Loading...
7.a)1) Staff Report-TuengeVarianceCouncil 7 15 14 Memorandum To: Scandia City Council Kristina Handt, City Administrator Reference: Tuenge Variance Application, City of Scandia Copies To: Kristin Tuenge, applicant Project No.: 15485.007 From: Sherri Buss, RLA AICP, Planner Routing: Date: July 8, 2014 SUBJECT: Tuenge Variance Application MEETING DATE: July 15, 2014 LOCATION: 20595 Quinnell Avenue North Scandia, Minnesota APPLICANT: Kristin Tuenge ZONING: General Rural District 120-DAY PERIOD: August 21, 2014 ITEMS REVIEWED: Application and Sketch Plan received April 23, 2014 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST: The applicant is seeking to add a bay window on the north side of the home. The existing setback of the home does not meet the ordinance requirement, the addition of the bay window will encroach further into the setback, and therefore a variance is required. The applicants’ parcel is approximately 1.45 acre in size. The property is located in the General Rural (GR) District. DETAILED EVALUATION OF THE REQUEST: Background The applicant has a small home that was built in 1939. She is seeking to add a bay window on the north side of the home in order to extend the dining room to accommodate a dining table. Tuenge Variance Staff Report Scandia City Council Page 2 July 15, 2014 The size of the proposed bay window addition is 36”x82’. The size and proposed location of the window are shown on the sketch plan. The home was built approximately 33’ from the rear parcel boundary. The Development Code now requires a 50-foot rear setback. The existing home encroaches into the setback, and the addition of the bay window would reduce the setback to 30 feet. The next sections analyze the request based on the City’s Development Code requirements. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan indicates that the General Rural District includes areas of mixed lot sizes, and will continue to do so. The Plan recommended a minimum 2-acre lot size in the GR District. Single-family residential uses are supported in the GR District. The proposed use of the property is consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan for the General Rural District. Development Code Requirements: Lot Size and Setbacks The applicant’s parcel includes approximately 1.45 acres. The General Rural District requires a minimum lot size of 2.0 acres. The lot was created before the adoption of the current Development Code, and is therefore a nonconforming lot. The required setbacks in the General Rural District include the following:  Front setback: 40 feet  Side setback, lots less than 1.5 acres: 10 feet  Rear setback: 50 feet The home meets the front and side setback requirements. The existing home is 33 feet from the rear lot line, and therefore does not meet that setback requirement. With the proposed addition, the setback would be further reduced to 30 feet. The proposed addition to the structure requires a variance from the rear setback. The analysis of the request based on the ordinance criteria follows in this staff report. Accessory Structures The Development Code allows one non-agricultural accessory structure up to 1,000 square feet in size on lots of 1 to 3 acres, and one detached garage up to 24’x36’. The parcel currently includes on accessory structure that is 120 square feet in area, and no new accessory structure is included in the application. The parcel meets the accessory structure standards in the Development Code. Lot Coverage The maximum impervious coverage in the General Rural District is 25%. The Planner calculated that the current lot coverage on the parcel is approximately 3%. The coverage would remain at 3% with the addition of the proposed bay window. The request meets the lot coverage requirement. Building Height The proposed addition will not change the height of the existing home. Tuenge Variance Staff Report Scandia City Council Page 3 July 15, 2014 Wastewater Treatment The proposed addition does not require a change in wastewater treatment on the parcel. Stormwater Management and Floodplain Elevations The proposed addition will not require additional stormwater management. The parcel is not located in a floodplain. Landscape Plan No landscape plan is required for the proposed addition. CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES AND FINDINGS Chapter 1, Section 6.0 of the Development Code includes the criteria and required process for considering variance requests. Variances may only be granted when the terms of the variance are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the development code. The other variance criteria include: 1. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Development Code. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. 4. Economic conditions alone shall not constitute practical difficulties. 5. 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. 6. The required variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty. 7. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Applicant’s Statement of Practical Difficulties The applicant is requesting the addition of a bay window to expand the dining room area to accommodate a small dining table. The existing home is of modest size. The dining room is located at the northwest corner of the home. Expansion to the west would impact the existing porch. Therefore, the applicant is requesting expansion to the north. The existing setback on the north (rear) side of the home is 33’ rather than the required 50 feet. The home was built in 1939, before the adoption of the current ordinance and setbacks. There are existing white pine trees along the north property boundary that provide some screening for the home and proposed addition. Findings The following bullets present the Planner’s findings related to Ms. Tuenge’s request for a variance, based on the statutory criteria for granting a variance. Each of the criteria is shown in italics: Tuenge Variance Staff Report Scandia City Council Page 4 July 15, 2014  Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the official control. The Comprehensive Plan and Development Code support single-family residential uses in the General Rural District. A dining room is a typical element of a single-family home. The requested variance is in general harmony with the Comprehensive Plan and intent of the Development Code.  The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner under the conditions allowed by official control(s). Single Family Residences are reasonable uses in the General Rural District. A functional dining room is a reasonable element of a single-family home.  The practical difficulties are not caused by the landowner, and are unique to the property. The practical difficulties are related to the existing location of the home on the lot, the location of the dining room within the home, and existing porch. The location of the home constructed in 1939 does not meet the current rear setback requirement in the Development Code. The bay window addition cannot be added to the side of the home, where it could meet the side setback requirement, due to the location of the porch. The only reasonable location for the expansion is toward the rear setback. The practical difficulties are unique to the property.  The variance would not alter the essential character of the area. The addition is relatively small in size, and will not be visible from most adjacent parcels. The residential use of the parcel will be maintained, and the home with the addition will be similar in size to other homes in the area. Granting the variance would not alter the essential character of the area.  Economic conditions alone shall not constitute practical difficulties. The practical difficulties are related to the location of the home on the parcel relative to the rear lot line, and the internal configuration of the home. The practical difficulties are not only economic in nature.  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 the supply of light or air to adjacent properties. It will continue the use of a common driveway for three parcels, and will not increase congestion, endanger the public, or substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood.  The required variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty. Tuenge Variance Staff Report Scandia City Council Page 5 July 15, 2014 Granting the variance will provide space for a small dining table in an appropriate location given the configuration of the home. It is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty.  Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. The variance is not related to a need for direct sunlight for solar energy systems. PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING AND DISCUSSION The Planning Commission held a public hearing for this application at its regular meeting on July 1, 2014. The Commission received no written or verbal comments on the variance request. The Commission discussed the request and rationale for the variance, noting that the adjoining parcels that face the proposed bay window are vacant, and views toward the rear of the Tuenge home where the bay window is proposed are screened by existing trees. The Commission also noted that the bay window will extend no farther than the existing steps on the rear side of the home. The Commission recommended approval of the variance based on the findings. ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council can recommend the following: 1. Approval 2. Approval with conditions 3. Denial with findings 4. Table the request PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the proposed variance from the required rear setback to allow construction of a 36”x82” bay window addition to the home located at 20595 Quinnell Avenue North that is 30 feet from the rear parcel boundary. The Commission recommends the following conditions for the variance: 1. Development of the property shall be consistent with the plans provided to the City on April 23, 2014. 2. The applicant shall obtain a building permit from the City. 3. The applicant shall maintain the existing trees that provide screening for the adjacent parcel to the north. 4. The applicant shall pay all fees and escrows associated with this application.