HomeMy WebLinkAboutLA18-000016 (1370 Cherry Pl) VAR Ex E PCSRDate Application Received: 2.19.18
Date Application Considered as Complete: 3.7.18
60-Day Review Period Expires: 5.6.18
To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members
Dustin Rief, City Administrator
From: Laura Oakden, Planner
Date: March 19, 2018
Subject: LA18-000016, Dale Gustafson o/b/o Erik Nafstad, 1370 Cherry Place, Variance,
Public Hearing
Background
The applicant has submitted an application to add retaining walls and landscaping to the
shoreline of the property at 1370 Cherry Place. The property abuts Lake Minnetonka. It has a
slope along the shoreline. There are currently stairs leading down the slope creating access to
the Lake. There is also an existing boat house they are proposing to retain. The applicant
proposes to build new stairs to the lake around the boat house and add retaining walls to
support the slope. This plan includes multiple retaining walls running along the stairs and
running along the slope.
LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Section 78-1680 and 78-1700 -Hardcover Calculations:
Overlay District Total Area in
Zone
Allowed
Hardcover
Existing
Hardcover
Proposed
Hardcover
Tier 1
Applicable Regulations:
Lake Setback Variance (Section 78-1279)
Retaining walls are not permitted within 75’ of the lake, therefore the applicant is requesting a
setback and hardcover variance. The applicant’s plan involves replacing the existing stairs,
replacing the existing retaining walls, and constructing additional retaining walls. The applicant
is hoping to proactively prevent any further erosion and potential failure of the lake yard with
tiered retaining walls to stabilize the area.
Governing Regulation: Variance (Section 78-123)
In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the
Application Summary: The applicant is requesting to construct a retaining wall in the 75 foot
lakeyard setback
Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends for the Planning Commission
to discuss the practical difficulties for retaining walls in the lakeyard.
LA18-000016
3.19.18
Page 2 of 4
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. 2, 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 §462.537 Subd. 6(2) variances shall only be permitted when:
1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance.
Preserving and protecting the existing slope in the lake yard is in harmony with the
intent of the ordinance. The proposed retaining walls will be screened with vegetation
to maintain the rural nature of the lake. This will likely not alter the essential character
of the locality.
2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan.. The proposed retaining walls
are recessed into the earth to limit their visual impacts and support the stairs and slope
on the property, maintaining the rural character of the lake.
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 owner proposes to install Improvements
which are residential in nature and reasonable from a residential scope.
b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner;
The owner has proposed a solution which will protect against failure of the
slope. The existing slope of the lake yard was not a result of actions by the
owner and
c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance to
permit structure within the 75-foot setback will help to maintain the existing
slope and character of the area.
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. 2, 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 the use for a single family home with stairs
for lake access is an allowed use in the LR-1B District.
LA18-000016
3.19.18
Page 3 of 4
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 slope of the property combined with
the pre-existing improvements is a unique condition to the subject property.
9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which
the land is located. The subject property’s specific slope is beginning to erode and
stairs have become unsafe, creating conditions which do not apply to adjacent
properties.
10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant. Granting a lake setback variance to allow
the retaining walls within the 75-foot lake setback is reasonable and necessary to
preserve the property rights of the owner and supported by the vulnerable lake yard
slope on the property.
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
lakeyard setback variance allowing the retaining walls within the 75-foot lake setback
will not adversely impact health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any way be contrary
to the ordinances.
12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant,
but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The applicant has demonstrated
practical difficulties which support granting the lakeyard setback variance to permit
the construction of the tiered retaining walls and in-kind replacement of the stairs
within 75 feet of the OHWL.
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.
Septic System Status
The property is connected to sanitary sewer.
Practical Difficulties Statement
Applicant has completed the Practical Difficulties Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and
should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application.
Practical Difficulties Analysis
Staff is suggesting approval of the project with screening of all of the retaining walls be required
to preserve the natural look of the shoreline when viewed from the lake.
Public Comments
To date, one comment against development in the lake yard in general has been received.
Issues for Consideration
1. Has the applicant met the standards of practical difficulties to warrant a variance?
2. There are many variations of design to provide stair access to the lake. Has the
LA18-000016
3.19.18
Page 4 of 4
applicant made an attempt to meet the city standards for stairs access to the lake?
3. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the
essential character of the neighborhood?
4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application?
Planning Staff Recommendation
Access to the lake is activity contemplated by the zoning ordinance. However, there are other
options to stone stairs built into the steep slope, including wood stairs on pillars, in this case
requiring additional hardcover in the lake yard. The Planning Commission should discuss whether
the practical difficulty standards are met with the proposal. If the commission finds practical
difficulties apply then a motion should be made for approval of the variance request.
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A. Application
Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form
Exhibit C. Existing & Proposed Survey/Site Plan
Exhibit D. Property Owners List and Map
Exhibit E. Public Comment