Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4A 6370 Conroy Street NE - Variance - PC Report 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: APRIL 22, 2019 AGENDA #: 4A PREPARED BY: PRESENTED BY: AMANDA SCHWABE, PLANNER AMANDA SCHWABE AGENDA ITEM: PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AP- PROVING VARIANCES FROM THE MINIMUM LAKE SETBACK AND EXPAN- SION OF A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE ON A PROPERTY IN THE R-1 SD (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL SHORELAND) ZONING DISTRICT DISCUSSION: Introduction Tim and Megan Maher own the property at 6370 Conroy Street NE and are re- questing a variance from the minimum lake setback and to expand a non-con- forming structure to construct a deck on their single-family residence. The prop- erty is located along the northern shores of Lower Prior Lake, east of Shady Beach Trail NE and west of Greenway Ave NE. The following variances are re- quested as noted on the attached survey: • A 16.5-foot variance from the required minimum 52.5-foot lake setback (Section 1104.308 (2)) • Expanding a non-conforming structure (Section 1107.2303 (2) a.) Regulation Minimum Proposed Variance Lake Setback (Averaging allowed, 2 yards w/in 150’) 52.5’ 36’ 16.5’ 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 is in the Shoreland Overlay District of Lower Prior Lake. Current Circumstances The property is 11,249 square feet in size with a single-family residence that was built in 1983. At the time of purchase in 2013, there was a deck which wrapped around the front, side and rear of the home. The previous deck extended ap- proximately 6 feet from the rear of the home towards the lake with a four-foot section that wrapped around the house toward the side property line and a larger seating area at the front entrance to the home. At that time, the deck was ap- proximately 550 sq. ft. in size. According to the applicants, in 2016, the exterior of the home was renovated. During the renovation it was discovered that the previous deck was not properly flashed nor properly fastened, which allowed water to infiltrate the home. As a result, the deck was removed. The building permit for the exterior work has not 2 been finaled as the applicants were anticipating constructing a deck. In conver- sations with staff at that time, it was discussed that deck stairs further encroach- ing on the lake setback would likely not be supported. As a result, the applicants are requesting to construct a deck (without stairs) ap- proximately 413 sq. ft. in size (approximately 137 sq. ft. smaller than the deck which was in place in 2013. The furthest protrusion of the proposed deck would be approximately 36 feet from the OHW of Lower Prior Lake. Lake Setback: Subsection 1104.302 (4) lists the setback requirements for riparian lots. Set- backs are measured from the Ordinary High Water (OHW) mark which is the 904 elevation of Lower Prior Lake. Averaging is permitted on shoreland lots that have 2 adjacent lots with existing principal structures. Averaging would allow any new residential structure or addition to an existing structure to be setback the average of the adjacent structures from the OHW or 50 feet, whichever is greater. The properties within 150 feet of the subject property are less than 75 feet from the OHW therefore, setback averaging applies. As a result of averaging, the mini- mum setback for this structure is 52.5 feet. Most of the neighboring residences have decks, which have setbacks which range from approximately 9 feet to 50 feet from the 904 elevation. Non-Conforming Lot & Structures: Subsection 1104.302 (3) requires a minimum of 15,000 sq. ft. for a single-family riparian lot. Subsection 1107.2303 (2) a. states that construction is permitted on or within a legal non-conforming structure provided it does not extend, expand or intensify the non-conformity. The existing lot is less than the minimum and the residence does not meet the required minimum front yard or lake setback; there- fore, it is considered legal, non-conforming. The proposed deck is considered an expansion of the non-conforming structure thus a variance is necessary. Conclusion The City Staff believes the variances requested are warranted due to the lot con- straints unique to the property and practical difficulties as stated in the findings in this report. Letters of support from each adjacent property owner have been sub- mitted. City Staff recommends approval of the requested variances with the fol- lowing conditions:  The variance resolution shall be recorded at Scott County.  Building Permit shall be obtained from the Building Department prior to the commencement of construction. ISSUES: This project includes a request for variances. 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 the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning 3 Ordinance. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. There are practical difficulties in complying with the strict terms of the Or- dinance. This non-conforming lot has an existing residence which does not meet with required front yard or lake setback. Since the existing resi- dence (without the deck) is located approximately 46 feet from the OHW at its closest point, there is not a location on the rear of the home where a deck could be constructed in a conforming location. According to the applicant, they were originally hoping to construct a deck that extended 12 feet towards the lake; however, they revised the pro- posed deck to be 10 feet, which they feel is the minimum width for func- tional use. The applicants considered locating the larger, seating area of the deck on the south side of the residence, however they would prefer not to construct the deck over the existing sidewalk that leads from the driveway area to the back yard. That location would also place the deck very close to the existing residence to the south. (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 appears 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 develop- ment of the residential, business, industrial, public land, and public areas”. Furthermore, the Shoreland Ordinance (Section 1104) policy’s intent is “in the best interests of the public health, safety, and welfare to provide for the wise development of shoreland of public waters.” The construction of a deck is in harmony with these purposes and policies. (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. Due to the location of the existing residence and narrow depth of the lot, there is not an option to construct a deck in a conforming location on the rear of the residence. The existing sidewalk on the south side of the home would be covered if the deck were enlarged on the south side. The appli- cants are not proposing an access to the deck from the front of the home therefore, covering the sidewalk would eliminate a hard surface access to the rear of the yard and would place the deck very close to the neighboring structure. The lot width and location of the existing residence creates a practical difficulty not resulting from actions of the owners of the property. 4 (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 will not alter the essential character of the Conroy Street NE neighborhood nor be detrimental to the health and safety of the public welfare. Most of the neighboring residences have decks, which have setbacks ranging from approximately 9 feet to 50 feet from the 904 elevation. Based on aerial photos, the average setback from the furthest protrusion of the existing residences to the 904 elevation in this area is approximately 31 feet, so the proposed 36-foot setback will not alter the character of the neighborhood. (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 the construction of a deck on a single-family residential dwelling which is an allowed use within the R-1 SD (Low Density Residential in Shoreland) Zoning District. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Motion and a second to approve a resolution approving the variances re- quested for 6370 Conroy Street NE with the listed conditions or approve any variance the Planning Commission deems appropriate in the circumstances. 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 variances requested because the Planning Commission finds a lack of demonstrated practical difficulties under the zon- ing code criteria. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: Alternative #1. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 19-XXPC 2. Location Map 3. Survey Dated 9-06-16 4. Narrative from Applicant 5. Letters of Support 1 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 RESOLUTION 19-XXPC VARIANCES FROM THE MINIMUM LAKE SETBACK AND EXPANSION OF A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE ON A PROPERTY IN THE R-1 SD (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL SHORELAND) ZONING DISTRICT Motion By: Second By: WHEREAS, The Prior Lake Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Adjustment, conducted a public hearing on April 22, 2019, to consider a request from Timothy and Megan Maher, to approve variances for a reduced lake setback and expansion of a non-conforming structure to construct a deck on a single-family dwelling located in the R-1 SD (Low Density Residential Shoreland) Zoning District at the following property: 6370 Conroy Street NE, Prior Lake, MN 55372 Legal Description: (as per Document No. A943196) That Part of Lot 41, CONROY’S BAY, Scott County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof, lying southwesterly of a line drawn from a point on the easterly line of Lot 41, distant 30.00 feet northerly of the southeasterly corner of Lot 41, to a point on the westerly line of Lot 41 distant 27.50 feet northerly of the southwesterly corner of Lot 41, AND all of Lot 40, AND that part of Lot 39 described as follows: Beginning at the Northwesterly corner of said Lot 39 and running thence Southerly along the Westerly line thereof a distance of 10.1 feet; thence easterly to the Northeasterly corner of Lot 39: thence Westerly along the Northerly line of Lot 39 to point of beginning; and that part of the adjacent road described as follows: Beginning at the northwesterly corner of the South Half of said Lot 41 and running thence Westerly along the extension of the Northerly line of South Half of Lot 41 a distance of 4.7 feet; thence deflecting 90 degrees 55 minutes to the left a distance of 48.6 feet; thence deflecting 21 degrees 22 minutes to the left a distance of 36 feet to the Southwesterly corner of Lot 40; thence Northerly along the westerly line of said Lot 40 and the Westerly of the South Half of Lot 41 to the point of beginning, all according to the plat of Conroy’s Bay on file and of record in the office of the Register of Deeds, of Scott County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, Notice of the public hearing on said variance request was duly published in accordance with the applicable Prior Lake Ordinances; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission proceeded to hear all persons interested in this variance request, and persons interested were afforded the opportunity to present their views and objections related to the variance request; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed the application for the variances as contained in Case #DEV19-000009 and held a hearing thereon on April 22, 2019; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has considered the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety, and welfare of the community, the existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on property values in the surrounding area and the effect of the proposed variance on the Comprehensive Plan. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA as follows: 1. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein. 2. The Planning Commission hereby adopts the following findings: a. 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 the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. There are practical difficulties in complying with the strict terms of the Ordinance. This non-conforming lot has an existing residence which does not meet with required front yard or lake setback. Since the existing residence (without the deck) is located approximately 46 feet from the OHW at its closest point, there is not a location on the rear of the home where a deck could be constructed in a conforming location. 2 b. 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 appears 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 public areas”. Furthermore, the Shoreland Ordinance (Section 1104) policy’s intent is “in the best interests of the public health, safety, and welfare to provide for the wise development of shoreland of public waters.” The construction of a deck is in harmony with these purposes and policies. c. 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. Due to the location of the existing residence and narrow depth of the lot, there is not an option to construct a deck in a conforming location on the rear of the residence. The existing sidewalk on the south side of the home would be covered if the deck were enlarged on the south side. The applicants are not proposing an access to the deck from the front of the home therefore, covering the sidewalk would eliminate a hard surface access to the rear of the yard and would place the deck very close to the neighboring structure. The lot width and location of the existing residence creates a practical difficulty not resulting from actions of the owners of the property. d. 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 will not alter the essential character of the Conroy Street NE neighborhood nor be detrimental to the health and safety of the public welfare. Most of the neighboring residences have decks, which have setbacks ranging from approximately 9 feet to 50 feet from the 904 elevation. Based on aerial photos, the average setback from the furthest protrusion of the existing residences to the 904 elevation in this area is approximately 31 feet, so the proposed 36-foot setback will not alter the character of the neighborhood. e. 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 the construction of a deck on a single-family residential dwelling which is an allowed use within the R-1 SD (Low Density Residential in Shoreland) Zoning District. 3. Based upon the findings set forth herein, the Planning Commission hereby approves the following variances to allow the construction of deck in the R-1 SD (Low Density Residential Shoreland) Zoning District: a. A 16.5-foot variance from the required minimum 52.5-foot lake setback (Section 1104.308(2)) b. Expanding a non-conforming structure (Section 1107.2303 (2) a.) 4. The variances are subject to the following conditions of approval: a. The variance resolution shall be recorded at Scott County. b. Building Permit shall be obtained from the Building Department prior to the commencement of construction. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 22nd DAY OF APRIL 2019. _______________________________ Bryan Fleming, Commission Chair ATTEST: _________________________________ Casey McCabe, Community Development Director VOTE Fleming Kallberg Tschetter Ringstad Tieman Aye ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Nay ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Absent ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Abstain ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ CONROY ST NE Lower Prior Lake Scott County GIS Ü 6370 Conroy Street NEVarianceLocation Map LOWER PRIOR LAKEGD (904) PIKELAKE NE(820.5) Lower Prior Lake Scott County GIS SUBJECTPROPERTY SUBJECTPROPERTY