Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-08-08 PACKET 04.Q.REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL AGEND MEETING ITEM DATE 8/8/12 Community Development ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT John McCool STAFF AUTHOR COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST Consider approving a variance to the required 20 -foot side yard setback to allow a driveway extension to be constructed 10 feet from the side property line at 11931 Lofton Avenue South. i : _ •►l ►l ►_�� • Adopt the resolution approving the variance to the required side yard setback to allow a driveway to be 10 feet from the side property line at 11931 Lofton Avenue South. BUDGET IMPLICATION $N /A BUDGETED AMOUNT ADVISORY COMMISSION ACTION DATE ® PLANNING 7/23/12 ❑ PUBLIC SAFETY ❑ PUBLIC WORKS ❑ PARKS AND RECREATION ❑ HUMAN SERVICES /RIGHTS ❑ ECONOMIC DEV. AUTHORITY El SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS $N /A N/A ACTUAL AMOUNT FUNDING SOURCE REVIEWED APPROVED DENIED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® MEMO /LETTER: Memo from John McCool dated 8/1/12 ® RESOLUTION: Draft ❑ ORDINANCE: ❑ ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION: ❑ LEGAL RECOMMENDATION: ❑ OTHER: Excerpt from unapproved 7/23/12 Planning Commission meeting ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS r' City Administrator I f Date i'. COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ OTHER CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE MINNESOTA TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator FROM: John McCool, Senior Planner DATE: August 2, 2012 RE: Paul Runze Variance Application — Driveway Side Yard Setback Proposal Paul Runze, 11931 Lofton Avenue South, has applied for a variance to reduce a driveway side yard setback requirement from 20 feet to 10 feet. Mr. Runze's variance request applies to the side yard setback along the east property boundary line. The location of the property is shown on the map below. 67 11672 116 11681 11660 1701 11686 11 1733 11721 1170 11680 11681 tit 11775 1820 . 11740 11700 11701 11793 � 1840 � 11795 11706 �^ � 01 11721 1860 11710 Q P� 21 11760 11741 11880 11780 Sl: i1b E 11800 1178 11900 s 11820 11920 Proposed Driveway Sideyard Setback Variance 1941 11801 11911 11901 11821 11921 11989 Location Map Advisory Commission Recommendation Planning Commission The Planning Commission reviewed Runze's variance application at a public hearing on July 23, 2012. Mr. Runze attended the meeting. Garrit Memelink, 11921 Lofton Avenue, expressed con- cerns about drainage that may adversely affect existing trees, his sanitary septic /drainfield sys- tem, and his home. Memelink also was concerned that removing trees between the two homes will lessen the natural screening between their home and Runze's proposed new driveway. Honorable Mayor Bailey, City Council Members and Ryan Schroeder Runze Variance Application — Driveway Setback and Easement August 2, 2012 Page 2 of 7 Runze explained that Mr. Memelink's property is higher in elevation, and runoff from Memelink's property flows onto his property, across the existing driveway, and into an existing ravine along Runze's west property line. A culvert exists beneath Runze's existing driveway, but the culvert is plugged. Runze also explained that his drainage from his driveway flows to the front area of the detached and attached garages. To improve the drainage in this area so water does not collect in front of these structures, the area in front of the detached garage will be modified to direct surface runoff to the east side of the detached garage and into the existing ravine located along his rear lot line. Runze said the drainage swale along the east side of the detached garage will be mod- ified so that runoff does not flow onto Memelink's property. The Planning Commission unanimously voted (6 -to -0) to recommend that the variance as pro- posed by the applicant be approved based on the findings of facts and subject to the conditions listed in the planning staff report. The Planning Commission's recommendation also was subject to staff verifying that the drainage will not adversely impact the neighboring property. An excerpt from the Planning Commission's unapproved minutes is attached. On July 26, 1 met with Mr. Runze at his property to discuss the tree removal and drainage issues described at the Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Runze agreed not to remove the two trees leaning toward Memelink's property. It is apparent that Runze's drainage flows into the existing ravines that are along Runze's west and south property boundary lines. None of Runze's drai- nage flows onto Mr. Memelink's property. The existing culvert beneath Runze's driveway is plugged. Runoff that collects on the east side of Runze's driveway either seeps into the ground or drains across Runze's driveway during heavy rainfalls. Runze's survey shows the low point of his driveway to be about one foot lower than the lowest point along the common property boundary line. Runze's property is a wooded parcel with mostly deciduous trees of varying sizes. Approximately 11 trees with less than a 3.5 -inch trunk caliper, two 5 -inch trunk caliper, one 14 -inch trunk caliper, and two 20 -inch trunk caliper trees will be removed to construct this proposed driveway exten- sion. Two large dead oak trees south of the detached garage will also be removed. Re- grading the area in front of the attached and detached garages will direct drainage within the existing drainage swales. This drainage will not be directed onto Mr. Memelink's property. The drainage will go into the existing deep ravine located on property owned by the Eagle's Watch Home- owner's Association. Bruce Tschida, President of the Eagle's Watch Homeowners Association does not have any drainage concerns for the driveway improvements proposed by Mr. Runze. On July 27, 1 met with Mr. and Mrs. Memelink. We walked the area between the two properties, identified which trees will be removed by Runze and visually comprehended the existing drainage patterns between the two properties. Mr. Memelink reiterated that he prefers no trees to be re- moved, but understood Runze has the right to remove some trees that are on his property. Memelink also acknowledged that drainage from his property flows onto Runze's property and Runze's proposed driveway improvements will not direct runoff onto his property. Mr. Runze provided additional spot elevations for the drainage patterns the proposed driveway project will create. Runze agreed to install a new culvert beneath his driveway if the driveway ele- vation at this low point is proposed to be elevated. The illustration below shows the direction of existing and proposed drainage patterns on Runze's property: Honorable Mayor Bailey, City Council Members and Ryan Schroeder Runze Variance Application — Driveway Setback and Easement August 2, 2012 Page 3 of 7 Memelink's House Existing Culvert Lofton Avenue (North) .t Approx. 46 feet (East) °�'�' d fL+� a A � 4 fi _ - � O r � y�•fr 7t - k� _FAJL f atd4A K.41NZb r New Conifer Plantings _ - - - Dir6cfio6 for Drainage Runze's Garage (South) Runze's House Ordinance Requirements The property is zoned Residential Estate (R -2). The minimum side yard setback requirement for accessory structures, driveways, and parking pads is 20 feet. The property owner proposes to extend their driveway along their east property line to create a circular driveway. A portion of the new driveway will encroach 10 feet into the 20 -foot minimum side yard setback. The Planning Commission may recommend a variance from the strict application of the provision of this title, if they find that: 1. The variance is in harmony with the purposes and intent of this title. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. 3. The proposal puts the property to a reasonable use. 4. There are unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner. 5. That the conditions upon which an application for a variance is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. & That the purpose of the variance is not based exclusively upon a financial hardship. 7. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located. 8. That the proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adja- cent property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety. Honorable Mayor Bailey, City Council Members and Ryan Schroeder Runze Variance Application — Driveway Setback and Easement August 2, 2012 Page 4 of 7 The City's Tree Preservation Ordinance allows up to 20 percent of the qualifying trees on any property to be removed without any requirement for replacement or mitigation. A "qualifying" tree is a healthy tree measuring a minimum of six inches in trunk diameter. Three of the 14 trees that are proposed to be removed have a trunk diameter size greater than six inches. The applicant's proposal complies with these ordinance regulations and tree replacement is not required by City ordinance. The property is part of the Countrywood subdivision that was platted in 1973. On October 1, 1986, the City granted a variance for this property that reduced the 100 -foot setback requirement from a bluff line so that a new house could be constructed closer to the bluff line (Res. No. 86- 183). The existing single family house was constructed in 1987. On September 2, 1998, the City granted a variance to allow a detached garage to be constructed at the bluff line edge (Res. No. 98 -165). The City also granted a variance on May 2, 2001, that allowed the property owner to construct an in- ground swimming pool 26.9 feet from the bluff line (Res. No. 01 -052). On May 17, 2006, the City granted a variance that allowed the construction of an addition to the house (Res. No. 06 -092). This variance reduced the minimum side yard setback from 25 feet to 23 feet and allowed the addition to be 14 feet from the bluff line. Planning Considerations Property Characteristics The property has approximately 196.56 feet along Lofton Avenue and has an average depth of approximately 332.42 feet, for a 1.5 -acre lot area. There is a steep slope along the west and south property boundary lines. The lot is a wooded site with mature deciduous trees. The existing driveway is a bituminous hard - surface drive that extends from Lofton Avenue to the front of the attached two -car garage and detached garage. The house, in- ground swimming pool, and detached garage are located at the south end of the lot. The property survey showing the location of the existing house, in- ground swimming pool, and detached garage and an aerial photograph of the property with the proposed driveway extension graphically superimposed on it are shown below: Honorable Mayor Bailey, City Council Members and Ryan Schroeder Runze Variance Application — Driveway Setback and Easement August 2, 2012 Page 5 of 7 96.57 PR h 2 3 to 36tl C� i96t e �i M}1 N D wr_ OF SE'- Survey Drawing Proposed Driveway Extension The new driveway is proposed to be 12 feet wide and 10 feet from the east property boundary line. The circular access drive will surround a relatively large deciduous tree and a few other smaller trees and landscaping plantings. Constructing this driveway will require other deciduous trees to be removed. This lot will still have only one private access connection to Lofton Avenue. The existing asphalt driveway will be removed and new asphalt will be used to replace the exist- ing driveway and the proposed driveway extension. The applicant's sketch plan showing the alignment of the proposed driveway extension along the east side of the property is shown below. i - SWAr I -OFrOA ASS The property owner has marked their east property boundary line with pink plastic tape. White flags delineate the inside and outside edges of the proposed new driveway. A photograph de- picting the proposed alignment of the driveway extension is shown below. 2009 Aerial Photograph Honorable Mayor Bailey, City Council Members and Ryan Schroeder Runze Variance Application — Driveway Setback and Easement August 2, 2012 Page 6 of 7 Utilities The property is outside the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). This property has a private well and sanitary sewer septic and drainfield system. The drainfield is along the west side of the existing driveway. Because of the existing drainfield, modifying the driveway alignment west of the existing driveway is not feasible. City Department Comments The Public Works Department has reviewed the variance application and visited the site. They have no concerns if the variance application as proposed by the applicant was granted by the City Council. Public Hearing Notices Public hearing notices were mailed to 24 property owners who are within 500 feet of the proposed addition project. These notices were mailed on July 11, 2012. The public hearing notice was also published in the South Washington County Bulletin on July 11, 2012. Proposed Driveway Alignment Illustration Honorable Mayor Bailey, City Council Members and Ryan Schroeder Runze Variance Application — Driveway Setback and Easement August 2, 2012 Page 7 of 7 • • • ., That the City Council accepts the Planning Commission's recommendation and approve Paul Runze's variance application to reduce the minimum side yard setback requirement for his driveway from 20 feet to 10 feet. A draft resolution approving this variance application is attached for your consideration. The findings of facts and conditions granting this variance have been included in this resolution. WHEREAS, Paul Runze applied for a variance to the required 20 -foot side yard setback to allow a driveway extension to be constructed 10 feet from the side property line, on property legally described as: Lot 18, Block 1, Countrywood Addition, Cottage Grove, Washington County, State of Minnesota. Commonly known as 11931 Lofton Avenue South, Cottage Grove, Washington County, State of Minnesota. WHEREAS, a planning staff report which detailed specific information about the property and the variance application was prepared and presented; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission at their July 23, 2012, meeting, reviewed this application and the variance criteria and findings of facts established by the Zoning Ordinance for granting a variance; and WHEREAS, public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within 500 feet of the property and a public hearing notice was published in the South Washington County Bulletin; and WHEREAS, the public hearing was open for public testimony and testimony from the applicant and the public was received and entered into the public record; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission unanimously (6 -to -0 vote) recommended to the City Council that the variance be granted based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions listed in the Planning Staff Report; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, Washington County, Minnesota, hereby grants a variance to City Code Title 11- 3- 10(C), Driveway Locations, to reduce the 20 -foot minimum side yard setback to 10 feet to allow a driveway extension on the property legally described above. Granting this variance is based upon the following findings of fact: A. The topography along the west side of the property and the existence of a sanitary sewer system and drainfield on the west side of the existing driveway prohibits the property owner's ability to improve the accessibility between Lofton Avenue and the garage structures at the rear of the property. B. The proposed new driveway extension will comply with the Zoning Ordinance regarding driveway surfacing regulations. C. The proposed driveway will not adversely impact adjoining neighbors' views of any parks or open space. Resolution No. 2012 -XXX Page 2 of 2 D. The variance request is not specifically addressed in the City's Future Vision 2030 Comprehensive Plan, but its residential characteristics are consistent with the low density residential land use designation for this property. E. The proposal continues a reasonable use on the property. F. The unique circumstances to the property were not created by the landowner. G. The purpose of the variance is not based exclusively upon a financial hardship. H. Granting the variance should not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other landowners in the neighborhood. The proposed driveway will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties. It will not create congestion in the public streets, become a fire danger, or endanger the public's safety. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the recommendation for approval of the variance is subject to the following conditions: The existence of this driveway must not cause erosion to the nearby slopes of the ravine. 2. The property owner must complete a building permit application for the proposed driveway. A building permit must be issued by the City before construction starts. 3. The driveway surface within 30 feet of the front property line must be hardsurfaced as required in City Code Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 9(E)(5). Passed this 8th day of August 2012. Myron Bailey, Mayor Attest: Caron Stransky, City Clerk . . M. 6.1 Runze Driveway Variance — Case V12 -023 Paul Runze has applied for a variance to the required 20 -foot side yard setback to allow a driveway to be constructed 10 feet from the side property line at 11931 Lofton Avenue South. McCool summarized the staff report and recommended approval based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Reese asked how far the neighbor's home is from the property line. McCool responded 56 feet from the property line. Ventura asked about the width of the existing driveway. Paul Runze, 11931 Lofton Avenue South, stated that it is 12 feet wide. He explained that the reason for the proposed location is to avoid having to remove a large maple tree. Rostad opened the public hearing. Garrit Memelink, 11921 Lofton Avenue South, stated that they feel that the Runze's request is a want not a need. The trees that lean towards his property, which are proposed to be re- moved, are beautiful oaks that pose no danger to his house or property. He stated that Runze has given him two different plans. The first showed a water drainage system that is not shown on the application before the Planning Commission. He expressed concern about the water drainage running onto his property that could possibly kill the oak trees. He stated that when the original owners of Runze's house put in the driveway, they added a culvert for natural drainage, which goes by the house into the ravine. The Runzes have closed that drainage, and he is concerned there could be problems in the future such as septic system backup or possible flooding of the house. They are not against the Runzes expanding their driveway but are concerned about water runoff, drainage, and removal of trees creating a privacy concern. Runze responded that Memelink had previously expressed concern to him that the trees that lean toward their property may fall on his house and suggested that they be removed. He stated that the trees do not need to be removed for the driveway. He then stated that his first plan had a catch basin. His father -in -law is a professional surveyor who engineered this project, and they shot elevations throughout the property. He noted that the original driveway is now 26 years old and during heavy rains, water runs down into the garage. They are putting in a new apron outside the garage that slopes so the runoff goes into the ravine. They have also volunteered to put in a six to eight -foot high privacy hedge along the east side of their property where the driveway encroaches within the 20 -foot setback. Reese asked what material would be used for the proposed driveway. Runze responded blacktop. He then explained that their front yard drainage flows into a ravine along their west property line and toward the area in front of their attached and detached garages and then into a ravine behind their property. Runze admitted that the culvert under their driveway is Excerpt from Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes Runze Driveway Variance — V12 -023 July 23, 2012 Page 2 of 3 plugged, but the surveyed elevations of their driveway shows the driveway elevation is lower than the Memelink's property. Reese asked if it would be possible to bring the driveway a little closer to the maple tree without damaging it if that area was going to be used for parking. Runze responded that is not intended to be a parking area, but a driving surface. Heurung asked about the health of the maple tree. Runze stated that they had an arborist look at it, and he recommended that they stay one inch from the tree trunk for every inch of diameter of that trunk. No one else spoke. Rostad closed the public hearing. Heurung asked about the elevation drawings that Runze's father -in -law provided showing the drainage patterns, which could address the neighbor's concerns. Runze noted that runoff either flows into his garage or into the ravine. He pointed out on the aerial photo where they are proposing the drainage would flow. He noted that staff has the drainage information. Rostad stated that if the City has reviewed the elevations and found that water runoff would not be an undue influence on the neighbor's property, he could support the variance. McCool provided the elevations for the front part of the two garages, but does not have grade eleva- tions along the east property line. Reese made a motion to approve the side yard setback variance for 11931 Lofton Avenue South, based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions listed be- low, with a change to note the driveway would be blacktop and that staff verifies the drainage would not affect the neighboring property prior to the application going to the City Council. Ventura seconded the motion. Findings of Fact A. The topography along the west side of the property and the existence of a sanitary sewer system and drainfield on the west side of the existing driveway prohibits the property owner's ability to improve the accessibility between Lofton Avenue and the garage structures at the rear of the property. B. The proposed new driveway extension will comply with the Zoning Ordinance regarding driveway surfacing regulations. C. The proposed driveway will not adversely impact adjoining neighbors' views of any parks or open space. D. The variance request is not specifically addressed in the City's Future Vision 2030 Comprehensive Plan, but its residential characteristics are consistent with the low density residential land use designation for this property. E. The proposal continues a reasonable use on the property. F. The unique circumstances to the property were not created by the landowner. Excerpt from Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes Runze Driveway Variance — V12 -023 July 23, 2012 Page 3 of 3 G. The purpose of the variance is not based exclusively upon a financial hardship. H. Granting the variance should not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other landowners in the neighborhood. The proposed driveway will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties. It will not create conges- tion in the public streets, become a fire danger, or endanger the public's safety. Conditions of Approval 1. The existence of this driveway must not cause erosion to the nearby slopes of the ravine. 2. The property owner must complete a building permit application for the proposed driveway. A building permit must be issued by the City before construction starts. 3. The driveway surface within 30 feet of the front property line must be hardsurfaced as required in City Code Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 9(E)(5). Motion passed unanimously (6 -to -0 vote).