HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-028 Deny Impervious Surface Variance
~r" ~_--.....
PR10">',
.~'\,
('" \ 4646 Dakota Street S.E.
)-\
.~ i Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
ht/
RESOLUTION 08-028
A RESOLUTION DENYING A 4.9% VARIANCE FROM THE 30% MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
ALLOWED IN THE R-1 DISTRICT TO ALLOW FOR DRIVEWAY AND WALKWAY ADDITIONS ON A
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY
Motion By: LeMair
Second By: Haugen
WHEREAS, Phillip Hines is requesting an impervious surface from the Zoning Ordinance to allow for
driveway and walkway additions on a residential property zoned R-1 (Low Density
Residential) at the following location, to wit;
2719 Spring Lake Road SW, Prior Lake, MN 55372
The Westerly One Half of Lot 3; and Lot 4; and the Easterly One Half of Lot 5, all in
Block 46, and a strip of land between said Lots and lying southerly thereof and the
waters edge of Spring Lake Townsite, according to the plat thereof on file and of record
in the Office of the Register of Deeds in and for Scott County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission reviewed the application for variances as contained in Case
File 07-149, and held a public hearing thereon January 14, 2007; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission concluded the variance was not consistent with the criteria
set forth in Section 1108.406 of the Zoning Ordinance, and denied the variance subject
to conditions; and
WHEREAS, The applicant appealed the decision of the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, The City Council reviewed the appeal of the Planning Commission's decision, and the
information contained in Case File 07-149 and Case File 08-102, and held a hearing
thereon on February 19, 2008.
WHEREAS, The City Council continued their discussion of the variance to the March 3, 2008 City
Council Meeting.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE,
MINNESOTA as follows:
1. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein.
2. The City Council finds that the requested variance is consistent with the criteria set forth in Section
1108.406 of the Zoning Ordinance, subject to conditions.
3. The City Council upholds the Planning Commission's decision to deny the variance subject to
conditions.
\A(\N\N.cityofpriQ~Ia~e.c(;)IT1:~ >
Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245
4. The City Council makes the following findings:
a) The decision of The Planning Commission was properly and timely appealed in accordance with
Section 1108.210 of the City Code.
b) The City Council reviewed the appeal of the Planning Commission's decision, and the
information contained in Case File 07-149 and Case File 08-102, and held a hearing thereon on
February 19, 2008.
c) 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 variance on the Comprehensive Plan
d) The City Council finds a variance from the maximum impervious surface requirement is
unnecessary. The applicant has already maximized the amount of impervious surface for the
lot. The lot area of 12,812 square feet is above the minimum lot size for an R-1 low density
residential lot. The elimination of the rear 120 concrete slab would provide the applicant with an
alternative to utilize the excess impervious surface in a small driveway addition.
e) The lot area of 12,812 square feet is not an uncommonly small lot, however; therefore a
variance from the maximum allowed impervious surface is not warranted.
f) A variance from the impervious surface requirement is not necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right of the owner. As an alternative the applicant could
remove the 120 square feet of concrete slab in the rear yard for the necessary impervious
surface amount to construct the driveway addition without the need for an impervious surface
variance.
g) Granting of the variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property
or negatively impact public safety.
h) The granting of the variance would not impact the character and development of the
neig h borhood.
i) One of the purposes of the Shoreland Ordinance is to "to provide for the wise utilization of
shoreland areas in order to preserve the quality and natural character of these protected waters
of the City." This purpose is implemented through a required maximum impervious surface
amount. In this case, a lack of hardship for the impervious surface variance results in an
inconsistency with the purpose of this ordinance.
j) Granting the impervious surface variance will merely serve as a convenience to the applicant. It
is not necessary to eliminate a demonstrable undue hardship. A reasonable driveway area and
a 3 foot walking path can be achieved without the need for any impervious surface.
k) The chosen designs of the driveway and walkway path create a hardship as related to the
impervious surface requirement. An alternatively designed driveway addition and walkway path
can be designed within the strict application of the impervious surface ordinance requirement.
I) There is no evidence that increased development or construction costs or economic hardship
are the basis of this request.
5. The contents of Planning Case #07-149 and 08-102 are hereby entered into and made a part of the
public record and the record of decision for this case.
M:\COUNCIL\RESOLUTI\2008\08-028 Uphold Deny Variance of Impervious Surface. DOC
6. Based upon the Findings set forth above, the City Council hereby denies the following variance to
allow for driveway and walkway additions on a residential property zoned R-1 (Low Density
Residential):
1) A 4.9% variance from the 30% maximum impervious surface allowed in the R-1 District
(Section 1104.306).
7. The variance is hereby denied on property legally described as follows:
The Westerly One Half of Lot 3; and Lot 4; and the Easterly One Half of Lot 5, all in Block 46,
and a strip of land between said Lots and lying southerly thereof and the waters edge of
Spring Lake Townsite, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the Office of the
Register of Deeds in and for Scott County, Minnesota.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 3RD DAY OF MARCH, 2008.
YES
NO
Haugen X HauQen
Hedberg X HedberQ
Erickson X Erickson
LeMair X LeMair
Millar X Millar
Frank
M:\COUNCIL\RESOLUTI\2008\08-028 Uphold Deny Variance of Impervious Surface.DOC