STAFF REPORT. Peter Zielsdorf

Transcription

1 STAFF REPORT Applicatin: Cnstruct a new septic drainfield t replace the existing drainfield apprximately 64 feet frm Mink Lake (min. 75 ft required). Applicant: Agenda Item: 4(a) Peter Zielsdrf Backgrund Infrmatin: Prpsal: The applicants are prpsing t replace an existing septic system that was fund failing in 2005 with a new mund septic system. As the system wuld be cnstructed n a peninsula with Mink Lake n three sides, the drainfield wuld be partially within the required lake setback f 75 feet. The setbacks n tw sides wuld be 64 and 70 feet. Lcatin: Prperty address: 8020 GRUNWALD AVE NW Sec/Twp/Range: Parcel number(s): Zning: R1 - Urban/Rural Transitin/S2 - Residential-Recreatinal Shrelands, Mink Lake (Recreatinal Develpment lake) Lt size: Apprx. 72,699 sq ft (1.67 acres) accrding t Beacn GIS estimate Existing Impervius Cverage: Buildings: Abut 3,972 sq ft (5.5%) Ttal: Abut 10,343 sq ft (14.2%) Prpsed Impervius Cverage: Buildings: Abut 3,972 sq ft (5.5%) Ttal: Abut 10,343 sq ft (14.2%) Septic System Status: The prperty wuld be served by a new septic system (mund) Natural Features: Permit Histry: Fldplain: The existing and prpsed structures are nt within an identified fldplain. Bluff/Steep Slpes: The lt des nt cntain a bluff, but des have sme steep slpes. Wetlands: There d nt appear t be any wetlands that wuld impact this prpsal Permit fr 24 x 32 cabin Crinna Twnship 4(a) - 1

2 1973 Permit fr 24 x 48 basement under existing cabin 1974 Denied variance request t build cabin within lake setback (in additin t main hme) 1989 Apprved variance request t build tw detached strage structures within the lake setback (request was f r ne larger building 1,440 sq ft) Permit fr rfed deck 1989 Permit fr 24 x 30 detached garage Applicable Statutes/Ordinances: Minnesta Statutes (2011) OFFICIAL CONTROLS: ZONING ORDINANCE. Subd. 6. Appeals and adjustments. Appeals t the bard f appeals and adjustments may be taken by any affected persn upn cmpliance with any reasnable cnditins impsed by the zning rdinance. The bard f appeals and adjustments has the fllwing pwers with respect t the zning rdinance: (1) T hear and decide appeals where it is alleged that there is an errr in any rder, requirement, decisin, r determinatin made by an administrative fficer in the enfrcement f the zning rdinance. (2) T hear requests fr variances frm the requirements f the zning rdinance including restrictins placed n nncnfrmities. Variances shall nly be permitted when they are in harmny with the general purpses and intent f the rdinance and when the variances are cnsistent with the cmprehensive plan. Variances may be granted when the applicant fr the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in cmplying with the zning rdinance. "Practical difficulties," as used in cnnectin with the granting f a variance, means that the prperty wner prpses t use the prperty in a reasnable manner nt permitted by the zning rdinance; the plight f the landwner is due t circumstances unique t the prperty nt created by the landwner; and the variance, if granted, will nt alter the essential character f the lcality. Ecnmic cnsideratins alne d nt cnstitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties include, but are nt limited t, inadequate access t direct sunlight fr slar energy systems. Variances shall be granted fr earth sheltered cnstructin as defined in sectin 216C.06, subdivisin 14, when in harmny with the rdinance. The bard f appeals and adjustments r the gverning bdy as the case may be, may nt permit as a variance any use that is nt allwed under the zning rdinance fr prperty in the zne where the affected persn's land is lcated. The bard r gverning bdy as the case may be, may permit as a variance the temprary use f a ne family dwelling as a tw family dwelling. The bard r gverning bdy as the case may be may impse cnditins in the granting f Crinna Twnship 4(a) - 2

3 variances. A cnditin must be directly related t and must bear a rugh prprtinality t the impact created by the variance. Crinna Twnship/Wright Cunty Regulatins 502. APPEALS AND BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Findings (1) The Bard f Adjustment must review variance petitins and cnsider the fllwing factrs prir t finding that a practical difficulty has been presented. The applicant must prvide a statement f evidence addressing the fllwing elements t the extent they are relevant t the applicant s situatin. (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) The granting f the variance will be in harmny with the Cunty Land Use Plan. The prperty wner prpses t use the prperty in a reasnable manner nt permitted by an fficial cntrl. The plight f the wner is due t circumstances unique t the prperty nt created by the wner. The prpsal des nt alter the essential character f the lcality. The practical difficulty cannt be alleviated by a methd ther than a variance; and. The granting f the variance will nt adversely affect the envirnmental quality f the area. The Bard f Adjustment may grant a variance if it finds that all f the abve factrs have been established. The Bard f Adjustment must nt apprve a variance request unless the applicant prves all f the abve factrs and established that there are practical difficulties in cmplying with fficial cntrls. The burden f prf f these matters rests cmpletely n the applicant. Crinna Twnship 4(a) - 3

4 716. SEWAGE AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL STANDARDS Site Evaluatin and Design Requirements Findings f Fact: The fllwing findings f fact are presented by Staff fr cnsideratin by the Bard f Adjustment: 1. Will the granting f the variance be in harmny with the general purpses and intent f the Crinna Twnship Land Use (Zning) and/r Subdivisin Ordinance? Yes. The spirit and intent f the setback requirement fr septic systems frm a Crinna Twnship 4(a) - 4

5 lake is t adequately prtect grundwater frm pllutin and t avid wave/ice actin and ptential fr ersin frm impacting a septic system shuld it be t clse t the lake. DNR dcuments als mentin a desire t keep septic systems dwnslpe f private wells given that allwing fr septic systems between a huse and the lake are typically cnstructed n flat r slping grund dwnslpe f private wells. The prpsed setback fr the drainfield wuld be reasnably cnsistent with the intent f the regulatin in that it wuld be dwnslpe f the private well n the prperty and far enugh away frm the lake t avid negative impacts. Further, the system is designed t adequately treat sewage befre it enters grundwater. 2. Will the granting f the variance be cnsistent with the Crinna Twnship Cmprehensive Plan? Yes: The Cmprehensive Plan states the fllwing as strategies t Ensure that all Twnship prperties are adequately and efficiently treating sewage, bth fr current residents and expected future ppulatin grwth : Require all n-site sewage treatment systems t strictly cnfrm t state and cunty requirements fr new and existing n-site sewage treatment systems. Carefully cnsider new rules t these requirements which prvides fr Large Sewage Treatment Systems (LSTS), r as they are als called Cmmunity Sewage Treatment Systems, as an innvative alternate apprach t the traditinal individual site system. Develp an nging inspectin and mnitring prgram t ensure that all individual sewage treatment systems remain cmpliant and functining, cntinuing t meet perfrmance standards. Cmment: The prpsed sewer system will be f a type allwed by state and cunty regulatins, but will nt be a Type I sewer as required fr develpment f nncnfrming lts (withut a variance). The Twnship, thrugh its cntract with Wright Cunty, has a system in place fr requiring regular inspectin and mnitring, as is required fr the type f system prpsed fr this lt. 3. Is the prpsed use f the prperty reasnable? Yes. The desire and need fr a cmpliant septic system is reasnable. The prpsed lcatin is reasnable given that there are limited ptins fr lcating a drainfield that wuld meet setback requirements given that the lt is a peninsula. 4. Is the plight f the landwner due t circumstances unique t the prperty nt created by the landwner? Yes. The need fr the variances is due primarily t the lt being a peninsula with lake n three sides. 5. Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character f the lcality? Crinna Twnship 4(a) - 5

6 N. The installatin f a septic system wuld have n impact n the residential character f the lcality. 6. Are ecnmic cnsideratins the nly reasn the applicant cannt meet the strict requirements f the rdinance? N. The need fr the variance is due t ther factrs mentined in #4 abve. 7. Culd the practical difficulty be alleviated by a feasible methd ther than a variance (taking int accunt ecnmic cnsideratins)? N. Other ptins fr lcating the system were explred and the prpsed lcatin and type f system was determined by the applicant s sewer designer t be the best system fr the lt (the alternative lcatin, which wuld have met lake setbacks, wuld have been a Type IV system with less separatin t grundwater than the prpsed septic system). 8. Will the granting f the variance adversely affect the envirnmental quality f the area? N. The prpsed septic system has been designed by a state-licensed septic designer t adequately treat sewage and the system wuld be far enugh frm the lake t avid damage frm wave/ice actin r ersin. Bard f Adjustment Directin: The Bard f Adjustment may apprve the variance request, deny the request(s), r table the request(s) if the Bard shuld need additinal infrmatin frm the applicant. If the Bard shuld apprve r deny the request, the Bard shuld state the findings which supprt either f these actins. Staff Recmmendatin: Based n the findings f fact nted abve, Staff recmmends apprval f the requested variance as presented. Crinna Twnship 4(a) - 6