The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1998-09-16 PACKET 04.G.REQUEST OF CITY COUNeIL AC°f10� COUtdGIL AGE�(6,4 t�AEETl�i� IT Nl # DATE 9J16P98 PREPARED BY Communify Development Kim Lindquist ORIGINATIiVG C3EPARTMEi�T STAFF FlUTFiOR a�e�4��Aa��.t.�.�.�.�.��kR��.4�.m.v.:«ma�«�..+m. • , • - ��,� Adopt a resolution granting a variance #o Sections 28-67(g)(7}(c )(v) and 28-73(c )(3)(g) of the City's Zoning Ordinance to permit construction of a single-family dwelling closer to the normal high-water mark than the setback of neighboring dweliings and continue the use of the existing private access drive without elevating its grade. The property is located at 8299 Ftiver Acres Road. ADVISORY COMMISStON ACTfON: �.. /� �' : •- � ■ ' . ■ - • *• . ■ -•- r •. � . . . ■ • • • •- ■ ..r� i� REVIEWED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ APPROVED � ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ DENIED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ � MEMO/LETTER:1) Memo from John McCool dated 9/9/98 � RESOLUTION: Draft ❑ ORDINANCE: ❑ ENGINEERlNG RECOMMENDATIOPJ: ❑ LEGRL f�ECOfvtMEN��TIOM1I: � OTHEF2: 1) Staff Report and Exhibits 2) Excerpt frorn unapproved minute� of August 24�' Planning Commission fl/leeting ADfVIINI�TRATdf2S COt�MEfVTS � � 60 /r City �dministrator Clate «��m��.��.�,��.��..�*�g�s��<d.a CC�l1fdClL ACTIORI TAKE�d: �] P,PPF20VEC3 ❑ o��i�� ❑ o Y ., .� . �'• � T0: Honorabie Mayor and Council Members Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator FROM: John McCool, Senior Planner DATE: September 9, 1998 RE: Ted and Diane Fredrickson - Variance Appiication INTRODUGTION Ted and Diane Fredrickson, 8291 River Acres Road, have applied for a variance to construd a new residentiai dwelling that will be Goser to the river bank of the Mississippi River than the neighboring dweiling and to continue using their existing private access drive without elevating it above the flood protection elevation. Their existing singie family home and detached accessory structure wili be razed. The lowest floor elevation for the new structure will be at 700 feet above mean sea level, which is the 100-year flood elevation established by city ordinance. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission heid a public hearing conceming this matter at their regular meeting on August 24. The applicant submitted a revised buiiding plan prior to the meeting and a copy was distributed to each Pianning Commission member. The revised plan showed that the proposed new structure would not be Goser to the Mississippi River than the current location of the existing residential structure. A copy of this revised site plan is attached. The applicant e�cpressed no objections to the conditions stipulated in the staff report and no other pubic comment was received. Based on the facts and information contained in the Planning staff report, the Pianning Commission unanimously approved Fredrickson's variance application, subject to certain conditions. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached resolution granting variances to the City's Zoning Ordinance for property at 8291 River Acres Road. The attached draft resolution was prepared in accordance with the recommendations made by the Planning Commission. GWIANNING\7�J96�CITYCOUNCN9637 SEPT76MEM RESOLUTION NO. 98-XXX A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO SECTIONS 28-67(g)(7)(c)(v) AND 28- 73(c)(3)(g) OF THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF A SING�E-FAMILY DWELLING CLOSER TO THE NORMAL HIGH-WATER MARK THAN THE SETBACK OF NEIGHBORING DWE�LtNGS AND TO CONTINUE USING THE EXISTING PRIVATE ACCESS DRIVE WITHOUT ELEVATING ITS GRADE AT 8291 RIVER ACRES ROAD. WHEREAS, Ted and Diane Fredrickson have filed a variance application for 8291 River Acres Road South, Cottage Grove, Minnesota. The variances pertain to Section 28- 67(g)(7)(c)(v), a provision that requires ail new principal structures to have vehicular access at or above an elevation not more than two feet below the regulatory flood protection elevation, and to Section 2&73(c}(3)(g), a provision that states that in no case shall a dweliing be placed Goser to the biuff line or normai high water mark than the average setback of the structures on the adjacent lots. The variance requests are to allow the applicants to continue to use their private access drive which is lower than two feet below the regulatory flood proteetion elevation and to place a new single-family dwelling 26 feet cioser to the river edge than the neighboring residential structure. The property is legally described as follows: Lot 018, Houses River Acres, Washington County, Min�esota. Commoniy described as 8291 River Acres Road South, Cottage Grove, Minnesota. (Geocode 33-027-21-31-0005) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted the pubiic hearing on August 24, 1998; and WHEREAS, no testimony was received in opposition to the variances; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the criteria and findings established by the Zoning Ordinance for granting a variance. A summary of this cxiteria is as follows: 1) It must be determined that there are unique conditions that apply to the structure or land in question that do not genera�ly apply to other land or structures in the same district; 2) That granting a variance must not merely senre as a convenience to the appiicant, but must be necessary to alleviate a demonstrabie hardship or difficulty from the City's ordinance; and Resolution No. 98-XXX Page 2 3) Granting the variance must not impair health, safety, comfort or morals or in any respect, or be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Ordinance or the Comprehensive Plan. The City may impose conditions and safeguards in granting any variance. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, by a unanimous vote, recommended to the City Council that the variance to permit the continued use of existing gravel driveway without elevating its grade and the variance to allow the proposed new dwelling (deck excluded) to be no Goser than 124 feet from the rear lot line shall be granted based on the following: a. The inability to move the proposed new structure further north because of the existing sanitary septic system. b. Other residential structures in this vicinity are cioser to the riverbank than the principal structure setback proposed by the Fredrickson's. Because these parcels are not adjacent to the applicant's property, they were not included iri averaging the setback from the riverbank. c. The provisions of the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Overlay District were considered and it was defermined that the proposed principal struct�re will not adversely impact any of the criteria listed in Section 28-81(b) of the City's Zoning Ordinance. d. The elevation of the private driveway is not significantly lower than the twa foot below the 100-year flood elevation referenced in the 1976 F{ood Insurance Study. Reconstructing this driveway may have an adverse impact to specimen oak trees that abut the driveway and may create nuisance drainage on the west side of the applicanYs existing driveway and possibiy a portion of the neighboring property owner's front yard. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, Washington County, Minnesota concurs with the Planning Commission's findings that the variance application is hereby granted as follows: A variance to Section 28-67(g)(7)(c)(v), a provision that requires all new principal structures to have vehicular access at or above an elevation not more than hvo feet below the regulatory flood protection elevation. 2. A variance to Section 28-73(c)(3)(g), a provision that states that in no case shali a dweiling be placed closer to the bluff line or normal high water mark than the average setback of the structures on the adjacent lots. Resolution No. 98-XXX Page 3 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that approval of these variances is subject to the following conditions: The applicant must complete a building permit application for the demolition of the existing dweliing and a building permit to construct the new single family home. The City must issue the permit before any construction can begin. 2. The lowest floor elevation for the proposed new singie family home shall not be below the 700-foot mean sea level elevation as estabiished by Section 28- 67(b) of the City's Zoning Ordinance. 3. All flood-proofing requirements imposed by local ordinances and building codes shaii be compiied with. 4. M enciosed addition onto the rear of the principal structure is prohibited. Passed Unanimously this 16th day of September, 1998. John D. Denzer, Mayor Attest: Caron M. Stransky, City Clerk � m (tttTt a V V s �� V V 1 V } JL/[""lli V L1� 8030 Cedar Avenue South Suite 228 Bloomington, MN 55425 Phone (612) 854-4055 Fox (612� 854-4268 � rnn 6 4.7 x fp94,4 �� Survep For: Ted Fredrikson . �9<.2 28" Oak 26" Qpk 69 .� ;, ; x �.�/ ._l.ao" oak Conc. 99.3 Dnve 0 Oo M � � 5 oak M 69i 68�.6 27 / �x 69�. ' � JO" Oak rv v c 6962 x � '�x 695.8 10" Sproce 8" $pmce � � ]Q�T(C:. I p BROWN, R.L.S. President NORTH Scole: 1"=30' 0 Denotes Iron Monument. PROPOSED STRUCTURE 36" Ook � � �x 696A p0" Boxeld r 8 S�rcce w.x 695.0 � Se9tic lonk . �696.0 . 69<J x 694.8 � x 6 ]_i x 696. 322 s" sp��e st � 6945 �� esa.e ��-----'-- EXISTING � Y/�� /� �� STRUCTURE � � � 12" Norway o � �10" Sprure Well � x 694.! �e' 98•�893 6868 —'-------, sso.� NOTE�. No Search Wos 6 � — �—�--- x .�.""�-. 685.8 Made For Any 686 .___� Easement5. Woter Elevction on Mcy i, 68b.80 PROPERiY DESCRIPTION Lot 18, HOUSE'S RIVER ACRES, Washingtan County, Minnesoto. I hereby certify thct this survey, pfon or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervlsion ond that I am o duiy Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of tfie State of Mirnesoto. W. BROWN C S RVEYIN WC. �� ---/ Dated: �Z/— 98 �io-4s Woodrow A. Brown, R�.S NO. 15230 . as/2� iori STAFF REPORT CASE: V98-31 ITEM: 6.4 PUBLIC MEETING DATE: 8/24/98 TENTATIVE COUNCIL REVIEW DATE: 9/16/98 APPLICATION APPLICANT: Ted and Diane Fredrickson REQUEST: Approval of a variance to Sections 28-67(g)(7)(c)(v) and 28-73(c)(3)(g) of the City's zoning ordinance to permit construction of a single-family dwelling closer to the normal high-water mark than the setback of neighboring dweilings and continue using the existing private access drive without making any improvements to elevate its grade. SITE DATA LOCATION: ZONING: CONTIGUOUS LAND USE: SIZE: 8291 River Acres Road R-4, �ow Density Residentiai NORTH: Residentiai EAST: Residential SOUTH: Mississippi River WEST: Residential Lot area = 34,202 square feet DENSITY: N/A RECOMMENDATION Approval, based on conditions stiputated in this staff report. • � " . � � � F:\GROUPSIPLANNINGU998�PCREPOR'R9837 CoverPage.doc ... ,o,� £_ .. _ ; . : � . . _..-- -- -' ----- . .., . f� � i I! oa� i a ^ ° F . S :�, o : , '. ° ` , _— _'_... e _ _ . _ .. . ._. — ` ^ � ___— _ __""_ ' _. ._. ... �.. -.._.._ 1.. _.... _� ,_. _ ..__. __—_ . -- '__.__ __ .. __ _ . . _— _._.__ �._ . . ._ _ .. .__. _ __.... ; . ; y s. - n>+I '. 1 : . , R � ' . ' .�� '. � .kz _ rme va . .� I , . . _ t . >no , nm. nao � �,. � . . ` � � . i . . . . . . _ . ^ � _ , _ - - _ _ � � " � . _ _ R 4 ox` . . '. .�¢ i _ .. e � R I S. ��0. R .. . ._' . i_ . • I . '�' / 3' / i � � �..�'.. . '-':. .'_<_ I..�. _ _ �_ _�"'� � h ..�,�> .. �+ �w, �./ a - � � � - >"�� i �.� �� { m� � � k � �-��SITE: � �188�� g l. .o�t� � . �' 1'! } i :�'^'V..� " : �" �Ll . .w , �° . � � , �"�� \\ ._-� .'z" ( �:✓ _ � ) F ^\ Y� " J � c SY _ _ � . � , . . �� t ,�.� ��:�� . N PLANNING STAFF REPORT CASE V98-31 AUGUST 24, 1998 -;•-• ; Ted and Diane Fredrickson are requesting approval of a variance from Section 28- 67(g)(7)(C)(v) and Section 28-73(c)(3}(g) of the City's Zoning Ordinance relating to floodway and floodway fringe and Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Overlay District regulations. The applicant is proposing to raze the existing single family home and detached accessory structure to construct a new dweliing on the site. The new structure wiii be constructed at a slightiy higher elevation so that it will comply with the minimum flood elevation requirements required by city ordinances. The existing dwelling is considered non-conforming because its lowest fioor elevation is below the estabiished 700-foot fiood elevation. The requested variances pertain to the ordinance requirements that 1) vehicular access must be at or above an elevation that is two-feet below the regulatory flood protection ele- vation; and 2) the provision that the dwelling must not be placed any closer to the normal high-water elevation than the average setback of the structures on adjacent lots. Relative to the first issue, the appiicants pian to continue to use their private access drive even though its 694.7 feet to 696.9 feet elevation is lower than two feet below the regulatory flood pro- tection elevation. The proposed placement of the new dwelling will be approximately 13 feet farther from the riverbank compared to the location of the existing dwelling, but will still be approximately 26 feet closer to the river edge than the neighboring residentiai structure located to the west. There is no dweliing on the vacant lot east of the applicanYs property. Therefore an "averaging" cannot be accompiished and the ordinance standard cannot be met. The average setback from the normal high water level of other structures adjoining this site will not be complied with. Exhibit A is a survey of the property's current conditions and Exhibit B is a plot plan showing the location of the proposed new home. BACKGROUND The applicant's property is located within a residential subdivision cailed River Acres. This plat was recorded in 1958 and most of the homes in this general area were built between 1960 and 1975. The appiicanYs property is located in Zone Al2 of the Flood Hazard Boundary and Flood insurance Rate Maps (prepared in February 1976 by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Federal Insurance Planning Staff Report Case No. V98-31 August24,1998 Page 2 Administration). Zone Al2 is within the 100-year flood hazard area where base flood ele- vations and flood hazard factors have been determined. This study shows the 100-year flood elevation in this vicinity of the Mississippi River to be at 696.9 feet above mean sea level. The adoption of the City's Zoning Ordinance relative to floodway and floodway fringe districts establishes the 100-year flood elevation to be 700.0 feet above mean sea level. Exhibit A depicts a first floor elevation of the existing dwelling to be 698.6 feet above mean sea level. The appiicanPs home did not sustain any flood damage during the 1993 and 1997 floods. • � .._ ._� • ► Variance A copy of the variance criteria and Mississippi River Corridor Area Overlay District as es- tablished by the City's Zoning Ordinance is attached as Exhibit C. The applicanYs response to the variance criteria is attached as Exhibit D. The existing residentiai dwelling is a one-story structure that has a totai foundation area bf 2,776.4 square feet. A 12-foot by 12-foot detached accessory building is located at the northwest corner of the home. The weil is located on the south side of the existing dwelling and will continue to be used for the proposed new home. Tne individual sanitary septic system exists on the north side of the home and wili aiso be connected to the new structure. The proposed new dwelling is a two-story structure with a three-car attached garage. The totai foundation area is approximately 2,898 square feet. The new home wiil constructed so that the top of foundation block will be at the 700-foot flood protection elevation as required by City ordinance. Positioning of the new home on the lot wiil be approximately 13 feet further away from the river's edge, but still approximately 26 feet closer to the river than the adjoining dwelling to the west. The private access drive consists of a gravel-surfaced driveway that exists between the public roadway and dwelling. The surface elevation of this driveway ranges between 894.5 to 896.0 feet above mean sea level. City ordinance requires all new principal structures to have a vehicular access at or above an elevation not more than two feet below the regula- tory flood protection elevation, which in this case would require that the driveway elevation should be at 898.0 feet above mean sea level. The applicant is requesting that the City grant a variance to this provision based on fact that the driveway functions well for their pri- vate use, that elevating the driveway may detrimentally affect four large (16-inch to 40-inch trunk diameter) oak trees that abut the driveway, and that it may create nuisance drainage not only on their property, but possibly affecting the neighboring property as well. Staff can support the variance to the setback averaging from the river edge and driveway elevation for severai reasons. One, there is approximately 123 feet from the river's edge to Planning Staff Report Case No. V98-31 August 24, 1998 Page 3 the closest point of the proposed new dwelling and 109 feet to the edge of the proposed new deck. The existing dweliing is approximately 110 feet from the river's edge. There- fore, the proposal does not decrease the setback of the structure to the river and increases it slightly by one foot. Second, there is only one existing dweiling adjoining the applicanYs property, which is located farther away from the riverbank than the applicant's existing home. Seventeen of the 24 homes along the riverside of River Acres Road are just as close or even closer to the river's edge. Third, placing the proposed new dweliing farther from the riverbank wiil require an additional oak tree (26" diameter trunk) to be removed and relo- cating the existing sanitary septic system. Fourth, the existing private driveway elevation at its lowest point is 2.4 feet below the 696.9-foot 100-year flood elevation as documented in the 1976 Flood Insurance Study. No other property owner uses or depends on this private driveway for access. The appiicant is aware of the potentiai for flooding of the driveway and is willing to assume any risk. Overail, staff believes there are unique circumstances that limit the location of the proposed structure. The proposed new structure is similar in size and type to newer homes that have been buiit along River Acres Road. Additionally, staff believes the proposed piacement of the building is consistent with the ordinance's intent by exceedi�g the 100-foot setback from the riverbank and does not significantiy detract views from the river. Property Characteristics The property dimensions shown on the plat survey differs slightly from the subdivision piat that was recorded with the Washington County Recorder's office. The plat survey shows the appiicanYs lot as having smaller dimensions than the subdivision plat, but the overall difference is about 1,552.9 square feet, or about 0.03 acres of land. The lot area per the dimensions of the recorded subdivision plat shows the totai lot area as being approximately 35,755.58 square feet or about 0.82 acres of land. The parcel is a legal lot of record, but is considered non-conforming because it does not comply with the 1.5-acre minimum lot area requirement because of the on-site septic system. Mississippi Nationai River and Recreation Area This variance appiication was forwarded to staff of the National Park Service (NPS) and Department of Naturai Resource (DNR) because the property is within the boundaries of the Mississippi Nationai River and Recreafion Area (MNRRA). The NPS did not express any objections to this variance application. A copy of their letter is attached as Exhibit E. Neighbor Support Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within 500 feet of the applicant's property. Our office received a letter from two neighboring property owners supporting the applicanYs requested variances. A copy of each letter is attached as Exhibits F and G. Planning Staff Report Case No. V98-31 August 24, 1998 Page 4 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of a variance to Section 28-67(g)(7)(C)(v) to permit the existing gravel private driveway to continue its existence w4thout any improvement or reconstruction to elevate its grade above the two-foot below the 10d-year flood elevation. In addition, a variance is recommended for approval to Section 28-73(c)(3)(g) to allow the proposed new dwelling (deck excluded) to be no closer than 114 feet from the rear lot line. This recom- mendation is based on the following findings of fact: The inability to move the proposed new structure further north without requiring the removal of one additional specimen oak tree and existing sanitary septic system. 2. Other residential structures in this vicinity are closer to the riverbank than the principal structure setback proposed by the Fredrickson's. Because tnese parceis are not adja- cent to the appiicanYs property, they were not included in averaging the setback from the riverbank. 3. The provisions of the Mississippi River Corridor Criticai Rrea Overlay District were considered and it was determined that the proposed principle structure will not adversely impact any of the criteria listed in Section 28-81(b) of the City's Zoning Ordinance. 4. The elevation of the private driveway is not significantly lower than the two-foot below the 100-year flood elevation referenced in the 1976 Flood Insurance Study. Recon- structing this driveway may have an adverse impact to specimen oak trees that abut the driveway and may create nuisance drainage on the west side of the applicant's existing driveway and possibiy a portion of the neighboring property owner's front yard. Granting of the variances is subject to: 1. The applicant must complete a building permit application for the demolition of the existing dweiling and a building permit to construct the new singie family home. The City must issue the permit before any construction can begin. 2. The lowest floor elevation for the proposed new single family home shail not be below the 700 foot mean sea level elevation as established by Section 28�7(b) of the City's Zoning Ordinance. 3. Ali flood-proofing requirements imposed by local ordinances and building codes shall be compiied with. 4. An enclosed addition onto the rear of the principal structure is prohibited. Pianning Staff Report Case No. V98-31 August 24, 1998 Page 5 Prepared by: John McCool, AICP Senior Planner Attachments: Location Map Exhibit A— Existing Plot Survey Exhibit B— Proposed Plot Survey Exhibit C- Variance and Critical Area Criteria Exhibit D- ApplicanYs Response to Variance Criteria Exhibit E — NPS Letter Exhibit F — Dunbar Letter Exhibit G — Marcotte Letter . � . EXISTING SITE SURVEY ey. �� ; &330 Cedor Aven�e Sou1h Suita 718 Bbwninqton, MN 55125 Phone (612) 854-4055 Far {6121 &i1-�168 � � 7 00.65 vo.�. nd< � Survey For: Ted F`redrikson 1� 6ga � �! �� 1 s sv z". cs..z � 0 U 2fi Ook IG� 69 :� 69<.5 �.S v �0 - � Oak . ) } 696.0 16 Oa� �. 696 a Con�. Drive vk �c 696 ] 69>.1 Oat / i—�� 6962 z i'�49].5 �' 696 � a '�' v 695. 10' SOnvc< 692 2(Y Ooael � SF��<e � fiSt.O Ton� 0 a 69�.� . 6918 �66. 6 Sp�vc� J ava 69L5 � M � n 1Z' NOr�py � � �..J a '�,� 1lf SOrucc . 69l.1 �, � �. ' A BROWH, R.LS. Prsaident NORTH I $COl¢: 1 =}0' 0 Denoles Iron 1lonumen(. 69ttu�_��9 --_.. 98.W89J 69fi.8 �---�._� F90.�� NOTE: No Search Wos 686.8 Mode For My 686.8 � Eosemeni5. woler E�waGOn on 4ay i, 1998 - 686.80 .,__._ b �o 0 • • . . PROPOSED SITE PLAN MIS'StS� iPPI I�iYE(� � �----�-.--- 6oa e`" . � . . ORDINANCE CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES Section 28-12, Variances Where there are practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships in carrying out the strict letter of the City Ordinances, a variance may be granted; provided that ali the following conditions are true: The particular physical surroundings, shape or topographicai conditions of the specific parcel of land involved cause a particular hardship to the owner, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulation were to be carried out. There are unique conditions that apply to the structure or land in question that do not apply generally to other structures or land in the same zoning district. 2. The conditions upon which a petition for a variation is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and not generally appiicable to other property within the same zoning classification. 3. The alleged di�cuity or hardship must be caused by this article and not by any person presently having an interest in the parcel of land. 4. 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. 5. The proposed variance wili not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, will not increase the congestion of the public streets, wiil not endanger the public safety or will not diminish or impair property value within the neighborhood. The Gity may impose conditions and safeguards in granting any Variance. ORDINANCE CRITERIA FOR MISSISSIPPI RIVER CORRIDOR CRITICAL OVERLAY DISTRICT Section 28-81(b), Variances, requires the Planning Commission and City Council to address the following items: Variance and Critical Area Criteria Page 2 1. Preserve the scenic and recreational resources of the river corridor, especially in regard to the view from the use of the river. 2. The maintenance of safe and healthfui conditions. 3. The prevention and control of water pollution, including sedimentation. 4. The location of the site with respect to floodways, floodplains, siopes and blufflines. 5. The erosion potential of the site based on degree and direction of slope, soil type and vegetation cover. 6. Potential impact on game and fish habitat. 7. Location of the site with respect to existing or future access roads. 8. The amount of wastes to be generated and the adequacy of the proposed disposal systems. 9. The anticipated demand for police, fire, medical and schooi services and facilities. 10. The compatibility of the proposed development with uses on adjacent land. G:U'LANNING\9 997WCRPTVBCRIT � , i ' ORDINANCE CRITERIA- In order to aid in the application review process, please give a DETAILED response to the foliowing criteria. Your ability to meet these findings are what the Planning Commission/City Councii are required, in part, to base their review on, so be specific. � In order to grant a Variance, ail of the foliowing findings must be met: A. There are unique conditions that apply to the structure or la�d in question that do not apply.generaily to other structures or land in the same zoning district. Please list the conditions that are unique. o�0i,c�u�b weat� .Q[a�u�Q� ,�'•Prur-�ra�6r �c $= ••'�'�; � �R � 7- /tE .Qol�n r �o Ac�FSr .F'�c of ou,e � EisA'� t r ,Fl ,�..�� o�t vF .C�I�F,t .r.��P�s l��4r� !1 o,v�Y A'� G9� gf S.P/NGi�VC i se �crNC� Fi�c tuo��v aE'/tt Lok�P /�Ftst.��,ru� �oo y�c ctD a�'� �.Cr-fs ri'.�ar �i.�E 7"a'r i��-i::F w 4Y 6. The granting of a Variance must not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but must be necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty. Please identify the hardship or difficulty. u?'= A,PF ao� ,3�ic�r,rF ?"�t� tiF�u f!v-u� c� osF.c 7'0 �a� �PrrF.P P.� 5f? �!�'c<' f? ,Fr^" Ff,�o,�+ �t£ /��`? S/sF_ . �'fl�/�Gr��F �ErT/or.? v1 R- '13��` .C�x,r,117 .C?c��au i�7r �t i 7"0 /NCVr �i'F �dro SEPT/� T�7�u�! �l�F� �S�em"FN �f°s" �fi'F�R.�i/E! P l��D AFEMov� `�h�r /oo lh2 OGp bf7K7iQEf1 C. Granting the variance must neither impair the pubiic health, safety, comfott, or morals in any respect, - nor be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Ordinance or the Comprehensive Plan. Piease identify any potentia� impact the requested variance may have. !°✓; � Economic hardship is not regarded by the Courts as a reason for approvai. Neighborhood opposition, without any basis of facts, is not regarded by the CouRs as �eason for either approval or denial. SiMv (601 Dav Waiver. The City HEREBY notifies the appiicant that development review may not be completed wiffiin the required 60 days, due to public hearing requirements and agency review. Therefore, the City is notifying the appiicant that the City is taking an automatic 60. day extension for deve�opment review. Developme�t review will be completed wdhin 120 days unless additional review exte�sions are approved by the appiicant The Planning Department will notify you of all meetings. Acknowledament and Sianature: The undersigned hereby requests upon all of the penatties of law, for 4he purpose of inducing the City of Cottage Grove to take the adion herein requested, that all statements herein are true and that aU work herein mentioned wiil be done in accordance with the ordinance�of the City of Cottage Grove, and the laws of the State of Minnesota. APPLICANTS SIGN U E: L- � � DATE: r< ,��- �� .��, .� , �/�� 's � OWN S SIG RE � (� � � � � � /�' DATE: � /� �� ii�l�r�L /1.///CMO ; .'�/��.�^/.��1�!',��i' � h:lwpwin�appiicWarincl . . PM•HY �1�4' n � o - -_._: � a � � � . > �_ q CM 3 ` IN klPU' kCPEI('fU: United States �'3ep�rtmen� of �� rterior NATTQNAL PARIs SERV TCE Miuiasippl Nationai Rivcr a�d Recceatian Arca 195 FSfth Stroct East, Suiie 418. Boz 41 St. Yaul, Minnesot2 56101-2a6� L8006(MISS)-3 August 18, 199€ Mc John A1cCool CiTy of Cottage Crtovs 751 tS 80"' Street Soueh CotYage Grove, i�IN 55016 Dear Mr. McCool: Thank you foz the opportunity to zeview the floodway and flood £ringe variance request presented by Ted and Diane Fredrickson, 8291 Rivez Acres Road. As you aze a�vare, the pxoject site i.s ez�tirely witk�in tkAe bouzAdaries of the Mississippi National River and Reereation Area (MNIZRA), a unit of the national pazk system. While the 2vTational Pazk Sezvice has no zegulatoty autlao�ty, the �N [ZRr1 Compzek�ez�sive Ivlanagexnezzt P1.azz (CMP) incor�orates by reference requirements of fhe siafe Mississi�pi River Critical Area Program. This project falls wztlazn the puzvzew of chat progzam. `1'be I�epartznent of Natu�aJ Resouzces (DNR) eomments on confoirnanee with Critical Area requirements. The National Park Service comments on consistez�cy of projects with additional voluntary MNRRA policies. $ased on the voluntazy n4NRRA guidelanes azxd on vazjance zequest infozmation provided in the letter and diagratzas we received, we have no objections to this �roject. As noted 'zn youx letter, the proposed rebuilt home is further back &om the river than the exzsiizzg home. The pzoposed deck does not extend beyond ihe e�sting house structuze. While chese modifications do not fall in tLje exact �ootpz�nt of the existz�g stzucture, they are uo closer to the river than what is currently in place. The drtveway is existzng atad, based oz� our information, there aze no changes proposed. Therefore, we have no objections to that portion of the variance zequest. Thank you for keeping us infoczpecl ofprojects in Cottage Grrove that are within the MNZ2RA boundaries. We urge you to give cazeful consideration to comments £zozn the DNR. If you have questions please call NaxACy Auzzcazi at 65 ]-290-4I 60, extension 237. Sincerely, _� �,� :..,�i ;: t'F_ ___ �`%.t.,zE.� _ ; 'Jo.4nn Kyral �% Superintendent � � � •.,�� . Richard E. & Hilda P. Dunbar 8285 115th Street South Cottage Grove, MN 55016-4565 John McCool Senior Pla�ner City of Cottage Grove 7516 - 80th Street South Gottage Grove, Minnesota 55016 Dear Mr. McCool: � July 28, 1998 �„�"' n ! ( .. � t�_ _.----� _ � , , ,,, r, (t � �- J � il�, We are the adjoining neighbors to the west of Ted and Diane Fredrickson. They have given us the opportunity to examine their building plans and proposed site plan, so we are aware of their plans and the variances they have sought from the city. The setback from the Mississippi River that they are planning will not negatively impact us. It is actually set back furthe� than tfieir present home. Therefore, we have no objection to their building site. With regard to their driveway elevation plans, we find no negative impact upon us or our home. Requiring them to elevate thei� drive to the code level, however, does have the potential to create a negative impact upon us, in that it would be likely to cause a pool or pond of standing water to form on the east side of our property during periods of heavy rain. In summary, we have no objection to their building site plan or driveway plan. �� el G�� y��.�� j .:��¢�!l ��''1�� '✓v� t}�'�' Dick and Pat Dunbar . . July 29, 1998 John McCool Senior Planner City of Cottage Grove 7516 - 80th Street South Cottage Grove, MN 55016 Dear Mr. McCooi: As the adjoining neighbor to the east of Ted and Diane F�edrickson, I am aware oF their building plans and the variances they have sought from the city. They have shared their building plans as well as their site plan with me. I do not feel I will be negatively impacted by the setback from the Mississippi River because it is actually set back further than their present home. Therefore, I have no objection to their building site. With regard to their driveway efevation plans, I find no negative impact to me or my home. In summary, I have no objection to their building site plan or driveway plan and am supportive in their efforts to obtain the vaziances. Sincerely. <�GGC�?'�f/ )'�O/CC%'d`�� Sharor. L. tviazco::e 8327 River acres Road cc: Ted and Diane Fredrickson Unapproved Excerpt from the Minutes of the August 24, 1998, Planning Commission Meeting Ted and Diane Fredrickson have appiied for a variance from the floodplain ordinance relating to access elevation and a variance from the normal high•water structure setback requirements for their property at 8291 River Acres Road. McCool summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. He stated that today staff had received a revised site plan and building footprint from the applicant. Copies of the revised site plan have been distributed to the Planning Commission members. McCool stated that under the revised site plan proposal, an additional oak tree would be removed. Boyden asked if the new site plan proposal moved the structure further from tne river. McCool answered that the southwest corner of the home would be further from the river tfian the original proposal. Mrs. Fredrickson, 8291 River Acres Road, stated that they had to sandbag during 1993 and 1997 and decided to build a new house. They will stay within their septic and well systems. More fill would have to be brought in to aliow for a higher home but to add fill to raise the driveway couid kiil some of the trees on the property. They don't want to cut trees, though a few will be lost. She also stated that the road connected to the driveway was also below flood piain regulations. She reported that they shared the proposal with the neighbors on both sides and neither had any objections. She then stated that the new house would be valued twice what their existing home is now. McCool stated that he had received a response from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and they had no objections to the proposal. They did request that any trees that were lost would be replaced. Auge opened the public hearing. No one spoke. The public hearing was c%sed. Boyden moved to approve fhe appiication with the revised site plan subject to the conditions listed below. Japs seconded. 1. The applicant must complete a building permit applicafion for the demolition of fhe exisfing dwelling and a building permit to construct the new single family home. The City must issue the permit before any construction can begin. 2. The lowest floor elevation for the proposed new single family home sha!l nof be below fhe 700.foof inean sea leve/ elevation as estab/ished by Secfion 28-67(b) of the City's zoning ordinance. 3. A!I flood-praofing requi�ements imposed by local ordinances and bui/ding codes shali be complied with. 4. An enc/osed addition onto fhe rear of the principal sfrucfure is prahibited. The motfon passed unanimously.