4. BASR 10-13-2009~/
Elk REQUEST FOR ACTION
.~...
River
To Item Number
Board of Ad'ustments 4.
Agenda Section Meeting Date Prepared by
Plannin Items October 13, 2009 Jerem Barnhart, Plannin Mana er
Item Description Reviewed by
Consider Request by Robert and Linda Moore for Shoreland
setback variance, Case No. V 09-06, Public Hearing Reviewed by
Action Requested
Staff recommends that the Board of Adjustment approve the Shoreland setback variance request, as
illustrated on drawings dated August 31, 2009, with the following condition:
1. Erosion control measures shall be inspected by staff prior to construction.
Attachments
Location Map
Applicant's Narrative
• Site Plan dated August 31, 2009
General Information
Applicant Robert & Linda Moore
60 Day Rule The application has been deemed complete as of October 8,
2009. The City must take action by December 8, 2009
Requested Action Variance from the shoreland setback
Location and Size Approximately .86-acres.
Location Existing Use Land Use Plan Designation Current Zoning
Subject
Property Single Family Urban Residential R 1b, SF residential
North Single Family Urban Residential R 1b, SF residential
South Single Family Urban Residential R 1b, SF residential
East Elk River River River
West Single Family Urban Residential R 1b, SF residential
Case File: V 09-06
Page 2
Variance
Ruben & Linda Moore
Overview
The applicant is requesting to tear down their existing garage due to its dilapidated condition and
reconstruct a new 3-car garage, contingent upon receiving a variance to allow the new garage to
encroach in shoreland setback.
The proposed variance is to allow an attached garage to be within the 100-foot shoreland setback. If
constructed as proposed, a setback of 58.2 feet would be provided (a 41.8 foot variance). The
proposed setback would not encroach into the setback anymore than the existing garage. The
applicant also looked at moving the garage closer to the road but there are utility lines in that area,
making it a dangerous situation.
The property is zoned R1-b which has the following garage setbacks:
Front: 35-feet
Side: 5-feet
Rear: 100-feet from the ordinary high water mark.
With the exception of the rear yard setback, the proposed garage meets all of the required setbacks.
The proposed garage would be setback approximately 68.7 feet from the front property line, and
12.3 feet from the north property line.
Applicable Regulations
~~ariance Criteria
7. Literal en orcement o~the ordinance avill cause undue hardshit~.
Literal enforcement would not allow a functional new structure or one that would meet the city's
minimum requirements of square footage. The property currently holds a garage. The proposed
garage, while inconsistent with the literal reading of the ordinance, is an improvement toward
the goals of the ordinances, with respect to the increase of shoreland setback over what's
currently provided.
2. The hardsbi~ is caused by .rbecial conditions and circumstances which are peculiar to the ~rol~erty and the
structure involved and nihich are not characteristic o~ or a~~licable to other lands or structure in the .came area
The hardship is caused by special conditions and circumstances, which are peculiar to the
property. Due to small lot size, river setbacks, access to the rear of the property and the
property being located on a dead end the site has limited buildable area. The development in
which the property is located is an older established neighborhood. Since this neighborhood has
been developed, it appears that there may have been ordinance changes, as there are other
structures in the area that encroach in the current required setbacks.
S:\PLANNING MAIN\Case Files\Variance\V 09-06 Moore\V 09-06 BA.doc
Case File: V 09-06
Page 3
Variance
Robert & Linda Moore
3. The ~7~ecial conditions and circTSanstances are not a consequence o~the,~etitioner's own action or inaction.
The conditions are not a consequence of the petitioner's own action or inaction. The petitioners
researched alternatives, including locating the garage closer to the road, but that option was
hampered due in part to exiting utilities, and the impact on the neighborhood character.
4. The literal a~~lication o~ the ~ravisions of this ordinance would derive the petitioner o_ f rz~htr en~oyed by other
properties in the Bayne district under the terms of this ordinance.
Without the variance, the property could not construct a new functional garage or one that
meets the city's minimum requirement. The variance would not establish inconsistency with the
neighborhood character.
5. The variance will not be injurious to or adversely a fect the health sa~et or wel are of the residents of the cit~or
the neighborhood where the property is located and will be in keeping with .rbirit and intent of the ordinance
The request will not be injurious to or adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of the
residents of the city or the neighborhood where the property is located.
ACtlon Motion by Second by Vote
Follow Up
S:\PLANIVING MAIN\Case Files\Variance\V 09-06 Moore\V 09-06 BAdoc
WV 8£ 6i 0i 6002/i/OI '6nnp~dey~ uoi~e~o~~a~ooW 90-60 ~\a~ueiae~~sa~ij ase~~9NINNb'ld\ S
VARIANCE APPLICATION FOR A NEW GARAGE:
FOR: ROBERT AND LINDA MOORE
LOCATION; 18692 YANKTON ST. N.W.
ELK RIVER, MN. 55330
PHONE: 763-441-502?
DATE: 9/21/09
Our existing garage is in very poor condition: the roof leaks badly, the siding/walls have many holes
causing rain to come into the garage, the floor has massive cracks and the grading is too low for the
garage. Also the garage sets lower then the road, driveway and in the springtime when the snow melts the
water nuns into the garage. When the water refreezes we have a skating rink in our garage making it very
slipper and dangerous to walk on. We are both in our early 60's, so falling and getting hurt is something
we would like to avoid. We looked into repairing the roof, wails, and floor and raising the existing garage
up and it would be very expensive /more expensive then building a new 3 car garage. We would still not
be able to build a 3 car garage were our existing garage is. Which is want we need for our 2 vehicles,
small fishing boat, lawnmower, etc. With the present economy our existing garage lowers the value of
our property
Our lot is very narrow, not allowing us to build the new 3-car garage the required 100 feet from the river.
And 35 feet from the road. Also if we try to bring the garage too far forward then we are right under the
electrically wires that run across our lot making it very dangerous for those who would be building the
new garage, the proposed new garage will also need to be elevated up to stop the melted snow water from
running into the garage floor. By bringing the new garage up 100 feet we will also have the front of the
garage 25 feet from the middle of the road. Putting our garage out of line with our neighbors and greatly
out of line with our house. Making it a great eye sore.
x~~
~~w
~~~
V
w ~
NZ~
~~~
do
w
oho
'
,~ ' / `~' /
-,-'~.1~~ Nd~ -','~
,-- ' ~~,5 N ..~ '
~- ' .MN 1 ~ '
~ 5 ~'
~ ~ ..5 ,.n 0~ ~~
_ ~
~N`p~~9 ~
.~~9N ~~~~'~
cr~~
N~
cfl,~
t'n
I //
_,,---~
m
~o
I
N
I
O
ro
A
D
p~
Y
''~~ 3NC13b~H' V 1~
~.~A,~ /r
~g
~~
>p L~
2 ~ C7
g z~
~ D
I ~
U S~
I
M
11
~ N
v O
u
rn
D ~
Z
z vm~
~ N p
~ c~ o r+1 ` T
\N~ jt;Q~ O < h p ``~
ova ~~~~D ~~~ ~o $~ [~~ c ~i o $ y~v7 ~ Vy ~ ~
w ~~~ ~ ~S2 n ~~ m~ m ~ ~ M g $m ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ D 1+~
W
~~ ~ ~
~~ ~ ~~~ ~> ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y ~ ~ ~ o -v ~ y
~~~ ~ ~~~ o~ ~~ ~ ~ m ~ $ ~s n0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ b
• -~
~p ~ ~ $ z ~ $ o ~ Z z m ~ ~1 ~~~y rn_ ~I
~1 ,a-f ^~ ^' N p~ C m ~ Z D SQ ~ Z ~ ~I V r rrA O~
zaa g~ ~ ~ ~ N m
-, ~ ~ o ~1
o ~1 z~~ $ ~ ~ ~
\1Rl ~ ~ ~ ~ to ~'1 N ~ U ~ v
v
O a~~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~
V rnA ZA ~ " v ~Z ~ ca
1 e ~ ~ ~ o