Recommend Resolutions #16-01-005, #16-01-006, #16-01-007, and #16-01-008 Related to a Request for a Variance to Minimum Lot Size, Width and Side Yard Setbacks in the Critical River Overlay District on the Properties Located at 14510 and 14500 Bowers Drive NW; Case of Central Bank

The City has received an application for a Variance to the minimum required lot size and width requirements in the Critical River Overlay District (the "Overlay District") for the property located at 14510 Bowers Drive NW (the "Subject Property").  The purpose of the request is to address an existing structure encroachment from the adjacent property at 14500 Bowers Dr NW.  The Subject Property is presently vacant with the exception of the aforementioned encroachments.  Should the Variance to lot size and lot width be approved, the applicant would then proceed with an Administrative Subdivision to realign the common lot line between the Subject Property and the adjacent lot to eliminate the existing encroachments.

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

The Subject Property is part of the Bowers Mississippi Acres plat, which was approved in 1948, well before the implementation of the Overlay District standards.  Both the Subject Property and the adjacent lot are approximately 100 feet wide; the Subject Property is about 0.94 acres in size and the adjacent parcel to the south is about 1.08 acres in size.  Both are considered lawful, nonconforming lots with regard to the width and area standards, as the Overlay District specifies a minimum lot width of 200 feet and a minimum lot size of 2.5 acres.

The home on adjacent parcel was constructed in 1970 and there is no record of any Site Plan or survey indicating the proposed location of the home.  In reviewing the property file, there does not appear to be any record of a permit(s) for the existing, two (2) tiered deck that also partially encroaches onto the Subject Property.  However, based on assessment information within the property file, there appears to be potential evidence of said deck(s) dating back to at least 1981.  Based on the submitted Subdivision Sketch, it appears that the deck would only be seven (7) feet from the newly aligned common lot line, which does not meet the minimum side yard setback requirement of ten (10) feet.  Finally, there is an asphalt driveway 'turn-around' that also encroaches on the Subject Property that should be addressed as part of this request as well.

The most reasonable way to address these encroachments, which have existed for several decades, is to process an Administrative Subdivision to realign the common lot line between these two parcels to eliminate the encroachments. The Administrative Subdivision would result, at a minimum, in the reduction of acreage from about 0.94 acres to 0.89 acres for the Subject Property.

Under City Code Section 117-590 (Administrative Subdivision), the Zoning Administrator cannot approve the realignment of lot lines if doing so would circumvent other zoning regulations and City Code Section 117-57 (b) prohibits expansions of non-conformities. Thus, after reviewing the information with the City Attorney, it was advised that an application for a variance to minimum lot size be processed which, if approved, would allow the property owners (or their representatives) to proceed with an Administrative Subdivision to realign their common boundary without creating any new buildable lots.

Applicant Proposal

The Applicant proposes to carves out about 2,100 square feet from the Subject Property (just around the existing structural encroachments) that would ultimately be combined with the adjacent lot to the south.  The size of the Subject Property would be reduced to about 0.89 acres (a reduction of 0.05 acres) while the adjacent lot to the south would increase to about 1.13 acres in size.  This configuration would not impact the existing lot width at all.  If this were approved, the Variance would need to clearly state that the driveway encroachment would need to corrected by a specified date (this would entail removal of existing asphalt and restoring with vegetation).  The primary downside to this approach is the resulting 'bump-out' of one parcel that may lead to encroachment issues for future property owners.

Potential Modifications to Proposal
 

1. Adjust common lot line on all or a portion of the property, not just the area of encroachment. This approach would result in a slightly more desirable lot line configuration and would also at least partially address the driveway encroachment as well.  However, it would result in a reduction in lot width of the Subject Property from 100 feet to eighty (80) feet.  Furthermore, the lot size of the Subject Property would be reduced by 3,100 square feet.
2. Grant Variance to Side Yard Setback for existing deck. As currently depicted, the proposal is still deficient in side yard setback for the existing deck.
3. Grant Variance to Driveway Setback. As currently depicted, the proposal is still deficient in side yard setback for the existing driveway.

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?

The Applicant is seeking this variance to clear the title of the Subject Property so that it can be marketed as a buildable residential lot, which is a permitted use in the underlying zoning district.  The owner of the Subject Property, Central Bank, was not responsible for installing any of the existing encroachments, which were the result of actions taken by a previous owner(s) of the adjacent lot to the south.  Central Bank is making a good faith effort to correct the existing encroachments that it acquired after foreclosing on the Subject Property. The encroachments have existed for somewhere between twenty-five (25) and forty-five (45) years and thus, approving a variance that would allow an Administrative Subdivision to be processed, would have little or no impact on the essential character of the neighborhood, especially compared to the alternative (removal of decks and a portion of the adjacent home).

Alternatives

Alternative #1: Recommend the Planning Commission adopt Resolutions #16-01-005, #16-01-006, #16-01-007 and #16-01-008 approving a variance to lot size and lot width standards as shown on the Subdivision Sketch for the property located at 14510 Bowers Dr NW and a variance to side yard setbacks for the property at 14500 Bowers Dr NW.  This would represent the minimum variance necessary to address the structural encroachments.  While this may create a less than desirable lot configuration , a similar variance and administrative subdivision were previously approved within this same subdivision.  Staff would be supportive of this option as long as it addresses the remaining driveway encroachment as well.

Alternative #2: Recommend the Planning Commission adopt modified versions of Resolutions #16-01-005 and #16-01-006, approving a variance to lot size and lot width standards but with an alternative lot configuration of adjusting the property line along the entire side property line, not just the area of encroachment.  While this appears to result in a more straight forward lot configuration, which may help eliminate future encroachment issues, this would result in an even greater reduction in lot size and lot width and would still require corrections to the driveway encroachment and the substandard side yard setback of the deck still needs to be addressed.  Additionally, the applicant may not desire to transfer the additional property to the adjacent owner.

Alternative #3: Recommend the Planning Commission not approve the request for a variance to lot size and area standards.  The structural encroachments appear to have existed for quite some time now and are not the result of actions of the applicant.  If a variance were not approved, the improvements that encroach on the Subject Property would need to be removed before the owner of the Subject Property could complete a sale of the land.  The removal work would result in significant land disturbances and likely significant loss of vegetation.  Staff does not support this alternative.

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

Motion to recommend the Planning Commission adopt Resolutions #16-01-005 and #16-01-006 granting a variance to lot size and lot area at 14510 Bowers Dr NW, as depicted on the Subdivision Sketch, prepared by Rum River Land Surveyors & Engineers, dated October 29, 2015, and Resolutions #16-01-007 and #16-01-008 granting a variance to the minimum side yard setback for the existing deck at 14500 Bowers Dr NW.