Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutExhibit A - Staff ReportDate Application Received: 02/21/2024 Date Application Considered as Complete: 02/23/2024 60-Day Review Period Expires: 04/23/2024 To: Chair Bollis and Planning Commission Members Adam Edwards, City Administrator From: Natalie Nye, Planner Date: March 18, 2024 Subject: #LA24-000012, Robert Breon, 2700 Casco Point Road, Variances - Public Hearing Background The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing home on the property and keep an existing two-story detached garage. The existing detached garage is nonconforming as it relates to front yard and side yard setbacks. The applicant is proposing to construct a new home that connects to the existing nonconforming structure and requests variances from front and side yard setback requirements as the home will be 20 feet from the front property line and 2.4 feet from the side property line. The new home will expand the nonconformity as the structure will have an expanded second story above the existing garage space. The applicant is proposing the enclose part of the second story above the garage and have a covered open area patio over a large portion of the garage footprint. The Planning Commission should as the applicant for additional testimony regarding the needs for covered outdoor living space in a nonconforming location. The subject property is nonconforming in lot width and lot size for the LR-1C zoning district and therefore for the construction of a new home to take place on the property, variances from lot width and lot size are also required and requested. The proposed project meets all other zoning criteria including hardcover and building height. Practical Difficulties Analysis Applicant Submittal Information: The applicant has identified the property’s existing conditions as a practical difficulty. The applicant originally intended on remodeling the existing home and garage, however, the foundation on the existing home was beyond repair. The existing two-story detached garage is in good condition and is proposed to remain. The applicant is proposing to construct a new home and connect it to the existing accessory building. The existing detached garage is nonconforming as it does not meet the 30-foot front yard setback or 7.5 side yard setback. The applicant states they have designed the home to be stepped away from the front and side yard in order to minimize the expansion of the nonconformity. Planning Staff Practical Difficulty Analysis: Staff agrees with the applicant’s assessment. The property contains an existing detached garage building that is nonconforming and permitted to remain. The nonconforming building could also be rebuilt in kind per City Code. However, the applicant is choosing to attach the accessory building to the new home and thus making it part of the primary structure and subject to the required setbacks. Variances from front and side yard are required for the footprint of the existing structure and for the vertical expansions of the second story within the setbacks. Staff also finds that the small lot size and narrow lot poses practical difficulties. Application Summary: front yard setback in order to construct a new home with a connection to an existing nonconforming Staff Recommendation: FILE #LA24-000012 March 18, 2024 Page 2 of 5 LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-350 – Setbacks: Front/Street 30’ 20’ North Side 7.5’ 2.4’ South Side 7.5’ 6’ 7.7’ Rear 75’ 67’ 78’ Section 78-350 – Lot Area/Width: Required 21,780 s.f. (0.5 acres) 100’ Actual Section 78-1403 – Structural Building Coverage: 8,205 s.f. (0.19 acre) Allowed: 2,000 s.f. Existing: 1,397 s.f. Section 78-1680 and 78-1700 – Hardcover Calculations: Overlay District Total Area Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Tier 2 8,205 s.f. Applicable Regulations: Lot Area and Lot Width Variances (Section 78-350) Zoning Code Section 78-72 provides options for the redevelopment of lots which do not meet the minimum area or width requirements for the respective zoning district. Substandard properties within the Shoreland Overlay District, such as the subject lot, are able to be redeveloped without variances if specific standards are met; such as: 1. All setback requirements can be met; 2. A Type 1 sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, can be installed or the lot is connected to a public sewer; and 3. The impervious surface coverage meets all hardcover location and square footage restrictions of this chapter and the total square footage of hardcover does not exceed 25 percent of the entire lot area. 4. All other zoning district standards can be met. The applicant’s request for front yard and side yard setback variances results in the property’s inability to conform to all of the standards above. Therefore, lot area and lot width variances are required in order to redevelop the property. The ability to develop the property consistent with other existing developed properties in the neighborhood would be limited if the area and width variances were not granted. FILE #LA24-000012 March 18, 2024 Page 3 of 5 Side and Rear Setback Variances (Section 78-350) The existing detached garage is 20 feet from the front property line and 2.4 feet from the side property line. The existing accessory building is proposed to be attached to the new home and therefore making it part of the primary building and subject to primary building setbacks. The existing footprint does not meet the required 30-foot front yard setback or the 7.5 side yard setback on the north side and therefore variances are required. The applicant is also proposing to expand the second story above the garage within the setback which is an expansion and requires variance approval. The second story above the garage is partially enclosed but then entire area above the garage is roofed. Because of the roof over the entire footprint of the existing garage the front and side yard setbacks are required. Governing Regulation: Variance (Section 78-123) In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. §216C.06, subd. 14, when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. According to MN §462.357 Subd. 6(2) variances shall only be permitted when: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The variances required for the construction of a new single-family home on a substandard parcel are supported by practical difficulties. The new home will connect to an existing detached garage on the property that is nonconforming. The existing structure is permitted to remain and be rebuilt per City Code. Making the existing footprint part of the primary building requires a front yard setback of 20 feet instead of the zoning districts requirement of 30 feet and a side yard setback of 2.4 feet when 7.5 feet is required. The existing detached garage is two stories and the proposal includes the expansion of this second story within the setbacks. The applicant has made efforts to pull the enclosed area away from the property lines to minimize impacts to neighbors, however the second story above the garage will be fully roofed. The third story has been pulled back to meet the required setbacks of the district. The construction of a new home is in harmony with the general intent of the Ordinance due to the practical difficulties of the substandard lot size, substandard lot width, and existing conditions present. This criterion is met. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The variances resulting in a new single- family home is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant has identified the necessary practical difficulties inherent to the land supporting their requests. This criterion is met. 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. FILE #LA24-000012 March 18, 2024 Page 4 of 5 a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; The construction of a new single-family is a reasonable use of the property. The proposal will utilize the existing nonconforming detached garage as part of the design and therefore requires front and side yard setback variances. This criterion is met. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The existing house was not built by the current owners. The lot is substandard in area and width. The applicant is proposing to maintain the same front and side yard setback and meet all other required zoning regulations. The small lot size, substandard width, and existing improvements are not the result of the current property owner’s actions; and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The proposed variances resulting in the construction of a new home are supported by practical difficulties and will not alter the character of the area. The new home will maintain existing setbacks and update the site with a new modern home design. This criterion is met. Additionally, City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 17, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78. This condition is not applicable. 6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. This condition is not applicable, as a residential home is a permitted use in the LR-1B District. 7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. This condition is not applicable. 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The substandard lot size, substandard lot width, and existing conditions of the property are unique conditions to this specific property. This criterion is met. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The subject property is smaller in size than most of the neighboring properties. Additionally, the location of the existing structures on the property are unique to the subject property. This criterion is met. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The existing detached garage is in a nonconforming location and proposed to remain. The proposal is to connect the existing detached garage to the new home and thus requiring primary building setback variances. Without the approval of the front and side yard setback variances, the applicant would not be able to connect to the existing building. This criterion is met. FILE #LA24-000012 March 18, 2024 Page 5 of 5 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. Granting the requested variances will not adversely impact health, safety, comfort, or morals of the community. This criterion is met. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The variances allow for the construction of a new home that is connected to an existing building on site. The new home is designed to meet all other setbacks and restrictions of the zoning district. Without the approval of the front and side yard setback variances, the existing detached garage structure could not be connected to the home. The site is substandard in both size and width and requires a creative design. This criterion is met. The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located. Public Comments The applicant has provided neighbor letters that are included in the packet. No other public comments have been received. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? 2. The Planning Commission should discuss the second story expansion above the garage and determine if the open patio area that is roofed is reasonable and meeting practicaly difficulty criteria. 3. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? 4. Does the Commission have any issues or concerns with the expansion of the second story within the required front and rear yard setbacks? 5. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Staff is supportive of the requested variances for lot area, lot width, front yard and side yard setback in order to construct a new single-family home.