HomeMy WebLinkAboutLA22-000036 (2815 CPR) Ex E PCSRDate Application Received: 06/22/2022
Date Application Considered as Complete: 08/21/2022
60-Day Review Period Expires: 10/20/2022
To: Chair McCutcheon and Planning Commission Members
Adam Edwards, City Administrator
From: Melanie Curtis, Planner mcc
Date: 19 September 2022
Subject: #LA22-000036, Scott Gates o/b/o Lisa Thostenson, 2815 Casco Point Road,
Variances
Public Hearing
Background
The owners purchased the property in April 2022 and have planned improvements to the home. They have
recently applied for an administrative building permit (RPS22-000126; Exhibit J) to construct a garage
addition to the rear of the home, meeting the setbacks; the existing detached garage will be removed. The
garage addition project reflects changes to the site which bring the existing hardcover level down from
31.1% to 25%.
The current variance application reflects changes to the roof orientation from a hip roof to gable within the
side yard setback, as well as within the average lakeshore setback. They are proposing a first floor lakeside
deck within the average lakeshore setback which exceeds the 42-inch height allowance within the setback.
To support this plan, a hardcover variance is requested to permit 26.48% hardcover.
Practical Difficulties Analysis
Applicant Submittal Information: The applicant has identified the existing conditions as practical difficulties
supporting the requested variance(s). Additionally, they have provided supporting documentation regarding
Practical Difficulties attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the
application.
Planning Staff Practical Difficulty Analysis: Regarding practical difficulty, Staff finds there are difficulties in
the location of the existing home which may support the variances for the change in the rooflines.
Staff may be able to support he average lakeshore setback variance for the change in the lakeside roof mass
as long as the change does not adversely impact views of the lake from the neighboring homes. The average
lakeshore setback request pertaining to the new deck cannot be supported. As proposed, the elevated deck
and railing appear to impact the lake views for the adjacent neighbor(s). A grade-level deck or on-grade
patio (≤ 42 inches from existing grade) can be constructed in the same location.
Application Summary:
Staff Recommendation:
FILE # LA22-000036
19 September 2022
Page 2 of 6
Regarding the requested hardcover variance, the application for building permit demonstrates that a level of
25% hardcover is achievable and therefore staff does not find practical difficulty supporting a hardcover
variance.
LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Section 78-350 & 78-1279 – Setbacks:
Rear 30’ 78’
4.8’
Lakeshore 75’
Average Lakeshore lakeshore setback. The proposed deck will extend 18 feet lakeward of
the average lakeshore setback line on the west side and approximately
Section 78-350 – Lot Area/Width:
LR-1C DISTRICT Lot Area Lot Width
Section 78-1403 – Structural Building Coverage:
Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage
Existing: 2,324 s.f. (15.5%)*
*According to Permit RAS22-000126
Section 78-1680 and 78-1700 – Hardcover Calculations:
The existing condition prior to the to-be-issued building permit RPS22-000126 is 4,4,650 square feet or
31.1% hardcover. The applicant is providing over 1,000 square feet of hardcover removals to reach a
conforming level of 25% for permit issuance.
Stormwater
Overlay District Total Area in
Zone
Allowed
Hardcover Existing Hardcover* Proposed Hardcover
Tier 1 14,926 s.f.
*According to Permit RAS22-000126
FILE # LA22-000036
19 September 2022
Page 3 of 6
Applicable Regulations:
Side Setback Variance (Section 78-350)
The existing home is located between 4.8 – 7.5 feet from the west side lot line. The required side setback for
this property is 7.5 feet. Due to the nature of the design, the proposed changes to the roof structure from a
hip roof on the street and lake sides to gable ends will increase the mass on each end within the
substandard side yard setback. A 2 foot overhang is permitted as long as the building meets the required
setback. It appears there may be additional massing impacts proposed in the side yard area on the west side
of the home (increased roof overhang, new shed roof over the kitchen window) however, the plans do not
clearly identify the existing conditions for comparison.
Average Lakeshore Setback Variance (Section 78-1279)
The aforementioned changes proposed to the roof structure from a hip roof on the street and lake sides to
gable ends will also increase the mass of the home encroaching within the average lakeshore setback.
Improvements within the average lakeshore setback are permitted with a maximum height of 42-inches
above existing grade. The proposed deck extends from the first floor and will be situated approximately ±6
feet above grade (the walking surface is 3.9 feet above grade on the west side plus a minimum of a 36”
railing). Approximately 19 feet of the deck’s total width is elevated above the lower level walkout on the
east side and is shown to be approximately 8.2 feet above grade (plus 36-inch railing).
The deck is shown to encroach into the average lakeshore setback between 18 feet on the west side and
15.5 feet on the east side.
Hardcover Variance (Section 78-1700)
As noted above, the applicant is showing over 1,000 square feet of hardcover removals to reach a
conforming level of 25% for their building permit issuance. Their variance request reflects an additional 223
square feet of hardcover to be added resulting in 26.48% hardcover.
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 applicant is
proposing to make improvements to the home on a residentially zoned property which is
FILE # LA22-000036
19 September 2022
Page 4 of 6
consistent with the intent of the ordinance. The hardcover level proposed is not consistent with
the hardcover regulations.
2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The variances resulting in improvements
to a home in a residential zone are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. However, the
proposed encroachments lakeward of the average lakeshore setback line and the hardcover level
proposed are not consistent with the comprehensive plan.
3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties.
a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by
the official controls; The applicant is proposing to use the property in a manner consistent
with the LR-1C district. Reasonable use of the property is afforded with the residential
building on the property and the permitted improvement of the addition. The structural
changes proposed within the average lakeshore setback resulting from the new gable roof
may not be reasonable as it will increase the mass of the home/roof which may impact
neighbors’ views of the lake. The deck and the required railings proposed within the
average lakeshore setback also limit the views of the lake from adjacent properties, and is
not reasonable.
b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The location
of the existing home on the property is the limiting factor and was not constructed by the
current owner; and
c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance to permit an
increase in hardcover over 25% as well as the overall massing volume of the home within
the side yard and average lakeshore setbacks has the potential to alter the character of
the neighborhood.
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 residential improvements are an allowed use in the LR-1C District.
However the hardcover level and encroachments into the average lakeshore setback are not
permitted within the ordinance.
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. There are a number of properties on Casco Point which are
situated nearly in line with neighboring homes similarly to the subject property. The conditions
applying to this property are not unique to the property.
9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is
located. The existing condition of the nonconforming home location on this property is not specific
to the property. The setback variance requested would be out of character and would limit the
light, air, and open space for the adjacent neighbors.
10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right of the applicant. The applicant states the project is necessary for the preservation of
FILE # LA22-000036
19 September 2022
Page 5 of 6
the owners’ property right. Staff finds there are alternative opportunities to expand the living
space of the home which would be more reasonable and would not require a setback variance.
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. The proposed hardcover level and
setback encroachments requested are not supported by practical difficulty and may be contrary to
the intent of the zoning chapter.
12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is
necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The proposed massing encroachment of the roof
reorientation within the substandard side yard setback and within the average lakeshore setback
over the existing footprint serves as a convenience to the applicant as they have reasonable use of
the property with the single family home. There are alternate methods of constructing the
additions without such a severe encroachment. Further, a grade-level patio is permitted within
the average lakeshore setback, the applicant’s choice to propose a deck resulting in more mass
within the setback is a convenience. With the applicant’s building permit plan they have achieved
a conforming hardcover level. Adjustments can be made to the scale/size of the addition to
accommodate new outdoor living space/hardcover.
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
Comments from the public have been received and are attached as Exhibit K. Most of the comments
received do not support the project.
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. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the essential
character of the neighborhood?
3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the impacts
created by the granting of the requested variance(s)?
4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application?
Planning Staff Recommendation
The applicant’s plans do not show the existing home structure to compare the massing increases/changes.
Staff requested an overlay plan for comparison, which was not submitted. Therefore staff is unable to fully
evaluate the potential impacts.
Staff recommends the applicant redesign the plans to limit or eliminate variances. Regarding the variances
requested to permit the new lakeside deck resulting in 26.48% hardcover where 25% is allowed, the
proposed garage addition (for RAS22-000126) should be adjusted to accommodate the additional hardcover
requested. Planning Staff recommends denial of the average lakeshore setback variance and hardcover
variance relating to the deck. The applicant has the option of reducing the hardcover and installing a grade-
level patio without variances.
The side yard setback variance involving the roof expansion may be reasonable if the encroachments do not
FILE # LA22-000036
19 September 2022
Page 6 of 6
further limit the light, air, and open space of the neighbors to the west. If the Commission identifies practical
difficulties which support the roof changes in the side yard area, the new encroachments should be limited
to the roof and any additional new impacts, such as roof overhangs and the possible new shed roof over
kitchen window, should be denied. The average lakeshore setback variance to change the hip configuration
to a gable thereby increasing the mass of the roof within the setback significantly is not supported by
practical difficulty. Staff recommends denial.
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A. Application & Narrative
Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form
Exhibit C. Existing Survey/Hardcover
Exhibit D. Proposed Survey/Site Plan
Exhibit E. Staff Annotated Survey
Exhibit F. Proposed Plans and Elevations
Exhibit G. Staff Annotated Plans
Exhibit H. Proposed Hardcover Calculations
Exhibit I. Aerial Photos
Exhibit J. Building Permit Packet RPS22-000126
Exhibit K. Public Comment
Exhibit L. Property Owners List
Exhibit M. Plat Map