lot of Record) 0.92 2.5 0.82 0.82 Buildable Area (ac.) 1.00 N/A ~0.00 sq. ft. ~0.00 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width (ft.) 150 160 150 150 Lot Frontage (ft.) 100 N/A 150 150 Setbacks (ft.) Front 40 N/A 38.8 38.8 Side 10 N/A 42 42 OHWL 100 100 50 39.6 Maximum Lot Coverage 25% 25% 24.59% 24.75% Accessory Structure Location Outside all setbacks, if in front of principal structure see Character Standards N/A 6.4 ft. within the OHWL. Behind principal structure 25 ft. from OHWL, meets all other setbacks. Behind principal structure. Accessory Structure Height (ft.) 35, but not taller than Principal Structure 35 Not provided. Not provided. Total Accessory Structure Area (sq. ft) 1,000 N/A 192 192 Accessory Structure Dimensional Standards for Domestic Farm Animals: Any seasonal or year-round wetland, lake or stream (ft.) 200 N/A 43.90 N/A The existing lot is legally nonconforming due to lot size and buildable area. The OHWL setback and front setback overlap for the majority of the lot aside from a small area in the southeast portion of the lot. This area is approximately 70 sq. ft. and is the only location where a structure could be located to not be within a structure or OHWL setback. This area, is also the location of septic tank lids as noted by the existing conditions survey which also require setbacks. The parcel is approximately 35,719 sq. ft., however, a large section of the lot is under the OHWL. The area outside of the OHWL is 20,371 sq. ft. A large area of the western part of the lot is within the 100-year flood elevation of both FEMA and the Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District. FEMA has identified these areas as Zone AE and Zone X. The lot meets minimum lot width and frontage. The existing principal structure is a single-family dwelling and is a legal nonconforming structure. The dwelling encroaches into the OHWL setback by 50 ft. (50 ft. setback) and encroaches into the front setback by 1.2 ft. (38.8 ft. setback). The existing detached accessory structure is located 6.4 ft into the OHWL and is within the 100-year flood elevation of both FEMA and the Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District. The City does not have records approving this structure, so the City cannot determine if the existing accessory structure is a legal or illegal nonconformity. Additionally, a chicken coop is currently located on the property within the OHWL setback. The keeping of domestic fowl falls under the Livestock and Livestock Operations use which is prohibited in the RR-N zoning district. Governing Standards Section 153.500.110 Subd. 3 (E) Expansion of Nonconforming Buildings or Structures establishes the standards of when a nonconforming building can be expanded. If a nonconformity is nonconforming based on height, yard setback, or lot area expansion can be allowed through an administrative permit, otherwise, a variance is required. Chapter 5, Shoreland Management Regulations 3.72, states that all additions or expansions to the outside dimensions of an existing nonconforming structure must meet the setback, height, and other requirements of Sections 5.0 to 8.0 of the ordinance. Any deviation from these requirements must be authorized by a variance. Proposed Conditions The proposed expansion to the principal structure will increase the encroachment into the OHWL by 10.4 ft., for a setback of 39.6 ft. The previous variance approved for the principal structure to be constructed with a setback of 42 ft. from the OHWL. However, the OHWL of the lake has been adjusted so that the existing structure is now 50 ft. from the OHWL. The previous approvals allowed for construction of a legally nonconforming building, but does not create a preexisting approval or “grandfathering in” that would allow for expansion. The proposed accessory building is located 25 ft. from the OHWL. The applicant has submitted a narrative that includes language about setback averaging. The City of Scandia does not use setback averaging in to either structure setbacks or OHWL setbacks. An existing impervious patio is located on the west side of the existing dwelling. If the variance is approved, this would be removed, and a new impervious walkway would be constructed to access the proposed expansion. The submitted plans show a wetland buffer and rain garden as well. These have been added to address comments from the Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District. The applicant stated in their narrative an alternative that includes filling underneath the OHWL to effectively move the OHWL. Fill of this nature would be regulated by the Department of Natural Resources. Variance Section 153.500.060 Subd. 1 (B) establishes the standards for when the City shall approve a variance. The variance must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, must be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this Chapter, and when the strict enforcement of this Chapter would result in practical difficulties with carrying out the strict letter of the Code. Practical difficulties are established within the UDC and are listed below in italics. Staff’s analysis of these is below each practical difficulty: a. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Chapter. The proposed use is not a reasonable use of the property. It is reasonable that the lot was approved for development of a single-family dwelling with an attached accessory garage. The proposed expansion is reasonable in it’s use but is does not meet the standards of a practical difficult established in the UDC and is not consistent with the Shoreland Management Overlay. Other alternatives exist for improving the existing structure such as alternations to the existing structure and expansions that either maintains the OHWL setback nonconformity without increasing the nonconformity or expanding into the front setback with a variance. b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. The applicant has stated three reasons regarding the need for the variance: (1) A prior variance from 1993 allowed for construction 42 feet from OHWL – so parts of this request help comply with that precedent. (2) Absent the 1993 variance, the standard 100 foot setback extends to the front yard setback making any necessary structural improvements to the property untenable. This circumstance is unique to the property and is driven by the need for additional four-season space to accommodate Post-COVID remote work and the potential for additional space to care for elderly family members not driven by the homeowner. (3) To the extent that the council applies averaging of set back from the lake these projects would conform to the essential character, history of the neighborhood, and prior variance decisions that must have been made on adjoining properties. In both projects below these structures will be above the OHWL of 942.2 feet. The applicant’s first point is not applicable to the current proposal. Recorded Document 1023004 approved the construction of a legally nonconforming structure. The dwelling was constructed and still exists today. The allowances granted with Recorded Document 1023004 in 1993 have been used with the construction of the principal structure. The applicant’s second point is accurate. The existing lot is nonconforming and a structure could not be constructed without a variance. A dwelling with an attached accessory garage exists on the property. There is no practical difficulty established that prohibits the proposed uses in the applicant’s narrative with the existing dwelling. The applicant’s third point references standards and practices not used by the City of Scandia. The City of Scandia does not use setback averaging in to either structure setbacks or OHWL setbacks. Each variance should be evaluated as a unique case, and prior decisions by the City do not set precedents when considering a variance. The plight of the landowner is directly due to circumstances created by the property owner. The applicant is requesting approval to increase a nonconformity on an existing legally nonconforming use where no practical difficulty exists. Alternatives exist to improving or expanding the home, such as expanding in a way that does not increase the nonconforming OHWL setback or expanding into the front setback with a variance. The proposed detached accessory structure is a reasonable use. The applicant has identified this as a relocation, but within the standards of Section 153.500.110 Subd. 3 Nonconforming Buildings and Structures, the proposed structure is considered a new structure. Accessory structures are required to meet structure and OHWL setbacks, and the proposed location is within the OHWL setback. The Department of Natural Resources model Shoreland Ordinance includes provisions for one accessory structure within 10 feet of the OHWL. However, Scandia’s Shoreland Management Regulations does not include this allowance. c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. If the variance were granted, it would not alter the essential character of the locality based on a structural or architectural means, but would alter the presence of structures along the shore of Big Marine Lake within the required setback area. d. Economic conditions alone shall not constitute practical difficulties. Economic conditions are not a factor in the variance. e. May include, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. The variance is not related to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. f. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The proposed variance will not impair adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood g. The requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty. Staff does not believe that a practical difficulty exists, and therefore no action is required to eliminate a practical difficulty for the expansion to the principal structure. If a variance were to be approved, staff believes that what the applicant has proposed is not the minimal action. Alterations or expansion to the dwelling could be done in other locations that may still require a variance, but will be a more minimal action than further encroaching towards the lake. Staff believes that there is a practical difficulty regarding locating an accessory structure on the site. The lot has essentially no area where a structure can be built without a variance. Staff believes that an accessory structure could be located elsewhere on the lot that would minimize the setback encroachment into the OHWL, however, a variance is likely to still be required. ANALYSIS Review Comments The submittal was sent to city staff and other regulatory agencies for review and comment. Engineering Department The City Engineer has provided comments, and the comments are attached. A grading permit will be required as the site is within 1,000 feet of a lake. An erosion and sediment control plan will also be required. Access to the site is limited, so the plans must be revised to show a construction entrance. The project must secure a permit from the CMSCWD and comply with the Watersheds rules and standards. Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District The Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District has provided comments, and the comments are attached. The Watershed noted that the application must meet stormwater management and wetland buffers. Fire Department The Fire Chief had no comment. Public Works Department The Public Works Director had no comment. Washington Conservation District Washington Conservation District provided no comment. Washington County Washington County had no comment. Department of Natural Resources The DNR Area Hydrologist provided no comment. Staff Analysis Staff finds that the proposed plan is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff finds that the proposed plan is inconsistent with the Unified Development Code (UDC). The Comprehensive Plan prioritizes environmental stewardship on lakeside lots. Increasing the encroachment into the OHWL setback does not align with the goal of environmental stewardship. The applicant has not established a practical difficulty that warrants a variance being issued to expand the existing nonconforming structure. The parcel has already been developed and contains a habitable dwelling and useable accessory garage. Further expansion of the dwelling is not required to alleviate a practical difficulty. Staff believes that the existing nonconforming detached accessory structure is substandard and should be removed. If not removed, if any alterations to the structure are proposed it will be required to achieve compliance with Chapter 6 Floodplain Management Regulations. The existing chicken coop and keeping of domestic fowl are not a permitted use in the RR-N zoning district. Under the previous zoning ordinance that was in effect from 2009 to October of 2022, this use was permitted as the parcel was zoned General Rural. If the applicant can prove that the use has existed since before the UDC was adopted and the use has not ceased for a year, the use can remain a legal nonconformity. If the legal nonconforming status cannot be confirmed, the use must cease immediately, and the must should be removed. COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission can do one of the following: 1. Recommend approval, with or without conditions, of the attached ordinance and resolutions. 2. Recommend denial, with findings, of the attached ordinance and resolutions. 3. Table the request for further review/study. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend denial of both proposed variances, subject to the following findings: 1. The proposed expansion is not a reasonable use of the property. It is reasonable that the lot was approved for development of a single-family dwelling with an attached accessory garage. The proposed expansion is reasonable in its use but it does not meet the standards of a practical difficulty established in the UDC and is not consistent with the Shoreland Management Overlay. 2. The plight of the landowner is directly due to circumstances created by the property owner. The applicant is requesting approval to increase a nonconformity on an existing legally nonconforming use where no practical difficulty exists. The proposed detached accessory structure is a reasonable use. The applicant has identified this as a relocation, but within the standards of Section 153.500.110 Subd. 3 Nonconforming Buildings and Structures, the proposed structure is considered a new structure. Accessory structures are required to meet structure and OHWL setbacks and the proposed location is within the OHWL setback. 3. If the variance were granted, it would not alter the essential character of the locality based on a structural or architectural means but would alter the presence of structures along the shore of Big Marine Lake within the required setback area. 4. Economic conditions are not a factor in the variance. 5. The variance is not related to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. 6. The proposed variance will not impair adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. 7. Staff does not believe that a practical difficulty exists, and therefore no action is required to eliminate a practical difficulty for the expansion to the principal structure. Staff believes that there is a practical difficulty regarding locating an accessory structure on the site. The lot has a miniscule area where a structure can be built without a variance. Staff believes that an accessory structure could be located elsewhere on the lot that would minimize the setback encroachment into the OHWL. If the Planning Commission wishes to recommend approval, findings need to be established that support the variance review criteria. Staff has prepared conditions of approval if the Commission wishes to recommend approval: 1. The location and layout of structures on the lot shall be consistent with the plans and setbacks submitted to the City and reviewed with this request. No other structures shall be allowed. a. The expansion of the existing legal nonconforming principal structure shall be setback from the ordinary high water level 38.8 feet. b. The proposed accessory structure shall be setback from the ordinary high water level 25 ft. 2. The proposed expansion of the existing legal nonconforming principal structure shall not increase the number of bedrooms that currently exist on the property and shall meet all city ordinance requirements in order to ensure that connecting the dwelling to the City sewer system does not overwhelm said system. 3. The existing detached accessory structure within the ordinary high-water level shall be removed. 4. The existing detached accessory structure identified as a chicken coop shall be removed. 5. Before a building permit can be issued on the site, the following must occur: a. The applicant shall submit a site plan that is consistent with the approved site plan. b. The applicant shall be in compliance with the standards of the Carnelian-Marine- St. Croix Watershed District including, but not limited to, required buffers and rain gardens. c. A grading plan and erosion control plan shall be submitted to the City for review, showing any areas of soil disruption, construction entrances, any trees that will be removed, building floor elevations, and drainage patterns. 6. The applicant shall secure all applicable permits required from local, state, and federal entities. 7. The applicant shall pay all other fees and escrows associated with this application. 8. The applicant must commence the authorized use or improvement within one year of the date on which the variance is issued. After one year, the approvals issued under the provisions of the Section shall expire without further action by the Planning Commission or Board 9. The applicant shall record the Variance Washington County within one year of the date when the Variance is approved by the City. Attachments 1. Draft Resolution 2. Zoning Map 3. Future Land Use Map 4. Variance from 1993 (Document 1024003 from the Office of the County Recorder Washington County, MN) 5. Application 6. Variance Narrative 7. Existing Conditions 8. Proposed Conditions 9. Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District Comments, dated June 20, 2023 10. Washington County Comments, dated June 12, 2023 CITY OF SCANDIA, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 07-18-23-XX DENYING A VARIANCE FOR AN EXPANSION OF A PRINCIPAL STRUCUTRE AND CONSTRUCTION OF AN ACCESSORY STRUCUTRE LOCATED AT PARCEL ID 34.032.20.24.0022 WHEREAS, Eric S Boyles & Mickie S Dent (the “applicants”), has requested made an application for variances from ordinary high water level setback to expand a legally nonconforming structure on a nonconforming lot that includes a 61.2 foot variance from the 100 foot ordinary high water level setback of Big Marine Lake for expansion of a legally nonconforming structure and a 75 foot variance from the 100 foot setback of Big Marine Lake to constructure an accessory structure on property identified as 18510 Norell Avenue North, legally described as follows: Lots 7, 8, and 9, Block 2, ANDERSON’S BIG LAKE ADDITION; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Variance request at a duly noticed Public Hearing on July 11th, 2023, and recommended that the City Council deny the request; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCANDIA, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does deny the requested variances, based on the following findings: 1. The proposed expansion is not a reasonable use of the property. It is reasonable that the lot was approved for development of a single-family dwelling with an attached accessory garage. The proposed expansion is reasonable in its use but it does not meet the standards of a practical difficulty established in the UDC and is not consistent with the Shoreland Management Overlay. 2. 2. The plight of the landowner is directly due to circumstances created by the property owner. The applicant is requesting approval to increase a nonconformity on an existing legally nonconforming use where no practical difficulty exists. The proposed detached accessory structure is a reasonable use. The applicant has identified this as a relocation, but within the standards of Section 153.500.110 Subd. 3 Nonconforming Buildings and Structures, the proposed structure is considered a new structure. Accessory structures are required to meet structure and OHWL setbacks and the proposed location is within the OHWL setback. 3. If the variance were granted, it would not alter the essential character of the locality based on a structural or architectural means but would alter the presence of structures along the shore of Big Marine Lake within the required setback area. 4. Economic conditions are not a factor in the variance. 5. The variance is not related to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. 6. The proposed variance will not impair adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. 7. Staff does not believe that a practical difficulty exists, and therefore no action is required to eliminate a practical difficulty for the expansion to the principal structure. Staff believes that there is a practical difficulty regarding locating an accessory structure on the site. The lot has a miniscule area where a structure can be built without a variance. Staff believes that an accessory structure could be located elsewhere on the lot that would minimize the setback encroachment into the OHWL. Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 18 day of July, 2023. Christine Maefsky, Mayor ATTEST: Kyle Morell, City Administrator 18 8.1 Legend 0 132 Feet This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This drawing is a compilation of records, information, and data located in various city, county, and state offices, and other sources affecting the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City of Scandia is not responsible for any inaccuracies herein contained. Disclaimer: © Bolton & Menk, Inc - Web GIS 7/6/2023 3:22 PM City Limits Parcels (4/1/2023) Lot Lines PWI Basin Public Water Basin Public Water Wetland PWI - Watercourse Parks Shoreland Overlay PUD Overlay Lakes Mining Overlay Saint Croix River District Zoning Agricultural Core Agricultural Preserves Rural Residential General Village Neighborhood Rural Commercial Rural Residential Neighborhood Village Historic Core Village Center Industrial Park Scandia_2022.sid Red: Band_1 Green: Band_2 Blue: Band_3 Zoning Map Boyles Variance m i n n e s o t a RL Ate' m 1IqmIp E: y n _ 95 4 kz/1 Mfg i i / Z"] / iii - 1 _ 45'-6 3/4" 43.90 f t From: Tom Langer <tom.langer@cmscwd.org> Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2023 8:51 AM To: Eric Boyles; Milo Horak; Mickie Dent Cc: Mike Isensee; TJ Hofer Subject: RE: Boyle Variance - OHWL Setback Encroachment and Accessory Structure Placement (PID 3403220240022) Attachments: 0) Application and SW Worksheet - Boyle-Dent.pdf; Combined Buffer & Stormwater Declaration Template.docx Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed Hi Eric, I’ve reviewed, edited, and am attaching an updated SW worksheet and Application based on the submitted project understanding. I do agree that it does appear that there are two project here and think it best to keep them separated. The shoreline project will require a watershed permit ($10 fee & $500 surety) as currently understood, however, it also appears eligible for the District’s Cost-Share grant. I’ve copied Mike, whom has been on site to discuss the shoreline project. When you are ready to move forward with that project, please complete another permit form. The redevelopment project of the porch, patio, and shed will need to be approved by the City. Assuming your project is permittable under a variance your project triggers the District’s stormwater and buffer rules. Rule 2: Stormwater management: Stormwater management is required for all new or reconstructed impervious surfaces in accordance with the District’s Residential Stormwater Worksheet and the stormwater practice declared against the property. The Site Survey will need to be updated to include a stormwater practice above the OHWL (we cannot permit a stormwater practice below the OHWL). Rule 4: Buffers: A permanent buffer at 50% distance from primary structure to OHW (25 ft in this case) needs to be established and shown in the site plans, field monumented, and declared against the property with any LGU variance approval for shoreland or wetland setback. The proposed patio and addition are compliant with this requirement. The current location of the proposed shed would be within 25ft of the OHWL and not be permittable by District Rule. If the shed is moved beyond the 25 ft setback it can be permitted by the watershed. Next steps: submit updated site plans with buffer and stormwater items as outlined, full fee and surety payment, and updated application. Once received, the Watershed will further assist with drafting the buffer and stormwater declaration (template only is attached, please don’t complete at this time) and schedule your project for review at the next available board meeting. Thank you, Tom Langer Riparian Permit Specialist | Carnelian Marine St. Croix Watershed District 11660 Myeron Rd North | Stillwater, MN 55082 Phone: (651) 275-7452 | Cell: 507-276-8056 www.cmscwd.org From: Daniel Elder <Daniel.Elder@co.washington.mn.us> Sent: Monday, June 12, 2023 12:21 PM To: TJ Hofer Subject: RE: Boyle Variance - OHWL Setback Encroachment and Accessory Structure Placement (PID 3403220240022) Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed The County has no comments on this variance. Daniel Elder | Planner II Washington County Public Works Department 11660 Myeron Road North, Stillwater, MN 55082 Office: 651-430-4307 A great place to live, work, and play…today and tomorrow