PUBLIC HEARING: Consider a Variance to Horse Stable Setbacks at 17400 Baugh St NW

The City has received a Land Use Application from Susan Arellano (the "Applicant") on behalf of John McAllister (the "Permittee") to request a Variance to Horse Stable Setbacks and a Home Occupation Permit for Commercial Dog Boarding under the business name "Sniffspot" at 17400 Baugh St NW (the "Subject Property"). The Applicant is seeking these permits to help bring the property into compliance with City Code.

It should be noted that on September 17, 2024, the Applicant withdrew the part of the application requesting the Home Occupation Permit. Thus, Planning Commission's review is solely focused on the Variance.

Staff attempted to notify property owners within 350 feet of the Subject Property, as reflected in the Anoka County Property Records, of the requests for a Variance and a Home Occupation Permit and the Public Hearing to be held by the Planning Commission. A notice of the Public Hearing was published in the Anoka County UnionHerald, the City's official newspaper. A proposed development sign was placed on the property.

Subject Property
The Subject Property is located along the west side of Baugh St NW, between 173rd and 175th Avenues NW, in the northwest corner of Ramsey. The Subject Property is zoned RR, Rural Residential, and is guided for Rural Developing land uses in the City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan. It is 1.74 acres in size and accesses Baugh Street to the east with a gravel driveway. Surrounding properties are similar in size and are also zoned and guided for Rural Developing land uses.

Variance
The variance is unique in nature because the stable was built before the property was subdivided. Chapter 10, Section 10-3 of City Code requires stables to be set back a minimum of 75 feet from the property line. The existing stable is only 21 feet from the property line, and it appears to have been built prior to 1977, according to aerial imagery. The property was last subdivided in 2004 through a metes and bounds split with Anoka County, so the property has never officially been platted. The properties to the south and west appear to have been part of the original pasture, according to Anoka County's aerial imagery from 1977, 1985, 1997, and 2005. Additionally, pictures provided by the Applicant, corroborated by a Staff site visit, clearly show the stable was built for the keeping of horses. The stable includes three horse stalls, a tack room, a wash bay, and an indoor riding arena. However, the keeping of horses cannot be considered legally non-conforming to the property because no previous property owner had submitted a sketch plan to document the keeping of horses on this property. Thus, the variance is needed for the Permittee to keep horses in the stable.

It should be noted that Section 10-1(b)(4) of City Code provides additional regulations for the keeping of horses on properties in Ramsey. The Applicant and Permittee have complied with this section by providing the City with a detailed sketch plan, as required by this section. The City has granted administrative permission to the Applicant and Permittee to keep two horses outdoors on the property. The 75-foot setback does not apply to pastures or outdoor roaming areas. Rather, the only setback that does apply to pastures, in some instances, is a 3-foot setback for electric fences from property lines per Section 106-585 of City Code. The Applicant is not intending to use an electric fence. Instead, to ensure the pasture is adequately secured for the keeping of horses, the Applicant has built a wooden fence setback at least 20 feet from the south property line, aligned with the south edge of the existing stable. She has also repaired existing wooden fences along the north and west sides of the pasture, both of which are setback at least 3 feet from the respective property lines. This ensures that the wooden fence could later be reinforced with an electric fence without having to obtain further permission from Planning Commission or Staff.

City Code Section 106-220 discusses the practical difficulties that are allowed to be used for justifying variances. Among them, the Applicant has identified the following practical difficulties and associated justifications for the variance:

• That the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning code. The owner requests a variance to be allowed to use the stables and indoor riding arena for his therapy horses. When the owner purchased this property, it was marketed as a hobby farm consisting of a pasture area with two shelters, a stable, and an indoor riding arena. The structure was clearly previously used as a horse stable with an attached riding arena. The structure existed several years before the property was subdivided, causing the need for a variance. There are several similar properties in Ramsey that also have horses and stables. 
• The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. The owner purchased the property with the reasonable presumption that it was a hobby farm with stables and an indoor arena. He had no pre-existing knowledge of any nonconformities. The building was built prior to the owner purchasing the property, and no modifications, alterations, or expansions have been made to the building. When the property was split by a previous property owner, the new property line was placed 32 feet from the edge of the stable and 21 feet from the edge of the riding arena.
• The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. As noted previously, the horses are currently housed in the pasture. The utilization of the stables and indoor arena will not alter the locality. There are several similar properties in Ramsey with horses and stables. Using the existing stable as such will be consistent with the neighborhood's character and history.
• Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. The owner purchased the property with the understanding that he could keep horses in the stable. It was his sole intent to purchase this property for that use. The owner is a veteran and takes care of his horses as a means of therapy.

With the above justifications, the Variance request seems reasonable and would allow the Permittee to use the property to keep horses, as the facilities are clearly designed for horses.

Home Occupation Permit
The initial application included a request for a Home Occupation Permit for Commercial Dog Boarding under the business name of "Sniffspot". However, as of the time of writing this case, the Applicant has withdrawn that portion of the application after deciding not to pursue the "Sniffspot" business any longer. 

Additional Considerations
This case was initiated by a code enforcement complaint regarding the "Sniffspot" business operating without a Home Occupation Permit. Staff has worked with the Applicant to resolve these issues. In working with the Applicant, it was discovered that the Variance would be needed to keep the horses in the stable. The stable otherwise meets all accessory structure setbacks and could be used in other manners. The stable setback only applies if the building is used for the keeping of horses, which is the Applicant's intent.

Alternatives
Alternative 1: Approve the Variance to the stable setback. Based on the existing conditions of the property, the design and apparent historical use of the accessory building as a horse stable, and the context of the surrounding neighborhood, this request seems reasonable. Chapter 10 regulations allow horses to be kept outside on the property, with an enclosed roaming area being allowed up to the property line, so using the existing accessory building as a horse stable seems reasonable. Staff supports this alternative.

Alternative 2: Approve the Variance to the stable setback with any reasonable conditions that mitigate the impact of the variance to the neighborhood.

Alternative 3: Deny the Variance. Without an approved variance, the structure could not be used as a shelter for horses. However, horses could still be permitted in an outdoor enclosed roaming area, and this area is permitted to extend up to the property line. Thus, denial of the variance would not mitigate the impact of keeping horses on the property. Staff does not support this alternative.

Staff recommends approval of the Variance to the Stable Setback.

Motion to adopt Resolution 24-273, Approving a Variance to Horse Stable Setbacks at 17400 Baugh Street NW.