Loading...
08.b1b CC Staff Report_Rodsjo 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: Rodsjo Variance Application Copies To: Brenda Eklund, Clerk Ken Cammilleri, City Administrator Susan & Paul Rodsjo, Applicant Project No.: 18108.000 Rodsjo Variance From: Evan Monson, Planner Routing: Date: February 10, 2022 SUBJECT: Variance to construct a detached accessory dwelling unit closer to the right- of-way than the house on a lot under 5 acres in size. MEETING DATE: February 15, 2022 LOCATION: 21450 Pomroy Avenue North, PID 13.032.20.31.0004 APPLICANT/OWNERS: Susan & Paul Rodsjo ZONING: General Rural (GR) REVIEW PERIOD: 60 day ended February 7th, 120 day period ends April 8th ITEMS REVIEWED: Application and plans received December 9, 2021 DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The owners of the property are looking to construct a detached Accessory Dwelling Unit, or ADU, on their property. The proposed structure would have a footprint of 736.50 SF, and be under 20 feet in height. The structure would be located near the middle of the lot. It would be approximately 51 feet from the south side property line, 276 feet from the west/rear property line, and approximately 269 feet from the east/front property line. The property currently has just a single-family residence on it. An ADU is permitted on the property, if it can meet certain criteria. Since the proposed ADU is not attached to the house, it is required to be no closer to the right-of-way (ROW) than the house. The proposed location would be closer to the road than the house, so a variance is required to approve of the ADU in the proposed location. The footprint of the structure is 736.50 SF. The structure has two floors, with the second floor bei ng 270 SF in size. Combining the two floors results in a total floor area of 1,006.50 SF. The maximum floor area for an ADU is 1,000 SF, so a variance would be needed to exceed it. The applicant has indicated they would reduce the floor area to under 1,000 SF in order to not need an additional variance. This item was initially on the January Planning Commission agenda, though was tabled to the February 2022 meeting. The Planning Commission reviewed the request at their February 8 th meeting. They found Rodsjo Variance Staff Report February 8, 2022 Scandia Planning Commission Page 2 the request was meeting the criteria for a variance, and recommended approval. The conditions recommended by the commissioners are listed on page five of this report. PROPERTY INFORMATION Parcel description: 21450 Pomroy Avenue North is located north of the intersection of Scandia Trail and Pomroy Avenue. The parcel is approximately 4.43 acres in size. The lot is rectangular in shape; its depth is approximately 612 feet and 315 feet wide. The house is located towards the northwest end of the property. The lot slopes down from the west end of the site down east towards the road. Trees and vegetation are located throughout the lot, screening the views of the property from the road. Zoning: General Rural (GR) Land use: Single-Family Residential EVALUATION OF VARIANCE REQUEST Applicant’s Explanation of the Plan and Variance Request See attached narrative from applicant. Staff Comments on the Variance Request Engineer The City Engineer noted that the following would apply:  Grading plan shall be submitted that includes grading limits/elevations that don’t negatively impact the adjacent properties from direct drainage off of the site.  Site work shall be within compliance of the Watershed District.  Any septic systems would require approval from Washington Count y. Watershed The Carnelian Marine St Croix W atershed District noted a permit would be required for this project. Development Code Chapter Two, Section 4.2 of the Development Code notes the requirements for accessory dwelling units (ADUs). This includes requirements on a covenant being required, so as to ensure the ADU cannot be sold separately from the house, permits needed if renting an ADU, connection to approved on-site waste disposal systems, and no additional curb cuts created specifically for the ADU. Section 4.2(10) lists specific requirements for ADUs detached from the house. Section 4.2(10)(B) notes the floor area of a detached ADU cannot exceed 1,000 SF in size. The submitted plans show a footprint of 736.5 SF, with a second floor of 270 SF, which would result in a total floor area of just over 1,000 SF. The applicant indicated that the plans could be revised to have a floor area under 1,000 SF. Section 4.2(10)(C) notes that an ADU is to be to the side or rear of the principal structure on the site, and not be closer to the ROW unless certain criteria are met. Those criteria are:  The structure is at least 200 feet from the road right-of-way on lots of five (5) acres or more; and  All setbacks are met. Rodsjo Variance Staff Report February 8, 2022 Scandia Planning Commission Page 3 While the structure is meeting the second criteria, and is more than 200 feet from the ROW, the lot is under 5 acres in size, so the first criteria is unable to be met. Without acquiring more land, either a variance is needed, the house needs to be moved to the east, or the ADU location needs to be to the side or rear of the house. Difficulties with locations to the side and rear are noted by the applicant in their submittal. The areas to the west/rear of the house are occupied by the septic system and drainfield for the property. The land to the side south could accommodate the ADU, though this area is an alternate/secondary location for on- site septic systems. Land to the north of the house includes a well for the property, along with some drainage paths that form after rain events and snow melt. The proposed location, while closer to the road than the house, is currently screened from views in most directions as a result of the existing trees and vegetation on the site. The applicant indicated they would be willing to add additional sc reening, if the city finds that the proposed location is not amply screened from neighboring properties and the ROW. The Planning Commission felt the existing screening on the site was able to address concerns with seeing the structure. Section 4.2(10)(D) lists design standards for ADUs, though these only apply for ADUs on lots 4 acres or smaller in size, so these requirements are not applicable to this situation. The idea of a commercial bed and breakfast was brought up during the meeting. The ‘Bed and Breakfast Inn’ use is found in Section 4.4 of Chapter 2; an accessory dwelling unit would not be able to meet the requirements for this land use, as this use is intended to be “a converted or renovated single-family residence”. 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 accessory dwelling units as an option to provide additional housing options. Table VI-F – Housing Implementation identifies the city continuing to support ADUs. Apart from being closer to the ROW than the house, the structure would meet and exceed required setbacks. The proposed request appears to be 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 residential, which would not change if this variance request is approved. The proposed accessory dwelling unit, if approved, would have to follow the requirements of such structures as set out in the Development Code and city ordinances. Proposing to use the property as proposed is a reasonable use.  The practical difficulties are not caused by the landowner and are unique to the property. The practical difficulties are due to the lack of available space to the rear or side of the house. The location of the house deep in the lot limits available locations. There is drainage that runs along the north side of the house, which eliminates this as an option. The rear of the house is occupied by the existing septic system and drainfields, while the south side of the house has been identified as the secondary/alternative location for septic on the site. The practical difficulties Rodsjo Variance Staff Report February 8, 2022 Scandia Planning Commission Page 4 impacting the areas to the side and rear of the house were 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. The proposed location would exceed setback requirements, and is currently screened from view of neighboring lots and the roadway. Granting the variance for the location would not alter the essential character of the area, provided the structure meets the requirements of the Development Code. Additional screening could be required by the city as a condition of approval.  Economic conditions alone shall not constitute practical difficulties. The practical difficulties are related to the limited amount of land located outside of required setbacks. 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 variance would not result in limiting light or air to neighboring properties. The land use will remain residential, so increases to congestion, fire danger, or public safety are not expected. The property values of neighboring values should not be negatively impacted, either, if the request is granted. The requested variance 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. The location of the house and septic limits locations that meet setbacks and are to the rear or side of the house. The locations of wells, septic, and drainage patterns on the lot leave the areas between the house and the road as viable spots. The current screening of the site, and ability to meet setbacks appear to make the proposed request the minimum action required . The requested variance appears to be the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty of the ADU being unable to be to the side or rear of the house.  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 support granting the requested variance to place the ADU closer to the road than the house. Conditions could be added to ensure proper screening from neighboring lots and the right-of-way. Rodsjo Variance Staff Report February 8, 2022 Scandia Planning Commission Page 5 ACTION REQUESTED The City Council can do one of the following: 1. Approve 2. Approve with conditions 3. Deny with findings 4. Table the request RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommended approval of a variance to construct a detached accessory dwelling unit closer to the right-of-way than the house on a lot under 5 acres in size, at 21450 Pomroy Avenue North. The following conditions for the variance were recommended: 1. The proposed ADU shall be no closer than 260 feet to the ROW of Pomroy Avenue, and no closer than 50 feet to the south lot line, as proposed on the site plan submitted to the city and reviewed with this request. 2. The applicant shall secure any applicable permits from the Watershed District, and comply with their requirements. 3. The ADU shall follow applicable requirements of ADUs as indicated in Chapter 2, Section 4.2 of the Development Code. The proposed ADU shall have a total floor area not exceeding 1,000 SF. 4. 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 and locations of any trees to be removed or added, in order to ensure that drainage is not directed to adjacent properties and proper erosion control measures are taken. Plans should include grading limits/elevations that don’t negatively impact the adjacent properties from direct drainage off of the site. 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.