Loading...
4.a) Staff Report-EtzwilerVariancePC9 2 14 Memorandum To: Scandia Planning Commission Kristina Handt, City Administrator Reference: Etzwiler Variance Application, City of Scandia Copies To: Lisa Etzwiler, applicant Lisa Etzwiler and Randall Clary, owners Project No.: 15485.015 From: Sherri Buss, RLA AICP, Planner Routing: Date: August 26, 2014 SUBJECT: Etzwiler Variance Application MEETING DATE: September 2, 2014 LOCATION: 20789 Quint Avenue North Scandia, Minnesota APPLICANT: Lisa Etzwiler 16522 Baxter Forest Ridge Drive Chesterfield, Missouri 63005 OWNERS: Lisa Etzwiler and Randall Clary 16522 Baxter Forest Ridge Drive Chesterfield, Missouri 63005 ZONING: Agriculture – Core (AG C) and St. Croix River Overlay District 120-DAY PERIOD: September 27, 2014 ITEMS REVIEWED: Application, Survey, and Photos received July 24 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST: The applicant is seeking to replace and expand an existing accessory structure on the parcel she owns at 20789 Quint Avenue North. Replacing the structure in the proposed location requires a variance from the required setbacks from the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) of the St. Croix River and the bluff line. The applicant’s parcel is approximately 2.31 acres in size. The property is located in the Agriculture - Core (AG C) District and the St. Croix River Overlay District. Etzwiler Variance Staff Report Scandia Planning Commission Page 2 September 2, 2014 BACKGROUND Construction Start Prior to Obtaining Permits and Garage Setbacks In the fall of 2013, the applicant began demolition of an existing shed on the parcel at 20789 Quint Avenue North, and construction of a new bunkhouse/workshop at the same location. The demolition and construction began before the applicant applied for a building permit from the City for this work. After the City required the construction to cease, the applicant applied for a building permit on November 19, 2013. The City Administrator sent a letter to the applicant on November 27, 2013 that noted the following:  The building permit application was determined to be incomplete, so that the City could determine if the new structure complied with the Development Code, or if a variance was needed.  The demolished structure and proposed new structure are located within the St. Croix River Overlay District and the Scenic Easement held by the National Park Service (NPS).  City staff met with staff from the NPS, Minnesota DNR and Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District (CMSCWD) to discuss the building permit application and required approvals, given the location within the Overlay District and Scenic Easement. The City notified the applicant that construction could not continue until the required approvals were obtained; that the applicant needed to provide effective erosion control at the site within 7 days; and that the following were required: o Meet the requirements of the Lower St. Croix River Bluffland and Shoreland Management Ordinance and City Development Code for replacement of the substandard structure, including placing the structure in a location that meets the setback requirements, or obtaining a variance o Approval of the NPS for a replacement structure o City building permit and grading/land alteration permit o Watershed District permit The applicant received a building permit from the City recently to construct a new garage on the parcel (identified on the survey submitted with the application). The National Park Service noted that the garage location does not meet the required setback from the bluffline—it is setback approximately 80’ from the bluffline rather than the required 100 feet. Structure History and Proposed Size The applicant is proposing to build a 22’x22’ (484 square feet) structure that would include a storage area (12’6”x22’, or 275 square feet) plus a work area with a sink, bathroom, and a loft space. The proposed structure is a total 18 feet in height. She is proposing that the new structure replace both the existing shed structure and an existing outhouse on the parcel that does not meet the bluff line setback requirement. The application notes that the existing building and foundation were demolished, without any survey record of the size of the structure, and that existing Park Service and Washington County records of the building size differ. The applicant requested that photos of the demolished shed be used as evidence of the size of the structure. Etzwiler Variance Staff Report Scandia Planning Commission Page 3 September 2, 2014 The National Park Service appraised the property and structures at the applicant’s property in 1976 as part of the purchase of a Scenic Easement over the property. The NPS inventory of structures on the parcel showed a 12’x14’ woodshed in the location where the new structure is proposed, and noted that there was a small lean-to attached to the structure. The Washington County Assessor noted that an appraisal completed for the property identified the structure size as 12’x16’. In the City’s letter to the applicant (November 27, 2013), the NPS indicated that photos cannot be used to accurately determine the size of the structure that was demolished. The NPS indicated that adequate documentation may include a certificate of survey, deed or other dimensioned drawing signed by a registered surveyor or engineer that shows the size and location of the original structure, or an aerial photo of sufficient quality to determine the location and dimensions. The letter indicated that the without the required documentation, the request should be revised to propose a structure no larger than 12’x14’, and noted that the National Park Service would need to approve the size and appearance of the replacement structure. The National Park Service has since indicated that it will accept the building size identified by the Washington County Assessor, which includes the lean-to area identified by the NPS in its survey, so that the size of the structure that has been removed is determined to be 12’x16’. The applicants are proposing to remove the existing 4’7” x 5’8” (approximately 26 square feet) outhouse, and expand the proposed replacement structure to include the same area with a bathroom and additional sink. ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS The applicant is requesting to replace and expand an existing shed that is a Substandard structure because it does not meet the current OHWL and bluffline setback requirements of the Lower St. Croix River Bluffland and Shoreland Management Ordinance. The existing shed is located within the OHWL setback and the bluff area. Ordinance requirements related to replacement of substandard structures and variances include the following:  The Lower St. Croix River Bluffland and Shoreland Management Ordinance requires that an extension, enlargement or alteration of an existing substandard structure or sanitary facility must meet the setback standards of the ordinance, and that if a substandard structure needs replacement due to destruction, deterioration, or obsolescence, such replacement shall comply with the dimensional standards of the ordinance. The applicants are requesting a variance to permit replacement of the shed structure in its existing location, where it would not meet the setback requirements. Therefore, the City needs to determine if the shed can be placed in another location on the parcel that meets the setback requirements, and a variance may be granted only if there is no other location for the cabin that can meet the setback requirements, or the proposed replacement location meets the criteria for granting a variance. Variances may only be granted if they meet the “practical difficulties” criteria in State Statutes, which have been adopted in the City’s Development Code.  The Ordinance permits variance from the bluffline setback in rural districts (includes Scandia) within the 40 to 100 foot range using the variance procedure in the ordinance, and with the following conditions: o The existing drainage patterns shall not be disturbed o All construction and grading shall be resodded or seeded within 180 days of the date of issuance of the building permit Etzwiler Variance Staff Report Scandia Planning Commission Page 4 September 2, 2014 o Vegetation over 6 inches in diameter shall not be removed, to the extent possible o The structure shall be visually inconspicuous when viewed from the river during summer months o The site shall be capable of supporting a standard septic treatment system  The demolished structure was a nonconforming structure under the Development Code (same as a Substandard structure in the St. Croix River District), because it did not meet the setback requirements in the zoning district. Chapter One, Section 13.3 of the Development Code requires that alteration or replacement of nonconforming structures shall not expand the building size, or change the building occupancy capacity. The sections that follow discuss the criteria and rationale for granting the requested variance related to this application. EVALUATION OF VARIANCE REQUEST Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan states that the Agriculture - Core (AG C) District is intended to protect and encourage long-term agriculture. Residential development is also permitted as a secondary use in the District. The Comprehensive Plan supports protection of the St. Croix River, bluffs, and related high quality natural areas in the River Corridor. The ordinance that governs the St. Croix River Overlay District permits Single-Family Residential and related accessory uses in within the overlay district. However, it regulates the setback of structures and septic facilities from blufflines to protect scenic values, vegetation, soils, water, and bedrock from disruption by structures and facilities. A key purpose of the ordinance is to conserve and protect the natural scenic values and resources of the river valley. The ordinance requires that any extension, enlargement, or alteration of an existing substandard structure or sanitary facility shall meet the setback requirements in order to meet the purpose of the ordinance. The applicant is proposing to replace and enlarge the demolished shed structure that was located within the bluff setback. The rationale for the variance states that there are practical difficulties related to building the new structure in a location that meets the setback requirement. The applicant indicates that the structure needs to be replaced in its current location to meet storage needs at a location close to the water, due to the difficulty of transporting water craft and maintenance items up the bluffs to the location that would meet the setback. The applicant is also proposing to expand the structure to include a work area, loft and bathroom facilities. The proposed expansion of the building in its current location within the setback from the OHWL and bluffline is not consistent with the goals of the St. Croix River Overlay District or Scandia’s Development Code. Replacement of the structure at its original size requires a variance. Development Code Requirements: Lot Size and Setbacks The applicant’s lot is 2.31 acres in size and is therefore a nonconforming lot in the AG C District and a Substandard lot in the St. Croix River Overlay District. The AG C District permits lots of Etzwiler Variance Staff Report Scandia Planning Commission Page 5 September 2, 2014 2-5 acres or 20 acres and larger in size, and the St. Croix River District requires that lots in rural areas be at least 2.5 acres in size. The required setbacks for structures in the St. Croix River Overlay District are the following:  Building setback from the OHWL: 200 feet  Building setback from the bluff line: 100 feet  On-site sewage system setback from OHWL: 200 feet  On-site sewage treatment setback from bluff line: 40 feet The required setback in the AG C District include the following:  Side setback: 20 feet  Rear setback: 50 feet The demolished shed and proposed shed location meet the side and rear setback requirements. It is located approximately 10 feet from the south (side) property line, and approximately 490 feet from the rear property line. The survey indicates that the demolished structure was located approximately 100’ from the St. Croix River, and within the bluff area, and therefore did not meet the required setbacks form the river or bluff line. The new structure is proposed in approximately the same location. The survey indicates that there is ample area in the western portion of the parcel to replace the demolished shed in a location that would meet the setback requirements from the OHWL and the bluffline, and meet the side and rear setback requirements. The applicant therefore needs a variance from the setback requirements to locate the replacement building in the same location as the structure that was demolished. Accessory Structures There is an existing garage structure on the parcel that is approximately 675 square feet in area. The Development Code allows a detached garage up to 864 square feet in size and 1 accessory structure up to 1,000 square feet in area on lots that are 1 to 3 acres in size. The application proposes a 484 square foot shed. The number and area of accessory structures proposed meets the ordinance requirement. Lot Coverage The St. Croix River Overlay District permits up to 20% lot coverage. The Planner estimated the existing lot coverage by impervious surfaces is approximately 4%. The parcel coverage would not change with the replacement of the existing structure in the same location as the demolished structure. The parcel would meet the coverage requirement with the replacement of the structure in the same location. Building Height and Color The maximum structure height permitted in the St. Croix River District is 35 feet. The proposed height meets the ordinance requirement. The Lower St. Croix River Bluffland and Shoreland Management Ordinance requires that the exterior color of new or removed structures, including roofs, shall be of earth or summer Etzwiler Variance Staff Report Scandia Planning Commission Page 6 September 2, 2014 vegetation tones, unless completely screened from the river. The Planner included a condition for approval of the variance that the structure color shall meet the ordinance requirement, subject to NPS review. Driveway Access There is an existing driveway located within an easement that provides access to the parcel. Wastewater Treatment and Well There is an existing septic system that serves the home on the parcel, and an abandoned outhouse. The Planner sent a copy of the application to Pete Ganzel, Washington County Health Department, for review and comment. Pete’s comments included the following:  “They will not need a permit from the County nor need to expand the existing compliant sewage system to add a bathroom.  “They obviously need a building permit from the City and any plumbing inspections should be done by the building inspector.  “They would need a permit from the County to abandon the privy.” DNR staff and City staff recommend that the proposed expansion of the structure to include a bathroom not be approved. This would be an expansion of the size and use of the structure, and could permit the structure to be used as living space. If the Planning Commission recommends that the expansion of the new building be permitted to include the bathroom facilities, the Commission should recommend conditions that the applicant obtain the necessary permit to abandon the privy. Stormwater Management The Planner sent the application to the Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District for review and comment. The District Administrator’s comments included the following:  “The District is not in favor of granting variances in requirements for river setbacks. However, the Board of Managers understands that there are pre-existing conditions which may be interpreted as hardships to the owners and may necessitate granting variances to existing codes.  “It is not clear that this is the case, particularly in light of the difficulty of establishing the pre-existing conditions and the property owner’s responsibility to be aware of the terms of any scenic easement which may restrict the available options on the property. If a river setback variance is granted in this situation, the District supports the use of existing documentation, such as the survey, to determine the size of the replacement structure in addition to the removal of the existing outhouse structure to reduce the amount of hardcover. A district permit will be required if the variance is granted.” The Planner has added a proposed condition for approval of the variance that the applicants shall obtain the necessary Watershed District permit. The Planner added proposed conditions related to drainage patterns, restoration, vegetation and septic system that are required for variances in the St. Croix River District, and a condition Etzwiler Variance Staff Report Scandia Planning Commission Page 7 September 2, 2014 that the NPS determine whether the structure will be visually inconspicuous from the river, based on the requirements of the scenic easement. Landscape Plan No landscape plan is required. The St. Croix Bluffland and Shoreland Management Ordinance says that a vegetative cutting permit is not required for construction of a validly permitted structure or septic system as long as the existing quality, character, density and canopy of vegetation are maintained as viewed from the river. In this case, the applicant is proposing replacement of the structure in the same location as the demolished structure, so no tree removal should be required. DNR Comments The Planner sent the application to the DNR for review and comment. DNR staff commented twice on the application, to City staff and to NPS staff. DNR comments included the following:  “I have reviewed the preliminary submittal by the Etzwilers. I don’t really see much discussion about whether the structure could be located so as to better meet setbacks. We understand there is a convenience and access issue with the primary structure being located below the bluff. The ordinance says that replacement of a substandard structure must meet the setbacks. We also understand the desire to store recreational equipment out of sight and weather. I wonder if a small additional could be attached to the existing structure that could serve the same purpose. To replace this structure with a workshop, bed and bathroom appears to be an intensification of use.” [The National Park Service staff indicated in response that NPS would be opposed to expansion of the existing cabin.]  “I think it will be impossible over time to monitor [that the expansion of the cabin with the bathroom] that it is not going to be used as living space or a guest house by this owner or future owners. This is why I am opposed to the sink and toilet. They can too easily add a bed or futon or murphy bed to use as a guest house, add a microwave, etc.” National Park Service (NPS) Comments The National Park Service provided the following comments on the variance request:  “Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the variance request for the storage shed at 20789 Quint Avenue. We have reviewed the current project request against the NPS scenic easement which encumbers the property.  The location of the proposed storage shed is considered to be within line of sight of the St. Croix River. Therefore, changes or additions are very limited. No building which extends the structure nearer to the river nor increases either the width or height of the structure as seen from the river will be allowed.  There is some question as to the exact dimensions of this structure because it was removed before the variance request was submitted. In the appraisal which the NPS did before the purchase of the scenic easement in 1977, this shed was described as follows: "The shed is a 12'x14' wood structure with rolled asphalt roof and wood floor. It has a small attached wood shed." Washington County assessor records indicate that the shed was recorded as a 12'x16' shed. As stated in our email of February 5, 2014 to Lisa Etzwiler Variance Staff Report Scandia Planning Commission Page 8 September 2, 2014 Etzwiler, NPS is willing to go with the County Assessor's description of the footprint dimensions of the old shed at 12'x16'.  Regarding the old outhouse which is currently standing at the site, NPS would approve of the removal of that structure and will allow a stool and a sink to be incorporated into the new structure. As long as the current septic system has been checked and approved to handle this. However, this is not an approval for any kind of living space.  The NPS has concern that this new structure be rebuilt in the footprint and in-kind which means that it remain for storage purposes only. The National Park Service will allow a one-story, 12'x16' storage shed replaced on the original footprint and in-kind incorporating a simple stool and sink, with earth tone coloration on the exterior building materials which allows the structure to blend in with the site.” The Planner has included the NPS recommendations in the proposed conditions. Based on the concerns expressed by the DNR regarding the expansion of use if bathroom facilities are included, and the difficulty of monitoring the use of the structure, City staff recommend that the bathroom facilities not be included if a variance is approved for a storage structure to replace the demolished structure. CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES AND FINDINGS Chapter 1, Section 6.0 of the Development Code and the Lower St. Croix River Bluffland and Shoreland Management Ordinance include 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 in the Development Code 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. The Lower St. Croix River Bluffland and Shoreland Ordinance permits variance from the bluffline setback in rural districts (includes Scandia) within the 40 to 100 foot range using the variance procedure in the ordinance, and with the following conditions: a. The existing drainage patterns shall not be disturbed b. All construction and grading shall be resodded or seeded within 180 days of the date of issuance of the building permit c. Vegetation over 6 inches in diameter shall not be removed, to the extent possible d. The structure shall be visually inconspicuous when viewed form the river during summer months Etzwiler Variance Staff Report Scandia Planning Commission Page 9 September 2, 2014 e. The site shall be capable of supporting a standard septic treatment system Applicant’s Rationale for the Variance The application includes a lengthy discussion regarding the history of the structure that was demolished on the property, and request to replace the previous building and existing outhouse. However, the Lower St. Croix River Bluffland and Shoreland Management Ordinance requires that an extension, enlargement or alteration of an existing substandard structure or sanitary facility must meet the setback standards of the ordinance, and that if a substandard structure needs replacing due to destruction, deterioration, or obsolescence, such replacement shall comply with the dimensional standards of the ordinance. The application does not address whether the building can be replaced in a location that meets the dimensional requirements. Review of the survey indicates that such locations exist in the western portion of the parcel that could meet all setback and dimensional requirements. The application also requests that photographic evidence be used to determine the size of the structure that was demolished. The NPS indicated that such evidence cannot be used to determine the size of the structure that was demolished, and that the records of the NPS and Washington County Assessor may be used as evidence of the size of the structure. The application includes a rationale for a variance to replace the storage use of the demolished structure on the site where the demolished structure was located. The rationale focuses on the need for the storage use of the structure, and includes the following:  “There is no driveway access to yard or cabin. Although we have a hill elevator, this is mainly to transport small items like luggage or groceries. It is not large enough to hold canoes or kayaks, and very awkward to transport lawn equipment of furniture. Even when transporting small tools it is not practical to go up and down the hill every time one needs to get a rake, fishing net, or a hammer.  “We have some storage above, but this has not turned out to be a practical solution due to the distance up the hill and then having to unload and transport heavy or large items another 100 feet back to the garage beyond the bluffline.  “Thus for now, we have needed to leave our equipment below the bluff outside the cabin. Additionally, in an attempt to be good stewards and better reduce our outdoor clutter, we are temporarily storing some items in living spaces.  “We have had to leave canoes, kayaks, life jackets, lawn chairs, lawn mowers, rakes, gas tanks, firewood, beach toys and other items outside our cabin, which is neither visually desirable nor good for long term care of these items. We are currently storing some items in our screened porch and other living areas on a temporary basis in an effort to further reduce current lawn clutter.  The applicant sent an email to the Planner on August 22 that emphasized that “our emphasis for this project is to regain our storage area, and we wish to re-clarify that our intention for the building is to use it for storage and as a workshop, which is what the original building was used for. Our request for the placement of a toilet and sink in the same building is an additional request that we thought would be both a visual and an environmentally desirable replacement for our existing outhouse.” Etzwiler Variance Staff Report Scandia Planning Commission Page 10 September 2, 2014 Findings The applicant is requesting a variance to replace and expand a shed that was demolished in a location that does not meet the setback requirements from the OHWL and bluffline. The following bullets present the Planner’s findings related to the Etzwiler request for a variance, based on the statutory criteria for granting a variance. Each of the criteria is shown in italics:  Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the official control. The Comprehensive Plan and Lower St. Croix Bluffland and Shoreland Management Ordnance support single-family land uses in the AGC and St. Croix River Districts. The Plan and code support protection of the St. Croix River and views from the river. The Lower St. Croix River Ordinance requires that structure alteration or replacement of Substandard structures occur in a location that meets setback requirements, unless the replacement meets the criteria for a variance, and the City’s Development Code prohibits the expansion of such structures without a variance. The City has approved variances to provide for storage structures or storage space within a structure in Shoreland Districts because there were practical difficulties identified to access storage structures in other locations that met setback requirements due to the steep slopes and bluffs on the property. Granting the variances was consistent with City goals to maintain the neat appearance of properties in the City, and recognized the need to provide reasonable storage for personal possessions and lake- related recreational equipment to protect those items from adverse weather. The applicant’s rational for replacement of the storage area in the demolished structure in the same location due to the difficulties of carrying canoes, kayaks, tools, maintenance equipment, and other personal belongings up and down the steep slopes, the need to protect those items from the weather, and to store them inside to screen them from view from the river. The applicant proposed the following to provide protection for the St. Croix River and related resources with the replacement and expansion of the structure:  Replace the demolished cabin in the same location to minimize disturbance and maintain the existing screening and views from the river.  The proposed replacement plan meets the coverage standard in the District.  Remove the existing outhouse and replace it with a toilet and sink in the new structure The replacement of the demolished structure with a storage shed in the same location and of the same size as the documented original structure, to be used for storage purposes only, is in harmony with the intent and purposes of the Comprehensive Plan and Development Code. The applicant’s request to expand the size of the structure and the use of the structure to include bathroom facilities and expanded use is not in harmony with the intent and purposes of the Comprehensive Plan and Development Code. Etzwiler Variance Staff Report Scandia Planning Commission Page 11 September 2, 2014  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 AG C District and the Lower St. Croix River District. The National Park Service has indicated that it will approve a replacement shed at the size of the building that was demolished, if it meets the other design requirements of the scenic easement. The proposed use is reasonable under the conditions allowed by the Development Code.  The practical difficulties are not caused by the landowner, and are unique to the property. The practical difficulties are created by the location of existing bluffs and property access, and the resulting difficulties related to transporting and storing watercraft and other personal property up and down the bluff. The practical difficulties are not caused by the landowner, and are unique to the property.  The variance would not alter the essential character of the area. Other properties in the area include cabins and accessory buildings with similar setbacks from the river. The proposed location will protect much of the existing woodland and tree canopy, to screen the view of the structure from the river. 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 existing bluffs and property access and resulting difficulties related to transporting and storing watercraft and personal property. 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 replacement of the demolished building with a storage shed will not impair the supply of light or air to adjacent properties, and maintenance of the existing single- family use will not increase congestion, endanger the public, or substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood.  The requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty. Granting the variance will permit the applicant to replace the structure that was demolished with a structure that will replace the storage function of the building. The National Park Service requires that the replacement structure be no larger than the recorded size of the original structure. The requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty identified for storage of watercraft and personal property. Etzwiler Variance Staff Report Scandia Planning Commission Page 12 September 2, 2014  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. ACTION REQUESTED: The Planning Commission should receive public comments at the hearing on September 2, and review the analysis related to practical difficulties at the site visit to the property. The Planning Commission should discuss the variance request, and can recommend the following: 1. Approval 2. Approval with conditions 3. Denial with findings 4. Table the request PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: The Planner recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of a variance to permit the replacement of the demolished structure in the same location identified on the property survey (May 8, 2014) with a storage structure of a size not to exceed 12’x16’. The location of the structure shall be a minimum of 100’ from the OHWL of the St. Croix River. The Planner recommends the following conditions for the variance: 1. The location of the storage structure shall be consistent with the location of the demolished structure shown on the survey provided to the City on July 24, 2014. The maximum size of the replacement structure shall be 12’x16’, and the structure may be one story in height and may be used for storage only. 2. The applicant shall obtain required approvals for the structure from the National Park Service (NPS). The exterior color of the structure, including the roof, shall be of earth or summer vegetation tones, and shall be approved by the NPS. 3. The applicant shall obtain a building permit from the City. 4. The applicant shall obtain a Grading and Erosion and Sediment Control permit from the City. 5. The applicant shall obtain the required Watershed District permit. 6. The storage structure shall not include a dwelling unit. 7. Construction of the building shall not change the existing drainage patterns on the parcel. 8. All areas that are impacted by construction, grading and related activities shall be resodded or seeded within 180 days of the date of issuance of the building permit. Etzwiler Variance Staff Report Scandia Planning Commission Page 13 September 2, 2014 9. To the greatest extent possible, vegetation over six (6) inches in diameter shall not be removed. 10. The Applicant shall pay all fees and escrows associated with this application.