PUBLIC HEARING: Consider Request for a Variance to Driveway Setback Standards on the Property Located at 17209 Tungsten St NW

The City has received an application from Frank and Dorothy Frederick (the "Applicant") for a Variance to the required setback for a driveway on the property located at 17209 Tungsten St NW (the "Subject Property").  The Applicant is requesting a variance to allow a new concrete driveway to be installed up to the side lot line (extending a line even with the front wall of an attached garage) and to continue use of an existing gravel surface along the side of the attached garage for parking purposes.

Staff attempted to notify all Property Owners within a 350 foot radius of the Properties of the Public Hearing via Standard US Mail. The Public Hearing was also published in the City's official newsletter, the Anoka County Union Herald.

The Subject Property is located in a Planned Unit Development, but the underlying zoning would be R-1 Residential (Rural Developing).  The surrounding parcels are all similarly zoned with exception of the parcel to the southeast, which is Fox Park.  The Subject Property is approximately 1.61 acres in size and is surrounded by other properties of similar size (with the exception of Fox Park).  The home was originally constructed on the property in 1994 and there was an addition to the attached garage that was constructed in 1996, resulting in the attached garage being located at the minimum required setback of ten (10) feet.

In reviewing aerial photos dating back to 2001, there is evidence of driveway (it is unclear whether it consisted of gravel or dirt) that lead to and around the side of the garage addition.  At that time, there were no permit requirements for driveways and thus there is no record of approval for that driveway. Based on the aerial photos, it appears that portions of the driveway, and especially the extension around the side of the garage, encroached into the required setback, even up to the property boundary.  There is no record of a variance for this deviation from City Code.

The Applicant owns an RV that they have been parking adjacent to their attached garage on an existing gravel surface.  The Applicant had submitted a Zoning Permit application for the installation of a concrete driveway from the street to the front of the garage.  It was through review of this permit that it was discovered that the proposed driveway did not meet the required setback and that there is also a ten (10) foot wide drainage and utility easement along this lot line as well. 

The desire of the Applicant is a common one, to be able to park or store a motor vehicle or piece of equipment adjacent to an attached garage.  In fact, earlier this year when the off-street parking regulations were amended to create more consistent and simplified enforcement, it was acknowledged that it wouldn't resolve this type of scenario.  Due to the fact that there is generally drainage and utility easements along common lot lines, there was concern about eliminating a setback requirement completely for all parcels; however, deviations to that could be considered on a case by case basis.  In this instance, the adjacent grade (neighbor's property) is slightly higher than the Subject Property, so there should not be adverse impacts due to drainage to the adjacent parcel.  Additionally, there is no storm sewer infrastructure in place within this easement nor any small utilities either.

It appears that there is reasonable space to install a new driveway that meets the minimum required setback of five (5) feet for much of the length of the driveway.  Accommodating the parking of any vehicle along the side of the garage would not be feasible without a variance to the setback requirement.  Thus, Staff is supportive of a variance to allow the class V gravel surface along the side of the garage as well as a portion of the concrete driveway to encroach into the required setback (angling toward the gravel surface) but not the full length of the driveway.  Due to the existence of a ten (10) foot drainage and utility easement, an Encroachment Agreement between the Applicant and the City would be necessary.  Engineering Staff has stated that they would be supportive of a partial encroachment but would have concern with the entire width of easement being improved with concrete.

When contemplating a variance request, there is a three (3) factor test for practical difficulties that must be met by the Applicant. The following are the three (3) factors:
1.  Is the property owner proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner?
2.  Is the landowner's problem due to circumstances unique to the property and not caused by the landowner?
3.  If granted, would the variance alter the essential character of the locality?

Parking a vehicle or piece of equipment along the side of an attached garage is reasonable and commonplace.  The wooded setting of the adjacent property provides good screening of this area from the home and thus, it doesn't appear that it would truly alter the essential character of the locality.  However, there seems to be sufficient space for a majority of the length of the driveway to meet the required setback before needing to encroach into it to accommodate parking a vehicle.

As a reminder, the Planning Commission acts in a quasi-judicial capacity when considering variances rather than a providing a recommendation.

Alternative #1: Approve Resolutions #15-07-164 and #15-07-165 approving a variance to allow a portion of a driveway to encroach upon a required setback contingent upon execution of an Encroachment Agreement.  The desire to park a vehicle along the side of the garage is reasonable and would help screen the large RV from public view.  However, it appears that there is sufficient space to meet the required five (5) foot setback for majority of the length of the driveway.  Staff believes that this option represents a reasonable compromise that would allow the Applicant to continue to store their RV along the side of the garage.  As drafted, the Variance would allow the concrete driveway to begin angling out toward the property line (at a 45 degree angle) fifteen (15) feet in front of the garage to provide some maneuvering space.  Staff supports this option.

Alternative #2: Approve modified versions of Resolutions #15-07-164 and #15-07-165 approving a variance to allow the entire length of the proposed driveway to be right up to the lot line contingent upon execution of an Encroachment Agreement.  While this may make it easier for the Applicant to pull in and back out with a large RV (provides a straight shot), there appears to be sufficient space to meet the required setback with the exception of where the vehicle would actually be stored.  While the parking area is gravel, the majority of the driveway will be concrete.  If utilities were ever to be located within this easement, or if the area was ever needed to address drainage issues, that becomes more challenging and costly with concrete in place.   Staff does not support this option. If the Applicant desires this width of driveway, Staff would recommend an Administrative Subdivision to shift the common property line to allow for the required setback.

Alternative #3: Do not approve the request for a variance.  This option would require all portions of the driveway (existing gravel and proposed concrete) to meet the minimum required setback of five (5) feet.  By default, this action would eliminate the ability to park a vehicle or equipment along the side of the garage.   Additionally, an Encroachment Agreement would still be necessary as the driveway would still encroach five (5) feet into the drainage and utility easement.

All costs associated with this request are the Applicant's responsibility.

Staff recommends approving a variance to driveway setbacks for a portion of the driveway but not the entire length of it.

Motion to adopt Resolutions #15-07-164 and #15-07-165 approving a variance to allow a portion of a driveway to be up to the side lot line on the property located at 17209 Tungsten St NW contingent upon executing an Encroachment Agreement with the City.