The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01-29-07 Item 7B, Planning Case 06-035 Variance at 3203 Shorewood Drive ~ --A~ HILLS Request for Council Action ~:e~~red BY:~~~T:!;~;;t;;We~ett~- Council Mtg. Date: - . - ---- --- }2g::0r-m... - ---- -- .... . Final Action Needed By: ._:;!~lL-Qt_______._".__ Agenda Item: 7.8 Actual Amount: Funding ~:g~~h'CiI:A:~~.fo.Q,__R_~_gGestT;__,_-:::"::",,,,:';t;'::~_;'c":.' : Consider a'-Motion -io' ApprovePiannln-g"'Cas-e-OS:03s-;\f3"i-iance-foi-Joh'n"&-Je-ifHuyetfat3203"'sfio-rewoodO-rlve;"Base<i"on"ihe-FlricHn"gs-of"'t="iict' and the Submitted Plans as amended by the Four Conditions in the January 29,2007, Planning Case Report. '_~~frR~_g_gl-D~~R:~_~jqj,':_;___,_::::,,-,,_,,_,,:::.-,:,:;,::_'___::::',_:; Approve the PlannTri'g Case as 'recomm-ende(fb}'-ihe-PfiinnlngCo'mmls-sion:'" 1-10-07 x No.: No.: Recommendation; Recommendation; x Draft Planning Commission minutes & Planning Case Report for 06-035 ~ '1\~HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: January 29,2007 CC Agenda Item 7.B TO: Mayor & City Council J ames Lehnhoff, City Plarme# PC #06-035 Variance John & Jeri Huyett 3203 Shorewood Drive FROM: SUBJECT: Request Consider a Motion to Approve Plarming Case 06-035, Variance for John & Jeri Huyett at 3203 Shorewood Drive, Based on the Findings of Fact and the Submitted Plans as amended by the Four Conditions in the January 29, 2007, Planning Case Report. Background The applicants have submitted a revised variance request to construct a 411 square foot addition to the front side of their dwelling adjacent to the attached garage. The addition would encroach up to seven inches into the ten foot western side yard setback and approximately twelve feet into the fifty foot drainage ditch setback from the east. The addition will not encroach into the front yard setback or into the Lake Johanna setback. Approximately 70 percent or 286 square feet of the proposed addition is outside of all setbacks, which leaves about 125 square feet within the side and drainage ditch setbacks (Attachment 3A-3 of the Plarming Case Report). The applicants have submitted a letter outlining the reasons for the request, a response to the variance evaluation criteria, and drawings of the house before and after the addition (Attachment 3A-1 of the Plarming Case Report). A full survey of the property has also been submitted (Attachment 3A-3 ofthe Planning Case Report). The proposed addition in this report is a revision from their original submission in November 2006. The applicants originally submitted a variance application to construct a 312 square foot (I2'xI6') addition to the front of the attached garage and a ten (2'x5') square foot addition to the main portion of the dwelling. The 312 square foot addition was entirely within the forty foot front yard setback and the fifty foot drainage ditch setback. The revised plans in this application \\Metro-inet.uslardenhills1Planning1Planlling Cases\2006\06-035 Huyett Variance (PENDING)\OJ 1907 - CC Report - Huyett Variance.doc Page 10f4 are less intense of a variance than the original submission. The Planning Commission did review the revised application. Since the Planning Commission review on January 10, 2007, the City has received a letter from the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) stating that the applicants would not be required to obtain any permits for the proposed addition from the RCWD. There are two prior planning cases related to this property. Planning Case 74-010 was approved in 1974, which was for a variance to construct a garage that encroached 2.5 feet into the front yard setback. A file for a second variance to construct a garage that encroached 11.5 feet into the front yard setback was approved in Planning Case 82-022. The garage does encroach approximately 14 feet into the front yard setback. Variance Evaluation Criteria Variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code may be granted in instances where the strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration. Variances shall only be granted when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Code. "Undue hardship," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means: I. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under conditions permitted by the Zoning Code; 2. The plight ofthe landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; and, 4. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship ifreasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Code. Although State Statutes include guidelines for evaluating variances, the interpretation and meaning of those Statutes have been impacted by various court decisions. A somewhat common, though incorrect, interpretation of the written Statutes is that a property owner must show that they do not have reasonable use of their property without an approved variance. Instead, according to the City Attorney, the landowner must only demonstrate that the proposed variation is reasonable for a particular property in a given zone. Findings of Fact The City Council must make a finding as to whether or not the proposed variance meets the four variance evaluation criteria. The Planning Commission offers the following twelve findings for consideration: I. The 12,579.97 square foot lot size is classified as a legal, nonconforming lot within the R-I Zone. \iMctro-inct.lIsiardenhills\PlanningIPl(/Il/ling Cases\2006\06-035 Huyell Variance (PENDING)\OJ 1907 - CC Reporl- Huyett Variance,doc Pagel 0[4 2. The current dwelling is nonconforming because it encroaches approximately fourteen (14) feet into the front yard setback, .5 feet into the western side setback, forty (40) feet into the drainage ditch setback, and up to twenty (20) feet into the Lake Johanna setback. 3. The proposed addition would encroach approximately seven inches into the western side yard setback and approximately twelve feet into the eastern fifty foot setback from the Lake Johanna drainage ditch. The proposed addition would not encroach any further to the lot line or the drainage ditch than the existing structure. 4. The proposed addition along with the existing structure would not exceed the impervious limits. 5. The existing single family home and the proposed addition would be used for permitted uses within the R-I Zone. 6. The existing structure and proposed addition are outside of the twelve (12) foot wide drainage easement, the 100-year flood plains, and any wetlands. 7. A variance to construct an addition that encroached 2.5 feet into the front yard setback was approved in Planning Case 074-10 on May 13, 1974. 8. A variance to construct an addition that encroached 11.5 feet into the front yard setback was approved in Planning Case 082-22 on October 18,1982. 9. The proposed addition is a reasonable use within the R-l Zone as compared to other single family homes in the City. The addition would be used for living space within a single-family home, which is a permitted use in the R-I Zone. 10. The proposed addition is unlikely to negatively impact the essential character of the neighborhood or the City. The sizes of the other homes along Shorewood Drive are comparable to the size of the subject home with the proposed addition. Approximately 70 percent of the addition is outside the setbacks and could be built without a variance. There are seventeen other homes along Shorewood Road, at least seven of which encroach as much as twenty feet into the front yard setback (information on encroachments into side and lake setbacks was not readily available). Three ofthe homes have approved variances for the encroachments and the others may have been constructed prior to the current regulations. 11. The drainage ditch, nonconforming lot size, groundwater level, and the relatively small building pad pose unique challenges to expanding west, east, down, up, toward the lake, or toward the road on this property. The property and required setbacks is unique as compared to most other property in the R -1 Zone. 12. The proposed addition is not based on economic considerations alone. Recommendation The Planning Commission reviewed Planning Case 06-035 and unanimously (4-0) recommends approval of the Variance for 3203 Shorewood Drive based on the submitted plans and twelve findings of fact. The recommendation for approval is subject to the following three conditions: I. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission. \\Mclro-il1ef.us\ardenhillsIPlanlling\Planning Cases\2006\06-035 Huyell Variance (PENDING)\Ol1907 ~ CC Report Huyett Variance.doc Page 3 of 4 2. The applicant shall use best management practices to control erosion throughout construction and restoration. Silt fencing shall be installed along the drainage ditch prior to any construction on the property. 3. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits from the Rice Creek Watershed District and any other necessary agencies prior to the City issuing any building permits. Options 1. Approve the proposal as submitted. 2. Approve the proposal with conditions. 3. Deny the application with reasons for denial. If the City denies the petitioners request, "...it must state in writing the reasons for the denial at the time it denies the request." 4. Table for additional information. If the variance is denied, the City Council should state findings directly related to the four variance evaluation criteria in the motion. Deadline for Al!encv Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on November 20, 2006. The deadline for agency action as required by State Statute would have expired on January 19, 2007 (60 days); however, the City provided the applicant with a letter on January 10, 2007, informing them that the City would be extending the deadline for agency action by an additional sixty days as permitted by State Statute. The deadline for agency action is now March 20,2007. Attachments 7B-1 7B-2 Draft Planning Commission Minutes Report to the Planning Commission - http://www.ci.arden-hiJls.mn.us \\Metro-inel.uslardenhillsIPlanningIPlanning Cases\2006\06-035 Huyett Variance (PENDING)\011907 CC Report -HI/yeff Variance.doc Page 4 0[4 Attachment 7B-l Draft Planning Commission Minutes January 29,2007, City Council Meeting ....... u... <C ! ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 10,2007 2 PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING CASE #06-035, VARIANCE - JOHN & JERI HUYETT; 3203 SHOREWOOD DRIVE Mr. Lehnhoff stated the applicants were requesting a variance to construct a 411 square foot addition to the front side of the existing home at 3203 Shorewood Drive. Approximately twelve feet of the eastern part of the addition is within the fifty foot drainage ditch setback on the eastern side of the property, and approximately seven inches of the addition is within the ten foot side yard setback on the western side of the property. Staff recommended approval based on the following conditions: 1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission. The applicant shall use best management practices to control erosion throughout construction and restoration. Silt fencing shall be installed along the drainage ditch prior to any construction on the property. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits from the Rice Creek Watershed District and any other necessary agencies prior to the City issuing any building permits. 2. 3. Commissioner Larson noted the application talked about the plight of the property owner and asked if the Statutes used the word plight. Mr. Lehnhoff stated that the word plight is used in the Statutes. Commissioner Larson stated high water being fifteen feet from the lake was not an usual condition. Chair Sand opened the public hearing at 7:12 p.m. Chair Sand invited anyone for or against the request to come forward and make comment. Jolm and Jeri Huyett, 3203 Shorewood Drive, stated they have been working with staff for about three months and he believed what they were planning to do would enhance the property. He stated they had spoken with their neighbors and they were in agreement with this project. Commissioner Larson asked if they knew about the encroachment on the drainage easement when they purchased the property. Mr. Huyett responded he did not believe he knew about it, but it might have been discussed in his title search. Commissioner Zimmerman stated he was impressed with this project and he believed it fit with the existing home. Mr. Huyett noted they have already contacted Rice Creek Watershed District and were working through their approval process. Chair Sand closed the public hearing at 7:21 p.m. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 10, 2007 3 Commissioner Zimmerman moved, seconded by Commissioner Modesette to recommend approval of Planning Case No. 06-035, John & Jeri Huyett, request for a variance to construct a 411 square foot addition to the front side of the existing home at 3203 Shorewood Drive, subject to the three conditions as outlined in staffs December 27, 2006 report and based on the Findings of Fact in staff's December 27,2006 report. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). ~~ Q~ Attachment 7B-2 Report to the Planning Commission Available online at: http://www.ci.arden-hiIls.mn.us January 29,2007, City Council Meeting