Loading...
6.b PC Staff Report_Maher 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 Planning Commission Reference: Maher Variance Application Copies To: Brenda Eklund, Clerk Ken Cammilleri, City Administrator Melinda Maher, Applicant Project No.: 18407.000 Maher Variance From: Evan Monson, Planner Routing: Date: September 29, 2022 SUBJECT: Variances to remodel and construct an addition onto an existing nonconforming cabin, and construct a detached accessory structure within required setbacks of wetlands and the St Croix River MEETING DATE: October 4, 2022 LOCATION: 16955 197th Street North, PIDs 30.032.19.13.0006, 30.032.19.13.0008, 30.032.19.13.0032, & 30.032.19.13.0033 APPLICANT/OWNERS: Melinda Maher ZONING: Agricultural Core (AG C), St Croix River Overlay REVIEW PERIOD: 60-day period ends October 31, 2022 (30-day DNR review period ended October 1st) DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The property owner is looking to remodel an existing seasonal cabin. Along with the remodel, they would like to add a 450 SF addition onto the west end of the current cabin. The property currently consists of multiple nonconforming parcels located along the St Croix River. The cabin is currently within the required setbacks of the river, as well as a nearby wetland and the north side property line. The owner is also looking to build a small detached garage on the west end of their site, which would replace a small shed currently located on the southwest corner of the property. This proposed structure would also require variances from setbacks from a nearby wetland, as well as property lines. As a result of the application being received prior to the adoption and publication of the recently adopted Unified Development Code (UDC), the standards and requirements of the Development Code were used in review of this request. Maher Variance Staff Report October 4, 2022 Scandia Planning Commission Page 2 PROPERTY INFORMATION Parcel description: 16955 197th Street North is located east of St Croix Trail North, off of 197th Street and along the scenic St Croix River. The property consists of multiple parcels that total just under 22,000 SF in size; if combined they are nonconforming to the minimum lot sizes required in the applicable zoning districts. A small wetland resides on the west end of the property, while another wetland is to the north of the property. A small shed and outhouse reside on the site as well. The site is fairly flat, before sloping near the cabin down towards the river. An old outhouse and shed are located on the site; they are proposed to be removed as part of this project. A permit for the septic system on the site was issued in 2020; the septic line for the property runs through unopened right-of-way to another parcel to the west where the drain field lies. Land use: Single-Family Residential Figure 1: Subject property shown in red, via City of Scandia GIS EVALUATION OF THE REQUEST Staff Comments on the Variance Request Engineer The City Engineer noted the following: Maher Variance Staff Report October 4, 2022 Scandia Planning Commission Page 3  Confirm with County the existing septic will accommodate the new cabin addition and remodel.  Existing 4-20” pines along centerline of creek within wetland area shall not be removed, in order to prevent erosion and root structure within this critical drainage area.  Construction will damage existing tree canopy, a tree replacement plan is recommended as a condition.  MnDNR shall review for compliance specifically related to viewshed of the riverway.  Grading plan shall be required prior to building permit issuance.  All site work shall be within compliance of Washington Conservation District and Watershed District. Watershed The Carnelian Marine St Croix W atershed staff noted the following comments regarding watershed rules and what would apply:  Rule 2 Stormwater Management – This rule is triggered by the proposal to increase site impervious above 5% of the parcel. Compliance with the District’s Small Residential Stormwater Worksheet will be required for the new and reconstructed impervious surfaces (cabin addition, new garage, stone patio and steps, and any other improvements such as gravel drives that may not be currently shown on the proposed site plan). Onsite soils are mapped as HSG D, so filtration is the recommended method of stormwater management. 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 be required for permit issuance.  Rule 3 Erosion & Sediment Control – An erosion and sediment control plan is required. Minimum requirements include perimeter control down-gradient of disturbed areas, protection of stormwater BMPs during construction or staging of BMPs after stabilization of disturbed areas, revegetation specifications, and a construction entrance to minimize tracking of sediment from the site.  Rule 4 Buffers – Due to variances from the city ordinances, this rule will be triggered. The District will require a wetland boundary determination and District Wetland Management Category classification for the onsite wetland to verify compliance with buffer width requirements. The buffer(s) will need to be field monumented by a licensed surveyor and shown on the site plans. A planting plan to establish native vegetation is required for any areas of the buffer area that will be disturbed by the construction activities. A declaration for buffers will be required for permit issuance. • Rule 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.  Reviewing the site plans, it appears that if the City approves a variance from wetland setbacks, you will be able to meet the watershed 50% from existing structure buffer requirement. NPS The National Park Service has a scenic easement over the property, as a result of its proximity to the St Croix River. NPS staff sent a letter out on September 29th noting the submitted plans would be in compliance with the scenic easement. Maher Variance Staff Report October 4, 2022 Scandia Planning Commission Page 4 Wetlands A delineation of the wetlands near the cabin was conducted this summer. There were two wetlands identified, both were determined to be a ‘Manage 1’ wetland. DNR The East Metro Area Hydrologist had not provided comments at the time of this staff report. Development Code Setbacks The required setback from the St Croix River is 200 feet, as is required in the Lower St Croix River Bluffland & Shoreland Management Regulations. Nearly all of the property is within 200 feet of the ordinary high water level (OHWL) of the river. The Shoreland Management Chapter of the Development Code outlines required setbacks from wetlands. The wetlands on the site are ‘Manage 1’ wetlands, which requires a minimum setback of 75 feet. The existing cabin is within the wetland setbacks. The proposed detached garage would also be within the setback from the wetlands. Table 1 outlines the setbacks of the cabin (current and the proposed addition), as well as the proposed garage from the wetlands and the river. The addition onto the cabin would encroach closer to both wetlands than the existing cabin. The proposed detached garage would also encroach into the required setbacks from the wetlands. As a result of most of the property being within the setback from the river, the current cabin, the proposed addition, and the proposed garage would be within the 200 foot setback. Table 1: River and wetland setbacks. Highlighted are variances for new structures/additions Setback from north wetland Setback from west wetland Setback from River Cabin – Existing 26’ Variance: 49’ 64’ Variance: 11’ 87’11” Variance: 112’1” Cabin – Proposed West Addition 14’5” Variance: 60’7” 39’4” Variance: 35’8” 119’ Variance: 81’ Proposed Detached Garage 52’1” Variance: 22’11” 15’5” Variance: 59’7” 194’ Variance: 6’ Chapter Two, Section 2.4(7) of the Development Code lists the minimum setback from side property lines, which is 20 feet. Table 2 on the following page outlines the setbacks from the lot lines. The existing cabin is already nonconforming to multiple setback requirements (north side lot line, wetlands, and river). The proposed cabin addition would be within the north side setback, though it would encroach less than the current cabin. The proposed garage would be within the required setback from the south lot line. The proposed accessory structure is closer to the front lot line than the principal structure on the site (the cabin). Detached accessory structures are only permitted closer to the front property line than the principal structure if certain criteria are met, such as being a lakeshore lot, or the property being over 5 acres in size (Chapter Two, Section 3.2(2)(B)). Since this property is unable to meet those criteria, a variance would be necessary to place the structure closer to the front line than the cabin and within the front setback of 40 feet. The detached garage is limited in potential locations to build in, due to setbacks, Maher Variance Staff Report October 4, 2022 Scandia Planning Commission Page 5 wetlands, and requirements of the scenic easement on the property. placing it further north on the site would get it closer to the wetlands and the septic system on the site, while shifting the structure further from the front property line would place it further into the setback from the river. Table 2: Property line setbacks. Highlighted are new structures/additions Setback from side line (north) Setback from side line (south) Setback from front line (west) Cabin – Existing 2’1” Variance: 17’11” >40’ 106’ Cabin – proposed west addition 7’0” Variance: 13’ >40’ 81’1” Proposed Detached Garage >55’ 5’1” Variance: 14’11” 10’1” Variance: 29’11” Non-conforming Lot & Structure The subject property is located within the AG C zoning district, as well as the St Croix River overlay zone. The minimum lot size for the AG C zone is 2-5 acres, or 20 acres or greater; the St Croix overlay zone utilizes the lot standards of the AG C zone. The subject property is less than an acre, so it is not conforming to the minimum lot size. The AG C zone also sets a minimum buildable area (areas outside of setbacks, waterbodies, and bluffs/steep slopes) of one acre, and a minimum frontage of 160 feet. The overlay zone sets a maximum impervious surface coverage of 20% of the lot. The property is meeting the impervious surface coverage currently, and will continue to be below the 20% threshold under the proposed plans. The size of the subject property being less than an acre means that the property is unable to conform to the buildable area requirement. The required setback from the river covers most of the property; the setback from the wetlands and required setbacks from lot lines cover the rest. The site does not front a public street, so it is not conforming to the minimum frontage requirement; the site is able to access 197th Street through a private road that serves a number of other seasonal cabin lots in this neighborhood. Chapter One, Section 13.3(1) covers nonconforming structures in the city. If a nonconforming structure is altered to an extent that the cost of repair or replacement would exceed fifty percent (50%) of the appraised value of the original structure, a variance is required. With the alterations proposed to the existing cabin exceeding that threshold, a variance to alter the structure is necessary. 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 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 Comprehensive Plan has 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 small size of the lot, and locations of the wetlands, trees, existing cabin and septic greatly limit where one can build. The proposal by the applicant is to place the addition away from the river, which will prevent impact to existing trees Maher Variance Staff Report October 4, 2022 Scandia Planning Commission Page 6 south and east of the cabin and keep the project within what is allowed for the NPS Scenic easement that is applicable to the site. The detached garage would occupy the location that a small shed currently resides in. The structure would be large enough for one vehicle to park in it. Due to the required setbacks, the areas one can build a garage on this site at are very limited. The proposed remodel and addition, and detached garage appear to be in harmony with the Comprehensive Plan and the official controls. Conditions of approval can be added in order to ensure the project does not negatively impact the existing natural features of the site, such as a tree preservation and replacement plan, and a reduction in encroachment into required setbacks from the wetlands.  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 a seasonal cabin, which would not change if this variance request is approved. Neighboring parcels are also occupied by seasonal cabins. Proposing to continue to use the property for seasonal 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 nearly all of the property being located within required setbacks, and the property not conforming to minimum size requirements. The existing cabin is located within three different required setback areas; it was built prior to the current ordinances being adopted. While a property of this size being within the 200 foot setback of the river is not uncommon in this area of the city, the subject property is uniquely limited in the amount of buildable space it has due to the two wetlands, with one of the wetlands running through the lot itself. It is not a unique difficulty not to be able to have a garage on a site, as it is not uncommon for small properties such as this one to not have a garage on them. The practical difficulties of the site were not caused by the current landowner and are unique to the property. The need for a garage or an addition is not a difficulty that is unique to the property.  The variances would not alter the essential character of the area. The use and function of the property would remain as it is currently; other parcels nearby are also occupied by seasonal cabins located at similar setbacks from the river and property lines. As a result of being placed away from the river, the new addition would be closer to the wetlands nearby than the current cabin. The new garage would be placed where a small shed currently resides. The placement of the garage would be noticeable to those on neighborin g properties. Granting the variances for the garage or addition may alter the essential character of the area.  Economic conditions alone shall not constitute practical difficulties. The practical difficulties are related to the size of the property and 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 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 the request is granted. The requested variance will not impair the supply of light or air to adjacent Maher Variance Staff Report October 4, 2022 Scandia Planning Commission Page 7 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. Most of the property is located within the required setback from the river and two wetlands; without a variance from those setback requirements, the lot is unable to be used. The wetland setbacks would be encroached by the proposed addition. C onditions could be added to ensure the wetlands are not negatively impacted, such as a reduction in footprint of the cabin addition. The proposed garage is located where a small shed currently resides. The garage woul d be located within the setback of both wetlands, the river, and two property lines. The garage’s design is large enough for a half bath and a covered entry, which would not appear to be eliminating the practical difficulties of the lot. The requested variances to remodel the existing cabin appear to be the minimum actions required to eliminate the practical difficulty of the lot lacking buildable area. The proposed cabin addition and detached garage, as proposed, do not appear to be the minimum actions necessary.  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 variances to remodel the existing cabin. The cabin addition and detached garage appear to not meet all of the criteria for approval. Conditions of approval reducing the encroachment of the addition and garage int o required setbacks could result in the request meeting the variance criteria. ACTION REQUESTED The Planning Commission can recommend to the Scandia City Council that it do one of the following: 1. Approve, with or without conditions 2. Deny, with findings 3. Table the request STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planner recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Variances to remodel an existing nonconforming cabin, and denial of the proposed addition and detached garage as proposed, located at located at PIDs 30.032.19.13.0006, 30.032.19.13.0008, 30.032.19.13.0032, AND 30.032.19.13.0033. The following conditions for the approved variance is recommended: 1. The proposed remodel project shall adhere to the current/existing setbacks, as indicated on the submitted plans. 2. The parcels for the property shall be combined onto one deed through the lot line adjustment process. Maher Variance Staff Report October 4, 2022 Scandia Planning Commission Page 8 3. Applicant shall verify and demonstrate Washington County’s approval of the existing septic system to accommodate the remodeled cabin. 4. The applicant shall secure applicable permits from the Watershed District, and comply with their requirements. 5. 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 and added, in order to ensure that drainage is not directed to adjacent properties and proper erosion control measures are taken. a. A tree replacement plan shall be submitted to the City for review prior to issuance of a building permit, showing replacement of removed existing trees with new trees on the site. 6. The applicant shall secure any other applicable Federal, State, County, and local permits required for the project. 7. The applicant shall pay all fees and escrows associated with this application.