5.1.
Regular Planning Commission
- Meeting Date:
- 06/02/2016
- Submitted For:
- Chris Anderson
- By:
- Lucinda Meyers, Community Development
Information
Title:
Consider a Request for a Variance from the Ordinary High Water (OHW) Line Setback, Front Lot Line Setback, and Maximum Number of Driveways Allowed at the Property Located at 14301 Neon St NW (Project #16-86); Case of Greg and Rachelle Binfet
Purpose/Background:
The City has received an application for a variance to the Ordinary High Water (OHW) building setback, as well as to the front lot line setback, and to the maximum number of driveways permitted. The applicant is proposing to construct a twenty-four foot by thirty foot (24’ x 30’), or 720 square foot, detached accessory building on the property located at 14301 Neon St. NW (the “Subject Property”). The proposed location, as noted previously, would be within both the OHW setback and the front yard setback for accessory structures.
The Subject Property is located in the southeastern quadrant of Ramsey. It is zoned R-1 Residential (MUSA) and is within the Shoreland Overlay District. Neon Street NW, a private street, services a total of five residences ranging from 0.5 to 1.5 acres in size, all of which are also zoned R-1 Residential (MUSA).
The Subject Property is just over one (1) acre in size (45, 5725 square feet), and is considered irregular in shape. Two (2) of the six (6) property lines abut Ramsey Terrace Pond (east and south), two (2) more abut Neon Street NW (west), and the remaining two (2) abut residential properties (north and southwest). The topography of the parcel ranges in elevation from 871 feet to the north (near the home), down to 857.3 at the southernmost point. The unimproved area south of the residence is densely wooded and decreases in slope from Neon St. NW to the shore.
The OHW line is located at an elevation of 858.1 feet, and is within the Subject Property boundary at the southern end. The water’s edge is located at an elevation of 857 feet, and is outside of the Subject Property boundary.
Environmental Protection Districts and the Shoreland Overlay District
The Department of Natural Resources and the City have designated certain areas within the city to be critical to the ecological health of the community, region, and beyond. To ensure that these areas are protected, the City has incorporated three (3) Environmental Protection Districts into the Zoning Code and the Zoning Map. The Shoreland Overlay District, of which the Subject Property is a part, is one such area.
Ramsey Terrace Pond
Ramsey Terrace Pond, DNR I.D. #2-114, is one (1) of four (4) General Development Lakes within Ramsey. According to the DNR Shoreland Management Classification System, General Development Lakes usually have more than 225 acres of water per mile of shoreline and twenty-five (25) dwellings per mile of shoreline, and are more than fifteen (15) feet deep.
Shoreland Standards
Minnesota DNR statewide minimum shoreland standards apply to all lakes greater than twenty-five (25) acres (10 acres in municipalities) and rivers with a drainage area two square miles or greater. The Shoreland Management Act regulates all land within 1,000 feet of a lake and 300 feet of a river and its designated floodplain. Upon notification by DNR Waters, local governmental units having shorelands are required to adopt these or stricter standards into their zoning ordinances. The City has adopted the statewide minimum shoreland standards in the form of a Shoreland Overlay Zoning District.
The DNR identifies the area within twenty-five (25) feet of the OHW, or Shore Impact Zone, to be the area immediately adjacent to a lake or river that is critical to preserving water quality, wildlife habitat and visual screening of the developed area farther back from the shore. Within it, restrictions apply to the placement and size of structures, vegetation removal and shoreland alterations (grading and filling). The City, however, does not specify a setback requirement for the Shore Impact Zone.
The Subject Property is located in the southeastern quadrant of Ramsey. It is zoned R-1 Residential (MUSA) and is within the Shoreland Overlay District. Neon Street NW, a private street, services a total of five residences ranging from 0.5 to 1.5 acres in size, all of which are also zoned R-1 Residential (MUSA).
The Subject Property is just over one (1) acre in size (45, 5725 square feet), and is considered irregular in shape. Two (2) of the six (6) property lines abut Ramsey Terrace Pond (east and south), two (2) more abut Neon Street NW (west), and the remaining two (2) abut residential properties (north and southwest). The topography of the parcel ranges in elevation from 871 feet to the north (near the home), down to 857.3 at the southernmost point. The unimproved area south of the residence is densely wooded and decreases in slope from Neon St. NW to the shore.
The OHW line is located at an elevation of 858.1 feet, and is within the Subject Property boundary at the southern end. The water’s edge is located at an elevation of 857 feet, and is outside of the Subject Property boundary.
Environmental Protection Districts and the Shoreland Overlay District
The Department of Natural Resources and the City have designated certain areas within the city to be critical to the ecological health of the community, region, and beyond. To ensure that these areas are protected, the City has incorporated three (3) Environmental Protection Districts into the Zoning Code and the Zoning Map. The Shoreland Overlay District, of which the Subject Property is a part, is one such area.
Ramsey Terrace Pond
Ramsey Terrace Pond, DNR I.D. #2-114, is one (1) of four (4) General Development Lakes within Ramsey. According to the DNR Shoreland Management Classification System, General Development Lakes usually have more than 225 acres of water per mile of shoreline and twenty-five (25) dwellings per mile of shoreline, and are more than fifteen (15) feet deep.
Shoreland Standards
Minnesota DNR statewide minimum shoreland standards apply to all lakes greater than twenty-five (25) acres (10 acres in municipalities) and rivers with a drainage area two square miles or greater. The Shoreland Management Act regulates all land within 1,000 feet of a lake and 300 feet of a river and its designated floodplain. Upon notification by DNR Waters, local governmental units having shorelands are required to adopt these or stricter standards into their zoning ordinances. The City has adopted the statewide minimum shoreland standards in the form of a Shoreland Overlay Zoning District.
The DNR identifies the area within twenty-five (25) feet of the OHW, or Shore Impact Zone, to be the area immediately adjacent to a lake or river that is critical to preserving water quality, wildlife habitat and visual screening of the developed area farther back from the shore. Within it, restrictions apply to the placement and size of structures, vegetation removal and shoreland alterations (grading and filling). The City, however, does not specify a setback requirement for the Shore Impact Zone.
Notification:
Staff attempted to notify all property owners within 350 feet from the Subject Property via U.S Mail and a notice of Public Hearing was also published in the Anoka UnionHerald, the City's official newspaper.
Observations/Alternatives:
Variance Proposal
The Applicant is proposing to construct a 720 square foot accessory structure within the fifty (50) foot Ordinary High Water (OHW) setback (A), as well as the forty-five (45) foot front lot line setback (B), and to provide access to the structure from Neon St. NW through a secondary driveway (C).
The Applicant is proposing to construct a 720 square foot accessory structure within the fifty (50) foot Ordinary High Water (OHW) setback (A), as well as the forty-five (45) foot front lot line setback (B), and to provide access to the structure from Neon St. NW through a secondary driveway (C).
- The Shoreland Overlay District requires structures to maintain a fifty (50) foot setback from the Ordinary High Water (OHW) line, per City Code Section 117-225 (f) (1) a. In the location proposed, the structure is encroaching approximately twenty-one (21) feet into that setback, at an estimated distance of twenty-nine (29) feet from the OHW line. Details of the relation of the proposed location to the OHW line are provided in Table 1, below.
| Distance from OHW | Change in Elevation | |
| Southwest corner | 28 feet* | 2.1 feet* |
| Southeast corner | 30 feet* | Between 1.1 and 2 feet* |
| Average | 29 feet* | 1.8 feet* |
| Required by Code | 50 feet | ** |
| Requested Deviation | 21 feet* | 2.2 feet** |
Table 1. Relation of the Proposed Location to the OHW Line.
*Distances and elevation changes are estimated by staff, based off of the information provided in the Certificate of Survey completed May 2nd, 2016, that was submitted by the Applicant in support of the original proposal. The revised proposal does not, however, provide the level of accuracy featured in the original proposal.
**As a point of reference: If applicant were able to locate the structure 50 feet from the OHW line, thus meeting the setback requirement, there would be an estimated total of four (4) feet of change in elevation between the OHW and the structure.
The Applicant has stated that the proposed location allows for the preservation of several trees located in the wooded area where the structure is proposed, as the site is within an existing clearing. A significant limitation of the property, as noted by the Applicant, concerns topography. Siting the structure within the lawn area near the home (outside of all setbacks and easements) would require “excessive fill” or would result in an “unmanageable driveway”- and could be considered out of character with the neighborhood.
The variance proposal is the second of two (2) proposals the Applicant has submitted to the City. The first, or ‘original’ proposal located the structure nearer the OHW, and within the Shore Impact Zone. The original proposal was discussed during the Staff Development Review meeting held on May 10th, 2016, where concerns were raised in regard to potential drainage issues and the likelihood of occurrence during wetter than normal years. This was raised as a concern because there have been past examples in which the City had to rework and/or redesign grading to eliminate water issued in a basement and/or septic system.
The original proposal was also reviewed by the Environmental Policy Board at their May 16, 2016 meeting. The EPB also noted concerns with the proximity to the OWH and the lack of elevation difference between the OHW and the elevation of the lowest adjacent grade to the proposed building. The EPB noted that they would be supportive of Staff continuing to work with the Applicant to find a more suitable location for the detached structure but would not support it in the originally proposed location.
Finally, the DNR reviewed the proposal and although they chose not to comment, they requested the Planning Commission be furnished with supplemental information pertaining to the ecological importance of that area within fifty (50) feet of the OHW, listing some key considerations for variance approval. That literature has been attached for your review.
Staff met with the Applicant at the Subject Property on May 17th, 2016, to discuss the original proposal and to attempt to locate an alternative site that would reduce the OHW encroachment, while still allowing for tree preservation and minimal impact to the viewshed of Ramsey Terrace Pond that is enjoyed by neighboring residences. Details of the adjustment are outlined in Table 2, below.
*Distances and elevation changes are estimated by staff, based off of the information provided in the Certificate of Survey completed May 2nd, 2016, that was submitted by the Applicant in support of the original proposal. The revised proposal does not, however, provide the level of accuracy featured in the original proposal.
**As a point of reference: If applicant were able to locate the structure 50 feet from the OHW line, thus meeting the setback requirement, there would be an estimated total of four (4) feet of change in elevation between the OHW and the structure.
- As outlined in City Code Section 117-111, accessory structures are required to be thirty (30) feet from the front lot line, or the same distance as the home (whichever is greater). In the case of this proposal, the home is located forty-five (45) feet from the front lot line. The proposed location for the accessory structure provides a distance of 33.5 feet between the structure and the front lot line, which encroaches a total of 11.5 feet into the distance required by City Code.
- The Applicant is also requesting a variance from the maximum number of driveways allowed. The R-1 Residential District (MUSA) standard currently allows for one (1) driveway per street frontage. The intent of this standard, at least in part, is to control costs associated with street reconstruction projects. The Applicant proposes to construct a second driveway that would allow access to the structure from Neon St. NW. The surface area proposed for the driveway has not been provided.
The Applicant has stated that the proposed location allows for the preservation of several trees located in the wooded area where the structure is proposed, as the site is within an existing clearing. A significant limitation of the property, as noted by the Applicant, concerns topography. Siting the structure within the lawn area near the home (outside of all setbacks and easements) would require “excessive fill” or would result in an “unmanageable driveway”- and could be considered out of character with the neighborhood.
The variance proposal is the second of two (2) proposals the Applicant has submitted to the City. The first, or ‘original’ proposal located the structure nearer the OHW, and within the Shore Impact Zone. The original proposal was discussed during the Staff Development Review meeting held on May 10th, 2016, where concerns were raised in regard to potential drainage issues and the likelihood of occurrence during wetter than normal years. This was raised as a concern because there have been past examples in which the City had to rework and/or redesign grading to eliminate water issued in a basement and/or septic system.
The original proposal was also reviewed by the Environmental Policy Board at their May 16, 2016 meeting. The EPB also noted concerns with the proximity to the OWH and the lack of elevation difference between the OHW and the elevation of the lowest adjacent grade to the proposed building. The EPB noted that they would be supportive of Staff continuing to work with the Applicant to find a more suitable location for the detached structure but would not support it in the originally proposed location.
Finally, the DNR reviewed the proposal and although they chose not to comment, they requested the Planning Commission be furnished with supplemental information pertaining to the ecological importance of that area within fifty (50) feet of the OHW, listing some key considerations for variance approval. That literature has been attached for your review.
Staff met with the Applicant at the Subject Property on May 17th, 2016, to discuss the original proposal and to attempt to locate an alternative site that would reduce the OHW encroachment, while still allowing for tree preservation and minimal impact to the viewshed of Ramsey Terrace Pond that is enjoyed by neighboring residences. Details of the adjustment are outlined in Table 2, below.
| Distance from OHW | Change in Elevation from Structure to OHW | |
| First Proposal | 18 feet | 0.95 feet |
| Second Proposal | 29 feet* | 1.8 feet* |
| Change | 11 feet* | 0.9 feet* |
Table 2. Relation Between the First and Second Proposal.
Applicant has stated they are willing to “haul-in black dirt or fill” to increase the elevation of the structure if need be.
Zoning Requirements
All other zoning requirements appear to be met. Due to the constraints of the lot, it appears that siting an accessory building almost anywhere on the Subject Property would likely require a variance.
Three (3) Factor Variance Test
A variance may be granted if enforcement of a zoning ordinance provision as applied to a particular piece of property would cause the landowner “practical difficulties.” For the variance to be granted, the applicant must satisfy the statutory three-factor-test for practical difficulties. If the applicant does not meet all three factors of the statutory test, then a variance should not be granted. Also, variances are only permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance, and when the terms of the variance are consistent with the comprehensive plan. The three-factors of the practical difficulties test are as such:
Alternative #1: Approve Resolutions #16-05-105 and #16-05-106 granting a variance to the OHW setback, the front yard setback, and allowing a second driveway. The Applicant has attempted to site the building in a location that not only minimizes deviations from City standards, but also does not obstruct neighboring property owners’ views of Ramsey Terrace Pond. Staff would be supportive of the request if an updated survey were completed that confirms that the structure would be outside the Shore Impact Zone and meets/exceeds the elevation assumptions noted previously.
Alternative #2: Approve a modified version of Resolutions #16-05-105 and #16-05-106. This action would be based on discussion but may focus more specifically on a minimum separation distance from the OHW, a specified elevation difference between the OHW and the floor of the garage, or other factors.
Alternative #3. Do not approve the variance request. The Subject Property is irregularly shaped and has unique factors associated with it. Staff believes that the proposed use is reasonable and in order to blend in with the character of the neighborhood, a variance would be needed. Therefore, Staff does not support this option.
Applicant has stated they are willing to “haul-in black dirt or fill” to increase the elevation of the structure if need be.
Zoning Requirements
All other zoning requirements appear to be met. Due to the constraints of the lot, it appears that siting an accessory building almost anywhere on the Subject Property would likely require a variance.
Three (3) Factor Variance Test
A variance may be granted if enforcement of a zoning ordinance provision as applied to a particular piece of property would cause the landowner “practical difficulties.” For the variance to be granted, the applicant must satisfy the statutory three-factor-test for practical difficulties. If the applicant does not meet all three factors of the statutory test, then a variance should not be granted. Also, variances are only permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance, and when the terms of the variance are consistent with the comprehensive plan. The three-factors of the practical difficulties test are as such:
- The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner.
- The landowner’s problem is due to circumstances unique to the property not caused by the landowner.
- If the variance is granted it will not alter the essential character of the locality.
Alternative #1: Approve Resolutions #16-05-105 and #16-05-106 granting a variance to the OHW setback, the front yard setback, and allowing a second driveway. The Applicant has attempted to site the building in a location that not only minimizes deviations from City standards, but also does not obstruct neighboring property owners’ views of Ramsey Terrace Pond. Staff would be supportive of the request if an updated survey were completed that confirms that the structure would be outside the Shore Impact Zone and meets/exceeds the elevation assumptions noted previously.
Alternative #2: Approve a modified version of Resolutions #16-05-105 and #16-05-106. This action would be based on discussion but may focus more specifically on a minimum separation distance from the OHW, a specified elevation difference between the OHW and the floor of the garage, or other factors.
Alternative #3. Do not approve the variance request. The Subject Property is irregularly shaped and has unique factors associated with it. Staff believes that the proposed use is reasonable and in order to blend in with the character of the neighborhood, a variance would be needed. Therefore, Staff does not support this option.
Funding Source:
All costs associated with this request are the responsibility of the Applicant.
Recommendation:
Staff believes that the Applicant has successfully demonstrated all three factors of the practical difficulties test, and therefore should be granted a variance to the applicable Code requirements, thus allowing for construction of the accessory structure within the OHW and front lot line setbacks, and construction of a secondary driveway. The absence of accurate elevation information is, however, a point of concern. Staff would like to request that the Applicant furnish the City with a survey similar to the survey submitted with the original proposal, which features the location and elevation of the structure in relation to OHW.
Action:
Motion to approve Resolutions #16-05-105 and #16-05-106 granting a variance to the OHW setback, the front yard setback, and allowing a second driveway on the property located at 14301 Neon St NW, contingent upon the Applicant providing an updated survey confirming that the proposed location is outside the Shore Impact Zone as well as the assumed elevation differences noted in the case.
Attachments
- Site Location Map
- Applicant Narrative
- Original Site Plan
- Current Proposal
- Images 1-3
- DNR OHW Variance Guidance
- EPB Minutes
- Findings of Fact
- Variance
Form Review
| Inbox | Reviewed By | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Chris Anderson | Chris Anderson | 05/26/2016 04:41 PM |
| Brian Hagen | JoAnn Shaw | 05/27/2016 08:37 AM |
- Form Started By:
- lmeyers
- Started On:
- 05/26/2016 03:26 PM
- Final Approval Date:
- 05/27/2016