Loading...
7. PC Staff Report Tomaro Walsh Variance Memorandum To: Scandia Planning Commission Reference: Tomaro Walsh Variance Application Copies To: Brenda Eklund, Clerk Ken Cammilleri, City Administrator John Walsh, Applicant Project No.: 17722.000 Tomaro Walsh Variance From: Evan Monson, Planner Routing: Date: November 6, 2020 SUBJECT: Variance requests for Lake, Front, and Side Setbacks MEETING DATE: November 10, 2020 LOCATION: 18570 Norell Avenue North, PID 34.032.20.24.0020 APPLICANT: John Walsh OWNERS: Tom and Barb Tomaro ZONING: General Rural (GR), Shoreland Overlay REVIEW PERIOD: 120-day November 14, 2020 (waiver to December 1) ITEMS REVIEWED: Revised plans received November 4, 2020 DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST: The original request was reviewed and tabled by the Planning Commission back in September to allow the applicant and owners to revise their plans. The Planning Commission indicated they would like to see more detailed surveys or plans to ensure the site does not exceed the impervious surface coverage, as well as solutions addressing connecting to the city sewer system. The owners also had indicated during the meeting a desire to keep the existing cabin and to incorporate that into a revised plan. The latest plan would still need variances from the minimum lake, front, and side setbacks to construct a new residence on their property at 18570 Norell Avenue North. Tomaro Walsh Variance Staff Report November 10, 2020 Scandia Planning Commission Page 2 The property currently has an old cabin, nonconforming to the lake side setback, and two sheds on it. The existing sheds are proposed to be removed. The owners would like to keep the existing cabin while removing it from the city sewer system and hooking it up to a holding tank. The proposed residence would be located towards the east half of the lot. The proposed structure would be 32 feet from the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) (note that distance is due to the OHWL on the adjacent lot to the south coming over much further to the east than the OHWL as measured on the Tomaro’s lot). The proposed residence would now be placed at a setback of 17.8 feet from the south property line, and 30 feet from the front. A proposed tank and lift station is proposed on the north side of the lot to provide connection to the city sewer system for the house, hence why the house was shifted south. The proposed driveway on the lot is proposed to be made with an impervious surface in order to reduce the impervious coverage of the lot. Per the plans, the lot would have an impervious coverage of just over 23%. The property is substandard, as it does not meet the minimum frontage/width, size, or buildable area requirements for the General Rural (GR) zoning district. PROPERTY INFORMATION Parcel description: 18570 Norell Avenue North is a parcel located on the east side of Big Marine Lake. It has an existing 740 SF cabin that was built in 1959. The existing cabin is 27.3 feet from the OHWL. The lot gradually slopes down from the east end near the street towards the lake, with flat areas throughout. The lot area, as measured from the ordinary high water line, is 19,850 SF per the submitted survey. The lot is approximately 100.26 feet wide, with the depth measuring 192 on the north property line and 207 feet for the south property line. This lot does have access to the Anderson/Erickson Sewer System, though that system is currently at capacity. Zoning: General Rural, Shoreland Overlay Land use: Single-family Residential EVALUATION OF VARIANCE REQUEST Applicant’s Explanation of the Plan and Variance Request “Submitting a revision to the multiple side lot variance request from 1 ft. on each side (north side and south side property line) to a single request of just 2 ft. on the south side property line. The revised site plan will shift the proposed new building toward the south lot line compared to the initial site plan. The revised site plan would result in a 20 ft. setback on the north side and an 18 ft. setback on the south side lot line. Rationale: The 20 ft. spacing to the north allows ample room to install the new septic holding tank and lift station to meet requirements for online hook up to the Anderson Erickson sewer system. (The inclusion of this septic equipment and infrastructure is new to the site plan Tomaro Walsh Variance Staff Report November 10, 2020 Scandia Planning Commission Page 3 compared to the original.) The revised 2 ft. variance to the south allows for opportunity to maintain the intentions of setbacks ordinances because: 1- There is extensive tree and shrub/vegetation buffer allowing for a visual buffer and providing water control for the adjoining property to the south (as well as the north side) 2- the adjoining property area/ single lot to the south is (dimensionally standing) a non-conforming piece of property, thus negating future issues of intended setback criteria do to a lack of future lot development of the adjoining south property. 3- The revised side set-back proposals reduce the initial side lot variance requests from 2 to 1. 4- Also, in acceptance of this variance request, we will obviously comply with all guidelines of the Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District to ensure and maintain stormwater management on the property.” Staff Comments on the Variance Request The City Engineer provided the following comments during the original review: • The Anderson/Erickson Sewer System is already operating at or above capacity limits allowable within the adopted ordinance last time Public Works closely reviewed the daily flows, thus if the property is proposing “additional use” that discussion needs to occur prior to allowing a large new year round home to be brought onto the system. How many bedrooms/bathrooms does the current structure have? • Having separate garage doors face three different directions shall be discussed on attended use, driveway location, and how drainage will be managed on this site that is very flat. This site is so flat is may require constructing a rigid (concrete) drainage swale down the lot lines to ensure drainage is not pushed onto neighboring properties once the tree canopy is lost with the proposed size of house and removal of the existing cabin and guess the new home will be slightly elevated with a new foundation. • City should ask for a 5 foot drainage and utility easement along the entire eastern property line to allow for private utilities to be located within that area with the road being so close to the property line. • Any change to the building structure will require the septic system to become within compliance of the current City Ordinance and comply with Washington County permit requirements. • Driveway permit and grading permit will be required. • Water table information will be important in obtaining for building review. • Project shall be in compliance with the Watershed District which will include additional requirements. The following comments were made after viewing the revised plans • A pervious surface for the driveway would not be permitted due to concerns over maintenance and effectiveness. The water table level could impact the functionality of a pervious surface in this location. • The tank and lift station as shown may not be accessible. Tomaro Walsh Variance Staff Report November 10, 2020 Scandia Planning Commission Page 4 The Watershed District: The Watershed District noted this project will require a permit from the Carnelian Marine St. Croix Watershed District, and the following rules will likely be applicable: • Rule #2 Stormwater Management – This rule is triggered by the amount of land disturbance with impervious surface creation within 1,000 feet of a public water and by the shoreland setback variance (if approved by Scandia). Stormwater management BMPs sized in compliance with the District’s Small Residential Project Stormwater Worksheet will be required. Quantification of existing and proposed impervious surface areas are necessary to calculate stormwater management treatment requirements. In addition, a stormwater declaration will be required to be recorded with Washington County for CSMSCD access to and landowner maintenance of incorporated stormwater BMPs. • Rule #3 Erosion Control – An erosion/sediment control plan is required including silt fence or silt logs downslope of disturbed areas, a rock construction entrance and details for disturbed area vegetation establishment (sod, seed and mulch, erosion control blanket, etc.). • Rule #4 Buffers – This rule will be triggered by the shoreline setback variance (if approved by Scandia). The standard buffer width for Big Marine Lake, a groundwater-dependent natural resource, is 100-feet. Rule 4.9.4 (exception for nonconforming setback) provides flexibility (reduction) in the required buffer width. The site plan indicates the existing cabin is approximately 31.5-feet from the OHWL so the minimum required buffer width is approximately 16-feet. The proposed home is approximately 93-feet from the OHWL. It should also be noted that a lakeshore buffer declaration will be required to be recorded with Washington County. Areas disturbed within the buffer will be required to be revegetated with native vegetation, with the exception of permitted access to the waterbody. Areas undisturbed are allowed to remain as-is. • Rule #5 Shoreline and Streambank Stabilization – Site plan indicates a rock wall. It is unclear if this is existing or proposed. If proposed applicant will need to meet with District onsite to discuss alternate shoreline stabilization that is allowed by District Rule. • Rule #7 Floodplain and Drainage Alterations – A proposed grading plan has not been provided. Fill below the 100-year elevation (942.5’) would require 1:1 compensatory floodplain storage creation. The Department of Natural Resources: • The East Metro Area Hydrologist had not commented at the time of this staff report. Tomaro Walsh Variance Staff Report November 10, 2020 Scandia Planning Commission Page 5 Development Code The Development Code includes the zoning and shoreland management regulations of the city. For this request, there are a number of complex issues to consider: setbacks, impervious surface coverage, and keeping the existing cabin on the parcel. The proposed plan shows the new house within both the required front, south side, and lake side setback. The house is shown meeting the north side setback. The impervious surface coverage maximum is 25% of the lot. The City Engineer noted that the driveway cannot be made with a pervious surface, which would result in the lot then exceeding the 25% threshold. The plans would then need to be revised in order to bring the property within the 25% limit. Possible ways to bring the proposed plans within the 25% limit could include reducing the footprint of the house. If the proposed house was within the south side and front side setbacks, the impervious coverage would be 26.7%. Leaving the front of the house as shown, but having the house meet the side setback and also removing the existing cabin would bring the impervious coverage to 24.7%. The existing cabin can potentially be kept on the site and approved as an accessory dwelling unit, or ADU. The shoreland management chapter of the code defines an ADU as “A dwelling unit that is located on the same lot as a principal residential or commercial structure to which it is accessory, and that is subordinate in area and form to the principal use. A density unit is not attributed to this dwelling unit when calculating density”. In this situation, the cabin would be subordinate to the proposed house. Both the shoreland management chapter and zoning regulations chapter have regulations concerning ADUs. Since this lot is within the shoreland overlay, an ADU can be permitted by a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The shoreland management chapter notes that a detached ADU “must be located in the rear yard (between the primary dwelling and roadway on lakeshore parcels) or side yard, and designed to reduce its visibility as viewed from public waters and adjacent shoreland by vegetation, topography, increased setbacks or color, assuming summer leaf-on conditions”. Since the cabin would be located between the proposed house and the lake, an additional variance would be necessary to approve the location of the ADU prior to getting a CUP. The zoning regulations chapter notes a detached ADU’s footprint would count against the limitations of square footage allowed for accessory structures. The total square footage allowed for accessory structures on lot less than one acre is 720 SF, which means the cabin is 20 SF over this threshold. In order to keep the cabin on-site, the owner would need an additional application for variances requesting both the size and the location of the cabin be approved, as well as a CUP if the size and location are approved. This additional future review and approval needed to allow the cabin to remain as an ADU complicates the review of the current variance request for the proposed house. Many of the issues with approving the variances for the house can be eliminated by simply not keeping the cabin. In reviewing these plans, the impact of the proposed ADU is taken into account given the cabin is an existing structure, even though the review and approval for an ADU is not part of this variance request. Tomaro Walsh Variance Staff Report November 10, 2020 Scandia Planning Commission Page 6 Criteria for Variance and Findings Chapter 1, Section 6.0 of the Development Code includes the criteria and required process for considering variance requests. Each item to be considered for a variance is identified below in italics, followed by the Planner’s findings regarding the requested variances for lake, front, and side setbacks at 18570 Norell Avenue North. • Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the Comprehensive Plan and general purposes and intent of the official control. The Comprehensive Plan prioritizes environmental stewardship on lakeside lots. The applicant proposes to have a new residence that is placed further away from the lake than the existing cabin. As a result of the increased lake setback, the house does encroach into the front yard setback. The revised plans shifted the house south compared to the original request, in order to have room for a tank and lift station to address issues with connecting to the sewer. The proposal to keep the cabin as an ADU would negate the increased setback from the lake, though, and would potentially put the lot at an impervious coverage of over 25%. By removing the cabin, and reducing the proposed house’s encroachments into the front or south side setback, the lot would be able to be below the impervious coverage limit. The proposed plans as shown are not in general harmony with the Comprehensive Plan and Development Code; revisions or conditions for approval would need to be made in order to bring the request into harmony with the Comprehensive Plan and Development Code. • The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner under the conditions allowed by official control(s). This property is in the General Rural zoning district, which is guided for single-family residential use. Proposing to continue to use the property for residential use is a reasonable use in the General Rural District. • The practical difficulties are not caused by the landowner and are unique to the property. The practical difficulties that limit the use of the property are a result of the lot being substandard and not conforming to the minimum requirements of the development code. The lot does not meet the minimum lot size (2 acres), buildable area (1 acre), or minimum frontage (160 feet) of the underlying zoning district. Due to the limited amount of space, it can difficult to use the property without setback variances and meet code. The 100 foot lake setback in particular is hard to meet on this lot due to the OHWL taking a sharp turn eastward on the adjacent property. The practical difficulties are not caused by the current landowner and are unique to the property. • The variance would not alter the essential character of the area. Tomaro Walsh Variance Staff Report November 10, 2020 Scandia Planning Commission Page 7 The proposed plans would keep the use of the property as single-family residential. The existing cabin is less than 30 feet from the OHWL, whereas the proposed house would be constructed further from the OHWL. As shown, the proposed plans would put the impervious surface coverage at above 25%. Exceeding the impervious surface limit is not something that would be encouraged in this area, and would likely impact the character of the neighborhood and the lake in a negative manner. Adjustments to the proposed house’s footprint in conjunction with removing the existing cabin would negate this issue. The requested variances as shown could alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Reducing encroachments into the required side and/or front setback along with removal of the existing cabin would keep the lot in-line with the character of the rest of the neighborhood. • Economic conditions alone shall not constitute practical difficulties. The practical difficulties are related to the lot not providing the minimum amount of space as is required in the code. 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. Granting the requested variances would not result in the new house limiting light or air to neighboring properties. The land use will not change from single-family residential, so increases to congestion or fire danger are not expected. The property values of neighboring values would not be negatively impacted, either. This area of the city is served by the Anderson Erickson Sewer System. The existing system is at or exceeding current capacity, so a residence with more bedrooms could potentially cause issues with the sewer system. Given the potential issues with the city sewer, a new house would have to have the same number of bedrooms the existing cabin did in order to prevent the system being overwhelmed. If the existing cabin were to be kept, it would need to be removed from the system. The requested variances will not impair the supply of light or air to adjacent properties, increase congestion, or substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The property will have to limit the number of bedrooms in the house and work with the city to guarantee that hooking up into the system will not overwhelm it. • The requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty. The proposed residential structure will be further from the OHWL than the existing cabin. The lot is not meeting the minimum frontage, and the requested variance to encroach into the side setback is minimal. The house, as a result of being placed further away from the OHWL, encroaches into the front setback. Tomaro Walsh Variance Staff Report November 10, 2020 Scandia Planning Commission Page 8 As shown in the current plans, the lot would be exceeding the impervious surface coverage. Removing the existing cabin would bring the property to an impervious coverage of 25.3%. Given that the house footprint would still need to be reduced to get the lot below the 25% threshold, the requested variances do not appear to be the minimum request necessary to overcome the difficulties of the lot being substandard. • 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. Not all of the findings above support granting the variances. In order to meet the criteria to grant the variances, the applicant would need to further revise their plans by showing the existing cabin removed and reducing the footprint of the house, or would need to meet conditions of approval that would result in the request complying with impervious surfacing limitations. ACTION REQUESTED: The Planning Commission can recommend to the Scandia City Council that it do one of the following: 1. Approve 2. Approve with conditions 3. Deny with findings 4. Table the request PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planner recommends that the Planning Commission to deny the requested variances, due to the findings above not supporting the granting of the request as shown in the latest plans.