PUBLIC HEARING: Consider a Variance Request to Allow a Detached Accessory Garage Nearer the Front Lot Line than the Home at 5725 180th Ln NW (Project No. 18-162); Case of Lisa and Scott Monserud

The purpose of this case is to review a request from Lisa & Scott Monserud (the "Applicant"), owners of the home at 5725 180th Ln NW (the "Subject Property") to build a detached garage closer to the front lot line than the home on the subject property. The subject property is approximately 1.37 acres and is zoned R-1 Rural Developing. The City Code restricts the siting of detached accessory buildings on lots less than 2 acres to the side or rear yard. In order for an accessory building be nearer the front property line than the principal building on the lot, a variance must be obtained.

 

Staff attempted to notify all property owners within 350 feet of the Subject Property of the requested variance via standard U.S. mail and published the Notice of Public Hearing in the Anoka County UnionHerald.

Garage Specifications
The proposed garage would be 24 x 60 and would be a metal building with colors compatible to the home.  The proposed garage would be used for personal storage, and is a four stall garage. The applicant has signed a document that states no portion of the detached garage would be used for a home-based business, and that there are no home-based businesses onsite.

Based on the property size, the property is allowed up to 2,200 square feet of accessory buildings, a maximum of three total accessory buildings, and must have exerior finish similar to the home, including compatible metal panels. There is currently a 10 x 10 foot membrane structure onsite that will be removed upon completion of the detached garage. If the variance is approved, the property will have 1,440 square feet of accessory buildings, which does allow for future expansion, including the installation of a shed.

The garage will house a classic car, multiple off-road vehicles, a boat, and a 4-wheeler, most of which are currently stored outside on the Subject Property. Staff does note that these items are currently not in compliance with the City Code, as the vehicles are stored in the rear yard on the grass. These code violations will need to be cleared with the new building, and notes that no vehicles may be stored on the grass.

The proposed detached garage does meet the front yard setback of 40 feet.

City Code
The City Code allows accessory buildings in the front yard of lots greater than two acres if three of the following conditions are met:

• Minimum of three complimentary colors
• Minimum of 35% brick on front facade
• 100% vegetative screening
• 10% window coverage on front facade and common property lines

Because this lot is less than two acres, a variance must be obtained to place it nearer the front property line than the home. Staff does feel it is appropriate to apply the above conditions if the Planning Commission supports the variance request. Staff has discussed the above conditions with the applicant, and they have agreed to put windows on the south side of the building, stone on the east side of the building to match the home, and there is screening onsite which will not be removed. The building will also have complimentary colors and design to the home, though the building is proposed to have metal paneling.

Practical Difficulties
In order to grant a variance, the Planning Commission must consider the practical difficulty test and consider the following three-factor test:

• Reasonableness: Staff does feel that a detached garage is a reasonable use of the residential property, and is an allowed accessory use on the property. The proposed garage is a 4-stall garage, which does seem a bit larger than typically required for residential use, but the owner has stated it would be used for personal storage.
• Uniqueness: In order to grant a variance, the problem at hand cannot be caused by the landowner and generally the uniqueness relates to the physical characteristics of the property. The property owner has received a letter from their septic company stating that if put in the rear yard, they could not access the system. There are also wetlands onsite which limit the placement of the garage, as well as a pool.
• Essential character: The Planning Commission must consider if the garage, if built, would be out of scale or place in the neighborhood. Staff does not feel that it would alter the character of the neighborhood, as other neighbors have similar buildings in the front yard, and the neighbors have signed a letter of support for the detached garage.

Alternatives
Alternative 1: Adopt Resolution 19-005 granting a variance to allow a detached garage to be built nearer the front property line than the home on the Subject Property. Based on the wetlands and septic location onsite, the surrounding properties and support from neighbors, the proposed addition does seem to meet the three criteria needed to grant a variance outlined above. The proposed garage would have comparable metal panels, windows, stone added, and have screening onsite. The proposed garage does meet the required front yard setback. Staff supports this alternative.

Alternative 2: Deny the variance request. The applicant is proposing a new, detached garage that appears to match the character of the neighborhood and be a reasonable use of the property. The proposed garage does seem to make sense in the proposed location and meets the required front yard setback. Staff does not support this alternative.

The Applicant is responsible for all costs related to this request.

Staff recommends adopting Resolution #19-005 granting a variance to allow a detached garage to be built nearer the front property line than the home on the Subject Property.
 

Motion to adopt Resolution #19-005 granting a variance to allow a detached garage to be built nearer the front property line than the home on the Subject Property.