The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPL PACKET 04162019 If you would like to request special accommodations or alternative formats, please contact the City Clerk at 612-782-3313 or email city@savmn.com. People who are deaf or hard of hearing can contact us by using 711 Relay. Our Mission is to be a progressive and livable community, a walkable village, which is sustainable, safe and secure. Call to Order. Pledge of Allegiance. Roll Call. Consideration, discussion, and possible action on all of the following items: I. Approval of the April 16, 2019 Planning Commission Meeting Agenda. (action requested) II. Approval of the March 19, 2019 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. (action requested) III. Public Hearing. A. Consider a request for a 10.3 foot variance from the required 35.9 foot front yard setback to allow for new front steps, consider a request for a 3.8 foot variance from the required 5 foot side yard setback to allow for a patio, and consider a request for a 2.5% variance from the maximum impervious lot coverage amount of 35% at 2609 Pahl Avenue. IV. Staff Reports. V. Other Business. VI. Community Forum. Individuals may address the Planning Commission about any City business item not included on the regular agenda. Speakers are requested to come to the podium, sign their name and address on the form at the podium, state their name and address for the Clerk’s record, and limit their remarks to five minutes. Generally, the Planning Commission will not take official action on items discussed at this time, but may typically refer the matter to staff for a future report or direct the matter to be scheduled on an upcoming agenda. VII. Information and Announcements. VIII. Adjournment. CITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA APRIL 16, 2019 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 PM CITY OF ST. ANTHONY 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2 March 19, 2019 3 7:00 p.m. 4 5 CALL TO ORDER. 6 7 Chair Papatola called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 8 9 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. 10 11 Chair Papatola invited the Commission and the audience to join him in the Pledge of Allegiance. 12 13 ROLL CALL. 14 15 Commissioners Present: Chair Papatola, Commissioners Neumann, Payne, Rude, Socha, and 16 Westrick. 17 18 Absent: Commissioner Bartel 19 20 Also Present: Student Liaison Nimo Hashi and City Planner Stephen Grittman 21 22 23 Chair Papatola welcomed Commissioner Payne and Rude to the Commission. Chair Papatola also 24 introduced the new City Planner Stephen Grittman. 25 26 27 I. APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 19, 2019 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 28 AGENDA. 29 30 Motion by Commissioner Neumann, seconded by Commissioner Westrick, to approve the March 31 19, 2019 Planning Commission agenda. 32 33 Motion carried 6-0. 34 35 II. APPROVAL OF THE DECEMBER 17, 2018 REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION 36 MEETING MINUTES. 37 38 Motion by Commissioner Socha, seconded by Commissioner Neumann, to approve the 39 December 17, 2018 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as presented. 40 41 Motion carried 6-0. 42 43 III. PUBLIC HEARING. 44 45 A. Consider a request for a 10.3-foot variance from the required 35.9-foot front yard 46 setback to allow for new front steps, consider a request for a 3.8-foot variance from 47 the required 5-foot side yard setback to allow for a patio, and consider a request for 48 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes March 19, 2019 Page 2 a 2.5% variance from the maximum impervious lot coverage amount of 35% at 1 2609 Pahl Avenue. 2 3 City Planner Stephen Grittman recommends tabling this application, at the request of the 4 applicant, due to their inability to attend the hearing on this date. The public hearing has already 5 been noticed. At the March 19 meeting, the Planning Commission can acknowledge the hearing 6 notice, then consider a motion to continue the public hearing to April 16th, and table action on the 7 item until that hearing. The applicant has been sent a letter extending the 60-day timeline, and 8 neighbors who receive notice and have commented will be notified of the date change. 9 10 Motion by Commissioner Neumann, seconded by Commissioner Payne, to continue the public 11 hearing to April 16, 2019 and table action on the item until that hearing. 12 13 Motion carried 6-0. 14 15 B. Consider a request for a 7.7-foot variance from the required 30-foot front yard 16 setback to allow for an addition to the master bedroom and a front porch, and 17 consider a request for a 14.6-foot variance from the required 30-foot side yard 18 setback to allow for an attached garage at 3401 Harding Street. 19 20 Chair Papatola noted he will attend the City Council Meeting regarding this matter. 21 22 Chair Papatola opened the public hearing at 7:04 p.m. 23 24 City Planner Grittman reviewed the applicant proposes to construct two additions to an existing 25 home at 3401 Harding Street NE. The proposed additions to the one-story rambler include living 26 space and a front porch to the west, facing Harding Street. On this side, the existing house 27 setback would be reduced from approximately 30 feet to 22.3 feet. 28 29 A second living space addition is proposed, with an attached garage facing the south (34th 30 Avenue NE). The 34th Avenue addition would result in a setback of 15.4 feet for the garage area, 31 and 23.4 feet for the living space addition. The existing setback toward 34th Street is 32 approximately 38 feet for the house, and 13.7 feet for a detached garage. The applicants indicate 33 the existing detached garage would be removed. 34 35 In reviewing the proposal, both additions raise the need for variances, as follows: 36 37 A. Reduced setback from Harding Street NE, a variance of approximately 7.7 feet. 38 B. Reduced setback from 34th Avenue NE, a variance of approximately 14.6 feet. 39 40 Variances from each of these standards are required to proceed with the project as planned. 41 42 In reviewing the proposed improvements against the ordinance requirements, staff recommends 43 approval of the Harding Street front yard setback encroachment as proposed. With regard to the 44 variance toward 34th Avenue, staff recommends approval of the 23.4-foot setback, with a 45 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes March 19, 2019 Page 3 recommendation that the attached garage be shifted on the plan to meet a setback of at least 20 1 feet. 2 3 Staff has reviewed for height, use, other setbacks, and impervious surface; the request appears to 4 meet all other code requirements. The proposed impervious surface is 27.18%, within the 5 allowance for up to 35% coverage. 6 7 The variance criteria for the front setback variance; side setback variance are: 8 9 - Use is a reasonable one, given the character of the neighborhood. 10 - Unique conditions exist on the property. 11 - Those conditions create practical difficulties in putting the property to that reasonable 12 use; and 13 - Conditions cannot be created by the owner 14 - Conditions cannot be solely economic in nature. 15 16 Staff recommends approval of the requested front yard setback encroachment variance at 3401 17 Harding Street NE with the following conditions: 18 19 A. The front additions for porch and living space are constructed to a point no closer than 20 22.3 feet from the front property line, as shown on the plans dated 2/19/19. 21 B. The plans are modified to meet the zoning ordinance requirements for all other aspects, 22 including building setbacks and impervious surfaces, unless otherwise approved by the 23 City Council. 24 C. Any required permits for construction are applied for and approved by other relevant 25 staff. 26 27 Staff recommends approval of the proposed side yard setback encroachment toward 34th Avenue 28 for the living space as designed; and an attached garage space of 25 feet setback, modified from 29 the proposal of 15.4 feet as shown on the plans dated 2/19/19, subject to the following 30 conditions: 31 32 A. The addition for living space is constructed to a point no closer than 23.4 feet from the 33 34th Avenue property line, as shown on the plans dated 2/19/19. 34 B. The addition for garage space is constructed to a point no closer than 25 feet from the 34th 35 Avenue property line, rather than the 15.4-foot setback shown on the plans. 36 C. The plans are modified and shown to meet the zoning ordinance requirements for all 37 other aspects, including impervious surfaces, unless otherwise approved by the City 38 Council 39 D. The existing detached garage is removed as proposed, no later than at the time of 40 occupancy for the proposed building additions. 41 E. Any required permits for construction are applied for and approved by other relevant 42 staff. 43 44 City Planner Grittman provided comparisons to neighboring properties. 45 46 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes March 19, 2019 Page 4 Commissioner Rude asked if there is a plan for a sidewalk along Harding or 34th. Mr. Grittman 1 stated he is not aware of any plans for a sidewalk. Commissioner Rude asked if the garage is 2 moved does that increase the lot coverage and Mr. Grittman stated it would be increased but not 3 significantly that would raise issues for the 35% code. Commissioner Rude asked if the egress 4 window would be affected by moving the garage back. Mr. Grittman stated there are windows on 5 the back side of the house and if they were egress staff would work with the applicant. 6 7 Commissioner Payne noted some of the other houses on 34th had similar houses and asked how 8 many and Mr. Grittman stated it is a common condition they are closer. There were no problems 9 reported with street plowing. 10 11 Commissioner Socha asked when the setback changed to 30 feet and Mr. Grittman stated he does 12 not know. Chair Papatola noted some may be legal non-conforming lots. 13 14 Mr. Chris Cornelius of EHR Construction, is the builder, stated they would like to make it a 20-15 foot setback on the garage. The elevation of the garage will be under 10%. If the garage is 16 pushed back 25 feet there would be no windows in the kitchen. The Applicants agreed. 17 18 Mrs. Shannon Foreman and Mr. Jim Foreman, applicants, stated the reason for the project is to 19 create a living space for her mother in their home. 20 21 Commissioner Westrick ask how big the backyard was and why wouldn’t it be extended to the 22 backyard. Mr. Cornelius stated the addition is off the master bedroom and if changed the plans 23 would need to be redone. 24 25 Commissioner Rude asked how far would the garage need to go per staff’s recommendation and 26 Mr. Cornelius stated there would be no window in the kitchen. Mr. Grittman stated the 20-foot 27 setback would be functional. 28 29 Commissioner Socha asked if the garage could be made 5 feet shorter and Mr. Cornelius stated 30 the depth of the garage has already been reduced to 23 in depth. The minimum that would 31 accommodate a full-size vehicle is 22 feet 6 inches. 32 33 Chair Papatola closed the public hearing at 7:25 p.m. 34 35 Commissioner Rude asked about the alternatives and if the existing garage is at 15 feet it can 36 stay in its same location. Mr. Grittman stated they would not be able to build along the 15-foot 37 line. 38 39 Chair Papatola stated he is in support of the two variance requests. Commissioner Socha agreed. 40 41 Motion by Commissioner Neumann, seconded by Commissioner Westrick, to recommend the 42 City Council approve a variance request for a 7.7-foot variance from the required 30-foot front 43 yard setback to allow for an addition to the master bedroom and a front porch.at 3401 Harding 44 Street and direct staff to prepare a resolution. 45 46 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes March 19, 2019 Page 5 Motion carried 6-0. 1 2 Motion by Commissioner Neumann, seconded by Commissioner Payne, to recommend the City 3 Council approve a variance request for a 14.6-foot variance from the required 30-foot side yard 4 setback to allow for an attached garage at 3401 Harding Street moving the garage farther into the 5 lot to a 20-foot setback – a ten foot variance from the 30 foot standard per the applicant’s request 6 and direct staff to prepare a resolution. 7 8 Motion carried 6-0. 9 10 IV. STAFF REPORTS – NONE. 11 12 V. OTHER BUSINESS – NONE. 13 14 VI. COMMUNITY FORUM. 15 16 No one appeared to address the Commission. 17 18 VII. INFORMATION AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. 19 20 City Planner Grittman thanked the Planning Commission for agreeing to move their meeting 21 dates to accommodate his schedule. 22 23 VIII. ADJOURNMENT. 24 25 Motion by Commissioner Socha, seconded by Commissioner Neumann, to adjourn the meeting 26 at 7:35 p.m. 27 28 Motion carried 6-0. 29 30 31 Respectfully submitted, 32 Debbie Wolfe (TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.) 33 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK MEMORANDUM To: St. Anthony Village Planning Commission From: Stephen Grittman, City Planner Date: Planning Commission Meeting – April 16, 2019 NAC Project No. 323.01 – 19.01 Request: Request for Variance to Front Yard Setback Requirement; Variance to Side Yard Setback Requirement; Variance to Impervious Surface Coverage Requirement Property Address: 2609 Pahl Avenue Property PID: 07-029-23-21-.0080 STAFF RECOMMENDATION The applicant has constructed an addition to the rear of an existing home at the above noted address. The addition to the one-story rambler included a large window well area to provide light to the lower level. As a part of the project, the applicant constructed walkways and a side-yard patio that were not included on the original plans. Additional work includes front and rear raised landings, one of which is the construction of a front stoop that encroaches into the front yard setback. In reviewing the work, the project both as now constructed and as proposed raised three potential elements that would have required variances, as follows: A. Raised front steps that encroach farther into the required 35.9 foot front yard setback (the existing structure is currently closer than the average setback of the adjoining parcels). The proposed setback would be 25.6 feet. B. Sidewalk access between front and rear yards which expands to a patio that encroaches by 3.8 feet into the required 5 foot side yard setback, to a proposed setback of 1.2 feet (this portion was constructed but not approved previously). C. Steps, walkway, and patio which combine to increase impervious surface on the lot by 2.5% beyond the required 35% maximum coverage (a proposed maximum impervious of 37.5%). Since the time of the original public hearing notice, the applicants have worked with staff to refine their application, making changes to increase conformity with several aspects of the zoning ordinance. Those changes resulted in narrowing of much of the paved space in the side yard to less than 5 feet in width, and a resulting reduction to overall impervious surface to 36.7%. April 16, 2019 Page 2 Because a portion of the side yard paved space continues (in the current proposal) to be shown at more than 5 feet in width and closer than 5 feet to the side property line, a variance is still at issue for this dimension, although lesser in scope than originally required. As a result, Variances from each of these three standards are required to proceed with the project as planned. In reviewing the proposed improvements against the ordinance requirements, staff recommends approval of the front yard setback encroachment as proposed, denial of the side yard setback variance for the “patio”, and approval of the impervious surface coverage variance as now proposed. Staff has reviewed for height, yard setbacks, and other zoning standards; the request appears to meet all other code requirements. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Thomas and Lindsay Wernimont Owner: Thomas and Lindsay Wernimont Location: 2609 Pahl Avenue Existing Land Use Low-Density Residential Zoning: R-1 Single Family District Surrounding Land North: Low-Density Residential / Zoned: R-1 Single Family District Use / Zoning: East: Low-Density Residential / Zoned: R-1 Single Family District South: Low-Density Residential / Zoned: R-1 Single Family District West: Low-Density Residential / Zoned: R-1 Single Family District Deadline for Agency Application Complete Date: January 28, 2019 Action: 60 Days: March 29, 2019 Letter Sent: March 11, 2019 120 Days: May 28, 2019 ANALYSIS 1. Background The applicant is proposing to construct (or has already constructed) site modifications that encroach into the front and side setbacks, and exceed the maximum allowable impervious surface. The parcel in question is shown on the zoning map below, and is 60 feet in width and approximately 9,285 square feet in area. April 16, 2019 Page 3 A. Front Setback Variance. The homes adjacent to the subject parcel result in an average setback of 35.9 feet for this parcel. The existing home on the property is currently at 32.6 feet, encroaching by 3.3 feet into the required setback as measured by the average of the adjoining properties. The applicants propose to construct front steps that would encroach an additional 7 feet into the required front yard, a resulting proposed setback of 25.6 feet, 10.3 feet closer than the average adjoining setback. The zoning ordinance includes an allowed encroachment for stoops to extend into a front yard by an additional five feet. Thus, the measured encroachment for the proposed front yard variance would be 5.3 feet. The zoning ordinance sets out a series of criteria for a request to qualify for variance consideration. Those criteria are found in §152.245, (C) Evidence of the Zoning Chapter, and are included in this report for reference below. The criteria can be summarized as whether there are unique conditions on the property that contribute to creation of a practical difficulty in putting the property to what would otherwise be considered a reasonable use – reasonable use is often thought of as one that would be common and acceptable in the area. Variances may not be entirely economic in nature, nor be the result of the actions of the applicant. In this case, the applicants suggest that there are conditions that meet the required criteria. First, the applicant’s home is setback 32.6 feet from the street – similar to, or slightly more than, nearly every other home constructed along the block of Pahl Avenue. Only the location of the single neighboring property to the east – a larger parcel at the corner of Pahl and Wilson Street NE – includes a 39.8 foot setback, which skews the subject property setback requirement significantly. The house on the parcel to the west is setback at 31.9 feet (0.7 feet closer than the subject parcel), and includes a front stairway encroaching to 23.0 feet from the right April 16, 2019 Page 4 of way line. The applicant’s request is to construct a stairway at a setback of 25.6 feet. The applicants further suggest that the requested stoop is reasonably sized to accommodate a landing for entry into the home – a common feature – and then steps to access the landing both toward the street and to the side. A sidewalk toward the side would then extend around the house to facilitate rear yard access from this point. The proposed design does not appear to be out of character with the neighborhood. Moreover, a landing of the size proposed by the applicants would not be able to be constructed fully within the setbacks as defined by the adjoining properties. The proposed landing and steps are reasonably sized, in character with the site and the neighborhood, and appear to meet the requirements of the variance criteria as listed in the code. As noted above, staff recommends approval of the variance for the front yard encroachment for the proposed steps as shown in the applicants’ application. B. Side Yard Setback Variance. The applicants propose to add sidewalk access between the front and rear yards, extending the sidewalk from the front steps to a new landing behind an existing enclosed porch area. Walkways on private property are not required to maintain a separate setback, however, patios are required to maintain a minimum 5 foot setback from a side property line. The code does not define “sidewalk” or “walkway”. The code defines “patio” as follows: PATIO. A courtyard or other finished exterior ground surface open to the sky constructed of rock, brick, concrete, stone, or similar materials and commonly used for relaxation, socializing, or dining. The general City Code references to sidewalk and walkway apply almost exclusively to public sidewalks, but also do not define the term. In common usage, a sidewalk is a pedestrian pathway, and in residential applications, is normally between 3 and 5 feet in width. This appears to be the current condition on much of the subject property, and common in the nearby neighborhood. This portion of the application has changed since the original notice. There are three separate aspects to be aware of: (1) The as-constructed paved area; (2) The revised plans that propose to modify the existing paved area, but still require variance; and (3) The staff recommendation for this paved space. April 16, 2019 Page 5 (1) Current Conditions. The applicants have constructed a paved walkway within the existing side yard on the east side of the house, an area that is 11.2 feet wide between the house and the property line. As constructed, this paved area is widened to approximately 10 feet, extending to within 1.2 feet of the side property line. At this location, staff would interpret the paved space to be a “patio”, under the definition in the code, even though it includes a walkway function. At 10 feet in width, it would also accommodate the recreational uses noted in the definition. As such, it is staff’s interpretation that any space that is greater in width than a typical residential walkway improvement must maintain a 5 foot setback from the side property line. The purposes of the setback for such uses are many. The setback accommodates a reasonable separation of activities that may impact a neighboring property. Patios allow for sustained activity, whereas a sidewalk is utilized only intermittently, making separation more important for patio areas. Because of the possibility of sustained activity, the setback area accommodates the possibility of screening or buffering – including fencing and/or landscaping - that can increase privacy. The setback also helps accommodate the additional drainage and runoff that would be common with a larger paved area, a condition that would not be as significant an issue with a narrower sidewalk. As developed, the applicants have numerous alternative locations for patio space to the proposed side yard encroachment. An outdoor entertainment space could be developed and accessible to the steps and landing being proposed adjoining the porch toward the rear of the property, rather than the side, and easily meet or exceed the five foot setback requirement. Finally, judging by aerial photography, side-yard patio encroachments do not appear to be common in the neighborhood. It is difficult to imagine that a patio with the encroachment proposed by the applicant would be necessary to make reasonable use of the property. (2) Amended Site Plan. Since the time of the hearing notice, staff and the applicants discussed alternatives to the existing condition by variance. The limits of the improvements suggested by staff include the allowance for a sidewalk (a paved improvement that is no greater than 5 feet in width), which is not subject to setback requirements, or patio design (a paved improvement which is wider than a sidewalk) which meets the setback. The applicants then submitted a modified plan that removes much of the paved area currently encroaching into the setback (measured as a 1.2 foot setback as noted above). In this plan, the applicants would cut a series of sections from the existing pavement to limit the width of said pavement to 4.9 feet or less in April 16, 2019 Page 6 width. The setback of the resulting paved area is shown as 3.5 feet on the site plan prepared by the applicants’ site designer. These changes result in conformity for most of the paved area with the two limitations suggested by staff. One area, however, continues to violate these limitations. The area highlighted in yellow below is both wider than 5 feet, and closer than 5 feet to the property line. The result is the need for a variance for an encroachment for a patio to a 3.5 foot setback. (3) Staff Recommendation. For the reasons noted above, including the lack of practical difficulties in complying with the code, lack of uniqueness that would suggest that a variance would be reasonable in this case, and the fact that the need for the variance is created by the applicants, staff does not recommend approval of the variance for a side yard setback encroachment as shown on the proposed plans. The applicants can remedy this encroachment in one of two ways: Further cut the paved area to meet the 5 foot setback, or to reduce the overall width to 5 feet or less, so it qualifies as a walkway, rather than a patio. Without approval of a variance, the applicants should amend the plan to conform this aspect of the project to the stated requirements. The applicants note that they did not include an application for a variance to this setback, maintaining instead that the space is a “decorative walkway”, not subject to the patio setback requirement. Staff noticed this variance as an April 16, 2019 Page 7 aspect of the project to avoid having to return to this issue at a later date. Because the concrete encroachment is already in place, and because staff’s interpretation is that this area is required to meet a 5 foot setback, the alternative would be to initiate an enforcement action to remove the encroaching pavement. Nonetheless, staff does not recommend approval either as constructed or as shown on the modified plans, and additional pavement removal would be the result of a variance denial. C. Impervious Surface Variance. The third variance requested is an increase in the impervious surface on the property from the maximum 35% to, originally, 37.5%. Impervious surfaces are those that are covered by material that is highly resistant to infiltration by water. The purpose of impervious surface regulations is to minimize flooding and stormwater control issues that contribute to sedimentation and pollution of local and regional water bodies. Particularly in areas that were developed prior to contemporary stormwater ponding and treatment requirements, managing impervious surfaces is a key component in avoiding these problems. The requirement for lots of more than 9,000 square feet (as with the subject parcel) is a maximum impervious coverage of 35%. For this parcel, this results in a total of 3,250 square feet of eligible impervious surface. As designed, the surveyor’s plans show an impervious total of 3,410 square feet, an excess area of 160 square feet. This has been adjusted downward from the original plan which proposed 3,482 square feet (232 square feet over the limit). The applicants note that for lots below the 9,000 square foot threshold, the impervious allowance is 40%, a standard that can result in anomalous impacts – such as, an 8,900 square foot lot which would be permitted more total impervious area than the applicants’ parcel (up to 3,560 square feet in this example). Nonetheless, the issue is not whether the applicants are close to the standard, but whether the variance criteria are met. The applicants have an otherwise conforming parcel with no apparent unusual conditions that would separate it from other similar parcels in similar circumstances. However, connecting the front sidewalk, front entryway, side/rear deck, and alley-fronting garage and driveway is a reasonable use of residential property. The applicants, if reducing all sidewalk areas to 5 feet or less, would still exceed the 35% threshold, suggesting that a small variance to the impervious standard is supportable. Finally, it is noted that the code permits construction of a wood deck, and exempts such decks from the impervious limit if the deck permits precipitation to drain through the deck to a pervious ground below. While the soils in the area do not easily accommodate infiltration, this solution is allowed by the code and is available to the applicants without increasing impervious coverage beyond the 35% standard, presuming it would meet required setbacks of 5 feet from the side property line. April 16, 2019 Page 8 In summary, staff recommends approval of the impervious surface variance for a total impervious coverage of 3,400 square feet. This calculation is made by using the applicants’ current proposal of 3,410 square feet, and eliminating the side encroachment area of approximately 10 square feet to meet the 5 foot setback for the paved area discussed in Section 1.B. of this report above. Approval of this variance would be supported by findings that include the application of the percentage standards for lots of this size, the reasonable connections on the subject property for front and rear yard sidewalks, and compliance with other common requirements of the ordinance. 2. Representative Codes Referenced. Title XV Land Usage, Chapter 152 Zoning Code, Section §152.039 (E) Front yard apply to this proposal. City Code Section 152.039 (E) states the front yard must have a depth equal to the greater of 30 feet or a distance equal to the average of the front yard depths of the two adjacent lots. Title XV Land Usage, Chapter 152 Zoning Code, Section §152.245 VARIANCES (A) Application states that “An owner of property with an existing structure which does not comply with the zoning code, or of property on which such a structure is proposed to be constructed, may apply for a variance upon payment of the fee specified in Chapter 33”. 3. Criteria for and Consistency with Criteria for Variance Approval. Title XV Land Usage, Chapter 152 Zoning Code, Section §152.245, (C) Evidence, lists the criteria the City Council must consider in determining whether to grant or deny a variance. The applicable criteria include: 1. The subject matter of the application is within the scope of this section. 2. Strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because: a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning code; b. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the property owner; c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; and d. Economic considerations alone are not the basis of the practical difficulties. 3. The variance, if granted, would be consistent with the City’s comprehensive land use plan. 4. The granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning code. SUMMARY AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION April 16, 2019 Page 9 Front Yard Setback Variance. Staff recommends approval of the requested front yard setback encroachment variance at 2609 Pahl Avenue with the following conditions: A. The front steps are constructed to a point no closer than 25.6 feet from the front property line, as shown on the plans originally dated 10/31/18, and as subsequently amended in correspondence with City Staff. B. The plans are modified to meet the zoning ordinance requirements for all other aspects, including patio setback and impervious surfaces, unless otherwise approved by the City Council as a part of this application. This condition would include removal of any unapproved elements of the project. C. Any required permits for construction are applied for and approved by other relevant staff. This recommendation is based on a finding that the proposed steps are consistent with the character of the neighborhood, and constitute reasonable use of the property, overcoming practical difficulties related to the imposition of unusual setback requirements by adjoining homes and limitations to reasonable access to the existing structure. Side Yard Setback Encroachment Variance. Staff recommends denial of the proposed side yard setback encroachment for the patio as designed and shown on the plans dated 10/31/18, and as subsequently amended in correspondence with City staff. This recommendation is based on a finding that the request is inconsistent with commonly found conditions in the neighborhood; that there do not appear to be any unique conditions on the property that would support varying from the ordinance 5 foot setback standard; that residential sidewalks are commonly no greater than 5 feet in width; and that there are alternatives available to the applicant that can be developed without the need for variance. Impervious Surface Coverage Variance. Staff recommends approval of the variance for the proposed increase in impervious surface coverage to allow up to 3,400 square feet of impervious surface, and as illustrated on the applicant’s current site plan submitted on April 2, 2019, but with removal of adequate paved surface to meet sidewalk widths of no more than 5 feet, or patio setbacks of no less than 5 feet. As noted, the maximum impervious surface standards are in place to protect the City, and neighboring property, from the potential for flooding, as well from excessive runoff of rainwater, sediment, and pollutants. Special conditions that would justify a departure from the standard include those noted in this report, specifically, the application of the percentage standards for lots of this size creates an anomaly in impervious surface standards for slightly smaller lots, that connections on the subject property for front and rear yard sidewalks constitute a reasonable use of residential property, and that the plan evidences compliance with other common requirements of the ordinance. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Decision 1. Variance to Front Yard Setback April 16, 2019 Page 10 1. Motion to recommend approval of the request for a variance to the front yard setback for construction of front landing and steps within the required 35.9 foot setback at 2609 Pahl Avenue and direct staff to prepare resolution declaring terms of the same. 2. Motion to recommend denial of the variance as requested. In the event of a recommendation for denial, the Planning Commission must state its findings related to denial. 3. Request Additional Information and Table Action, subject to the submission of additional information from staff and/or applicant. Decision 2. Variance to Side Yard Setback 1. Motion to recommend approval of the request for a variance to the side yard setback for construction of a patio within the required 5 foot setback at 2609 Pahl Avenue and direct staff to prepare resolution declaring terms of the same. 2. Motion to recommend denial of the variance as requested. This recommendation includes a requirement that the applicant make corrections to the submitted plan, as well as the constructed improvements, to ensure that either (a) any paved area greater than 5 feet in width meets the required 5 foot setback for patios; or (b), any paved area is modified to be no more than 5 feet in width so as to constitute a sidewalk rather than a patio. 3. Request Additional Information and Table Action, subject to the submission of additional information from staff and/or applicant. Decision 3. Variance to Impervious Surface Coverage 1. Motion to recommend approval of the request for a variance to the impervious surface coverage at 3,400 square feet (36.6 %) at 2609 Pahl Avenue and direct staff to prepare resolution declaring terms of the same. 2. Motion to recommend denial of the variance as requested. In the event of a recommendation for denial, the Planning Commission must state its findings related to denial. 3. Request Additional Information and Table Action, subject to the submission of additional information from staff and/or applicant. ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A: Location map Exhibit B: Application and Supporting Material Exhibit C: Draft resolution Classified - Confidential Wernimont Variance Request 2609 Pahl Avenue Saint Anthony, MN 55418 Property ID: 07-029-23 21 0080 Lot 33, Block 5 Murray Heights Addition to Minneapolis We are seeking two variances: 1. Front yard setback encroachment greater than the average of two adjacent properties 2. Lot coverage greater than 35% In July of 2018, we began a major addition and remodel project to make our St. Anthony home our forever home. With a growing family, we are excited to raise our children in this neighborhood! Regrettably, through the building/remodel process, a few items were missed by our general contractor, Lake Country Builders. Our original site plan was approved and much of the work falls within that original plan. Though through the process of seeing the addition come together, there were changes to the walkways and steps to the house, of which a new site plan was not submitted, therefore we are requesting the two variances. We hope the quality work put forth and money invested in our neighborhood will bring long term value to not only us, but our neighbors as well. Front Yard Setback Encroachment The originally submitted and approved site plan included a 7’4” concrete stoop. Instead of concrete, we have chosen to go with composite wood steps. These steps will be shorter into the yard than originally planned, at 7’, and we plan to take the steps out to the front, as well to the side to allow for entrance from both directions. The front sidewalk was poured to accommodate steps of a similar layout to the approved steps from the original site plan. We’d prefer to keep the current sidewalk layout which can only happen if a variance for encroachment into the front yard setback is granted. This allows for walkway access from the front street to back & front house doors and the garage. The requested setback will not alter the character of the property and is in in keeping with neighborhood aesthetics and usability/accessibility of our property. Upon further review from the city, it was noted the setback needs to be the average of the two adjacent front yards. Our house, we have been told, is legal non-conforming when it comes to the front yard setback. The average of the two adjacent front yards is 35.9’. The house to the east is set back drastically further than the remainder of the neighbors, as it is on a corner, double lot. This requires us to have a much greater front yard setback than the other properties on Pahl Avenue. When looking at “line of site” to the remaining houses down the block to the west, we would be in line with, or further from the street than, many properties. We hope that this improvement to the curb appeal and value of the house to the neighborhood will be sufficient in granting the variance to allow for this encroachment into the front yard setback. Formatted: Font: Not Bold Commented [WT1]: I’d leave footing out as I hate for them to say we have to tear that up if a variance isn’t granted. Classified - Confidential Lot Coverage Greater Than 35% One item considered heavily before remodeling/adding on was to go up or out. We chose to go out, versus up to keep in line with the neighborhood aesthetic being mainly one-story ramblers. This decision added 5% to our lot coverage. Our lot is just over 9000 sq ft which changes our lot coverage percentage dramatically (from 40% to 35%). On our block (Pahl Ave. between Wilson and Roosevelt St.), there are 18 60 ft. wide lots (the same width as our lot); and of these lots, 15 (83%) are under 9000 sq. ft. Because of the way the code is written, these 15 smaller lots are allowed more lot coverage than our lot. With most lots allowed 10% more lot coverage. The north and south property lines are not parallel for the lots on the north side of Pahl Avenue which increases lot length, thus lot size, as you go from west to east down Pahl Avenue. It is the inherent property of unparallel (lot) lines that puts us at a disadvantage to 83% of our neighbors with lots sizes of the same width (size). Being that our lot is longer, we therefore need additional walkway to get from the front to the back of the property, and therefore more lot coverage than our neighboring, shorter lots. It is our current sidewalk configuration that would have to be revised if a lot coverage variance is not granted. We are currently over lot coverage by 2.5%, or 232 sq ft, and are seeking a variance to maintain this overage in keeping with the allowed coverage for smaller lots on our block. We feel this is a reasonable usage of our property that takes into consideration the unique circumstances of our lot and maintains the intent of the zoning code. Formatted: Font: Not Bold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– Front Setback Variance for Entry Stoop Side Setback Variance for Patio Impervious Surface Coverage 3401 HARDING STREET NE FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE; SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE 2609 PAHL AVENUE FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE; SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE; IMPERVIOUS SURFACE VARIANCE Project Description: Building Additions: Front: Pahl Ave (south); Entry Stoop Concrete Pavement Front sidewalk Rear sidewalk Site sidewalk/Patio 2609 PAHL AVENUE FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE; SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE; IMPERVIOUS SURFACE VARIANCE VARIANCE CRITERIA: Use is a reasonable one, given the character of the neighborhood Unique conditions exist on the property Those conditions create practical difficulties in putting the property to that reasonable use; and Conditions cannot be created by the owner; Conditions cannot be solely economic in nature. 2609 PAHL AVENUE AERIAL PHOTO 2609 PAHL AVENUE INITIAL SITE PLAN AMENDED (CURRENT) SITE PLAN 2609 PAHL AVENUE FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE Front Yard Setback Variance 25.6 feet Variance of 5.3 feet 2609 PAHL AVENUE SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE FOR PATIO Side Yard Setback Variance for Patio 5 foot setback required Original installation at 1.2 foot setback (3.8 feet encroachment) Revised to meet sidewalk width (no setback), with one exception (7’ x 8’) at 3.5 feet setback 2609 PAHL AVENUE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE VARIANCE Impervious Surface Variance 35% Maximum Requirement (3,250 square feet on subject property) Original (noticed) proposal at 37.5% (3,482 square feet) Revised proposal at 36.7% (3,410 square feet) Staff recommendation (including elimination of some “patio” pavement: 36.6% (3,400 square feet) 2609 PAHL AVENUE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Front Entry Stoop (Front Setback Variance) Staff recommends approval of the requested front yard setback encroachment variance at 2609 Pahl Avenue with the following conditions: A.The front addition for an entry stoop is constructed to a point no closer than 25.6 feet from the front property line, as shown on the plans dated 10/31/18. B.The plans are modified to meet the zoning ordinance requirements for all other aspects, including patio setback and impervious surfaces, unless otherwise approved by the City Council as a part of this application. This condition would include removal of any unapproved elements of the project. C.Any required permits for construction are applied for and approved by other relevant staff. 2609 PAHL AVENUE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS 2. Patio/Sidewalk Encroachment (Side Setback Variance) Staff recommends denial of the variance as requested. This recommendation includes a requirement that the applicant make corrections to the submitted plan, as well as the constructed improvements, to ensure that either (a) any paved area greater than 5 feet in width meets the required 5 foot setback for patios; or (b), any paved area is modified to be no more than 5 feet in width so as to constitute a sidewalk rather than a patio. 2609 PAHL AVENUE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS 3. Impervious Surface Variance Staff recommends approval of the variance for the proposed increase in impervious surface coverage to allow up to 3,400 square feet of impervious surface, and as illustrated on the applicant’s current site plan submitted on April 2, 2019, but with removal of adequate paved surface to meet sidewalk widths of no more than 5 feet, or patio setbacks of no less than 5 feet. CITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. _____________ A RESOLUTION APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A 5.3 FOOT VARIANCE (SETBACK OF 25.6 FEET) FROM THE REQUIRED FRONT YARD FOR A FRONT STOOP; APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A 1.6% (150 SQUARE FEET) VARIANCE FROM THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE STANDARD OF 35.0%; AND DENIAL OF A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO THE REQUIRED SIDE YARD OF SETBACK OF 5.0 FEET FOR PATIO AREAS. WHEREAS, the City of St. Anthony Village received a request from Tom and Lindsay Wernimont for variances from the required front setback to allow for placement of front entry stoop, and a variance from the maximum impervious surface of 35% for residential lots to accommodate existing paved sidewalk and patio space, at 2609 Pahl Avenue, legally described as follows: Lot 33, Block 5, Murray Heights Addition to Minneapolis (Subject Property); and WHEREAS, the property is located in the R-1 Single Family Residential district and the applicable front yard setback is 30 feet for the Subject Property; and WHEREAS, the applicable side yard setback for patios in said district is 5 feet; and WHEREAS, the applicable impervious surface coverage requirements for lots of more than 9,000 square feet is 35.0%; and WHEREAS, Title XV Land Usage, Chapter 152 Zoning Code Section §152.245 provides that City Council must provide evidence that the subject matter of the application is within the scope of the section and that strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has requested variances from both front and side yard setback dimension requirements to accommodate a front entry stoop, existing paved patio, and total impervious surface of up to 36.7%; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered all of the comments, submissions and the staff report, which are incorporated by reference into the resolution; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 16, 2019 on the application and the applicant and members of the public were provided the opportunity to present information to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the City Council makes the following findings of fact in support of the resolution: Approval of Variance to Required Front Setback for Stoop: 1. The property is located in an area of varying setbacks from the street. 2. The proposed improvements to the property are consistent with the character of the neighborhood in which it is located. 3. The setbacks required by the ordinance for inhibit the reasonable access to the principal entry in question. 4. Due to the conditions found on the property, there are practical difficulties in complying with the strict terms of the ordinance. 5. The proposed variance will accommodate reasonable use without negative impacts on neighboring property nor on public improvements and services. Approval of to Maximum Impervious Surface Variance: 1. The property is just over the 9,000 square foot threshold, reducing allowable impervious surface to below that of slightly smaller lots. 2. The subject property is slightly irregular in shape, increasing lot size beyond that of a rectangular lot of similar dimensions. 3. The proposed improvements to the property are consistent with the character of the neighborhood in which it is located. 4. The impervious surface areas are related to reasonable uses including sidewalks connecting front and rear areas of the property, and are minimized when incorporating modifications recommended by the staff report. 5. Due to the conditions found on the property, there are practical difficulties in complying with the strict terms of the ordinance. 6. The proposed variance will accommodate reasonable use without negative impacts on neighboring property nor on public improvements and services. Denial of a Variance to the Required Side Yard Setback for Patios: 1. The applicant has alternatives to location and/or construction of outdoor entertainment spaces that will not require variances. 2. The encroachment of a patio space into the required 5 foot setback interferes with the ability to screen such uses from adjoining residential property. 3. The encroachment of a patio space into the required 5 foot setback raises the potential for unanticipated drainage issues between properties. 4. There are no practical difficulties that support the retention of the previously constructed patio space in the existing location. 5. Sidewalks are allowed to encroach into the side yard, but in common residential applications are no more than 5 feet in width. 6. The applicant can reduce the width of the existing concrete areas to no more than 5 feet in width, and avoid setback encroachment concerns. NOW THEREFORE MAY IT BE RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of St. Anthony Village accepts the findings and recommendations documented in the staff report and approves variances to the required front setback requirements and impervious surface requires as shown on the plans dated 10/31/18 and modified on 4/2/19, at 2609 Pahl Avenue: a. 5.3 feet (25.6 foot setback) to the front (Pahl Avenue). b. 36.6% Impervious surface coverage (3,400 square feet total). And further, MAY IT BE RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of St. Anthony Village hereby denies any variance for a patio setback of less than 5 feet, providing that any paved area within the required 5 foot setback area be modified from the existing condition to a dimension no greater than 5 feet in width so as to constitute a residential walkway; or that any paved area greater that 5 feet in width be modified from the existing condition to meet the required 5 foot setback for patio areas, and that plans documenting compliance are prepared and delivered to the City reflecting compliance with this Resolution. Passed in regular session of the City Council on the ___ day of _________ 2019. CITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGE By:_________________________________ Jerome O. Faust, Mayor ATTEST: By:_________________________________ Nicole Miller, City Clerk THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK