HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-188 RESOLUTION 02-188
RESOLUTION OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY COUNCIL REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE A 3 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE PROVISIONS OF
SECTION 1107.205(6) PERMITTING A MAXIMUM DRIVEWAY WIDTH OF 24 FEET TO ALLOW A
27 FOOT WIDE DRIVEWAY ON PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE R-1 (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
DISTRICT AND THE SD (SHORELINE OVERLAY) DISTRICT
IDENTIFIED AS 16994 MONROE AVENUE SW
MOTION BY: ZIESKA SECOND BY: GUNDLACH
WHEREAS, On November 4, 2002, the Prior Lake City Council held a public hearing to consider an appeal
by Richard Gau of the Planning Commission's denial of a request for a 3 foot variance to permit
a 27 foot wide driveway on the property legally described as follows:
Lot 12, Block 32, Spring Lake Townsite, Scott County, Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, The City Council finds that the requested variance meets the criteria for granting variances set
forth in Section 1108.400 of the City Code, and that the appellant has set forth adequate reasons
for reversing the decision of the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, The City Council has determined that the Planning Commission's decision denying the
requested variance should be reversed.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE:
1) The above recitals are incorporated as if fully set forth herein.
2) The City Council makes the following findings:
a. On November 4, 2002, the Prior Lake City Council held a public hearing to consider an appeal by Richard
Gau of the Planning Commission's denial of a request for a 3 foot variance to permit a 27 foot wide
driveway on the property legally described as follows:
Lot 12, Block 32, Spring Lake Townsite, Scott County, Minnesota; and
a. The Planning Commission reviewed the application for variances as contained in Case File #02-088, and
held a public hearing thereon September 9, 2002, and reviewed the request again on September 23, 2002.
b. The Planning Commission concluded the driveway variance request did not meet the hardship criteria and
denied the variance.
r:\resoluti\planresk2002\02-188.doc Page 1
16200 Ea§le Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Dh. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
c. Richard Gau appealed the decision of the Planning Commission in accordance with Section 1109.400 of
the City Code on October 15, 2002.
d. The City Council reviewed the appeal of the Planning Commission's decision, and the information
contained in Case File #02-088 and Case File #02-117, and held a hearing thereon on November 4, 2002.
e. The City Council has considered the effect of the requested 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.
f. The City Council has determined the request meets the hardship criteria. There are unique characteristics
of the property to warrant a variance, and the hardship was not created by the property owner. Parking is
prohibited on Monroe Avenue due to the public access to Prior Lake.
g. The denial of the requested variance constitutes a hardship with respect to literal enforcement of the
ordinance, as the reduced front yard setback from Monroe Avenue and lack of on street parking on Monroe
Avenue places a constraint on the parking of vehicles.
3) The contents of Planning Case File #02-088 and Planning Case File #02-117 are hereby entered into and made
a part of the public record and the record of the decision for this case.
4) Based upon the Findings set forth above, the City Council hereby reverses the decision of the Planning
Commission, and approves a 3-foot variance from the 24 foot maximum width of residential driveways to
permit a 27 foot wide driveway.
5) The following conditions shall be adhered to prior to the issuance of a driveway permit:
a) The driveway must be constructed as depicted on Attachment 1 - Certificate of Survey.
b) The permit is subject to all other city ordinances, and applicable state and county agency regulations.
c) The variance resolution must be recorded and proof of recording submitted to the Planning Department
within 60 days. An Assent Form must be signed, and pursuant to Ordinance Section 1108.400, the variance
will be null and void if the necessary permits are not obtained for the proposed addition within one year
after adoption of this resolution.
Passed and adopted this 18th day of November, 2002.
YES NO
Haugen X Haugen
Petersen X Petersen
LeMair X LeMair
Zieska X Zieska
:l
Gundlach X Gundlach I
{Seal} City Manager
r:~resoluti\planres~2002\02-188.doc Page 2