PUBLIC HEARING: Consider Request for a Conditional Use Permit to Exceed Allowable Square Footage for Detached Accessory Buildings at 15410 Nutria Street (Project No. 22-131); Case of Brady Doble

The City has received an application from Brady Doble (the "Applicant") for a Conditional Use Permit to exceed allowable square footage for detached accessory buildings on the property located at 15410 Nutria Street NW (the "Subject Property").

Staff attempted to notify all property owners within 350 feet of the Subject Property, as reflected in the Anoka County Property Records, of the request for a Conditional Use Permit via standard U.S. mail and published the Notice of Public Hearing in the Anoka County UnionHerald.  

The Applicant is proposing to construct a thirty foot by forty foot (30' x 40') detached accessory building on the Subject Property.  The Applicant has stated that the accessory building would be used to store personal equipment, such as a thirty-six foot (36') long camper, a boat, and other recreational vehicles/equipment indoors rather than outside or at a storage facility.  The Site Plan indicates that there are two (2) existing detached accessory buildings on the Subject Property, including a detached garage (576 square feet), which serves as the primary garage (there is no attached garage), and a small shed (168 square feet). 

There is actually a third detached accessory building (10' x 10' or 100 square feet) south of the detached garage, which was not included on the Site Plan. It has a wooden floor and is 'moveable'. Thus, the Applicant did not think it counted towards the square footage or number of buildings on site.  Therefore, there is currently 844 square feet of detached accessory building space and three (3) detached accessory buildings on the Subject Property. It should be noted that the smallest shed appears to be slightly encroaching onto the neighboring property, does not meet the minimum required side yard setback (10 feet), and is partially within a drainage and utility easement. 

The Subject Property is approximately 0.93 acres in size, is in the R-1 Residential (Rural Developing) District, and is guided as Rural Developing in the Comprehensive Plan.  The surrounding properties range in size from about 0.80 acres to 1.20 acres and are also zoned and guided the same as the Subject Property.  City Code Section 117-349 allows up to 1,800 square feet and a maximum of three (3) detached accessory buildings, on properties between 0.50 acres and 1 acre.  The proposed detached accessory building would result in a total of four (4) detached accessory buildings on the Subject Property totaling 2,044 square feet.

The proposed detached accessory building would exceed all minimum required setbacks.  It would be in the rear yard and access would be from 154th Lane NW (Zoning Permit was issued in 2021 for a driveway; presently, a class V apron exists).  The height would not exceed twenty-two feet (22'), which is the maximum allowed per City Code.  The Applicant has stated that the exterior finish would consist of metal panelling that is color compatible with the gray finish of the home.

The Applicant has indicated a preference to retain all three (3) existing detached accessory buildings.  Presently, the draft Conditional Use Permit would require removal of one of the existing detached accessory buildings (presumably one of the two smaller sheds) within thirty (30) days of approval of the final building inspection on the proposed building.  If the Planning Commission supports allowing four (4) detached accessory buildings on the Subject Property, then Condition #4 should be removed from the draft Resolution.

Alternatives

Alternative 1: Motion to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit contingent upon removal of one of the existing detached accessory buildings within thirty (30) days of approval of the final building inspection for the new accessory building.  The proposed accessory building is a fairly common size and the additional square footage is pretty minimal, especially considering if the property were 0.07 acres larger, a Conditional Use Permit would not even be needed.  Staff supports this alternative.

Alternative 2: Motion to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit as requested, allowing four (4) detached accessory buildings on the Subject Property.  Again, if the property were 0.07 acres (or 3,050 square feet) larger, the proposed square footage would be compliant (properties between 1 and 1.49 acres are eligible for 2,200 square feet).    The additional square footage would allow the Applicant to store personal equipment indoors on the Subject Property rather than outside or at an off-site storage facility.  Staff is not opposed to this alternative.  However, if the Planning Commission supports Alternative #2, then the motion should include eliminating Condition #4 from the draft Resolution and adding a condition that the smallest shed be relocated to comply with setback requirements.  

Alternative 3: Motion to recommend denial of the Conditional Use Permit.  The proposed building is a typical size for the Rural Developing district.  It would comply with the architectural standards in City Code as well as the required setbacks and would be harmonious with the intended character of the neighborhood.  Staff does not support this alternative. 

 

The Applicant is responsible for costs associated with this request.

Staff recommends approving the Conditional Use Permit contingent upon removal of one of the existing detached accessory buildings within thirty (30) days of approval of the final building permit inspection for the new accessory building.

Motion to recommend City Council adopt Resolution #22-189 approving a Conditional Use Permit to exceed the square footage allotment on the Subject Property.