Loading...
08.b1 Staff Report Fernholz 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: Fernholz Variance Application Copies To: Brenda Eklund, Clerk Ken Cammilleri, City Administrator Greg Fernholz, Applicant Project No.: 18407.000 Fernholz Variance From: Evan Monson, Planner Routing: Date: July 7, 2022 SUBJECT: A 52.4 foot variance request from the minimum 100 foot setback from Big Marine Lake, an 11.3 foot variance from the minimum 20 foot setback from the west side property line, and an 6.7 foot variance from the east side property line, in order to construct a deck MEETING DATE: July 19, 2022 LOCATION: 12090 196th Street North, PID 29.032.20.14.0023 APPLICANT/OWNER: Greg Fernholz ZONING: General Rural (GR), Shoreland Management Overlay REVIEW PERIOD: 60 day review period ends July 15, 2022, 120 day period ends September 13th ITEMS REVIEWED: Application and plans received May 16th DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The property owner is looking to construct a deck onto the north side of their residence on their property located at 12090 196th Street North. The deck would be approximately 433 SF in size. The property is small in size and width, which makes the lot nonconforming to the Development Code in effect at the time of application. The deck would encroach into the 100 foot setback required from Big Marine Lake, per the city’s Shoreland Management regulations. The deck would also encroach into the 20 foot setbacks required from the east and west side property lines, as per Chapter Two of the city’s Development Code. The house the deck would be attached to is currently nonconforming to the minimum side setbacks, as well as the setback from Big Marine Lake. Due to the placement of the proposed deck within these setbacks, three setback variances are being requested from the city. The Planning Commission reviewed the request at their July 5th meeting, and recommended approval. Their recommendation is found at the end of this report. Fernholz Variance Staff Report July 19, 2022 Scandia City Council Page 2 PROPERTY INFORMATION Parcel description: 12090 196th Street North is a rectangular-shaped lot located on Big Marine Lake. The parcel is 56.2 feet wide, and 8,623 SF in size; given the minimum lot width (160 feet), buildable area (one acre), and size (two acres) are not met, the lot is legally nonconforming. The parcel currently has a small shed and a house on it. The impervious surfaces on the lot total 17% of the lot, which is below the maximum permitted on shoreland lots of 25%. The lot slopes north towards the lake, and has some vegetation and trees spread throughout the site. The depth of the lot varies from 170 to 181 feet. Land use: Single-Family Residential Above: Survey of site, with proposed deck shown. Below: Aerial of site, per City GIS Fernholz Variance Staff Report July 19, 2022 Scandia City Council Page 3 EVALUATION OF VARIANCE REQUEST Applicant’s Explanation of the Plan and Variance Request See applicant’s submittal Staff Comments on the Variance Request Engineer The City Engineer provided the following comments regarding the request:  The proposed project, if approved, will have to acquire applicable permits and approvals from the DNR, watershed, and the City. Watershed The Carnelian Marine St Croix W atershed District noted the following:  Rule 4 Buffers – This rule will be applicable if Scandia approves the requested variance for the proposed 47.6-foot structure setback from the OWHL of Big Marine Lake. A buffer declaration will be required. The width of the buffer required may be less than the standard 100 -foot requirement for Big Marine Lake per Rule Exception 4.9.4. “For properties where the existing primary structure location does not conform to the setback under the applicable shoreland ordinance and the structure location is not required to be brought into conformance with the applicable setback, the buffer width shall be 50% of the existing distance between the structure and the OHWL, bluff line, delineated wetland edge, or top of bank as applicable to the resource.” In consideration of this exception, the minimum buffer width required is 28.2-feet (50% of 56.4- feet). A planting plan to establish adequate vegetation for any areas of the buffer that are disturbed (if any) will also be required.  Rule 2 Stormwater Management – This rule will be triggered if Scandia grants the proposed 47.6- foot structure setback from the OWHL of Big Marine Lake. That said, if the proposed deck is raised but not covered, it is not considered impervious. If it is not raised or if it is covered, then compliance with the District’s Small Residential Stormwater Worksheet will be required. Details for routing of stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces will be required. A planting plan for BMPs will also be required. Finally, a declaration for maintenance of stormwater management facilities will also be required for permit issuance.  Rule 3 Erosion Control – An erosion/sediment control plan will be required, along with details for vegetation establishment, if Rule 4 is applicable. DNR The East Metro Area Hydrologist has not provided comments at the time of this staff report. Development Code The Development Code includes requirements for lots within the GR zoning district in Chapter Two, as well as lots within the Shoreland Overlay zone in Chapter Five (Shoreland Management Ordinance). The GR zone requires a side yard setback of 20 feet. The Shoreland Management Ordinance notes a minimum setback from Big Marine Lake of 100 feet, due to the lake being classified as a ‘Recreational Development Lake’. The applicant’s existing residence and lot are nonconforming. The house is located within the 100 foot setback from the lake, and is within the 20 foot side yard setback of the east and west side property lines. Fernholz Variance Staff Report July 19, 2022 Scandia City Council Page 4 The lot is under 9,000 SF in size, which is below the minimum lot size (two acres) and minimum width/frontage (160 feet) of the GR zone. The proposed deck, being located on the lake side of the house, would encroach further into the 100 foot lake setback. This 100 foot setback occupies over half of the property when considering the depth of the lot is under 200 feet. The west portion of the deck would go around the house, which results in an encroachment into the side yard setback. While set further from the east side property line than the house, the deck is also within that side yard setback. The comparison of the minimum, current, and proposed setbacks are shown in Table 1. The table also shows the difference of the current setbacks of the house and the proposed deck, as well as the difference between the minimum required and the proposed deck. Table 1: Comparison of Setbacks Minimum Required Current (House) Proposed (Deck) Current - Proposed Minimum – Proposed (variance requested) Setback from Lake 100’ 56.4’ 47.6’ 8.8’ 52.4’ Setback from Side Property Line: East 20’ 3.2’ 13.3’ (10.1’) 6.7’ Setback from Side Property Line: West 20’ 14.8’ 8.7’ 6.1’ 11.3’ Development Code vs UDC The application was received on May 16, 2022, so the zoning regulations at the time apply. The UDC, which is under review of the City Council at the time of writing this report , does have some differences in standards that will apply to this lot in the future. These are noted in Table 2. The subject property will be within the recently created Rural Residential Neighborhood (RR-N) zone, which includes most lots located around Big Marine Lake. The RR-N, due to the nature of past development around the lake, permits a lower minimum side yard setback than the GR zone in the Development Code. The proposed deck, under the UDC requirements, would meet the side yard setback as required from the east property line but would still require a variance for the west side yard setback. The setback distance required from Big Marine Lake will not change from the Development Code to the UDC. Table 2: Development Code vs UDC Development Code – GR zone UDC – RR-N zone Proposed Deck UDC - Proposed Minimum Setback: Side Property Line 20’ 10’ East: 13.3’ West: 8.7’ East: (3.3’) West: 1.3’ Existing lots of record at the time of the UDC adoption are permitted a smaller minimum lot size in the RR-N zone, though our subject property would still be nonconforming to this requirement. The UDC also permits a slightly smaller minimum lot frontage, though our subject property would also not conform to this new requirement. Fernholz Variance Staff Report July 19, 2022 Scandia City Council Page 5 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 on the following pages in italics, followed by the Planner’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 Plan notes an objective in the Land Use section to “conduct development in a manner that is sensitive to the impact upon natural features and to environmental constraints, including but not limited to scenic views, surface water, wetlands, slopes, woodlands, vegetation, drainage ways, shorelands, and flood plain areas”. The dimensions of the lot, and the placement of existing structures, are already nonconforming to the standards of the Development Code and limit areas where the proposed deck could be without triggering a variance. The Planning Commission should discuss if 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 for single family residential, which would not change if this variance request is approved. The only change would be in having a deck on the lake side of the house. 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 are due to the limited amount of land not located within required setbacks due to the size of the lot, and the existing house on the site not meeting minimum setbacks . The lot, due to not meeting the minimum size and width required in the Development Code, has little land located outside of setbacks. The house is located within three required setbacks as well. The house and lot dimensions predate the Development Code, and the current owners. The practical difficulties 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. The proposed deck should not stand out when compared to development on other nearby properties, and would not impact the use and enjoyment of the lake by neighboring property owners . Granting the variances should not alter the essential character of the area.  Economic conditions alone shall not constitute practical difficulties. The practical difficulties are due to the limited amount of land not located within required setbacks due to the size of the lot, and the existing house on the site not meeting minimum 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 variances would not result in limiting light or air to neighboring properties . The land use will not change, 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 Fernholz Variance Staff Report July 19, 2022 Scandia City Council Page 6 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. Over half of the parcel is located within the 100 foot setback from the lake. The nonconforming size and width of the lot results in limited areas not within the two side yard setbacks . The only locations outside of all required setbacks would be away from the house, which would defeat the purpose of the deck. Apart from reducing the size of the deck, there are not options available to eliminate the practical difficulties facing the applicant. The requested variance appears to be the minimum action required to elim inate the practical difficulty of the lot lacking buildable areas outside required setbacks.  Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. N/A, the variance is not related to a need for direct sunlight for solar energy systems. The findings support granting the requested variance to setback requirements. ACTION REQUESTED The City Council can do one of the following: 1. Approve the request 2. Approve the request, with conditions 3. Deny the request, with findings for denial 4. Table the request RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommended approval of A 52.4 foot variance request from the minimum 100 foot setback from Big Marine Lake, an 11.3 foot variance from the minimum 20 foot setback from the west side property line, and an 6.7 foot variance from the east side property line, in order to construct a deck , 12090 196th Street North. The following conditions for the variances were recommended: 1. The proposed project shall be built as shown on the site plans 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 applicant shall secure applicable permits from the City for the request. 4. The applicant shall secure any other applicable Federal, State, County, and local permits required for the project. 5. The applicant shall pay all fees and escrows associated with this application.