Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/24/2022

Home

home and the Building that would not be suitable either. Based on the size of the Subject Property, the Applicant is eligible for up to 3,500 square feet of detached accessory buildings. The proposed building is 1,296 square feet and there is only one other detached accessory building on the property, a small shed approximately 400 square feet in size. Aside from the proposed location, the Building complies with all other accessory building regulations. Due to the angle of the Subject Property, which follows the river corridor, the slope of the bank (steeper in the north and more gradual to the northeast - approximately a twelve [12] foot change in grade), and the existing tree cover, the proposed location appears to best meet the intent of the Overlay District in terms of maintaining scenic views from the river. It does not appear that the Building could be positioned elsewhere on the Subject Property such that it met the required setbacks without significant tree removal and/or increasing its visibility from the river. Furthermore, the proposed location will require less paving (Applicant intends to extend existing driveway to new building) than if it were located elsewhere on the Subject Property with a separate, stand-alone driveway. Therefore, this location helps limit the amount of additional impervious surfacing on the Subject Property and thus limits the amount of 'new' runoff that would be generated. Variance Requirements In order to grant a variance, the Planning Commission must consider the practical difficulties test and consider the following three -factor test: • Reasonableness: Staff does feel that a detached garage is a reasonable use of the Subject Property, and is an allowed accessory use in the R-1 Residential (Rural Developing) District. • Uniqueness: In order to grant a variance, the problem at hand cannot be caused by the landowner and generally the uniqueness relates to the physical characteristics of the property. The topography of the Subject Property leaves few viable options for the placement of the Building, the proposed location is least impactful to the one neighboring residential property, and limits the amount of additional impervious surfacing. • Essential Character: The Planning Commission must consider if the Building, if built, would be out of scale or place in the neighborhood. Staff does not believe it would alter the character of the neighborhood at all, as detached accessory buildings are very common throughout the community. Furthermore, there is only one adjacent residential parcel (and none across the street) and the proposed location creates the most separation from that home. Alternatives Alternative 1: Motion to adopt Resolution #22-043 granting a variance to setbacks from the OHW of the Rum River for the construction of a thirty-six foot (36') by thirty-six foot (36') detached accessory building. Staff supports this request. Alternative 2: Motion to deny the requested variance. Approving this variance request would support the Minor Plat application which would create a legally conforming lot. If the Building is required to be constructed in an alternate location on the Subject Property, it would result in increased environmental impacts such as runoff and reduction of trees on -site. Staff does not support this alternative. Funding Source: The Applicant is responsible for all costs incurred while processing this request. Recommendation: City Staff recommend approval of the requested variance. Action: Motion to adopt Resolution #22-043 granting a variance to setbacks from the OHW of the Rum River for the construction of a detached accessory building on the Subject Property.