5.1 BASR 10-27-2015 hkl _ Request for Action
River
To Item Number
Board of Adjustments 5.1
Agenda Section Meeting Date Prepared by
Planning Items October 27, 2015 Chris Leeseberg, Senior Planner
Item Description Reviewed by
Request by Brent and Teresa Christenson for Zack Carlton,Planning Manager
encroachment of a single-family home and driveway Reviewed by
into the wetland buffer setback, 19338 Carson
Circle NW,—Public Hearing
Action Requested
Deny, by motion, the variance for the house for the following reasons:
1. Criteria #4"The plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the property not a
consequence of the petition's own action or inaction" is not met. It is through the petitioners
own action, of requesting the house be placed on the property in the proposed manner, that a
variance is required.
2. The house can be redesigned or the location of the house can be changed.
Approve, by motion, the variance for the driveway for the following reasons:
1. The general purpose and intent of the ordinance are met.
2. The property has a land use of residential and the proposed residential driveway use is consistent
with the comprehensive plan.
3. The proposed driveway use is reasonable and is permitted in the zoning ordinance.
4. Due to topography and proximity to wetlands, the proposed location is likely the only option and
is preferred to the existing driveway location as it has less wetland impact.
5. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality.
Background/Discussion
Case No. V 15-14
The applicant would like to construct a new residential home on the 10 acre property. The property is
zoned R1-a single family residential with a land use designation of residential. In 2003,when the
applicant purchased the property, the wetland area being impacted was not considered wetland but
reclassified as a wetland in 2006 resulting in more restrictive setbacks, requiring the current variance
application. Approximately one half of the subject property is covered by wetlands.
Section 30-1852 regulates wetland setbacks as shown in the image below. The house will not encroach
into the 25-foot wetland buffer strip,but is within the required 20-foot wetland buffer setback. The
applicant is asking for an 8'variance from the 20-foot wetland buffer strip setback which does not allow
structures. The proposed driveway will be within the 25-foot wetland buffer strip but due to topography
and proximity to wetlands, this is likely the only option and is preferred to the existing driveway location
as it has less wetland impact. Staff has no concern with issuing a variance for the driveway as proposed.
'POWERED
NATURE
.>
f fi
w titli-T,It'fii
'''''' }
,,,_,,,,qt4-:::,:',01:474, 4-.4,1 17,. ,
Applicable Regulation
(The applicant's responses are italicized with staff's notes after.)
Variances may be granted when the petitioner establishes that the variance satisfies all five of the criteria
described below. The variance is:
1. Is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance, and
We are following the residential guidelines for setbacks from other property lines. We are proponents of
protecting wetlands and have no intention of damaging or wrecking there value or puipose.
House: The general intent is to promote uniformity of setbacks and keep structures from
being too close to neighboring properties. The intent of the wetland setbacks is to protect
wetlands from negative impacts of building too close to them. The applicant is staying out of
the wetland buffer strip and only proposing a portion of the porch to be located in the
wetland buffer strip setback area. The general purpose and intent of the ordinance are met.
Driveway: The general purpose and intent of the ordinance are met.
2. Is consistent with the City of Elk River comprehensive plan.
We are following the residential guidelines for setbacks from other propero lines. We are proponents of
protecting wetlands and have no intention of damaging or wrecking their value or purpose.
House: The property has a land use of residential and the proposed residential use is
consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Driveway: The property has a land use of residential and the proposed residential driveway
use is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Variances may be granted when the petitioner establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying
with the zoning ordinance. Practical difficulties means that:
3. The petitioner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by
the zoning ordinance;
\\DC3-R1,KR\Shared\Departments\Community I)ev-elopment\Planning\Case Files\V\V 15-14 Christenson\V 15-14 sr B 1 1O-27-15.docy
We plan on using the property as residential.
House: The proposed residential use is reasonable and is permitted in the zoning ordinance.
Driveway: The proposed driveway use is reasonable and is permitted in the zoning
ordinance.
4. The plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the property not a
consequence of the petition's own action or inaction; and
As mentioned above the uniqueness of the property and the design requirements of the house put some
restrictions on house placement and driveway usage.
House: Although new wetland classifications and restrictions have been established since the
applicant purchased the property in 2003, the applicant did not have a pre-approved plan that
would be encumbered with the new requirements. Due to topography and tree cover, the
proposed location is perhaps the best area on the property to construct a house. The
applicant has drafted a design that may not fit their desired location on the property. They do
have the option to redesign the house or to move the location of the house so it can comply
with all setback requirements. Wetlands are not unique to properties in Elk River. The
subject property has approximately 5 acres (half) of wetlands leaving approximately 5 acres
(half) of non-wetland property. Although it is the applicants preferred location, the proposed
location may not support their current house design. It is the petitioners own action that is
requiring the variance.
Driveway: Due to topography and proximity to wetlands, the proposed location is likely the
only option and is preferred to the existing driveway location as it has less wetland impact.
5. The variance, if granted,will not alter the essential character of the locality.
The variance will not alter the locality. It will still be a very beautiful property.
House: The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. Due to the secluded
wooded nature of the properties in the area, the house will not be seen.
Driveway: The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality.
Financial Impact
None
Attachments
• Location Map
• Applicants Narrative
• Survey
• Site Plan Survey Exhibit
• Aerial with Contours
• Environmental Memo dated October 6, 2015
\\DC3-E1 KR\Shared\Departments\Community Development\Planning\Case Files\V\V'15-14 Christenson\V'15-14 sr BA 10-27-15.docx
T,
.
.�
-' ,t- '';.- ' 4..04 ., ,,,..,. , i ,,,,it ..,, - ... ...- i 4,
y
ry .E/ *'" , . ,,,s
}
,
.a I
's.
/
® r
A
t. ..
Christianson
f 6.
E
Variance base Na.V 15- I4 lver
Date: 10/19/2015
Request for Variance at 10760 Brooke Rd.
Thank you for reviewing our requests for variances. In 2003,we(Terry and Brent Christenson) purchased
these ten acres to build a home.When we purchased the land our three kids were 15, 14 and 5.After
much discussion it was clear they did not want to move from our neighborhood full of friends to a place
out in the country.So we did not move in 2003. Since then times have changed.The kids have grown up.
Two have moved out and one is a senior at Elk River High School. We are ready to downsize our house
and move to our retirement spot.
The style and design of the house from 2003 has changed to adapt to our future lifestyle with main floor
living. One of the features and a definite requirement is to have a screened in porch that would overlook
the field.When we purchased the land the field was considered low land. It was reclassified as
"wetlands" in 2006. We knew it was low but did not realize there were building restrictions with this
new reclassification. In order to get the nice view,the back of our house and part of the porch(porch is
three season and on stilts)would be in the 20'wetland setback. Our first variance request is asking to
have the back of the house and part of the deck and porch be built within the 20'setback.
More importantly than the view, is the ability to access the back 8(+/-) acres. With the design and
placement of the house facing south this is the only location for the house that gives us both access to
the back and a great view. However, we need to add 100' of new driveway to get to the garage.The
existing driveway has"wetlands" within 2' on each side. Our second variance request is asking to
continue the driveway straight and have it within the 25' buffer area.We will be abandoning the existing
drive which gives back 175(+/-)ft of wetland green space. So the environment wins on this.
I don't see these requests as unreasonable as we trying to fit a home into a small flat area.We are very
conservative people who recycle, compost and love nature. We are not trying to change or alter the
character of the locality. We bought it because of the beauty and uniqueness of the property. We are
just trying to fit a house into a small buildable space.
B1& B2:We are following the residential guidelines for setbacks from other property lines.We are
proponents of protecting wetlands and have no intention of damaging or wrecking there value or
purpose.
C1: We plan on using the property as residential.
C2:As mentioned above the uniqueness of the property and the design requirements of the house put
some restrictions on house placement and driveway usage.
C3:The variance will not alter the locality. It will still be a very beautiful property.
Thanks again for considering our requests.
Brent and Terry Christenson
1 .
...- 1
I 1
---- T
ATE A—ID _ IG.-a--f i. --.----„-2
1,,,--
-
_- - - -- —VAi 4°.- - ,/
,5 - _
,
R g3 6 o
P-1
I Basin "B-jo s \
<1___ ,--- ....„ 332.1:7,.../_„,- -1,. - 3'3rE_. 3244 :"--
13-2 `...v0-.1 \ \
r.----11111.-- 23.231i6I,L7 C-- -N.-— 64.67 — — __...- !
, \ '
--,,,e1
s
1\iltiLLIND',, EL-.4” ,\\ \
-,:ja- H -P c3,.. _1 `--NORTH LINE OF THE SW V4 OR TNE NE V4,
' \
el5b.
‘.,-3\ „.
o
Li_ ,..,.., cv / \\-,-,„.<\ , 5
,, 8-3 \-,- \
' \
IA ,T,i r,i / \\
B-4.4,
-,,'--i..., -"i:5),
i. `.., ,e_
N'-„_r`i ,
Ot,._.
M4A'4% „, i
=° 14 P
,I.
Ig -, SEE DETAIL OP \\ \ Lc)
PROSED ..- ..Z g!
C\I
0
< g kR
2' II 45,%,,'!","
O.(/'ri '.. /GARAGE r.' I / / 40 ts
-,..' 111 r 4, "...y ,,,. , --I'
'"Q yr,'" ' t/ 1
, /'--- ,,
•,, —
Lec:! CD PROPONtO o —ET."
6
139t0ING '5 i a
L.L'''=: ''- 1)," , g>, --•
, ,-.;.;.. • N't
r e'rUel ), .-
.t
..
r t?t5'4 q; seT9t.' ,.---./..--':-,'' - InlYo I'r9
GD
i ■ 3 _ 1,,
,•-Gti-st. ..,2k1
-"A ;1: , ,,,, ,„- /e-,--- -- _.' ______- -- • ,e221,go ; 2
1 ° '-' ''' ,N. ',-- .,__ N ‘_: 1 \-D ,--6' ---./,' ' 1??-----
..--0-:,,,..-- „ ,,./ ‘4S---,,q„i '6
§ §
---- /.,..- „ /..,,-
r./ ,.'.-- „,-'- ,././..
.11 1
Basin ''A''
/ ...-/
C?.., // a'
■ --'
. ,,/
// 42:-
BM Acres 5
434.623 Os.ft.
6 r I N •. ,
; I (oz ,,,,
' I la
i
/,'''''' I
0 L!.1 ,•0, 0,°`?,,,,,,,,/
st ii PPE.
1/i!.
.$il I / 99:0° la -A
,/' ' 4 t
NOTE: PROPERTY LIES MUNN ZONE X AREAS OUTSIDE OF 500 YEAR FLOOD i
THE BASE FLOOD 20NE ELEVATION IN THIS AREA IS 940.0
I 4, PER FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP NO.0 0436 PANEL NO.0385, (/ 1 en.
DATED NAY 4,MO. I P
I )Hi
Southeast comer of the SW I/4 of the-,
' \, DETAIL
,-°.^2, -11. '.. ,
_ 331,37 _ ,i 4, )i of. 1 .74 '
-- - -- -- _
- ‘. '- S89'38.03E 331.37 "-- - 662
-
17,7:A^ z z
1 ,
■ '5.0c.1 LINE OF THE SW I/4 OF HE NE V4, I cn
VARIANCE REQUESTED: -C73 >: Z
i
2 I- Lu
1.-
FOR 364 S.F. OF PROPOSED PORCH AND DECK WITHIN WETLAND BUFFER SETBACK X Z LL.I R v)
N FOR 1097 S.F. OF PROPOSED DRIVEWAY WITHIN WETLAND BUFFER SETBACK
41 3 8 E
1
1 ":.: E 1 ,,. :' I
,
NOTE:
- I :.t_.Ci ,,,L1 'c ow:
IL 1
> = CC
LEGEND
LEGAL DESORPTION:
WETLAND DELINEATION PROVIDED BY BOGART,PEDERSON &ASSOCIATES, OCTOBER 14,2015
0 Deno.Esist.so Nosing Location 0 .0 200 300
The Eost Holf of the West Half of the Southwest Quarter Denotes Existing ell INIIMIN•1111
of the Northeast Quarter of Section II,Township 40 W
33,
Range 26.Sherburne Countv,Minnesota. 'm Oenotes Existing Power Pole SCALE IN FEET
sHaT NO.
ow— Denotes E.t.a ovemsoe Electric Lin.
o°1:1'n'nfO'r Vg.17-af:7clyZeCZn'7Etr.17.;Hig'vVy'lZ.'21. —,, ,D--- Denotes renting Fencelino 1 __,66
• Denotes Iron Ploe Found
1
lk
i
Memorandum
River
To: Planning Department
From: Kristin Mroz, Environmental Department
Date: 10-6-15
Subject: Site Plan Review Meeting—October 2, 2015
The department listed above has reviewed the application(s) listed below and has the
following comments:
1. Sec comment in email to Zach 9 23 15
Case #V 15-14—Brent and Teresa Christenson
1. I have visited this site and conducted measurements for the wetland setbacks.The
buildable area of this lot is minimal and the property owners have been very accommodating
in the requirements.
2. To be clear, they are asking for a slight variance from the 45-foot wetland buffer
strip setback which does not allow structures. The house will not be encroaching within the
25-foot wetland buffer strip. The driveway will be within the 25-foot wetland buffer strip but
due to topography, this is likely the only option and is preferred to the previous driveway
location.
1. No concerns or isaucs with the application as proposed.
Case # CU 15 18 River of Life
1. No concerns or i3sues with the application as propo3cd.
PRMERER If
\\DC3-EI,KR\Shared\Departments\Community Development\Planning\Case Files\\'\\' 15-14 Christenson\SPR NATURE'
M emo_Environmental.docx
\ \
P- i Basin 4
QM
\ \
B-2� \`'it B- \` \\\
M D r ,^\\\ \\
/ \ v �v
ARC, v_ / vvv�\
� � vv v
_�� t vv \
`� _ � � vv o v
\\ \7J \B-4 •
N �`I \ \\�\ \
0
\ \ � ..
t0 \ \\
PROPOSED ~ �\ \\ \
DRIVEWAY / �\ ` _ \1 N
/ ,� i I i'
i i 13,3
i_ N
o--- 27�� / 56.50 _.,L_,_t50.1
N r--
AGE 1 1 ; 1 ,
o-,._ 13.5? o. / 1
«> N 8.0 r 1 I t I W
OPROPOSED --�---65.0 -8
�/ BUILDING 'j; 1
of �_ 52.0 _ --'
/ 34.50 ' n 1 _ 19.00
/ * • �D¢su-Tn
• 1 a o
e
/ /
//// �JFF j¢/
l/
__
�7p A „
cb/
/ ,' ,-Q&2��
N /
D<<O ' /'
9
' /0
/
/
/
(
1
1.
• ,,ate
}4 -, .,
*
a
5
..1
T"T4 "
e.. - d d�{ 3.6
ta.
. i : § x ii
`k
alit
3� e.
• .4 4