Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.a. Cornell Variance EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Planning Commission Regular Meeting: August 25, 2020 AGENDA ITEM: 20-41-V Request by Brenda Cornell and Kevin Pommerening for a variance from the R1A rear yard setback standard. AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearing PREPARED BY: Anthony Nemcek, Planner AGENDA NO. 5.a. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution; Site Location; Site Aerial; Nonconforming Lots Exhibit; Site Plan APPROVED BY: KL RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion by the Planning Commission acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments to Adopt a Resolution Approving a Variance from the R1A-Low Density Residential Rear Yard Setback Standard for Accessory Structures from twenty-five (25) feet to fifteen (15) feet at 3115 144th Street West. SUMMARY The City received a request for a variance from the rear yard setback requirements for an accessory building in order to facilitate the construction of a 24’ x 24’ two car garage at 3115 144th Street West in the R1A-Low Density Residential zoning district. The applicant is requesting a variance that would reduce the minimum rear yard setback for an accessory structure from twenty-five (25) feet to fifteen (15) feet. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments approve the variance. Applicant and Owner: Brenda Cornell and Kevin Pommerening Location: 3115 144th Street West Area in Acres: .20 Acres Comp Guide Plan Designation: LDR-Low Density Residential Current Zoning: R1A-Low Density Residential BACKGROUND The subject parcel is located within the R1A-Low Density Residential Zoning District. This district is comprised of single-family neighborhoods that were platted prior to 1979 and do not conform to many of the setback standards in the R1 zoning districts. Most of the homes in this particular neighborhood, located adjacent to Downtown, feature detached garages. The subject parcel has an existing detached, single-stall garage that the applicant would like to replace with a two car garage. In order to maneuver a vehicle into a second stall that extends behind the house, the garage must be placed farther toward the rear of the lot. Additionally, because a slope exists along the western property line, the applicant is unable to take full advantage of the permitted five-foot side yard setback. The parcel is approximately 110’ feet deep, while the lot standard for depth is 125’. Many of the parcels near the subject property are 150’ deep and still have accessory buildings that do not meet the minimum rear yard setback. It is not unusual in the neighborhood in which the subject property is located for an accessory building to encroach upon the required rear yard setback as this area of the City was developed prior to the adoption of the current zoning standards. In fact, 25% of the properties within a two block radius of the subject property contain accessory buildings that encroach into the 25-foot rear yard setback. A map showing 2 these lots is included in the attachments. Many lots within the area have accessory structures much closer to the rear lot line than the applicant’s proposal. The properties adjacent to the subject property on the east and west sides are residential, while directly to the north of the subject property is a parking lot owned by the school district. Staff is supportive and recommends approval of a variance to reduce the rear yard setback for accessory structures from twenty-five (25) feet to fifteen (15) feet in order to construct a detached, two-stall garage. ISSUE ANALYSIS Variance Standards According to Section 11-12-2.G, there are five criteria for the Board of Appeals and Adjustments to review when considering a variance request. The five criteria used to assess each request along with staff’s findings for each are listed below. While weighing a variance request against these criteria, there are also two key issues to consider. The first is whether the variance request allows for reasonable use of the property. The second is whether the project can be redesigned to eliminate or reduce the need for a variance. The Board of Zoning Appeals must approve or deny each request based on findings related to each of the five standards. 1. The variance request is in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance. Finding: Staff finds that the request is in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance. Detached garages are accessory uses in the R1A zoning district. 2. The variance request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Finding: The site is designated as Low Density Residential. The variance request is consistent with that designation. 3. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. Finding: The proposed use is consistent with many others in the immediate vicinity and it is reasonable to expect that a single family home would have enclosed storage for two vehicles. The garage size of 24’ x 24’ is reasonable and not oversized. 4. There are unique circumstances to the property which are not created by the landowner. Finding: Staff finds that there are unique circumstances to the property in that, at 110’, the lot is shallower than the lot standard in the R1A zoning district. Staff also finds that the slope along the western boundary of the property requires the detached garage to be positioned partially behind the house. 5. Granting of the variance does not alter the essential character of the locality. Finding: The essential character of the locality would not be altered by granting the variance. Many other properties in the vicinity feature accessory buildings that encroach into the required rear setback. Because those structures were built prior to the adoption of the R1A zoning standards they are considered legally non-conforming. RECOMMENDATION 3 Based upon the information provided by the applicant, the criteria for issuance of a variance, and City support for enclosed, off-street parking, staff is supportive of the variance request. 1 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION BA2020-03 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM THE R1A-LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL REAR YARD SETBACK STANDARD FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, FROM TWENTY-FIVE (25) FEET TO FIFTEEN (15) FEET. WHEREAS, Brenda Cornell and Kevin Pemmerening, 3115 144th Street West, (the “Applicant”) has submitted an application to the City of Rosemount (the “City”) for a variance from the R1A- Low Density Residential rear yard setback standard for accessory structures from twenty-five (25) feet to fifteen (15) feet. WHEREAS, notice has been published, mailed and posted pursuant to the Rosemount Zoning Ordinance, Section 11-12-2; and WHEREAS, the Rosemount Board of Appeals and Adjustments held a public hearing for a variance from the 25’ rear yard setback to 15’ on August 25, 2020; and NOW, THEREFORE, based on the testimony elicited and information received, the Rosemount Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following: FINDINGS 1.That the procedures for obtaining said Variance are found in the Rosemount Zoning Ordinance, Section 11-12-2. 2.That all the submission requirements of said Section 11-12-2 have been met by the Applicant. 3.That the proposed variance will allow the construction of a detached, two-stall garage at 3115 144th Street West that is a legal non-conforming structure because it encroaches upon the rear yard setback required by the Zoning Ordinance. 4.That the Variance will be located on property legally described as follows: The east ½ of lots 10 and 11, Block 1, TTCONLEY’S ADDITION, Dakota County, Minnesota. 5.The variance request is in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance. Finding: Staff finds that the request is in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance. The R1A zoning district is intended to maintain the character of the older neighborhoods in Rosemount by eliminating nonconformities related to setbacks and other standards of the R1 zoning district. 2 6.The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Finding: The site is designated as Low Density Residential. The variance request is consistent with that designation. 7.The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. Finding: The proposed use is consistent with many others in the immediate vicinity and it is reasonable to expect that a single family home would have enclosed storage for two vehicles. 8.There are unique circumstances to the property which are not created by the landowner. Finding: Staff finds that there are unique circumstances to the property in that, at 110’, the lot is shallower than the lot standard in the R1A zoning district. Staff also finds that the slope along the western boundary of the property requires the detached garage to be positioned partially behind the house. 9.Granting of the variance does not alter the essential character of the locality. Finding: The essential character of the locality would not be altered by granting the variance. Many other properties in the vicinity feature accessory buildings that encroach into the required rear setback. Because those structures were built prior to the adoption of the R1A zoning standards they are considered legally non-conforming. CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION Based on the foregoing, the Applicant’s application for a Variance is granted, subject to the applicants receiving any required permits for the accessory structure. Passed and duly adopted this 25th day of August, 2020, by the Board of Appeals and Adjustments of the City of Rosemount, Minnesota. __________________________________ Melissa Kenninger, Chair ATTEST: ________________________________ Stacy Bodsberg Planning & Personnel Office Specialist 3