PUBLIC HEARING: Consider Request for a Variance to the Minimum Front Yard Setback Requirement on the Property Located at 16877 Feldspar Street NW; Case of 21st Century Bank

The City has received an application from 21st Century Bank (the "Applicant") requesting a variance to the minimum front yard setback on the property located at 16877 Feldspar St NW (the "Subject Property").  As the Planning Commission will recall, a public hearing was recently held to consider a Preliminary Plat for Brookfield 5th Addition to convert the Subject Property from an outlot to a buildable lot.  On January 27, 2015, the Applicant received City Council approval of both the Preliminary Plat and Final Plat for BROOKFIELD FIFTH ADDITION.  This variance request is an attempt to mitigate a concern raised at the previous public hearing regarding the position of a new home on the Subject Property in relation to the existing home on the lot to the north.

Staff attempted to notify all Property Owners within a 350 foot radius of the Property 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 was initially platted as an outlot as part of Brookfield 1st Addition and was encumbered with a cul-de-sac and temporary road easement to facilitate an anticipated extension of Feldspar Street to service future redevelopment of the larger, existing lots to the south.  When the Subject Property was re-platted as Brookfield 5th Addition, it reinforced the fact that the cul-de-sac is serving more as a permanent road rather than in a temporary capacity.  The configuration of the cul-de-sac bulb results in a new home on the Subject Property needing to be much further east than that of the homes north of it. 

In submitting the application for a variance, the Applicant is attempting to address the concern previously raised that by meeting the minimum front yard setback, the new home's front windows would essentially be behind, and therefore create the ability to look into, the rear facing windows of the home to the north.  The Applicant is seeking a variance to permit a setback of twenty (20) feet from the front property line.  This would allow the home to be shifted west enough so that it is not entirely behind the rear wall of the home to the north while at the same time maintaining enough space from the street edge to ensure adequate snow storage capacity and vehicle parking.

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:
Alternatives

Option #1.  Approve Resolutions #15-02-031 and #15-02-032 adopting Findings of Fact #0940 and granting a variance to the front yard setback requirement.  The Applicant has provided an exhibit confirming that the lot is buildable without the issuance of a variance.  However, due to the unique design and configuration of the cul-de-sac bulb, which was not the result of actions by the Applicant, without a variance, the front of the proposed home would be east of the rear wall of the home to the north, resulting in an undesirable alignment.  Granting a variance to allow a front setback of twenty (20) feet allows the home to be shifted west so that its alignment with the homes to the north is improved while also still providing sufficient space for snow storage and vehicle parking.  Staff supports this option.

Option #2.  Approve amended Resolutions #15-02-031 and #15-02-032 adopting amended Findings of Fact #0940 and granting a variance to the front yard setback requirement.  This option would be based on discussion but accounts for alternative positioning of the home should the Planning Commission find that more desirable.

Option #3.  Do not approve Resolutions #15-002-031 and #15-02-032.  While a home could still be constructed on the Subject Property without the issuance of a variance, it would result in an undesirable alignment and position the home very near the boundary of a Drainage and Utility Easement resulting in little usable (buildable) area behind the home.  Furthermore, without a variance, it could be argued that the character of the neighborhood would be altered due to the alignment of the homes and the potential infringement of privacy of the property owner to the north.  Staff does not support this option.

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

Staff recommends approving Resolutions #15-02-031 and #15-02-032 adopting Findings of Fact #0940 and granting a variance to the front yard setback requirement (option #1).

Motion to adopt Resolution #15-02-031 approving Findings of Fact #0940 and Resolution #15-02-032 approving the request for a variance to the front yard setback requirement.