The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2014-07-16 PACKET 04.G. REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL AGENDA MEETING ITEM # � DATE 7/16/14 • � � PREPARED BY: Community Development Jennifer Levitt ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT STAFF AUTHOR ******************************************:��*** COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST Consider granting a variance to reduce the 10-foot minimum rear yard setback for an accessory structure to 3.5 feet from the rear lot line and allow the existing accessory structure to encroach on an existing ten-foot wide drainage and utility easement at 8884 Greenway Avenue. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution approving the variance. ADVISORY COMMISSION ACTION DATE � PLANNING 6/23/14 ❑ PUBLIC SAFETY ❑ PUB�IC WORKS ❑ PARKS AND RECREATION ❑ HUMAN SERVICES/RIGHTS ❑ ECONOMIC DEV. AUTHORITY ❑ REVIEWED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ APPROVED � ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ DENIED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS � MEMO/LETTER: Memo from John McCool dated 7/9/14 � RESOLUTION: Draft ❑ ORDINANCE: ❑ ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION: ❑ LEGAL RECOMMENDATION: � OTHER: Excerpt from unapproved minutes of 6/23/14 Planning Commission meeting ��ll '' •: •►I►l _► � / C1 / � Date *********�*�***************�*�**�****�***��***** COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ OTHER Cottage / Grove � Pride anaProsperity Meet TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator FROM: John McCool, Senior Planner DATE: July 9, 2014 RE: Norton Variance: 8884 Greenway Avenue — Minimum Rear Yard Setback and Encroachment on a Drainage and Utility Easement Proposal Chad and Guadalupe Norton, 8884 Greenway Avenue, are requesting a variance to reduce the 10-foot minimum rear yard setback for an accessory structure to 3.5 feet from the rear lot line (Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 3(C)) and to allow an existing accessory structure to encroach on an existing ten-foot wide drainage and utility easement (Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 3(E)). A location map for Norton's property is shown below. Location Map Review Process Application Received: May 27, 2014 Acceptance of Completed Application: May 27, 2014 Tentative City Council Date: July 16, 2014 60-Day Review Deadline: July 26, 2014 Honorable Mayor, City Council Members and Ryan Schroeder Norton Variance — Minimum Rear Yard and Encroachment July 9, 2014 Page 2 of 5 Planning Commission Review The Planning Commission held a public meeting on June 23, 2014, for Norton's variance appli- cation to reduce the 10-foot minimum rear yard setback for an accessory structure to 3.5 feet from the rear lot line (Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 3(C)) and to allow an existing accessory struc- ture to encroach on an existing ten-foot wide drainage and utility easement (Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 3(E)). Chad Norton stated that he checked with the Building Division after the City had initially received a complaint about his shed being too close to the rear lot line. Norton stated that the improve- ments made to the existing structure did not increase the structure's encroachment area or adversely impact existing drainage patterns on adjoining properties. Norton also stated that he contacted the City's Building Division approximately a year and a half ago to discuss this issue and the options available to him. Norton reported his willingness to make the necessary correc- tions if the existing structure encroachment is not acceptable. The Planning Commission noted that an overhead utility exists along the rear lot line and that the property owner reported that the existing structure does not cause adverse impacts to existing drainage patterns for adjoining properties. With the exception of the applicant's testi- mony, there was no oral testimony for or against the variance application. A letter from Jeff and Sylvia Harris, 8905 Greenway Avenue, dated May 28, 2014 was received and placed on file. The Harris' objected to the City granting a variance to reduce a 10-foot minimum rear yard set- back to 3.5 feet and further limiting accessibility to the 10-foot wide drainage and utility ease- ment. A copy of Paul and Diane Norton's letter date stamped June 23, 2014 objecting to the setback variance was also distributed to the Planning Commission. A copy of both letters is attached. The Planning Staff Report for Norton's variance application included two options for the Plan- ning Commission's consideration, a recommendation denying or approving Norton's variance application. Findings of facts were listed for recommending denial and findings of facts and conditions of approval were listed for recommending approval of a variance. The Planning Commission recommended (8-to-0 vote) that the City Council grant a variance to reduce the 10-foot minimum rear yard setback for an accessory structure to 3.5 feet from the rear lot line (Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 3(C)) and allow the existing accessory structure to en- croach on an existing ten-foot wide drainage and utility easement (Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 3(E)). This recommendation is based on findings of facts and subject to the conditions docu- mented in the planning staff report. An excerpt from the Planning Commission's unapproved minutes from their June 23, 2014 meeting and the draft resolution with conditions recommended by the Commission are enclosed. Ordinance Requirements Th� existing accessory structure is non-compliant with two City ardinanc� regulation�. Th� first regulation is the ten-foot minimum rear yard setback (Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 3(C )) and the Honorable Mayor, City Council Members and Ryan Schroeder Norton Variance — Minimum Rear Yard and Encroachment July 9, 2014 Page 3 of 5 second is the prohibition of any structure to encroach on or over any easement of record (Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 3(E)). The Planning Commission may recommend a variance from the strict application of the provi- sion 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. 6. That the purpose of the variance is not based exclusively upon a financial hardship. Planning Considerations Property Characteristics The Norton's property has an 86-foot averaged lot width and a 127.96-foot averaged lot depth for an 11,004 square foot lot area. The 10-foot by 14-foot accessory structure and its 6-foot by 12-foot addition is located 42 inches from the rear property line. An aerial photo of their property is shown below. ,� : ,. _ : � � ` ,,r t : 7 T} � ; -� �.l� :f� '.: t : 3 I 1 -� . ,w ' .r-- i – t �, 1j f ,' t �- � � - "�e� � � �aY�' l.s�� ._�� G ^�. _� .�.zrL'a � a � i �_{'T\� - ;� —,� 7 �= � y ' r ' ^� 4�R 'r �9�`�, ! f !f � � � �"�' ` � P ' ,:�-- � us _�� is � � � ` ` i � � � _ i � '�'� , -� � � �� -. � ` � _ ; -� :'�� - � ` r f k ,_��_ ' - �Exis1'ngAdd'Con� '��`��,-{� �� — ( U �� , � � 1 ,. j . � ' � 4 �,..-� �— �� SHED�� 4 � `_� l . _ �. ��'' _: ��,- + l � �.GA 4 �, —�� , / � � � - � .-�- _ ""� .� �' �� r �l S� � �4 _ _.. .. , ' 1 �- : a� _ - ° x � "� �` jt � RearYardVariance ,�`� �,� � :_ ,,�,� _ Y .r� t �� -�= ReducetOfoolminimum _� setback l0 3.5 teet and allow � t � � � � �a�"'R"�` � ��' =� slrucWre encroachment on i� � x ar.�Y �i �- � �-� �:-� drainage and WilAyeasement " rr �� . � �' �. . .�- - .. _ e E! '�!_ 2013 Aerial Photo � - a , Chad and Guadalupe Norton j 8884 Greenway Avenue /�' � ; � � � � 'y ' l � " � �F � : � �.. i _� �� : s ` _ � j. _ � �- .-P j � °, � � . fi ,�� , � ��<��. �� +' t _`i 0 5 , .� �o �—�. — . F�,� `�' � r iw -�:m' �� . } . �� E � The 10-foot by 14-foot accessory structure was constructed in 1990. The applicant explained that the 6-foot by 12-foot addition existed on the west side of the main accessory structure when they purchased the property in 2006. The applicant admitted to making structural improvements Honorable Mayor, City Council Members and Ryan Schroeder Norton Variance — Minimum Rear Yard and Encroachment July 9, 2014 Page 4 of 5 to the addition to improve its appearance and mitigate rainwater washouts. City building permit records for this property do not include any information relative to this accessory structure. The rear yard setback for this accessory structure is found to be approximately 42 inches from the rear lot line. The photo below shows the area between the shed and rear property line. � �' # r ".} t . 1 �. , �i., t. � - ...._ �-'. . .-�� r: i'�t ��zY.� -- � . i . � � - c�a�a�a�a , 1 � : �; _;� _ `ti Norton's Rear Property Line — Looking North Drainage and Utility Easement This property is within the Thompson Grove 4th Addition. This subdivision plat was recorded in 1958, and houses in this area were generally constructed in 1958-1959. At the time of platting this subdivision, the plat included a drainage and utility easement ten feet in width. This is com- mon along the rear property boundary lines for each lot. An excerpt from the Thompson Grove 4th plat showing drainage and utility easements on residential lots abutting the Norton's property is shown below. � �, 20 � � � �� r I.� � 1 d � N" -: �� is'• � � ia.� � � �+ � '� i� � ' /.lI.Y� 7 � /35.75 �__ ,c,► �� Q z , .., a � �j `�? �8 �� 9 '� 7" � N / � � � � � � ' /3�013 � ; 9l.9G Z � : /35 K' 1 , / ' � � � �� /D 7 � � � � �� I //�,►►{/�� e /3l.�� (�3. � � �!�D.1 i � � �i tt � � fn /L v. :. // � g �� a � Honorable Mayor, City Council Members and Ryan Schroeder Norton Variance — Minimum Rear Yard and Encroachment July 9, 2014 Page 5 of 5 Utilities All the public utilities exist and provide adequate service to this property and all other residential properties in this neighborhood. An overhead utility line exists along the rear property line. The drainage swale along the rear property line exists and conveys storm water during heavy rain- falls. No public utility needs to be relocated or modified to accommodate the applicant's requested variances. If a variance is granted for the shed to remain at its current location, a condition of approval will require the property owners to move the shed in the event it prevents or limits full use of the utility and drainage easement. Public Hearing Notices Public hearing notices were mailed to 101 property owners who are within 500 feet of the appli- cant's property. These notices were mailed on June 11, 2014. The public hearing notice was also published in the June 11, 2014, edition of the South Washington County Bulletin. City Department Review Representatives from various City Departments reviewed the Norton's variance request. Their comments generally did not condone allowing structures in easements, and they were unaware of any drainage issues that might exist in this vicinity. If the structure is allowed to remain, they recommended that a condition be included in the resolution granting the variance that the City is not liable for any potential damage that storm water drainage may cause to the structure and that the property owners agree to remove that portion of the structure encroaching on the easement if it is determined that the structure's existence inhibits necessary access to utilities. No comments or recommendations were received from any advisory commissions. Recommendation That the City Council accepts the Planning Commission's recommendation granting a variance reducing the 10-foot minimum rear yard setback for an accessory structure to 3.5 feet from the rear lot line (Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 3(C)) and allow the existing accessory structure to en- croach on an existing ten-foot wide drainage and utility easement (Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 3(E)) at 8884 Greenway Avenue. This recommendation is based on findings of facts and subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. A draft resolution was prepared and the findings of facts and conditions of approval were incorporated in the attached resolution. i � -- - ---- - -- ___ _ �� __ __ _. y � n �t� - `l� = S1�217 T.,.,��ya��+'.i_�i-:�' g ,3' � k � -----____ ----____________ '�-_ '2- � - -, _ __-_ - i ��' _ �s� i � � / � - t ' � I t r � t ' V� �' c '� — r--�-_._---� �1�,.,�.p�.�y> J��C1 J31 �, S r � � � � ; ; �,! _ i---_- _ a �, _ � �� [.�h�� -- �- �-' , _ __ __ _ CSi��.af{, sa" i 1 la-y�0� � ; � �� S�,-� ��.,�� 'd�� ( C.�zLz;��,�r�'d(vLs / � < � �;. ,�^ �.ar � L..-�!�'7j "i %��( n� � 4%JLc b V 3�i o { l� -------- — ---- ------ { May 27, 2014 For Consideration To The City of Cottage Grove Request for Variance 1, Chad N Norton at 8884 Greenway Ave South C.G., MN am requesting variance for exterior storage shed back lot-line offset. As shown in the attached drawing the finished lean-to shed is closer to the back lot-iine than what would normally be accepted. When the home was purchased by us in 2006 the primary shed had a partially attached secondary shed (off the rear) that was unsightly and poorly constructed. I h�ve since made the necessary improvements for structural integrity and aesthetics. The lean-to shed now has proper framing, fully shingled roof (matching) and full seamless gutters. The improvements (roofline and gutters) have actually ended a continuing washout problem by controlling and diverting the roof water. Sincerely, Cha Norton City of C�ttage Gr�ve Pl�nning Comrrfission A variance to a(low a existing lean-to 8884 Greenway Ave S A uariance to aliow a 8X16 accessory structure, a� 8940 Greenway l�ve S i feel if the City of Cottage Grove has a 14 fovt drair�age and utiiity easement on both praperties, no structure should be an the easement if the struc�ure would harrtp�r the drainage or utility easement. If th� owners at 8884 and 89aD did nat �et a bui(ding permit the variance should not be given. The variar�ce �hould be given before any building. (No� af�erj If building permits were �iven to property owners, and nv follow up/ sign off, this is a problem v�ith the City of Cottage Grove, as it has been years on each property. Sincerely, 4 �a.•-� Jeff & Sylvia Harris 89Q5 Greenway Ave S ��t�� JUN 1 9 2014. CITY OF C07TAGE GROVE i i ' ; , __ _ -- — � � � . � i .._-- ------ --- — i ,------ � ,-, F _=- j =------- � ��------ E , =--:---_ '— � � � � _-.___--- ' � �� I��m �I-h � JUN2� c111' �7i- er� r�rn� =�!�--- n r��-u"�. S_- -� Ci -- � i� n 4 G � _ — - - --- � � _ _ .__ < � ► s�� c�-� � -�-��-, C�-� ��,, �c� , �� - ��.__Ct �_ r'c� � na�C.2� � �cz.�-,--,-� _�=��cl �., _ � G,-e�, y - � t1--- __ _------ �-e_ --�-�� _ �� i,-� _� V�.YZ, -- � �--- � -- �hv� �_ -� !_lc�,� _Ci��-- ��r r�U a� c� �--�.e .� aY l.vha 1'� .��-es -�� . � �U c�_ __�-� �-��4 a ►� � � Q 1 I� C� i^rl �Yl u�l i��-t. .�--�- vv�._, _ c� l 1 ��w _ �?r� -2.�_ 3 �e� �r�-� n��- h�U-�, � Sh�,��c�. � -- ��c�V�-2C� e -- ___--_ ____ --------__-- re �; c1-�nn-�- �— �-�-e�, - _______ _ __---�__ _ -- - -- __ _�____ --- --- _ __ �-----_�-_�_-_ a l I c� Ci- �__C.�1-��__c�- n� �____ _ , . , �b��-a � ►�i --��e_r m ��--5 _� -�_rt-��ec,�-��Q„_ � _�►'�c� --- ------ -- �,' 1�-�-e� s � i n - � �--h-e� - , �-� _ __ - — — —=- ------------- -- - `Y��. � ►r�' -�..� �-� � c� �r� �� C l�� --h-� C��'o� i f� 4.Y�1(--�S ��__—c'r�►_�' '---__e�_ `, scG�p_I ►c�,�_ r� _ct.c-�-c c�� __-�►�'- �mv v-e-I c�-� �� ru c-�-� ��e � �ou�1 �. -------- --.__--__ ------------ �I �.t� -�-� rn� r�e a� �,�. �` tr �r-,-en �- s ,� � iA� r . � .: � u�, � _ __ � -�---- �--- � � 1 �� -��- _-- --- - . -- --- -- _ t�l��l_ ��' � �� __ �� '� -�� _ --- ---_ June 4, 2014 To �hom It May Concern, Chad Norton put in a shed for improvement to an existing structure. We, his neighbors, in the back of his residence, are very pleased with the shed improvements. If you have any further questions, We can be reached at; 8881 Greene Ave. So. C ottage Grove, l�'IN 5 5 016 651-459-1010 Sincerely, `�►�� , �� v ��.�� Max and Eileen Wakefield RESOLUTION NO. 2014-XXX A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE 10-FOOT MINIMUM SETBACK FOR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO 3.5 FEET FROM THE REAR LOT LINE AND TO ALLOW AN EXISTING STRUCTURE TO ENCROACH ON AN EXISTING 10-FOOT WIDE DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT AT 8884 GREENWAY AVENUE SOUTH WHEREAS, Chad Norton applied for a variance to reduce the 10-foot minimum rear yard setback for an accessory structure to 3.5 feet from the rear lot line (City Code Title 11-3-3C) and to allow that existing structure to encroach on an existing ten-foot wide drainage and utility easement (City Code Title 11-3-3E), on property legally described below. Lot 8, Block 6, Thompson's Grove 4th Addition, Cottage Grove, Washington County, State of Minnesota. Commonly known as 8884 Greenway Avenue South, Cottage Grove, Washington County, State of Minnesota. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed this application at their meeting on June 23, 2014; and 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 reviewed 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. The applicant attended the public hearing. Written testimony was received and entered into the public record; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission unanimously (8-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. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, Washington County, Minnesota, hereby grants a variance to reduce the 10-foot minimum rear yard setback for an accessory structure to 3.5 feet from the rear lot line (Ciiy Code Title 11-3-3C) and to aliow that existing structure to encroach on an existing Resolution No. 2014-XXX Page 2 of 2 ten-foot wide drainage and utility easement (City Code Title 11-3-E), on property legally described above. Granting this variance is based upon the following findings of fact: A. The existing structure has apparently has not caused abutting properties. : C existed at this location since August 1990 and any surFace storm water drainage problems for The variances do not adversely impact development goals and policies documented in the City's Future Vision 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The requested setback and easement encroachment variances continue a reasonable use on the property. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the recommendation for approval of the variance is subject to the following conditions: The property owner agrees to relocate the accessory structure if it is deter- mined that its existence on the drainage and utility easement prevents or limits full use of the utility and drainage easement. 2. The property owner agrees to hold the City harmless of any damages the non-compliant structure may sustain from storm water drainage and/or any future construction, maintenance, repair, or installation of public or private utility services necessary within the dedicated easement. 3. Constructing an addition or modifying the existing non-conforming acces- sory structure must not increase the amount of encroachment on the drain- age and utility easement. General maintenance (e.g. painting, re-siding and re-roofing) is permitted. 4. If the non-conforming accessory structure is removed from the site, all future accessory structures must conform to all development standards required by City Code regulations. Passed this 16th day of July 2014. Myron Bailey, Mayor Attest: Caron Stransky, City Clerk EXCERPT FROM UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE JUNE 23, 2014, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 6.3 Norton Shed Addition Variance — Case V2014-014 Chad Norton has applied for a variance to allow an addition to an existing shed to be 3.5 feet from the rear property line when the minimum rear yard setback is 10 feet and allow the existing accessory structure to encroach 6.5 feet onto a ten foot wide drainage and utility easement at 8884 Greenway Avenue South. McCool summarized the staff report and asked that the Planning Commission make a recommendation for either approval or denial based on their discussions and testimony received on this variance application. Chad Norton, 8884 Greenway Avenue South, submitted a letter to the Commission from the neighbor whose property is adjacent to the shed location. He explained that the shed was originally a plastic structure with a tarp over the top and he improved it into a code compliant structure. He believes that the new roof improves the drainage into the yard because gutters were installed versus water draining off the tarp roof that eroded the soil beneath the tarp roof. McCool noted that a letter was received in the mail today and a copy was provided to the Planning Commission. It was from Paul and Diane Norton, 6681 90th Street, stating that if building permits were filed and approved by the City, then they should be allowed to have the building. But if no permits were issued for the building, then they should not be granted variances. Included with the packet is a letter from Jeff and Sylvia Harris, 8905 Greenway, who commented on both this application and the next variance application on tonight's agenda. They stated that if the City prohibits structures in easements, they should not be granted variances. Norton stated that when the shed rear yard setback was brought to his attention from a concerned neighbor to the south, he spoke with the Building Division about bringing the shed into compliance and was told that it was just an improvement to an existing structure. Brittain asked if the structure was at least 10 feet from the property line would a permit be required for this type of improvement. McCool responded any expansion or renovation to a structure would require a building permit. Rostad opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Rostad closed the public hearing. Johnson asked if this was brought to the City's attention by a neighbor after it was built. McCool responded that the City received a complaint, and staff checked the City's records but did not find a building permit for the addition on the west side of the existing shed. The City's Code Enforcement Officer contacted the property owner to discuss their options, which were to move it off the drainage and utility easement and comply with the 10-foot setback or apply for a variance to allow it to remain in its current location. Johnson asked if there is a requirement that so many neighbors in a certain area have to approve a variance request before the City can. McCool responded no. Excerpt from Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes Norton Shed Addition Variance — Case V2014-014 June 23, 2014 Page 2 of 2 Graf asked if the addition was not there, would the structure would still encroach on the easement by about a half foot. McCool responded that was correct. Brittain stated that he has traditionally felt very strongly about adhering to the City's ordinances; however, where there is no harm done, variance requests should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. In his opinion on this particular application, the shed and addition have been there a long time and there haven't been any issues with drainage and getting access to the utilities. He would be in favor of approving this variance as long as the conditions are met and if there are problems, the shed would need to be removed. Rostad agreed with Brittain. Imdieke also agreed. Graf made a motion to grant a variance to allow an existing shed to be 3.5 feet from the rear property line when the minimum rear yard setback is 10 feet and allow the existing accessory structure to encroach 6,5 feet onto a ten-foot wide drainage and utility easement based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. lmdieke seconded. Motion passed unanimously (8-to-0 vote).