5.3 PCSR 09-27-1994 AGENDA ITEM 5.3
'ty of
liZMEMORANDUM
River
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: GARY SCHMITZ, PLANNING ASSIST. 0,--1
DATE: SEPTEMBER 27, 1994
SUBJECT: VARIANCE REQUEST BY WAYNE
ANDERSON, PUBLIC HEARING,
CASE NO. V 94-11
REQUEST
Wayne Anderson is requesting a lakeshore setback variance for a
proposed deck from the ordinary high water mark of a natural
environment lake. The request will also involve a variance
legitimizing the existing home and septic system, which were
constructed within the required shoreland setback in 1990.
• LOCATION
12752-208 Avenue NW (Part of Lot 10 and 11, Block 2, Greenhead
Acres Second Addition)
ZONING / LAND USE
Rla (Single Family Residential) / LR (Low Density Residential)
ATTACHMENTS
Location Map, Zoning Map, Site Plan
BACKGROUND
Wayne Anderson is requesting to construct a two-tier deck extending
twelve (12) feet out from the rear of the existing home. The home was
constructed in 1990 on Pintail Pond, which is a natural environment
lake protected by the DNR. The home is located seventy (70) feet from
the ordinary high water mark and the septic system is located thirty-
seven (37) feet from the ordinary high water mark. The existing home
• and septic system were constructed within the shoreland setback of
one-hundred, fifty (150) feet.
P.O. Box 490 • 13065 Orono Parkway • Elk River, MN 55330 • (612) 441-7420 • Fax: (612) 441-7425
Wayne Anderson Page 2
September 27, 1994
• SHORELAND ORDINANCE
The existing Shoreland Ordinance, amended in 1991, requires a one-
hundred, fifty (150) foot structure and septic system setback from the
ordinary high water mark of natural environment lakes. The City of
Elk River adopted the Shoreland Ordinance in the 1970's. Prior to the
amendment in 1991, the ordinance was adopted by reference only and
no standards were incorporated into the City Code. This is
unfortunate because a few homes and septic systems were constructed
within the shoreland setback without going through the variance
process. Staff became aware of this setback discrepancy when the
applicant recently applied for a deck permit. A few other homes
constructed around this area may also be located within the shoreland
setback required at the time the homes were built. Although some of
the homes are nonconforming, the City will not require a variance to
the homes unless the structure is upgraded in any way.
GREENHEAD ACRES SECOND ADDITION
Greenhead Acres Second Addition was platted by the City in January,
• 1979, into twenty-two (22) lots of approximately two and one-half (2
1/2) to four (4) acres in size. Several of the lots, including the subject
site, were platted with a large percentage of the lot area in wetland.
Greenhead Acres Second Addition was platted without the
consideration of the Shoreland Ordinance. Pintail Pond was added to
the Shoreland Ordinance on May 1, 1979, after this area was platted.
Several of the lots, including the subject site, are unbuildable without
variances due to the increased Shoreland Setback.
PROPOSED DECK
Mr. Anderson is proposing to construct a two tier deck, which will run
the length of the rear of the existing home. The deck will extend
twelve (12) feet closer to the protected wetland. The upper tier will
measure twelve (12)feet by sixteen (16) feet and is being designed to
accommodate a three season porch sometime in the future. The lower
tier will measure twelve (12) feet by thirty (30) feet and is being
designed to accommodate a detachable eight (8) foot by seventeen (17)
foot screened area.
•
anderson.planning
Wayne Anderson Page 3
September 27, 1994
• DNR
I have discussed this request with Area Hydrologist Dan Lais. Mr.
Lais mentioned that because the existing home is already at variance,
any further encroachment would have to be a "reasonable" request.
The Anderson's are proposing to extend the deck an additional twelve
(12) feet closer to Pintail Pond. It is the DNR's opinion that this is a
reasonable request, however, the DNR is concerned about the number
of enclosed structures (such as the three season porch and screened
porch in terms of a visual impact from the pond itself). The existing
structure and septic system setback is one hundred, fifty (150) feet
from the ordinary high water mark of the wetland. With the deck
addition, the home will be located fifty-eight (58) feet from the
ordinary high water mark, therefore, a variance of ninety-two (92) feet
will be required for the structure.
The DNR is concerned that the home, septic system, and proposed deck
are all within the "shore impact zone." The shore impact zone is
defined as a sensitive area located between the ordinary high water
mark and fifty percent (50%) of the structure setback. Therefore, the
• shore impact zone for this lake is seventy-five (75) feet along the entire
pond. It is the DNR's objective to minimize the impacts within this
area. In order to limit the visual impacts of the proposed request, the
DNR is recommending that only one of the proposed enclosed
structures be allowed with this request. Mr. Anderson did indicate
that the three season porch was a "future project." Therefore, the
proposed screened porch could be used until the three season porch is
constructed. At that time, the DNR is requesting the screened porch
be removed.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of a ninety-two (92) foot variance from the
ordinary high water mark of Pintail Pond for the existing structure
and proposed deck and a one hundred, thirteen (113) foot variance
from the ordinary high water mark for the septic system based on the
following findings:
1. LITERAL ENFORCEMENT FOR THE ORDINANCE
WOULD CAUSE UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BY
NOT ALLOWING THE APPLICANT TO
• CONSTRUCT A DECK IN A REASONABLE
LOCATION ON THE PARCEL.
anderson.planning
Wayne Anderson Page 4
September 27, 1994
• 2. THE VARIANCE IS NOT A CONSEQUENCE OF
THE PETITIONERS ACTION BUT DUE TO THE
PLATTING OF THE PROPERTY PRIOR TO THE
SHORELAND ORDINANCE.
3. GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE
INJURIOUS OR ADVERSELY AFFECT THE
HEALTH SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE
RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF ELK RIVER OR THE
NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THE PROPERTY IS
LOCATED.
If this request is approved, staff also recommends the following
condition:
1. ONLY ONE OF THE ENCLOSED STRUCTURES BE
ALLOWED TO LIMIT THE VISUAL IMPACTS
FROM PINTAIL POND.
•
•
anderson.planning
I I /
r o i , ..
:VA!
• 111
r f
I a
LOCATIONti' •
Cp•RD #33 L.
0.
i 4-' Ct\
0111rFmi
6, =
o a
t
Raj , m�
itit .
ip . .
II1IbAIiJ
-0 % ii
a
Tial'
w AV
-,`
.NII „ilk r 1 011;Iiii.. ... ,,,) r -4-N-ikKiltiiiiiil, \
•
. i T; IL...,,itAlOirt.r....4.0 '
'--N-1 - i, 7._‘1141% rig, _ CS.:
. x 2-17 --=--- .:rrra67.,:,1/41; u ,
mr'jliiiiii
lir
„,....n _. VRIGH7 — lb.�.A..‘
110 z/z
(.7 U
� IJ
\111k,
f . lCity of ,
;:4 W)
1 , � vCP �f�L mr a
W z
- = Q
LOCATION MAP ; )- h
• -. -
1� — ,
CASE: V 94-11
0ly `
I
• \\
, : .
: , -------T--:---:' .4
. , i/ . •,.,_
. ,r ,,
; ! J I
• ! I .----<)
la
______.-.04.,
.: i , : . -I •:'
f i �r „� . 1
� r f 1 ' „
I .. / ;
•
- I N..'`-
-- --�.� _.. - �� � r-- - -- - ,
i
,/ . , /s .4„ 4/ , ,, ...:
j' 1 f'
i
I
t
1 !� I r t i
L 1
{. ,.•.
Ria
i I 1,,_i . \es\ !' .
ii,
...:,
.....„....... •., ,,.,
..I,
..
,,..
1 , 1\0
�.� .
+ 1 - fl / '
I
LOCATION
r
\..........m::\
ZONING MAP _
• l
fi\--(. • -.,!...
� : 'i :, er CASE V 94-11J
1:7C6--;' ori,.. 7---:.--,..-„ . 7'7. ..__ x ,. ----
NEW LoT 1-'
/ :7-- .s;
t
�-' �� ' L 4 Ldr
p� v O �`° Ohl�% C Eat u
/ ' _.-
D' OL 4i
/ 'Q'} h�7'l'.',..,i-‘1'- ���oi
pct, - - /� 0 5 \
/ z•X\ / 1•S 0 \:Cils.
r- -
08-r . - - --- --
?�1,/ 'P % a tG C••,::- .1,t4-2 24) 7,1 z" . . 4,'/.41' ?i'^ ..�• 'd,SS`O1 fi• b.. \. bti\
/ , .. t
' - /z0g: .,z.,..
•riY, •
ell° N
9 .� L" ,, '�Z,A�Jf cs
c
�tGw PuuL r •K' a$Z'DZ • _ • 'Q-•
I\l'- '
t...S�M C 4S7• TO _a . t-
G G v C-G AT C"D F •20 • �/
1 r N \ Ct #1/1 --. 7
76 ar
� AJ
f� ► r . �r ^ ��r O v p <' Ai
� '� ;•• \ 1. v) . 7
o �
i i
ti \ ,.... 7
C3 �aP --- 1 �`
‘ \ ? 0 ‘
�� S
\o
,._,
SITE MAP
.—
( i
10 "-\ - -,(..) .
--,.c
..6--
Cry o>:
CASE
T "1Iiver ,-- '