07-08-2019 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

2 I reviewed the application against the five criteria above and below is a summary of how the application compares to three of them that the City may want to review the variance request against. Are there unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner? Unique circumstances relate to physical characteristics of the land - such as lot dimensions, steep slopes, poor soils, wetlands, and trees. These do not include physical limitations or personal circumstances created by the property owner that prevent compliance with the impervious surface provision, such as size of home or design preferences. The only unique circumstances presented in the application are the minimum house size requirements contained in the declaration of building covenants for St. Clair estates. The covenant states that the minimum house size is 1500 sq. ft. The house that is proposed (excluding garage) is approximately 2650 sq. ft. The 1150 sq. ft. difference between the minimum house footprint allowed in the development covenants, and the footprint selected by the landowner, results in the impervious surface percentage increasing from 33.0% to the requested 43.7% (this assumes the garage and driveway area are unchanged). A smaller house, along with a small change in driveway length or garage location or dimensions, could keep impervious below the 30% maximum impervious allowed. Therefore, there are not unique circumstances that justify the variance. Is the variance in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance? The purpose and intent of restricting impervious surface is to limit the rate and amount of runoff and pollutants entering public waters as development increases. When runoff from impervious surface coverage is not addressed, pollution increases and the diversity of aquatic life is reduced. The variance requested does not seek minimal relief of the maximum allowed impervious surface but is a substantial deviation that is not in harmony with the purposes and intent of the City’s Shoreland Ordinance. The proposed variance for a large increase in impervious surface sets a precedent for other less developed areas of the City. Does the proposal put property to use in a reasonable manner? There are alternative home designs that would allow development to occur on the property without needing a substantial deviation to the allowed impervious surface. The proposed footprint of the selected home is very large for the size of the lot and incorporates a long driveway due to the garage being placed on the left side of the home. When evaluated against the purpose and intent of the City’s Shoreland Ordinance the proposed development does not use the property in a reasonable manner. Recommendation After reviewing the application, it appears that the variance request is being driven by the design preference of the landowner. Legal standards require that variances may only be granted when the applicant establishes that there are “practical difficulties” in complying with the official control.