Loading...
9.b2a Johnson reply to staff findingsJohnson Variance Application RECEtV'ED OCT 5 2020 CITY OF SCANDIA Variance considerations for a detached 28' x 42' garage on lots 5 & 6, Bliss Plat 2"d Division. The lots are across Layton Ave. from our primary residence, 18941 Layton Ave. N. 1) Variance shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the Comprehensive Plan and general purposes and intent of the official control. We intend to have one parcel with one house and one accessory structure, in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and existing official control. We will merge lots 5 and 6 with 18941 Layton Ave N to create a single parcel. In August 2019, we spoke with Danette Kampfer, Washington County Property Records Principal Specialist. We discussed merging lots on opposing sides of the street, explaining our hope to construct a garage across the street. She researched our area and affirmed that we would be able to merge the lots as others in the neighborhood have previously done. We intend to have one parcel with one house and one accessory structure, in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and existing official control. 2) The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner under the conditions allowed by official controls. A house with an accessory structure is a reasonable use according to the existing Development Code. By merging the parcels as described above, the requested accessory structure would not be the primary use on the lot. Additionally, our actions would reduce the number of lots where homes could be built. This provides a benefit to the City by reducing the number of potential sewer connections in the neighborhood. 3) The practical difficulties are not caused by the landowner and are unique to the property. The property in the Bliss/Holiday Beach development was platted prior to Scandia becoming a city and our ownership of the lots. The fact that the lots are undersized for the current development code was not caused by our action. Although there previously was an attached garage, due to the nature of the lot size, the existing home and garage were inadequately sized for the storage needed by lakeshore lots. We are mitigating the practical difficulties by combining lots we own to create a larger area for our proposed construction than almost any of the other parcels in the area. We have no intention of adding another structure that will connect to the sanitary sewer system. 4) The variance would not alter the essential character of the area. Having a detached garage on a lot across the road is common in our neighborhood. Within a block of our home, there are three existing residences with accessory structures on land across the street from the primary residence: • 18975 Layton Ave N • 18884 Layton Ave N • 18819 Layton Ave N Our situation is not unique and will not alter the essential character of the area, as many homes in the area already have what we are requesting. 5) Economic conditions alone shall not constitute practical difficulties The difficulties encountered are not economic conditions 6) 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. Flooding has not occurred on this property since implementation of flood control in the 1980's. We are specifically requesting placement of the accessory structure to the north of the property so as not to interfere with the lakeview of the home to the west of the property. We are currently unable to meet outside storage requirements in Scandia's code. With approval of this accessory structure, we argue that property values will be increased by creating indoor storage. 7) The requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty. The lot coverage limitation will be eliminated by creation of one parcel. As previously stated, we have no intention of creating a sewer connection for the accessory structure. 8) Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. N/A Citv Engineer We understand we will need to develop and submit a grading plan. We don't understand the rationale or justification for granting an easement on lot 6. This lot has not flooded and is fully to the north of the drainage flow. We are requesting placement of the accessory structure well to the north of the sewer line that runs through lot 6. As previously stated, we have no intention of connecting to the sewer system. We understand we will also need to apply for a driveway permit. Watershed District We understand we will need to consult with the Watershed District to understand their unique requirements. We are requesting that the Planning Commission approve our request for the reasons stated above. Harold and Cindy Johnson 18941 Layton Ave. N. Marine on St Croix, MN 55047 651-433-3486 Cindy.harold78@yahoo.com