The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About4A 14259 Shady Beach Trail Variance report 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: JUNE 15, 2015 AGENDA #: 4A PREPARED BY: PRESENTED BY: JEFF MATZKE, PLANNER JEFF MATZKE PUBLIC HEARING: YES AGENDA ITEM: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM LAKE SETBACK FOR A PROPERTY IN THE R-1 (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICT DISCUSSION: Introduction Steiner & Koppelman, on behalf of the owners of the subject property, are re- questing a variance in order to allow for the construction of a new home on a property located at 14259 Shady Beach Trail NE. The property is located along the northern shores of Lower Prior Lake, east of Bayview Circle. The property currently contains a single family home. The following variance is requested with the proposed survey: • An 15.2 foot variance from the required minimum 65.2 foot structure setback from the Ordinary High Water (OHW) elevation of Prior Lake using the average lake setbacks of adjacent properties (Section 1104.308) History The property is zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential), and is guided R-LD (Urban Low Density) on the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The property currently contains a single family home which was constructed in 1958. Recently the home on the adjacent property to the west was removed and reconstructed further away from the lake resulting in greater average lake setback distance (The previous setback distance was 41.8 feet and the current distance is 84.2 feet) Current Circumstances The current City Ordinance regarding lake side setbacks according to Section 1104.302 (4) is 75 feet from the ordinary high water mark of Prior Lake. How- ever, the City Ordinance does allow for an averaging of the adjacent property lake setbacks below this 75 foot requirement. The averaging lake setback ordi- nance is as follows: 1104.308 (2) On shoreland lots that have 2 adjacent lots with existing principal structures on both such adjacent lots, any new residential structure or any additions to an existing structure may be set back the average setback of the adjacent structures from the ordinary high-water mark or 50 feet, whichever is greater, provided all other provisions of the Shoreland Overlay District are complied with. In cases where only one of the two lots adjacent to an undeveloped shoreland lot has an existing principal structure, the average setback of the adjacent structure and the next structure within 150 feet may be 2 utilized. Setback averaging may not be utilized when an undeveloped shoreland lot is adjacent to two other undeveloped shoreland lots. The purpose of the average lakeshore setback is to allow for a consistent re- quirement for areas which have common lakeshore setbacks less than 75 feet without the need to proceed through a variance process for each instance. According to the submitted survey the planned house proposes a 50.4 foot set- back from the lake to the southeast corner of the home. The current adjacent property building setbacks are indicated as 46.2 feet and 84.2 feet respectively with an average setback distance of 65.2 feet. (The applicant’s narrative states 67.6 feet as the required average lake setback but it was more recently discov- ered that 65.2 feet is the current required average). Given the required structure setbacks (side yard – 10 feet, front yard – 25 feet, and lake – 65.2 feet) the buildable area for the lot without the need for setback variances is approximately 3,816 square feet (represented by the red shaded area on the attached exhibit). No impervious surface calculation was provided with the survey but the applicant stated the proposal will meet the maximum re- quirement of 30% of the total lot area. Conclusion City Staff has met with the applicant and homeowner regarding the variance re- quest and has recommended reconfiguration of the house design. As stated in the attached narrative, the applicant does claim the recent reconstruction of the westerly adjacent property to the west and resulting increased average setback from 50 feet to 65.2 feet as a hardship. If a typical deck addition (16-20 foot deck depth) is constructed upon the adjacent property in the future the average set- back for the subject property could be reduced as much as 7 feet or more; how- ever, no deck permit has yet been submitted to the City. City Staff does believe that while this did impact the average setback requirement for the property, there remains a reasonable buildable area without the need for variances, and therefore, does not support the variance request. The DNR also commented that it appears the buildable area would allow for reconfiguration op- tions to achieve a similar sized proposed home. Based upon these findings in this report, City Staff recommends the applicant consider redesigning the proposed home to fit the buildable area without the need for variances. Perhaps a larger buildable area would exist given the future aver- aging of adjacent structures once a upper level deck addition were made to the westerly adjacent property. No resolution of approval or denial has yet been pre- pared for the variance request. If the decision of the Planning Commission were to approve or deny the variance request, City Staff would prepare a resolution based upon the Planning Commission’s findings. ISSUES: This project includes a request for a variance. Section 1108.400 states that the Board of Adjustment may grant a variance from the strict application of the provi- sions of the Zoning Ordinance, provided that: (1) There are practical difficulties in complying with the strict terms of the Ordinance. “Practical difficulties,” as used in connection with the granting of a Variance, means the property owner proposes to use 3 the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. While the submitted survey does indicate the neighborhood has other lake setbacks of 32-68 feet (with the exception of the newly constructed home to the west of the subject property) the buildable area of over 3,816 square feet does allow for a reasonable house to be constructed without the need for a variance. (2) The granting of the Variances are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the City Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances and the Comprehensive Plan. The granting of the variances does not appear to be in harmony with the general purposes of the Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan. A purpose of the Zoning Ordinance to “Promote the most appropriate and orderly development of the residential, business, industrial, public land, and pub- lic areas”. A reasonable residential house which meets the buildable area without the need for a variance could be achieved on the property. (3) The practical difficulty is due to circumstances unique to the property not resulting from actions of the owners of the property and is not a mere convenience to the property owner and applicant. It appears a reconfiguration of the house design may allow for a reasona- ble residential use of the property without the need for a variance. (4) The granting of the variances will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or be detrimental to the health and safety of the public welfare. The granting of the variances would increase the lake setback by over 12 feet from the existing house setback (currently 52.9 feet to proposed 65.2 feet). While there are other riparian properties in this corridor along Shady Beach Trail with similar nonconforming lake setbacks, the size and depth of the subject property would allow for a reasonable house construction. (5) The granting of the Variances will not result in allowing any use of the property that is not permitted in the zoning district where the subject property is located. The requested variances would allow construction of a residential upper level deck which is an allowed accessory use within the R-1 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District. ALTERNATIVES: The Planning Commission has the following alternatives: 1. Motion and a second to approve the lake setback variance requested by the applicant with the listed conditions, or approve any variance the Planning Commission deems appropriate in the circumstances. 4 2. Motion and a second to table or continue discussion of the item for specific purpose as directed by the Planning Commission. 3. Motion and a second to deny the application because the Planning Commis- sion finds a lack of demonstrated practical difficulties under the zoning code criteria RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: Alternative #2. EXHIBITS: 1. Resolution 15-XXPC 2. Location Map 3. Applicant narrative 4. Survey stamp dated June 10, 2015 5. Survey indicating approximately buildable area BU I L D A B L E A R E A (S h a d e d i n R e d )