Loading...
08.b3b Staff Report Melcher Variance TKDA ® | 444 Cedar Street Suite 1500 | Saint Paul, MN 55101 651.292.4400 • tkda.com An employee -owned company promoting affirmative action and equal opportunity. Memorandum To: Scandia City Council Reference: Melcher Variance Application Copies To: Brenda Eklund, Clerk Ken Cammilleri, City Administrator Forrest and Natalie Melcher, Applicants Project No.: 18108.000 Melcher Variance From: Evan Monson, Planner Routing: Date: June 4, 2021 SUBJECT: Variances to: construct a detached garage closer to the right-of-way than the house, and to construct an accessory structure exceeding the requirements permitted for parcels between 1 and 3 acres in size MEETING DATE: June 1, 2021 LOCATION: 12620 181st St N, PID 33.032.20.44.0004 APPLICANT/OWNER: Forrest and Natalie Melcher ZONING: General Rural (GR), Shoreland Overlay REVIEW PERIOD: June 14, 2021, 120-day August 13, 2021 ITEMS REVIEWED: Application and plans received April 15, 2021, revised plans received May 27, 2021 DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant is requesting to build a detached accessory structure on the southeast corner of their property. The structure would be 48 feet by 42 feet, with a 10 feet by 16 feet lean-to on the southeast side of the structure. The structure would be used for storage of personal vehicles and equipment, as well as provide space for a shop and woodworking area. The structure would need an access from 181st Street North, which terminates near the proposed location. The proposed accessory structure (including the lean-to) has a footprint of 2,176 square feet. The structure is proposed to be placed a minimum of 40 feet from the front property line. Though meeting the front yard setback, it would be closer to the road right-of-way (ROW) than the house on the property. The size of the structure would also exceed what is currently permitted in the Development Code for parcels between one and three acres in size. These issues trigger a variance, hence the request from the applicant. Melcher Variance Staff Report June 15, 2021 Scandia City Council Page 2 PROPERTY INFORMATION Parcel description: 12620 181st Street North is located on the south side of the city, south of Big Marine Lake in the Hardwood Hills subdivision. There are a number of waterbodies near the property, so the area is within the Shoreland Overlay zoning district. No waterbodies or wetlands are within close proximity of the parcel, though. The parcel is approximately 2.39 acres in size, which makes it nonconforming to the minimum lot sizes required in the applicable zoning districts. The impervious surfaces on the lot total less than 10% of the property. An existing house with an attached garage is located on the far northeast corner of the lot, with the septic system located to the west. The lot slopes from the northeast and southwest corners down towards the center of the lot. The lot is wooded apart from a small clearing near the road; this is the proposed location of the new accessory structure. Figure 1: Aerial of the property Zoning: GR, Shoreland Overlay Land use: Single-Family Residential EVALUATION OF VARIANCE REQUEST Applicant’s Explanation of the Plan and Variance Request “We are requesting permission to construct an accessory structure on our property. Due to the placement of the principal structure on the lot, and location of septic system and utilities, it would be impossible to be as far from the right of way as the principal structure, as required in the zoning ordinance. In addition to Melcher Variance Staff Report June 15, 2021 Scandia City Council Page 3 this, the principal structure is already non-compliant with current setback requirements, and adding onto this could only further infringe upon the requirements which we would like to res pect. Please see attached site plan for illustration and details. The proposed location would be minimally disruptive to the natural slope and drainage, as well as adjacent properties. It would be compliant with all required setbacks in the zoning ordinance. Please also note the location of the property at the dead end of 181st Street North and absence of any residences in close proximity. We love this community and truly believe this would not cause any significant disturbance. Thank you for your consideration.” Staff Comments on the Variance Request Engineer The City Engineer provided the following comments regarding the request.  If new driveway access is requested, Driveway access permit will be required through Public Works and potentially require a driveway culvert to be installed along with some potential ditch grading.  Site improvements shall be within compliance of the Watershed District. Stormwater management improvements shall be anticipated as conditions of approval for their permit.  Proposed improvements will result in loss of some tree canopy and discussion on if tree replacement plan should occur to show tree replacements on the final plans if required.  Proposed project will disturb fifty (10) cubic yards or more and/or disturbance of 600 sq uare feet or more, thus a grading permit will be required.  Soil piles and exposed vegetation areas must be contained with erosion control devices, including multi rows of erosion control considering how steep the slopes are on this site.  Temporary restoration may be required to contain any erosion. Upon completion of the grading, site restoration shall be completed as soon as possible.  Verify proposed finish floor elevation of the new garage and show on final plans. Watershed The CMSCWD indicated the following rules would be applicable:  Rule 2 Stormwater Management – Adding impervious surface that exceeds either one acre or five percent of the site (5,205-SF). Factoring in the amount of existing impervious, the proposed project will result in the lot exceeding 5% impervious. Stormwater management providing at least 330-CF of storage is required, maybe more if an access drive is also proposed. Onsite soils are HSG A, therefore bio retention is recommended.  Rule 3 Erosion Control – An erosion/sediment control plan will be required, along with details for vegetation establishment will be required.  Rule 7 Floodplain – Compliance with low floor freeboard requirement of stormwater BMPs will be required. DNR The East Metro Area Hydrologist did not provide comments at the time of this staff report. Development Code The front setback for the GR zoning district is 40 feet, as noted in Chapter Two, Section 2.6(7). The rear setback for this zone is 50 feet, while the side setback is 20. The proposed accessory structure is located at a minimum 40 feet from the front property line along the ROW. The existing house is located within the Melcher Variance Staff Report June 15, 2021 Scandia City Council Page 4 rear setback of 50 feet, and is approximately 17 feet from the east side setback line (or 37 feet from the property line). The Development Code notes in Chapter Two, Section 3.2 the standards for accessory structures. Section 3.2(2)(B) notes that no accessory structure is able to be closer to the road right-of-way (ROW) than the principal structure on a lot unless a number of criteria and all setbacks are met. (B) No detached accessory structure, including storage sheds, shall be located closer to the road right-of-way in relation to the front lot line than the principal building on a lot unless the following conditions are met: 1. The parcel is located on a lakeshore. Accessory structures on lakeshore parcels may be located between the roadway right-of-way and principal building and shall meet setback requirements; or 2. The accessory structure is located on a lot of five (5) acres or more and is placed at least 200 feet from the road right-of-way; or 3. The accessory structure is located on a parcel that is less than five (5) acres in size, is necessary to meet the Exterior Storage requirements of this Chapter, and the physical conditions on the parcel (including but not limited to steep slopes, locations of wetlands, location of the principal structure) prevent the location of the storage structure within the side or rear yard; and Permit required. The property owner shall submit a plan for the proposed structure and obtain an administrative permit authorizing the location of the structure in the front yard. The Zoning Administrator may require screening if needed to protect views from adjacent properties or public roadways. 4. In situations 1-3 above, all setbacks and impervious cover requirements are met. The first two conditions do not apply to this parcel, as the lot is not on a lake and is not 5 acres or more in size. The third criteria could be applicable, though the applicant is currently following the exterior storag e standards. Based off the location of the existing house (the principal structure), an accessory structure is unable to be built on most of the property, as most of the lot is between the ROW and the house. Building the proposed detached structure to the side or the rear of the house could likely need a variance, given the location of the house relative to the side and rear setbacks. There is space to the west of the house, though this is where the septic system is located. Further west the lot slopes down, so significant grading and removal of trees would be needed to build a detached accessory structure over there that meets setbacks and is no closer to the ROW than the house. For the same reasons above, if the applicant were to incorporate the shop space as an addition onto the house, the only feasible locations would be the front of the existing house. Section 3.2(3)(C) notes that lots between 1 and 3.0 acres in size are limited to one accessory structure and 1,000 SF of accessory space. The proposed structure would total 2,216 square feet in size. Since this parcel is 2.39 acres in size, it is limited to one structure totaling 1,000 square feet in size. Given the presence of an attached 576 SF garage already on the lot, the proposed request would exceed these Melcher Variance Staff Report June 15, 2021 Scandia City Council Page 5 thresholds. The property, even with the addition of the proposed accessory structure would still be well below the permitted impervious surface coverage limit of 25% of the lot. Variance Criteria and Findings Chapter One, 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 Planning Commission’s findings regarding the requested variances.  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 does identify the area as having ‘outstanding ecological quality’; the proposed location would be less intrusive than other conforming spots on this property. The request is in general 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). The current use of the property is single-family residential, which would not change if this variance request is approved. Proposing to continue to use the property for residential use is a reasonable use.  The practical difficulties are not caused by the landowner and are unique to the property. The practical difficulties limiting the locations to build the proposed structure are due to the current house being nonconforming, as well as the location of the existing septic system. Based off the current code requirements, this proposed structure would normally need to be to the side or rear of the house. Based off the location of the existing house and septic, this is difficult to do without a variance of some kind. The practical difficulties of the lot being non-conforming are not caused by the current landowner and are unique to the property.  The variances would not alter the essential character of the area. The use and function of the property would remain residential, as is the use of other nearby lots in the area. The roadway terminates near where the structure would be built. The addition of a new structure may stand out, as not many buildings are within clear view of the right-of-way, though given its use and the area’s limited traffic, it should not negatively alter the character of the neighborhood. Granting the variance would not alter the essential character of the area.  Economic conditions alone shall not constitute practical difficulties. The practical difficulties limiting the locations to build the proposed structure are due to the current house being nonconforming, as well as the location of the existing septic system. 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 limiting light or air to neighboring properties . The land use will still be single-family residential, so increases to congestion, fire danger, or public safety are not expected. The property values of neighboring values should not be Melcher Variance Staff Report June 15, 2021 Scandia City Council Page 6 negatively impacted, either, if the requested variances are granted. The requested variances will not impair the supply of light or air to adjacent properties, 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. Many of the locations that would be to the rear and side of the existing principal structure are either also within setback areas, or are already occupied. A conforming detached accessory structure could be built in the northwest corner of the lot, though it is not an ideal location due to slopes and needing to clear the area of trees. Given the location of the house, adding onto the house to provide additional storage space would be limited to only the front. The proposed size would exceed what is normally permitted for lots of this size. The requested variance for the location appears to be the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty. While the impervious surface would be well below the 25% limit, the practical difficulties of the lot do not justify exceeding the square footage of accessory space that is currently permitted for a lot of this size, and would be beyond the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulties of the lot.  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. The findings from the Planning Commission support granting the requested variance for the location of the proposed structure, but do not support the variance for the proposed size to exceed what is normally permitted for lots between one and three acres in size. ACTION REQUESTED The Scandia City Council can do one of the following: 1. Approve 2. Approve with conditions 3. Deny with findings 4. Table the request PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve a variance to construct a detached garage closer to the right-of-way than the house, and to deny the variance request to construct an accessory structure exceeding the requirements permitted for parcels between 1 and 3 acres in size, at 12620 181st Street North. The following conditions for the approved variance were recommended: 1. The applicant shall secure applicable permits from the Carnelian Marine St. Croix Watershed District, and comply with their requirements. 2. A grading plan and erosion control plan shall be submitted to the City for review prior to issuance of a building permit, showing any areas of soil disruption, in order to ensure that Melcher Variance Staff Report June 15, 2021 Scandia City Council Page 7 drainage is not directed to adjacent properties and proper erosion control measures are taken. 3. A driveway access permit shall be acquired from the City. 4. Finished floor elevations for the proposed structure shall be shown on final plans. 5. The applicant shall secure any other applicable Federal, State, County, and local permits required for the project. 6. The applicant shall pay all fees and escrows associated with this application.