5.1. BASR 05-28-2019Request for Action
To Item Number
Board of Adjustments 5.1
Agenda Section Meeting Date Prepared by
Public Hearing May 28, 2019 Chris Leeseberg, Senior Planner
Item Description Reviewed by
Scott Lillestrand, 12426 193rd Lane NW Zack Carlton, Planning Manager
Reviewed by
2.5’ side yard setback variance to construct a
deck, Case No. V 19-02
Action Requested
Deny, by motion, the side yard setback variance for the following reason:
1. Is not in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance.
2. The plight of the petitioner is not due to circumstances unique to the property, and is a
consequence of the petitioners own action or inaction. The deck design and/or location can be
changed to meet the setback requirements.
Background/Discussion
The property is located at 12426 193rd Lane NW and is zoned R1c with setbacks as follows:
Front: 30 feet
Side: 10 feet
Garage: 5 feet
Rear: 20 feet
The applicant is seeking a variance to construct a deck 2.5 feet within the 10 foot side yard setback.
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
The general purpose and intent of side yard setbacks is to keep structures reasonably separated for safety and
aesthetic reasons. The garage side setback requirement is 5-feet. Currently, the garage of my home is 5.5-feet from
the side property line. The proposed variance request would place the new deck construction 7.5-feet from the
property line. That is 2-feet further away from the property line than the existing garage. This new addition would
not further encumber access to the side yard as the garage is already at a 2-foot shorter distance to the lot line than
the proposed deck construction location. In theory, the garage could be extended further into the back yard at 5-feet
from the property line without issue. A deck would be far less imposing to the general purpose and intent of this
ordinance and I would conclude that it would be safer as well. One could also conjecture that a deck is also better
than a garage aesthetically speaking. There are no utilities located in the area of the proposed deck construction.
The Elk River Vision
A welcoming community with revolutionary and spirited resourcefulness, exceptional
service, and community engagement that encourages and inspires prosperity
In addition to reasonably separating properties and uses for aesthetic and safety reasons, the
principal structure setbacks are in place to keep habitable spaces separated at least 20 feet (in this
case) from one another. While a garage/shed can be 5-feet from a property line, the rationale is
the space is not habitable. The general purpose is not achieved.
2. Is consistent with the City of Elk River comprehensive plan.
The property is guided for residential and decks are allowed in residential districts. It is consistent with the
comprehensive plan.
The 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;
Under the current zoning ordinance, I could extend and/or construct a garage 5-feet from the property line. I find it
reasonable to think that a deck in this same area to the lot line would not make any more negative impact to the
spirit of the zoning ordinance than a garage. The garage is already encumbering an area 5.5-feet from the property
line and the proposed deck location would encumber less than the current garage by an additional 2-feet.
The applicant is proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner, as decks and garages are an
allowed use. The applicant believes if a garage can be up to 5 feet from a property line then a deck
should also be allowed.
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
The layout of our home as built dictates that we can only build a screened-in porch and deck combination in limited
ways. We spent considerable time designing with trial and error to find the most efficient and best use of our current
building/land. One priority was to keep the view out the rear picture widow of our home unobstructed. At the
same time, making sure the addition is structurally sound, functions with water drainage, and is a well-built
addition. For a roof line that was nice to view and functioned well for both build quality and water drainage, it was
required that we line up the side wall of the screened-in porch with the side wall of the house. It is from that location
that we get to add measure to the side deck. The challenge we found was that the width of our city lot, as designed, is
narrow. We have an average to below average rambler by size and footprint in my opinion and I believe our
development was designed with narrow lots. Lot size being larger, this would not be an issue and one that is out of
our control.
No unique features appear to be on the parcel requiring a variance. The deck could be designed
2.5 feet narrower and meet the required setbacks. While the desire of the applicant is not to block
the view from a window, the deck portion can be placed on the southwest side of the proposed
porch in front of the window.
5. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
The essential character of the locale will not be altered. I would reiterate that a garage could be built in this same
area without issue, but a deck is far more appealing to our community and neighbors and is equally safe all things
considered.
N:\\Departments\\Community Development\\Planning\\Agendas\\BA Packets\\2019\\05-28-2019\\V 19-02 sr BOA 5-28-19.docx
The character of the locality would not be altered. Some structures are allowed to be within 5 feet
of the property line.
Financial Impact
None
Council Meeting
If denied, or an appeal is made by any interested party by June 7, 2019, this item will go to the June 17,
2019, City Council meeting.
Attachments
Location Map
Applicant’s Narrative
Aerials
Deck Drawings
N:\\Departments\\Community Development\\Planning\\Agendas\\BA Packets\\2019\\05-28-2019\\V 19-02 sr BOA 5-28-19.docx
RECEIVED
Scott Lillestrand
12426 193'd Lane NW
Elk River, MN 55330
(763)607-2475
slillestrand@gmail.com
Variance Narrative
APR 2 6 2019
I, Scott Lillestrand, the owner of 12426 193rd Lane NW Elk River, MN 55330 am requesting a variance
from 10-feet to 7.5-feet on the "Garage side" side-yard setback of the property line for the construction
of a deck. Thank you for your time and considering this request.
The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance.
The general purpose and intent of side yard setbacks is to keep structures reasonably separated
for safety and aesthetic reasons. The garage side setback requirement is 5-feet. Currently, the
garage of my home is 5.5-feet from the side property line. The proposed variance request would
place the new deck construction 7.5-feet from the property line. That is 2-feet further away from
the property line than the existing garage. This new addition would not further encumber access
to the side yard as the garage is already at a 2-foot shorter distance to the lot line than the
proposed deck construction location. In theory, the garage could be extended further into the
back yard at 5-feet from the property line without issue. A deck would be far less imposing to
the general purpose and intent of this ordinance and I would conclude that it would be safer as
well. One could also conjecture that a deck is also better than a garage aesthetically speaking.
There are no utilities located in the area of the proposed deck construction.
The variance is consistent with the City of Elk River comprehensive plan.
The property is guided for residential and decks are allowed in residential districts. It is
consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The petitioner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the
zoning ordinance;
Under the current zoning ordinance, I could extend and/or construct a garage 5-feet from the
property line. I find it reasonable to think that a deck in this same area to the lot line would not
make any more negative impact to the spirit of the zoning ordinance than a garage. The garage
is already encumbering an area 5.5-feet from the property line and the proposed deck location
would encumber less than the current garage by an additional 2-feet.
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
EXISTINGHOUSEEXISTINGHOUSEEXISTINGGARAGEEXISTINGGARAGE 1281'-6"1'-6"9'-4 3/4" (F.V.)
3'-0"2'-11 1/4"128128EXISTINGHOUSEEXISTINGHOUSEEXISTINGHOUSEEXISTINGHOUSE1'-6"2'-11 1/4"
9'-4 3/4" (F.V.)1'-6"1281289'-4 3/4" (F.V)3'-0"REAR ELEVATION1/4"= 1'-0"DISCLAIMERIN PREPARATION OF THIS PLAN EVERYATTEMPT HAS BEEN MADE TO AVOIDMISTAKES. DESIGNER CANNOT GUARANTEEAGAINST HUMAN ERROR. CONTRACTOR TOVERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONSAND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SAME.THESE DESIGNS, CONCEPTS ANDSPECIFICATIONS ARE INSTRUMENTS OFSERVICE AND AS SUCH REMAIN THEEXCLUSIVE PROPERTY OF COUNTRY LUMBERAND ARE NOT TO BE COPIED WITHOUT THEWRITTEN CONSENT OF COUNTRY LUMBER.OFDESIGN FOR:DRAWN BY:
CL#20
P:
R:
R:
F:
12575 OAK VIEW AVE. BECKER, MN. 55308
PHONE: (763) 262-4750
FAX: (763) 262-4445
1-800-247-0295
DESIGN CENTER
1419.055
LILLESTRAND PORCH
RK 04/10/19LEFT ELEVATION1/8"= 1'-0"RIGHT ELEVATION1/8"= 1'-0"Y:\Drawings\2019 Drawing\19.055 LILESTRAND\LILLESTRAND 1.dwg, 4/17/2019 7:43:51 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3
REPLACE EXIST.PATIO DR.3-2x12 FL.TRTD GLU-LAM
2x10 FLR. JST.
@ 12" O.C.
2x10 FLR. JST.
@ 12" O.C.
14'-0"4'-0"6'-0"14'-0"24'-0"4'-4"8'-0"14'-0"
26'-4"10'-0"EXISTINGHOUSE6x6 WOOD POST ON20" Ø x 48" DEEPCONC. PIER FTG.2-2x102-2x102-2x102-2x102x10
FLR. JST.
@ 16" O.C.APPLY SCREENUNDER DECKING3-2x106x6 WOOD POST ON12" Ø x 48" DEEPCONC. PIER FTG.7'-0"7'-0"5'-6"6"DBL. JST.BASEMENT PLAN1/4"= 1'-0"OF24Y:\Drawings\2019 Drawing\19.055 LILESTRAND\LILLESTRAND 3.dwg, 4/17/2019 7:44:04 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3
7'-0"4'-0"6'-0"7'-0"24'-0"4'-4"8'-0"14'-0"
26'-4"SCREENEDPORCHDECK10'-0"EXISTINGHOUSE2-11 7/8" MLH
2-11 7/8" MLH EXISTING HOUSEVAULTEDRIDGE LINE
3/0SCRN.7'-0"
14'-0"7'-0"4'-0"4"
7'-0"ROOF TRUSSES@ 2'-0" O.C.EXIST. WNDW.EXIST. PD. DN.DECKINGDECKING2-11 7/8" MLH14'-0"10'-0"FIRST FLOOR PLAN1/4"= 1'-0"SFT. (HOUSE) SFT. (GARAGE)OF34Y:\Drawings\2019 Drawing\19.055 LILESTRAND\LILLESTRAND 4.dwg, 4/17/2019 7:44:20 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3
TRTD. GLU-LAM2x10 FLR. JSTS.@ 16" O.C.5/4" DECKINGSCREWEDAPPLY SCREENUNDER DECKING6x6 WOODPOSTS6x6 WOOD POST ON20" Ø x 48" DEEPCONC. PIER FTG.2x10 FLR. JSTS.@ 16" O.C.5/4" DECKINGSCREWED2-11 7/8" MLH 124 128SUB FLOOR @EXISTING HOUSE9'-5 7/8"
4"9'-1 7/8"1'-6"14'-0"10'-0"1'-6"9'-5"
3'-0"T&G WOOD CLG.BUILDING SECTIONSEE BUILDERS SPECIFICATION FOR BUILDING MATERIALS3/8"=1'-0"OF44Y:\Drawings\2019 Drawing\19.055 LILESTRAND\LILLESTRAND 6.dwg, 4/17/2019 7:44:35 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3