Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem Work SessionCity of Lakeville Planning Department M e morandum To: Planning Commission From: Frank Dempsey, AICP, Associate Planner Date: August 31, 2018 Subject: Packet Material for the September 4, 2018 Planning Commission Work Session Agenda Item: Kyla Harder Variance Discussion BACKGROUND Kyla Harder, 10341 – 204th Street, has presented a plan to construct a larger deck on the rear of the house facing the lake. The property includes some unique characteristics and non- conforming conditions that prevent construction of the deck without a variance. The property is in the RS-3, Single Family Residential District and the Shoreland Overlay District of Lake Marion. Staff suggested that Ms. Harder meet informally with the Planning Commission to discuss her plans and get preliminary input from the Planning Commission prior to submitting a formal variance application. This memorandum will present the information submitted by Ms. Harder in addition to some background information with staff comments regarding the requisite variance criteria to establish practical difficulty and demonstrate consistency with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan. EXHIBITS A. Aerial Photos (3 Pages) B. 2018 Property Survey C. Survey With Staff Notes 2 PLANNING ANALYSIS The Harder property consists of a 16,553 square foot (0.38 acre) lot platted in 1971 as Southbluff. The subject property was platted prior to the adoption of the Shoreland Ordinance regulations. The lots in this area of the Southbluff plat that abut the lake are approximately 130-180 feet in depth and are steeply slopped toward Lake Marion. The topography shown on the survey shows that the subject property and the property to the east both have steep slope characteristics that qualify as “bluff” as defined by the Zoning Ordinance. The Harders purchased the property in 2013. A shoreland bluff is defined as any slope in the Shoreland Overlay District that rises 25 feet or more in elevation and averages a slope of 30% or greater. The Zoning Ordinance requires that properties platted prior to March 1, 1993 that include bluff areas maintain a minimum building setback of 20 feet from the top of the bluff subject to approval of a conditional use permit. A 75-foot building setback is also required from the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) of Lake Marion. The Zoning Ordinance allows setback averaging of adjacent non-conforming buildings when an adjacent building is closer to the OHWL than allowed provided a minimum 50-foot setback is maintained. Approximately 30% of the proposed new deck construction would not meet the minimum or 50 foot OHWL or 20 foot bluff setbacks. Shoreland zoning regulations and the criteria for a variance in lakeshore areas in Minnesota have their origins from legislative statutes dating back to the mid-1970’s requiring all cities and counties in Minnesota to apply certain standards for development and Zoning Ordinance enforcement. Standards for the consideration of variances also fall partly under these requirements. The property owners would like to construct a 14 to 15.5-foot wide deck on the east side of the house and have agreed to modify part of the existing non-conforming deck to reduce the non-conformity. They propose to construct the expanded deck on the east side of the house with about two-thirds of it in compliance with setback requirements to the bluff and OHWL. The modifications would include removing approximately one-third of the deck from the rear of the house in addition to four-foot wide deck that runs along the west side of house in exchange for constructing the new deck off the north east corner of the house. A walk-out glass door on the north side of the house exits onto the east half of the existing deck. The Harders would like to keep that part of the existing deck to allow access and use of the existing door and another door accessing the deck closer to the northeast corner of the house. In total, approximately 325 square feet of non-conforming deck would be removed and 14.5’ x 32’ (430 square feet) of new deck would be constructed, of which approximately 150 square feet (35%) would be within the 50-foot OHWL setback and 20-foot bluff setback. Staff has prepared an exhibit of sketch notes from the survey that provides information on slope percentage (bluff = 30% or greater), 20-foot bluff setback and 50 foot OHWL setback lines. The hatched area over the deck illustrates the possible removal of some of the existing non-conforming deck. 3 Sections 11-6-5 and 11-102-15 of the Zoning Ordinance set forth specific criteria that must be considered to determine whether a variance is warranted. The practical difficulties test requires the property owner to demonstrate that the proposed use of the property is reasonable and that he is prevented from compliance with the Zoning Ordinance due to certain practical difficulties. The Zoning Ordinance requires that the following criteria be met: Section 11-6-5 (All Variances) A. That the variance would be consistent with the comprehensive plan The comprehensive plan guides the property for low density residential development. The property is located in Comprehensive Plan Neighborhood Planning District No. 3 which states a goal encouraging compatible land use patterns and a high quality residential character. The proposed deck is a common accessory use structure on single family homes. B. The variance would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. The removal of part of the existing deck and the majority of the new deck constructed in compliance with Zoning Ordinance requirements would be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. C. That the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the applicant. The plight of the landowner is that the existing deck is long and narrow that results in a restricted usable deck area. The design of the house and the topography of the land is such that a deck is necessary for normal use of the home. The existing property owner did not create the non-conforming conditions of the existing deck and is proposing to eliminate roughly 50% of existing non-conforming deck area to construct a new deck that would include 35% new non-conforming deck area. D. That the purpose of the variance is not exclusively economic considerations. The request is to improve the usable area of the deck for a wider sitting area. The property owner is proposing to remove part of the existing deck to construct a more usable deck area that is more compliant with setback requirements; thus, the need for the variaince is not exclusively for economic reasons. E. That the granting of the variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located. The existing deck is set back 33.4 feet to the OWHL and within the required bluff setbacks. Removal of the west portion of the deck would reduce the non-conformity in that area. 4 Approximately six of the seven lots in the Southbluff plat that abut Lake Marion do not meet the OHWL and/or bluff setback requirements. F. That the requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty. The proposed new deck, where the majority would be constructed compliance with setback requirements, and removal of some of the existing non-conforming deck would be minimal and would reduce the non-conformity. G. Variances may not be approved for any use that is not allowed by the Zoning Ordinance for property in the zone where the affected person’s land is located. Single family residential uses are allowed in the RS-3 District. Section 11-102-23 (Variances in the Shoreland Overlay District) A. Result in the placement of an artificial obstruction which will restrict the passage of storm and flood water in such a manner as to increase the height of flooding, except obstructions approved by the watershed districts in conjunction with sound floodplain management. The proposed deck removal and the new deck construction would be more compliant with setback requirement. Construction would not be located in a floodplain and would not create an artificial obstruction that would restrict the passage of storm and flood waters. B. Result in incompatible land uses or which would be detrimental to the protection of surface and ground water supplies. The removal of a portion of the existing deck and construction of the proposed new deck would not be in detrimental to the protection of surface and groundwater supplies nor would it be contrary to the objectives of the Shoreland Overlay District. C. Be not in keeping with land use plans and planning objectives for the city or which will increase or cause damage to life or property. The deck removal and new deck construction would be in keeping with land use plans and planning objectives for the city. The variance would not increase or cause damage to life or property. D. Be inconsistent with the objectives of encouraging land uses compatible with the preservation of the natural landforms, vegetation and the marshes and wetlands within the city. 5 One of the purposes of the minimum bluff setback requirement is to ensure the preservation of the integrity of the bluff slope from things such as extensive grading, vegetation removal or a situation in which stormwater is channeled toward the steep slope. No new excavation is proposed except for construction of concrete footings for the new deck. Existing ground cover should remain intact or kept permanently covered by vegetation to prevent erosion of the steep slopes. Pervious ground cover must be maintained below the new deck area and overall impervious surface area shall not be increased. E. No permit or variance shall be issued unless the applicant has submitted a shoreland impact plan as required and set forth in this chapter. In granting any variance, the council may attach such conditions as they deem necessary to ensure compliance with the purpose and intent of this chapter. The applicant would be required to submit a shoreland impact plan stating methods of slope protection, restoration and type of ground cover after construction. F. The criteria established by section 11-6-5 of this title are met. All requirements for the consideration of a variance would have to be met as established in Section 11-6-5 of the Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Harder and Planning Department staff looks forward to your input and direction on this variance request. 10341 - 204th Street Property Information Au gust 27, 2018 0 450 900225 ft 0 130 26065 m 1:4,800 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. 10341 - 204th Street Property Information Au gust 27, 2018 0 50 10025 ft 0 10 205 m 1:6 00 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.