Loading...
ITEM 4.1 Schultz VarianceW OtCI�egoF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT INFORMATION Request for City Council Action ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: REQUESTOR: MEETING DATE: Planning City Planner Licht 11 April 2016 PRESENTER(s): REVIEWED BY: ITEM #: City Planner Licht City Administrator Johnson 4.1— Schulz Variance AGENDA ITEM DETAILS RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends approval of a 10 foot front yard setback variance for construction of a single family dwelling. ARE YOU SEEKING APPROVAL OF A CONTRACT? No. BACKGROUND/JUSTIFICATION: IS A PUBLIC HEARING REQUIRED? Held by Planning Commission 7 March 2016. Mr. Rich Schulz is proposing to build a single family dwelling served by on -site septic and well on Lot 16, Block 2, Autumn Woods, which is located north of CSAH 36 and east of Queens Avenue on 57th Street. The subject site was final platted in 29 March 1988 by Wright County (within Frankfort Township) and is currently vacant. City staff has addressed questions for several years regarding the buildability of the lot, which is effected by a wetland and steep slopes, indicating that a site plan with a septic system and building foundation compliant with setback requirements is necessary. Mr. Schulz has submitted a septic design prepared by a licensed septic installer and site plan for the subject site to allow for construction of a single family home constructed as a single story dwelling with walk out basement and attached garage with a 2,800 square foot footprint. Due to the steep slopes of the subject site and to accommodate the required septic system, the house is proposed to have a front yard setback from 571h Street of 20 feet, whereas the Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front yard setback of 35 feet. Mr. Schulz has submitted application for a variance to allow the encroachment into the required front yard setback for construction of the proposed house as shown on the site plan in accordance with Section 20-6-4 of the Zoning Ordinance. A public hearing to consider the application was held by the Planning Commission at their meeting on 7 March 2016. Mr. Schulz was present at the public hearing to represent his request. The public hearing was attended by several property owners surrounding the subject site opposed to the variance request. The Planning Commission discussion of the variance focused on consideration of the minimum variance necessary to allow reasonable use of the property balancing the environmental constraints of the subject site with the aesthetic concerns of the surrounding property owners. The public hearing was closed and the Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of a variance to allow construction of a single family dwelling with a 25 foot setback from the front lot line. The approved minutes of the Planning Commission meeting are attached. Mr. Schulz provided additional information in response to the recommendation of the Planning Commission. This information includes a letter from the Wright County Assessors' office regarding property values, an aerial photograph depicting other properties with less than a 35 foot front setback within the Wokson Hills and Autumn Woods subdivisions based on information from the Wright County Assessor's Office, a letter from the licensed septic designer and additional site photos. We have the following comments: ■ City staff advises the City Council not to consider any information related to property values in their decision as this is not one of the criteria outlined in Section 20-6-3 of the Zoning Ordinance. ■ City staff reviewed the property files for the lots shown on the exhibit, but the former Frankfort Township records are mostly incomplete. Based on the property files and Wright County GIS data, City staff confirmed that the lots identified as #1, #2, and #8 have the principal building setback less than 35 feet from the right-of-way. City staff did further research regarding the setback requirements in effect under Frankfort Township and found that a 65 foot setback from the centerline of the roadway was required. Based on a 66 foot right-of-way, the minimum setback from the front property line would be 32 feet. Our own analysis of the variance request was that there is no clear building line along 57th Street that would be negatively affected by the variance. The house to the west fronts Qulliey Avenue and is setback approximately 60 feet from 57th Street and the house to the east, though it is setback approximately 65 feet or more from the right-of-way, is located along the cul-de-sac radius and would be north of the front line of the proposed house on the subject site. ■ The letter from the septic designer addresses the effects of a 25 foot setback versus a 20 foot setback indicating there would be additional tree loss to the south of the proposed house and that maintenance of the septic system would be more complicated. The applicant is requesting the City Council consider their original request for a 20 foot variance. City staff has drafted findings of fact consistent with the recommendation of the Planning Commission for consideration by the City Council. As noted, the public hearing has been closed and in accordance with that process, no additional public comment should be taken. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: ❑ ATTACHED ❑ NONE A. Planning Report dated 2 March 2016 B. Engineering memorandum dated March 1, 2016 C. Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of March, 7 2016 D. Applicant letter dated April 5, 2016 D. Findings of Fact and Decision POSSIRLE MOTION Please word motion as you would like it to appear in the minutes. Motion to approve a variance to allow a 25 foot front yard setback for Lot 16, Block 2 Autumn Woods subject to the Findings of Fact and Decision dated April 7, 2016. ► • tie tRI FUNDING: BUDGETED: ❑ YES NO NA ACTION TAKEN o APPROVED AS REQUESTED ❑ DENIED ❑ TABLED ❑ OTHER (List changes) COMMENTS: TPC3601 Thurston Avenue N, Suite 100 Anoka, MN 65303 Phone: 763.231.5840 Facsimile: 763.427.0520 TPCg Planni ngCo. com PLANNING REPORT TO: Otsego Planning Commission FROM: Daniel Licht, AICP DATE: 2 March 2016 ACTION DATE: 16 April 2016 RE: Otsego —Schultz Variance TPC FILE: 101.02 BACKGROUND Mr. Rich Schultz has acquired Lot 16, Block 2, Autumn Woods, which is located north of CSAH 36 and east of Queens Avenue on 57th Street. The subject site was final platted in 29 March 1988 by Wright County (within Frankfort Township) and is currently vacant. City staff has addressed questions for several years regarding the buildability of the lot, which is effected by a wetland and steep slopes, indicating that a site plan with a septic system and building foundation compliant with setback requirements is necessary. The property owner has submitted a septic design prepared by a licensed septic installer and site plan for the subject site to allow for construction of a single family home constructed as a single story dwelling with walk out basement and attached garage with a 2,800 square foot footprint. Due to the steep slopes of the subject site and to accommodate the required septic system, the house is proposed to have a front yard setback from 57th Street of 20 feet, whereas the Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front yard setback of 35 feet. The property owner has submitted application for a variance to allow the encroachment into the required front yard setback for construction of the proposed house as shown on the site plan in accordance with Section 20-6-4 of the Zoning Ordinance. A public hearing to consider the application has been noticed for the Planning Commission meeting on 7 March 2016. Exhibits: A. Site Location B. Site Plan ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan. The 2012 Comprehensive Plan guides the subject site for low density residential uses within the east sewer district. Sanitary sewer and water utilities are not currently available to the subject site and Autumn Woods was final platted based upon provision of on -site septic system and well services. The proposed single family home is consistent with the land uses guided by the Comprehensive Plan for the subject site. Zoning. The subject site is zoned R-3, Residential Long Range Urban Service District. The R-3 District allows for single family residential dwellings as a permitted use. Lots within the R-3 District are expected to be served by on -site septic systems and wells. The proposed single family home is consistent with the uses allowed by the Zoning Ordinance for development of the subject site. Surrounding Uses. The subject site is surrounded by the following existing and planned land uses shown the table below. The subject site is the only lot within Autumn Woods that has not been developed with a single family home. The proposed single family home will be compatible with the other single family homes built on lots surrounding the subject site. Direction Land Use Plan Zoning Map Existing Use North LD Residential R-3 District " Single family East LD Residential R-3 District Single family South LD Residential R-3 District Single family West LD Residential R-3 District Single family Lot Requirements. Lots within the R-3 District are subject to the minimum requirements outlined in the table below. The subject site complies with the minimum lot requirements of the R-3 District. Min. Lot Area Min. Lot Width Required 1.00ac. 150ft. Existing 1.08ac. 195ft. Setbacks. The table below identifies the minimum setback requirements applicable to principal buildings constructed on lots within the R-3 District. Front (north) Side Rear (South) East West Required 35ft. 10ft. 10ft 20ft. Proposed 20ft. 42ft.1 69ft. 123ft. P The location of the proposed single family home complies with applicable setback requirements except for the front yard setback; the proposed house encroaches 15 feet into the required front yard setback. The proposed house location is setback 20 feet from the front lot line and is 36 feet from 57th Street at its closest point within the public right-of-way at the start of the cul- de-sac turnaround and 45 feet from the main street section. The location of the proposed single family home is necessitated by the steep slopes and extent of wetland area encumbering the center and south portions of the subject site. The topography of the site rises from a pond at the rear of the lot with an elevation of 890 feet to the high point at the north-northeast corner of the lot at 919 feet, a 29 foot vertical change in elevation over a horizontal distance of 120 feet, or 24 percent slope. It is not possible to locate a single family dwelling upon the lot with the required septic system, including primary and secondary drain field sites, and comply with the setback requirements of the R-3 District given the topography of the site. The proposed walk -out type structure serves to minimize the impact of the development on the slopes. The proposed site plan will also minimize tree loss on the subject site including areas south and east of the proposed single family house location where the existing vegetation is most dense. As the subject site was final platted in 1988 the setback requirements from wetlands established by Section 20-16-5.F.4 of the Zoning Ordinance do not apply, but no wetland encroachments are allowed. The rear line of the proposed house is setback 33 feet from the line of the drainage and utility easement shown on the submitted survey that overlays the pond on the property and the contours indicating the extent of the pond/wetland, which the house will not approach based on the depth of the house from the front lot line. The boundaries of the wetland will need to be delineated and shown on a revised survey. Access. The subject site is accessed from 57th Street, which is a rural section cul-de-sac street serving three single family dwellings and the subject site. Based on Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) estimates of 10 trips per day for single family homes, 57th Street has only 30 trips per day, which would increase to 40 trips per day with the addition of the single family house on the subject site. Traffic with construction upon 57th Street is well within the 3,000 trip per day capacity of a local street. Section 20-21-4.H.11.a of the Zoning Ordinance allows one access to the subject site from 57th Street. The site plan indicates one driveway is to be constructed to 57th Street accessing a side - loaded attached garage. The side -loaded configuration of the attached garage results in a 54 foot deep driveway off of the public street. The depth and configuration of the proposed driveway will allows for vehicles backing out of the garage to turn and enter the street in a forward direction with enough depth for adequate visibility, and with space for off-street parking upon the apron, minimizing the effect of the reduced front yard setback of the principal dwelling, in contrast to if a front -loaded garage were constructed. The driveway will likely require retaining walls on its south and east sides. Any retaining wall more than four feet in height must be designed by a civil engineer and must have a fence barrier at the top of the structure. 3 The width of the proposed driveway is 10 feet within the public right-of-way and complies with the 30 foot wide limit established by Section 20-21-4.H.7.a of the Zoning Ordinance. The driveway is also setback 10 feet from the nearest side lot line (east), which exceeds the five foot setback required by Section 20-21-4.H.8 of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 20-21-4.H.12.b of the Zoning Ordinance requires the driveway to be paved with asphalt, concrete or paver bricks. Utilities. The applicant has submitted aseptic system design for the on -site system to be installed to serve the proposed house, which was prepared by a licensed designer. The septic system, including primary and secondary drain field sites, is shown on the submitted site plan. Also shown on the submitted site plan is a proposed well location to the north of the single family home within the front yard. The proposed septic design and utility locations shown on the site plan have been reviewed by the Building Inspector and found to comply with Chapter 4, Section 3 of the City Code regulating subsurface sewage treatment (septic) systems. Accessory Buildings. Section 20-18-2.C.6 of the Zoning Ordinance would allow for construction of up to 1,080 square feet of detached accessory building area upon the subject site. The ability to construct a detached accessory building is subject to compliance with the setback requirements set forth in Section 20-18-2.C.3.b of the Zoning Ordinance. The inability to construct a detached accessory building or the maximum area of detached accessory buildings allowed by the Zoning Ordinance is not a stipulation for reasonable use of the property, and our office does not foresee a circumstance whereby a variance would be justified to allow construction of a detached accessory building upon the subject site. We recommend that a condition of approval of the requested variance be that any detached accessory structures comply with the performance standards of Section 20-18-2.0 of the Zoning Ordinance. Variance. The subject site is entitled to a reasonable use of as an existing lot of record approved by Wright County in 1988. Where the strict application of the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance precludes a reasonable use of the property, such action may be considered to be a government taking and Minnesota Statutes 462.357, Subd. 6 and Section 6 of the Zoning Ordinance provide opportunity for relief through a variance from the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 20-6-3 of the Zoning Ordinance states that an application for variance is not to be approved unless a finding is made that failure to grant the variance will result in practical difficulties. Practical difficulties are defined as the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Chapter and include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Moreover, Section 20-6-3.13 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that the applicant must also demonstrate that the request satisfies the following criteria: That the variance would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Comment: The Comprehensive Plan establishes as policy that development regulations, such as setbacks, are to be applied consistently and uniformly. Variances are only to be approved in unique circumstances whereby the physical characteristics of a property prevent reasonable use of a property that complies with the requirements of M the Zoning Ordinance. The unique physical characteristics of the subject site warrant approval of a variance to allow for development of the subject site as guided by the Comprehensive Plan and consistent with development of surrounding lots within the some subdivision. Furthermore, granting of the variance preserves and protects the existing wetland and steep slopes within the subject site consistent with the policies outlined in the Comprehensive Plan to prevent impacts from development to natural features, such as wetlands, which perform important environmental functions in their natural state and restrict development on slopes identified as potential problem areas due to erosion. 2. That the variance would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of [the Zoning Ordinance]. Comment: The intent of the R-3 District is to allow for single family uses served by on -site septic systems. The requested variance will allow for development of subject site with a single family home served by an on -site septic system that complies with the City Code, the maximum possible front yard, and access and off-street parking from a public street consistent with requirements for single family uses. Based on these considerations, the proposed single family home and site plan and approval of the requested variance are consistent with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. That the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the current or any previous landowner. Comment: The practical difficultly in developing the subject site in compliance with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance is due to the extent to which the subject site is uniquely encumbered by wetlands and steep slopes. 4. That the purpose of the variance is not exclusively economic consideration. Comment: The application for variance is based upon the physical characteristics and limitations of the subject site and not economic considerations. 5. That the granting of the variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located. Comment: The granting of the variance will allow reasonable use of the property for construction of a single family dwelling consistent with the character of development of other lots within Autumn Woods subdivision. 6. That the requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty. Comment; The variance requested is the minimum necessary to overcome the practical difficulties in developing the subject site and allow reasonable use of the property as permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION The existing wetlands and steep topography encumbering the subject site create a practical difficulty in constructing a single family home upon the lot that complies with applicable setback requirements and provision of on -site utilities for reasonable use of the lot as guided by the Comprehensive Plan and permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant has, in our office's opinion, satisfied the criteria established by the Zoning Ordinance for approval of a variance. We recommend approval of the requested variance as outlined below. POSSIBLE ACTIONS A. Motion to recommend approval of a variance to allow a 20 foot front yard setback for Lot 16, Block 2 Autumn Woods based on a finding that the applicant has demonstrated that the request satisfies the criteria outlined by Section 20-6-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, subject to the following conditions: 1. The subject site shall be developed in accordance with submitted site plan dated 02/15/16. 2. Any retaining wall over four (4) feet in height shall be an engineered design with a fence at the top of the structure and is subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. The septic system design shall be subject to review and approval of the Building Inspector and require a permit prior to construction. 4. Any detached accessory structures constructed upon the property shall comply with all applicable the performance standards of Section 20-18-2.0 of the Zoning Ordinance. 5. The boundaries of the wetland within the property shall be delineated and shown on a revised survey, subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 6 B. Motion to deny the application based on a finding that the request is inconsistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and that the applicant has not demonstrated that the request satisfies the criteria outlined in Section 20-6-3 of the Zoning Ordinance. C. Motion to table. C. Lori Johnson, City Administrator Tami Loff, City Clerk Ron Wagner, City Engineer Andy MacArthur, City Attorney Rich Schultz, applicant 7 J U v Q YU z > r = y J Main Office: 4 0 HCz�(cZIISC�n 3601 Thurston Avenue, Anoka, MN 55303 IIIIAnderson Phone: 763/427-5860 Fax: 763/427-0520 www.haa-ine.com MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council CC: Lori Johnson, City Administrator Tami Loff, City Clerk Dan Licht, AICP, City Planner Andy MacArthur, City Attorney Rich Schultz, Builder Dennis Taylor, Taylor Land Surveying, Inc. FROM: Ronald J. Wagner, P.E., City Engineer DATE: March 1, 2016 RE: Site Plan Review (REVISED) — Lot 16, Block 2, Autumn Woods We have reviewed the site plan and have the following comments: 1. The principal building & septic system show a 20' setback form the street right-of-way. 35' set back is required unless given a variance. 2. The emergency over flow (EOF) of the pond must be shown and must be a minimum of 1.5' below that elevation of the lowest opening of the principal building. It appears the lowest opening will be well above the 1.5' of freeboard required from the EOF. 3. The proposed well location must be shown and must be a minimum of 50' from any proposed or existing septic system area. 4. Substantial retaining walls for driveway and house (elevation 2' to 12' tall for driveway and 2' to 5' for principal structure lowest floor) will be required and must be designed by PE licensed in the State of Minnesota. The septic system must meet State rules. The building department has apparently reviewed and approved. Recommendation The lot is a difficult property to develop. It appears with the allowance of variances for front yard setbacks, the design can meet all of the standards. C:\Users\Tami\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\L723WOXW\OT2500- 2016 Autumn WoodsR.docx OTSEGO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OTSEGO PRAIRIE CENTER March 7, 2016 7:00 PM Call to Order. Chair Black called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. Roll Call: Chair Pam Black; Commissioners: David Thompson, Steve Schuck, Roger Mord, Richard Nichols, Aaron Stritesky, Jim Kolles and Alan Offerman. City Council: Vern Heidner. Staff: Daniel Licht, City Planner, Ron Wagner, City Engineer and Connie Schwecke, Administrative Assistant. 1. Annual Business: 1.1 Election of the 2016 Planning Commission Chair & Vice -Chair. Commissioner Nichols nominated Pam Black as Chair for 2016/2017. Seconded by Commissioner Stritesky. All in favor. Motion carried. Commissioner Nichols nominated Dave Thompson as Vice -Chair for 2016/2017. Seconded by Commissioner Stritesky. All in favor. Motion carried. 2. Announcements: City Planner Licht stated that provided on the dais are comments received regarding Item 4.3 on the agenda, which are to be included in the official record of the public hearing. 3: Consider the following minutes: 3.1 February 1, 2016 Planning Commission Meeting. Commissioner Schuck requested correction of item 3.2 to read Commissioner Thompson. Commissioner Thompson motioned to approve amended minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Schuck. All in favor. Motion carried. 4. Public Hearin item: tem: 4.1 Riverpoint 6th Addition: A Planned Unit Development -Conditional Use Permit (PUD-CUP) allowing a lot without direct access to a public street. B. Preliminary and Final Plat for one single family lot. City Planner Licht presented the Planning Report. Jeff Busch, 12830 43rd NE St Michael, who is the applicant, had no additional comments on staff report. Otsego Planning Commission March 7, 2016 Page 2 Chair Black opened the Public Hearing at 7:12 PM. Rob Lokhurst, 17021 59th St NE Otsego, stated he owned property east of Mr. Busch's property. He had concerns of rain water run off eroding the driveway and asked what the plans for drainage would be. City Engineer Wagner stated that the driveway would be substantial with a fourteen foot wide, four inch layer of crushed aggregate, four inch layer of class five and a two inch layer of asphalt with an eighteen inch culvert running underneath. The driveway will be tipped north with water running down to culvert and sloped away from Mr. Lokhurst's property. City Engineer Wagner also stated that further up the slope of the driveway a drop structure would be placed to prevent runoff. Mr. Lokhurst asked who would be responsible if there was any damage to his property or utility easement during development and construction. City Engineer Wagner stated that the work will be done in the utility easement and any damaged on the property or easement would be repaired by the applicant and not Mr. Lokhurst's responsibility. Mr. Lokhurst was also concerned if development would stop and not be completed, would it be his responsibility to return the unfinished driveway back to sod. City Planner Licht explained that the developer would need to provide an financial security that would provide funding if the developer abandons the project so that the City would have funds to restore the property. Commissioner Thompson questioned if development would occur to the north of the property, where would 59th Street go. City Planner Licht stated when Lennar revised Riverpointe Fifth Addition, they prepared a ghost plat where 59th Street goes uphill to the north. Property owner to the north would be required to allow street access to the subject site. Commissioner Schuck asked who would be responsible to restore the abandoned driveway. City Planner stated it would be covered under private easement and required to be removed by the property owner. Mr. Lokhurst questioned who would be responsible for the removal of the driveway. Otsego Planning Commission March 7, 2016 Page 3 City Planner Licht stated it would be the owner of Riverpoint 6th Addition Commissioner Mord question if police and fire equipment would have access to the driveway at the projected grad elevation. City Engineer Wagner stated yes, they would have the ability to access the house, with the grade elevation at 12% and there would be a flat area at the top adjacent to the garage. Commissioner Thompson commented that the fire hydrant is at the cul-de-sac and the fire hoses would run up the driveway. Chair Black closed the Public Hearing at 7:27 PM. Commissioner Thompson motioned to recommend to the City Council approval of a preliminary/final plat and PUD-CUP for Riverpointe 6th Addition, subject to the ten conditions. Seconded by Commissioner Mord. All in favor. Motion carried. 4.2 Lahn: A Zoning Map amendment rezoning from A-1 District to R-5 District. B. Planned Unit Development — Conditional Use Permit (PUD-CUP) and Preliminary Plat of 345 single family lots. City Planner Licht presented the Planning Report. Paul Tabone, Lennar Corporation, 16305 36th Ave N Plymouth. He thanked the City for working with them through this process. He stated that Lennar would be developing 345 homes on 247 acres and starting the first phase in late spring. He in three housing types; discovery home, landmark series and patio homes. Mr. Tabone said that they agree with the recommendations in the staff report. Chair Black opened the Public Hearing at 7:51 PM. Ben Cyr, 16825 53rd St Otsego, had concerns whenWright County raised the bend on CSAH 36. He stated the traffic is extremely fast and that last year there were three accidents on his property. He also stated that he has problems with trespassers who walk to the river on his property and leave garbage. He asks the City to move his mailbox to his side of property because of the difficulty of crossing CSAH 36 due to the Otsego Planning Commission March 7, 2016 Page 4 high volume and speed of the traffic. He also asked the City to reduce the speed limit on CSAH 36. City Planner Licht stated that City staff can contact the Rogers Post Office to request a change of the post box location. City Planner Licht also stated City staff would also advise Wright County regarding speeding concerns on CSAH 36. Jason Pebul, 17396 56th NE Otsego, stated that CSAH 36 traffic lanes are not wide enough and that on a daily basis, he sees people crossing the traffic lanes. He also stated concerns about the odor coming from the wastewater treatment facility and said he was touring the plant next week. City Engineer Wagner explained that the treatment facility is only using 25% of capacity now and with the new development would only increase 6% to a 31% capacity. Mr. Pebul asked if the City could do a study to see if the smell was coming from the treatment plant. He also asked if the City would extend the distance of 350 feet to notify people of new development. City Planner Licht stated that the City Council is currently involved in the wastewater treatment facility operations issue and that staff would forward his concerns on to them. City Planner Licht also explained that the 350 feet notification is required by state law and the City follows that limit for consistency.. Brandon Wisner, 5886 Rawlings Ave NE Otsego, asked for clarification of wetland restorations along CSAH 36 that may affect plans for a trail along the roadway. City Engineer Wagner stated the developer would need to maintain a corridor for the trail along CSAH 36. City Planner Licht added that all grading, drainage and eroision control issues are subject to review and approval by City Engineer and these conditions give the City oversight. Mr. Wisner had concerns with trails being both private and public. He asked if one trail would be considered to cut down costs and questioned if the trail would loop to the corridor for better access. City Planner Licht stated theCity has planned regional connections and will work with developer to for trails from CSAH 36 to Randolph consistent with the Future Parks and Trails Plan. He also stated that all streets have sidewalks on one side. There will be additional trail connections with future development. Otsego Planning Commission March 7, 2016 Page 5 Mr. Wisner had concerns with the flood plain and flood way to the south of the development. City Engineer Wagner stated the south pond does not receive any water and the east pond, in the preliminary plan, is shown outside current flood way. Commissioner Nichols had concerns of the home on the steep river bank off of County Road 36 and questioned if there were plans to stabilize the bank. City Planner Licht stated that the City has a lift station just to the west and would need to stabilize the bank from erosion. City Engineer Wagner agreed and stated that the bank would be piled (armored) in that area to stop erosion as part of the grading plan for development of the subject site south of CSAH 36. Chair Black closed the Public Hearing at 8:17 PM. Commissioner Thompson asked to clarify if it was a thirty foot garage setback. City Planner Licht said yes. Commissioner Thompson had concern on the proposed 55 foot wide lot sizes south of CSAH 36 where they do not back up to a stormwater basin or wetland outlot. City Planner Licht asked the applicant if the smaller lots had the narrow townhomes planned as HOA maintained detached townhomes and Mr. Tabone said yes. Commissioner Nichols motioned to recommend to the City Council approval of a Zoning Mapiamendment rezoning the subject site from A- 1 District to R-5 District based on a finding that the request is consistent with the criteria outlined in section 20-3-2.P of the Zoning Ordinance. Seconded by Commissioner Stritesky. All in favor. Motion carried. Commissioner Nichols motioned to recommend to the City Council approval of a preliminary plat, PUD-CUP and negative declaration on the need for an EIS, subject to thirteen conditions and condition #5 amended: Otsego Planning Commission March 7, 2016 Page 6 S. PID 118-802-0011300 must be provided access to Road 6, made part of the development, or Outlot H shall be deeded to the owner of the exception parcel at the time the right-of-way for Road 6 is final platted. Seconded by Commissioner Kolles. All in favor. Motion carried. 4.3 Schulz: A Variance on future Planning Commission Aaenda items. City Planner Licht presented the Planning Report. Mr. Richard Schulz, 19173 Zane St Elk River, applicant, thanked City staff for working with him. He stated he would work with all the challenges and was looking forward to continuing with this project. Chair Black opened the Public Hearing at 8:42 PM. Rich Martin 16861 57th St NE Otsego, asked the commissioners to refer to his letter. He questioned the setback variance. He believes this setback would change the character of neighborhood and asked the Commissioners not to accept this variance. City Planner Licht explained the development review process and that City staff reviewed the application material and site plans based on our professional experience and recommends approval of a variance because of the constraints to the property. Mr. Martin stated the house could be setback to 35 feet requirement by building retaining walls and adding fill. City Planner Licht stated that construction of the retaining walls would cause site alterations which would impact the septic site, steep slopes and wetlands on the property. Mr. Martin asked the Commissioners to deny the variance. Lyn Neutgens, 16871 57th St NE Otsego, stated that she agreed with Mr. Martin's comments and in their cul-de-sac of three homes, this proposal of the home being so close to the road would significantly impact the neighborhood and would be aesthetically unattractive. Thomas Kennedy, 16820 56th St NE Otsego, questioned why Mr. Schulz was clearing and tearing down trees. Otsego Planning Commission March 7, 2016 Page 7 City Planner Licht stated the owner has right to tear down trees at any time. Commissioner Thompson questioned where Mr. Kennedy's property is in relation to the applicant. Mr. Kennedy stated that his property is to south of Mr. Schulz. Mike Wiggins, 16860 56th St NE Otsego, stated his concern of the environmental impact of the property. Kevin Brenny 16824 57tn sr NE Otsego, stated that the existing homes in the area are all setback and ascetically pleasing. Mr.Brenny felt that having one house in the area so close to the road might decrease the value of the other homes and he asked the Commissioners to deny the variance. Commissioner Nichols questioned how the the request for a twenty foot setback variance was determined. City Planner Licht stated it related to elevation of the garage floor one foot over the street elevation and the topography of site. Commissioner Nicholas questioned if a proposed house plan with footprint of 35' x 80' had been turned in with the application. City Planner Licht said no. Commissioner Nichols asked Mr. Schulz if he had a house plan. Mr. Schulz stated that this was the proposed footprint according to the surveyor and he was working with an architect to guarantee that his concept plan would meet all the City requirements. Mr. Schulz also said he was very conscience of the wetlands. Commissioner Nichols asked if Mr. Schulz would consider moving the setback five more feet. Mr. Schulz stated he would consider any option if the contractor stated it was more feasible. Commissioner Mord questioned if Mr. Schulz had talked to the architect about the 35 foot setback before he purchased the property. Mr. Schulz said yes. Otsego Planning Commission March 7, 2016 Page 8 Commissioner Stritesky asked the size of your house plan. Mr. Schulz stated it will be 1,800 square feet on the main floor with a three car attached garage. Commissioner Nichols asked Mr. Schulz if he would be agreeable to table this until he talked to his architect to come back with a plan that was further back from the road. Mr. Schulz stated he did not want to table this request because he wanted to stay on track with his project. City Planner Licht said that the Planning Commission has the option of recommending approval of a different setback with a variance or tabling the application for more information. Commissioner Kolles stated that by adding five feet to the proposed setback, he would be more comfortable with the distance from the street. Nan Martin, 16861 57th St NE Otsego, thanked the Commissioners for hearing their concerns and asked the Commissioners to please consider denying this request. Mr. Martin reminded the Commissioners that all the houses had a 35 foot setback and asked the commissioners again to deny the request. Chair Black closed the Public Hearing at 9:37 PM. Commissioner Nichols motioned to recommend to the City Council approval of a variance to allow a 25 foot front yard setback for Lot 16, Block 2 Autumn Woods based on a finding that the applicant has demonstrated that the request satisfies the criteria outlined by Section 20-6-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, subject to the following five conditions. Seconded by Commissioner Kolles. All in favor. Motion carried. 5 Update on City Council actions, CM Heidner gave an update to the Commissioners on City Council actions. 6 Update on future Planning Commission Agenda items. March 21, 2016 Frankfort Application. 7. Adjourn, Otsego Planning Commission March 7, 2016 Page 9 Commissioner Stritesky motioned to adjourn. Seconded by Commissioner Thompson. All in favor. Motion carried. Adjourned at 9:46 PM. Pam Black, Chair ATTEST: JUV—_,Vv �4 Tam! Loff, City Clerk Written by: Connie Schwecke, Administrative Assistant To: Honorable Mayor & City Council From: Rich Schulz Date: April 5, 2016 Subject: Variance Request I am writing to request your consideration to reinstate the original recommendation for the original 20 foot front yard setback variance on Lot 16, Block 2, Autumn Woods - PID#118-135-002160. I have been working with Otsego city staff since mid January 2016 to build my final home at the property listed above; the city staff were thorough in discussions regarding development challenges of the property. The planning report submitted by Dan Licht on March 7, 2016 is in favor of granting the front yard setback of 20 feet. The site plan meets and exceeds all areas guided by the comprehensive plan and permitted by the zoning ordinance. The planning commission heard from a few surrounding neighbors who voiced personal concerns on the following three subjects: • Decreased neighboring property values • No other homes are placed this close to a public street • Loss of privacy & impact on a wetland I have enclosed factual documents and colored photos to provide an accurate perspective regarding my property that contain information related to the three topics of concern. After your review, I am asking for your consideration to reinstate the original 20 foot front yard setback variance recommendation with consideration on all of the factual information related to the property including the original recommendation from the city planner, city engineer, and city inspector. Your consideration and time are greatly appreciated. Sincerely, <--P? (- 4 -5-C � �" Anthony P. Rasmuson Wright County Assessor Wright County Government Center 10 2nd Street NW, Room 100 Buffalo, MN 55313-1183 Phone: (763) 682-7367 / (763) 682-7368 1 (800) 362-3667 FAX: (763) 684-4553 www. co. Wright. mn. us March 30, 2016 RE: 118-135-002160 To Whom It May Concern; In the matter of parcel 118-135-002160, located in Autumn Woods subdivision, and weather a setback variance for new construction would impact the value of existing properties in the area. Autumn Woods is a large lot subdivision with on -site sewer and water. Otsego has many similar subdivisions. After an examination of the sales in these areas the appraiser has found no evidence that a variance of the front setback has any impact on the value of neighboring properties. Mike Michael Vanderlinden, AMA Wright County Assessors' Office City of Otsego (763)682-7366 michael.vanderlinden@co.wright.mn.us t• i M w z L LO • 00 IVA r�0 0 0 ai o� 0 o 0 o O . r' ro [ Jam' is v n ro c / 0 0 0 0 N N O> ro E V J I r W z jo m 4-1 �Z Cl) uO LO : rn 0) cc N � cn 0 O O O C7 Companies, Inc. 13792 247th Avenue - Zimmerman, MN 55398 Phone (763) 274-0925 Fax (763) 274-0928 ROLL -OFFS SEPTIC SYSTEMS * EXCAVATING LANDSCAPING * DEMOLITION Rich Schulz Date 3/ 16/ 16 Job Lot 16 Block 2 Autumn Woods Wright County A site visit was completed at the above location to determine best location of the septic system. Soil borings were completed in the proposed septic tank and drain field area. It is my recommendation that the septic tanks be placed as far from the wetland as possible. Based on the proposed 20' setback for the house no further trees will need to be removed. Constructability of the system ongoing maintenance become more complicated the closer the tanks get set to the wetland, along with an additional 8-12 trees impacted for removal. Sincerely Shane Steinbrecher Steinbrecher Companies, Inc L8207 �t x r ,3c 16. al, �� ox �� ��v� C�s�t� . P P OtSezTY F O MINNESOTA V APPLICANT: Rich Schulz 7 April 2016 FINDINGS & DECISION VARIANCE APPLICATION: Request for approval of a variance from front yard setback requirements for Lot 16, Block 1, Autumn Woods. CITY COUNCIL MEETING: 11 April 2016 FINDINGS: Based upon review of the application and evidence received, the Otsego City Council now makes the following findings of fact: A. The legal description of the property is Lot 16, Block 1, Autumn Woods, City of Otsego, County of Wright, State of Minnesota. B. The property lies within the East Sanitary Sewer Service District and is guided for low density residential land uses by the Otsego Comprehensive Plan, as amended. C. The property is zoned R-3, Residential Long Range Urban Service District, which allows single family dwellings as a permitted use. D. The applicant is requesting a variance from the front yard setback requirements for construction of a single family dwelling served by on -site septic system and well. E. A variance request shall not be approved unless a finding is made by the City Council that failure to grant the variance will result in practical difficulties in accordance with the criteria established by Section 20-6-3.B of the Zoning Ordinance: That the variance would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Finding: The Comprehensive Plan establishes as policy that development regulations, such as setbacks, are to be applied consistently and uniformly. Variances are only to be approved in unique circumstances whereby the physical characteristics of a property prevent reasonable use of a property that complies with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The unique physical characteristics of the subject site warrant approval of a variance to allow for development of the subject site as guided by the Comprehensive Plan and consistent with development of surrounding lots within the same subdivision. Furthermore, granting of a variance preserves and protects the existing wetland and steep slopes within the subject site consistent with the policies outlined in the Comprehensive Plan to prevent impacts from development to natural features, such as wetlands, which perform important environmental functions in their natural state and restrict development on slopes identified as potential problem areas due to erosion. 2. That the variance would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of [the Zoning Ordinance]. Finding: The intent of the R-3 District is to allow for single family uses served by on -site septic systems. A variance will allow for development of subject site with a single family home served by an on -site septic system that complies with the City Code, the maximum possible front yard, and access, and off-street parking from a public street consistent with requirements for single family uses. Based on these considerations, the proposed single family home and site plan, and approval of the a variance are consistent with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. That the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the current or any previous landowner. Finding: The practical difficultly in developing the subject site in compliance with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance is due to the extent to which the subject site is uniquely encumbered by wetlands and steep slopes. 4. That the purpose of the variance is not exclusively economic consideration. Finding: The application for a variance is based upon the physical characteristics and limitations of the subject site and not economic considerations. 5. That the granting of the variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located. Finding: The granting of a variance will allow reasonable use of the property for construction of a single family dwelling consistent with the character of development of other lots within Autumn Woods subdivision. 6. That the requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty. Finding: Approval of a variance is necessary to overcome the practical difficulties in developing the subject site and allow reasonable use of the property as permitted by the Zoning Ordinance balancing the environmental constraints of the subject site with existing character of the area and the potential aesthetic impacts to surrounding properties. F. The planning report dated 2 March 2016 prepared by the City Planner, The Planning Company LLC., is incorporated herein. G. The memorandum dated March 1, 2016 prepared by the City Engineer, Hakanson Anderson Associates, Inc., is incorporated herein. H. The Otsego Planning Commission held a public hearing at their regular meeting on 7 March 2016 to consider the application, preceded by published and mailed notice. Based upon review of the application and evidence received, the Otsego Planning Commission closed the public hearing and recommended by a 7-0 vote that the City Council approve a 10 foot variance from the front yard setback requirements of the R-3 District based on the aforementioned findings. I. The applicant requested that consideration of the application by the City Council be delayed until 11 April 2016 to allow them opportunity to review the recommendation of the Planning Commission; the applicant provided a response to the recommendation of the Planning Commission in a letter dated April 5, 2016, which is incorporated herein. 2 DECISION: Based on the foregoing information and applicable ordinances, a variance to allow a 25 foot front yard setback for Lot 16, Block 2 Autumn Woods is hereby APPROVED and is subject to the following conditions: 1. The site plan dated 02/15/16 shall be revised such that development of the subject site complies with the following setback requirements, subject to review and approval of the Zoning Administrator: Principal Building Driveway Front (north) Side Rear (South) Side East West 25ft. loft, 10ft. 20ft. 5ft. 2. Any retaining wall over four (4) feet in height shall be an engineered design with a fence at the top of the structure and is subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 3. The septic system design shall be subject to review and approval of the Building Inspector and require a permit prior to construction. 4. Any detached accessory structures constructed upon the property shall comply with all applicable the performance standards of Section 20-18-2.0 of the Zoning Ordinance. 5. The boundaries of the wetland within the property shall be delineated and shown on a revised survey, subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. MOTION BY: SECOND BY: ALL IN FAVOR: THOSE OPPOSED: Attest: ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Otsego this 14th day of March, 2016. CITY OF OTSEGO By: Jessica L. Stockamp, Mayor Tami Loff, City Clerk 3