HomeMy WebLinkAbout97-053 Variance
The. undersigned, duly qualified and City Manager of the City of Prior Lake, herebY.. Il"H'
certifies the attached hereto IS a true and correct copy of the original. .~~tI/
. Resolntion 98-01 J ~ J- ~
7-~
~ -;z;- ~
~
/~
.
~
TO ~
p~-
Case #97-053
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)ss.
COUNTY OF SCOTT )
on file in the office of the City Planner, City of Prior Lake.
Dated this 9th day ofJanuary, 1998.
06700-2963 (8-95 1 M)
CUSTOMER RECEIPT
PAT BOECKMAN
SCOTT COUNTY REGISTRAR OF TITLES
SCOTT COUNTY RECORDER
COURTHOUSE ROOM 113
SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1392 (612) 496-8143
ooosmo 3-05-98#01.0
$20.00TO
THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT VALID AS A RECEIPT UNTIL YOUR CHECK HAS CLEARED THE BANK
PAGE
/ b.5~I7~*'~-<-~1
Vol
A.
Pat Boecl<man ,/J~
Pat. Bo~, 1aq1~U" /'-7 /J
})y jJ'JJAAJ~ . Deput.y
May 15, 1998
To whom it may concern:
The attached is a true and correct copy of Resolution 98-01 A Resolution of the
Prior Lake City Council Overturning the Decision of the Planning Commission in
the Matter of Request for Variance, Case No. 97-053 and Approving a Variance for
the Property Located at 16575 Inguadona Beach Circle.
Please record.
~jiltuu RieAJ
Deputy City Clerk
I:ISECYICOPY.DOC
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
.,
RESOLUTION 98-01
RESOLUTION OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY COUNCIL OVERTURNING THE
DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF REQUEST FOR
VARIANCE, CASE NO. 97-053, AND APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16575 INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
MOTION BY:
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
KEDROWSKI
SECOND BY:
PETERSEN
the Prior Lake City Council heard this issue on November 17, 1997,
December 1, 1997 and January 5, 1998, to act on an appeal by Brian Mattson
of the Planning Commission's denial of a request for a driveway setback
variance and an impervious surface variance for property legally described as
Lot 29, Inguadona Beach; and
On December 1, 1997, the City Council directed staff to work with the DNR
to present a solution and specifics on decreasing the rate of run-off from the
site; and
the City Council finds that the request for variance meets the standards for
granting variances set forth in Section 5-6-6 (C, 1-4) of the City Code, and
that the appellant has set forth adequate reasons for overturning the decision
of the Planning Commission; and
the City Council has determined that the Planning Commission's decision
denying the request for variance should be overturned, and said variance
should be approved:
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE:
FINDINGS
'9-.~~.;.:
1. Brain Mattson applied for a variance from Sections 5-5-5 F and 5-8-3 B,1 of the Zoning
Code in order to permit a 1 foot side yard setback for a driveway rather than the required 5
foot setback and a 24% variance to permit impervious surface coverage of 54% rather than
the maximum allowed of 30% impervious surface coverage as drawn in Exhibit A on
property located in the R-l (Suburban Residential) District and the SD (Shoreland Overlay)
District at the following location, to wit;
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle, legally described as Lot 29, Inguadona Beach
2. The Planning Commission reviewed the application for variance as contained in Case File
#97-053, held hearings thereon on June 23, 1997 and on October 27, 1997, and denied the
applicant's request.
16200 E~~<feu~V~~~I~~I.a~~~9~1~?~ke, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612)aa~7-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
3. Brian Mattson appealed the decision of the Planning Commission in accordance with Section
5-6-3 (A) of the City Code.
4. The Prior Lake City Council reviewed this appeal on November 17, 1997, December 1, 1997
and January 5, 1998.
5. City staff met with DNR representatives on December 4, 1997 at the site to discuss the
grades and means of decreasing the rate of run-off (see December 10, 1997 letter from
DNR).
6. The City Council has considered the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety,
and welfare of the community, the existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air,
danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on property values in the surrounding area
and the effect of the proposed variances on the Comprehensive Plan.
7. Approving the variance allows a permitted accessory use, a two-car garage, and access to the
garage, on this property.
8. The proposed variance does not negatively impact light, air or drainage on the site. Snow
storage can occur on the site, and the potential damage to adjacent properties can be avoided
through the use of a fence.
9. The City Council has determined that there are unique circumstances or conditions regarding
the property that are not the fault or cause of the applicants.
10. The City Council has determined literal enforcement of the ordinance will result in undue
hardship, as the applicant's are proposing to meet the building setback requirements and the
proposed variances are unavoidable.
11. The contents of Planning Case File #97-053 are hereby entered into and made a part of the
public record and the record of the decision for this case.
CONCLUSION
Based upon'the Findings set forth above, the City Council hereby overturns the decision of the
Planning Commission and hereby approves the following for a proposed detached garage and'
driveway as drawn in Exhibit A and modified by the applicant in Exhibit B, which exhibits are
incorporated into this resolution:
1. A three foot side yard setback variance permitting a driveway setback of two feet
rather than the required driveway setback of five feet.
2. A 6.5% impervious surface variance permitting impervious surface of 36.5% rather
than the maximum allowed of 30%
These variances are granted with the following terms and conditions;
r: \council\reso luti\planres\rs980 1 cc.doc
Page 2
.
1. A revised survey must be submitted, indicating the applicants proposed change and
the removal of the existing concrete patio and driveway to decrease the impervious
surface to 36.5%.
2. The applicant hereby agrees to keep and store all snow from the driveway on his
property .
3. Gutters are to be placed on the proposed garage to direct run-off to the yard to the
south side of the property (grassy area).
4. As per DNR letter dated December 10, 1997, a two foot aggregate trench will be
constructed (as part of the permit for the garage) the entire length of the driveway to
decrease the rate of run-off from the proposed garage and driveway and to
significantly reduce run-off to the adjacent property to the north. Mr. Mattson, at his
discretion may place a perforated plastic tile line in the trench to move excessive
water to the street.
5. As per City Code Section 5-6-6 (D), the applicant has 60 days to record this
resolution or it is null and void and as per Section 5-6-8, the applicant has one year
to obtain the necessary permits for the proposed project or this approval is null and
void.
Passed and adopted this 5th day of January, 1998.
Mader
Kedrowski
Petersen
Schenck
Vacant
YES
X
X
X
NO
Mader
Kedrowski
Petersen
Schenck
Vacant
""'~"-"'""'.;-:
City M~n:ager,
Ci~ ak
{Seal}
r:\council\reso luti\p lanres\rs980 1 cc.doc
Page 3
. Agreed with staff s report.
. It is mandatory to have a two car garage in Minnesota.
. The lot is substandard and the applicant has tried every way to comply.
. The DNR basically agreed with the runoff.
. There is a hardship.
Cramer:
. Agreed with staff s recommendation.
. A two car garage is appropriate for Minnesota.
. The applicant has done a great deal of work to come as close to the impervious
surface requirement as possible.
. Supports the proposal.
Stamson:
. Very hesitant to grant a variance over the 30%.
. In the past, Commissioners have generally concluded a garage is necessary.
. Staffs recommendations are down to a 2.7% variance.
. All setbacks from adjacent properties are met.
. The drainage on neighboring properties is almost non-existent. The runoff is taken
care of.
. This is a very unique circumstance.
. Supports staff s proposal.
Open discussion:
Kuykendall:
. Will support the variance given the uniqueness of the property.
. Applicant Whitney explained how she measured and maintains the green space (14 x
61 feet).
. Changed his position given the rationale applicant maintains the adjoining property to
support the request.
MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY VONHOF, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 97-
17PC GRANTING A 3% VARIANCE TO PERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE OF 33%
RATHER THAN THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED OF 30% FOR A PROPOSED
GARAGE AND EXP ANDED DRIVEWAY ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT
14407 W ATERSEDGE TRAIL WITH THE ADDED CONDITION GUTTERS BE
ADDED TO EACH SIDE OF THE GARAGE.
Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
5. Old Business:
-.-/
B. Case #97-053 Brian Mattson Variance Continued - Request to construct a new
garage and access driveway for the property located at 16575 Inguadona Beach Circle.
L:\97FILES\97PLCOMM\PCMIN\MNl 02797 .DOC
3
Planner Jenni Tovar presented the staffreport dated October 27, 1997.
This request was brought before the commission in June and continued at the request of
the applicant for plan revisions to reduce the overall variance requests. Mr. Mattson is
proposing to construct a new detached garage and access driveway. There is no existing
garage on the property. No previous variances have been granted.
The existing house with deck is setback approximately 22 feet from the front property
line, 9.8 feet from the side property line to the north, approximately 10 feet from the side
property line to the south.
The applicant is proposing to construct a 480 square foot detached garage in the rear yard
with a bituminous access driveway located along the side of the principle structure to the
garage in the back. Existing impervious surface is 28%. The proposed additions with
impervious surface removal will create an overall impervious surface of 36.5%. The
Shoreland Ordinance allows a maximum impervious surface coverage of not more than
30%. The proposed driveway will be located 2 feet from the property line. The City
Code requires a minimum driveway setback of 5 feet from the side yard property line.
Therefore, the applicants are requesting a 6.5% variance to impervious surface coverage
maximum to permit coverage of 36.5%, rather than the maximum allowed of 30% and a 3
foot variance to the driveway side yard setback to allow a 2 foot driveway setback rather
than the required setback of 5 feet.
The DNR is not opposed to the location of the driveway 2 feet off the property line along
with staffs conditions as stated in their report. Tovar said staff would work with
applicant in diverting the water.
Staff Recommendation: If the Planning Commission feels a 2 car garage is reasonable,
then staff recommends approval of the variances proposed. If the Planning Commission
feels a 1 car garage is reasonable, staff recommends denying the variance request.
Mr. Matson's neighbors, Kenneth and Evelyn Falkum submitted a letter objecting to the
requested variances.
Comments from the Public:
Brian Mattson, 16575 Inguadona Beach Circle, responded to questions regarding gutters.
There is on one side of the house where the driveway would be located. Mr. Mattson said
he has been sensitive to the impervious surface and his neighborhood area. All the other
new construction above him has forced the water down the road and changed the
neighborhood. It has become a real consideration for his garage by his neighbors across
the street. One of the contingencies is a 3 foot easement for snow storage and drainage.
Tovar explained the driveway setback allowing for adequate snow storage. Mattson
explain his plan for snow removal.
L:\97FILES\97PLCOMM\PCMIN\MNI02797.DOC
4
Dennis Falkum, 10500 Olympic Circle, Eden Prairie, is the son of the neighboring
property across the road, voiced his parents concerns for the runoff.
Comments from Commissioners:
Kuykendall:
. Questioned width and easement. Tovar explained the possible snow storage easement
between the neighbors.
. With the water problems in the neighborhood he cannot agree with the higher
impervious surface. There were no alternative proposals from the applicant to solve
the runoff problem.
. Even with a one car garage the impervious surface would be 32% percent.
. Mr. Mattson responded he is at 28% right now. He has four drivers and a boat and is
trying to deal with storing his property.
. Suggested removing the concrete patio under the deck.
. Would like to see other designs.
. Given the impact on the community suggested tabling to a future meeting.
Criego:
. Very small lot - 5,600 sq. feet. The DNR has proposed alternatives.
. A neighbor does not want to provide a snow area.
. If it was just 36% he could agree, but does not support using the neighbor's property
for snow storage.
Cramer:
. Agreed with Criego. Has difficulty with the two foot setback.
. The neighborhood drainage is a problem.
. The DNR wants to slow down the drainage.
. There is no "on street" parking.
. Cannot agree to grant the variance.
V onhof:
. The neighborhood has tight lots.
. The house across the street is below grade.
. Suggested to Mr. Mattson - remove the driveway to the south side of the property
which would reduce the setback and impervious surface.
. There is a reasonable alternative. Hardship criteria is not met.
. There will be a grading issue either way.
. Need for a two car garage.
Stamson:
. Agreed with Commissioners on the parking issue.
. The DNR is asking 25% impervious surface. In this neighborhood there are no curbs
or gutters.
. What is proposed will only add to the existing problems.
L:\97FILES\97PLCOMM\PCMIN\MN102797.DOC
5
. The neighbors can build 5 feet from the property. A total of7 feet between the two
properties will be a problem.
. This proposal has a significant negative impact on the neighborhood.
Mr. Mattson believes the primary cause of the water problems are from the newly
constructed homes. Their construction has turned the roads into a river. His driveway
construction is minimal. He understands the problem.
Kuykendall:
. Suggested purchasing the adj acent lot.
MOTION BY VONHOF, SECOND BY CRIEGO, TO DENY THE REQUESTED
VARIANCE BASED ON THE LACK OF HARDSHIP DEMONSTRATED FROM
THE ZONING CODE CRITERIA.
Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
6. New Business:
A. Discussion with Prior Lake Spring Lake (PLSL) Watershed District
Representative - Craig Gontarek
Mr. Gontarek began his presentation by pointing out the Watershed District has a very
marginal role in the FEMA ordinance. The only role the Watershed District maintains is
management of the outlet, which policies are dictated by the DNR. He explained the
outlet and the future with the 509 Plan (a 10 year outlook). The original outlet was
designed for flood relief, rather than flood control. They have a joint powers agreement
with the City of Shakopee and the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District. If the
PLSL Watershed District wants to open the outlet, they have to notify Shakopee and the
Minnesota River District. If they are having problems they have the ability to shut the
outlet off.
The Watershed is concerned with the increasing impervious surface in the system. They
would like to incorporate ponding upstream. Unfortunately the topography is not good.
The Watershed is also looking at modifications to the outlet and the affects on the
surrounding properties and Minnesota River. Construction costs are tens of millions of
dollars. Most of the problems are in the upper watershed. Mr. Gontarek mentioned the
PLSL Watershed is on the leading edge on how to address some of the problems. The
Watershed does not enforce zoning ordinances. Their primary focus has been water
quality. Funds and grants were discussed as well.
The Commissioners discussed Scott County and the Metropolitan Council's involvement
in the area. The Watershed meets with the Cities, Townships and Met Council. How land
is developed has a major impact on the watershed. Planned developments such as cluster
housing and leaving open areas are needed and should be understood and incorporated byidevelopers. The Watershed did not have the power to make land use decisions in the
L:\97FILES\97PLCOMM\PCMIN\MNI02797.DOC
6
ordinance. He said he was not comfortable granting some requests and some not based upon
reasons other than the ordinance and its requirements.
. Councilmember Robbins said Mr. Hines mentioned there is no other way to access the deck
unless you go through house.
. Mr. Hines said in order to access the front deck, he would have to go through the house.
. Councilmember Kedrowski said so the whole purpose of the variance is to build steps to the
deck.
. Mr. Hines said the purpose of the variance is so he can build what he wants and fit it within
current guidelines.
. City Attorney Pace asked how do you get on the deck now?
. Mr. Hines said the stairs now, but if he built according to the planning commission criteria,
he would have to go through the house to reach the other side of the deck.
. Councilmember Kedrowski said so the hardship is you won't have access to the property.
. Mr. Hines said he is asking for a variance on an existing allowable non-conforming use.
. Planner Tovar said he would be creating his own hardship by cutting off the stairs to build a
porch, and that is not a hardship.
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY SCHENCK TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 97-
104 AFFIRMING DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING A
V ARlAJ.'l"CE REQUEST BY PHILIP AND BYRON HINES TO THE SETBACK.
Upon a vote, ayes by Andren, Kedrowski, Mader, Robbins, and Schenck, the motion carried.
Variance Request Mattson Side Yard Setback
.
Planner Tovar showed a site plan detailing the proposal. Mr. Mattson is proposing to build a
garage and a driveway. The proposed driveway is setback 1 foot from the property line, and
the requirement is five feet. His impervious surface proposal originally was 54% which
would be a 24% variance. The setbacks are met for the garage. The Planning Commission
gave him the opportunity to revise his impervious surface proposal. He proposed to remove
1 foot to make it seven feet wide, with a 2 foot side yard. Staff recommended approval
contingent upon him obtaining an easement. The Planning Commission denied it because
they felt legal alternatives exist. The driveway could be moved to the opposite side of the
hOuse;, allowing 5 feet. The garage could be smaller.
1 11797.DOC
15
.
Councilmember Kedrowski asked what kind of surface is the impervious surface?
.
Planner Tovar said concrete.
.
Councilmember Kedrowski said when coming in from the other side, is there anything that
would prevent the driveway.
.
Planner Tovar said there are steps that would have to be removed and relocated. The
Planning Commission felt drainage was an important issue and the cost of relocating the
steps would be worth the positive effect on the drainage.
.
Brian Mattson of 16575 Inguandona Beach Circle addressed the Council. He said there are
topographical problems with putting the driveway on the other side. He said the concrete
area under the deck was 5'x 20' and the water would flow down onto the road. If the
driveway was put onto the other side of the house, as far as the drainage in the
neighborhood, this is a vacant lot. The setback is tightest next to the house. It is a private
road. There is a lot of new construction taking place. The vice president of the homeowner's
association feels there would be no change to the area.
.
Councilmember Kedrowski asked why wouldn't the neighbor give an easement?
.
Mr. Mattson said the neighbor is older and has been talking with his children about the
property and they don't want him making any decisions regarding the property.
.
Councilmember Kedrowski asked whether it would work without an easement.
.
Planner Tovar said if there is no easement to the north side, there may be problems down the
line with snow and leaves on someone else's property. The reason for the setback is to
provide for drainage and snow storage and prevent future problems.
.
Councilmember Schenck asked what is the size of the property to the north?
.
Planner Tovar said it appears to be the same width, not the same depth, approximately 55
feet in width.
.
Councilmember Schenck said so in other words they would be looking at a variance for that
as well. .
.
Planner Tovar said it depends upon the footprint ofthe house, but it is possible.
.
Councilmember Schenck asked if Mr. Mattson had sought purchase of the lot.
.
Mr. Mattson said no, because of the earlier reason. He said there were two vacant lots in a
row. There will probably be two other homes in there. He said he can't rationalize how
drainage would be a problem.
.
Mayor Andren said Mr. Mattson meets three of the four variance criteria. She said the
sticking point is whether it would serve the intent of the ordinance, which it would if he
111797.DOC
16
could find someplace to store the snow. She asked if there was an alternative for snow
storage outside of a five foot easement.
. Mr. Mattson said he was planning to start in the center of the driveway. He said right now he
has to blow it straight into the street. All the snow from the circle is put into the vacant lot.
. Planner Tovar said if the Council does feel that way, perhaps a fence would relieve that
problem, then he would have to keep the snow on his property and deal with that issue
himself.
. Mayor Andren asked if he would have any trouble putting a fence up and keeping the snow
on his side.
. Mr. Mattson said he would not have any trouble putting a fence up.
. Mayor Andren said she would be happy with that.
. Councilmember Mader said his feeling was that every effort should be made to come up
with a way to allow him to have a garage, a logical requirement in Minnesota. He said he
would like to suggest deferring the issue until the next meeting so the staff could investigate
the alternatives. He said the issue of where to put the snow should be further investigated.
MOTION BY MADER SECOND BY ROBBINS TO TABLE THE ISSUE FOR THE
NEXT MEETING SO STAFF CAN WORK WITH MR. MATTSON FOR
ALTERNATNES.
Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Robbins, nays by Andren, Kedrowski, and Schenck, the motion
failed.
.
Councilmember Schenck said they had not yet heard from Councilmember Robbins.
.
Councilmember Robbins said she had not heard anything about the drainage problems
existing on the lot and would like to know more about it.
.
Planner Tovar said it was her understanding that there were several lots in the area with over
30% impervious surface, creating a lot of runoff all over, with no curb and gutter. There are
engineering and drainage issues that have never been dealt with. Because they are private
streets, it is left up to the homeowners to deal with those issues.
.
Councilmember Robbins asked specifically on this lot, are there significant drainage
problems?
.
Planner Tovar said it would be the elevations that create the rate of runoff from the back of
the lot to the front of the lot without allowing any filtering on the driveway. That is one of
the recommendations of the DNR, that they provide some kind of filtering to decrease the
rapid rate of runoff.
.
Councilmember Robbins asked what does that mean?
11I797.DOC
17
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
111797.DOC
Planner Tovar said it could be oil on the driveway, tar; the steeper the slope, the faster it will
run off into the street.
Councilmember Robbins asked how would they filter the water?
Planner Tovar said grass, a drainage swale, or grass on the side. Gutters on top of the roof
could be directed toward a grassy area instead of onto the driveway.
Councilmember Kedrowski asked whether in moving the driveway to other side of house,
the higher elevation would increase the flow of the water.
Planner Tovar said she is not the filtering expert but she can give them her opinion. She said
cost is not a hardship. It could be alleviated by physically moving the dirt. There is more lot
width and area to deal with. They could adjust the grades to meet the intent of the ordinance.
Mayor Andren said the man needs a garage. That is a reasonable request for the State of
Minnesota. She said outside of what staffhas recommended, a drainage swale and easement,
which the neighbor does not want to give, she likes the idea of putting up a fence. She asked
if a drainage swale could be put in.
Planner Tovar said she could work with the applicant and the DNR to come up with
something to meet the intent of the DNR.
Mayor Andren said she would be in favor of granting the variance provided that he put up a
fence on his property to contain the snow.
Planner Tovar asked if she could make a suggestion. She said it is the intent of the ordinance
to decrease the variance requests as much as possible and if it were tabled, one
recommendation that she would make is that the concrete patio under the deck be removed
to decrease the impervious surface that much more on the lot. If this were tabled, that would
be on staff's list of recommended changes.
Councilmember Schenck asked what impact would the fence have on the neighbors?
Planner Tovar said the City ordinance allows anyone to have a fence up to and on the
property line, up to six feet high in the rear and side yards. In the front yard it would have to
be 42 inches and 75% open.
Councilmember Robbins said so in front of the house the fence would not be solid.
Planner Tovar said the ordinance requires a 75% open fence in the front yard. Maybe they
could make that a condition, that an opaque fence be put up on the side and rear yards. She
said if the Council was going to approve it, staff has to write a resolution anyway, so they
could just direct staff to write a resolution, and Council could then change it if they wanted
to.
18
MOTION BY SCHENCK SECOND BY KEDROWSKI TO TABLE THE ISSUE UNTIL
DECEMBER 1ST AND DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION
OVERTURNING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
Upon a vote, ayes by Andren, Kedrowski, Robbins, and Schenck, nay Mader, the motion
carried.
Ordinance 97-18
FLOOD PLAIN
8. NEW BUSINESS:
A. Consider Approval of Ordinance 97-18 Amending the Flood Plain Regulations of the
City Relating to the Establishment of the Official Flood Map, the Flood Protection
Elevation, and Non-conforming Structures.
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY SCHENCK TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 97-
18 AMENDING THE FLOOD PLAIN REGULATIONS OF THE CITY RELATING TO
THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE OFFICIAL MAP, THE FLOOD PROTECTION
ELEVATION AND NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURES.
.
Councilmember Robbins clarified if a house is at 908.5 it would have to have a foot of
freeboard because it is below the ordinary high water mark, but if it is at 908.9, it won't
require the extra foot because it is outside ofthe flood plain.
.
Planning Coordinator Kansier said so you are asking if we have a house in the identified
flood plain where the ground elevation is below 908.9, which is the 100 year flood elevation,
will it require a foot of free board? Are we talking about a new structure? That would be yes.
.
Councilmember Robbins said so if there is a new house above 908.9 it wouldn't require
freeboard.
.
Planning Coordinator Kansier said correct because at that point it would not be in the flood
. plain.
.
Councilmember Robbins said so it is not one level of water height that means it needs
protection for all homes, it depends upon the situation.
.
Planning Coordinator Kansier said the elevation is identified in the study at 908.9 and that
elevation on each property is identified by the topography or existing elevations of the site.
.
Councilmember Robbins said so a new house could be at 909 and have to have protection.
.
Planning Coordinator Kansier said it is not the house it is the ground elevation, so you
would be taking a vacant piece of land and measuring the elevation of the site. Obviously, it
would be adjacent to the lake. If you think of it as layers of ground, where each layer is 1/10
of a foot, from lot to lot it can vary. If the elevation of the ground is above 908.9, then it is
outside the flood plain and would not have to be constructed according to the flood
regulation.
.
Councilmember Robbins said so it is different depending on where the house is.
11l797.DOC
19
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
Date: January 5, 1998
~1l'V SO~ ~
N E L TO ORDER: Mayor Mader called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Present were: Mayor Mader,
Councilmembers Kedrowski, Petersen, and Schenck, City Manager Boyles, City Attorney Pace, Assistant City
Manager Woodson, Finance Director Teschner, Parks and Recreation Director Hokeness, City Engineer Ilkka,
Planning Director Rye, Planning Coordinator Kansier, Planner Tovar, Recording Secretary Oden.
2. A) OATH OF OFFICE:
.
Mayor Wes Mader
Councilmember Jim Petersen
Councilmember Pete Schenck
.
.
· City Manager Boyles administered the Oath of Office. Mayor Wes Mader, Councilmember Jim Petersen, and
Councilmember Pete Schenck were sworn in as elected officials.
B) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Mader led the Pledge of Allegiance and welcomed everyone to the
meeting.
3. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES:
A. December 3,1997 Truth in Taxation
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY SCHENCK TO APPROVE THE DECEMBER 3, 1997 TRUTH
IN TAXATION HEARING MINUTES.
Upon a vote, ayes by Kedrowski, Mader, and Schenck, abstention Petersen, the motion carried.
B. December 15, 1997 Regular City Council Meeting
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY SCHENCK TO APPROVE THE DECEMBER 15,1997 CITY
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES.
Upon a vote, ayes by Kedrowski, Mader, and Schenck, abstention Petersen, the motion carried.
4. CONSENT AGENDA:
A. Consider Approval of Invoices to be Paid.
B. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-01 Overturning the Decision of the Planning Commission
Denying A Variance Request By Brian Mattson to the Side Yard Setback for Driveway and
Impervious Surface for Property Located at 16575 Inguadona Beach Circle.
C. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-02 Authorizing The Execution of the 1998 Joint Powers
Agreement for Traffic Markings, Street Sweeping, Crack Sealing, and Seal Coating.
· Mayor Mader requested the removal of items A and B.
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY SCHENCK TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM C.
Upon a vote, ayes by Kedrowski, Mader, Petersen and Schenck the motion carried.
· Councilmember Kedrowski requested that item 4B be heard immediately since the applicants were in the
audience.
· Item 4B. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-01 Overturning the Decision of the Planning Commission
Denying A Variance Request By Brian Mattson to the Side Yard Setbackfor Driveway and Impervious Suiface
for Property Located at 16575 Inguadona Beach Circle
16B6JGkEagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4215
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
.
.
.
.
1598.DOC
.
City Manager Boyles introduced the item. It was ftrst considered in December, and the Council elected to
defer the issue. The staff was directed to check with the DNR to determine whether a solution for drainage
could be found.
.
Councilmember Petersen said it appears the objective was to move water off the street. The purpose of a trench
is to move water into street.
.
Planner Tovar said the trench would hold the water on the property so it would not run to the adjacent
property. She said with the aggregate trench, the water would percolate into the soil before moving to the
street.
.
Councilmember Petersen asked if there will be no additional runoff?
.
Planner Tovar said the DNR letter indicated drainage will improve with a trench. Additional runoff from the
driveway can be diverted into the trench.
.
Councilmember Schenck said he visited the property, and it is a hard-packed surface. It will increase the runoff
remarkably. That whole street needs help. He said if they are allowed to move forward and we have another
house slide what does that do to our liability?
.
Planner Tovar said this is not a lake lot.
.
Councilmember Schenck said to the north it is.
.
City Attorney Pace said the Council needs to act reasonably on the information before it. The Council has
information from the DNR with expertise in hydrology, and the DNR is satisfied with the proposed design. If
the Council chooses to rely on the DNR, it should be OK.
.
Councilmember Schenck asked what is the City's influence on the homeowner's association?
.
Planner Tovar said none, it is a private street.
.
Mayor Mader said the request for the variance was in November. He asked if the sixty days extension was
granted.
.
Planner Tovar said yes.
.
Mayor Mader asked if adjacent property owners received notiftcation.
.
Planner Tovar said yes.
.
Mayor Mader asked whether by granting this variance there would be more water on the street or a likelihood
of more water on the lake side of the street? An adjacent property owner said he was having problems.
.
Planner Tovar said she did not have the speciftcs to answer that.
.
Mayor Mader asked if City Engineer Ilkka would answer the question.
City Engineer Ilkka said his opinion is that potential for increased runoff to the north is minor and potentially
evens out.
Mayor Mader asked if that was across the street or the adjacent property.
City Engineer Ilkka said it was the adjacent property.
Mayor Mader said his concern was with the parcel across the street.
2
· City Engineer Ilkka said he could not answer that.
· Councilmember Schenck asked whether the vacant land is buildable.
· Planner Tovar, said yes, it is an existing lot.
· Councilmember Schenck asked whether this decision will reflect any future variance for the adjacent land.
· City Attorney Pace said no. All property is relatively unique. The focus on the issue is the criteria for granting
a variance. It is one particular property. The decision is whether they concur with the Planning Commission.
· Planner Tovar said the existing driveway is over 20 feet wide. The applicant is proposing a seven foot wide
drive.
· Mayor Mader asked City Attorney Pace whether the Planning Commission made a valid decision. He said
there was a potential effect on adjacent property. He said it seems a drainage ditch would tend to provide a
water channel and provide access for water to get to the soil level below. He asked about the tile line and
whether it would percolate.
· Planner Tovar said perforated plastic tile would let overflow go into the street
· Mayor Mader said at the expense of those across the street.
· City Manager Boyles said if the primary concem is perforated tile, it is permissive and not mandatory. Council
could amend #5 on page 3 of the resolution. Removal of number 5 would address the issue.
· Mayor Mader asked City Engineer Ilkka what is his perception? He asked if the water would move quickly to
the street and create a problem.
· City Engineer Ilkka said water would flow to north before it would go across the street.
· Mayor Mader asked about storage of snow in the front yard.
· Planner Tovar said a six foot fence will stop at the front of the house. There is an area in the front yard to store
snow.
· Mayor Mader said but what if the fence would not go from the front of house to the street. The resolution says
the applicant will keep and store snow especially in the front yard.
· City Attorney Pace said it was to store all snow from his property on his property.
· Mayor Mader said some fences function as a snow fence which produces a drift on one side and could intrude
on the neighbor's property. He asked Planner Tovar for clarification.
· Planner Tovar said she had no opinion on snow fences.
· Mayor Mader repeated the question to City Engineer Ilkka.
· City Engineer Ilkka said in general the percent of open space and width and height of fence would determine
how much snow would go through.
· Mayor Mader said the questions were the snow on the property, the snow fence, and whether the perforated
tile should be left out.
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY PETERSON TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 98-01
ELIMINATING SNOW FENCE AND CHANGING LANGUAGE TO "KEEPING SNOW ON PROPERTY"
VERSUS "ESPECIALLY FRONT YARD" AND LEAVE #5, PERFORATED TILE IN THE TRENCH IN
AS AN OPTIONAL NOT MANDATED ITEM.
1598.DOC
3
STAFF AGENDA REPORT
DATE:
4B
JENNI TOVAR, PLANNER
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION #98-XX
OVERTURNING THE DECISION OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING A VARIANCE
REQUEST BY BRIAN MATTSON TO THE SIDE
YARD SETBACK FOR DRIVEWAY AND
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 16575 INGUADONA BEACH
CIRCLE, Case File #97-053
JANUARY 5, 1998
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
SUBJECT:
INTRODUCTION:
The purpose of this item is to consider adoption of
Resolution 98-XX overturning the decision of the Planning
Commission to deny a variance for the construction of a
garage and driveway on property located at 16575
Inguadona Beach Circle. The City Council directed staff to
prepare the resolution after hearing the appeal on
November 17, 1997. On December 1, 1997, the City
Council directed staff to work with the Department of
Natural Rescues (DNR) to get specific details addressing
the run-off issue. On December 4, 1997, planning staff met
with Pat Lynch and Peter Leete of the DNR and Brian
Mattson on this site to discuss a solution.
BACKGROUND:
The Council will recall at the December 1, 1997 meeting, a
neighbor expressed concern about drainage problems
which might be exacerbated by the variance. (See attached
- excerpt from December 1, 1997 Minutes.)
The DNR has concluded that there are limited opportunities
to reduce run-off on this site. However, the attached letter
(December 10, 1997) details what is acceptable to the DNR
to achieve a decreased rate of run-off with the additional
impervious surface. The DNR specifically states the
removal of the existing parking area is necessary. Mr.
Mattson is proposing to do this anyway.
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97-053\97-53CC3.DOC Page 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Considering that the proposed driveway will be setback
two feet from the side property line, the DNR suggests
construction of a two foot aggregate-filled trench. A
perforated plastic tile line could be embedded in the trench
to move water to the street. This will allow for run-off to
be absorbed into the ground and directed away from the
adjacent property. The attached drawing indicates existing
slopes and run-off and how the proposed aggregate trench
affects run-off. Gutters along the garage will direct the
run-off away from the driveway to the grassy area which
will decrease the rate of run-off.
Additionally, at the December 4, 1997 site inspection with
the DNR, Mr. Mattson indicated that the residents of
Inguadona Beach were seriously considering options for
curb and gutter. The streets are private, thus the project
would be funded with private dollars. The DNR felt this is
the overall solution to the drainage problems in the
neighborhood.
The attached resolution includes findings as discussed at
the November 17, 1997 meeting. The conditions included
in the resolution are as follows:
1. A revised survey be submitted indicating the changes to
impervious surface as proposed, including removal of
the patio area under the deck;
2. A 5-6 foot tall opaque fence must be constructed along
the side property line (meeting City Code);
3. The applicant agrees to store the driveway snow on his
property;
4. Gutters are to placed on the proposed garage to direct
the run-offto the south side of the yard (grassy area);
5. As per DNR letter dated December 10, 1997, a two foot
aggregate trench will be constructed (as part of the
permit for the garage) the entire length of the driveway
to decrease the rate of run-off from the proposed garage
and driveway and to significantly reduce run-off to the
adjacent property to the north. Mr. Mattson, at his
discretion may place a perforated plastic tile line in the
trench to move excessive water to the street.
DISCUSSION:
If the Council feels that the attached resolution and
hardship criteria are not representative of the discussion at
the last meetings, then the necessary changes should be
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97-053\97-53CC3.DOC
Page 2
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Adopt Resolution 98-XX overturning the decision of
the Planning Commission as requested by Brain
Mattson with the conditions set forth above.
2. Defer this action to a date specific and provide the staff
with additional direction.
RECOMMENDATION: Alternative #1.
ACTION REQUIRED: Motion and second adopting the attached Resolution
#98-XX, overturning the decision of the Planning
Commission and approvin he requested variances.
les, City Manager
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97-053\97-53CC3.DOC
Page 3
RESOLUTION 98-XX
RESOLUTION OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY COUNCIL OVERTURNING THE
DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF REQUEST FOR
VARIANCE, CASE NO. 97-053, AND APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16575 INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
MOTION BY: SECOND BY:
WHEREAS, the Prior Lake City Council heard this issue on November 17, 1997,
December 1, 1997 and January 5, 1998, to act on an appeal by Brian Mattson
of the Planning Commission's denial of a request for a driveway setback
variance and an impervious surface variance for property legally described as
Lot 29, Inguadona Beach; and
WHEREAS, On December 1, 1997, the City Council directed staff to work with the DNR
to present a solution and specifics on decreasing the rate of run-off from the
site; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the request for variance meets the standards for
granting variances set forth in Section 5-6-6 (C, 1-4) of the City Code, and
that the appellant has set forth adequate reasons for overturning the decision
of the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the Planning Commission's decision
denying the request for variance should be overturned, and said variance
should be approved:
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE:
FINDINGS
1. Brain Mattson applied for a variance from Sections 5-5-5 F and 5-8-3 B,1 of the Zoning
Code in order to permit a 1 foot side yard setback for a driveway rather than the required 5
foot setback and a 24% variance to permit impervious surface coverage of 54% rather than
the maximum allowed of 30% impervious surface coverage as drawn in Exhibit A on
property located in the R-l (Suburban Residential) District and the SD (Shoreland Overlay)
District at the following location, to wit;
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle, legally described as Lot 29, Inguadona Beach
2. The Planning Commission reviewed the application for variance as contained in Case File
#97-053, held hearings thereon on June 23, 1997 and on October 27, 1997, and denied the
applicant's request.
1:\97fi1es\97var\97-053\rs98xxcc.doc l'ags: J
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (61~) l!-47-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
3. Brian Mattson appealed the decision of the Planning Commission in accordance with Section
5-6-3 (A) of the City Code.
4. The Prior Lake City Council reviewed this appeal on November 17, 1997, December 1, 1997
and January 5, 1998.
5. City staff met with DNR representatives on December 4, 1997 at the site to discuss the
grades and means of decreasing the rate of run-off (see December 10, 1997 letter from
DNR).
6. The City Council has considered the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety,
and welfare of the community, the existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air,
danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on property values in the surrounding area
and the effect of the proposed variances on the Comprehensive Plan.
7. Approving the variance allows a permitted accessory use, a two-car garage, and access to the
garage, on this property.
8. The proposed variance does not negatively impact light, air or drainage on the site. Snow
storage can occur on the site, and the potential damage to adjacent properties can be avoided
through the use of a fence.
9. The City Council has determined that there are unique circumstances or conditions regarding
the property that are not the fault or cause of the applicants.
10. The City Council has determined literal enforcement of the ordinance will result in undue
hardship, as the applicant's are proposing to meet the building setback requirements and the
proposed variances are unavoidable.
11. The contents of Planning Case File #97-053 are hereby entered into and made a part of the
public record and the record of the decision for this case.
CONCLUSION
Based upon the Findings set forth above, the City Council hereby overturns the decision of the
Planning Commission and hereby approves the following for a proposed detached garage and
driveway as drawn in Exhibit A and modified by the applicant in Exhibit B, which exhibits are
incorporated into this resolution:
1. A three foot side yard setback variance permitting a driveway setback of two feet
rather than the required driveway setback of five feet.
2. A 6.5% impervious surface variance permitting impervious surface of 36.5% rather
than the maximum allowed of 30%
These variances are granted with the following terms and conditions;
1. A revised survey must be submitted, indicating the applicants proposed change and
the removal of the existing concrete patio and driveway to decrease the impervious
surface to 36.5%.
1: \97 files\97var\97 -053\rs98xxcc.doc
Page 2
/ yJJ-J ~ (Y'
{~ 'A completely opaque fence, 5 to 6 feet in height and meeting City Code, is to be
lY constructed between the proposed driveway and the property line to the north,
abutting Lot 26, Inguadona Beach, to contain the applicant's snow within his
property. This fence will be constructed prior to the issuance of a certificate of
~ occupancy, temporary or permanent, for the proposed garage. ~ I' _ P ~\
(:) - () p . . ~ S F. tjfi 7
~ The applicant hereby agrees to keep and store snow from the proposed driveway,
eSlleeilllly tit'" ff6fl.t )M6, on his property.
4. Gutters are to be placed on the proposed garage to direct run-off to the yard to the
south side of the property (grassy area).
5. As per DNR letter dated December 10, 1997, a two foot aggregate trench will be
constructed (as part of the permit for the garage) the entire length of the driveway to
decrease the rate of run-off from the proposed garage and driveway and to
significantly reduce run-off to the adjacent property to the north. Mr. Mattson, at his
discretion may place a perforated plastic tile line in the trench to move excessive
water to the street.
~s per City Code Section 5-6-6 (D), the applicant has 60 days to record this
eso1ution or it is null and void and as per Section 5-6-8, the applicant has one year
to obtain the necessary permits for the proposed project or this approval is null and
void.
fY'-~
a~ _ p~r"\
Passed and adopted this 5th day of January, 1998.
YES
NO
~~
I;V~
Mader
Kedrowski
Petersen
Schenck
Vacant
Mader
Kedrowski
Petersen
Schenck
Vacant
{Seal}
City Manager,
City of Prior Lake
1: \97files\97var\97 -05 3\rs98xxcc.doc
Page 3
BRIAN MATTSON
16575 INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
PRIOR LAKE, MN. 55372
ValleY Surveying Co., f?A.
SUITE /20-C, /6670 FRANKLIN TRAIL
FRANKLIN TRAIL OFFICE CONDOMINIUM
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
TELEPHONE (612) 447 - 2570
EXHIBIT A
<'0
") ,:::
c '-I
S 89.18'08"E
103.3 plot
---IOS.73 meos.---
flu
1936.9)
- I ~939~4--
--- ":p (1l39.31
,940.2
.
940.6' I
)
,
Y20" MAPLE
! ~
,
941.6
(941,91
,
J~
0'
"0>
cO
180
. III
f~
")0
L_ --./
FENC E 0.5' EAST
.
,~
944.' I~
d,--.119. 71 meos.---
oi' 116.7 plot
946.2.' N88.54'47'W
"
..,
'"
o
GA RAGE SLAB
EL. 942..01
EX'STlNG
HOUSE
-...z ,.....
,-I\.)
I
I
DESCRIPTION:
Lot 29, "INGUADONA BEACH", Scott County, Minnesota. Also showing the !.ocation of
the existing impr-ovem.'- sand pJ::'oposed addition, this 16th day of Feb. 1996.
l'!CIl'ES' BenchmaJ::'k SI::l6.15 walkout elevation of the existing house.
Net lot area: 5,607 sq. ft.
946.7
x
DENOTES EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
~
(940.2) DENOTES PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION
DENOTES PROPOSED DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE
SET GARAGE SLAB AT EL. 940.34
SET TOP OF BLOCK OF GARAGE AT EL. 947.82
Net existing lot coveJ::'age : 28.0 %
PJ::'oposed net lot coveJ::'age : 53.8 %
o
I
SCALE
20
40
I
Revised 5/15/97 To show proposed garage
os directed by owner.
, hereby certify that this survey was prepared
by me or under my direct supervision and that
,~...d~'y 'icensed Land SlIVeyor under the
)dW' of..'f,ie Sto'~ of )\jinM,,\to. _.J~
IN
FEET
. r ~
EXHIBIT A
. CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
Impervious Surface Calculations
(To be Submitted with Building Pennit Application)
For All Properties Located in theShoreland District (SO).
The Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage Permitted in 30 Percent.
PAGE .2
Property Address \lQC;1S... 'IN. G,\,)l\.~,~~ ..e E~~ c..\Y~<:.u€"
Lot AreaS I {,l'51 Sq. Feet x 30% = "............, {PB"Z., 0
***************.**~*************************************.***************
HOUSE
.. LENGTH
~.S.,,~
11- x
x
WIDTH
'z.L\
.~.c6
=
. SQ. FEET ..
{p~L\ '''''''"'C
4"2---
=
ATTACHED GARAGE
...
..
DETACHED BLDGS
(Gara~
TOTAL PRINCI.PLE STRUCTURE...........~...........
f~~P (;..A~t\je
. 'z.<.;L x 20 4SD
':> l" . x. t --z... ' t'2.0
TOT ALDET ACHED BUILDINGS.......................
,-, I- .2...0 . '3Q 0
~.S x Zo = \to
''2..~ x <OV-\-z.. Au.. "'~ Cu.k., '
'2.'5 x e ... 4b
1..\. ?;) -L:. \"2- , , 5 z-
TOTAL PAVED AREAS...............,.,~"...........,..,........
~2..(p
CONt.rek (ej..~~)
DlUVEWAYIPAVED ARl!AS
-- .' - '
(Driveway-paved or not) ..
. (SidewalkIParking Areas)
\coo
. .PATIOS/PORCHESIDECKS
(Open Decks W' min. opening between
boards. with a pervious surface below;
are not considered to be impervious)
x ...
X ...
'X ...
,T OT AL D:E:, CK~..... h. ~.. ..... .... .... .... .......... ......,.. ....... ...
~ -z..o
~
X e
X qe
=
\ <00 - "t)"'fl.A~c.__.
.., OY_brlft ~'.,.\C4
\~
:s
3(r~
=
TOTAL. OTHER....;~........."."."...........~.................... ~
TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
.UND~':' .
. prepf).redBy\J",\~ SUR.t'"\''''j c.. I B fl.. ·
Company~UtW~~..!
.. .
, I 3DI~.O I'
L\?J31..o' I
.. Date CS - 2<''\- ~I
Phone #\..l.'-\I-~S'7 t>
~ ,
~ EXHIBIT B
/(),-17-?7
REVISIONS
--:;;;111,' ~Uir:
tJ?'IM X. r"( U; ~ r:..prvi0<6 (!" Ie" t....ko ""/
~.,..... ... J q. :; -F7.IIDw S . -rh'x: "Tr(" ""'y
d'r/)fi'~t~( ok-ry{'~. bzc/"d.tse:.. r~ r~r/'~~S
SLf ear +0 36 ~
tff;IA'f.P~~ eJC.i '::>-I-i~ dr I tJ~
te IhIQ.,Jc.. .sh4::(
Decree; ~ t,)/a...f4 ,~ d"'('t)~Vd/
-fi-I'H<1 g t' ~~ '7 ~
-fT-oVVf
7~..s- s.,t ;c.e: f-
/;20
elL-!- '+u.ru,,~~~VtcI 511lb I'''''
ffPo""- ,,-f- ~rtt<,.!- ~'y 3',l( ~
~8
60
-'"
---
9'73
t)r '1 /V'f"f: f ~r"/tJ(t~
be (21" ~~' ~
5(')/~
973
jIIew ~enh (;~~
-
;2~~, e9r :5'(;?~ (2"1/;":' .$"lO7)
~~ }/PI,
~'~
,,;'657.s- ~~trI~&_~ .
h'-' t';t"7b '7'?.....~-- ~. (:;-
w - 7' -,:s- ? ..S'~CP
q Lf 1 4-..:.u,{ S-
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
DNR Waters, Metro Region, 1200 Warner Road, St Paul, MN 55106-6793
Telephone: (612) 772-7910 Fax: (612) 772-7977
December 10, 1997
~
Ms. Jenni Tovar
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: MATTSON IMPERVIOUS SURF ACE AND SIDEYARD SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST,
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE, SCOTT COUNTY
Dear Ms. Tovar:
This letter is a follow up to the Thursday, December 4 site visit of the Mattson property regarding the
variance requested for the installation of a driveway and garage. The Department of Natural Resources
(DNR) agrees that there are limited options for the property as far as improved drainage for either the
existing or proposed driveway alignment. As I recall, the following was agreed to as the best solution to
runoff concerns:
1. Removal of the existing car slab.
2. ~nt of a two-foot aggregate-filled trench between the proposed driveway and the
Eortherly property line. A ~rforated "plastic tile line could also be placed in the trench to
move excessive w~ to Jh.~.!tmet.
-~.....----'-~-----~
The DNR will not object to the proposal as currently agreed to. The rock-filled trench adjacent to the
proposed driveway should decrease the rate of runoff, allow for some infiltration, and prevent water from
running onto the property to the north. Gutters on the house and proposed garage as well as grading of other
areas of the lot could also help in redirecting existing drainage to minimize the overall effects of the increased
impervious su."facc cfthe lot. We arc interested in overall solutions to lhe neighborhood's concerns of street
runoff. Please keep us informed if street modification plans go forward.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please contact me at 772-7910 should you have questions.
s~//--/ #'
li1~1
Hydrologist
P AMUcds
c: Brian Mattson, 16575 Inguadona Beach Circle, Prior Lake
DNR Information: 612-296-6157,1-800-766-6000 . TTY: 612-296-5484,1-800-657-3929
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Who Values Diversity
ft Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a
'-~ Minimum of 10% Post-Consumer Waste
r
r
I
1
I
E)lIS'fltlG GflAOE
I
~I
.....
tl
a:
&'
~I
f
.'
;'
//
PROPOSED 71 DRIVEWAY
I'
fYl' () Jk-s froYYl
L-J-J, )~l t,' '0 CoUVlD,'1 rn ( e-lf ~
9. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA
A. Consider Approval of Resolution 97-XX Overturning the Decision of the Planning
Commission Denying a Variance Request by Brian Mattson to the Side Yard Setback
for Driveway and Impervious Surface for Property Located at 16575 Inguadona
Beach Circle, Case File #97-053.
.
Councilmember Mader said everything should be done to allow the owner to have a garage.
He asked about the impervious surface presently on the property. He said the net existing lot
coverage is 28% and asked if that was impervious surface.
.
Planner Tovar said yes.
.
Councilmember Mader said they were talking about going from 28% to 36.5%, meaning
about 6.5% over the present ordinance. He asked about the fence, whether it could be taken
down in the future.
.
Planner Tovar said no, it would be recorded.
.
Councilmember Mader said the resolution says the applicant agrees to store snow, and asked
if it would be recorded.
.
Planner Tovar said if the City Council wanted a separate agreement they could do that but
the entire resolution would be recorded, so if the property transferred, the conditions would
hold.
.
Councilmember Mader asked about the provision in the resolution for water being diverted
to a swale or holding area.
.
Planner Tovar said she talked to Pat Lynch of the DNR and he would work with them, but
may not be able to do the swale on the property.
.
Councilmember Mader said to the extent that there is more impervious surface, there is more
runoff, and where on the property could they have a swale or divert the runoff to a holding
, area?
.
Planner Tovar said there are possibilities of re-routing the water.
.
Councilmember Mader said the south side of the property is higher.
.
Planner Tovar indicated the elevation and slope of the property in the back of the garage and
the street. She said they would do some grading in the back.
.
Councilmember Mader said he would be more comfortable if he saw how they would deal
with the water.
12197,DOC
5
. . Councilmember Kedrowski said the resolution is requiring him to remove a concrete deck,
but it is not stipulated that he would have to move the driveway in front.
. City Attorney Pace said that could be incorporated.
. Planner Tovar said it was under the conclusion part of the resolution.
. Councilmember Mader said Councilmember Kedrowski's reference is to removing the patio
concrete and not specifying the driveway as well. It should state both so there is no
misunderstanding.
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY SCHENCK TO AMEND THE RESOLUTION
TO INCLUDE EXHIBITS A AND B AND IN NO. 1 LIST CONCRETE DRIVEWAY
AND THAT THE RESOLUTION BE RECORDED.
. City Attorney Pace said in number 4, the additional impervious surface runoff should be
water.
. Councilmember Mader said he had concern with that. It makes it subjective. Somebody
better figure out a way to deal with the water.
. Mayor Andren recognized Dennis Fulcom of 10500 Olympic Circle Eden Prairie. He
addressed the Council on behalf of his parents, who owned the house accross the street. He
was concerned about runoff to his parents house. He said there was a big water problem
now.
. Councilmember Mader said this should be tabled one more time so the staff could look at it
with the property owner and DNR so that more problems are not created for the property-
owners across the street.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY ROBBINS TO TABLE THE ITEM.
Upon a vote, ayes by Andren, Kedrowski, Mader, Robbins, and Schenck, the motion carried.
. City Attorney Pace asked where are we on the sixty day rule?
. Planner Tovar said it started November 2nd, so we have until January 2nd. She said if
necessary, they can grant another 60 day extension.
10. OTHER BUSINE
A. City Manager
MADER TO NOMINATE COUNCILMEMBERS
EVALUATION COMMITTEE.
.
12197.DOC
6
STAFF AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
SUBJECT:
4B
JENNI TOVAR, PLANNER
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION #97-XX
OVER TURNING THE DECISION OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING A VARIANCE
REQUEST BY BRIAN MATTSON TO THE SIDE
YARD SETBACK FOR DRIVEWAY AND
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 16575 INGUADONA BEACH
CIRCLE, Case File #97-053
DECEMBER 1, 1997
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
The purpose of this item is to consider adoption of
Resolution 97-XX overturning the decision of the Planning
Commission to deny a variance for the construction of a
garage and driveway on property located at 16575
Inguadona Beach Circle. The City Council directed staff to
prepare the resolution after hearing the appeal on
November 17,1997.
BACKGROUND:
At the November 17, 1997 City Council meeting, staff was
directed to prepare a resolution overturning the decision of
the Planning Commission and approving the req~ested
variances for Brian Mattson. The attached resolution
includes findings as discussed at the meeting. The
conditions included in the resolution are as follows:
1. A revised survey be submitted indicating the changes to
impervious surface as proposed, including removal of
the patio area under the deck;
2. A fence must be constructed along the side property
line (meeting City Code);
3. The applicant agrees to contain the driveway snow on
his property;
4. The DNR must approve a plan to decrease the rate of
run-offwith filtering as recommended.
16200 ~~rJIC~:~;r~~~~~-.~5p~Z;5(~fJ;~~nesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612jg447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
DISCUSSION:
If the Council feels that the attached resolution and
hardship criteria are not representative of the discussion at
the last meeting, then the necessary changes should be
made.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Adopt Resolution 97-XX overturning the decision of
the Planning Commission as requested by Brain
Mattson.
2. Defer this action to a date specific and provide the staff
with additional direction.
RECOMMENDATION: Alternative #1.
ACTION REQUIRED: Motion and second adopting the attached Resolution
#97-XX, overturning the decision of the Planning
Commission and approvi the requested variances.
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97-053\97-53CC2.DOC
Page 2
RESOLUTION 97-XX
RESOLUTION OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY COUNCIL OVERTURNING THE
DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF REQUEST FOR
VARIANCE, CASE NO. 97-053, AND APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16575 INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
MOTION BY: SECOND BY:
WHEREAS, the Prior Lake City Council conducted a hearing on the 17th day of
November, 1997, to act on an appeal by Brian Mattson of the Planning
Commission's denial of a request for a driveway setback variance and an
impervious surface variance for property legally described as Lot 29,
Inguadona Beach; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the request for variance meets the standards for
granting variances set forth in Section 5-6-6 (C, 1-4) of the City Code, and
that the appellant has set forth adequate reasons for overturning the decision
of the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the Planning Commission's decision
denying the request for variance should be overturned, and said variance
should be approved:
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE:
FINDINGS
1. Brain Mattson applied for a variance from Sections 5-5-5 F and 5-8-3 B,1 of the Zoning
Code in order to permit a 1 foot side yard setback for a driveway rather than the required 5
foot setback and a 24% variance to permit impervious surface coverage of 54% rather than
the maximum allowed of 30% impervious surface coverage as drawn in Exhibit A on
property located in the R-l (Suburban Residential) District and the SD (Shoreland Overlay)
District at the following location, to wit;
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle, legally described as Lot 29, Inguadona Beach
2. The Planning Commission reviewed the application for variance as contained in Case File
#97-053, held hearings thereon on June 23, 1997 and on October 27, 1997, and denied the
applicant's request.
3. Brian Mattson appealed the decision of the Planning Commission in accordance with Section
5-6-3 (A) of the City Code.
4. The Prior Lake City Council reviewed this appeal on November 17, 1997.
1:\97files\97var\97-053\rs97xxcc.doc Page I
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
5. The City Council has considered the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety,
and welfare of the community, the existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air,
danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on property values in the surrounding area
and the effect of the proposed variances on the Comprehensive Plan.
6. Approving the variance allows a permitted accessory use, a two-car garage, and access to the
garage, on this property.
7. The proposed variance does not negatively impact light, air or drainage on the site. Snow
storage can occur on the site, and the potential damage to adjacent properties can be avoided
through the use of a fence.
8. The City Council has determined that there are unique circumstances or conditions regarding
the property that are not the fault or cause of the applicants.
9. The City Council has determined literal enforcement of the ordinance will result in undue
hardship, as the applicant's are proposing to meet the building setback requirements and the
proposed variances are unavoidable.
10. The contents of Planning Case File #97-053 are hereby entered into and made a part of the
public record and the record of the decision for this case.
CONCLUSION
Based upon the Findings set forth above, the City Council hereby overturns the decision of the
Planning Commission and approves the requested variances and hereby approves the following
for a proposed detached garage and driveway as drawn in Exhibit A and modified by the
applicant in Exhibit B.
This variance is granted with the following terms and conditions;
1. A revised survey must be submitted, indicating the applicants proposed change and
the removal of the concrete patio to decrease the impervious surface to 36.5%.
2. A completely opaque fence, 5 to 6 feet in height and meeting City Code, is to be
constructed between the proposed driveway and the property line to the north,
abutting Lot 26, Inguadona Beach, to contain the applicant's snow within his
property. This fence will be constructed prior to the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy, temporary or permanent, for the proposed garage.
3. The applicant hereby agrees to keep and store snow from the proposed driveway,
especially the front yard, on his property.
4. Additional impervious surface must be diverted to a swale or holding area to
decrease the rate of run-off within the property. This diversion is to be approved by
the DNR as part of the building permit approved plans.
Passed and adopted this 1st day of December, 1997.
1: \97files\97var\97 -053\rs97xxcc.doc
Page 2
{Seal}
1: \97files\97var\97 -053\rs97xxcc.doc
Andren
Kedrowski
Mader
Robbins
Schenck
YES
Andren
Kedrowski
Mader
Robbins
Schenck
NO
City Manager,
City of Prior Lake
Page 3
, '......1 ...,\~..... I....t'.
Valley' Surveying Co., P.A,
SUITE 120-C I /6670 FRANKLIN TRAIL
FRANKLIN TRAIL OFFICE CONDOMINIUM
PRIOR LAKE I MINNESOTA 55372
TELEPHONE (612) 447-2570
EXHIBIT A
BRIAN MATTSON
16575 INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
PRIOR LAKE, MN. 55372
I
[r
~
q,,"
<20
,..) ,:::
L_ \..}
SS90IS'OS"E
103.3 plat
---105.73 meas. ___
Tiu
-~ ~~t3~~~~3)
,940.2
,
(!l36.9)
940.~1
~
,
Y ZO" MAPLE
I ~
,
94',6
(941,9)
"')0
L_ '--'
. ~~~:02l
Ire 10" MA'. ~
- ,"'
,J ~ : PROPOSED" ..
~ G~AG! N
943.3 I c;;J IZ" MAPLE
/ l,I944..JlL_20 1_ 10..{)0
0, 943.6 8 (4~1) 946.
" ~.
,I Q
;)
,.,'
;J; '.S
- ~
,
,
~-~
0-
"'0)
/Eo
"'0
a",
?~
,
'"
944.11~
~,---119. 71 meas.--_
.,;1 116.7 plat
946.2,' N8so54'47'W
0.5' EAST
"
u
..
o
GARAGE SLAB
EL. 942...01
EXISTING
HOUSE
-...2 ".-..
....,U
I
I
DESCRIPTION:
Lot 29, "INGUADONA BEACH", Scott County, Minnesota. Also showing the 1.ocation of
the existing impmvem-~- s and proposed addition, this 16th day of Feb. 1996.
NC~ES' Benchmark 4~6.l5 walkout elevation of the existing house.
Net lot area = 5,607 sq. ft.
~
Proposed net lot coverage = 53.8 %
946.7 DENOTES EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
x
(940.2) DENOTES PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION
DENOTES PROPOSED DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE
SET GARAGE SLAB AT EL. 940.34
SET TOP OF BLOCK OF GARAGE AT EL. 947.82
Net existing lot coverage = 28.0 %
o
r
SCALE
20
40
I
Revised 5/15/97 To show proposed garage
as directed by owner.
t hereby certify that this survey was pr~pared
by me or under my direct super"ision and that
10"''' .dllly licensed Land Surveyor under the
Id';'. of tlJ'e Stole of ^!Inn.,."to. . JI
IN
FEET
. ( ~
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
. Impervious Surface Calculations'
. (To be Submitted with Building Penn it Application)
ForAH Properties Located in theShoreland District (SD),
The Maxi.mum Impervious Surface Coverage Permitted in 30 Percent.
.PAGE.2
Property Address \~t~r1S'
~ G:. \.) l\.~,~ p,. e E ~l"\- c... \,<<.c.ue:
. .
Lot AreaS i ~C51 Sq. Feet x 30% = ..............\ (,pB"z.~ 0
*******************************************************~.***************
HOUSE
'. LENGTH
. W.~.,x
x
11-
WlDTH
2~
;.~
...
SQ. FEET .",~M"
u,~4 "'U';,
Yv
...
ATTACHED GARAGE
x
...
..
DETACHED BLDGS
(Gara~
TOTAL PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE..........~...........
p~poseP G.-A(~je
. '"ZlL x 20
'-;7 to . x. t:.z..
~2.(p
46D
. 1"2.. 0
TOT ALDET ACHED BUILDINGS....................... \obD
CONe.. rek (ej..~kt) l-"7 -I- 2...0 '340
DRIVEWAY/PAVED A . AS c:;.? x 2.0 ... \ \ 0
' --.
(Driveway-paved or not) .' . '2.<-\ X <0 = Vi -z.. A,... "''''"'''' CluJc.. .
(SidewalkIParking Areas) 1...'5 x 8 ... -zo
4.?) ..t.:.\"Z- 52- Wl~~=W
TOT AL PAVED AREAS..................~........................
. P A TIOS/PORCHES/DECKS
(Open Decks W' min. opening between
boards, with a pervious surflice below;
arc not considered to be impervious)
x ...
X ...
X ...
,TOTAL DECK~.........!........... .....................................
'4=1:..e ~ ~
.. . e.e.x ~
. \ X qe
=
\ <co - "011"" A.,.f.__
-'O~_l>"'\W't p.....p.H~
\\c
58
3/N
...
TOTAL OTHER...~;~............................~.................... ~
TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
UND~......',.
Prepared By \J 0,\\""-1, SUR>J",\\'j c.. I P f>. .
cOmpanyjJM~~~
. I 3olL(.() ,.
L\~31..o I
. Date ~ - "2. <-1- Ct.(
Phone #\..\'-rl-~S'7 Z)
.....-...,. ..-.-'_.....:, ...--
~ '"
'EXHIBIT B
REVISIONS
; (;.-17-?/
--:J:rtI11'~{/t( r: ..
tJlI~x r( u: !x..- :r;..r'm/;Ck~~ (1" ll'vfofro-'1
Dt>J>7v..--J '15 +;,lfows . -rI><x qr(' -r
tf'rol" Y d CO t...ry (' ~ . !)..c.r<tt k. TVI. ::r v",pvv,,,,- S -{T-O",-"/
SLf "?v +-0 56 ~
~JA-1.0,.l~ ex.. I ~7-ivr...:J dr I uc:.-
te.Vk().,IC. ..5>h<!<(
~rc" x t,jld+4 ,~ drt'()~l.o,)d/
-fr/)u., g t' ~~ '7 ~
7 to,s- S, he f-
/;;20
C,,--I-+urt1."~(J~"'cI SII/[, ,'''''
ff~-rr ~+- ~r,q'1~ .6y -~X~
f5'g
60
..
----
9'73
~r rfj /Vl~ f ~t"'!/(J((~
f)~ Cr" ~t:i ~
50/~
fl/ew ~erth (;~~
973
;:2t?~, ~r :5"?D (214/:": S"UJ7)
/~ j/Pt(
~'~
/6.57.:s- ~"f'trlt't:,_~ '
.#-. ~t'7'o Cj/'/,,~~_ ~. (~
4/ - 7'.3.5- P j.,9c?
q q 7 4-..:2 <.,I S-
"
STAFF AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
SUBJECT:
7B
JENNITOVAE4PLANNER
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION #97-XX
AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION DENYING A VARIANCE REQUEST
BY BRIAN MATTSON TO THE SIDE YARD
SETBACK FOR DRIVEWAY AND IMPERVIOUS
SURFACE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16575
INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE, Case File #97-053
NOVEMBER 17, 1997
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
The purpose of this item is to consider an appeal by Brian
Mattson of the decision of the Planning Commission to
deny a variance for the construction of a garage and
driveway on property located at 16575 Inguadona Beach
Circle. The applicant has been sent a copy of this report.
BACKGROUND:
Brian Mattson originally submitted an application for a 4
foot side yard setback variance to allow a setback of 1 foot
for driveway and a 24% impervious surface variance to
permit impervious surface coverage of 54% to construct a
new detached garage and driveway.
On June 23, 1997, the Planning Commission heard the
case. Upon the request of the applicant, the Planning
Commission continued the case to allow the applicant the
opportunity to modify the proposed additions to
reduce/eliminate the variance requests.
The applicant modified the proposed driveway to be
setback 2 feet, thus requesting a 3 foot variance to the 5
foot required side yard setback. The applicant also revised
the plan to remove the existing 705 square foot driveway.
The removal of the existing driveway along with the
decreased driveway and turn around, the impervious
surface is now 36.5%. Therefore, the variance requested is
6.5% to permit impervious surface coverage of 36.5%,
rather than the maximum allowed of 30%.
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97-053\97-053CC.DOC Page 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
On October 27, 1997, the Planning Commission reviewed
the modified proposal. The staff report recommended
approval based on the revision and the absence of any
garage on the property with the condition that an easement
be obtained from the adjacent property owner for snow
storage and that run-offbe filtered per the DNR. However,
at the meeting, it became apparent that the easement would
not easily be obtained and that more impervious surface
could be removed and that significant drainage problems
exist on the lot and in the area. The Planning Commission
denied the requested variances citing that legal alternatives
exists and undue hardship is not created by literal
enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance. The Planning
Commission felt that the proposed location of the drive
could be relocated to the other side of the house and
provide a 5 foot side yard setback. Also, the commission
strongly felt drainage and impervious surface could be
improved with a different site plan. Utilizing a more
appropriate design is a viable alternative to the variance
requests.
The attached minutes of the June 23, 1997 and October 27,
1997 Planning Commission meeting summarize the
discussion of this variance request. The applicant filed an
appeal ofthe decision on November 3, 1997.
DISCUSSION:
The Planning Commission based the denial of this variance
request on the following factors:
1. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would result
in undue hardship with respect to the property.
This criteria goes to whether reasonable use can be
made ofthe property if the Ordinance is literally
enforced. In this case, there are legal alternatives for
the applicant. That is to relocate the driveway to the
other side ofthe house, to remove more impervious
surface, and to construct a smaller garage.
2. Such unnecessary hardship results because of
circumstances unique to the property.
The unique circumstances in this case are the small size
of the lot and the location of the existing house and
deck. However, there is no topographical or vegetative
L: \97FILES\97V AR \97-053 \97 -053 CC.DOC
Page 2
hardship relating to the property that warrant the
granting of a variance.
3. The hardship is caused by provisions of the
Ordinance and is not the result of actions of persons
presently having an interest in the property.
The lot is considered to be substandard. It is less than
12,000 sq. feet in area (5,607 sq. feet) and less than 86
feet wide (51 feet). Ifthe applicant reduces and
relocates the proposed addition and reduces existing
impervious surface, the setback and impervious surface
can be met and a variance will not be necessary. The
applicant has control over the proposed structure and
driveway of which their size and location are not
hardships.
4. The variance observes the spirit and intent of this
Ordinance, produces substantial justice and is not
contrary to the public interest.
The size and location of the existing and proposed
structures on the lot are consistent with the location of
other structures in this area. The neighborhood of
Inguadona beach circle consist of small lots (under
10,000 square feet). Because the property was platted
in 1924 there are several older cabins and smaller
houses including detached garages in the area. The
property to the north is vacant and the property to the
south is a single family dwelling.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Adopt Resolution 97 -XX denying the appeal by Brian
Mattson and upholding the decision of the Planning
Commission.
2. Approve Brian Mattson's appeal by overturning the
decision of the Planning Commission and approving
the requested variance. In this case, the Council should
direct the staff to prepare a resolution with findings of
fact supporting the variance.
3. Other specific action as directed by the Council.
RECOMMENDATION: Alternative #1.
L\97FILES\97V AR\97-053\97-053CC.DOC
Page 3
ACTION REQUIRED:
Motion and second adopting the attached Resolution
#97-XX, denying the appeal and upholding the decision
of the Planning Commission
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97 -053\97 -053CC.DOC
Page 4
RESOLUTION 97-XX
AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO DENY A 3
FOOT VARIANCE REQUEST TO PERMIT A 2 FOOT SIDEY ARD SETBACK
RATHER THAN THE REQUIRED 5 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR A
RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY AND A 6.5% VARIANCE REQUEST TO PERMIT
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE OF 36.5% RATHER THAN THE MAXIMUM
ALLOWED OF 30% FOR A PROPOSED GARAGE AND DRIVEWAY AS SHOWN IN
EXlDBIT A WITH PROPOSED REMOVALS TO IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AS
STATED IN EXlDBIT B, CASE NO. 97-053, FOR BRIAN MATTSON ON PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 16575 INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
MOTION BY: SECOND BY:
WHEREAS, the Prior Lake Planning Commission conducted a hearing on the 23rd day of
June and the 27th day of October, 1997, to act on setback and impervious
surface variance requests by Brian Mattson for property known as 16575
Inguadona Beach Circle; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has denied the setback variance request based on
lack of hardship as determined upon review of the hardship criteria set forth
in City Code; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has appealed the Planning Commission's decisions to the City
Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council heard the appeal on November 17, 1997; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, upon hearing the facts, concurs with the decision made by
the Planning Commission to deny the setback variance requests.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE:
FINDINGS
1. The Planning Commission held a hearing on June 23, 1997 to review a 4 foot variance
request to permit a 1 foot side yard setback for a driveway rather than the required 5 foot
setback and a 24% variance to permit impervious surface coverage of 54% rather than the
maximum allowed of 30% impervious surface coverage as drawn in Exhibit A.
2.
3. The Planning Commission held a hearing on October 27, 1997 to review a revised plan
consisting of a 3 foot variance request to permit a 2 foot side yard setback for a driveway
16200 E~~f~~Y<vA:~-~BSc~i€Wct.ake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (61~~gM7-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
rather than the required 5 foot setback and a 6.5% variance to permit impervious surface
coverage of 36.5% rather than the maximum allowed of 30% impervious surface coverage as
modified by the applicant in Exhibit B, for Brian Mattson, on property located in the R-l
(Suburban Residential) District and the SD (Shoreland Overlay) District at the following
location, to wit;
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle, legally described as:
Lot 29, Inguadona Beach, Scott County, Minnesota.
4. The Planning Commission reviewed the variance requests as contained in Case File #97-053,
and denied the setback variance requests based on the lack of hardship determined upon
review of the hardship criteria set forth in the City Code.
5. The Prior Lake City Council reviewed this appeal on November 17, 1997.
6. The City Council has considered the effect of overturning the decision of the Planning
Commission upon the health, safety, and welfare of the community, the existing and
anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect
on property values in the surrounding area and the effect of the proposed variances on the
Comprehensive Plan.
7. The City Council has reviewed the hardship criteria in relation to the setback and impervious
surface variance requests for the proposed additions as shown in Exhibit A and modified in
Exhibit B.
8. The City Council has determined that there are no unique circumstances or conditions
regarding the property that are not the fault or cause of the applicants.
9. The City Council has determined that literal enforcement of the ordinance will not result in
undue hardship, as the applicant's can modify their plan including relocating the driveway to
the southern side of the house to meet setbacks and by removing the patio and proposing a
smaller garage to decrease the imperious surface to significantly reduce or eliminate the
variance to impervious surface.
10. The contents of Planning Case File #97-053 are hereby entered into and made a part of the
public record and the record of the decision for this case.
CONCLUSION
Based upon the Findings set forth above, the City Council hereby denies the setback and
impervious surface variance requests and concurs with the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to deny a 3 foot variance request to permit a 2 foot side yard setback for a driveway
rather than the minimum requirement of 5 feet and a 6.5% variance request to permit impervious
surface coverage of 36.5% rather than the maximum coverage allowed of 30% for a proposed
detached garage and driveway as drawn in Exhibit A and modified by the applicant in Exhibit B,
Case No. 97-053, for Brian Mattson on property located at 16575 Inguadona Beach Circle.
Passed and adopted this 17th day of November, 1997.
1: \97fi1es\97var\97 -053\ccres.doc
Page 2
Andren
Kedrowski
Mader
Schenck
Robbins
{Seal}
1: \97files\97var\97 -053\ccres.doc
YES
Andren
Kedrowski
Mader
Schenck
Robbins
NO
City Manager,
City of Prior Lake
Page 3
BRIAN MATTSON
16575 INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
PRIOR LAKE, MN. 55372
Valley Surveying Co., P.A.
SUITE 120-C, /6670 FRANKLIN TRAIL
FRANKLIN TRAIL OFFICE CONDOMINIUM
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
TELEPHONE (612) 447-2570
EXHIBIT A
I
[r
~
tt'
.?O
"") I::
L '-I
S S9.'S'OS"E
103.3 plot
---105.73 meos.--_
TIU
- - --'~939~4----
-+- ...~ 11139.31
:940.2
.
(936.9)
940,;1
\
,
Y20" Ml\PL!
i ~
1
941.6
(941,91
,
:~
~~
"<])
eO
l/)Q
Ol/)
-.
'7:::
"")0
L_ .../
~,.3 (940.2)
'trl'. Z~"M::' ~ ;;)
J ~ ~ PAOPOSE2 .... i' 1.5
/ e G~AGE - ~
943.3' ~ IZ"MAP'l.E \
,,/ l,(944.1)L_20 1_ 10-00
0, 943.6 8 ( ?:11946.
',: /2
0.5' EAST
,
'"
944.1 I~
0' ,--.119. 71 meas.--_
ai' 116.7 plot
946.2.' N SS. 54' 47"W
'"
u
'"
o
GA RAGE SLAB
EL. 942.01
EXISTING
HOUSE'
-;z /~
....)\.)
I
I
DESCRIPTION:
Lot 29, "INGUADONA BEACH", Scott County, Minnesota. Also showing th", '.ocation of
the existing imp~ovem~ - s and p~oposed addition, this 16th day of feb. 1996.
N(~ES' Benchma~k 9~6.l5 walkout elevation of the existing hnuse.
Net lot a~ea = 5,607 sq. ft.
946.7
x
DENOTES EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
~
Proposed net lot cove~age = 53. S %
(940.2) DENOTES PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION
DENOTES PROPOSED DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE
SET GARAGE SLAB AT EL. 940.34
SET TOP OF BLOCK OF GARAGE AT EL. 947.82
Net existing lot cove~age = 28.0 %
o
I
SCALE
20
40
I
Revised 5/15/97 To show proposed garage
os d lreeled by owner.
I hereby certify that this survey was prPparod
by me or under my direct supervision ond that
10"'" ..du/y licensed Land Surveyor under the
I",,,, oft~t Stat. of .^fl""....ta _ //_
IN
FEET
__.._....... ~~~ _,.c~..~..,.....
EXHIBIT A
:.{
. CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
. Impervious Surface Calculations
(To be Submitted with Building Permit Application)
For All Properties Located in theShoreland District (SD).
The Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage Permitted in 30 Percent.
.PAGE.2
Property Address \lQl~r16 - 'INGUl\.~'~A- eE~~ c...,,<<.~
Lot AreaS I (.,<::i1 Sq. Feet x 30% = .............., lPB-z... 0
***************-***************************************~****************
HOUSE
. LENGTH
. W.~.,x
1.1- x
x
WIDTH
'2.<.\
.. ~ .e=?
=
. SQ. FEET _
lD~4 --'''~'T
'Y"Z.--
=
ATTACHED GARAGE
=
-
DETACHED BLDGS
(Gara~
TOTAL PRlN CIPLE STR U CTURE...........~...........
p~f'O$eP G-A(~l4-je
. -2..<.:L x 20.
l~ . x. t~
~2-.lp
460
. t'20
'>
CONt. rek (eJL~~)
DRIVEWAY/PAVED AREAS
- . .- .
(Driveway-paved or not) ...
. (Sidewalk/Parking Areas)
TOT ALDET ACHED BUILDINGS.......................
\000
. l'7 i-Z-o' 340
tG.~ x 2.0 = \\0
. 'z.'",1. x <C \ 'i-z.. A.- o,I~ O...&c.. .
'"2.. oS x8 =-zo
'-\ . ?> ..t..:. \'2- 5 Z-
TOTAL PAVED AREAS.....~..........~~....................... WwM -'l~
. P A TIOS/PORCHESIDECKS
(Open Decks W' min. opening between
boards, with a pervious surface below;
are not considered to be impervious)
x =
X =
X =
. orvP'";~.eJlnR\~\.uA<4. 40
. ~e~ G:r~1'<.Aa€- ."
. OTHER"...J.. .
.T OT AL DECKS... ........ ............. .... .... ...... ....... ............
~.. ".e, t-7..i,J,
ee X ~
. e
\ . X qe
=
\ <00 - "O"'<<.A.,.~__
.., OY_1>t'\~ p....'.H~
\~
5.
3en
=
TOTAL OTHER....nn........................................n..... .-3J.L
TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
DND~.. ...:'.
PreparedBy \l '" \ \~ S" R,J<<(, "~ Co. I ? fo-. .
Company1JM~~.-I
, I ?;'OIY.O ,.
Ll?:> 31..0 I
. Date c; - -2.. C'-\ - Ct.,
Phone #'4'-\I--Z-S'7 t)
EXHIBIT B
/tJ.-17-?,?
REVISIONS
-J:f1.1 "-1d~ r: ..
tf1I~tJ X r( u. !x.. r;..prv;o<~!:" {!" Ie "&1'1-''0-1
D.I>.J,,0J4....J q.s -FOllowS. -r'/us< oqr(" _.,,-
t1'r/)f..~f~1 (Jk-ryc~. l)zC/"c:ttsc. rill. r~v/f7"5
sLt "?v +0 36 ~
tIf;~(),.J~ ex i '::>-I-i~ dr I u~
{.e./A'luvc. ..sh4:(
Deere," s.c t,J1t/+'-z ,~ drl'vCVd/
-Vt'1N1 ~ l ~~ '7 /
-FOIl\.-1
7&.s- s,2 ;c.~ f-
/;:10
C fL.+- '+u.(I-1.rJ ('"~~Vtd Sill G "VI
-Frwrr ~+- ~t'.:<,.2-.6Y 3',,:< ~
g'8
60
'"
----
9'73
~r /1 /Vf.c ( ~r"/(J,(-S:.
De Ct" ~J:l ~
jI1e~ ~e.nh (Jt'.(S:,.
-;:f:)/~
973
;2f!/~; e9r ~,,70 (':;14/:':' S'"107)
/~ YtY/f
~'~
/657.:s,- ~o.(&{t'Lr_-r<:t' . :>
.h'- 0/1'7'0 'T ?'....~__ ~. (',-
4/- '7' -,:s- ? ...f'.,p~
qq7 4-..2'1 S-
City Council Members: l
Written appeal regarding plan ing commissions decision on
case 97-053. Brian Mattson variance to construct a garage and
access driveway for the property located at 16~75 Inguadona
Beach Circle.
My family and I are so very fortunate to have found an
affordable home with a lake view and lake access. We knew the
house was small and did not have a garage but we had hopes and
dreamed of making some future improvements.
The issue here is impervious surface and drainage. I live
next to 2 vacant substandard lots similar to mine. (lots 25 &26)
Both these lots can be built on and as close as 5 feet fr~m
the side property lines as stated by the PC. If the PC will
consider the building of homes on lots 25 & 2~then what effect
will that have on the areas impervious surface and drainage?
How can my 7 foot driveway and 6.5% variance be denied when
the PC will openly discuss building on lots 25 & 26?
I appeal to your logic and common sense judgement. Please
do not deny my appeal. I need tbe full 6.5% variance and the
driveway setback variance. I can not afford any more modificatio-
ns to the existing property or I may as well sell the house
knowing well that no affordable realistic improvements are
possible.
Thank you for your consideration:
~~
/1-;2--f>7
II ~\ i NOV 3 199! ,e:,
IU \1L~-...._--------''-
I ".__J
L_-----
dn MOllO::! O.l
alee
.j
-I
AVOO.l Op Ol SBU!4l
. Agreed with staff s report.
. It is mandatory to have a two car garage in Minnesota.
. The lot is substandard and the applicant has tried every way to comply.
. The DNR basically agreed with the runoff.
. There is a hardship.
Cramer:
. Agreed with staff s recommendation.
. A two car garage is appropriate for Minnesota.
. The applicant has done a great deal of work to come as close to the impervious
surface requirement as possible.
. Supports the proposal.
Stamson:
. Very hesitant to grant a variance over the 30%.
. In the past, Commissioners have generally concluded a garage is necessary.
. Staffs recommendations are down to a 2.7% variance.
. All setbacks from adjacent properties are met.
. The drainage on neighboring properties is almost non-existent. The runoff is taken
care of.
. This is a very unique circumstance.
. Supports staffs proposal.
Open discussion:
Kuykendall:
. Will support the variance given the uniqueness of the property.
. Applicant Whitney explained how she measured and maintains the green space (14 x
61 feet).
. Changed his position given the rationale applicant maintains the adjoining property to
support the request.
MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY VONHOF, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 97-
17PC GRANTING A 3% VARIANCE TO PERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE OF 33%
RATHER THAN THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED OF 30% FOR A PROPOSED
GARAGE AND EXP ANDED DRIVEWAY ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT
14407 W ATERSEDGE TRAIL WITH THE ADDED CONDITION GUTTERS BE
ADDED TO EACH SIDE OF THE GARAGE.
Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
5. Old Business:
;:\
B. Case #97-053 Brian Mattson Variance Continued - Request to construct a new
garage and access driveway for the property located at 16575 Inguadona Beach Circle.
L:\97FILES\97PLCOMM\PCMIN\MNl 02797 .DOC
3
Planner Jenni Tovar presented the staffreport dated October 27, 1997.
This request was brought before the commission in June and continued at the request of
the applicant for plan revisions to reduce the overall variance requests. Mr. Mattson is
proposing to construct a new detached garage and access driveway. There is no existing
garage on the property. No previous variances have been granted.
The existing house with deck is setback approximately 22 feet from the front property
line, 9.8 feet from the side property line to the north, approximately 10 feet from the side
property line to the south.
The applicant is proposing to construct a 480 square foot detached garage in the rear yard
with a bituminous access driveway located along the side of the principle structure to the
garage in the back. Existing impervious surface is 28%. The proposed additions with
impervious surface removal will create an overall impervious surface of 36.5%. The
Shoreland Ordinance allows a maximum impervious surface coverage of not more than
30%. The proposed driveway will be located 2 feet from the property line. The City
Code requires a minimum driveway setback of 5 feet from the side yard property line.
Therefore, the applicants are requesting a 6.5% variance to impervious surface coverage
maximum to permit coverage of 36.5%, rather than the maximum allowed of 30% and a 3
foot variance to the driveway side yard setback to allow a 2 foot driveway setback rather
than the required setback of 5 feet.
The DNR is not opposed to the location of the driveway 2 feet off the property line along
with staffs conditions as stated in their report. Tovar said staff would work with
applicant in diverting the water.
Staff Recommendation: Ifthe Planning Commission feels a 2 car garage is reasonable,
then staff recommends approval of the variances proposed. If the Planning Commission
feels a 1 car garage is reasonable, staff recommends denying the variance request.
Mr. Matson's neighbors, Kenneth and Evelyn Falkum submitted a letter objecting to the
requested variances.
Comments from the Public:
Brian Mattson, 16575 Inguadona Beach Circle, responded to questions regarding gutters.
There is on one side of the house where the driveway would be located. Mr. Mattson said
he has been sensitive to the impervious surface and his neighborhood area. All the other
new construction above him has forced the water down the road and changed the
neighborhood. It has become a real consideration for his garage by his neighbors across
the street. One ofthe contingencies is a 3 foot easement for snow storage and drainage.
Tovar explained the driveway setback allowing for adequate snow storage. Mattson
explain his plan for snow removal.
L:\97FILES\97PLCOMM\PCMIN\MN102797.DOC
4
Dennis Falkum, 10500 OIYID;pic Circle, Eden Prairie, is the son of the neighboring
property across the road, voiced his parents concerns for the runoff.
Comments from Commissioners:
Kuykendall:
· Questioned width and easement. Tovar explained the possible snow storage easement
between the neighbors.
· With the water problems in the neighborhood he cannot agree with the higher
impervious surface. There were no alternative proposals from the applicant to solve
the runoff problem.
· Even with a one car garage the impervious surface would be 32% percent.
· Mr. Mattson responded he is at 28% right now. He has four drivers and a boat and is
trying to deal with storing his property.
· Suggested removing the concrete patio under the deck.
. Would like to see other designs.
· Given the impact on the community suggested tabling to a future meeting.
Criego:
· Very small lot - 5,600 sq. feet. The DNR has proposed alternatives.
· A neighbor does not want to provide a snow area.
· If it was just 36% he could agree, but does not support using the neighbor's property
for snow storage.
Cramer:
· Agreed with Criego. Has difficulty with the two foot setback.
· The neighborhood drainage is a problem.
. The DNR wants to slow down the drainage.
. There is no "on street" parking.
. Cannot agree to grant the variance.
V onhof:
. The neighborhood has tight lots.
. The house across the street is below grade.
· Suggested to Mr. Mattson - remove the driveway to the south side of the property
which would reduce the setback and impervious surface.
. There is a reasonable alternative. Hardship criteria is not met.
· There will be a grading issue either way.
. Need for a two car garage.
Stamson:
· Agreed with Commissioners on the parking issue.
· The DNR is asking 25% impervious surface. In this neighborhood there are no curbs
or gutters.
. What is proposed will only add to the existing problems.
L:\97FILES\97PLCOMM\PCMIN\MNI02797.DOC
5
. The neighbors can build 5 feet from the property. A total of7 feet between the two
properties will be a problem.
. This proposal has a significant negative impact on the neighborhood.
Mr. Mattson believes the primary cause ofthe water problems are from the newly
constructed homes. Their construction has turned the roads into a river. His driveway
construction is minimal. He understands the problem.
Kuykendall:
. Suggested purchasing the adjacent lot.
MOTION BY VONHOF, SECOND BY CRIEGO, TO DENY THE REQUESTED
VARIANCE BASED ON THE LACK OF HARDSHIP DEMONSTRATED FROM
THE ZONING CODE CRITERIA.
Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
6. New Business:
A. Discussion with Prior Lake Spring Lake (PLSL) Watershed District
Representative - Craig Gontarek
Mr. Gontarek began his presentation by pointing out the Watershed District has a very
marginal role in the FEMA ordinance. The only role the Watershed District maintains is
management of the outlet, which policies are dictated by the DNR. He explained the
outlet and the future with the 509 Plan (a 10 year outlook). The original outlet was
designed for flood relief, rather than flood control. They have a joint powers agreement
with the City of Shakopee and the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District. If the
PLSL Watershed District wants to open the outlet, they have to notify Shakopee and the
Minnesota River District. If they are having problems they have the ability to shut the
outlet off.
The Watershed is concerned with the increasing impervious surface in the system. They
would like to incorporate ponding upstream. Unfortunately the topography is not good.
The Watershed is also looking at modifications to the outlet and the affects on the
surrounding properties and Minnesota River. Construction costs are tens of millions of
dollars. Most of the problems are in the upper watershed. Mr. Gontarek mentioned the
PLSL Watershed is on the leading edge on how to address some ofthe problems. The
Watershed does not enforce zoning ordinances. Their primary focus has been water
quality. Funds and grants were discussed as well.
The Commissioners discussed Scott County and the Metropolitan Council's involvement
in the area. The Watershed meets with the Cities, Townships and Met Council. How land
is developed has a major impact on the watershed. Planned developments such as cluster
housing and leaving open areas are needed and should be understood and incorporated by
developers. The Watershed did not have the power to make land use decisions in the
L:\97FILES\97PLCOMM\PCMIN\MNl 02797 .DOC
6
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
SITE:
PRESENTER:
REVIEWED BY:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
PLANNING REPORT
5B
CONSIDER SIDE YARD SETBACK AND IMPERVIOUS
SURFACE VARIANCES FOR BRIAN MATTSON, Case
File #97-053
16575 INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
JENNITOVAR,PLANNER
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
YES l NO
OCTOBER 27,1997
As the Planning Commission will recall, this was brought before the commission
in June and continued at the request of the applicant for plan revisions to reduce
the overall variance requests. Brian Mattson is proposing to construct a new
detached garage and access driveway. There is no existing garage on the
property. No previous variances have been granted.
The existing house with deck is setback approximately 22 feet from the front
property line, 9.8 feet from the side property line to the north, approximately 10
feet from the side property line to the south.
The applicant is proposing to construct a 480 square foot detached garage in
the rear yard with a bituminous access driveway located along the side of the
principle structure to the garage in the back (Exhibit A). Existing impervious
surface is 28%. The proposed additions with impervious surface removal will
create an overall impervious surface of 36.5%. The Shoreland Ordinance allows
a maximum impervious surface coverage of not more than 30% (Section 5-8-3).
The proposed driveway will be located 2 feet from the property line. The
City Code requires a minimum driveway setback of 5 feet from the side yard
property line (Section 5-5-5). Therefore, the applicants are requesting a 6.5%
variance to impervious surface coverage maximum to permit coverage of
36.5%, rather than the maximum allowed of 30% and a 3 foot variance to the
driveway side yard setback to allow a 2 foot driveway setback rather than
the required setback of 5 feet.
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
DISCUSSION:
The lot is located in the subdivision known as Inguadona Beach (1924) and is a
non-riparian lot. The house was constructed in 1977 and a deck was added in
1989. The original house building permit does not indicate if a garage was part of
the structure (Exhibit B). The property is located within the R-1 (Suburban
Residential) and the SD (Shoreland Overlay) district. This lot is 5,607 sq. feet,
55 feet wide at the street and 51 feet wide at the rear lot line. Therefore, this lot
is a substandard lot because it does not meet the minimum lot area of 12,000 sq.
feet and lot width of 75 feet for general development lake non-riparian lots under
the current Shoreland Ordinance. No previous variances have been granted on
this property.
The proposed garage will be within the building envelope (Exhibit C) however,
the driveway will be 2 foot from the property line. Generally, the city maintains a
5 foot drainage and utility easement on side property lines. However, such
easements were not granted when the property was platted in 1924. Such is
usually the case in older plats. The issues of drainage onto the adjacent
property is a concern. Although, the adjacent property to the north is vacant
now, there is no guarantee that it will continue to be vacant in the future. Also
snow storage will be a significant problem for a driveway located 2 foot from the
property line.
The applicant originally proposed to construct the garage with an 8 foot wide
bituminous driveway 1 foot from the side property line. Since the first hearing in
June, the applicant has proposed to reduce the impervious surface by removing
the existing driveway in the front yard, removing the shed, decreasing the width
of the proposed driveway to 7 feet and by reducing the proposed turn around
area by 60 square feet. The resulting impervious surface is 36.5% compared to
the original request of 54%. In addition to the reduced impervious surface, the
side yard setback of the proposed driveway is 2 feet compared to the original
proposal of 1 foot.
The DNR responded to the original variance request in a letter dated June 19,
1997. The DNR was not opposed to the location of the proposed garage, and
recommended removal of the existing concrete drive to reduce the impervious
surface. In comments on the revised request, the DNR recommends that if the
variance to impervious surface is granted, that conditions be placed on the
property that reduce the overall rate of run-off/ provide filtering of the run off.
The DNR is not opposed to the side yard setback variance request.
L:\97FI LES\97V AR\97 -053\97 -53PC4. DOC
Page 2
VARIANCE HARDSHIP STANDARDS
1. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would result in undue hardship
with respect to the property.
This criteria goes to whether reasonable use can be made of the property if
the Ordinance is literally enforced. In this case, the lot does have existing off-
street parking but no garage. As revised, there is no reasonable legal
alternative for the reducing the variance request further.
2. Such unnecessary hardship results because of circumstances unique
to the property.
There are unique circumstances in this case. The size of the lot is
considerably smaller than the ordinance requires and was platted in 1924.
The applicant has reduced the impervious surface 973 square feet resulting
in a decrease to impervious surface of 17.5%. The applicant can meet all
structural setbacks. The variance to side yard setback for the driveway
cannot be eliminated. Due to the placement of the existing structure, the
driveway cannot be placed on the south side of the house without entirely
removing the stairs from the deck.
3. The hardship is caused by provisions of the Ordinance and is not the
result of actions of persons presently having an interest in the property.
The lot is considered to be substandard. It is under 12,000 sq. feet in area
(5,607 sq. feet) and 86 feet wide. The location of the structure is of no
control of the applicant. The applicant has considerably reduced the variance
requests to present hardship that is beyond the control of the applicant via
design/placement of the proposed garage and driveway. The hardship is
caused by the provisions of the Ordinance and is not the result of the
applicants proposed building and drive locations.
4. The variance observes the spirit and intent of this Ordinance, produces
substantial justice and is not contrary to the public interest.
The spirit and intent of the impervious surface maximum in the Shoreland
District is to reduce storm water run-off, which will eventually drains into the
lake. The intent of the 5 foot side yard setback for driveways is to protect
drainage and utility easements and to allow for snow storage and automobile
overhangs. The granting of the requested variances can meet the intent of
the Ordinance and be of the best public interest with condition that the
applicant create a drainage swale to decrease the rate of run-off as
recommended by the DNR and if the applicant obtains an easement from the
adjacent property owner for snow storage.
L:\97FI LES\97V AR\97 -053\97 -53PC4. DOC
Page 3
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the variances requested by the applicant, or approve any variances
the Planning Commission deems appropriate in the circumstances.
2. Table or continue discussion of the item for specific purpose.
3. Deny the application because the Planning Commission finds a lack of
demonstrated hardship under the zoning code criteria.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff has concluded that the intent of the applicant to construct a garage is
reasonable and the revisions to the plan to decrease the impervious surface and
driveway setback have proven that hardship does exists. This hardship is based
on the size of the lot and the non-existence of a garage. The intent of the
ordinance can be met with the two recommended conditions.
ACTION REQUIRED:
A motion adopting Resolution 97-15PC.
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97 -053\97 -53PC4. DOC
Page 4
RESOLUTION 97-15PC
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A 3 FOOT VARIANCE REQUEST TO PERMIT
A 2 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK RATHER THAN THE MINIMUM
REQUIREMENT OF 5 FEET AND A 6.5 PERCENT VARIANCE REQUEST TO
PERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE OF 36.5 PERCENT RATHER THAN THE
MAXIMUM ALLOWED OF 30 PERCENT FOR A PROPOSED GARAGE AND
DRIVEWAY ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16575 INGUADONA BEACH
CIRCLE FOR BRIAN MATTSON.
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota;
FINDINGS
1. Brian Mattson has applied for a variance from Section 5-5-5 and Section 5-8-3 of the
City Code in order to permit the construction of a 480 square foot detached garage
and bituminous access driveway on property located in the R-1 (Suburban
Residential) District and the SD (Shoreland Overlay) District at the following
location, to wit;
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle, legally described as Lot 29, Inguadona Beach,
Scott County, MN
1. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variance as contained in
Case #97-053 and held hearings thereon on June 23, 1997 and October 27, 1997.
2. The Board of Adjustment has considered the effect of the proposed variance upon the
health, safety, and welfare of the community, the existing and anticipated traffic
conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on property
values in the surrounding area and the effect of the proposed variance on the
Comprehensive Plan.
3. The applicant originally requested impervious surface of 54% and a driveway setback
of 1 foot. At the June 23, 1997 hearing, the applicant requested the hearing be
continued until a revised survey could be submitted. The applicant has revised the
driveway setback and proposed impervious surface by removing the existing
driveway and shed and reducing the width of the proposed driveway
4. The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant. The variance will not serve merely as a
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
convenience to the applicants. and is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship as
no reasonable alternatives exist.
5. The DNR has no recommendation on approval, but suggest if approved, a condition
such as a drainage swale to decrease rate of run-off from the additional impervious
surface be constructed.
6. The contents of Planning Case 97-053 are hereby entered into and made a part of the
public record and the record of decision for this case.
CONCLUSION
Based upon the Findings set forth above, the Board of Adjustment hereby approves the
following variances for the proposed garage and driveway as shown in Exhibit A;
1. A 3 foot variance permitting a 2 foot driveway setback from the side yard
instead ofthe required 5 foot setback.
2. A 6.5 percent variance to permit impervious surface coverage of36.5 percent
instead of the maximum allowed of30 percent.
The approval ofthe variances is contingent upon the following conditions:
1. A revised survey must be submitted, indicating the applicants proposed
changes to decrease the impervious surface to 36.5%.
2. A minimum 3 foot drainage easement must be obtained and recorded, for the
applicant's snow storage and drainage, on Lot 26, Inguadona Beach.
3. As recommend by the DNR, additional impervious surface must be diverted to
a swale or holding area to decrease the rate of run-off.
Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on October 27, 1997.
Anthony Stamson, Chair
ATTEST:
Donald R. Rye, Planning Director
I: \97var\97 -053 va\97 -0 15re.doc
2
BRIAN MATTSON
16575 INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
PRIOR LAKE, MN. 55372
Valley Surveying Co., P.A.
SUITE 120-C, /6670 FRANKLIN TRAIL
FRANKLIN TRAIL OFFICE CONDOMINIUM
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
TELEPHONE (612) 447-2570
EXHIBIT A
<?o
r) ,::
L_ '-}
I
I
S 890 18'08"e:
103.3 plot
---105.73 mea..--_
FENCE 1.5'
WEST
(936.9)
940.67'1
~
1
Yzo" MA'Lf
I ~
I.
94',6
.941.,2
Tits
--..- -~~93~~;~3)
,940.2
,
r)\~
L_ -.../
~. (::0.2)
IrL 20" MAP. ~
- .'"
~ ~ : PfltOPOSEO; ;:;
-' G~AGE
943.3 I c;;J IZ" MA'LE
/ .' (944..1) L 20 I /0 ^_
1"11 - - --'"
0, 943.6 8 ( 1:11 946.
I' .I"'" .
" 2
(941.91
;)
...'
~ 1.5
- ~
\
,
J~
0'
"0>
1;0
1l)0
Oil)
\
'..
944.'l~
o',_nI19. 71 meos.~-_
oi' 116.7 plot
946.2.' N 88054' 47"W
r;
FENC E 0.5' EAST
'"
U
'"
o
GARAGE SLAB
EL. 942..01
EXISTING
HOUSE
-.< "
,-' \...)
I
I
DESCRIPTION:
Lot 29, "INGUADONA BEACH", Scott County, Minnesota. Also showing the '.o<::ation of
the existing improvem~' s and proposed addition, this 16th day of Feb. 1996.
[\JurES' Benchmark 4.<6.15 walkout elevation of the existing house.
Net lot area = 5,607 sq. ft.
946.7
x
DENOTES EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
~
Net existing lot coverage = 28.0 %
Proposed net lot coverage = 53.8 %
(940.2) DENOTES PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION
DENOTES PROPOSED DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE
SET GARAGE SLAB AT EL. 940.34
SET TOP OF BLOCK OF GARAGE AT EL. 947.82
o
r
SCALE
20
40
I
Revised 5115/97 To .haw proposed garage
os directed by owner.
f hereby certify that this survey was prf~pored
by me or under my direct 5uperv;s;on and that
, ~fTJ. 0 .duty licensed Land Surveyor under the
IdW$ of the State of ^,!inn~'o}a
IN
FEET
EXHIBIT A
, CITY OF PRlORLAKE
Impervious Surface Calculations
(To be Submitted with Building Permit Application)
For All Properties Located in theShoreland District (SD).
The Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage Permitted in 30 Percent
PAGE 2
, Property Address \lQS'1S, - ~ ~ul\o.~\...:IA-e E.~~ L.\'(<-QE;'
Lot AreaS i ~t51 Sq. Feet x 30% = ............~., l,pB"z.~ 0
************************************************************************
, LENGTH WIDTH SQ. FEET
r2.l\ 1"._,.....,'''''.
HOUSE '2.!8 . ~. .. !( '., = v,~4 -,
\1- x -,;.~ = 4v
ATTACHED GARAGE x =
..
DETACHED BLDGS
(Gara~
TOT AL PRIN CIFLE STR U CTURE..........~...........
p~ pos-etl &A-(~A-je
"z.cL x '20
lo ,x, t"2-
~i..lp
460
, ''2..0
'--:>
CONe.. rek (e1L~~)
DRIVEWAYIPAVED AREAS
, ---
(Driveway-paved or not) ,
- (Sidewalk/Parking Areas)
TOT ALDET ACHED BUILDINGS.......................
- 1"7 .{-.L..O "3L{ 0
~.S X 2.0 = \to
"Z.<-\ x <C \ q-z,.
'2-S X .8 =""70
4.3 ~\"Z- Sz.-
TOTAL P A YED AREAS.....,...........~~.......................
\OOD
w.~~~
P A TIOSIPORCHESIDECKS
(Open Decks W' min. opening between
boards. with a pervious surface below;
are not considered to be impervious)
x =
X =
'x =
o('V~;s~~ j)R\O~\.\JM -k
~ew, (~~r<Aa, e... .1
OTHER ....J , ,
.T OT AL D ECK~...................................... ...................
:ft" . , , e ~"Z..i, ':)
ee .X ~
, \ ,x qe
==
\<00
IO~
\~
5,
3(;.,
=
TOTAL, OTHER....n............................~.................... ~
TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
UND~", .,'
Prepared By\lc,\\~ S"R.>e,,\'j c." p ~. ,
Company UIW~;;"..!
- . ,. '.,' \
, ,
I 3ol~.o I'
L\?J31..o I
Date 'S -2. <-1- ~,
Phone # '\.\ '-\( -'LS-' L>
~,-,".'...:,~.._-,_._._, ~--
'\
OCT-17-97 11:33 PM
P.12I1
EXHIBIT A
REVISIONS
ItJ'-17~/
--J:(l11 i-1dUl r: .
tfkll X r( u,' ~ r:..prviCtl!>. {!, Ie v (",fro-'/
Dt>.J"oJ<< ..- J q. s -Fi> /(OW.s . -r1<'5-= <;>r(' _"
,1'r"f" ~ft::{ C k-ryc ~ . t)zc/"lfIsc.. L"" r~l.h~".s
S;Lj e?G1 +0 56 ~
~/.A'f.Ov{' e)(i c::d-i-:.:J dr I ue:..-
te. /A1g.,lc- .5>h4::(
~rc" x- t,)1d'-/-4 ,~ drt'U(!Vd/
-6f,,~ g l ~~ '7 /
-fT-Ovvt
7&:1.s- s~ ;c.t:: f-
/;20
C",-t+uru"~(J~v,cf S/tlb "111
-Fr~""- ,,-f- ~r~<J~ iy 3.:.<' ~
c;g8
60
'"
----
9'73
t!J(11/V1",: ( ~''''(}/(J,(~
be c/ ~ci 5.e
~o/~
jtlew ~enh ~t(S:.
973
;2~~~ e9r :.5'" "?v (2'4/:": .$""lO7)
~~ }/b/,
~~~
/6.57.s- ~"fe;('L,_~
,#-, ~"'7b 'Y7"",,~-- ~. c;.-
41- 7'5-5- P .fd>tP
q~7 4-..2'1S-
r-"
,.
m
t-
-
m
-
::I:
><
W
,;'-
b
:5
a3
> ;"
=- · I ~"f, J~
..... r \<J I~ ' .'
~ lfu>i
.... t :" 1.
C) I"".'.' .
-. .: N::~~,.,'
Q:'
o i .
Cl)l
c::t
LLI
~
.....
o
~
~
CI)
:;UHVI:. Y I-'HU'AHI:.U I-UH.
BRIAN MATTSON
16575 INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
PRIOR LAKE, MN. 55372
Valley Surveying Co., P.A.
SUITE 120-C, 16670 FRANKLIN TRAIL
FRANKLIN TRAIL OFFICE CONDOMINIUM
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
TELEPHONE (612) 447-2570
EXHIBIT C
LEGAL BUILDING ENVELOPE
<?o
"') ,.:-
L \.)
---105.73 'meos.---
- -~k
!
~.
"
E:
~
,
i;
c: :---119. 71 meos. ---
.,
0.5' E4,Sr
"
u
'"
o
GA RAGE SLAB
EL. HZ-.O'
EXISTING
HOUSE
-;z "
'-)\)
DESCRIPTION:
Lot 29, "INGUAOONA BEACH", Scott County, Minnesota. 1\] so showing the J.ocation of
the existing impr-ovem." sand pr-oposed addition, this 16th day of Feb. 1996.
NC~ES' Benchmar-k 9~6.l5 walkout elevation of the existing house.
Net lot ar-ea = 5,607 sq. ft.
946.7
x
DENOTES EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
~
Pr-oposed net lot cover-age
= 28.0 % (940.2)
'5105'\1 H,
= 53.8 %
3011 $\ F1 .
,Q, 'J~'!): n\
. -:Y"1" ,,~h
DENOTES PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION
DENOTES PROPOSED DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE
SET GARAGE SLAB AT EL. 940.34
SET TOP OF BLOCK OF GARAGE AT EL. 947.B2
Net existing lot cover-age
100 frlJ~n $'huf ,_
II. ' ,I"t. .=-, 'l(\f~
;;l;l\'" W' '\ Lv"!' ,,,"ovid -/ .
""" v"tIJ, (lHlv
o
[
SCALE
20
40
I
Revised 5/15/97 To show proposed garage
os d ireeled by owner.
I hereby certify that this survey was prepared
by me or under my di,.rt suporvislan and that
'g.m...d1!!Y licensed Land Surveyor undor the
__~, 'h. <::'1'1.1. rtl__~
IN
FEET
SENT BY: DNR METRO;
10.21 .97 10: 04;
6127727573 =>
6124474245;
#1/1
Minnesota Ocpartrnent of N,llural Resources
Metro Waters - 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106-6793
Telephone: (612) 772-7910 Fax: (612) 772-7977
October 20. 1997
Ms. Jenni Tovar
City ofPnor Lake
16200 Eagle Cn::d:: Ave. SE
Prior l,lIke. MN 55372
RE: MATISONIMPERVIOUS SURFACE AND SIDEYARD SETBACK VARIANCE llliQUEST. CITY Ol"
PRIOR LAKE. SCOTT COUNTY
and
WlllTNEY TMPER VIOUS SURF ACB VARIANCE REQUEST. CITY OF PRIOR LAKE, SCOTT
COUNTY
Dear Ms. Tovar:
The Depllrtment ofNlltural RQUurces (DNR) hAS rmewed the information you submittl;d regarding the:: above
referenced req\le$ts (0 vary the shoreland stan~d8 dealing with impervious swflU.":e and sideyard setbacks in th.:: City of
Prior l..ake. Based on our review of the request, da.... md maps of the area, we have the following cammcnls lu u.ffi:r:
Both applicants are applying fur variances which would allow similar impervious surface increases relative to the City of
Prier l.&b's Ordinam:e. Mr. Mattson has applied for I. 6.5% variance and Ms. Whitoey bas requested 5.5%. Althoush
these proposed increases appears to be a small percentage in n:lation to 'the City's Ordinance, it s.hC7l.lld be noted that tJu:
City of Prior Lake's Ordinance is currently less restrictive than the statewide standards fur management of shoreland
areas which require a maximum impervious surface coverage of lots no gruter lh.-n 25%.
If a variance is granted, we suggest that conditions be added to off-seiche impacts of the additionlll impervious sutface
arca. One such condition would be to require the landowner to <<eate an area. on site, sw;;h as a grass swale, which will
initially c:antam watc:r aDd ~Iasc it at dClCI"C:1ISCd ratc:, as wc:l1l15, ~Ip to act &i a filtcr fot sediments and/or pollutants.
The DNR. has no concerns regning Mr. Mattson's sideyard setback variance request provided that all other sethacks
arc met.
Thank you for the opportwUty to commenl Pica&; contact me at 772-7910 should you have: q~OJllI.
Sincerely I
0,..;t.. 0
-.\.:; t ,I,
\~(~",.
Pat Lynch .... i
Are. llydrologist \J
.)
PNI~ 111111111111Ii"'1: hL'. }lIh hl:'l'/, I.XOO.1tln.oIJUIJ . TTY: ti/2-21)6-5-1"-I. J.lWfl.I>:'i7':;1)2'.1
\1\ bllHll OI'I'~'IIUal'~ l;IHI'Jc.~."':1
\\'!..', V.)hh':. ni\4~1':.:iI~'
ft P..i.lh,'.1 \'111 loh,,'y..:h.'d ....II'tCr t. "_IH.dl1i1~L' ,.
'-.I '\.1111111:lIu'llIf I ;,,~ PU...I.C'II"lI~nl\r \}v'i;""
SENT BY: DNR METRO;
6-19-97 10:34;
6127727573 "'>
6124474245;
#1/2
Minnesota Dcpartrncnl of Natural Resources
Metro Waters - 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106-6793
Telephone: (612) 772-7910 Fax: (612) 772-7977
JlU1C 19, 1997
Phone #
7671
"\b"Q,f
Z'
Post-It" Fax Note
To
Mr. ()un Rye
Planning Director
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eaglo Creek Avenue
Prior Lake, MinnesotJl 55372-171 4
Co.lD..pl.
eg.
Phlln" H
fal( U
RE: HINES SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST (SPRING LAKE) AND MATTSON SIDEYARD AND
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE V A RlANCE REQUEST
Dear Mr. Rye;
I have received the hewing notices for the subject variWlcc rcqucsls which will be considered by the Prior Lake Planning
Commission on June 23, 1997. Please include the following comments into the official record of the hearing.
HINES OUW SETBACK VARIANCE REQUE~T
The eity of Prior Lake recently amended their ordinance 10 reflect a relaxation of the lake setback standard for Prior
and Spring Lakes. The required setback is 75'. It is recommended the variance as reque~tcd be denied. The deck size
depicted on the survcy which accompanied the hcnring notice appears to have plae:ed little regard for the: setback
requirement in its design. I note the struct\ues on eilher side oftbe Hines' property un.: setback at 51' and 46', The
DNR recommends the applicant re-design the proposed improvemenlS to meet the required seLback. There appears
ample buildable area to the: west and north of the existing sLructw-c. In ilddition, the property currenLly has a deck. If
tlle existing deck is in a state of disrepair, the DNR is not opposed to reconsLruction at the existing 10c~1l.ion, and to the
exisling dimensions of the current dock. It will be dilTicull to M!,'Ue hardship in this case,
MATTSON rMJ>J1:RVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE AND STDtl::~RD SETBACK VARrANr~
The subject lot is very small (5,607 square feet). and is relatively narrow. The potential for additional dcvclopmclll
on the lot wilhout I.he need for multiple varil:lIlces is limited. The DNR is not opposed to Lhe construction of a gnroge
at the proposed location, provided an equal amount of impervious Sllrl~,ce is removed. It appears that tllere is a
significant llmount of wn"''t'ctc on the west side of the prupcrty which could be removed to balance the additional
impervious of the proposed new garage. Another option, perhaps more suitable in Lcrms ofimpervious surface, would
be to construct a garage on the existing concrete slab. This would result in the elimination of the need for variances
from impervious swface and from the sidcyard setback:. It would, however. most likely require a \'ariance from the road
selback. The DNR would not be opposed to the TOad setback variance. As proposed, the DNR recommends denial
of the variance for impervious surface coverage of 54%.
Di'iH 11lf..lr'lll<llioll: (iJ::!-2',Jn.tJl.~7, I-XOO-7hl'l.I',OOO . TTY: ,.,1.) }'1i.> ~..t~4. 1.l:<OI.I-f>Yl-Y)2'~
..\11 blllil! ()l'l'urhlllil\ limp!i\\"'"
\.\'"hI1 \':11111"' nj'....l."il~.
.... I", illi.t:d ~m N.L'L'~'\.:kd P:tP";1 ('llfll:1l1l1 rl,l' ,I
'-4>> ~1illllllUlll (I' H)'..; PO!;! ('I~ll.;lInh'r \N..I';~I'
SENT BY: DNR METRO;
6-19-97 10:35;
6127727573 =>
6124474245;
#2/2
DOll Rye
Jum; 19, 1991
page 2
Please cnter these DNR objections into the hearing record. If you have Il!lY ql.1cstions or c:onUllcnts regarding DNR
review of the pending shorell1r\d issues, plea51il caH me at 772~791 O.
Sincerely,
y~~illU.
Patrick J. Lynch III
Area Hydrolo!.>ist
.~
.//
I
/
Planning Case File No. ~~-I~S3
Property Identification No. 0 $ O~ 70
City of Prior Lake
LAND USE APPLICATION
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E. / Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Phone (612) 447-4230, Fax (612) 447-4245
Type of Application: Brief description of proposed project (attach additional
o Rezoning, from --
(present zonin~) sheets/narrative if desired)
to (proposed zonin~) rB 1A.l U (3art2[j (( /'
o Amendment to City Code, Compo Plan or City Ordinance
o Subdivision of Land
o Administrative Subdivision
o Conditional Use Permit
Ji{ Variance Applicable Ordinance Section(s):
o Other: . ':J::"V'Yl rf.trtJ ,'(.7 ~ ::g iL r tl-a ~
j)N(Jt" /;IlLY e+ (}tk
Applicant(s ): B~/aVl ~a7fu#1
Address: /hS7S :ZUJu~dtJ-PJQ d~~, Cr, 5.W,
Home Phone: ~tfo t{7~S Work Phone: 4'3-5 gSZ)/
.
Property Owner(s) [If different from Applicants]:
Address:
Home Phone: Work Phone:
Type of Ownership: Fee _ Contract for Deed _ Purchase Agreement----",
Legal Description of Property (Attach a copy ifthere is not enough space on this sheet):
1.07 ~9 rY1dlNJ c&""'&? a:,Al' (0 l-,
c/
To the best of my knowledge the information provided in this application and other material submitted is correct. In
addition, I have read the relevant sections of the Prior Lake Ordinance and procedural guidelines, and understand that
applications will not be processed until deemed complete by the Planning Director or assignee.
~~ /;;2-97
Applicant's Signature Date
Fee Owner's Signature Date
THIS SPACE TO BE FILLED IN BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR OR DESIGNEE
PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED DENIED DATE OF HEARING
CITY COUNCIL APPROVED DENIED DATE OF HEARING
CONDITIONS:
Signature of Planning Director or Designee Date
lu-app2.doc
tpk/l/nj Ct)f14#1 t'S.S'/Ot1 :
~
MeJe a -N/M/ly ~-f ..5"'; J1')t('.5e hits no s;.fr;/,~~ S/4~e c?c/4/1<26~
?/ -F-tm/fy V'Ut'V1/! b~r.s. j,~/}( Cilr...s t? U/ Wt?rd '" C~n-~V?-f If-
hue -16 t/4rK ) J-1 .s-frccT ~ r J /I /?e'<;tJ,6t:1r...s i/.e: r3"v-tT /t:1'r-
.fl, ~y hme d- 11,z,(/;'60r::, 1,914<(.. tv~rt: ju,,'/f- 1//1 /'6 -,Lh.;r- .
Wt!.('~-r ?r~~rI<r fjf'dckcf -F&tr I'1lrV1ul( /rt e~t'c6i-I'~q...5~.:r de; 11~f-
ht2d~ any /e()~ ;tf'()UJ1c! c2><c~~ -fbr I1t... .s~?-tdh(!)y ~V1 ~rl-/t'r~ /pT;
:3, -lAc S /k ,trF -/-k~ 1t1-(- r;t- C u r/'~vt. -t jl /',t:t de /' ewe.. s 11 CJ
a Hervt~Y-i(/e,S. :6u-r ~ -r;./~ /My //'&l/t:lXcf t//I?',IC4C~..s1'
-.:z:::. wt's4 -I he I/)~ h.hu rd. )u.tI~ /~CI'1 ~ ~Wlt' ~/ycr
6fV\,cl Q ret)5h1.at'(~ qYk~Up2( eJ-;: flRc.r;zy w~w~ 4.wtc- tfct!'4?
(;~u/(,'~cfr~e A~tu<. /It'd- ~ P'UC: U//5 I?t'//~ ~ 7 YCil'J,
c:l-rftr )--?1/i4C '<;;j -Ih(' j1l1ldr'~ WLS dt:l'rl~ t:1n -;I-/.z~r /~ t--
Wt'fh 1'1// rCjttf'c( ~t? ~r 0::' /'~c /'1-7.
t:.A ,:r /2eGJ 5~""" ~;('''' F..r wI,/( Clr~,,- ) /&Y S t<J~!JI<f /,'H'j
e;Ut'f?U-C~h-t- '<:/- -10 ~!so VI-'1~t<<, 1-4c: ?vI/.", U/'5 q ..47Y/c- ~/('<:.-
6ekr46/~ -FOr P'Uy -GM1t'!vA
"
NOTICE OF HEARING FOR THE FOLLOWING VARIANCES;
1. A 6.5% VARIANCE TO PERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
COVERAGE OF 36.5% INSTEAD OF THE PERMITTED 30%;
2. A 3 FOOT DRIVEWAY SIDEYARD SETBACK VARIANCE TO
PERMIT A DRIVEWAY SETBACK OF 2 FEET INSTEAD OF THE
REQUIRED 5 FEET FROM THE SIDE LOT LINE;
ALL RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW DETACHED GARAGE
AND DRIVEWAY ON PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE RI-SUBURBAN
RESIDENTIAL AND SD-SHORELAND DISTRICTS
You are hereby notified that the Prior Lake Planning Commission will hold a hearing at
Prior Lake Fire Station #1, located at 16776 Fish Point Road SE (Southwest of the
intersection of c.R. 21 and Fish Point Road), on: Monday, October 27, 1997, at 6:30
p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible.
APPLICANT: Brian Mattson
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle SW
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
SUBJECT SITE: Lot 29, Inguadona Beach, Scott County, Minnesota, also known as
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle SW.
REQUEST: The applicant proposes the construction of a new detached garage
to be located in the rear yard of the subject property. The proposed
construction will result in the following requested variances;
1. A 6.5% VARIANCE TO PERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
COVERAGE OF 36.5% INSTEAD OF THE PERMITTED
30%;
2. A 3 FOOT DRIVEWAY SIDEY ARD SETBACK
VARIANCE TO PERMIT A DRIVEWAY SIDEY ARD
SETBACK OF 2 FEET INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 5
FEET;
The Planning Commission will review the proposed construction and requested variance
against the following criteria found in the Zoning Ordinance.
1. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would result in undue hardship with
16200 E!g)27t~~WJY~1p.}fJtSE~R~~iN~95tRs~~2ffl~ / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
respect to the property.
2. Such unnecessary hardship results because of circumstances unique to the
property.
3. The hardship is caused by provisions of the Ordinance and is not the result of
actions of persons presently having an interest in the property.
4. The variance observes the spirit and intent of this Ordinance, produces
substantial justice and is not contrary to the public interest.
If you are interested in this issue, you should attend the hearing. Questions related to this
hearing should be directed to the Prior Lake Planning Department by calling 447-4230
between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. The Planning
Commission will accept oral and/or written comments. Oral or written comments should
relate to how the proposed construction and requested variances are or are not consistent
with the above-listed criteria.
Prior Lake Planning Commission
Date Mailed: June 10, 1997
Revision Mailed: June 16, 1997
Notice Mailed for Continued Hearing Date: October 17, 1997.
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97-053\9753V APN.DOC97-53PN2.DOC
2
)
NOTICE OF HEARING FOR THE FOLLOWING VARIANCES;
1. A 24% VARIANCE TO PERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
COVERAGE OF 54% INSTEAD OF THE PERMITTED 30%;
2. A 4 FOOT DRIVEWAY SIDEY ARD SETBACK VARIANCE TO
PERMIT A DRIVEWAY SETBACK OF 1 FOOT INSTEAD OF THE
REQUIRED 5 FEET FROM THE SIDE LOT LINE;
ALL RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW DETACHED GARAGE
AND DRIVEWAY ON PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE RI-SUBURBAN
RESIDENTIAL AND SD-SHORELAND DISTRICTS
You are hereby notified that the Prior Lake Planning Commission will hold a hearing at
Prior Lake Fire Station #1, located at 16776 Fish Point Road SE (Southwest of the
intersection ofC.R. 21 and Fish Point Road), on: Monday, June 23,1997, at 6:30 p.m.
or as soon thereafter as possible.
APPLICANT: Brian Mattson
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle SW
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
SUBJECT SITE: Lot 29, Inguadona Beach, Scott County, Minnesota, also known as
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle SW.
REQUEST: The applicant proposes the construction of a new detached garage
to be located in the rear yard of the subject property. The proposed
construction will result in the following requested variances;
1. A 24% VARIANCE TO PERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
COVERAGE OF 54% INSTEAD OF THE PERMITTED
30%;
2. A 4 FOOT DRIVEWAY SIDEY ARD SETBACK
VARIANCE TO PERMIT A DRIVEWAY SIDEY ARD
SETBACK OF 1 FOOT INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 5
FEET;
The Planning Commission will review the proposed construction and requested variance
against the following criteria found in the Zoning Ordinance.
16200 Eh~tFc~~~~Y.~?~at~~RY,~}jJ;~q&g7~s~H-~i1<4C/ Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
1. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would result in undue hardship with
respect to the property.
2. Such unnecessary hardship results because of circumstances unique to the
property.
3. The hardship is caused by provisions of the Ordinance and is not the result of
actions of persons presently having an interest in the property.
4. The variance observes the spirit and intent of this Ordinance, produces
substantial justice and is not contrary to the public interest.
If you are interested in this issue, you should attend the hearing. Questions related to this
hearing should be directed to the Prior Lake Planning Department by calling 447-4230
between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. The Planning
Commission will accept oral and/or written comments. Oral or written comments should
relate to how the proposed construction and requested variances are or are not consistent
with the above-listed criteria.
Prior Lake Planning Commission
Date Mailed: June 10, 1997
Revision Mailed: June 16, 1997.
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97-053\9753V APN.DOC9753V APN.DOC
2
SUBJECT LOT:
....
LOT 29,
INGUADONA BEACH
.-"
".-- - -
;/
4
.,..
~6 5
~
2 r- '" ,
..!l :7
.s 8 ..:. '-
- ~
,- "
-
9
^
'.[ ).
, --
KJ-
._-~
--0;
'"
"
"
-,
Ul
~
~
-.
-
~ 2-
~
VI
a-
t"" 3
~
<ii 42-
~
r-
'"
~
)---,
! .
i
.I'
~
^
\Q
,
-<
"c
-~~
..
~~
'~ .
~
~.
~ ~ /' ':'t."''''
"I:' ~. ",'I
~, . I
'" '-
, 38.;
<?o
SS90IS'OS"E
103.3 plol
---105.73 meos.---
FENCE 1.5'
WEST
~) t::
L_ \..)
-, ~939::4--
- .....1/ 1~9.3)
940.jl
~
,
y 20" MAPLE
: C
I
I
94/.6
1941,9)
~940. 2
.
941.3 1940.2)
1 ft' . 20
. fil
. ZQI' MAP E ::t
. 1/1
:,)
~ 1.5
~ "
\
I
I
'~
{;:
QlO)
E:o
~O
.tn
, . ,
'" -
Ties
-
.....-
\
''''
I'
944"1<:'
';,-..119.71 meos.---
oi' 116.7 plOI
946.2.' NSs054'47"W
0.5' EAST
<?o
"
t.J
...
o
GARAGE SLAB
EL. 942..01
EXISTING
HOUSIr
-...z ,......
--) \. )
I
/
DESCRIPTION:
Lot 29, "INGUAOONA BEACH", Scott County, Minnesota. Also showing th~ J.ocation of
the existing improvem'~- s and proposed addition, this 16th day of Feb. 1996.
N(~ES' Benchmark 9l6.1S walkout elevation of the existing house.
Net lot area = 5,607 sq. ft.
946.7
x
DENOTES EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
Net existing lot coverage = 28.0 %
Proposed net lot coverage = 53.80/0
(940.2) DENOTES PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION
DENOTES PROPOSED DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE
SET GARAGE SLAB AT EL. 940.34
SET TOP OF 8LOCK OF GARAGE AT EL. 947.82
....
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
SITE:
PRESENTER:
REVIEWED BY:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
FILE COpy
PLANNING REPORT
4B
CONSIDER SIDE YARD SETBACK AND IMPERVIOUS
SURFACE VARIANCES FOR BRIAN MATTSON, Case
File #97-053
16575 INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
JENNI TOVAR, PLANNER ~\L1
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATO~~
_ YES -1L NO V" U
JUNE 23, 1997
The Planning Department received a variance application from Brian Mattson
who is proposing to construct a new detached 480 square foot garage and
access driveway. There is no existing garage on the property. No previous
variances have been granted.
The existing house with deck is setback approximately 22 feet from the front
property line, 9.8 feet from the side property line to the north, approximately 10
feet from the side property line to the south.
The applicant is proposing to construct a 480 square foot detached garage in
the rear yard with a bituminous access driveway located along the side of the
principle structure to the garage in the back (Exhibit A). Existing impervious
surface is 28%. The proposed additions will create an impervious surface of
54%. The Shoreland Ordinance allows a maximum impervious surface coverage
of not more than 30% (Section 5-8-3). The proposed driveway will be located
1 foot from the property line. The City Code requires a minimum driveway
setback of 5 feet from the side yard property line (Section 5-5-5). Therefore, the
applicants are requesting a 24% variance to impervious surface coverage
maximum to permit coverage of 54%, rather than the maximum allowed of
30% and a 4 foot variance to the driveway side yard setback to allow a 1
foot driveway setback rather than the required setback of 5 feet.
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
DISCUSSION:
The lot is located in the subdivision known as Inguadona Beach (1924) and is a
non-riparian lot. The house was constructed in 1977 and a deck was added in
1989. The original house building permit does not indicate if a garage was part of
the structure (Exhibit B). The property is located within the R-1 (Suburban
Residential) and the SO (Shoreland Overlay) district. This lot is 5,607 sq. feet,
55 feet wide at the street and 51 feet wide at the rear lot line. Therefore, this lot
is a substandard lot because it does not meet the minimum lot area of 12,000 sq.
feet and lot width of 75 feet for general development lake non-riparian lots under
the current Shoreland Ordinance. No previous variances have been granted on
this property.
The proposed garage will be within the building envelope (Exhibit C) however,
the driveway will be 1 foot from the property line. Generally, the city maintains a
5 foot drainage and utility easement on side property lines. However, such
easements were not granted when the property was platted in 1924. Such is
usually the case in older plats. The issues of drainage onto the adjacent
property is a concern. Although, the adjacent property to the north is vacant
now, there is no guarantee that it will continue to be vacant in the future. Also
snow storage will be a significant problem for a driveway located 1 foot from the
property line.
The variance to impervious surface and driveway setback could be eliminated if
the garage was located on the existing driveway, or under the deck. In this case
a variance to front yard setback would be required. If variances are granted, a
reduction of the existing impervious surface by removal of the concrete area
should be considered. This has been suggested to the applicant. Verbally, the
applicant has stated that he has a great need for the concrete drive and would
not be willing to remove a portion or all of it.
The ONR has responded to the variance request in a letter dated June 19,1997.
The ONR is not opposed to the location of the proposed garage, and
recommends removal of the existing concrete drive to reduce the impervious
surface. The ONR suggests a more suitable option of locating the garage on the
existing drive, as not to increase impervious surface. This would required a front
yard setback variance. As proposed, the ONR recommends denial.
VARIANCE HARDSHIP STANDARDS
1. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would result in undue hardship
with respect to the property.
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97 -053\97 -053PC. DOC
Page 2
This criteria goes to whether reasonable use can be made of the property if
the Ordinance is literally enforced. In this case, the lot does have existing off-
street parking but no garage. As proposed, there is a legal alternative for the
reducing the variance request to impervious surface by removing existing
concrete.
2. Such unnecessary hardship results because of circumstances unique
to the property.
There are unique circumstances in this case. The size of the lot is
considerably smaller than the ordinance requires and was platted in 1924.
However, if the applicant utilizes the existing driveway and places the
proposed garage in the front yard, the variance to impervious surface and
driveway setback will be eliminated. This would result in the need for a front
yard setback variance. There appear to be alternatives that reduce the
hardship which should be considered by the applicant.
3. The hardship is caused by provisions of the Ordinance and is not the
result of actions of persons presently having an interest in the property.
The lot is considered to be substandard. It is under 12,000 sq. feet in area
(5,607 sq. feet) and 86 feet wide. If the applicant moves the garage to the
front of the house and places it on the existing driveway the two variances
required would be eliminated. However, a variance to front yard setback
would be required. The hardship is caused by the provisions of the
Ordinance and is the result of the applicants proposed building and drive
locations.
4. The variance observes the spirit and intent of this Ordinance, produces
substantial justice and is not contrary to the public interest.
The spirit and intent of the impervious surface maximum in the Shoreland
District is to reduce storm water run-off, which will eventually drains into the
lake. The intent of the 5 foot side yard setback for driveways is to protect
drainage and utility easements and to allow for snow storage and automobile
overhangs. The granting of the requested variances are contrary to the intent
of the Ordinance and is not in the best interest of the public. Staff concurs
with the DNR and as proposed, recommends denial of the variances.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the variances requested by the applicant, or approve any variances
the Planning Commission deems appropriate in the circumstances.
L:\97FI LES\97V AR\97 -053\97 -053PC. DOC
Page 3
2. Table or continue discussion of the item for specific purpose.
3. Deny the application because the Planning Commission finds a lack of
demonstrated hardship under the zoning code criteria.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff has concluded that the intent of the applicant to construct a garage
certainly is reasonable, the proposed location and variances requested are
contrary to the intent of the ordinance. There does exist hardship based on the
size of the lot and the non-existence of a garage. However, there are
alternatives which reduce the variances necessary and the overall impact on the
lot would be decreased.
ACTION REQUIRED:
A motion adopting Resolution 97 -15PC.
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97 -053\97 -053PC. DOC
Page 4
RESOLUTION 97-15PC
A RESOLUTION DENYING A 4 FOOT VARIANCE REQUEST TO PERMIT A
1 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK RATHER THAN THE MINIMUM
REQUIREMENT OF 5 FEET AND A 24 PERCENT VARIANCE REQUEST TO
PERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE OF 54 PERCENT RATHER THAN THE
MAXIMUM ALLOWED OF 30 PERCENT FOR A PROPOSED GARAGE AND
DRIVEWAY ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16575 INGUADONA BEACH
CIRCLE FOR BRIAN MATTSON.
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota;
FINDINGS
1. Brian Mattson has applied for a variance from Section 5-5-5 and Section 5-8-3 of the
City Code in order to permit the construction of a 480 square foot detached garage
and bituminous access driveway on property located in the R-l (Suburban
Residential) District and the SD (Shoreland Overlay) District at the following
location, to wit;
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle, legally described as Lot 29, Inguadona Beach,
Scott County, MN
1. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variance as contained in
Case #97-053 and held hearings thereon on June 23, 1997.
2. The Board of Adjustment has considered the effect of the proposed variance upon the
health, safety, and welfare of the community, the existing and anticipated traffic
conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on property
values in the surrounding area and the effect of the proposed variance on the
Comprehensive Plan.
3. The existing impervious surface coverage is 28 percent including a paved drive area
and concrete area below the existing deck towards the front-yard. Use of the existing
driveway results in an alternative that eliminates the requested variances.
4. The granting of the variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant. The variance will serve merely as a
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
convenience to the applicants. and is not necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship
as alternatives exist.
5. The DNR has recommended denial of the variances as proposed.
6. The contents of Planning Case 97-053 are hereby entered into and made a part of the
public record and the record of decision for this case.
CONCLUSION
Based upon the Findings set forth above, the Board of Adjustment hereby denies the
following variances for the proposed garage and driveway as shown in Exhibit A;
1. A 4 foot variance permitting a 1 foot driveway setback from the side yard
instead of the required 5 foot setback.
2. A 24 percent variance to permit impervious surface coverage of 54 percent
instead of the maximum allowed of 30 percent.
Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on June 23, 1997.
William Criego, Chair
ATTEST:
Donald R. Rye, Planning Director
1:\97var\97 -053 va\97 -0 15re.doc
2
SENT BY: DNR METRO;
6 - 1 9 - 97 1 0 : 34 ;
6127727573 =>
6124474245;
#1/2
Minnesota Dcparlrncnl of Natural Resources
Metro V:l aters - 1200 Waroer Road, St. Paul, MN 55106-6793
Telephone: (612) 772-7910 Fax: (612) 772-7977
JlU1C 19, 1997
Phon" /I
7671
'.';vcif
,"
Post-It" FElx Note
To
Mr'. Don Rye
Plunning Director
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-171 4
Co.lD..pt.
eg.
Phnrmif
f al( ~
RE: HINES SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST (SPRING LAKE) AND MATTSON SlDEYARD AND
JMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE V A RlANCE REQUEST
Dear Mr'. Rye:
I have received the hearing notices for the subject variance requests which ""ill be considered by Lhe Prior Lake Planning
Commission on June 23, 1997. Please include the following comments into lhe official record of the hearing.
HJNES OJlW SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST
The city of Prior Lake recently amended their ordinmu:e to reflect a relaxation of the lake setback standard for Prior
and Spring Lakes. The required setback is 75'. It is recommended the variance as reque~tc:d be denied. The deck size
depicted on lhc survey which acconlpanicd the hcMing notice appears to have placed Jittle regard for thc setback
requirement in its design. T note the structures on eiLher side ofthc Hines' pJ'operty un: setback at 51' illld 46', The
DNR recommends the applicant re-design the proposed improvemcnlS to meet the required seLback. There appears
ample buildable llrea to the west and north of the exisling structure. In Olddition, the property currently has 11 dcl.:k. If
tlle e~1ing deck is in a slate of disrepair. the DNR is not opposed to reconstruction at theexi~ting location. and to the
c~isting dimensions of the currcnt deck. It wiJl be dimcull to argue hllrdshjp in this case.
MATTSON IMP~:RVIOUS SURFAa; COVERAGE AND STD"F;Y ~RD SETBACK VARTANrl:;
The subject lot is vcry small (5,607 square feel). and is relatively narrow. The potential for additional dcvclopmelH
on the lot wilhoutl,he need for multiple variances is limited. The DNR is not opposed to !.he conslTuctlOll of a garage
at the proposed location, provided an equnl iJUlount of impervious slIrface is removed. It appears thilt tllC:l'e is <I
signiflcnnt amount of concrete on the west side of the:: pruperty which could be removed Lo balance the additional
impervious of the proposcdncw garage. Another option, perhaps more suitable in \.erms of impervious surface, would
be to construct a garage on the existing concrete slab, This would result in the elimination of the need for variances
from impervious surface and from the sidcyard setback. It would, however, most likely require a variance from the road
setback. The DNR would not be opposed to the TO<ld setback variance. As proposed, the DNR recommends denial
of the vwianec for impervious surface coverage of 54%,
DNf< 1,'(II'.'1I,lIi\.lll: liJ2-2'HH'>I.'i7. l-r;IlIl-7hh-hIiOIl . TTY, 1,1' }l.}f:, ~...s.... 1.:~I)Il-h.,/-YI29
All btuall)l'l'orltlllil\ limpltIVI".
'lv'hll \':111..", 1)i\'I,'r,iry
.ft 11.;IHlol.I 011 J("'l.'~',,'k\J P:lp..;t ('11111;1111111,'. ,I
"'., \.1illlllJUIIl (11 Jll'..; Ilmil ("I~noa1l1h'r 'W"ol';:'-
SENT BY: DNR METRO;
6-19-97 10:35;
6127727573 =>
6124474245;
#2/2
DOll Rye
June 19. 1997
page 2
Please enter these DNR objections into the hearing record. If you hllve any qucsLions or conuncnts regarding DNR
rcvicw of the pending shoreland issues. plciJS!: call me at 772-7910.
Sincerely,
?~~illU-
Patrick J. Lynch III
Area Hydrologist
BRIAN MATTSON
16575 INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
PRIOR LAKE, MN. 55372
I
/tr-
~
ct'
DESCRIPTION:
Valley Surveying Co., F!A.
SUITE /20-C. /6670 FRANKLIN TRAIL
FRANKLIN TRAIL OFFICE CONDOMINIUM
PRIOR LAKE. MINNESOTA 55372
TELEPHONE (612) 447-2570
EXHIBIT A
~O
") I:::
L '-I
SS901S'OS""
103.3 plot
---105.73 meos.---
;,.-: -~ -~t3~~~~3) -
,940.2
.
I.
Y 20" MAPLE:
I ~
I.
941.6
(941,9)
,
J~
0:
"0>
1;0
"'0
0",
-0
'?=:
(936.9)
940.i'
)
, ~1.3 1940.2)
t fl.'ZO
'Ito"MA.~ :,)
.-J ~ ;: P~OPOSE~" :& ;J; 1.5
e. G~AGE - ~
943.3 I t:;.;) IZ"MA.-u; \
/ lll944..IlL_20 1_ 'O~
!!i I 943.6 8 ( '1;11 946.
.,: /2
")0
L. -../
0',.../19.71 meas.--_
..I 116.7 pial
946.2, r N SSo 54' 47'W
FENe E 0.5' EAST
"
~
o
GARAGE SLAB
EL. 942.01
EXISTING
HOVS E
:z ,.....
'--) U
I
I
Lot 29, "INGUADONA BEACH", Scott County, Minnesota. Also showing the 1.ocation of
the existing imp~ovem~' s and p~oposed addition, this 16th day of Feb. 1996.
N(~ES' Benchmark Y~6.l5 walkout elevation of the existing hnuse.
Net lot a~ea = 5,607 sq. ft.
~
946.7
.
DENOTES EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
(940.2) DENOTES PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION
DENOTES PROPOSED DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE
SET GARAGE SLAB AT EL. 940.34
SET TOP OF SLOCK OF GARAGE AT EL. 947.S2
Net existing lot cove~age = 28.0 %
Proposed net lot coverage = 53.B %
o
I
SCALE
20
40
I
IN
FEET
Revised 5/15/97 To show proposed garage
os d ireeled by owner.
I hereby cerflfy that this survey was prepored
by me or under my dirKt sup<<,v;a;on and that
I 0","" .duly licensed Land Surveyor under the
lOW' of t~" State of /,jlnne..Vo. _
.,-..\.
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
Impervious Surface Calculations
(To be Submitted with Building Penn it Application)
For All Properties Located in theShoreland District (SD).
The Maximum 1I11pervious Surface Coverage Permitted in 30 Percent.
Property Address \lRS1S' . ~ c:'\.)l\.~,~~ e E.~~ c...,'(<..Q.G
Lot AreaS I f..,cil Sq. Feet x 30% = ..............\ ~B"z... 0
***************-********************************************************
. LENGTH WIDTH SQ. FEET
I . HOUSE 1.!8.C:;. . ~ '. '2.4 = lP~L\ '_~7.""'~:"'"
\1- x 1,.~ = 4v
ATTACHED GARAGE x =
..
DETACHED BLDGS
(Gara~
TOTAL PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE..........~...........
p~pos-eP &A(~"je
. -z.t.L x '20
'--/ ll-' . x. \"'2-
-:"l2..(p
460
. ''20
TOT ALDET ACHED BUILDINGS.......................
. \~ 1-2...0 . "3Lt 0
~.S x 2..0 = \to
. "2..'-\ x ~ = \ ~-z.
'2.'5 x e =-zo
Yo.?> ~\7- Sz.-
TOTAL PAVED A.REAS.....~...........~~........................
looo
CONe.. rek (ej..~~)
DRIVEWAY/PAVED AR1!AS
- -- .
(Driveway-paved or not) .'
. (Sidewalk/Parking Areas)
A
W,pA4l~
. P A TIOS/PORCHESIDECKS
(Open Decks W' min. opening between
boards, with a pervious surfS:ce below;
are not considered to be impervious)
x'
x
=
=
x
oro~;s.eJJ nR\IJ~\.,-,I\;4.... -k
~e~ {;d~~€.... . I
OTffER' -..J. . .
TOTAL D ECKS....................................... ..................
t- 7..D
'<0
x e
X q8>
=
\(00
.., o~
~~
3cn
=
TOTAL. OTHER...~;~............................~.................... ~
I
TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
UND~...' ....
. Prepared By \l" \\~ S" .....'f\ ".j C. I P. f.- .
Company1J~~ ~.J
.. .
, I 301'..(.0 I'
L\?J31..o I
Date ~ -2. <-l- ~--,
Phone #'\.\'-\i-'Z..S'7 t>
!;
!::i
5
Q1
~
-.I
~
......
~
.....
a:
o
CI)
<t
LLI
~
0:
~f
ct:i
L ~
(;;1
m
I-
-
m
-
:J:
><
W
. ::;UHVI:. Y t-'HI:.t-'AHI:.U l"UH.
BRIAN MATTSON
16575 INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
PRIOR LAKE, MN. 55372
Valley Surveying Co., P.A.
SUITE 120-C, 16670 FRANKLIN TRAIL
FRANKLIN TRAIL OFFICE CONDOMINIUM
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
TElEPHONE (612) 447-2570
EXHIBIT C
LEGAL BUILDING ENVELOPE
<20
1') I::
L_ \.)
I
I
---105.73 meo..___
- -~~
~:
..
IE
1Il
o
,
i;
FENCE 0.5' EAST
x
:.:
o
GARAGE SLAB
EL. 942...01
EXISTING
HOUSE'
-...z ,....
'-) \..)
DESCRIPTION:
Lot 29, "INGUADONA BEACH", Scott County, Minnesota. Also showing th" '.ocation of
the existing impcovem~- sand pcoposed addition, this 16th day of feb. 1996.
N(~ES' Benchmack 4~6.15 walkout elevation of the existing house.
Net lot acea = 5,607 sq. ft.
946.7
.
DENOTES EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
~
Proposed net lot coverage
= 28.0 % (940.2)
ISiOS'j,H,
= 53.8 %
30 11 ~, H .
'J j '~e'}; rt1
. :Y"'f'",)h
DENOTES PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION
DENOTES PROPOSED DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE
SET GARAGE SLAB AT EL. 940.34
SET TOP OF BLOCK OF GARAGE AT EL. 947.B2
Net existing lot coverage
100 {.t-UYl" $:'hu1' _
;;!;l\'l ,-",I" cvnf'(:"'~,"."d =; '1(\'1:->
-1t) ';I\hr (1Jt\/./
o
I
c:rJ1., t:
20
40
I
Revised 5/15/97 To show proposed garage
os d ireeled by owner.
I he..by certify 'hal 'hi. .urvey wo. prepared
by m. or under my d;r~ct superv;s;on and thot
lo...",..,dv!y lic!nsp.d Lnnd $urvf!,/or rmder thp
,~: - ~ I. H_ -_ ~
lAL
~r:r:T
/.
Planning Case File No. ~~-~53
Property Identification No. 0 S O:l. 70
City of Prior Lake
LAND USE APPLICATION
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E. I-Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Phone (612) 447-4230, Fax (612) 447-4245
Type of Application: Brief description of proposed project (attach additional
o Rezoning, from --
(present zonin~) sheets/narrative if desired)
to (proposed zoning) 8td 1;1 Gard(j t' /
o Amendment to City Code, Compo Plan or City Ordinance
o Subdivision of Land
o Administrative Subdivision
o Conditional Use Permit
Ji{ Variance Applicable Ordinance Section(s):
o Other: 12. '3:"' ~ f.erv ,'lJ ~ i ~ r 1ret eu
I N(/t' ,.JiLt e+ dcl<
Applicant(s): (8 ~/a V1 ~C?7fuP1
Address: 16S7-C:;- ~bI~fii1q a;cC. Cr, ..s.W.
Home Phone: ?/L./o t;7~S- Work Phone: ~3S gS"/
Property Owner(s) [If different from Applicants]:
Address:
Home Phone: Work Phone:
Type of Ownership: Fee _ Contract for Deed _ Purchase Agreement ------'"
Legal Description of Property (Attach a copy if there is not enough space on this sheet):
Lor ::<9 7::';o1&/U4 c&nq ~rA(t 0
(/
To the best of my knowledge the information provided in this application and other material submitted is correct. In
addition, I have read the relevant sections of the Prior Lake Ordinance and procedural guidelines, and understand that
applications will not be processed until deemed complete by the Planning Director or assignee.
~~~ 6;,2-97
Applicant's Signature Date
Fee Owner's Signature Date
THIS SPACE TO BE FILLED IN BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR OR DESIGNEE
PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED DENIED DATE OF HEARING
CITY COUNCIL APPROVED DENIED DATE OF HEARING
CONDITIONS:
Signature of Planning Director or Designee Date
lu-app2.doc
;;?k/lfrlj CO/MP'1 /ss/Ot1 :
~
//eve {) +dVl'1/1y crf' S'; hUI..se hits no s.~/''lc S/tit!~ c?'CI.:?I"/e2b6
?/ -Ftm,'ly Y'Mt'~b<rs h~IH Cilr.5 tP uef 4/l/rt<.. C~r(~V!-f(y
hue -10 t/~rt( /1'1 S+ra:.T-,t:Jr J// /Jt'<jJ,6i7r...s t/~C!rh4( /P'T-
/. ~y )zJme d- ne;yJ,6tJrS hPJM.(.. Wt!r~ ,bttr'/f-- #'? 1,,.,6 +Jz~ .
Wrt.(~-r /,oj7~rlr fJl'dckcf ~r J'1JrVful( /rt ex'~~ct7i-/()V1..5_:Z: d;; )1,11-
hade.. any lecl~ flroul?d e:><(~r -fbr dL .5,{vtc/bc:JY t?'vt ~rl-l"rt!!. /t/T-;
3. --1A(' S/k crF -7k~ leT ~ Cur/'c!.-<-7 jl/'t::<de a,we,. S i'ltJ
a HerVt.~'''!it.le.s.. 6u-f ~o HIe. /Ur //'~r/x.d t//II'I04CC..s,
::z;::. w /s t, -I- h c.. I tJ ~ lJ i ~ rei h tl tJ ~ Ic-c 1"1 t::( /r WI (' t:::-/uyc r
C!vtd Q red5;J/t.d.&Ic. ql--k,lUnT I!If fIRcf;'-y U/&1WU ~..4-'C"" tfC:4?
(;~u/("(c(~--rl'e A~~( /1~X+- -10 PHC U/~5 /?u/~ ~ 7 YCi/'-5
c::l-F-kr n-tl'rlc. "'::/ -Ih(' f'l'lldr'vtj WtlS dr/'yt~ t:1~ r~~r /.::' 1-
wt'fh .Y!t) rCjFlf'c/ ?,-" ~r c:?/~Crf7.
c-, ,J /1,t'qf 5,j""'e ~N" F.. r Wlrk' ar",,, ) j"y S td<iI'f Prf'j
e;t{,.('f'~~h+-- ~ -10 cc/so I/"'T,tK-c -I-hc W;'"" j-<:/5' q /;77'1c::: ~/rc-
t3~ r /l6/<! -FO r pu y -G ""1-1/'/Y- '
r\ ...... l
f::~'
./~~~
// if? v
I
-'
NOTICE OF HEARING FOR THE FOLLOWING VARIANCES;
1. A 24% V ARIA.l~CE TO PER1Y1IT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
COVERAGE OF 54% INSTEAD OF THE PERMITTED 30%;
2. A 4 FOOT DRIVEWAY SIDEY ARD SETBACK VARIANCE TO
PERMIT A DRIVEWAY SETBACK OF 1 FOOT INSTEAD OF THE
REQUIRED 5 FEET FROlVI THE SIDE LOT LINE;
ALL RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW DETACHED GARAGE
AND DRIVEWAY ON PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE R1-SUBURBAN
RESIDENTIAL AND SD-SHORELAND DISTRICTS
You are hereby notified that the Prior Lake Planning Commission will hold a hearing at
Prior Lake Fire Station #1, located at 16776 Fish Point Road SE (Southwest of the
intersection ofC.R. 21 and Fish Point Road), on: Monday, June 23,1997, at 6:30 p.m.
or as soon thereafter as possible.
APPLICANT: Brian Mattson
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle SW
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
SUBJECT SITE: Lot 29, Inguadona Beach, Scott County, Minnesota, also known as
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle SW.
REQUEST: The applicant proposes the construction of a new detached garage
to be located in the rear yard of the subject property. The proposed
construction will result in the following requested variances;
1. A 24% V ARIAl'JCE TO PERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURF ACE
COVERAGE OF 54% INSTEAD OF THE PERMITTED
30%;
2. A 4 FOOT DRIVEWAY SIDEY ARD SETBACK
V ARIANCE TO PERMIT A DRIVEWAY SIDEY ARD
SETBACK OF 1 FOOT INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 5
FEET;
The Planning Commission will review the proposed construction and requested variance
against the following criteria found in the Zoning Ordinance.
16200 E6gf~?cVe~~~~~7~a~~R~pt.RM~9&g7~5~+f.1t11.<4C/ Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTCNITY EMPLOYER
. "~.'. \
1. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would result in undue hardship with
respect to the property.
2. Such unnecessary hardship results because of circumstances unique to the
property.
3. The hardship is caused by provisions of the Ordinance and is not the result of
actions of persons presently having an interest in the property.
4. The variance observes the spirit and intent of this Ordinance, produces
substantial justice and is not contrary to the public interest.
If you are interested in this issue, you should attend the hearing. Questions related to this
hearing should be directed to the Prior Lake Planning Department by calling 447-4230
between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. The Planning
Commission will accept oral and/or written comments. Oral or written comments should
relate to how the proposed construction and requested variances are or are not consistent
with the above-listed criteria.
Prior Lake Planning Commission
Date Mailed: June 10, 1997
Revision Mailed: June 16, 1997.
L\97FILES\97V AR\97-053\9753V APN.DOC9753V APN.DOC
2
..
SUBJECT LOT:
tOT 29,
INGUADONA BEACH
~
~
~
- ...-::- . :::::::=::::--- ~~
~ . - -~L-5 ,-(
r 317"r
jj
I
-':
".-- -; .
;r
./
4
""
::6 5
~
"J-
r-- ., 6 I
2 ..!l :7
~
- :::
...... '.....
,.
~;..
"
.1
.~--
r
~
"
--~
~.
s
"'-
"
...
. -
~oA. C
;:::::te:::
\S")
~
r--
'<)
-
J-,
!
i
.I'
~
,.,
\Q
....
-
~
~ 2-
I4l
cr
~ 3
'0:;
<ii 4 2-
::!
"C
.\.G~
-.
~~
,'0 .
^~ ".
\4~= ./ . ~
~', ~....,
"'I' " _ " ,\8
~ '. /
,~
, .J8;
("-
'"
<:IQ
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
SITE:
PRESENTER:
REVIEWED BY:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
PLANNING REPORT
53
CONSIDER SIDE YARD SETBACK AND IMPERVIOUS
SURFACE VARIANCES FOR BRIAN MATTSON, Case
File #97-053
165751NGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
JENNITOVAR,PLANNER
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
YES ---X- NO
AUGUST 11, 1997
On June 23, 1997 the Planning Commission heard a variance request from Brian
Mattson who is proposing to construct a detached garage with driveway. The
applicant had originally requested a variance to allow impervious surface
coverage on the lot to be 54% and the driveway to be setback 1 foot from the
property line.
Based on the hardship criteria used for evaluating variances, the Planning
Commission was prepared to deny the variances as requested. Upon request of
the applicant, the Planning Commission continued the discussion to July 28,
1997. This was to allow the applicant time to modify the proposed additions to
reduce/eliminate the variance request. The applicant had requested an
extension to the August 11, 1997. On July 28, 1997 the Planning Commission
made a motion continuing the hearing until August 11, 1997.
The Planning Department has received a written request from the applicant
requesting another extension until August 25, 1997. The applicant has
significantly reduced the impervious surface on the site and is awaiting
completion of final survey.
ACTION REQUIRED:
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Because the Planning Commission continued the hearing until August 11, 1997.
A motion continuing the hearing until August 25, 1997 is necessary.
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97 -053\97 -53PC3. DOC
Page 2
AUG-04-97 MOH 03:03 PM GROSSMAH CHEVROLET CO
612 435 937.0
P.01
:, " '.,.. , ..~.. _ '. '_'II'. _" .. ".... ," ':. ..I..'.
'. ..... .. " . ..
.. :t:o: '; _ ~ ,.
e-- ~..q7
(jlr'br k~ {?~i1rl'''J &U1H1'
-;;;'u,1Y --;;C/~r
\,
,.
-
...,;,.
t?~St!- e;L~d P'lA'-( 4:hri'tJ/Ac<C.-
addev.J~U1 -10 g-;;S-4?,: ~~;t(
ftUed'~ -h~( Strt./e.'V '
(J, Ailtt/3JJt1
. (AVl .1" _ . 6ct, (}
~ / /,.,qt(t1.-(~/ttJ..
/657~ ~./
t/q7q,<'-I~- ~/r
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
SITE:
PRESENTER:
REVIEWED BY:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
PLANNING REPORT
SB
CONSIDER SIDE YARD SETBACK AND IMPERVIOUS
SURFACE VARIANCES FOR BRIAN MATTSON, Case
File #97 -053
16575 INGUADONA BEACH, E~LE
JENNI TOVAR, PLANNER ,Jt""
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR~
_ YES -1L NOU~
JULY 28, 1997
On June 23, 1997 the Planning Commission heard- a variance request from Brian
Mattson who is proposing to construct a detached garage with driveway. The
applicant had originally requested a variance to allow impervious surface
coverage on the lot to be 54% and the driveway to be setback 1 foot from the
property line.
Based on the hardship criteria used for evaluating variances, the Planning
Commission was prepared to deny the variances as requested. Upon request of
the applicant, the Planning Commission continued the discussion to July 28,
1997. This was to allow the applicant time to modify the proposed additions to
reduce/eliminate the variance request.
The Planning Department has received a written request from the applicant
requesting an extension until August 11, 1997. The applicant has significantly
reduced the impervious surface on the site and is awaiting completion of final
survey.
ACTION REQUIRED:
Because the Planning Commission continued the hearing until July 28, 1997. A
motion continuing the hearing until August 11, 1997 is necessary.
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447~4230 / Fax (612) 447~4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
U\~/~
1f, '~ ~
INNtSO
June 24, 1997
Brian Matttson
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Extension of Sixty Review Period for Variance Requests
Dear Mr. Mattson:
The purpose of this letter is to advise you the 60 day deadline for City of Prior Lake
action on your variance requests to driveway side yard setback and impervious surface
has been extended an additional 60 days from August 2, 1997 to October 1, 1997. The
reason for the additional 60 day extension is to due to the continuation of the Planning
Commission decision of your request, to allow you to make revisions for consideration of
the variances.
Please submit your revised survey to me by July 15, 1997. This will allow us time to
prepare a report for Planning Commission consideration on July 28, 1997. If you have
any questions about this matter, please contact me at 447-4230.
Sincerely,
.j~
"? Wc'c ~
.......
8-//
1:\97files\97var\9 7 -053\6Odaylet.dac
16200 Eagle Creek AI..'e. S.E.. Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372-1714 I Ph. (612) 447-4230 : Fax (612)447-4245
~:1 '
r' d~#d~d
8-// $ ~4~r/-'
~~ --/
~/ - /- 2/-v"4-;/
a~1
'\'\ ~,.,' .. ,..---.--....-........-. ...--
-'. ,..-., I~ j-;:J ~
I c' ,
I I ~1 jJ\ lr Ii
U II' U
wi... w-U
Stamson:
· Questioned previous variances.
· Concurs with staff and commissioners. There are no hardships.
· Reasonable use of the property.
Criego:
· Agreed it is important to preserve trees, but also the quality of the lake.
· Pollution and runoff is a concern. The staff and DNR agreed.
· There are no hardships.
· As presented, agreed with staff s recommendation.
Commissioner Kuykendall explained a lower level deck would not require a variance.
Mr. Hines questioned extending the existing deck to the west and requested continuing
the matter to the July 28, 1997 hearing.
MOTION BY CRlEGO, SECOND BY WUELLNER TO CONTINUE THE MEETING
TO THE JULY 28, 1997 MEETING.
Vote signified ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
~
7'
B. Case #97- 053 Variance Request by Brian Mattson, 16575 Inguadona Beach
Circle SW, requesting:
A 24% VARIANCE TO PERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE OF 54% INSTEAD
OF THE PERMITTED 30%; A 4 FOOT DRIVEWAY SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE
TO PERMIT A DRIVEWAY SETBACK OF 1 FOOT INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 5 FEET
FROM THE SIDE LOT LINE; ALL RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW
DETACHED GARAGE AND DRIVEWAY ON PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE Rl-
SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL AND SHORELAND DISTRICTS
Planner Jenni Tovar presented the staff report. The Planning Department received a
variance application from Brian Mattson proposing to construct a new detached 480
square foot garage and access driveway. There is no existing garage on the property.
The existing house with deck is setback approximately 22 feet from the front property
line, 9.8 feet from the side property line to the north, approximately 10 feet from the side
property line to the south. The applicant is proposing to construct a 480 square foot
detached garage in the rear yard with a bituminous access driveway located along the side
of the principle structure to the garage in the back. Existing impervious surface is 28%.
The proposed additions will create an impervious surface of 54%. The proposed driveway
will be located 1 foot from the property line. The City Code requires a minimum
driveway setback of 5 feet from the side yard property line. Also snow storage will be a
significant problem for a driveway located 1 foot from the property line. Therefore, the
MN062397.DOC
3
UlJ W L~ It U
applicants are requesting a 24% variance to impervious surface coverage maximum to
permit coverage of 54%, rather than the maximum allowed of 30% and a 4 foot variance
to the driveway side yard setback to allow a 1 foot driveway setback rather than the
required setback of 5 feet.
The variance to impervious surface and driveway setback could be eliminated if the
garage was located on the existing driveway, or under the deck. In this case a variance to
front yard setback would be required. If variances are granted, a reduction of the existing
impervious surface by removal of the concrete area should be considered. This has been
suggested to the applicant. Verbally, the applicant has stated that he has a great need for
the concrete drive and would not be willing to remove a portion or all of it.
The DNR has responded to the variance request in a letter dated June 19, 1997. The
DNR is not opposed to the location of the proposed garage, but recommended removal of
the existing concrete drive to reduce the impervious surface. The DNR suggests a more
suitable option of locating the garage on the existing drive, as not to increase impervious
surface. This would required a front yard setback variance. As proposed, the staff and
DNR recommends denial.
Comments from the public:
Brian Mattson, 16575 Inguadona Beach Circle, stated he was originally reluctant to
remove the driveway. He is now willing to cut the drive down but would like to leave a
reasonable amount of space to the side and front entrance. Mr. Mattson would also
remove a 10 x 12 foot shed and also felt snow storage would not be a problem. His
neighbor with the adjacent vacant lot told him he did not have a concern with the
driveway being one foot from the property line.
Comments from the Commissioners:
Stamson:
. Initial feeling is not having a garage is a hardship.
. Impervious surface is too high in the Shoreland District.
Wuellner:
. Suggested looking at different designs.
. Go back to the drawing board and think about removing the driveway. Be creative in
designing a garage.
Kuykendall:
. Look at a tuck-under approach.
. There are alternatives.
. Support staff s recommendation and recommend the matter be continued.
MN062397.DOC
4
r:-~
, i I
: I
, .
L~)
ill] [~~
LJ
Criego:
. 54% impervious surface is a real problem.
. The City's standard is 30% the DNR's 25%. For the City to go beyond that is
probably not going to happen.
. Suggested not to exceed 30% impervious surface.
. The one foot driveway setback has to be looked at.
Mr. Mattson said he would like to continue the hearing.
Tovar suggested a driveway easement (5 feet) with the neighbor for snow storage.
Sandy Mattson, 16575 Inguadona Beach, said they have looked at many designs. She is
concerned for the suggested design which would totally cut off the front entrance. There
would be no real exit out of the house except for the garage. It would also eliminate
many of the windows. For those reasons they felt building in the back yard would be
appropriate.
MOTION BY WUELLNER, SECOND BY STAMSON, TO CONTINUE THE
HEARING TO THE JULY 28, 1997 PLANNING MEETING.
Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
5. Old Business:
A. Case #97- Continuation of North wood Oaks Estates Preliminary Plat.
Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the staff report reviewing the preliminary
plat hearing from the June 9, 1997 meeting.
The revised plans addressed some of the questions asked by the Planning Commission.
The staff also reviewed the plans with respect to the conditions listed in the Planning
Report dated June 9, 1997. The revisions have addressed some, but not all, of the
proposed conditions. Specifically, the revisions did not reduce the length of the cul-de-
sac, did not include revisions to the tree preservation or landscaping plans, and did not
address the issues outlined in the memorandum from the Assistant City Engineer. The
revised plans did change the name of Pond View Lane to Lakeview Circle; however,
there is already a Lakeview Circle in the City.
The Prior Lake Police surveyed Northwood Road traffic for three days and gave out one
citation for speed and one warning. The average speed was 32.5 mph.
The outstanding issue in this preliminary plat is still the disturbance of the slopes on this
site. This plat has several locations in which slopes of 20% or greater are disturbed,
either for the placement of roads and utilities or the placement of homes. While the
MN062397.DOC
5
, . ~",."_ _',.", ,,,,,'.' ",_,." ",.','. ....;~, ^,." .~.- ...,_,,."....._.,,:,,:...-.,...~.~_l,,.,....~,oO>'-..,
. .e_.".)
FILE COP
January 22, 1999
Brian Matttson
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Expiration of Variances
Dear Mr. Mattson:
The purpose of this letter is to advise you the variances granted on January 5, 1998
expired on January 5, 1999. A building permit will not be issued for your proposed and
previously approved garage. In order for you to construct your garage a variance must
first be applied for again. The Planning Commission and/or City Council would have to
review any such request.
If you have any questions about this matter, please contact me at 447-4230.
jfWvJ
...I:\97filEl&\97\(ar\97 -053\expidlr.doc
16200 cagle creeK Ave. ::;.t.., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
FILE COPl
December 11, 1998
Brian Matttson
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Expiration of Variances
Dear Mr. Mattson:
The purpose of this letter is to advise you the variances granted on January 5, 1998 will
expire on January 5, 1999. In order for you to construct your garage as approved with
variances, you must apply for a building permit and have it approved, paid for, and
picked-up prior to January 5, 1999. Therefore, you should apply for your building permit
as soon as possible. It takes approximately two weeks for the city to review and issue a
building permit, depending on completeness of the application. I have included a copy
of the City Code relating to the expiration of variances. If you have any questions about
this matter, please contact me at 447-4230.
J:\97file.s,\97v,ar\97 -053\ 'tYearltr .doc,
16200 cagle creeK Ave. ~.t:.., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
I -
~
5-6-1 0
All conditional use permits and variances granted prior to May 20, 1996 for
which necessary and/or appropriate permits have not been issued shall be
dealt with in the following manner:
(A)
All conditional use permits and variances granted prior to November
5, 1995 shall become null and void on November 20, 1996.
f
t
.-..
_ ~ (B)
All conditional use permits and variances granted after November 5,
1995 shall become null and void twelve (12) months from the date of
approval. (Ord. 96-11, 5-20-1996) -
5-6-9: NONCONFORMING USES: The Board of Adjustment shall
have the power to authorize changes of lawful nonconforming
uses as follows:
,/ ..........-..
(
(A) A nonconforming use which occupies a portion of a structure may be
extended within such structure as it existed when this Title was
enacted but not in violation of the area and yard requirements of the
Zoning District.
(B)
A new nonconforming use may be created in an existing structure to
replace a lawful nonconforming use provided that the owner agrees
in writing that:
c:
1. The proposed nonconforming use will entail no structural changes
or additions other than those required for purposes of safety, health
and aesthetics.
2. The proposed use will be limited by all provisions of this Section.
(Ord. 83-6, 6-24-1983)
5-6-10: AMENDMENTS: Prior to filing an application for variance the
prospective applicant(s) will schedule a preliminary meeting
with the Zoning Officer or appointee to discuss items including, but not
limited to, the nature of the proposed use, consistency of the proposal with
applicable City standards and information required for a formal application.
The City Council may, by a two-thirds (2/J vote of all its members, amend
this Title as proposed by the City Council, by the Planning Commission or
by a petition of a person owning property within Prior Lake in accordance
with the following provisions: (Ord. 95-17, 11-20-1995)
(~
'-~
(A) Petitions: Petitions by property owners for amendment shall be filed
with the Zoning Officer, and the petitioner, upon such filing, shall pay
-/
896
City of Prio,. LaJe~
,.
I
FILE COpy
February 2, 1998
Brian Mattson
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle
Prior Lake, MN 55378
RE: Recording of Approved Variances
Dear Mr. Mattson:
The purpose of this letter is to advise you the resolution approving a variance to
side yard setback for driveway and impervious surface granted on property
located at 16575 Inguadona Beach Circle must be recorded within 60 days of
approval or the variance will be null and void per Section 5-6-6 of City Code.
Enclosed are two certified copies of the original and a copy for yourself. One of
the copies is to be recorded at the Scott County Recorders office by March 6,
1998. The other copy is to be stamped as recorded by the recorders office and
returned to the Planning Department as proof of recording. A building permit will
not be issued until proof of recording is submitted. Also, if for any reason, you
choose not to build as approved in Resolution 98-01 PC, your variance will be
voided one year from the approval date of January 5, 1998.
If you have any questions about this matter, please contact me at 447-4230.
Sincerely,
jnrOA-J
1:\97fil~\97yar\97 -053\recdJet2.do~
16200 Eagle Lreek Ave. :::i.e., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
FILE COpy
January 9, 1998
Brian Mattson
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle
Prior Lake, MN 55378
RE: Recording of Approved Variances
Dear Mr. Mattson:
The purpose of this letter is to advise you the resolution approving a variance to
side yard setback for driveway and impervious surface granted on property
located at 16575 Inguadona Beach Circle must be recorded within 60 days of
. approval or the variance will be null and void per Section 5-6-6 of City Code.
Enclosed are two certified copies of the original and a copy for yourself. One of
the copies is to be recorded at the Scott County Recorders office by March 6,
1998. The other copy is to be stamped as recorded by the recorders office and
returned to the Planning Department as proof of recording. A building permit will
not be issued until proof of recording is submitted. Also, if for any reason, you
choose not to build as approved in Resolution 98-01 PC, your variance will be
voided one year from the approval date of January 5, 1997.
If you have any questions about this matter, please contact me at 447-4230.
Sincerely,
(lP41,zI-W1 j rf'ur:vJ
~ifer Toflar
Planner
1:\97fil~\97yar\97 -05.J\!llcdlet.doc
16200 Eagle creel< Ave. S.t.., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
. _,"",,;' -. , 11:"- ..:.~-, .. .'l.q'-li
"__~_",_.....-_,.,-....",,-,_:.~-.!...-...._.;....-~;-,--,,-;,, ..,.__,..._''.....-..___-'<l-.-...~-~,-_"" ",,"-,-_._,-_"'~...,...:._______.___~ ~',,~--.-.---'-
.' ,,,~...~.._-~..---~,~,,--,,~,-,
FILE COpy
December 22, 1997
Brian Matttson
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Extension of Sixty Review Period for Zoning Appeal
Dear Mr. Mattson:
The purpose of this letter is to advise you the 60 day deadline for City of Prior Lake
action on your appeal of decision of Planning Commission regarding a variance request
to driveway side yard setback and impervious surface has been extended an additional
60 days from January 2, 1998 to March 3, 1998. The reason for the additional 60 day
extension is to due to the continuation of the City Council decision of your request, to
allow additional information regarding drainage issues and to meet with the DNR. We
have tentatively scheduled this appeal to be heard by the City Council on January 5,
1998. If you have any questions about this matter, please contact me at 447-4230.
~
1:\97files\97var\97 -053\60daylt2.doc
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
~
I
I
BRIAN MATTSON
16575 INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
PRIOR LAKE, MN. 55372
Valley Surveying
SUITE 120-C, 16670 FI
FRANKLIN TRAIL OFFIC
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESO'
TELEPHONE (612) 44i
/ <0
/{r
~
It'
.
'"
9",'I~
Post-it" Fax Note
To
Lu.te-
D''!/I2.
77J-7~1 10
'-r1J-~ 7~'1
Co./Dept.
Phone #
Fax #
r) ,::
L_ \..1
se9.le'oe"E
103.3 plot
---105.73 meos.-u
Tju
- - -, 939:.-- -
-- ":~ 1;39.3) ,94,.0.2
I
VZO" MA~LE:
I ~
I
941.6
1941,9)
I
.~
~:
"01
1;;0
~o
.11)
-.
tp==
1936.9)
940.i'
)
r)o
L_ -../
~1.3 1940.2)
f~20
fllO"..... ~
,Ill
;,-00119.71 meos.---
.,;1 116.7 plot
946.2,' Nee. 54' 47"W
"
f.:
o
GARAGE SLAB
El. 942..01
EX'STlNG
HOUS E
DESCRIPTION:
0.5' EAST
-2 ,.....
-....) \...)
I
I
Lot 29, "INGUADONA BEACH", Scott County, Minnesota. Also showing the: !.ocation of
th~ existing impcovern'" sand pcoposed addition, this 16th day of ~-eb. 1996.
NC~ES' Benchmack ~~6.l5 walkout elevation of the existing house.
Net lot acea = 5,607 sq. ft.
946.7
x
~
DENOTES EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
Pcoposed net lot covecage = 53.8 %
(940.2) DENOTES PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION
DENOTES PROPOSED DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE
SET GARAGE SLAB AT EL. 940.34
SET TOP OF BLOCK OF GARAGE AT EL. 941.82
Net existing lot covecage = 28.0 %
o
I
SCALE
20
40
I
IN
FEET
Revised 5115/97 To show proposed garage
os directed by owner.
, hereby certify that this survey wos prepared
by me or under my direr:t supervision and that
, aIll-" .du!y licensed Land SUlVeyor under the
....:.~ ~,. .t... ~6-." _ _. I".. ",."".
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
CC:
October 24, 1997
PLANNING COMMISS.I~
Jenni Tovar, Planner ..if1
Variance Hardship Criteria
Don Rye, Planning Director; Jane Kansier,
Planning Coordinator
At Monday's upcoming Planning Commission meeting you will be
reviewing two variance requests as they relate to proposed two car
detached garages within the shoreland district. The variances requested
are for impervious surface to exceed 30%. The staff reports recommend
approval for each of the variances based on the absence of any garage
on the properties and a two car garage (480 square feet) being
reasonable.
Certainly, the garages could be modified to one stall garages resulting in
reduced/eliminated variance. In Mr. Mattson's case a one stall garage
(12' by 20' or 240 square feet) would still require a variance, impervious
surface being 32.1 %. In Ms. Whitney's case, a single stall garage of the
same size and with recommended reductions to impervious surface,
would result in 29% impervious surface.
'>/.The Planning Commission must determine if a one or two stall garage is
reasonable when it comes to justifying the variance hardship criteria. It
has been noted at previous meetings (Vaughn Lemke variance) that
having no garage in Minnesota winters is an undue hardship. Previous
setback variance requests have been denied based on smaller house
footprints being reasonable within the legal building envelope (Pinnacle
Partner bluff setback variance). However, you may feel the proposed
garages could be reduced to one stall garages to eliminate or reduce the
variance requests without causing undue hardship.
L:\97 FI LES\97 P LCOMM\PCCORRS\GARAGE. DOC
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
October 24, 1997
Planning Commission
Jenni Tovar, Planner
Brian Mattson Letter of Opposition
We received the letter today, Friday 10/24/97, from a neighbor of Brian Mattson
opposing the proposed driveway. You packets were mailed yesterday and we
thought you would appreciate this before the meeting. Call me if you have any
questions.
October 23, 1997
[..---:::
liD I~.. (:
-... '-
I r-.......
\ OC1 2 4
L------.
.0
Prior Lake Planning Commission
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
Subject: Variance(s) requested by Brian Mattson
165751nguadona Beach Circle SW
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Dear Prior Lake Planning Commission:
We are the owners of Lot #26. We reside across the street from Mattson's (Lot #29)
home.
We have given this request a lot of thought. We have discussed this matter with our
four sons and others to get their opinions and the consensus seems to be that this is not
a move in our best interest.
We would like you to consider the following in making your decision:
To begin with, the road around Inguadona Circle is very narrow! Definitely a
problem in the winter. Heavy rains, snow removal and drainage from melting
snow have presented a problem for us.
The past two years (it seems much longer) two of the homes (Lots 5 and 4)
have been undergoing complete remodeling. The lots owned by Bill
Bradstad were sold and a new house built (Lots 7 and 6).
Since all this has been going on, we have been having more drainage
problems. Along with the water runoff (lots of rain this summer), we've been
coping with sand, soil that the water brings with it. What happens is that we
are "in the middle" (Lot 10 too). We get the drainage from both directions.
The water not only runs into our yard, but also collects on the road in puddles
which, in below zero weather, freezes making it a hazardous situation.
Okay, so now if the variance is granted, we have another problem. If the
Mattsons are allowed to put in a driveway, we are very concerned once again
about drainage. What happens to all the water that will be running down this
long driveway? Where is it going to go? It seems to us it will create an even
bigger problem than we had before.
. (,
'" f
V~ I OCT 2 4
We are also concerned about snow disposal. Where will the accum ~--!L
snow from the driveway be put? Will this be shoveled onto Lot 26 or will it be
brought down to the road where persons who do the plowing are already
having difficulty finding a place to put the snow. While it (Lot 26) is still a
vacant lot, this wouldn't be a problem; but should it be sold, future owners
may be very unhappy about this aspect.
---.J
We realize we already have a drainage problem, but do not feel we should
have to deal with additional complications.
Should we decide to sell Lot 26 or decide to build on it, would you then grant
a variance on the adjacent property if we requested it or (buyer requested it)?
Putting ourselves in a buyer's position, we fee! we would have reservations about buying
a lot where the driveway is so close to the lot line. It certainly wouldn't add to the value
of the property.
Hopefully, you will consider our reasons for objecting to Brian Mattson's request for this
variance.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
-)
!f~~~{;;i<', 5.-~/!~.
Kenneth Falkum
16568 Inguadona Beach Circle SW
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
.("" /,,
(,tJ Lvt"';-'i . ..--' b .f:.: .I. .' r k.
Evelyn Falkum
PS: The notice for this hearing came as a complete surprise since Brian
Mattson had indicated in early June (or before) that it was our decision to
make. He apparently changed his mind.
FILE COpy
September 19, 1997
Brian Mattson
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Reminder of Meeting Date
Dear Mr. Mattson:
Your item is scheduled for the October 27, 1997 Planning Commission meeting. The
meeting begins at 6:30 p.m. and is located at Fire Station #1 on Fish Point Road. Please
submit your revised survey by October 17, 1997. The Planning Department is intending
to bring closure to your request as soon as possible. If a revised survey is not submitted
by October 17, 1997 your item will be remain on the agenda for a final decision as
originally submitted. If you have any questions please call me at 447-4230.
Si.ncerelY,. j..
(JIfAMA ~
~: ~~~ar
Planner
16200 Ea~PJ~~'R~~~~?j?~\Lme~h;nesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
01"
t.,.---....-..-----.--.-..-.-.. .....,
: r -~:'\ r~~~f ('(=~\
, , \ ' I ' ,"
[i" U' I e'=:~..::^~-'"
I~l SEP - 3 1991
WAIVER OF 120 DAYS
MINNESOTA STATUTE SECTION 15.99, A COpy OF WHICH IS ATTACHED, REQUIRES
THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE ("CITY") TO APPROVE OR DENY A ZONING RELATED
APPLICATION WITHIN 60 DAYS OF RECEIVING A COMPLETED APPLICA nON. THE CITY
MAY EXTEND THE TIMELINE BEFORE THE END OF THE 60-DAY PERIOD BY PROVIDING
YOU WITH WRITTEN NOTICE.
THE CITY RECEIVED YOUR APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE AND
DETERMINED IT WAS COMPLETE ON 6/3/97 . ON 6/24/97
THE CITY PROVIDED YOU WITH WRITTEN NOTICE THAT IT WAS EXTENDING THE
TIMELINE FOR REVIEW AN ADDITIONAL 60 DAYS UNTIL 10/1/97
BY LAVI ANY EXTENSION BEYOND 1011/97 MUST BE
APPROVED BY THE APPLICANT. YOU HAVE REQUESTEDI AGREED TO AN EXTENSION
BEYOND 10/1/97 . THE REASON FOR THE EXTENSION IS AS FOLLOWS:
I/lArtl:'vtJ tV/#! Su fJC,/O\ +0 aclll'e"l( t?Ct'c~-Ik irn~('(.I/t!q ~ Su,r/;,cc:..
ij'e/[e f/r"fAf0 ,
BY SIGNING THIS WAIVER YOU ACKNOWLEDGE; A.) RECEIVING A COpy OF
MINNESOTA STATUTE SECTION 15.99; B.) THAT YOU WERE ADVISED THAT THIS
WAIVER AFFECTS YOUR PROPERTY RIGHTS AND THAT YOU MAY WANT TO REVIEW IT
WITH AN ATTORNEY; C.) YOU HAVE AGREED TO THE EXTENSION; AND D.) YOU WAIVE
ALL RIGHTS UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTE SECTION 15.99.
~
SIGNATURE OF THE APPLICANT //~~' '0 ~?v)
t....---
PRINT NAME OF APPLICANT (l;tAtIJ1 ~-mOt1-
,
DATE 9-5-97
,
II... & II,... ".,..
16515 .If'. .... c:lrJ
Prior i.AM._ J5m
..
August 29, 1997
Brian Mattson
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Request for Extension
Dear Mr. Mattson:
By State Statute cities are required to make decisions on Zoning Requests in a timely
manner meaning within 60 days upon receipt of a completed application. If an extension
is necessary, one can be granted for up to 60 days given a reason. If a decision is not
made within this time frame, proposals are automatically approved.
The Planning Department received your application on June 3, 1997. The first 60 days
expired on August 2, 1997. On June 24, 1997, the City extended your request 60 days
until October 1, 1997 for revising of your survey. On August 18, 1997, the Planning
Department received a written request from you requesting your item be continued into
October. Because of our restricted time frame for deciding requests, we need you to sign
and return the attached "Waiver of 120 Days" to continue your request beyond October 1,
1997.
Please sign and return the form as soon as possible (by September 5, 1997). There are
two meetings in October. Please call and tell me if you want to be on the October 13 or
27. If you choose October 13, 1997, then your revised survey must be submitted no later
than October 3, 1997. If you choose October 27, 1997, then your revised survey must be
submitted by October 17, 1997.
Sincerely,
Jenni Tovar
Planner
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
August 11, 1997
Brian Mattson
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Revised Survey Submittal for 8/25/97 Planning Commission Meeting
Dear Mr. Mattson:
The purpose of this letter is to advise you the deadline for submittal of your revised
survey is Monday, August 18, 1997. This will allow us time to prepare a report for
Planning Commission consideration on August 25, 1997. The Planning Commission
has specifically continued your request to this meeting. If you cannot submit your
survey by then, please notify us in writing requesting the next Planning Commission
date or to table indefinitely. However, the Planning Commission would like to bring this
matter to a close. If you have any questions about this matter, please contact me at
447-4230.
~~
E-1ff41
~ -V()c1f
~y SCh~~ Me Pr
~6~ fi1L'~-I/'j' a/I tv/II 4:..-
/~{L'!'t? 47- r~~-I :rr~e.~
~~~1'1i--
1:\97files\97var\97-053\ltr.doc - /~ ~~'t?
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 4 -4 30 / Fax (612) 44f4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Metro Waters - 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul,
Telephone: (612) 772-7910 Fax: (61
Minnesota Department of Natural
June 19, 1997
Mr. Don Rye
Planning Director
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Aven c
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55 72-171 4
RE: HINES SETBACK ARIANCE REQUEST (SPRING LAKE) AND MATTSON SIDEY ARD AND
IMPERVIOUS SURF CE COVERAGE VARIANCE REQUEST
T
Dear Mr. Rye:
I have received the hearing otices for the subject variance requests which will be considered by the Prior Lake Planning
Commission on June 23, 1 97. Please include the following comments into the official record of the hearing.
HI
The city of Prior Lake rec ntly amended their ordinance to reflect a relaxation of the lake setback standard for Prior
and Spring Lakes. The req . ed setback is 75'. It is recommended the variance as requested be denied. The deck size
depicted on the survey w . ch accompanied the hearing notice appears to have placed little regard for the setback
requirement in its design. note the structures on either side of the Hines' property are setback at 51' and 46'. The
DNR recommends the app icant re-design the proposed improvements to meet the required setback. There appears
ample buildable area to the est and north of the existing structure. In addition, the property currently has a deck. If
the existing deck is in a sta of disrepair, the DNR is not opposed to reconstruction at the existing location, and to the
existing dimensions of the urrent deck. It win be difficult to argue hardship in this case.
The subject lot is very sm 1 (5,607 square feet), and is relatively narrow. The potential for additional development
on the lot without the need r multiple variances is limited. The DNR is not opposed to the construction of a garage
at the proposed location, rovided an equal amount of impervious surface is removed. It appears that there is a
significant amount of con rete on the west side of the property which could be removed to balance the additional
impervious of the proposed ew garage. Another option, perhaps more suitable in terms of impervious surface, would
be to construct a garage on the existing concrete slab. This would result in the elimination of the need for variances
from impervious surface and from the sideyard setback It would, however, most likely require a variance from the road
setback. The DNR would ot be opposed to the road setback variance. As proposed, the DNR recommends denial
of the variance for impervi us surface coverage of 54%.
DNR Informati n: 612-296-6157,1-800-766-6000 . TTY: 612-296-5484,1-800-657-3929
ft Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a
\.;1 Minimum of 10% Post-Consumer Waste
Don Rye
June 19, 1997
page 2
Please enter these DNR objections into the hearing record. If you have any questions or comments regarding DNR
review of the pending shoreland issues, please call me at 772-7910.
Sincerely,
r~
Patrick 1. Lynch III
Area Hydrologist
JUL-15-97 TUE 02:23 PM GROSSMAN CHEVROLET CO
612 435 9370
P.01
... . nil ~1fJ
~~~~ Gee
\Y Burnsville
FAX COVER ~.L
~: ~~f1; -,;,u: r
FAX #: 4"Lt7~"'~
FRlJ:II/: ~ ' I II- v1 -~ ___ /}
DATE: 7-/\-9;7
'IOI'AL NUMBER OF PAGES, lNCLUDING COVER SHEET: ::<.
IF YOU 00 NO'!' RECEIVE ALL OF THE: PAGES, PLEASE CALL US 435-8501.
ro TRANSMIT 'ID US AtJIaV1ATICALLY, rnLL OUR F.AX #: 612-435-9370
,
'. .,
"--......
" "'-
/It \
( 1 "./ )
f/itll(;
June 24, 1997
Brian Matttson
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Extension of Sixty Review Period for Variance Requests
Dear Mr. Mattson:
The purpose of this letter is to advise you the 60 day deadline for City of Prior Lake
action on your variance requests to driveway side yard setback and impervious surface
has been extended an additional 60 days from August 2, 1997 to October 1, 1997. The
reason for the additional 60 day extension is to due to the continuation of the Planning
Commission decision of your request, to allow you to make revisions for consideration of
the variances.
Please submit your revised survey to me by July 15, 1997. This will allow us time to
prepare a report for Planning Commission consideration on July 28, 1997. If you have
any questions about this matter, please contact me at 447-4230.
Sincerely,
~~
1:\97files\97var\97 -053\60daylet.doc
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.L, Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
NEW ABSTRACTS
CONTINUATIONS
CLOSING SERVICE
REGISTERED PROPERTY ABSTRACTS
TITLE INSURANCE
RECORDING SERVICE
SCOTT COUNTY ABSTRACT AND TITLE, INC.
223 HOLMES STREET, P.O. BOX 300 SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379
David Meenen and Dale Kutter
Telephone: (612) 445-6246
FAX: (612) 445-0229
May 19,1997
Brian Mattson
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle SW
Prior Lake, MN 55372
To Whom it may concern:
According to the 1997 tax records in the Scott County Treasurer's office,
the following persons listed on Exhibit "A" are the owners of the property
which lies within 100 feet of the following described property:
Lot 29, Inguadona Beach, according to the recorded plat thereof on file and
of record in the Office of the County Recorder in and for Scott County,
Minnesota.
.r; (iN
,-/~
1l~;.r~~N",V}'l"~,l'.-r\~f/.<('.!!-:',l:.~;'r..~t.,~,A ~.:
I S"Ol- C.....' ",'TV \ D(''''O: ....c ..,.
V Al"ID!\.I~.l!~: ~'\~,~~' ~t\v I ~~"
I h i I i 1..1-, ,1':;\,,.1, ~:
_ Llcer::€;j ;,ty;:r"ctor ~
5 Slate of Mirr:esota S
~ ~~"..I'N';",;"'VY'./;JV".
:sI
MEMBER MINNESOTA LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION
AGENT FOR CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
WE-,
MURIEL G RUONAVAR
16594 INGUADONA BEACH CIR
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
JAMES W TUREK & GLORIA J LINDEMAN
16455 INGUADONA BEACH CIR
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
MARILYN J & ROBERT L DEMARCE
16576 INGUADONA BEACH CIR
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
CHERYL A HUKRIEDE
1808 RUBY CIR
SHAKOPEE, MN 55379
KENNETH R & EVELYN FALKUM
16568 INGUADONA BEACH CIR
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
MN Dept. of Natural Resources
Attn: Pat Lynch, Div. of Waters
1200 Warner Road
St. Paul, MN 55106-6793
.....
RAPHAEL & BEVERLY MECHTEL
16558 INGUADONA BEACH CIR
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
llir(~ 1v\tw!-~
b \O~ 01
CC-
LINDA L NELSON
16481 INGUADONA BEACH CIRC
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
V ALENE J SILCOX
16585 INGUADONA BEACH CIR
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
BLAINE H & PENNY E AADLAND
16471 INGUADONA BEACH CIR SW
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
I
I
I
I
I
ElHlIT...Af P16E...LOF -LPAGES.
!
\,
" \n, I. Cl
,)L \ I L(
I
-z/i I
"
I ,/MURIEL G RUONA V AR
,/ 16594 INGUADONA BEACH CIR
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
L/'l{ !'l JL/
,\f
\
MARILYN J & ROBERT L DEMARCE
16576 INGUADONA BEACH CIR
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
LI Lj (-' ) L. "") (
,,,\>
\ ,\
KENNETH R & EVELYN FALKUM
16568 INGUADONA BEACH CIR
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
Clll")' )},)"{l'
~HAEL & BEVERLY MECHTEL
~16558 INGUADONA BEACH CIR
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
'-IefC. ;)L,7cf
/
,,/LINDA L NELSON
16481 INGUADONA BEACH CIRC
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
I( if' }- <)l{ I{
,,///
/XALENE J SILCOX
16585 INGUADONA BEACH CIR
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
/' ,')
/ ( .- IlC 'j J
.iLAINE H & PENNY E AADLAND
. .
1/ 16471 INGUADONA BEACH CIR SW
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
i( 1 ' ' ~ ~ . /j
I \.L CL I lL:('lc_C
(11 -[~ <)' ,3
bN~
:.A~ES W TUREK & GLORIA J LINDEMAN
16455 INGUADONA BEACH CIR
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
4 Lit .- 7((( 'G.
L//~RYL A HUKRIEDE
1808 RUBY CIR
SHAKOPEE, MN 55379
('!;JC-:'V~~1 [
/ / /'-/ ~- -- 1-/ -; / 3
. ~ Dept. of Natural Resources
t/Attn: Pat Lynch, Div. of Waters
1200 Warner Road
St. Paul, MN 55106-6793
......
l~~l%,*~
" t-l~ ~- S' ':;-C; I
; ( . ~ /7 c-- J' c' ' ,.~
I _,.I ) '- / J \.<.:/ C I<- -r (, ( h. ~_ .. IN: /Lc: 't:,,--
~
b- \O~ 01.1
c'c
~.~ PIeE.l.OF -L.PAGES.
NOTICE OF HEARING F R THE FOLLOWING VARIANCES;
1. A 24% VARIANCE TO ERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
COVERAGE OF 54% I STEAD OF THE PERMITTED 30%;
2. A 4 FOOT DRIVEWAY IDEY ARD SETBACK VARIANCE TO
PERMIT A DRIVEWAY SETBACK OF 1 FOOT INSTEAD OF THE
REQUIRED 5 FEET FR M THE SIDE LOT LINE;
I
ALL RELATED TO THE CONS:UCTION OF A NEW DETACHED GARAGE
AND DRIVEWAY ON PROP RTY LOCATED IN THE R1-SUBURBAN
RESIDENTIAL AN SD-SHORELAND DISTRICTS
You are hereby notified that the prior~Lake Planning Commission will hold a hearing at
Prior Lake Fire Station #1, located t 16776 Fish Point Road SE (Southwest of the
intersection ofC.R. 21 and Fish Point Road), on: Monday, June 23,1997, at 6:30 p.m.
or as soon thereafter as possible. I
I
APPLICANT: Brian Mattson
16575 Inguado a Beach Circle SW
Prior Lake, Mi esota 55372
SUBJECT SITE: Lot 29, Inguad na Beach, Scott County, Minnesota, also known as
16575 Inguado a Beach Circle SW.
REQUEST: The applicant p oposes the construction of a new detached garage
to be located in the rear yard of the subject property. The proposed
construction wi I result in the following requested variances;
1. A 24% VA ANCE TO PERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
COVERA E OF 54% INSTEAD OF THE PERMITTED
30%;
2. A 4 FOOT RIVEW A Y SIDEY ARD SETBACK
V ARIANC TO PERMIT A DRIVEWAY SIDEY ARD
SETBACK OF 1 FOOT INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 5
FEET; I
The Planning Commission will revie the proposed construction and requested variance
against the following criteria found i the Zoning Ordinance.
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97-053\9753V APN.DO 9753V APN.DOC
1. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance w uld result in undue hardship with
respect to the property.
2. Such unnecessary hardship results beca se of circumstances unique to the
property.
3. The hardship is caused by provisions of he Ordinance and is not the result of
actions of persons presently having an i terest in the property.
I
4. The variance observes the spirit and in1nt of this Ordinance, produces
substantial justice and is not contrary t1 the public interest.
If you are interested in this issue, you I should attend the hearing. Questions related to this
hearing should be directed to the Prip,r Lake Planning Department by calling 447-4230
between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and~:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. The Planning
Commission will accept oral and/or itten comments. Oral or written comments should
relate to how the proposed constructi n and requested variances are or are not consistent
with the above-listed criteria.
Prior Lake Planning Commission
Date Mailed: June 10, 1997
Revision Mailed: June 16, 1997.
\
L,\97FlLES\97V AR\97-053\9753V APN .D~C9753V APN.lXlC
i
i
2
stBJECT LOT:
i
LOT 29, INGUADONA BEACH
~.
" fi
~\
~ .
-"'-=-' ====-- ~
. - -~t-5l....( .
317J-.
--.
~--
/'
J
_/'
4
....
~6 5
1-
r-- t1'I 8 I
2 -!l :7
a
~
9
~-'-""
~/:~
r--
'J-
"
,
/
;
'.1-' .
~~o
I--"rJ (!;:
l.f')
~
-0
--
-
~ 2-
2 ~
\Il
0'"
t- :3
::?
(jj 42-
~
5
1\
~
---- ~
~.
"
..)
~
t
\0
......
~-
I --
f
,I'
. '<;
""'c
.....~Oci
~"vO
,\0 .
..~ ^.
~.. /.
~'A ~,.,
'y -...... "
"V'.....- , "
/, I,
_ ~ __,,-L_
I 38.;
I .
<20
r) t::
L_ \..)
I
I
S89aI8'08"E
103.3 plot
---105.73 meos.---
Tiu
(g36.9)
-, ~g39-::4--
- "'f (1a9.3l
940.;1
)
I -
Yzo" MAPLE
I ~
, T,,;;;.I
I
I
941.6
( 941,9)
!940.2
.
f") (..\
L_ ..../
~1.3 1940.2)
1~- 20
lliro" MAP E ~
. ,rIl
/
:,)
1li 1.5
- ~
\
I
:~
;go
CIIOl
So
III 0
o III
-a
1Il_
:-
Ties
I. '" ...
/ ... C" PROPOSED ~
e . G~AGE
943.3 I c;.;J IZ" MAPLE
/ ll(944..IlL_zol_ 10-00
!!! I 943.6 8 ( ?:ll946.
,I /.
,I Q
0.5' EAST
, . ,
'" -
--
--
\
''''
944.1 l~
d,-..119. 71 meos.---
ai' 116.7 plot
946.2, I N 88a 54' 47"W
<20
X
IJ
'"
o
GARAGE SLAB
EL. 942.01
EXISTING
HOUSE
-2 /--
.....' \.)
I
I
DESCRIPTION:
Lot 29, "INGUAOONA BEACH", Scott County, Minnesota. Also showing th~ location of
the existing improvem,'- s and proposed addition, this 16th day of Feb. 1996.
NC~ES' Benchmark 916.15 walkout elevation of the existing house.
Net lot area = 5,607 sq. ft. 946.7 DENOTES EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
x
Net existing lot coverage = 28.0 % (940.2) DENOTES PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION
'r DENOTES PROPOSED DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE
Proposed net lot coverage = 53. e a/o
SET GARAG E SLAB AT EL. 940.34
SET TOP OF BLOCK OF GARAGE AT EL. 947.82
HERITAGE
1891
COMMUNITY
1991
tf,QJ'.:Jr!).ff
.2Qjf
September 7, 1990
Pat Lynch
Department of Natural Resources
1200- Warner Road
st. Paul, MN 55106
Dear Pat,
The enclosed information is in regard to a proposed side and r~ar
yard varianoe on a non-lakeshore lot located wIthin the Shore 1 and
District of Prior Lake. The subj,ct site is legally described
. as: Lot 35, Boudins Manor. A copy of the variance application
and area map indicating the subject site location are enclosed.
The applicant wishes to build a 22'X 2~' detached garage in the
rear yard of Lot 35. The required setbaoks a.re 10' for side
yards and 10' for rear yards. The applioant is requesting
variances to locate the home 5' from the south and east property
lines as proposed in the attached survey.
comment on tha enclosed information. The
item has been tentatively set for Thursday,
at 8:15 p.m. If you have questions or
this mattor, contact the planning Department
Please review and
hearing for this
september 20, 1990,
comments regarding
at 447-4230.
s&t)JCl./tMM
Deb Garross
Assistant city Planner
DG:rms
Enclosures
4629 Dakota St. 5.E.. Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 I Ph. (612) 4474230 I Fax (612) 447.4245
,
. ,
d
: 1
I '
t
, I
! I
I
,I
t
1
~
i
I
,
i
;
it
,
I
..~
~
I
j
j
HERITAGE
1891
COMMUNITY
1991
18J5(9,A/'
.2Q91
July 24, 1990
Pat Lynch
Department of Natural Resources
1200 Warner Road
st. Paul, MN 55106
Dear Pat,
The enclosed information is in regard to a proposed side and rear
yard variance on a non-lakeshore lot located wIthin the Shoreland
District of Prior Lake. The subject site is legally described
as: Lot 35, Boudins Manor. A copy of the variance application
and area map indicating the subject sit.e location are enclosed.
The applicant wishes to build a 22'x 24' detached garage in the
rear yard of Lot 35. The required setbacks are 10' for side
yards and 10' for rear yards. The applicant is requesting
. variances to locate the home 5' from the south and east property
lines as proposed in the attached survey. This application
concerns me from the perspective of the Flood Plain Manaaement
Ordinance. The garage floor must be at elevation 909, then~ fill
placed 15' around the perimeter of the building at elevation 908.
The proposed location would require fill in a drainage easement
and an adjacent property. To my knowledge the City has not
allowed exceptions to the filling requirement of the Flood Plain
Ordinance. In addition, there are approximately 17 trees in the
rear yard and ~any would have to be re~oved to accommodate a
garage.
Please review and comment on the enclosed information. The
hearing for this item has been tentatively set for Thursday,
August 2, 1990, at 7:35 p.m. If you have questions or comments
regarding this matter, contact the Planning Department at
447-4230.
sincerely,
tiJit
Deb Garro
Assistant
)
Planner
DG:rms
Enclosures
4629 Dakota St. S,E., Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372 I Ph. (612) 447.4230 I Fax (612) 447.4245
..
'I
'{
1
i
.1
i
I
J
I
I
I
1
1
I
'1
I
,
;
, ;
t
I
I ,!
III
)
L
1,1
II
jl
11
11
,,, ...- I'j,jf'
:',',.., ;-:'>,J ~" ,;
-\ '1- -..:::..\ '," ~>t'" " :, ..... ·
hr:,~'W", ":1
~}i~ f~
.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 20, 1990 PAGE 4
Deb Garross presented information on the varianc. application.
The naw Flood Plair. Management Ordinance recently adopted
includes a claul'e stat.i.ng that it is possible to build a garage
below the 909 by uuing upgraded building teChniques, which the
applicant will do. Staff recommendation is to approve the
variance as requested. A hard8hip does exist as the lot i. a
substandard lot, there is no garage existing on the property,
compli~ce with ~etback standar~s would cause the loss of
approximately 1 to 10 trees and that a 1918 building permit for
the home showed a future garage location th~t could not function
due to its close proximity to the side property line and
deficient driveway space.
Consensus from the commi8sioners were supportive of the variance,
compatible with the neighborhood, and hardship not caused by the
applicant.
MOTION BY LOFTUS, SECOND BY ARNOLD, TO APPROVE THE 5 FOOT SOUTH
SIDE YARD AND 5 FOOT REAR YARe VARIANCE FOR 14401 WATFRSEDGE
TRAIL. RATIONALE BEING THE LOT IS A SUBSTANDARD LOT, UNWORKA9LE
PLAN CREATED BY THE FORMER BUILDER, NO GARAGE ON SITE, AND THE
VARIANCES WOULD NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTK AND WELFARE OF
THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
Wells,
and
Vote taken eignified ayes by Loft.us, Arnold,
Kedrowski. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION BY ARNOLD, SECOND BY WELLS, TO ADJOURN MEETING.
Vote taken slgnif!.ed ayes by Arnold, Wells, Kedrowski and Loftus.
MOTION CARRIED.
Meetin9 adjourned at 9:47 P.M. Tapes of the meetin~ are on file
at City Hall.
Deb Garross
A~sistant city Planner
Rita M. Sch6.we
Rqcording Secretary
);
,
~
'1
1 J
'l
~"\i
: ,!ij
~,;;-~
~' .~. i ~
.,.,-11:
, ' 'j
. ' , ;
, "
, t,
I ...
~ ~
'!~ ()
, ',)
r!l
il
~,
\1
'II
it
.
,
1
,t
4
r:
~,
(I
It
:~ (l
1 1
l ~i
, 1, I
\ () 'il
I' :
I
~
'4'-'
t
l
'I
j
1
. J
~
1
IDl
I j
1
1
1
~
1
I
_.' ,~....'7 ~.,.,...~ .~""., . ,,"'. "P"':ro>r..,...,,.,.''''.........,,,..~.~... .\....,.\~'F'''~~'''''' .....'" .,-!'I"......,..i~'~"".'.~...":l"t1j\lf.~~'.!~'~7"....1:1< ,.." ,.", 1~.'!l"'i".,."'I""..,.,. r.."....,'!'''~'if.. ,', ..., . .- ,:" ''\: =..'
RECEIPT
N2 30723
DATEi) G~ 3 ~ 7
U I
CITY., O-F
PRIOR LAKE
16200 EAGLE CREEK AVE. S.E., PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
Received of
~;tiM ~~
whose address and/or legal description is
~ ~'"
the sum of. _v.tv " n n it, V\-<ll ( Q17-
for the purpose of .J., ( ! ' \
L #..Ai l1A. d f - 5111J--U.d!vz"
de-I I ars
$
Jq), ;fJ
[€.,.f...,ere.n.ce J-nV,OciC No.
~t. P I'
l / ?'L/~Ll( f}Jut/)cVl /
Receipt Clerk for t~ City of Prior Lake
~
BRIAN]. OR SANDRA M. MATTSON
_ _~ v,_ ~o
16575 maUADONA BEACH CR.,.SW
PRIOR rAKE. MN 55372
_llnil
-j:
.,~
'i'lO 0'"
---""t, _ on':,' -~........
., ollars "m =:..-
HER/TAGE
1891
COMMUNITY
1991
19J9JAI'
2Q91
',t',':, , ,
"VA17PC"
~
APPLICANT:
ITEM:
PRESENTER:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
PLANNING REPORT
ROBERT WALTERS
VARIANCE
DEB GARROSS, ASSISTANT CITY PLANNER
_YES -1LNO
{,
SITE ANALYSIS
f
~.
HISTORY/BACKGROUND:
ThePlanninqDepartment has received a variance application from
Robert Walters of 14407 Watersedqe Trail. The applicant wishes
to construct a 22 x 24 foot detached qaraqe in the southeast
corner of his.. lot as per attached survey. The request is to
qranta5foot south side and 5 foot rear yard variance.
PREVIOUS PROPOSALS:
The existinq single family home W'1S built in 1978 under the
jurisdiction of the City of Priclr Lake. At that time a 22 x 24
"~~:~lY:~t1s",I~~.p~~~~:~~ .... :~ef~:ciea~e~i~e:~~~~ .......c.o(~~e b:tt~~~;~
\Z '>Xi1.survey~r~',\;ceX'tificate/#78-l63 for details > ,The, qarage 'location
,,~~,"'proposedin1978 does not provide adequate driveway access to
accommodate a vehicle attemptinq to park in the west garage
stall.
;"';x.;t::,,^.,
"~":: ,':".:: /, ~
~t:;~
PHYSIOGRAPHY:
Lot 35, Boudin's Manor contains approximately 6,200 square feet.
The lot is located within the floodplain of Prior Lake. The
existinq home was built prior to the adoption.of.a'Flood Plain
Mana~e.mentordinanceand.the existinq home is actually located
withl.n.ithefloodplain. The proposed qaraqe will .have.to be built
at elevation 909 which may pose drainage problems for the
existing home. There are approximately 14 mature trees'within
the rear yard, of which perhaps 3 to 4 will be removed to
accommodate the proposed garage.
ADJACENT USES:
Adjacent lots are developed with single family homes. There is a
thirty three foot drainaqe and utility easement located adjacent
to the east rear yard property line.
DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
Staff has reviewed this application in order to identify the best
location for the proposed garaqe considerinq drainaqe, tree
PrIor Lake, Minnesota 55372 I Ph. (612) 4474230 I Fax (612) 4474245
removal ~esthetic implications and impact on adjacent
properties. Lot 35 isa very small lot with a home that was
unfortunate:y placed directly in the. center of the property. The
central location reduces the options available for placement of a
fully accessible garage.. It would be possible to locate the
qarag. . in the northeast corner of the lot requiring only a five
toot side yard variance. However, this alternative would
necessitate . removal of an existing patio and would destroy the
rear yard environment in order to accommodate driveway and
turnaround space.
The proposed location will require fill and the applicant will
need to regrade portions of the lot to accommodate surface water
drainage. A retaining wall will likely be needed adjacent to the
the existing patio in order to divert water away from the
walkout. The applicant will be required to provide a drainage
plan as part of the buildinq permit process. This information iE
provided for the Planning Commission hearing so that all parties
are made aware of the problems associated with construction
within the floodplain district.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The recommendation from staff is to approve the side and rear
yard variances as requested. The applicant currently has no
garage and a hardship exists due to the substandard size of the
lot. The property is heavily wooded and there will be little
open space available for planting of additional trees. However,
the Planning Commission may wish to address tree raplacement as a
condition of the variance application.
.....,
'I
1
,
l
I
.1
J
_1lII'_~~-:.
l'''';''';''~'''<',\,:.;:i.:N}
.';-it,;:,"'-< .
:t;:r.;I::r,)!\:~i;)i~:J,Si?:;;'t;P;,~;,'f-0.71t.~:>./ "'0' ' .' i.""
-""r':(~i ,," .):: f.,' ,,' " ,
(-_j""t:~';\'i?::;;'~":';,,-
i'_ ;.':hP;
'(}:;:",,"""
( .
k
I.. .
'? i''''* 1(P~
Survey For: '-ilL & MRS. CHARLFS ~ 6
-- ~I3
SUNDE LAND SURVEVING, INC. IUC...~~~~~PN.,H;U~~~Y~~
8001 EAST BLOOMINGTON FREEWAV 136WI . BLOOMINGTON. MINNESOTA &&420 . '12.881.24&&
W.O. 275-78
58/1
SUlveyor's Certificate
"~
~
L4.
o
M
II
.c
u
c
-
....
..
QI
.-
10
U
VI
~4
Iron Pipe Elev. = 910.8
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
NOTES & LEGEND
Lot 35. BOUDINS MANOR, according to the plat
on file in the Office of the Register of Deeds
Scott County, Minnesota.
I hereby cert i fy tha t thi s survey. plan or
report was prepared by me or under my direct
supervision and that I am a duly R~gistered
Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of
Minneosta.
* Proposed Top of Block elevation =911.5
* Proposed Basement floor elevation = 908.3
* Proposed Front House entry elevation ;----
912.7 .
* Proposed Ga~age floor elevation = 908.5
* The above proposed elevations are subject
to review and change by the City Engi neer.
Buildins Dept., developer and owner.
proposed grades approved by the City are
fi na 1 .
\.1...;b ~-
Edward H. Sunde, R.L.S.
Date August 10. 1978 Reg. No. ~
~CL
,0...-.
I
1
J
1
I
1
~
I
j
. ,
1
: I
-j i
, I
~ ~
I.
JUN-16-1997 11:13
VALLEY SURVEYING CO.
612 447 2571
Sl)~VE'" PflEPAREO fOR;
BRIAN.- MATTSON
16S1!!> INC3UADONA aEa,eH CIRcLE
P~OR LAICE, ""N. !5537~
Valley Sur"eying Co.. P.A.
SU/T'E lilO-C I 16670 FRANK!./", TflArL
FRIINKLlN TRAIL OFFICE CONDOMINIUM
PRIOR I.Akc, ""NNESOT~ 55372
rELEPjofO""E (lill) 447- il570
~O
2G
I
I
1MD.2
.
I
Y wm'"
I
"I..
"4i.;.J
r
'~
fg
we,
...
in'
:~
.
...
.-4".II~
,; ,-..1 Hi. 71 mea!. ___
110.1: ~3il?' ,f,l:hf
0.5' e.sr
"
t:
Q
~~ac .....
. It.. ,_a.,fJl
IMI'T,.
""""E
-,l ,....
....1" )
I
I
DESCRIPl'Ia.l:
[.a~ 29, "INQJAlXlNA BEACfl" , SCott cwnty, l'IinnellOta- Also sh"",ing I:liOl '.c;>oat,ion of
the el(ili1ting 1ll1pt'QU"..........1I 8~ pt'oposed ad6iticn. this 16th day of Feb. 1996.
.crISS' \'Ien"""""'..k $I.;Ii.;L!;i ....lkQ<.lt elevation at. the .."istir19 hause.
~
Net lot area = 5.607. llCl- ft.
Net existing lot COV&~~g~ = 28.0 ,
9'18.7 OENClTEli EXISTING GRADE EL6:VATION
.
1940. iO DENOTES PROF'OSEO Fl""SHEO ~R.O" EI.EVATlQf\I
DENOTES PROPOSED DIRECTIQN 0' suA'AcE OI'IAINAlM
$&:1" ..ARAGE SLAB liT EL. li4Q.~
SET TOP "BLOCI( or GARAGE AT EL. 947."'i
l"~...:I nvt ~"t <;O"'1;"89v = Y.B '1.
o
l
SCALE.
zo
40
~---,
FEE.T
flIllloed 9/16/97 To ahow 1.00 Drlv..."y
Sel~
lI.vlnd 6/16/97 To 'haw pn>p<>Md \Io'o~
"" ..__ bY ""'"or,
J "1I1d1, 1:.""'1 tftGt ttIl. ....., wn pr.parwd
", me or under my dind ....""'.1... _ mo,
,~ Ntl"..d LllIId ~1lI' under lhe
r~~~ s,,,,. a!JotJ-flJ. ,II
.. .....r j "<fk,
I , , . ~
. ...' ~TN..... ~ . ...i"..P.'....ot>.....
....." L'~".. No. 'OlS3
IN
o Dtn"'..' 12 IlIeft . '" lot"" irQft
manu....'" .... and moI'tled b1
LI....... 1'/0. lOlS:!
. O"'QI.. IrQ-n IIIIIGIIInMJ'J' found
.. P.'"d.~ ~ It. N..' ..f
liB
lIZ~5
tIoACC
.,n"..
P.02
IZ
TOTAL P.02
JUN-16-1997 11:13
VALLEY SURVEYING CO.
612 447 2571 P.01
VALLEY SURVEYING CO., P.A.
'16670 FRANKLIN TRAIL S.E.
SUITE 1ZGC
PRIOR LAKE. MN. 55312
OFFICE (&12) "7-2110
F,.,. (112) 447.2571
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL COVERSHEET
ATTENTION:
lo... p,~... ~l-
t;~ oE- P.L.
J. ~
:enoj \0" ...~
44
? I,.."" \ ~ € ",'"1
DATE:
TO COMPANY:
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
TRANSMITTED FROM;
IN REFERENCE TO:
~~\ ~~
~V\~ \\so N
Q~,,\\~, O.J
NUMBER OF PAGES: ~
(including coversheet)
TRANSMITTED INFORMATION:
, .
-------
SURVEY PREPARED FOR:
BRIAN MATTSON
16575 INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
PRIOR LAKE, MN. 55372
Valley Surveying CO., f? A.
SUITE 120-C, /6670 FRANKLIN TRAIL
FRANKLIN TRAIL OFFICE CONDOMINIUM
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
TELEPHONE (612) 447 - 2570
EXHIBIT C
LEGAL BUILDING ENVELOPE
/,<0/
f') ,::
L_ \..}
--
I
I
---105.73 'meas.---
FENCE 1.5'
WEST
- - - -
/.
":p
.
Q
I
I
, .
~:
CII'
E
&
o
,
.<t"
100
/
',-..119. 71 meas. -__
~,
"
FENCE 0.5' EAST
-I
I
I
:lC
l.J
III
o
GA RAGE SLAB
, EL. 942...01
EXISTING
HOUSE
-.2 ,.....
'-...) \. )
DESCRIPTION:
Lot 29, "INGUADONA BEACH", Scott County, Minnesota. Also showing the location of
the existing improvem:~-s and proposed addition, this 16th day of Feb. 1996.
NC~ES' Benchmark 9)6.15 walkout elevation of the existing house.
Net lot area = 5,607 sq. ft.
946.7
x
DENOTES EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
Proposed net lot
coverage = 28.0 % (940.2)
151DS'b H,
coverage = 53.8 %
3011 s,H.
Q ( Of(rJ' n\
, -:y~r '" ()JS
,
DENOTES PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION
DENOTES PROPOSED DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE
SET GARAGE SLAB AT EL. 940.34
SET TOP OF BLOCK OF GARAGE AT EL. 947.82
Net existing lot
100, " . fyu VY\ s-lYi.4:1'
~;}.\'l W\{'h, CL>nc,d/\~fV\()V(d =; ~D1o
40 oJ'^ ~r c.U dt,;
o Denotes 1/2 inch x 14 inch iron
monument set and marked by .
License No. 10/83
. Denotes iron monument found
CD Denotes P K. Nail set
Revised 5/15/97 To show proposed garage
os directed by owner.
I hereby certify that this survey was prepared
by me or under my direct supervision and that
I ar;p,,,Q.dl!ly licensed Land Surveyor under the
IdWS of,J6~ State of)'1,iflne",ta.
::.:llI.J:...l,,.,."",.",.... "..'~.",/.,:'~:,:,'..',.'".,,',';.:,,",'.v,.,...-j"",,....,'~~.',;....~'?
-. t " , .u.'.;,:{(?,1 ."",
'""';Y License No, 10183
o
I
SCALE
20
I
IN
40
I
FEET
FILE No.
8235
BOOK
216
PAGE
12
::n
f11'
~ ~: '!-' I
'..
"
..
.~ .~..:~ . .."~,.~......~_:_~r:"
/ /.:
.:- -....
/
<0
REVISED
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
TO BE REMOVED
q1 '3 ]lf~~ S
....
. 1
r
"-
~
ct'
S89018'08"E
103.3 plat
---105.73 meas.---
''''~
FENCE 1.5'
WEST
Ties it'-
(936.9)
940..6' I
r--..r ~:r-J .
V;} 0 . V.: zo" MAPLE
) : C
- r:
941.3 (940.2) 94,1.6
1 ft..~: - (941,9 J
-
-t
l\I
~,)
~ 1.5 j
~ /\
\
I
,
~~
0=
(jJ(])
Eo
1/)0
01/)
-0
1/)-
'-
,
EX ISTING
HOUSE
W /0 EL, (") l ~
936,15 L_--../
o
/q
Q
-
\
1'1'
944.1 I ai
/
'1--.119.71 meas.---
o
ai' 116.7 plat
946.2, I N 88054' 47"W
FENC E 0.5' EAS
:x:
u
w
o
GA RAGE SLAB
EL.942....01
EX I STING
HOUSE
-.2 /--
'-) \. )
I
,~O- I
105 "
,ESCRIPTION:
li~
29, "DIGLJACONA BEACH", Scot:' County, Minnesot2. Also showing the }.ocation of
existing impr-ovem.,:' s anc pr-oposed acci :ion I this 16c.n cay of C'eb. 1996.
[\J(:TES I Benchmark 0?6.15 walkout elevation of the existing house.
ler.._ Lo_t_ ar-ea = 5,607 sg~ ft.
946.7
-"-
DENOTES EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
I
'J
I
I
I '
I .'
134.4..~
20
PROPOSED GARAGE AND DRIVE
('".... ......
.J (~
L_ "-)
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~.
I .
~.
5890 \8'08"E
103.3 plat
---105.73 meas.---
FENCE 1.5'
WEST
.941.2
- I ~939.4
~ ~J.' (939.3)
940.6' I
~
I
VZO" MAPLE
I ~
1 U.:J
I
I
941.6
!940.2
x
EX ISTING
HOUSE
WIO EL. ('") {~
936.15 L_ -.J
MI.3 (940.2)
t~'26
rt.~o" MAP E )
/ ~,
.J ~ ~ PROPOSED ;t I ~ 1.5
~ G1B.AGE ~ t\
943.3 I r;.;J 12"MAPLE \
/ l, (944..1) L__~o 1_ _, 10_00
~I 943.6 Q (4"?:1)946.
\' /Q
\ I Q
I
,
'~
CI)
0=
1U0l
~o
l/)Q
'?/f)
-0
/f)_
'-
,
-
FENCE 0.5' EAS
-
'"
\
l<t
944. 1 I ai
I
:>C
U
W
o
',--.119.71 meas _n
o .
oi' 116.7 plat
946.2, I N 880 54' 47"W
GA RAGE SLAB
EL. 942...01
EXISTING
HOUSE
--2 1'.....
'-.-) \. )
I
I
DESCRIPTION:
Lot 29, "INGUADONA BEACH", Scott County, Minnesota. AJso showing the J.ocation of
the existing impt"ovem"'- sand pt"oposed addition, this 16th day of Feb. 1996.
[\J(il'ES' Benchmack Y::36.15 walkout elevation of the existing house.
Net lot at"ea = 5,607 sq. ft.
946.7
x
DENOTE S EX I ~
'~~.5E ELEVATION
-~-------
------
LEGAL BUILDING ENVELOPE
<20
/
.
t') ,.=:
L_ \...)
J....(
~
~
FENCE 1.5'
WEST
_ _ -105.73 'me05. ---
--I
I
I
I
I.
~p
.
C
,
,
, .
VI
o
\IJ
E
I{)
o
I{)
I
~
,.;- .
I
I
FENCE O.S'E
'<t'
lai
,
, __.\19.71 me05.---
c,1
, I
'1
---~
)C
u
w
o
GARAGE SLAB
EL. 912...01
EXISTING
HOUSE
-2 1'.....
,--l\.)
Lot 29, "INGUAOONA BEACH", scott County, Minnesota. Also showing the location of
the existing impcovem~- sand pcoposed addition, this 16th day of ,'eb. 1996.
DESCRIPTION:
l',OrES' Benchmack ~16 .15 walkout elevation of the existing house.
,_~ ~ro~ = 5,607 sq. ft.
94(\
x
)ENOTES EXISTI NG GRADE ELEVATION