Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout#18 - 10092 Stillwater Lane Variance 1 STAFF REPORT DATE: 1/21/20 REGULAR TO: City Council FROM: Ben Prchal, City Planner AGENDA ITEM: Variance Requests for 10092 Stillwater Lane. REVIEWED BY: Ken Roberts, Planning Director BACKGROUND: The City has received variance requests from applicant Dan Grunder, for the property located at 10092 Stillwater Lane. The request is for a variance from the City Code requirement which does not allow an accessory building closer to the front lot line than the principle building. ISSUE BEFORE CITY COUNCIL: The City Council is being asked to review the requests, and make a determination on the request. REVIEW/ANALYSIS: PID 14.029.21.32.0010 Existing Land Use/Zoning: Single-family zone as Rural Single Family. Surrounding Land Use/ Zoning: Single family homes. History: The property has been used as a single family dwelling. Deadline for Action: Application Complete – 12/6/2019 60 Day Deadline – 2/4/2020 120 Day Deadline – N/A Applicable Regulations: • Article V - Zoning Administration and Enforcement • Article XI – Rural Districts 2 PROPOSED VARIANCES Variance Requests. The applicant is requesting to build an accessory building closer to the front lot line than the principle structure. Location of Shed: 154.406 C. Structure Location, Rural Districts. No detached garages or other accessory buildings shall be located nearer the front lot line than the principal building on that lot. The applicant would like to place the structure slightly closer to the front lot line than the home for several reasons. If the shed was located in the rear yard there would be several issues in accessing the building as well as flooding, which is stated in the applicants narrative. Access to the rear of the property from the east side could cause interference with a power line(s) and access to the rear from the west would require new fill and grading to create a grade that is reasonable for vehicular access. When variance requests are submitted to the City, Staff reviews them with bit of skepticism to ensure that there is a sense of reason, if recommending approval. Giving the property a cursory look there doesn’t appear to be much of a leg to stand on when it comes to recommending/granting approval. There is a graded rear yard that is flat and has no vegetative obstructions. Although the power lines to the east and required grading to the west presented additional “hardships” they do not necessarily appear significant enough on their own. Although the yard in the rear is a good location for a shed it is misleading. During rain events the rear yard becomes flooded and extremely saturated, which does present a hardship for the property. Standard Required Proposed Setback from the Front Property Line. Location 154.406 C. 30 ft. Or The Principle Structure 222.1 ft. The shed will be closer to the front lot line. East Access Rough Shed Location Looking West 3 The applicant would like to locate the shed closer to the front lot line than the home because the rear yard becomes extremely saturated during rain events, beyond that a large number of trees would be required for clearing (given the location they would place it) and they would be building into a hill side. The currently proposed location is relatively flat and would not require tree clearing or excessive fill to prepare the pad. AGENCY REVIEW There have not been any comments submitted from other agencies or departments. Neighboring Comments – Comments from neighboring properties have all been supportive. RECOMMENDED FINDINGS An applicant must establish and demonstrate compliance with the variance criteria set forth in Lake Elmo City Code Section 154.109 before an exception or modification to city code requirements can be granted. These criteria are listed below, along with comments from Staff regarding applicability of these criteria to the applicant’s request. 1) Practical Difficulties. A variance to the provision of this chapter may be granted by the Board of Adjustment upon the application by the owner of the affected property where the strict enforcement of this chapter would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration and then only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this chapter. Definition of practical difficulties – “Practical difficulties” as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by an official control. Estimated Location of water. 4 FINDINGS: • Variance for Accessory Building Setback: With respect to the proposed variance for the location of structure strict enforcement of the City’s zoning regulations will cause practical difficulties for the applicant, who is proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner. The request can be considered reasonable when all factors are considered as a whole. The eastern access will have difficulty contending with overhead utility lines, western access would require filling and grading to create a slope that is reasonable for access, and placement of a shed in the rear yard which becomes excessively saturated during rain events would put the building at risk of flooding. 2) Unique Circumstances. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. FINDINGS: • Variance for Accessory Building Setback: With respect to the proposed variance for the location of the structure, the plight of the Applicant is unique and has not been caused by the applicant. Considering that more grading, tree removal, and water all pose an issue in the rear yard, placement slightly closer to the front lot line appears to be reasonable. With the applicant being unable to have reasonable control of where flooding may or may not occur on the property the plight has not been caused by the landowner. 3) Character of Locality. The proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the locality in which the property in question is located. FINDINGS: • Variance for Accessory Building Setback: With respect to the proposed variance for the location of the structure, the proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The majority of homes in the area do not appear to have accessory buildings. With that said it is expected to be incredibly difficult, due to vegetation, to reasonably notice the building and claiming that its impact would be negative is a stretch. 4) Adjacent Properties and Traffic. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to properties adjacent to the property in question or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. FINDINGS. • Variance for Accessory Building Setback: With respect to the proposed variance for the location of the structure, the proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to the adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or substantially diminish property values. The location of the structure would not shade the neighboring properties or structures, nor would it impair air flow. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS 1. That the Applicant obtain all applicable permits including but not limited to a City building permit. 2. If no action is taken by the Applicant, the variance will expire on January 20, 2021. FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed variance is not expected to have fiscal impact on the City. PLANNING COMMISSION & CITY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Planning Commission: Section 32.035 requires 4 members of the Planning Commission to be present to meet the quorum requirements. Because only 3 were present it was thought the quorum requirements would not be met. Because of this, a formal recommendation was not voted on and instead stated by consensus with the members present that the request was reasonable Staff recommends the following motion: “Move to recommend approval of the variance request for the location of an accessory building for the property at 10092 Stillwater Lane.” 5 ATTACHMENTS: 1) Narrative 2) Survey 3) Additional Pictures 4) Neighboring Comments 5) Site Map 543597v2 SJS LA515-1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO 2020-008 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY BUILDING TO BE LOCATED CLOSER TO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE THAN THE PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10092 STILLWATER LANE. WHEREAS, Dan Grunder (the “Applicant”) of 10092 Stillwater Lane, Lake Elmo MN 55042 (the “Property”) has submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo (the “City“) for a variance(s) to allow an accessory building closer to the front lot line than the principle structure; and WHEREAS, notice has been published , mailed, and posted pursuant to the Lake Elmo Zoning Code, Section 154.109; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a public hearing on said variances on January 13th, 2020; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission has submitted its report and recommendations with respect to the requested variances to the City Council as part of the City Staff Memorandum dated January 21st, 2020; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the variances at its January 21st, 2020 meeting; and NOW, THEREFORE, based on the testimony elicited and information received, the City Council makes the following: FINDINGS 1) That the procedures for obtaining a variance are found in the Section 154.109 of the Lake Elmo Zoning Code. 2) That all submission requirement s of Section 154.109 of the Lake Elmo Zoning Code have been met by the Applicants. 3) That the proposed variances include the following components: a) That the proposed accessory building be located closer to the front property line than the principle structure. The building is set at 222.1 ft. away from the closest front property line. 4) That the Applicant has established and demonstrated compliance with the variance criteria set forth in Lake Elmo Zoning Code Section 154.109. Pursuant to that section of 543597v2 SJS LA515-1 the Code, a variance to a provision of the Zoning Code may be granted by the City upon the application by the owner of the affected property where the strict enforcement of Zoning Code would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration and then only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code. “Practical difficulties” when used in connection with the granting of a variance means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by an official control. The problem for the landowner/Applicant which the proposed variance is intended to correct must be due to circumstances that are unique to the property in question and that were not created by the landowner/Applicant. The proposed variance must not alter the essential character of the locality in which the property in question is located. Finally, the proposed variance must not impair an adequate supply of light and air to property adjacent to the property in question or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. a) With respect to the proposed variance for the location of structure strict enforcement of the City’s zoning regulations will cause practical difficulties for the Applicant, who is proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner. The request can be considered reasonable when all factors are considered as a whole. The eastern access will have difficulty contending with overhead utility lines, western access would require filling and grading to create a slope that is reasonable for access, and placement of a shed in the rear yard which becomes excessively saturated during rain events would put the building at risk of flooding. b) With respect to the proposed variance for the location of the structure, the plight of the Applicant is unique and has not been caused by the Applicant. Considering that more grading, tree removal, and water all pose an issue in the rear yard, placement slightly closer to the front lot line appears to be reasonable. With the Applicant being unable to have reasonable control of where flooding may or may not occur on the property the plight has not been caused by the landowner. c) With respect to the proposed variance for the location of the structure, the proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The majority of homes in the area do not appear to have accessory buildings. With that said it is expected to be incredibly difficult, due to vegetation, to reasonably notice the building and claiming that its impact would be negative is a stretch. d) With respect to the proposed variance for the location of the structure, the proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to the adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or substantially diminish property values. The location of the structure would not shade the neighboring properties or structures, nor would it impair air flow. DECISION AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) Based on the above findings, which show that all of the variance criteria for the location of the proposed accessory building have been met. The City Council hereby approves the requested variance for the location of the accessory building for the property located at 10092 Stillwater Lane. The conditions for approval for variance approval are set forth below: 543597v2 SJS LA515-1 1. That the Applicant obtain all applicable permits including but not limited to a City building permit. 2. If no action is taken by the Applicant, the variance will expire on January 20, 2021. Passed and duly adopted this 21st day of January, 2020 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. ________________________________ Mayor Mike Pearson ATTEST: ________________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk FD CIM FD IPFD IPFD IPGAR FLOOR945.76C.O. C.O. C.O. C.O. C.O. C.O. MAIN FLOOR 954.34 GAR FLOOR952.92FD IPE X C E P T I O N DECK EX. T R E E L I N EEX. TREE LINEEX. TREE LINEEXISTING HOUSE EXISTING GRAVEL DRIVEWAYEXISTING BITUMINOUSDRIVEWAYS89°53'23"W 352.00 N00°06'16"E 838.51S00°06'16"W 256.68N67°57'18"E 86.38N89°53'23"E 92.00S00°06'16"W 160.00N89°53'23"E 180.00S00°06'16"W 454.10EXISTING GRAVEL DRIVEWAYPOINT OF BEGINNINGWEST LINE OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4SEC. 114, TWP. 29N, RGE. 21 WNORTH LINE OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4SEC. 114, TWP. 29N, RGE. 21 W CENTERLINE AS TRAVELED293.6733 33 3333385.00 EAST LINE OF THE WEST 385.00 FEET OF THE NW 1/4 OFTHE SW 1/4 SEC. 114, TWP. 29N, RGE. 21 WFD IP FD IP FD IP FD IP P R O P O S E D S H E D956958960 9 6 2 962960958956952950 948946944 94 2 9 4 2 942968 966964962960958956954952950948946944942940938950950952954 9 5 6 95 8 96 0 96 2 96 4 950952952 950 948946 944942 940 942944952 942944946948948 946 9449609589569549529509489469 6 0 9 6 2 964 9569549529509489469449469 4 4 9 4 2940 STILLWATER LANE NORTHSUNFISH PARK ACCESS ROAD37.5140.8233.4 43 . 0 0 40.0043 . 0 040.00222.1154.2 173.7DENOTES EXISTING CATCH BASINDENOTES EXISTING HYDRANTDENOTES EXISTING SANITARY MANHOLEDENOTES EXISTING STORM MANHOLEDENOTES EXISTING UTILITY BOXDENOTES EXISTING SERVICE OR CLEANOUTDENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUNDDENOTES IRON MONUMENT SETDENOTES EXISTING POWER POLEDENOTES EXISTING LIGHT POLEDENOTES EXISTING CONSERVATION POSTOR WET LAND BUFFER POSTDENOTES EXISTING TREE8" TREE000.0DENOTES WOOD HUBDENOTES NAILDENOTES EXISTING RETAINING WALLDENOTES PROPOSED RETAINING WALLDENOTES EXISTING ELEVATIONDENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATIONDENOTES AS BUILT ELEVATION(000.0)000.0DENOTES EXISTING TREELINEDENOTES DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGEDENOTES EXISTING FENCELEGENDDENOTES EXISTING F.E.S.LOT AREA : 206,608 SQ. FT.EXISTING HOUSE AREA : 2,298 SQ. FT.PORCH AREA : 27 SQ. FT.OPEN SPACE SPACE AREA : 189,511 SQ. FT.EXISTING SIDEWALK AREA : 313 SQ. FT.EXISTING GRAVEL DRIVEWAY AREA : 10,691 SQ. FT.EXISTING STILLWATER LANE N. AREA : 1,037 SQ. FT.EXISTING BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY AREA : 1,010 SQ. FT.PROPOSED SHED AREA : 1,720 SQ. FT.CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY1. No specific soils investigation has been performed on this lotby the surveyor. The suitability of the soils to support thespecific house is not the responsibility of the surveyor.2.No title information was provided for this survey. This surveydoes not purport to show all easements of record.3. See architectural plans for final building dimensions.Legal DescriptionThe West 385.00 feet of the NW 1/4 of the SW ¼ of section 14, Township 29N, Range 21W, Village of Lake Elmo,Washington County, Minnesota, lying North of the centerline of Stillwater Lane North, (formerly Minn. HWY 212), exceptingtherefrom the following described tract; Commencing at the NW corner of the NW ¼ of the SW ¼ of Section 14, Township29N, Range 21W, Washington County, Minnesota, thence South along the West line of said NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 for 454.1feet; thence East parallel with the North line of said NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 for 33.0 feet to the point of beginning of saidexception tract thence continuing East, parallel with said North line of the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 for 180.00 feet; thenceSouth parallel with said West line of said NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 for 160.00 feet; thence East parallel with the North line ofsaid NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 for 92.00 feet; thence South parallel with said West line of said NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 for 255.6feet to its intersection with the centerline of Stillwater Lane No. (formerly Minn. HWY 212) for 293 feet, more or less, to itsintersection with a line drawn parallel with and 33.00 feet easterly from said West line of NW 1/4 of the SW1/4; thence Northparallel with said West line of said NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 for 525.2 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 5.4 acres, moreor less, subject to the right-of-way of Stillwater Lane North (formerly Minn. HWY 212), and together with an easement forroadway purposes over and across the West 33.0 feet of the above described 5.4 acre tract.11-7-2019 1 Ben Prchal From:Miriam Bergmark <mjbergmark@comcast.net> Sent:Monday, January 6, 2020 10:48 AM To:Ben Prchal Subject:Variance Request for 10092 Stillwater Lane N Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution.        January 6, 2020    To: Mr. Ben Prchal, City Planner  RE: Variance Request for 10092 Stillwater Lane N, Lake Elmo      We live at 10032 Stillwater Lane in Lake Elmo. We have spoken with our neighbor Dan Grunder regarding his planned  project for an accessory building on his property. We agree with his plans and do not believe there will be any negative  impact to our property if the variance is granted. We support his request for the variance.    Thank you,    Miriam J. Bergmark  David Duepner  1 Ben Prchal From:Sharon Lentsch <slentsch@comcast.net> Sent:Monday, January 6, 2020 9:24 AM To:Ben Prchal Subject:Dan Grunder - Pole Barn Variance Request Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution.        Dear Ben,    I understand there is going to be a hearing regarding the variance request by Dan Grunder at 10092 Stillwater Ln, Lake  Elmo.  I will be out of town, but just wanted to let you know that I don’t have any issues with the pole barn being up  front.    Please feel free to contact me with any questions.    Sharon Lentsch  3536 Kelvin Ct. N  Lake Elmo, MN 55042  651‐338‐2568  1 Ben Prchal From:STEVE KALLEVANG <STEVEKALLEVANG@msn.com> Sent:Monday, January 6, 2020 5:44 PM To:Ben Prchal Subject:Fw: Variance Request for 10092 Stillwater Lane N Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution. Ben: I received your letter dated Dec 30, 2019 regarding the variance the Grunder's have requested for their proposed shed. My wife and I live next door to the Grunders on their east at 10120 Stillwater Lane N. My wife and I have no objections, no concerns with the variance request to build a shed in the location the Grunders are requesting. In fact I think the location they're requesting is an ideal location given the topography of their lot and their house location within the lot. I'm not planning on attending the Jan 13 Planning Meeting, but if you'd like to discuss the variance request more with me, please feel free to contact me at 651-336-4515. Best Regards, Steve and Linda Kallevang, 10120 Stillwater Lane N. Washington County, MN January 7, 2020 0 375 750187.5 ft 0 110 22055 m 1:4,000 Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification.