HomeMy WebLinkAbout00-008 Variance Appeal
Doc. No. A 470033
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Certified Filed and/or Recorded on
03-10-2000 at 03:00 [ lAM [)()'PM
Pat Boeckman, County Recorder 01
by .J ~ ,Deputy Fee: $20.50
State of Minnesota )
)ss.
County of Scott )
I, Kelly Meyer, being duly sworn, as Deputy City Clerk for the City of Prior Lake, do hereby
certify that the attached Resolution 00-16 is a true and correct copy of the original as passed
and adopted by the City Council of the City of Prior Lake at its March 6, 2000 meeting.
Kelly Meyer
Deputy City Clerk
Date: i~ho
h:\certify .doc
RESOLUTION 00-16
RESOLUTION OF THE PRIOR LAKE 'CITY COUNCIL UPHOLDING A DECISION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE A 55 FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE
CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING BUILDING IN THE C-5 DISTRICT
TO BE LOCATED 20 FEET FROM A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
RATHER THAN THE REQUIRED 75 FEET
MOTION BY: PETERSEN
SECOND BY: GUNDLACH
WHEREAS,
on February 22, 2000, and on March 6, 2000, the Prior Lake City Council considered
an appeal by D.R. Horton Custom Homes, Deerfield Development, LLC and John and
Mary Mesenbrink of the Planning Commission's approval of a request for a variance by
Keyland Homes to locate an addition to the existing building at 17021 Fish Point Road
SE 20' from the side lot line adjacent to a Residential District rather than the required
75' for the property legally described as follows:
Lot 2, Block 2, WATERFRONT PASSAGE ADDITION, Scott County, Minnesota
together with that part of Lot 1, said Block 2, described as follows:
Beginning at the southeast corner of Lot 2, Block 2, of said plat; thence North 00
degrees 10 minutes 44 seconds East plat bearing along the east line of said Lot 2, a
distance of 228.00 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 2; thence South 89 degrees
49 minutes 16 seconds East along the easterly extension of the north line of said Lot 2,
a distance of 100.52 feet; thence South 00 degrees 10 minutes 44 seconds West a
distance of 228.00 feet to the intersection with the south line of said Lot 1; thence
North 89 degrees 49 minutes 16 seconds West along the said south line, a distance of
100.52 feet to the point of beginning.
WHEREAS,
the City Council finds that the requested variance meets the standards for granting
variances set forth in Section 1108.400 of the City Code, and that the appellant has not
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 approving
the requested variances should be upheld.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE:
FINDINGS
1. Kevin G. Horkey has applied for a variance from the Zoning Ordinance in order to permit the
construction of an addition to an existing warehouse/shop building in the C-5 (Business Park) District
located at 17021 Fish Point Road SE and legally described as follows:
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Page 1
r: \counci1\resoluti\planres\2000\OO-16.doc
Lot 2, Block 2, WATERFRONT PASSAGE ADDITION, Scott County, Minnesota
together with that part of Lot 1, said Block 2, described as follows:
Beginning at the southeast corner of Lot 2, Block 2, of said plat; thence North 00
degrees 10 minutes 44 seconds East plat bearing along the east line of said Lot 2, a
distance of 228.00 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 2; thence South 89 degrees
49 minutes 16 seconds East along the easterly extension of the north line of said Lot 2,
a distance of 100.52 feet; thence South 00 degrees 10 minutes 44 seconds West a
distance of 228.00 feet to the intersection with the south line of said Lot 1; thence North
89 degrees 49 minutes 16 seconds West along the said south line, a distance of 100.52
feet to the point of beginning.
2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variances as contained in Case File #00-
002 and held hearings thereon on January 24, 2000.
3. The Board of Adjustment concluded the variance met the hardship criteria and approved the request.
4. D.R. Horton Custom Homes, Deerfield Development, LLC, and John and Mary Mesenbrink filed an
appeal to the decision of the Board of Adjustment in accordance with Section 1109.400 of the City
Code on January 27, 2000.
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 variance on the Comprehensive Plan.
6. Because of conditions on the subject property and on the surrounding property, it is possible to use
the subject property in such a way that the proposed variance will not result in the impairment of an
adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, unreasonably increase congestion in the
public streets, increase the danger of fire, and danger to the public safety, unreasonably diminish or
impair health, safety, comfort, morals or in any other respect be contrary to the Zoning Ordinance
and Comprehensive Plan.
7. The location of the existing building on the lot limits the location of any addition to this building. An
addition meeting all required setbacks would nearly preclude any parking and loading areas for the
building.
8. The City of Prior Lake Economic Development Authority entered into an agreement with the
applicant for the purchase of the property with the express purpose of constructing an addition to the
existing building. The Development Agreement states the development of this site is consistent with
the goals and objectives of the Tax Increment Financing District.
9. There is justifiable hardship caused by the location of the existing building on the lot. Reasonable
use of the property does not exist without the granting of the variance to permit the addition to be
located consistent with the setback of the existing building.
10. The granting of the Variance will not serve merely as a convenience to the applicant, and is
necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship.
11. The contents of Planning Case File #00-001 are hereby entered into and made a part of the public
record and the record of decision for this case.
r:\council\resoluti\planres\2000\OO-16.doc
Page 2
CONCLUSION
Based upon the Findings set forth above, the City Council hereby approves the following variance for the
proposed structure as shown in Exhibit A:
1. A 20' setback from the south property line rather than the required 75' setback..
The following are conditions which must be adhered to prior to the issuance of a building permit for the
proposed structure:
1. The resolution must be recorded and proof of recording submitted to the Planning Department within
60 days of the date of approval. An Assent Form must be signed and, pursuant to Section 1108.400
of the City Code, the variance will be null and void if the necessary permits are not obtained for the
proposed structure within one year after adoption of this resolution.
Passed and adopted this 6th day of March, 2000.
YES NO
Mader X Mader
Ericson X Ericson
Gundlach X Gundlach
Petersen X Petersen
Schenck X Schenck
{Seal}
r: \council\resol uti\planres\2000\OO-16.doc
Page 3
o Q ~ u.Jl'\~V\ + :P=
Lf76a "33
Scott County Customer Service
200 4th Avenue West
Shakopee, MN 55379
# 17159 10-MAR-2000
Name: HORKEY KEVIN
A Filing 1@
Abstract 19,50ea
TOTAL FOR FEE 19,50
A Copy Conformed 1@
Conformed Copy 1.00ea
TOTAL FOR FEE 1,00
RECEIPT TOTAL 20.50
Check 20,50
PAYMENT TOTAL 20,50
CHANGE 0,00
~-,
STAFF REPORTS
AND
MINUTES
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
AGENDA ITEM:
DISCUSSION:
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MARCH 6, 2000
8B
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
DON RYE, PLANNING DIRECTOR
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION OO-XX
UPHOLDING A DECISION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO THE
REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK ADJACENT TO A
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN
ADDITION TO THE EXISTING KEYLAND HOMES
BUILDING IN THE C-5 ZONING DISTRICT
History: In January, 2000, the Planning Department received an
application for a variance to allow the construction of an addition to
the existing Keyland Homes building on the properly located at 17021
Fish Point Road in the Waterfront Passage Business Park. The
existing building is setback 20' from the south property line, where it
is adjacent to a Residential Zoning District. The proposed addition to
the building will also have a 20' setback. Therefore, a 55' variance to
permit a structure to be setback 20' from the side yard adjacent to a
Residential District rather than the required 75 feet (City Code Section
1102.1406) was requested.
On January 24,2000, the Planning Commission held a public hearing
to consider the requested variance. The Planning Commission heard
testimony from the applicant, Kevin Horkey representing Keyland
Homes. There was no other testimony at the hearing. Upon reviewing
the hardship criteria, the Planning Commission concluded there is a
hardship with respect to this property in that the greater setback is a
result of the annexation and rezoning ofthe adjacent property, and the
location of the existing building limits the options for the placement of
an addition. The Planning Commission thus approved the variance
request. A draft copy of the Planning Commission minutes are
attached to this report.
On January 27,2000, D.R. Horton, Deerfield Development and John
and Mary Mesenbrink, all owners of property within 350' of the site,
submitted the attached letter appealing the decision ofthe Planning
1:\OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\008cc2.doc 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Commission. This letter is consistent with the provisions of Section
1108.408 of the ~oning Ordinance.
The City Counc,l originally considered this matter on February 22,
2000. The Comicil deferred action on this appeal until March 6, 2000,
to allow the CittAttorney to address the legal questions concerning
the requested v 'ance. The City Attorney's memorandum addressing
the legal aspects of this case will be forwarded to the City Council on
Friday, March 3~ 2000.
I
Current Condit~Q.l1.S.l The property located at 17021 Fish Point Road
SE was originalty platted as Lot 2, Block 2, Waterfront Passage
Addition in 199~. In 1998, the applicant purchased an additional 1/2
acre of land fro the City Economic Development Authority and
added it to their existing lot in order to construct an addition to the
existing buildin$, as shown on Exhibit A.
i
The existing bui!lding was constructed in 1993 and met all required
setbacks at that time. The property directly to the south was annexed
in July, 1997. ~ate in 1997, the Comprehensive Plan was amended to
include this pro~erty in the MUSA and designating it for Low to
Medium Densitt Residential uses. In 1999, the property was rezoned
to the R-2 distri~t. Once rezoned, the 75' setback requirement from a
Residential Dis~ct became effective.
i
The building en~elope on the subject site meeting all setback
requirements, sliown on Exhibit B, is approximately 165' long by 135'
wide. The buil4ing envelope is primarily located on the north half of
the lot. The proposed addition is 150' long by 100' wide. It consists
of a shop and warehouse space. The loading docks and parking are
located on the north side of the building. The proposed addition is
located 20' from the south property line and 45' from the rear, or east
property line. The setback from the south property line is consistent
with the setback of the existing building.
The Issues: The City Council must determine if it concurs with the
Planning Commission's decision that the proposed development meets
the hardship criteria. In the letter appealing this decision, the
appellants state "the appeal is based on several inconsistencies in the
application, and the fact that the criteria for granting a variance have
not been satisfied." This letter does not include any specific or
supporting information.
On February 16,2000, the staff received a second letter from the
appellants outlining their arguments against the variance. The staffhas
reviewed this letter and provided an analysis of the relevant points in
the attached memorandum dated February 18,2000.
I: \OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\008cc2 .doc
2
The hardship criteria are listed in Section 1108.406 of the Zoning
Ordinance. The following includes the hardship standard as well as a
suggested finding relating to that standard.
1. Where by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of a lot,
or where by reason of exceptional topographical or water
conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional conditions
of such lot, the strict application of the terms of this Ordinance
would result in peculiar and practical difficulties or
exceptional or undue hardship upon the owner of such lot in
developing or using such lot in a manner customary and legally
permissible within the Use District in which said lot is located.
While the lot itself is not exceptionally narrow, the location of the
existing building on the lot limits the placement of an addition to
the building. If the addition were to meet all required setbacks, the
options for the placement of parking and loading docks are very
limited. This location would nearly eliminate the use of the
building for warehouse purposes.
2. Conditions applying to the structure or land in question are
peculiar to the property or immediately adjoining property,
and do not apply, generally, to other land or structures in the
Use District in which the land is located.
The existing building complied with the required setbacks at the
time it was constructed. The subsequent annexation and rezoning
of the adjacent property created the additional setback requirement.
3. The granting of the proposed Variance is necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of
the owner.
The property owner purchased the property from the City for the
express purpose of building an addition to the property. This
addition cannot be built without granting of the variance.
4. The granting of the proposed Variance will not impair an
adequate supply of light and air to the adjacent property,
unreasonably increase the congestion in the public streets,
increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety.
The addition conforms to the location of the existing building, and
will not impair the supply oflight and air to the adjacent property.
The addition will not significantly impact the public streets or
endanger public safety.
I: \OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\008cc2.doc
3
5. The granting of the Variance will not unreasonably impact on
the character and development of the neighborhood,
unreasonably diminish or impair established property values
in the surrounding area, or in any other way impair the health
safety, and comfort of the area.
The addition setback conforms to the setback of the existing
building on this site. The required landscape bufferyard located
along the south property line will provide screening between this
site and the adjacent residential district.
6. The granting of the proposed Variance will not be contrary to
the intent of this Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.
The granting of this variance is not contrary to the intent of the
Comprehensive Plan. When the applicant purchased this property,
he entered into a development agreement with the City. That
agreement notes the further development of this site by expanding
the existing building is consistent with the development objectives
set forth for the tax increment financing district.
7. The granting ofthe Variance will not merely serve as a
convenience to the applicant but is necessary to alleviate a
demonstrable undue hardship or difficulty.
The location ofthe existing building limits the options for the
location of any addition to that building. The granting ofthis
variance is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship.
8. The hardship results from the application of the provisions of
this Ordinance to the affected property and does not result
from actions of the owners of the property.
The annexation and rezoning ofthe adjacent property created the
need for the larger setback than originally required on this site.
9. Increased development or construction costs or economic
hardship alone shall not be grounds for granting a Variance.
This variance is not based on economic hardship.
Conclusion: The Planning Commission and staff recommend
approval of the requested variance on the basis the request appears to
meet the hardship criteria in that the greater setback is a result of the
annexation and rezoning of the adjacent property, and the location of
1: \OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\008cc2.doc
4
FISCAL IMPACT:
ALTERNATIVES:
RECOMMENDED
MOTION:
REVIEWED BY:
J: \OOfi Jes\OOappeaJ\OO-008\008cc2 .doc
the existing building limits the options for the placement of an
addition.
Approval of the variance will allow the construction of an addition to
the existing building, thereby increasing the tax base.
The City Council has three alternatives:
1. Adopt Resolution DO-XX upholding the decision of the Planning
Commission to approve the variance requested by Keyland
Homes.
2. Deny Resolution DO-XX and direct the staffto prepare a resolution
overturning the decision of the Planning Commission and denying
the requested variance.
3. Defer this item and provide staff with specific direction.
The staff recommends Alternative #1, adoption of Resolution DO-XX
upholding a decision ofthe Planning Commission approving the
variance request to allow an addition to the existing building to be
located less than th quired 75' from the side lot line adjacent to a
Reo 8trie .
Frank B Ie Cit Manager
5
RESOLUTION OO-XX
RESOLUTION OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY COUNCIL UPHOLDING A DECISION OF
THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE A 55 FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT
THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING BUILDING IN THE C-5
DISTRICT TO BE LOCATED 20 FEET FROM A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT RATHER
THAN THE REQUIRED 75 FEET
MOTION BY: SECOND BY:
WHEREAS, on February 22, 2000, and on March 6, 2000, the Prior Lake City Council
considered an appeal by D.R. Horton Custom Homes, Deerfield
Development, LLC and John and Mary Mesenbrink of the Planning
Commission's approval of a request for a variance by Keyland Homes to
locate an addition to the existing building at 17021 Fish Point Road SE 20'
from the side lot line adjacent to a Residential District rather than the
required 75' for the property legally described as follows:
Lot 2, Block 2, WATERFRONT PASSAGE ADDITION, Scott County,
Minnesota together with that part of Lot 1, said Block 2, described as
follows:
Beginning at the southeast comer of Lot 2, Block 2, of said plat; thence North
00 degrees 10 minutes 44 seconds East plat bearing along the east line of said
Lot 2, a distance of 228.00 feet to the northeast comer of said Lot 2; thence
South 89 degrees 49 minutes 16 seconds East along the easterly extension of
the north line of said Lot 2, a distance of 100.52 feet; thence South 00
degrees 10 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of228.00 feet to the
intersection with the south line of said Lot 1; thence North 89 degrees 49
minutes 16 seconds West along the said south line, a distance of 100.52 feet
to the point of beginning.
WHEREAS,
the City Council finds that the requested variance meets the standards for
granting variances set forth in Section 1108.400 of the City Code, and that
the appellant has not 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
approving the requested variances should be upheld.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE:
16200 EIa~W~pRJW?~~\r~q6R5f-t~ke, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612}a~7-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
FINDINGS
1. Kevin G. Horkey has applied for a variance from the Zoning Ordinance in order to permit
the construction of an addition to an existing warehouse/shop building in the C-5 (Business
Park) District located at 17021 Fish Point Road SE and legally described as follows:
Lot 2, Block 2, WATERFRONT PASSAGE ADDITION, Scott County, Minnesota together
with that part of Lot 1, said Block 2, described as follows:
Beginning at the southeast comer of Lot 2, Block 2, of said plat; thence North 00 degrees 10
minutes 44 seconds East plat bearing along the east line of said Lot 2, a distance of 228.00
feet to the northeast comer of said Lot 2; thence South 89 degrees 49 minutes 16 seconds
East along the easterly extension of the north line of said Lot 2, a distance of 100.52 feet;
thence South 00 degrees 10 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of 228.00 feet to the
intersection with the south line of said Lot 1; thence North 89 degrees 49 minutes 16 seconds
West along the said south line, a distance of 100.52 feet to the point of beginning.
2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variances as contained in Case
File #00-002 and held hearings thereon on January 24,2000.
3. The Board of Adjustment concluded the variance met the hardship criteria and approved the
request.
4. D.R. Horton Custom Homes, Deerfield Development, LLC, and John and Mary Mesenbrink
filed an appeal to the decision of the Board of Adjustment in accordance with Section
1109.400 of the City Code on January 27,2000.
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 variance on the Comprehensive Plan.
6. Because of conditions on the subject property and on the surrounding property, it is possible
to use the subject property in such a way that the proposed variance will not result in the
impairment of an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, unreasonably
increase congestion in the public streets, increase the danger of fire, and danger to the public
safety, unreasonably diminish or impair health, safety, comfort, morals or in any other
respect be contrary to the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan.
7. The location of the existing building on the lot limits the location of any addition to this
building. An addition meeting all required setbacks would nearly preclude any parking and
loading areas for the building.
8. The City of Prior Lake Economic Development Authority entered into an agreement with the
applicant for the purchase of the property with the express purpose of constructing an
addition to the existing building. The Development Agreement states the development of
this site is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Tax Increment Financing District.
I: \OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\rsOOxxcc.doc
Page 2
9. There is justifiable hardship caused by the location of the existing building on the lot.
Reasonable use of the property does not exist without the granting of the variance to permit
the addition to be located consistent with the setback of the existing building.
10. The granting of the Variance will not serve merely as a convenience to the applicant, and is
necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship.
11. The contents of Planning Case File #00-001 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 City Council hereby approves the following
variance for the proposed structure as shown in Exhibit A:
1. A 55' setback from the south property line rather than the required 75' setback..
The following are conditions which must be adhered to prior to the issuance of a building permit
for the proposed structure:
1. The resolution must be recorded and proof of recording submitted to the Planning
Department within 60 days of the date of approval. An Assent Form must be signed and,
pursuant to Section 1108.400 of the City Code, the variance will be null and void if the
necessary permits are not obtained for the proposed structure within one year after adoption
of this resolution.
Passed and adopted this 6th day of March, 2000.
YES NO
Mader Mader
Ericson Ericson
Gundlach Gundlach
Petersen Petersen
Schenck Schenck
{Seal}
City Manager,
City of Prior Lake
I: \OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\rsOOxxcc.doc
Page 3
~
January 25,2000
Zoning Administrator
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Appeal to the City Council: Variance Key Land Homes Board of Adjustment
decision of January 24, 2000
DearZoning Administrator:
We are property owners within 350 feet of the subject property. We are filing an appeal
to the variance granted by the Board of Adjustment at it's January 24,2000 meeting. We
make this appeal in accord with Section 1109.400 Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance. The
appeal is based on several inconsistencies in the application, and the fact that the criteria
for granting a variance have not been satisfied.
Sincerely,
~~m:::
Donald Patton
Manager Land Development
o rn@rno~. .&'n
U JAN27311k U
i... \1 FEe I 6..-n
U\~J ~
@,
Honorable Mayor & City Council
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Ave.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Appeal, Variance Key Land Homes
Dear Mayor and Council:
Midwest Planning & Design, LLC was asked to review the application for variance and
to prepare a letter to the Council. In our review of the information supplied to us, we
have found the following:
. There are several additional variances, which are required and which have not been
applied for
. The criteria for granting a variance to the side yard requirements of the City
Ordinance have not been satisfied.
. There may be a conflict with the City Council acting on an appeal and also members
serving on the EDA, which sold the property to the applicant. Also, there is a
conflict with the City Staff recommending a variance and providing staff services to
the EDA.
At your February 22nd, meeting, you are being asked to approve a variance to the
required yard ofan industrial building which is adjacent to D.R. Horton residential
development, Deerfield. We are asking you to deny the requested variance. The request
for a variance is clearly an attempt on the part ofthe applicant to over use the adjacent
property to the determent of future homeowners and to the determent of DR Horton and
the Messenbrinks. Midwest Planning & Design, LLC representing the adjacent property
owner makes this request to deny the variance for the following reasons:
1. D.R. Horton's new residential homes are required to maintain a yard and to provide a
landscaped buffer yard. We diligently provided this separation and the landscaping
knowing that the requirement from the adjoining property would be 75 feet for any
new buildings. D.R. Horton also purchased this property with the understanding that
although the existing industrial structure was only 20 feet away from property any
new structures would be required to be 75 feet from the south property line. We also
understood that the City performance standards would help the interface between
these land uses. A variance to this standard will have a negative affect on D.R.
Horton's development and the Messenbrink's property and on the value of the homes
to be built.
2. We are required to provide class one construction on the to be built homes. The
Councils intent of requiring class one is to make our "for sale" owner occupied homes
appear attractive from the adjoining property including this industrial property. Yet
the adjacent user is allowed to build a high bulk metal building only 20 feet from
south property line. This standard is inconsistent. Although section 1102.1407(2)
Additions and Alteration. Provides that the addition should be made of the same
Midwest Planning & Design, LLC
materials as the principle structure, it is hard to believe that the Council's intent was
to allow a metal building 20 feet from the property line adjacent to a residential use.
3. The purpose of required yards especially as separation from incompatible land uses is
to create buffers. Your ordinance realizes this requirement and requires additional
space and landscaping between incompatible land uses. Yet this application is to vary
the standard that is so important to maintain property value and habitable space for
new residents. The staff report indicates that this property was purchased before the
zoning was changed to residential. This is true. However, both the EDA and the
Applicant were aware that the Messembrink: land was planned for residential use
before the ~ acre was sold to the Applicant. The sale occurred in 1998. The
Township land use on the Messenbrink property has been residential for a number of
years. The City's Comprehensive Plan showed this property as low to medium
density residential use in late 1997.
4. The existing building is a non-conforming structure. Based on the following Sections
of the Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance, the proposed expansion is illegal.
. Section 1107.2302 (2) "A nonconformity shall not be enlarged, extended,
expanded or changed in any manner or dimension except to comply with
provision of this Ordinance". Expansion of this nonconforming structure is illegal
unless the City grants a variance to this section of the Ordinance.
. Section 1107.2303 Special Requirements. (2) Nonconforming Structures. a.
Permitted construction. "In the following cases, construction is permitted on a
legal nonconforming structure. Construction, which does not extend, expand, or
intensify the nonconformity. The existing building a nonconformity and is being
allowed to expand with out a variance to this section of the Ordinance. This is
clearly illegal.
. Section 1107.2303(5) Nonconforming parking. "Any use on any property which
contains a nonconforming parking lot shall not be expanded or intensified unless
the property is brought into compliance with the standards contained in subsection
1107.204." The existing parking lot is nonconforming in that it is 20 feet from
Fish Point Road. The requirement in this zoning district is that the parking lot be
at least 30 feet from Fish Point Road (Sectionll1 02.1406). Section 1107.204
requires that parking abutting an "R" District be at least 20 feet from the side lot
line and a Type "c" buffer yard be provided adjacent to the parking lot. The
applicants existing parking is less than 20 feet from the side lot line. The Zoning
Ordinance requires that this parking lot be brought into conformity. The proposal
does not show that the existing parking lot is being brought into conformity.
Likewise, the Ordinance's required buffer yard is not being provided adjacent to
the existing parking lot.
5. Not only is this an application for a yard variance, but the proposal seems to vary
several zoning performance standards with out application for a variance. We
understand that these variances have not been applied for but they will affect the
relationship between the properties. We suggest that this application be sent back to
the Board of Adjustment so they can act on all of the variances at the same time. The
ordinance clearly requires variances to the following section to allow this building to
be built on this lot:
Midwest Planning & Design, LLC
. Besides the specific performance standards, the proposed use does not
conform to the following Standards:
. Section 1107.305 there is no indication from the plan provided to
us that the requirement for off street parking and loading are met.
. Section 1107.1904 There is not indication from the plan furnished
to us that the landscape requirements are being met.
. Section 1107.2202 (1) there is not indication from the plan
furnished to us that the standards for rooftop equipment is being
met.
. Section 1107.2202 (6). There is not indication from the plan that
required class I material is being used. Nor is there a description in
the staff report, which indicates that these standards have been met.
Section 1102.1407 (2) requires that "all subsequent additions and
exterior alterations shall be the same as those of the principal
structure... This provision does not prevent upgrading of the
quality of material". The City Staff is interrupting this section to
mean that a non-conforming structures can be enlarged with a side
yard variance. This interruption is wrong. The existing structure
is a nonconforming structure. Section 1107.2300 clearly provides
that this existing structure must be brought into conformity to be
allowed to expand or intensifY.
. Section 1107.2202 (8)(t). From the plan furnished to us there no
indication that pedestrian areas are provided as required by the
Ordinance.
6. In the interface of incompatible land uses it is important to maintain separation not
only for the livability of the residential property but also the usability of the industrial
property. Standards are important to be maintained by both parties so that the
industrial user, the resident and the city are provided the longest and highest value
from the property. Variances are not the rule but the exception.
7. We know from experience that the over use of property with building or parking lot
has determaental affects on the surrounding property and the city. These affects are
as follows:
. Blighting influences on the industrial and residential property because of not
enough room to provide business operations and to provide effective yards
between buildings and uses
. Blighting influences because of the lack of parking and the use of the public street
for over flow parking which has been the case for a number of years in this under
designed industrial park.
. Blighting influences because of the not enough room to provide public fire
protections because of the reduced yards, which are filled with landscaping. One
of the reasons to have larger yards is to provide both landscaping buffers and a
means of fighting fire
. Surface water run off is increased because of the lack of impervious surface.
Midwest Planning & Design, LLC
, .
The State Legislature has realized that the variance is a tool that can be only used if
''undue hardship" exists. The City Ordinance requires that all nine conditions for granting
a variance must be met in order for the Board of Adjustment to grant a variance. The
following conditions have not been met:
1. There is not an undue hardship as defined by the City Ordinance or by the
State Statute. This is not an extra ordinary exception as is required by the
city ordinance. This lot is similar to most of the lots in the industrial area.
The property owners simply wants to over use this lot and not adhere to the
city standards which are meant to protect other property owners in the area
2. Conditions applying to this structure or to the land are not peculiar to this
property. The applicant and EDA were aware that the adjacent land was
planned residential when the property was purchased for the expansion. It is
unlikely that this is the only property in Prior Lake where the interface
between land uses does not conform to the existing ordinance.
3. This property is being used at the present time. The property owner is not
being denied the use ofhis property.
. Granting the variance will increase the danger of fire and will endanger public
safety. With only 20 feet between property rather then the required 75 feet the
ability to fight fires on the south side of the metal building is impaired when
the required landscaping matures.
. Granting this variance including harm to the ability to sell adjacent property
will impact the neighborhood. Granting this variance will reduce the value of
the adjacent property. Like wise, the proposed building is not too standard as
it relates to the architectural design standards, Section 1107. By not requiring
a variance to these standards and the nonconformity standards, the Board of
Adjustment violated the City Ordinance.
. Granting this variance will not be in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan,
which requires buffers between land uses. and requires high design standards
. This variance is to serve the convenience of the applicant. An undue hard
ship as defined by the State in the Enabling Legislation does not exist.
Reasonable use of the property can be made with out granting the variance.
. The hard ship results from the actions ofthe owners to over use the property.
Granting this variance will do harm to the value of the adjacent residential property and
to the general welfare ofthe community as well as to the public safety. For his reason
we are asking the City Council to deny the variance.
Sincerely,
Midwest Planning & Design, LLC
iL~~~/\ ~
U -! ~0....s
Richard Krier, AICP
CC D.R Horton Homes
Donald Rye
Midwest Planning & Design, LLC
...... '_.'._. .._.''''_.'._' ~'-, - ..0_.."0-.'" _
FilE COpy
Memorandum
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
cc:
Frank Boyles, City Manager
Jane Kansier, Planning COOrdinator~
February 18, 2000
Additional Information for Council Agenda Item 7B, Keyland Homes
Variance
Don Rye, Planning Director
On February 16, 2000, we received a letter from Dick Krier, on behalf of the
appellants, D. R. Horton and John and Mary Mesenbrink, outlining their
objections to the variance for Key1and Homes. The variance will allow Key1and
Homes to build an addition to their existing building that will be located 20' from
a residential lot line rather than the 75' required in the C-5 District. This letter
was included in the agenda materials; however, the staff did not have time to
respond to this letter before the agenda was mailed. The following is our response
to the relevant points of this letter.
Mr. Krier claims the building materials used for this addition are inconsistent with
the Ordinance requirements. Section 1107.2202 lists the general requirements for
architectural materials. The C-5 district, however, has a specific set of design
standards for buildings in that district. These standards are listed in Section
1102.1407. According to this section, metal panels with interlocking, concealed
or tongue-and-groove seams and concealed fasteners are an acceptable building
material in the C-5 district if the exterior finish is warranted by the manufacturer
for twenty years against blistering, peeling, cracking, flaking, checking or
chipping and if not more than 50% of the building elevation faces the street. The
attached description of the building material for the Key1and building shows that
it is clearly consistent with the requirements of the C-5 district.
In addition, Section 1102.1407 (2) specifically references additions and
alternations to buildings within the C-5 district constructed of materials that do
not conform to the current requirements. This section states "all subsequent
additions and exterior alterations built after the construction of the principal
structure(s) shall be of the same materials as those used in the principal structure
.
1:\OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\response.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
and shall be designed to conform to the original architectural concept and
general appearance. This provision shall not prevent the upgrading of the quality
of materials used in a remodeling or expansion project". This section also allows
the materials used in the proposed addition.
Mr. Krier also references the nonconforming requirements (Section 1107.2300) of
the Zoning Ordinance and suggests variances to these requirements are also
necessary. It is true that the setback ofthe existing building is nonconforming.
This setback cannot be expanded without a variance to the setback requirement, as
requested by Keyland Homes. The setback variance is the appropriate variance.
A variance to the nonconforming provisions is unnecessary and redundant.
Mr. Krier also references Section 1107.2303 (5) which pertains to nonconforming
parking areas. First of all, he is correct in stating the setback of the existing
parking area from Fish Point Road is nonconforming (20' instead of the required
30'). However, this section of parking lot is not being expanded. No parking will
be located closer to the right-of-way than the existing area. A portion of the
existing parking lot is also located closer than 20' to south property line where it
is adjacent to a Residential district. Again, this section of the parking lot will not
be expanded. All new parking areas will meet the requirements of the ordinance.
Finally, this letter suggests the following criteria have not been met:
. Section 1107.305, off-street parking and loading. The use requires 49 parking
spaces and one loading space. There are 59 parking spaces and at least 4
loading spaces on the site.
. Section 1107.1904, landscaping. The use requires a Bufferyard Type "E"
along the south property line for the length of the new building. This
landscaping is provided.
. Section 1107.2202 (1), rooftop equipment. There will be no rooftop
mechanical equipment.
. Section 1107.2202 (8,f), pedestrian areas. A total of 936 square feet of
sidewalk or plaza is required. The existing sidewalks meet this requirement.
The criteria used to grant a variance are addressed in the agenda report.
1:\OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\response.doc
Page 2
. VP 002 'panels"'rii3l<i:'ffiIs:'offtcel11angar"facil~1noraarchiteauraJ" 'fniiirid"" . . ,~,~,;"","...,..Z.:~.j.;.. ,.._;,...,:....,,~.~:L..:~i~:>~
.~. ~.~t~~~~~~~~~~M~F-~i.~~~i.':'"-::~4t1:.~it~i~~..~' ~. :.,.~--..-~...
. GENERAL DESCRip;nOt,r.~~':2~"7;r:~foundation' to'eave.!n most 't::, EY,BENEF.ITS~t,f,;'t;{;:?;;",:
The' uriiqui:i'design' of VP's ,.~ "'.::: /faCflities. ''':~1;;'~''''~,^''''''h' ~'>"'ct";>,,, ","';';"IA' . "" ".,--,..:......,
.. '....;... :~. . _.' ."., ,.".~~",_. ..".,",,:n- . ;;./"\rc Ite ura ppearan
architectural wall panels provides :;'.' ':-:'Because 0 the)ane's length'1-""'''':t.'''91,,,,,"v.,..,r. .....,;',:p
for many attractive bii'iIding' ;;;..:~ani:r ease :of'fnstallationconstruc \;,. .;~I.n.t~nor,..~ppl~,~~JI,~Q~;;.;;t
" ',. ....-~...."$"'''-~,~,,...........,;'.--....,. ... -':'"$.'. :1. ~Fast ConstructIOn.::~,::::
.applications:<VP. 100 is a., tlon time .ana cost. IS held toa",;""",.;,:,; .3~....,...~'.':"-,t,;.. ' '. ,""".;. .~ .~"
_ sculptured exterior shadow panel ~rni~iT:~!~.r~~f,~Q!!~~9-i~.~~.~~:~~~)\~~. IEQ.~~~X_ ~ff.!qient .'.~~:"'; ~;lr.
which can be used with interior . .:therefortl'more.ec~noiiiical.andXF:j;.,~.,;-EcoriomicaI Cost. ....::-.:::-
l~ner.paf1el~ in.c.om~i~~ti.?rfwit~):><re~~.r1iR~~;[0J~~~Y;~p:lac{; . ~~7~~ .... -.~t~:;)j;~S;?i~f
flbTrgla~s ~r ng'dbo~~~;,p_sulat:or)~J~!;t~~!.~..>~!h;~X,~~~~J11.Ct-a, ...., ... ".'
. ThiS attractive panel IS excellent:,~;f'ecor1omlcal;tfian:eoncret
. ~;:~~1~n:~d building.frortage. "~.;;tT~F.81t~
VP 002 is a flush panel used
either externally or as a liner
panel. especially appropriate for
mai1ufacturinc' ~'/arehous3 interior
applications. -This panel is
excellent as an accent panel for
,'VP ,1QO walls and is widely used
for facades and soffits. With the
variety of insulation options
available, your Builder can help
you decide on the optimal
insulation approach, considering
up-front cost and long term energy
savings. These interlocking
panels come with built-in weather
seals for weathertightness.
All fasteners are completely
~oncealed on VP 100 and VP 002:
panels. VP 100 panels cOlne in a : ~9
wide variety of colors. NP 002:~,1.";~;;
panels are available in, ~gypti~ri.~;
White and Patrician Bronze as~,!;;?
standard. . Also, th~se 'p~riel{'f~~L~
come in lengths to:38,f~~t,pr6vid~,
inQ ~ continuouS wall.~~~,e..I. fr~T.t~~:~:Vp~roO~"'fOViae7aroatfi&CWi!racaae""tln$~6UI"
,. ~""','__. .~ ,,_.~__.._G'-_~a.......;Io~r\TIl''+'':'':.~~~ '.
. . ",g. . /;. .
." -."..,. -
. .. . ',- -~ ,
,-~.'." . ,~. ....
. . :.r'..".'-
. '.' - ."..'.',".-:...,,:. ~.' .
'of'
. ::. ~:<.:.:. ".
.....'. i%:.-::.~..;;~~,:. ;,i:it::..~ti~,~:.:;~'~.;f;'i.7; :
. '. .._.C., ,- ." - ... . . ..~..--;~;:,.-.,",,... ":.
'., ":~~!"i~3~.r:~f~~~~~ftjErz,:: ·
.:;vP 100 & V"902,.:~., .' . "F1NISH WARRANTIES.>.
J~rr~~I~~~~r.kf~nels provide 1211 :. not CP.' ~~:~,..,KXL:~~i~l~f~~:
~ith lerigths.ofiJp.to 38 feet. Pan31s are ~j: ~'''':~o . r_" ~r.!nr. ..VARCo-PRUDEN AND
;':a,ptional) for VP 100 ana 24 gage stan'jC:i:, .. :.' ~;;' ... t...I,j~lQnal) lor VF THE VP CONTRACTOR
. :002. Both pctnels I"ave a G90 galvanized steel coating and KXL paint Vareo-pruden has built its
finish for;exterior a'~plications. KXL Is a 1 mil. KYNARt based finish reputation as a leader. in tho
;, :.8pplied to the sOrface of GeO galvanized steel to givf. a long-life color nonresidential construction maiket
~~at resists fading and chalking. by supplxjng _~~p~~~?r service and
t":"" - VP 100'-NP OO'2'-';~~~~~~~;~ SECTtONS --------- p~~...~~~;y.~.~,.>Builders
.. '- acroSs oilh Amenca. -. ...
J,;~vp_Buffdershive :constructed ...
- . Each and eyery- faci!itycames a..
reputation'foi:QU8Jit{andvalue. - (.
-. VP wall~ysteriis1are'desigried to '"
: ':'"~ . . ,...., .... -". ." . .. .....
, . .. meet the. most exacting customer ~:" ~~,._,:~lt !
~:::: .: . I require"!en~:::;~~~e)ro.i~l!he '.: . .. . .:.:":.~~~~;'~1~ .
~E':.:\;........... ,.~., ...............,F.._~..>~.....\..it~i*Ii{.(:~~~Jfi '
~ i-;;1i}:~}~:.S.;. ".:; '<"
--
.,s:~...:,'.,~_. ...;.~..~._..._._..~.,.,....:.'........__...'.: _"~ ,.:-.,_ .,',' .-. "0.' ..... ...~;,'.~..,/. '-". .........;},~..:: :...:.-...._~..,...:j,l
,:~:,,~g~ 'SECTioN P.ROPERTlES OF ARCHITECTURAL P~NELS
.liI\;~,!~,0I':);~f~OM;i~~:'i~~:~~)" ..... Yi~f'
,.\;;~VP 0G2~f'::24 . :::0.0279 ().262 il082 ..0.085 " u.082
::: ~~~:'U:::\<:.' .
, , ::',-.'~.::SlC .;"'. S~icn 'modulus (incheS')
_I:~. Ix;" Moment of inertia (inches.)
...'.
. .-;.';' '. ...,' '-;. :.,- :~",:,. "
----- ---- --
r-:-- -c- THERMAL DeSIGN VALUES FOR VP 100NP 002
,r Blanket Insulat!on
r .... Thlc:tness
..I. ~
r,
I.
1 -'Calculated thermal values ,:'3 based on full insulation thickness.
~ .. ::In-Ptace thermal values are based on ASTM C2~6 Gu~rded Hot Box, Tasts or are
I calculated accounting for effects of fasteners and Insulation compression Ylhen the
L2:sts are no!_~~:~____. __ ._~_
2"
3"
Calculated.
R-Value U-Value
7.41 0.~35
1 LaO (l.O!!5
15.10 C.066
In-Place"
R- Value U-Value
6.08 0.165
7.74 0.129
8.45 0.118
4"
:~
,;) ;J
: :-'!~~:1~. {l
:-::: :~-:'. -~:'.: ;; :.,
~.<.;".i'-.":. .
. :.:.~ :-~~~: ..~
:" t!~{~;'.,. \
.~ ......... '-",
. . .'~,: \;<
,.- ..'
.-.......,-~............- "
-....-.....---..-....-............'....--
f -------------.- ------------ ..--.- ,
~~~.i2i~~-~~~~~:::;.!:!':""""':'~.7'~~.:~,.~:7"'~!"~~:;-;~~~l'i;'i-SC:T};::~J":"-.::~~'~,~_.w..~;s;;'r!~1"
- ' KOCO; I VartG~PrudeiB '
I ~ 17 ~~i~M~!i\l,L'l~
~ v~~: ~U~.~t:~~.::~i~C,.. r,-.,....,..~ r'
.. I:L~"._ '..I1..J1.ltlj, i! .....,...;111;--.:;.11
~
~.
.~:..'.
.
"
~
-~/:J
j
.~1.
~
"'!
"'i_
"
tf
..~;
:!l
.<t
....
,
~
.~
. :,.
.il
:i
1
\:\
-.--~
~1
:.1
.l
"'~;,.:
i....
':;!.
, ,
;1.,
>
::;i
~
_.. ~ 't
,^.: ."
-'l (\ ......1"" X '='
....~ ~ ~}-\.'\
\ \.1,' ,!.H~\ y,-',{ .:'1.' f"'ll'l ~ . - ;\.-. ,~.
1,..\,~.....;-"I.j 1 ~ !:; lL.vf(:'~;V);:~'l i
'"
'J V' t"I\ "...) "'l;-"P~~
J""'\!. ~~~~",:t;:. 1" ~ ..d~.J
I _:..: ~ ~ '..: '...,.' C ~:..; H': 1t C.;~ H.J~. 1.1 :::"i~~n ~.
1 \ -""C..t'!~.,t1 tt.('.7 c::.. J::-w 'a~"
, .~
_"" I j. lc. .i'-::' ---: l ~ ~~. .;
:.:~::~ :(.:;;::4t..
1':":' '. ,.-.,' ~t ~i" ..~et. :0:"1.., ..;~.,~
':;;;~Jr::::::'~~ ...H';": ..;~C:':'"'f''''!~C~J' 1 ~c_(:m::=:::;.:j.;n .,.n.:,::-:',!..
C' ..,;.,IA~(C,(l'lU~N ~ .n ,ha '~nlci 1.;, ~d ~Icrru.
C.Jnlln"n1ci:'JnUdll ~rw:i ),lusloO. al'ld ~ ,~oos"d !O ,")fnlci
~1"'Olph~IIC condolio", 0' d~iin.d iHlow wiil. \Ub,,,CI '0 fl.')
f...ondl?lon\ ;Jnciii,nl'cho"-, :1'" ,~ :;, ~.. 'W:.~.. 41Qf croc:t. ch~c~.
bllIW, po<l!. tiok" 01 en:p. '::t ~ lA QC)IOf i'M1'l:I !han se unoll ,,.
-'H10IV,,,d .., Occo:lt.:cnc:~ ""it!\ ....37'M 0-:::14.1.79 "oro~'opn
J J ~ 4 0:' chalk In t"C~'S aI on ASTM ~j~ l'lO. 3' roling ie' 0
p3110d d lWO""tC;:C: y.Of~ ollor sh'pnnnl.
~:;Ol ....r.rrc:n~ CO" ,..,1 o:;J;:Ily. ho"",,,,,,,r 10 'oaf Qnd/et -:vc:i ponoh
'f"l~r~H~d ~!" :;::'!.: b~:!::Hr:; lo=:~t=d ;., In;; '..;c~ruit ~ ~ ~\,1j""
c...ol/::I Ih::folon",. Of chon'II':::1 plont Of ony ~~ ~ suQc'IlI
dcmog. 10 'ooi ond/ot wall po neb ma' I, ltac::loble Ie on
,<:i3n11hobl. lourC3 01 co'rOll"~ disch~ ....... Oi c:~
wn,cn no"". on :: ,110;\110. oosis. affsc~ :.udl ~lldng.
in odoorlon. Ih,s worrenty sholl nol oJpply !o:
loi rool endior wall pon~ls thaI ho"" !:clNl eomog::G 1lllr1::n:J
. 0' on lob II'ot Of 1,0"" oeen impfoperly Slor"d;
(b) roef e"~ w.:;lI .::on.ls Ihol ho"", boen sub!<<li:ld lI:l ml:I/SO.
n.,slogo"c3. or "Ov. b-3on '1'lcved from Iho orisi"d p!oc's cf
"e'Cllon. or ,ocl and/or woi! ;:anol~ :hat h..",. not bun
e,ec::td ,n occord:mc2 w,th 011 opplical:-le VA::CCH'~~CiEN
d'awon9~ and In$/fuc:tions and gooc "r"don ~
(e) collo':lfol i:luilding mol'3ricis.:;c::~uo,i"s, !!C;uis:me.li and
o:1r"~f It.,ms nol soid b'f VA~CC :-:WOEN ond ~y dcrr::sa-
'to :,cd on.:/of wdl p'-'neis resulling Ih"rorrom;
:dl damng:!:;: a' dol~c:s ,n '001 end/e' wail ponels -:au$I):! '!-Jr
- Imcrop3f 'nll']lIo~on
~:!I domoc;~':o Of defl!cls in ,oof ond/or woil po""l, cou~~ by
illm O~:~HOII"I 0' faSlon\l" "01 luppiiaC: by V AR :0-
?RUOEN or OOI,,"o,:;:I'on ," Ih;) ,,,of Q!l%r well panels
:elallld Iher~lo;
ill rho candillon Itnown os 'mierocrcc~in9' 01 '001 ond/o, ~,cii
.' : po"";' 'Hfl,c:~ il 0 commQ" oc:urronc. in thO! fomllng
, p,O':I)S~ of colot :::ol.,d 'oof ond/or .,.,,011 ;:c".,ls c:'Id is nol
Ie b~ ,:;:0'" ~d a delec! warrented "er'!l:;'ldo': end
i;:; ==;~:g~. fc:i'J(!J "r d~f'!cr~ c:olJ~:d ~y Acr: ct God. :;::ilir.g
00: !O:'l. e~r.,'"cl !o'c<l,. ,,~plol'c.r.. fi,.,. 11011. "".1
~::r,':~Crlon1. ~ormfui fumr::. ~or;llgn sub:.:onC:11 i~ rh"
.::~~~~:,~: 3. or ::,)rrC1iCn cat;.,~d b~ 'Jx;:o~~re tc morltil.'
=-~C,\P"~f". ~ah !pta~". C~.JmICc!s. 01:'. cr atc;"nu': rcdio::C:l
",! N:l"cntv " a;l.lenc<:d lo!"iy to tn~ C..,n-~' nc;r.ec haroin onc.' ::
~C!"l.:rC:;if~TObjl! cn:::J :10:"l~'$~lgnc=!o. jh:~ cc.i,:Jihcn is 0 mcr~r.r:J term
~:. rh:~ 'Herren"/ ~nd c:)nhc'~~'!hon cf ~h~ term bv ih~ owr.:u 01 ::s cc:nf
or re':~c:~('l'o:l''''! ~i-o.all ~~t'lt::., 'JA;(CO.P~uo:i;~ ~r.:rn it3 obligorior,:t
",,::r~~nd::r
7~~ W"~~i~NiieS C:S-:::16i:D A~O '.lM!':D ;';JOVe ;','10 TH:
~~....I,:J(ES Sri' :.:.:ztH 3EL'.JV-1 F'O~ ~cc":: AN~l:~ \,V~l~ ?,b.NE:..S
~,r<A:~L 3E iN ~!Eu ::F .!,~l '~T:1E~ 'l"A~~ANTiES OR ~~;\ieDI~5
/',' :"'E"!':~E~ :::?~:3~:O ex P'f\rUfD. INCtUi)!f'~G 3L!i NOT l~,~.,\l7;;=)
r:.:. .AriY IM?U;;O W,~,i!l;l,NTIES OF ~W~Ci..\NTA8ll1i'f AND
~, i~~,3S ~OR ,~ 'AIiTICIJlAR ?UR!'OS~.
;~..
Upc" ",rorlan noliliC::loon '9c"v1d by '1AilCO.?llUDEN wilhin Iho
~',", o:lCO~'!"IIOI:1d warranty pnriod ond mod" by rho Ownar within thirty
(301 da,!s irom delGdon ola:'lY foilura of the malerials to conform 10
:ho cb'ov9 werrcnr/. u~on pr"anlalian h, the O....nor of this fully
!"ec\:lod warren", ogr..,emanl. olld upon inspllClion by V....llCO.
?!lUi:JEN tQ verify said nonconformily. VARCC.i'RUDEN $0)011. 01 ill
lol~ option. ,.,pair, fopl-::c-:l or r'3pc;nl locf and/or wo9 pen.!s prC'ttG
10 ~ call1Ciivo wil'noul c'org8 10 tho Owner. 2eicr. any color chango
8 '/.......... .,-. .
Ul r '_m ::iupenor .;:J-JrlfCe
J"t .;;.1..Cl~.'C :n ~.~r:':J
1. -"'O'.:.;r.,d
-:r-" :;.,c.\
;r iH~ .")" ~c."'.li\ :-..j "; ~
.......'"'1.
;-'-.,"";'1:"
"'-.
:. ....,..
~.-''...: 4.,,;,;"';
~ .; I ' _' '';' ...
1\:0; ':~:'1:1 ..i~::1 .~ J .'
.;.. u:..:
.',.... : ::'~ ~ .1;" ~1,,::~'li1C~
.i'~"CC:'H~(,nln"l. rn'h. ~ann~' :nci ;.~r :h" :)"r:od ooov~ snQl1
C~ll:.Iliule '1.IIi,ill'll..nl ,)i oil -~ci&~urloOl ,,1 "I:.~CJ.hUO~N 10 '~'J 0.......,
wil~m"f based ~jJOn conrract. tori !includinq neg!;gon..:.ll. \lr'cr ioob.li,.,
0' olhtI'WI\~, ,\ny "'r-oi'!Xi. ,,,palnt.d or '"pice,':! ~r.." luppi,,,d ,n
,cli,:c:<:!,on 01 lis., obligehe "I und~r :hn '"",orrcnly ,hci; be lublllel 10 'h'l
wcrt\.ln;y only ior !h, r.,matnd.Jr d :1'0 pollod o;::;;I,eo:i. !o ,he ;l'OCUCI
erigtnaily purcnased. Fa,iura 01 rhlt Own'!r to glvo IImeiy nOllce 10
'IA;:C:J-i'~:JDEN oi ia,hJ'e I>:: ccnform rei:;:,,~s VAKC).i';<'JCE~ 01
:;.r.y und ;,iI obJigc;ions une::' !h" wO"':lnl'f
niE ~c.",^Ei)Ii:S :it! ~U~'H i"iBE!N ARE E~CLlJSIVE, W!THC'JT
:tEO..UD TO WHEi"'::~ . t,," DE'~Ci WAS DISCOVE~A6lE ca
LAT:;NT ~ T THE TIME \.. ~ t:E~IV::~Y OF THE MATERIALS TO THE
OWNEl. Th.. .nentiol purpose 01 rh,s ltxduSl"& remady lholl bo 10
prevlde the Ownllr with ,opel" Of raploc~. '"nl 01 pan.1i thaI pro... 10
bo dolodive within :n. pencd ,"nd "r:;!,: '.," :cno:liens pfllVIOl.Isly leI!
10rrh. This exdusi..e remedy shail net heve f, I..J of lIs .nenl,ol pvp.o,e
ie~ Ihe: 'orm is u,ad in Ihe Uni;o~m CommerCial Cod,,) pro"Ided
v~aCO-i'RUOEN remains w,iling !O '!l9C1r Of 'apiaco doleclivo poneh
within 0 comm.rcially r.alC"n"Jbi. rime aher il oblOlns oCluel
knowled;a ollhe 9JU~r.nc:t el 0 parlic:uicr O!!li,!o;!.
IN :\10 EVENT SHALL VA:tCO.P~\JDEN BE L1A8LE FO~ ANY
S?~(:IAl. CONS:~U!:N1'lAl. ~NCIDENT,..l\l OR INOIRECT DAMAC,;:S
WITH HSPECT TO T:-1IS SALE OR ANYTHING CONE iN
CONNECTION HE~I:WITH (INCLUDING. WITHOUT lIMIT':'i10N.
E~cC1'lCN SE~V'CES ?~O"'I(1:D BY aullDe~ 0;: !lY VARCO.
?~IJD:NI, WI-'E7HE:': 3.:.SED UPON CO~HP.ACT. TORi
\INCl.JDING ;>.tEGlIGENCE). STR!CT llA3111r:' OR OTHE~WISE
l::<C:l'T ro THE EXTEN r MODIFIED HE~eIN. THE 'N AR RANTY
cove:v:.c-, ;'i'PllCA8~f ro 'rHI$ 3LJIlDING SI~All aE :'S SiATED
iN '1A::C)-?RUDEN'S 'C;;.l.NDARO WA~~ANTY" AND ALL
t1MITA....!()N::i. '-XCLu 5 I":;' is AND DISCl.~IMEi!S iNt:LU~ED iN
$.)J~ oS"i..NOAltO '...,:'.::V,,'N' SHAll AP?~Y .Vli;.; FUll FORC=
HE;l:;-C EX.:~PT FO;2 Tl-iE Ar'!V;\ATiVc o ,LIGATiONS
U\,iO':;;-, .,;<tN ~'f '1,dC.':'.PRUJEN HE~E!N ANY
lNCON::i:.;;ci',1'"':' 3rTWEEN 7Hc T=~MS Or THIS WAR'Z..\;o.;iV AN:J
T;~:; Tn,"'.; OF SAle 'ST...NDA~O wARRA."iTY' 5..."." ee
RcSCl\lEO ,N ;:.,WO~ Of THE TEil.\;\S C:= SAiD 'STANDA~C
\N.:"i!i'AN7Y,'
Octl I~UQd
Vcr::~..,"lrlJ,:br. .:"'u-;;.Qrizcrion
V.A;"':;.
V:j Joe .;,
Joo locction
$' >!l:1
,oy
S,CI.,
e\Jildl'Jr'~ :-.lam"
Vcr1;OoPrudcn !uildings, a Division 0;
United Oominion lndustri~:l, Inc.
IC29 ;O/92.500.AP
I
1ii
~
~,
~
:~
~.-
~
fti
;s<
~"ii
ct'
,~
~.
~
~
m.5
~
m~.....
,.
~
~
tr
rl'
I
17021 Fish Point Road
........
WATERFRONT
PASSAGE 2ND ACO'N
o
400
800 Feet
~
N
~
<C
I-
-
m
-
:E:
X
W
ao
!5!
(l)
I
~
010
~~
""....
.~~ ~
o _
lVui 0>>
.~~ ..
e.'V .....ao
.!:I: CO
Co
~.g 'N
NC _
... .. 10
N::&......
w 0
Z'lt CO
0"" ao
-:; i
i;~
"5.:1 . '"
:I:t~
an'- ....
N~ CO
<om ......
I!!
II ~
P
d
. ~
i .
Ii
~ ~
~
C'~
>-
~
~a
~'"
<<
"""
0,..
0>-'"
w::iffi
"''''
~...
~g
,..:i!l
~~
~::;
"'~
I!!",
"'0
~z
/
L
..
:;
x
i
.
/~'3
~~G.
::(ffi
:SoQ.
~.~
~~
). :;.l:j
....... ...... ;~
.::.. /,
~ /
r ' ""
\ \ a~ I,
\ J !!!~
1 /- ~ffi
/ "-
<../ '
I' "-
/ -/,-
<.. / /
). .....,.
......
,,/-
" '\
':-.::...
,., -.. .::...
ao
ao
'I
,.,
ao
,...
~
....
, /
v
()
()
_.-I
('('
_ !....J
avo~ lNIOd HSI.:I
en
w
~
0
I
Cl
Z is ~
4: c ~ i
'" '"!jl
-l ~i ~i3 ~
>- -'", 0:
;/,'" i~ ~
w ..",
cz 0
~ ~~ 0
iSlt . "
::> o"~ ~
0'"
ill l'!"'~ ~
~ ~~!I
0 ~ ).: ;Ju" a5~ ~
~ ; ~~ .
-- " v8:w ~
>. ~iS ~~~
., ~:i lllga 0
Q) ~~ ~ 1l~ ~'"'
> ~Vl~ ~'"
... ~hil! IS ::;~ "'-'i 1l~
~ ",,,i5 iSSlVl ~~
~h~ 0: ~1i
U1 It j~ caiS
z ~ Z g~31 ~1l
-- 0 ~~U~~ U~.. OU
0 "'~~ z'"
J: J: 0:
0 < ~ J: ili ,,>,is ~~~ "...
> ~ ll~H~~ ~~
Q) ... ... " iSg~ ..~~
.... .... ... .....!!!" l'!is
..... ... ... .... ~~~~~~ ~ ...." ~~!
... IS ~"'i5 ~i
0 '" ~
U 0 u m oo~~oo I ~~is ~1i;; ~o
0 0 < 'U U
;;:: .... .... .... .,gc s~~ o:ili
... m IJl ~e:a 3l!!!0 l:l!jl
..... ... ... ... HllfH n~~ oo:~ "0
... .,~ IJl 0 " z~g: :E~
Q) ~ ~ <
U '" Iii Iii Iii Iii
<
g >- " ~ ~ 0 0
z z
...
o
....
~
a
IJl
"2~
i
x
..
..
I
IN
I
I'"
" g
"-
o
'"
o
u
...
'"
,
,/
/
"
N
:ao
~ci
~
~
s
~~
:;: I
.. I
I
D I
,
,
I
I
..
;; ~
~ i~
0
z
0
>=
<
...
z
...
IJl
...
'"
0.
...
'"
...
u
...
'"
25
u
0 ...
z
< z
...
... a
:>
'"
... ,..
< III
!!! 0
...
0
IJl :>
~ 0
'"
... 0.
" < ~
i2 x
'" ... J:
0
0 VI 0.
~ ~ ... a:
::& u
~ 0 IJl
~ X ...
'" 0
~ i ~~ ....
'"
. <0 <
is "
!!! ~'" ...
i5 0 ...~ ....
~ ~'"
~ <
00
~ ... ...z
~ ~ ,..a
j j ~III
* "'...
~ tj~
U " ,.....
'" .,
e: z mo
ii ...
is ~ "',..
U '" 'i!~
Iii Iii '"
0 0 ~~
z z
~s
:;...
;::<
:;)u
""
<lI>1Jl
......'"
"z...
~~5
""'"
",,,,,,..
o...m
o '0
gN :
.r:. 0: m:: 0:2
t:-'<O.J::::~
~ ~ ~ ~ :: ~~
., lit 0 -_-
50 ~5.~ ~g'
:5~g_E..g
._ v Oo.r:.
~; :5 a: ::
: g i~i~ ~ =j~.t
.~ ~ 3 ~! 8~.~
- " ::;'8g'
og"Stg=:J3
-0"" ~-
N (; _ ';i :5 ~~ 0
g g' ~ ~ ~ .5 ::6
_'~ u" ,,_ 0
~gg:5~:5E:
: ~ ~ g'~ 2'E:S
o E "2 - -01 0
~:: ~~.!::
~~~~..!8Z.!
~l.aJ Cl.lJNaja.N
~ .a ~ ~ d ~-8~
ug-ijo_m8
.. ~ .2 ~ - oco_
g en _ "'0 t::o
~. UUJ.c~o
~. .!-_.~~
It ~ g ! ~ :a t:2
5.~ ~ .~:o 0'::6
_ ENE 0 -;- 0
~~O~N~';:.
.5 en ~ "a ~o~
~ :: c :: -J c-' J:
'g. g. ~ g.~ ~~g
aJ'O""O""..,,
o
o
"
..
.~ ;
::&,2
>=.:2
C"
a 0
U'O
..
~:e
o ~
u u
VI ~
..
.'0
~'"
;:
--"
o u
00
""iij
"''0
" ,-
"" 0
","
",.
<-
a._
%.3
0-
'" 0
....-
'" ~
...0
...0..
~o
.s:
",-
",:5
g 'j
iii~
..
..s:
N_
..
-0'
00
....-
Vl
""
~
o
x
VI
VI
""
...
0.
...
U
x
...
vi
...
z
~g
~~
0,.:
~~
u:;)
t3~
"'-.
0....
",0
z~
~o
~~
~<O
0.",
~:i:
~...
oz
xO
Vlijj
e~
...
...0..
"':;)
OVl
&t;
~~
bO
z'"
VI::!!
...'"
0...
00
!=~
I-
W
W
Lo..
o
co
II
:t:
U
~
W
-l
<(
U
VI
~
o
8
""
...
GO
~
In
t-,
-
In
-
:I:
><
W
!
0)
I
..-
co
OlD
~~
"'....
J%
';;::I~
o ..-
." 01
.l!iol
e:. ..-
u:J: CO
- CIO
C"
101-"
N-8 ~
"'c"-
.ulD
N::I.....
...
('~ 0
-'
.... o..
loiN ~i.5 " 0
i!'.... ~~ ~...
%
~g :;;c-< ::l
""" i!:
~~ ~o
~~ a ::J~
'" 1=-<
~::J , '~~ =>u
-<
a:i!: ~:>",
!!I a: ......a:
"'0 i C)zw
~z / .. ~~~
'" ..
'- ~ -<'"
a:<>-
ow'"
~r
" ,
~~
i-~
~
....
~
....
bl 0
i~~
2;!j I
r;Gd
-50::1....
i: ,; 'N (/)
~~ iO W
"'........ :::E
o
:c
o
z
<(
~
w
~
I!
I'
.~ I
I .
~i
~
i
IN
I
I ...
I 0
\ I ..J
,I o..
/ 0
,
H
..
'"
o
u
W
II'
,
,
,
,
I
"
C'I
:lLO
go
" /
~-
r
"
~
~~i
~ ,
- I
'f i ;~/
wi ~
.. it..c:
o..
o
%
o
1=
<
...
%
...
'"
...
a:
n.
...
a:
...
o
...
a:
a:
o
u
o
%
<
...
:J
~
()
()
_.J
('('
_!...J
OVO~ lNIOd HSI.:J
i.:
o
.....
\ llh
~~z 5h~..~
~ ~.; Illli~
;!IH!iHH!
~ ~ 3 nnn
~ ~ I ! ! II t tt
~
~ ,. ~
g "'1;1 ~
-,0 3~
:t~ "Ii! ~
l!!1i ~o" '"
i;i ~~. ~ ;5
i5 e~S e ~ ':(
~:ita. 1:'" ~ ~ .c j5
~ ~~ !l~ i ,~
I ~:i ilo~ eo' S 9
5{i ,:/:;1:; ~ '; z
"I!! z!l" 00: ~ '"
P.; ~il ~:~ ~e ~ ~
it ~ 00 ..il! 5 F.l
i g/:,.,31 a 111
I g~", "".. i~ i w~
,~ ,:~ ':l!~w!:lw
"g~ ;r;..~ i5~ ~
I A:::~ aag ~~ i i
h~ ~~'IJ il ~ i
i ~!i ~n ~; ~ ~
~ il~~ iaf d g ~
I!! I!! I!! I!! I!! I!!
i i i i i i
<
!!!
>-
Q)
>
\...
:J
(/)
.....
o
Q}
....,
o
U
:0:
:;:;
\...
Q}
U
~~
.(~.- .3\
~
~
=
I!!!!J
@
~
~ui" ~
( g) '::....-
. ::''')"-
...
o
101
>-
~
a:
~
'"
..
~
r-
110
'"
110
~
~
0
OJ
'"
<
...
n. iil
...
u
x
...
on
...
z
"'0
ig
~N
0,:
a: a:
;1:;<
o=>
~~
5"'>
...
",0
...>-
%<
~o
~i!:
~'"
n.",
~;5
~%
00
iJiiil
05
....a:
...
....n.
a:=>
0'"
Q. ...
~~
n.a:
"'0
0
z>-
",::I
~ffi
00
~5
....
z
...
a
>-
110
o
...
o
5
o
a:
n.
Z
o
1=
~ ~
o '"
:J: l!l
~ti.: ~
~.~ ~
...!!! ~
:.:a:
<
g~
>-5
l!;m
a:...
tli!:
>-o..
1100
...
a:>-
~~
a:
~~
I-
W
" '0 ~
ON .. 0
~ '0 en:i o:g CD
" t:-'co.c:"S n
'0 ~.'2:5i,,~. :c
.. . a g c:.2:5=
u io ':5'~ a~ u
,~ ~ ~
::I!,g :5sgoe.~
,:..~ ;;:- :5 c: g :5.
c..
6 0 !~ N"a ::€~a. w
,",'0 ,,0 5 '- · ".s: -J
u "0 0 '0 - i' g~ ~ c(
:::2 u
o ~ ":5 -l :"O~g.~ en
u u
"," '0 g' ~ ~8 ~:.o
u
.'0 N ~ "~J: ;.0'0
aN
E... ~ gt '0 21:s: s
ou O"S ~ ,,'" '. ."0
co ~ ~ f5 ::5]:
-<0;
"''0 ND U 0'5,gE:5
C) ,- '0 0 ;; 5:5 -01 0
< "
"," ::~ ~~-;;l::
'"
<- ~ g is.! 8 :.;
n._
....3 0\&.1 c:WN .~
Z c:" "."CO.N
0- ~" "~d ~,,""!
a: 0 ug5go_",g
o..-
a:~ ..~.s~-OCl-
~g, g " _ "0 8:5'0
~o 5" ""'.511.
J:. & ... .!: ~ "z g ~
...;- ~vo-.o
",5 ... . ~:; "V uWi
~ "i -5 "'.5""c.- 0
o;~ _'~::: E 0-;;5~ .0
u
.J:. 00 O~N.'::. 0
N_ '"
u ,[: ~ ,,"0 .ao~ ,..
-'" 01
00
..J- "~~2~~5~5
E i ~ i.~ =1"~ 2 ~-
'E.~
s;l8~ .
.J8UUn PlAeQ
\
\
I i I
& ~ !l ~
, ~i i .
i~ I i ~- j i
ii I!~ ~~ ~i. i !.
is i ~r~R~ - ~i ~ ~ :~
~! '~;IU ~ ~~ U ~!
,~ ca~ tl ~ '~I:I, lii-
&. Ii~' I it .,~;~. ~~
~ . f'~ llilil~n~
.. ~
! ~ i
~
I
"\
Z t
<C i
..J .
a.. 31~~
.. r
W dl n ~
I- lLI..{
- "~6
en
1t()\Il
() UJ
II- Z
zIZ
() 1:
l-Q .
~Z~
~.<(~
~-1()
-<}-t:
W
Y..
~ I
----
iNol17fi
---
~~
,
I -'
~~!' .l:
IN"1ooI ~
! ~
I i ~
". d
: ~
- ,
i ~
,
In I Ie
hfi J U
8
~
L.
ii~
~~
<1
---.------
Iii I I
___.__.__~---- .7~-:J:~ :_ ~~l*
_----.--- .- "', avo~J.NIO..I t-t'$I.I lL_'_
cd Wd0v:v0 000G tt .uer
;~
.ON 3NOHd
51:B1 IH:)~ ~Il aI ()I:ja : WO~.:l
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MONDAY, JANUARY 24, 2000
1. Call to Order:
The January 24, AQ,90, Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairman
Cramer at 6:30 p.m><~'?o.se present were comml.'.ssSs)po ners Cramer, Criego, Stamson and
Vonhof, Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier, Zol}iiig Administrator Steve Horsman and
Recording Secretary Connie Carlson. //
".I
,-
2.
Roll Call:
Vonhof
Criego
Cramer
Stamson /
Present
Present
4. Public Hearings:
~
A. Case File #00-001 Keith Horkey of Keyland Homes is requesting a variance to
the required side yard setback adjacent to a residential district in the c-s
(Business Park) District for the construction of an addition to an existing
building on the property located at 17021 Fish Point Road SEa
Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated January 24,
2000, on file in the office of the Planning Department.
The Planning Department received an application for a variance to allow the construction
of an addition to the existing Keyland Homes building on the properly located at 17021
Fish Point Road. They are requesting a 55' variance to permit a structure to be setback
20' from the side yard adjacent to a Residential District rather than the required 75 feet.
Staff felt the proposed request appeared to meet the hardship criteria in that the greater
setback is a result ofthe annexation and rezoning ofthe adjacent property, and the
location ofthe existing building limits the options for the placement of an addition. The
staff therefore recommended approval of this request.
Comments from the public:
L:\OOFILES\OOPLCOMM\OOPCMIN\MNO 12400.DOC 1
.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 24, 2000
Kevin Horkey, Keyland Homes, explained the company needs additional storage would
like to expand and this is the only way to do it.
The public hearing was closed.
Comments from the Commissioners:
Stamson:
. The City marketed and sold the property with this in mind.
. Staff pointed out the variance meets all the criteria.
. Supported the request.
V onhof:
. Agreed with Stamson on the variance hardship st
. The annexation caused the hardship.
. Supported the requested.
Criego:
. Hardships have been met.
. Agreed with staffs recommendation.
Cramer:
. Questioned landscapin
a buffer yard and t
. Lighting require
. The hardship c
'lding. Kansier said they were building
dinance requirements.
MOTION B .
002PC
AN
L
BY STAMSON, APPROVING RESOLUTION 00-
ANCE TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF
UILDING IN THE C-5 DISTRICT TO BE
SIDENTIAL DISTRICT RATHER THAN THE
by all. MOTION CARRIED.
5.
A. Case File #99-100 Hillcrest Homes Variance - Resolution
Zoning Administrator Steve Horsman presented the Planning Report dated January 24,
2000 on file in the office ofthe Planning Department.
On January 10,2000, the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding the
requested variances on this property. After reviewing the proposal with respect to the
1:\OOfiles\OOplcomm\OOpcmin\mnO 12400.doc
2
fj)-CC/6
City Council Meeting Minutes
March 6, 2000
when you would apply the low density categories as opposed to the medium density. Believes that in
terms of predictability to the public and developers, having separate categories is probably more
informative, but maintains the ability to go back and amend the designation down the line. As to the
process, a change in either the Compo Plan or the Zoning Ordinance would have to go back to the
Planning Commission as a statutory requirement. It comes down to two options (1) it can stay as is
with the addition of some refining language that says "how are you going to apply that"; or (2) you can
designate on the Comprehensive Land Map what areas are medium density.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO REFER THE LANGUAGE CONSIDERATION
FOR LOW-TO-MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND DESIGNATION AS IT EXISTS IN THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR REVIEW AND
RECOMMENDATION.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Schenck and Ericson, the motion carried.
PRESENTATIONS:
MADER: Noted the Thank-You that Mrs. Hansen's 1st graders had sent from Westwood Elementary
thanking the Council for letting them lead the Council by signing the Pledge of Allegiance.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE.
OLD BUSINESS:
Consider Approval of Review of the Conditional Use Permit for Gleason's Gymnastics School
on Property Located at 17001 Fish Point Road (Case File No. 98-163).
BOYLES: Briefly reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report and the option available to
the Council.
MOTION BY GUNDLACH, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE REPORT AUTHORIZING
RENEWAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR GLEASON'S GYMNASTICS SCHOOL ON
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 17001 FISH POINT ROAD (Case File No. 98-163).
BOYLES: Clarified that the signs will be required as part of the original conditions of the CUP.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Schenck and Ericson, the motion carried.
~~
Consider Approval of Resolution 00-16 Upholding a Decision of the Planning Commission
Approving a Variance to the Required Side Yard Setback Adjacent to a Residential District for
the Construction of an Addition to the Existing Keyland Homes Building in the C-5 Zoning
District.
MADER: Provided a brief background to introduce the agenda item.
BOYLES: Advised that the City attorney's memorandum has been included in the agenda materials,
additional correspondence from the counsel from Keyland Homes, as well as a letter from David
Sellegren of D.R.Horton.
3
City Council Meeting Minutes
March 6, 2000
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY GUNDLACH TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 00-16
UPHOLDING A DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO THE
REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK ADJACENT TO A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO THE EXISTING KEYLAND HOMES BUILDING IN THE C-5
ZONING DISTRICT.
GUNDLACH: Supported the motion because of the case law for defining a hardship. He determined that
a hardship situation existed for Keyland due to the Deerfield property, and the fact that no objection
was made by D.R. Horton at the public hearing on the matter.
PACE: Clarified that it was the annexation of the Deerfield property as opposed to the Deerfield
development.
GUNDLACH: Clarified that the point is Keyland did not created the situation and thus the need for the
variance.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Schenck and Ericson, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Report Regarding Alignment of Ring Road.
MADER: Briefly reviewed the history of the item.
BOYLES: Discussed the focus of the Council at this time, and the intent of this discussion.
OSMUNDSON: Described each of the three layouts, the differences and advantages to each, as well as
the comparative cost estimates, including right-of-way costs, but not including costs for access rights,
decorative features, or significant soil correction. Recommended alternative number 2, but asked for
Council direction.
SCHENCK: Asked where 170th is divided and for clarification as to where the post office site is located.
MADER: Asked if options 3 and 4 both significantly interfere with the post office site and their
development plans.
OSMUNDSON: Advised that 170th is divided right down the middle between the Township and the City,
although none of the plans has been developed as far as a detailed design. At this point, the City has
not seen much from the postal service as far as their development plans. They do have significant
wetland in the area to deal with. Assuming the access will be Tower Street, both layouts #3 and #4
would significantly change the facility and parking area development.
ERICSON: Agrees with the staff recommendation to pursue layout #2 in general. Further noted that the
concept is preliminary at this point and there are some aspects that he does not agree with.
SCHENCK: Agrees that layout #2 appears the most feasible with the least impact on area property
owners, and asked about the funding sources and possible assessments.
OSMUNDSON: Advised that most of the funding would be borne by the City, including municipal state
aid, collector street fund or utility funds, and that there would be some help from MnDOT and the
County with respect to the County Road 23 I TH13 realignment. Advised that there would be
assessments for the unimproved portion of Tower Street, as well as in the Park Nicollet area.
4
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
AGENDA ITEM:
DISCUSSION:
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
FEBRUARY 22, 2000
7B
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
DON RYE, PLANNING DIRECTOR
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF
RESOLUTION OO-XX UPHOLDING A DECISION OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO
THE REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK ADJACENT TO A
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN
ADDITION TO THE EXISTING KEYLAND HOMES
BUILDING IN THE C-S ZONING DISTRICT
History: In January, 2000, the Planning Department received an
application for a variance to allow the construction of an addition to
the existing Keyland Homes building on the properly located at 17021
Fish Point Road in the Waterfront Passage Business Park. The
existing building is setback 20' from the south property line, where it
is adjacent to a Residential Zoning District. The proposed addition to
the building will also have a 20' setback. Therefore, a 55' variance to
permit a structure to be setback 20' from the side yard adjacent to a
Residential District rather than the required 75 feet (City Code Section
1102.1406) was requested.
On January 24,2000, the Planning Commission held a public hearing
to consider the requested variance. The Planning Commission heard
testimony from the applicant, Kevin Horkey representing Keyland
Homes. There was no other testimony at the hearing. Upon reviewing
the hardship criteria, the Planning Commission concluded there is a
hardship with respect to this property in that the greater setback is a
result of the annexation and rezoning of the adjacent property, and the
location of the existing building limits the options for the placement of
an addition. The Planning Commission thus approved the variance
request. A draft copy of the Planning Commission minutes are
attached to this report.
On January 27,2000, D.R. Horton, Deerfield Development and John
and Mary Mesenbrink, all owners of property within 350' of the site,
submitted the attached letter appealing the decision of the Planning
1:\OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\OO-008cc.doc 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Commission. This letter is consistent with the provisions of Section
1108.408 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Current Conditions: The property located at 17021 Fish Point Road
SE was originally platted as Lot 2, Block 2, Waterfront Passage
Addition in 1993. In 1998, the applicant purchased an additional 112
acre of land from the City Economic Development Authority and
added it to their existing lot in order to construct an addition to the
existing building, as shown on Exhibit A.
The existing building was constructed in 1993 and met all required
setbacks at that time. The property directly to the south was annexed
in July, 1997. Late in 1997, the Comprehensive Plan was amended to
include this property in the MUSA and designating it for Low to
Medium Density Residential uses. In 1999, the property was rezoned
to the R-2 district. Once rezoned, the 75' setback requirement from a
Residential District became effective.
The building envelope on the subject site meeting all setback
requirements, shown on Exhibit B, is approximately 165' long by 135'
wide. The building envelope is primarily located on the north half of
the lot. The proposed addition is 150' long by 100' wide. It consists
of a shop and warehouse space. The loading docks and parking are
located on the north side of the building. The proposed addition is
located 20' from the south property line and 45' from the rear, or east
property line. The setback from the south property line is consistent
with the setback of the existing building.
The Issues: The City Council must determine if it concurs with the
Planning Commission's decision that the proposed development meets
the hardship criteria. In the letter appealing this decision, the
appellants state "the appeal is based on several inconsistencies in the
application, and the fact that the criteria for granting a variance have
not been satisfied." The letter does not include any specific or
supporting information.
On February 16,2000, the staff received a second letter from the
appellants outlining their arguments against the variance. Due to the
late delivery of this letter, the staffwas unable to provide an analysis
of these points for this report. This analysis will be prepared and
delivered to the City Council on Friday, February 18,2000.
The hardship criteria are listed in Section 1108.406 ofthe Zoning
Ordinance. The following includes the hardship standard as well as a
suggested finding relating to that standard.
I: \OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\OO-008cc.doc
2
1. Where by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of a lot,
or where by reason of exceptional topographical or water
conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional conditions
of such lot, the strict application of the terms of this Ordinance
would result in peculiar and practical difficulties or
exceptional or undue hardship upon the owner of such lot in
developing or using such lot in a manner customary and legally
permissible within the Use District in which said lot is located.
While the lot itself is not exceptionally narrow, the location of the
existing building on the lot limits the placement of an addition to
the building. Ifthe addition were to meet all required setbacks, the
options for the placement of parking and loading docks are very
limited. This location would nearly eliminate the use of the
building for warehouse purposes.
2. Conditions applying to the structure or land in question are
peculiar to the property or immediately adjoining property,
and do not apply, generally, to other land or structures in the
Use District in which the land is located.
The existing building complied with the required setbacks at the
time it was constructed. The subsequent annexation and rezoning
ofthe adjacent property created the additional setback requirement.
3. The granting of the proposed Variance is necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of
the owner.
The property owner purchased the property from the City for the
express purpose of building an addition to the property. This
addition cannot be built without granting ofthe variance.
4. The granting of the proposed Variance will not impair an
adequate supply of light and air to the adjacent property,
unreasonably increase the congestion in the public streets,
increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety.
The addition conforms to the location ofthe existing building, and
will not impair the supply of light and air to the adjacent property.
The addition will not significantly impact the public streets or
endanger public safety.
5. The granting of the Variance will not unreasonably impact on
the character and development of the neighborhood,
unreasonably diminish or impair established property values
1: \OOfi les\OOappeal\OO-008\OO-008cc.doc
3
in the surrounding area, or in any other way impair the health
safety, and comfort of the area.
The addition setback conforms to the setback of the existing
building on this site. The required landscape bufferyard located
along the south property line will provide screening between this
site and the adjacent residential district.
6. The granting of the proposed Variance will not be contrary to
the intent of this Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.
The granting of this variance is not contrary to the intent ofthe
Comprehensive Plan. When the applicant purchased this property,
he entered into a development agreement with the City. That
agreement notes the further development of this site by expanding
the existing building is consistent with the development objectives
set forth for the tax increment financing district.
7. The granting ofthe Variance will not merely serve as a
convenience to the applicant but is necessary to alleviate a
demonstrable undue hardship or difficulty.
The location of the existing building limits the options for the
location of any addition to that building. The granting ofthis
variance is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship.
8. The hardship results from the application of the provisions of
this Ordinance to the affected property and does not result
from actions of the owners of the property.
The annexation and rezoning of the adjacent property created the
need for the larger setback than originally required on this site.
9. Increased development or construction costs or economic
hardship alone shall not be grounds for granting a Variance.
This variance is not based on economic hardship.
Conclusion: The Planning Commission and staff recommend
approval of the requested variance on the basis the request appears to
meet the hardship criteria in that the greater setback is a result of the
annexation and rezoning of the adjacent property, and the location of
the existing building limits the options for the placement of an
addition.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of the variance will allow the construction of an addition to
the existing building, thereby increasing the tax base.
I: \OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\OO-008cc.doc
4
'.
ALTERNATIVES:
RECOMMENDED
MOTION:
REVIEWED BY:
1: \OOfiles \OOappeal\OO-008\OO-008cc .doc
The City Council has three alternatives:
1. Adopt Resolution DO-XX upholding the decision of the Planning
Commission to approve the variance requested by Keyland
Homes.
2. Deny Resolution DO-XX and direct the staff to prepare a resolution
overturning the decision of the Planning Commission and denying
the requested variance.
3. Defer this item and provide staffwith specific direction.
The staff recommends Alternative #1, adoption of Resolution DO-XX
upholding a decision of the Planning Commission approving the
variance request to allow an addition to the existing building to be
located less than the re 'red 75' from the side lot line adjacent to a
ReS;O:iS l.
Frank Bo
5
RESOLUTION OO-XX
RESOLUTION OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY COUNCIL UPHOLDING A DECISION OF
THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE A 55 FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT
THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING BUILDING IN THE C-5
DISTRICT TO BE LOCATED 20 FEET FROM A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT RATHER
THAN THE REQUIRED 75 FEET
MOTION BY: SECOND BY:
WHEREAS, on February 22,2000, the Prior Lake City Council considered an appeal by
D.R. Horton Custom Homes, Deerfield Development, LLC and John and
Mary Mesenbrink of the Planning Commission's approval of a request for a
variance by Keyland Homes to locate an addition to the existing building at
17021 Fish Point Road SE 20' from the side lot line adjacent to a Residential
District rather than the required 75' for the property legally described as
follows:
Lot 2, Block 2, WATERFRONT PASSAGE ADDITION, Scott County,
Minnesota together with that part of Lot 1, said Block 2, described as
follows:
Beginning at the southeast comer of Lot 2, Block 2, of said plat; thence North
00 degrees 10 minutes 44 seconds East plat bearing along the east line of said
Lot 2, a distance of 228.00 feet to the northeast comer of said Lot 2; thence
South 89 degrees 49 minutes 16 seconds East along the easterly extension of
the north line of said Lot 2, a distance of 100.52 feet; thence South 00
degrees 10 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of228.00 feet to the
intersection with the south line of said Lot 1; thence North 89 degrees 49
minutes 16 seconds West along the said south line, a distance of 100.52 feet
to the point of beginning.
WHEREAS,
the City Council finds that the requested variance meets the standards for
granting variances set forth in Section 1108.400 of the City Code, and that
the appellant has not 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
approving the requested variances should be upheld.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE:
FINDINGS
16200 Eb~?~lei~Oe,p~~~?~~\r~qg~fc5rt~ke, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612)aae47-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
1. Kevin G. Horkey has applied for a variance from the Zoning Ordinance in order to permit
the construction of an addition to an existing warehouse/shop building in the C-5 (Business
Park) District located at 17021 Fish Point Road SE and legally described as follows:
Lot 2, Block 2, WATERFRONT PASSAGE ADDITION, Scott County, Minnesota together
with that part of Lot 1, said Block 2, described as follows:
Beginning at the southeast comer of Lot 2, Block 2, of said plat; thence North 00 degrees 10
minutes 44 seconds East plat bearing along the east line of said Lot 2, a distance of 228.00
feet to the northeast comer of said Lot 2; thence South 89 degrees 49 minutes 16 seconds
East along the easterly extension of the north line of said Lot 2, a distance of 100.52 feet;
thence South 00 degrees 10 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of 228.00 feet to the
intersection with the south line of said Lot 1; thence North 89 degrees 49 minutes 16 seconds
West along the said south line, a distance of 100.52 feet to the point of beginning.
2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variances as contained in Case
File #00-002 and held hearings thereon on January 24,2000.
3. The Board of Adjustment concluded the variance met the hardship criteria and approved the
request.
4. D.R. Horton Custom Homes, Deerfield Development, LLC, and John and Mary Mesenbrink
filed an appeal to the decision of the Board of Adjustment in accordance with Section
1109.400 of the City Code on January 27, 2000.
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 variance on the Comprehensive Plan.
6. Because of conditions on the subject property and on the surrounding property, it is possible
to use the subject property in such a way that the proposed variance will not result in the
impairment of an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, unreasonably
increase congestion in the public streets, increase the danger of fire, and danger to the public
safety, unreasonably diminish or impair health, safety, comfort, morals or in any other
respect be contrary to the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan.
7. The location of the existing building on the lot limits the location of any addition to this
building. An addition meeting all required setbacks would nearly preclude any parking and
loading areas for the building.
8. The City of Prior Lake Economic Development Authority entered into an agreement with the
applicant for the purchase of the property with the express purpose of constructing an
addition to the existing building. The Development Agreement states the development of
this site is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Tax Increment Financing District.
9. There is justifiable hardship caused by the location of the existing building on the lot.
Reasonable use of the property does not exist without the granting of the variance to permit
the addition to be located consistent with the setback of the existing building.
I: \OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\rsOOxxcc.doc
Page 2
10. The granting of the Variance will not serve merely as a convenience to the applicant, and is
necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship.
11. The contents of Planning Case File #00-001 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 City Council hereby approves the following
variance for the proposed structure as shown in Exhibit A:
1. A 55' setback from the south property line rather than the required 75' setback..
The following are conditions which must be adhered to prior to the issuance of a building permit
for the proposed structure:
1. The resolution must be recorded and proof of recording submitted to the Planning
Department within 60 days of the date of approval. An Assent Form must be signed and,
pursuant to Section 1108.400 of the City Code, the variance will be null and void if the
necessary permits are not obtained for the proposed structure within one year after adoption
of this resolution.
Passed and adopted this 22nd day of February, 2000.
YES NO
Mader Mader
Ericson Ericson
Gundlach Gundlach
Petersen Petersen
Schenck Schenck
{Seal}
City Manager,
City of Prior Lake
I: \OOfi les\OOappeal\OO-008\rsOOxxcc.doc
Page 3
lc~~"'.~22, %000 I
(
----
PRESENTATIONS:
Annual Report from Economic Development Authority - Bob Barsness
BARSNESS: Commented on the process to this point in completing the Downtown Redevelopment
study, the business owner survey, the memorandum of understanding and prospects for cooperative
efforts with the Scott County HRA, the wetland mitigation on the remaining commercial property in the
industrial park, and the recommendation for approval of the business assistance policy. Commented
that the EDA recommends future annual joint meetings between the EDA, the Council and the
Planning Commission. Also discussed the EDA's annual expenditures, and the EDA's research into
providing high-speed data transmission lines within the City.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Public Hearing to Consider Approval of Business Assistance Policy.
Mayor MADER opened the public hearing.
BOYLES: Discussed MN Stat. 116 which requires that the City adopt a business assistance policy if it
wishes to offer business assistance as an incentive to commercial development in the future, Also
noted that the policy parallels the policy adopted by Scott County. Clarified that no amendments had
been made to the policy since the Council's review prior to the public hearing.
There was no comment from the public.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY ERICSON TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Schenck, and Ericson, the motion carried.
ERICSON: Believes that it makes sense to have a policy in place because it gives the City the ability to
use such a tool if presented with a project.
Councilmembers PETERSEN, GUNDLACH and Mayor MADER agreed.
MOTION ERICSON, SECOND BY GUNDLACH, TO APPROVE THE BUSINESS ASSISTANCE
POLICY AS SUBMITTED.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Schenck, and Ericson, the motion carried.
Public Hearing to Consider Approval of Resolution OO-XX Upholding a Decision of the Planning
Commission Approving a Variance to the Required Side Yard Setbaclc Adj~c=~idential
District for the Construction of an Addition to the Existing~ff..., . gin! the C-S
Zoning District.
Mayor MADER opened the public hearing and asked City Manager BOYLES to introduce the item.
BOYLES: Noted the details associated with the variance request by Keyland Homes, the criteria in the
ordinance which were considered by the Planning Commission in its review and subsequent approval
of the variance request, the appeal by D.R.Horton, Deerfield Development and John Messenbrink, and
the hardship criteria the Council must consider. Also noted that the staff had recently received a letter
30f9
City Council Minutes - February 22, 2000
from the appellant outlining their position, and that the staff response was provided last Friday after the
agenda packet went out..
GUNDLACH: Asked if the rezoning of the Deerfield property made the difference in the setback
requirement for Keyland.
BOYLES: Clarified that it was the annexation of the Deerfield property, together with the rezoning to R-
2. Had the property not been annexed, there would be no requirement for a variance.
DAVE SELEGREN (Attorney for DR. Horton): Spoke in favor of the variance appeal as being a
detrimental impact to the residential development of Deerfield. Noted that there is nothing prohibiting
Keyland Homes from reasonable use of their property, and that the expansion is not a necessity, but
an inconvenience. Believes that the property is not unique or unusual, there are no practical difficulties
that create a hardship, the current use does not prevent the use of the property, that the expansion
would negatively impact the property values of the Deerfield development, and that granting the
variance would be incompatible with other parts of the ordinance relating to nonconforming structures
and the concept of extraordinary buffers. Therefore, the variance request does not meet the standards
identified by the ordinance.
KEVIN HORKEY (President of Keyland Homes): Noted that the hardship is that the building must be
expanded in order to accommodate semi-truck traffic. By adding the building, semi-trucks would be
able to turn around inside the building parking lot and eliminate the safety concerns created by the
truck traffic on Fish Point Road when it becomes a through street.
MATT KRUEGER (Wilderness Ponds resident): Supports the Keyland expansion. Believes residents
bought the properties in the area knowing there was an adjacent industrial park, and that an expansion
can take place without significantly impacting the neighborhood development.
KEITH HORKEY (Keyland Homes): Noted that most of the employees of Keyland Homes are residents of
Prior Lake, and that residents in the area are aware their neighbors are an industrial park.
There was no further comment from the public.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY GUNDLACH TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Schenck and Ericson, the motion carried.
MADER: Reminded the Council that it is necessary for the City to abide by its ordinances even in
circumstances that are not clearly black and white. Recommended deferral of the issue so that the City
Attorney can provide a recommendation considering D.R.Horton's most recent arguments. Noted that
the City Attorney has been ill and has not had the opportunity to respond at this time.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO DEFER THE MATTER TO THE NEXT REGULAR
MEETING AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN OPINION AS TO THE LEGAL
ARGUMENTS IN THE FEBRUARY 16, 2000 LETTER FROM THE APPELLANTS AND AT THIS
MEETING.
GUNDLACH: Concerned that the letter received by D.R.Horton is ill-timed, when this matter has
previously been discussed at a public hearing, and now the Council has in effect been further delayed
by Horton's bad timing. Noted that if the Deerfield project had not been approved, there would be no
variance required.
40f9
City Council Minutes - February 22, 2000
MADER: Commented that although unfortunate, the arguments by D.R. Horton must be considered.
PETERSEN: Stated that he would appreciate hearing the perspective of the City Attorney.
ERICSON: Supports the Planning Commission's recommendation, agreed with the concerns raised by
Councilmember Gundlach, and did not see any reason the Council could not proceed at this time.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Schenck, Petersen, Nay by Gundlach and Ericson, the motion carried.
OLD BUSINESS:
Consider Approval of Review of Conditional Use Permit for Gleason's Gymnastics School on
Property Located at 17001 Fish Point Road (Case File No. 98-163).
BOYLES: Briefly reviewed the item in connection with the staff report, noting that staff has
recommended deferring the item to the next meeting in order to receive and review the activities list
and installation of the remaining signs, and include the report at the March 6th meeting for final action.
MADER: Asked if there are any issues created by deferring the item to the next meeting.
RYE: Clarified that there is nothing in the CUP that would terminate the operation of the gymnastics
operation.
GUNDLACH: Noted that some citizens have expressed concern about the adequacy of parking between
the hours of 5pm and 6:30pm as being intrusive to the businesses.
RYE: Noted that parking was addressed when the CUP was originally considered, and 12 spaces were
to be specifically designated.
GUNDLACH: Asked the staff to clarify if there are parking issues or whether additional conditions to the
CUP should be imposed.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO DEFER REVIEW OF CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR GLEASON'S GYMNASTICS SCHOOL ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 17001 FISH
POINT ROAD (Case File No. 98-163) UNTIL THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING AS A CONSENT
AGENDA ITEM.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Schenck and Ericson, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Resolution 00-12 Approving an Environmental Assessment Worksheet
(EA W) Petition and Requiring an EA W be Completed Prior to a Decision Regarding the
Conditional Use Permit for Excavation of Sand and Gravel for Ryan Contracting on Property
Located in the Southeast Quarter Section of Section 22, Township 115, Range 22, Located on
McKenna Road.
MOTION BY SCHENCK, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 00-12 APPROVING
AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) PETITION AND REQUIRING AN EAW
BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO A DECISION REGARDING THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
EXCAVATION OF SAND AND GRAVEL FOR RYAN CONTRACTING ON PROPERTY LOCATED IN
THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 115, RANGE 22, LOCATED ON
MCKENNA ROAD.
50f9
Correspondence
L:\TEMPLA TE\FILEINFO.DOC
Mar-OS-ZOOO II:Z8am From-PETERSON FRAM BERGMAN
851ZZ8175S
T-Z78 P.OOI/OOS F-OZ5
~
Warren E. Pllttcr.;on
Jerome P. Filla
Daniel Witt Ftllm
Glenn A, 6ersrnlln
John Michael Miller
Michael T, oberle:
Steven H. Bruns'
Paul W. Fahning
Esther E. McCinnis
leffrey f. Cohen
___ PETE~-.. ,---
FRAM ..". BERGMAN
. ~ :: :~ ::~:IlL: 2.2~~':~' .r~ "'.~~ h -: 'P 'l~ "
Suite 300
50 East Filth Street
St. Paul. MN S~HOI-1197
10'511291-895'5
lb5112~8.1753 facsimile
.E.~ COVER LE~
Date:
March 3, 2000
Deliver To:
Fax No.:
(612) 447-4245
NameS:
Mayor Wes Mader and City Council Members
~. Kansler, Planning Coordinator
Frank Boyles, City Manager
Company;
City of Prior Lake
From;
Name:
Jerome P. Filla
Company:
Peterson, Fram & Bergman, P.A.
Total number of pages (including cover letter): 3
MAR
3 2(0)
,
"Uil
IV
File Name:
Keyland Homes - Variance Request
I J.\1L
Fax Operator; Bridget G;
This transmission consists of confidential information which is intended and designed only for the
person named above. If you receive this transmission by mistake, please call 651-291-8955 (collect) and
request the fax operator.
HARD COpy TO FOLLOW BY MAIL:
YES
x
NO
'A~SO ADMI'M'ED IN WISCONSIN
Warren E. Peterson
Jerom~'P. Filla
, Daniel Witt Fram
Glenn A. Bergman
John Michael Miller
Michael T. Oberle
Steven H. Bruns'
Paul W. Fahning
Esther E, McGinnis
Jeffrey I. Cohen
PETERSa'J,
FRt\M BERGMAN"'l
Suite 300
50 East Fifth Street
St. Paul. MN 55101-1197
(651) 291-8955
(651) 228-1753 facsimile
MAR 6 2(D)
,UDL-.
I
I Mcrr"h 3, 2000
Direct Dial #(651) 290-6907
jfiIla@pfb-pa.com
Via Facsimile (612) 447-4245
Mayor Wes Mader and City Council Members
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
Re: Keyland Homes
Variance Request
Dear Mayor Mader and City Council Members:
Our firm has experience in regard to land use planning and zoning matters. I have been asked
by Steve Nelson, who is the attorney for Keyland Homes (Keyland), to review and comment on the
variance requested by Keyland. I have reviewed the following documents, which I believe to be the
existing record in this case:
1. Prior Lake Variance and Non-Conforming Use of Standards;
2. Real Estate Purchase Agreement, dated December 22, 1997;
3. Development Agreement, dated March 1998;
4. Amendment to Real Estate Purchase Agreement, dated October 19, 1998;
5. Planning Commission for February 24, 2000;
6. Midwest Planning Memo, received by City on February 16,2000;
7. City Planner Memo, dated February 18,2000;
8. City Planner Memo prepared for meeting of February 22, 2000 and attached
Resolution;
9. City Council Minutes for meeting of February 22, 2000;
10. City Attorney Memo, dated February 28, 2000;
11. City Attorney Memo, dated March 1, 2000;
12. City Planner Memo prepared for meeting of March 6, 2000.
The City's Variance Regulations are consistent with the requirements to the Minnesota Land
Planning Act. Essentially, the City needs to be able to determine that an undue hardship exists
before it can grant a variance. According to state law and the city's regulations, an undue hardship
means (1) the Keyland property cannot be put to a reasonable use under the conditions allowed by
the city's zoning regulations; (2) the request for a variance is due to circumstances unique to the
Keyland property and not circumstances created by the owners of the property; and (3) the variance,
if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
'ALSO ADMITTED IN WISCONSIN
Reasonable Use. The variance is being requested only in regard to the land
acquired from the Prior Lake Economic Development Authority (parcel of land
approximately 100 ft. x 228 ft.). When this parcel was acquired, the City and
property owners anticipated, and the purchase documents reflect, that it would be
developed consistent with the then current 20 ft. set back requirement. The parties
also anticipated that the parcel would be used for an expansion of the Keyland
building located westerly of the parcel. Keyland would have not purchased this
parcel from the City if it could not have been used for the expansion. Given the
geographical location of this parcel of land, there is no other reasonable use
consistent with the City's regulations.
Unique CircumstanceslNot Created by Property Owner. What is unique about this
parcel is its size, its adjacency to Keyland's current use, and the fact that it cannot be
reasonably used in connection with property located south, east, or north of the
parcel. The circumstance which requires variance was not created by Keyland, but
it was due to the annexation request of the property owner to the south. When
Keyland purchased the parcel from the City, the City's regulations allowed a 20 ft.
set back. After the City annexed the property to the south, amended its
Comprehensive Plan and then re-zoned the property to the south, the 75 ft. set back
requirement was imposed by the City's regulations. All of this occurred after
Keyland purchased the parcel from the City in anticipation of expansion.
Character of Neighborhood. The area south of the Keyland property is currently
undeveloped even though a development plan has been approved. It is difficult to
adversely impact the character of an undeveloped area. In addition, Keyland has
agreed to landscape in a manner that will soften the impact of the building expansion.
It is also possible for the owner ofthe southern parcel to add additional landscaping
on its north property line, if they choose to do so, even ifthe additional landscaping
is not required by the City.
The record before the City indicates that the variance of standards imposed by state law and
the additional standards contained in the City's zoning regulations have been satisfied. On behalf
of Key land, we encourage the City Council to accept the recommendations ofthe planning staff and
planning commission, which are consistent with the legal analysis done by the City Attorney.
Keyland will be represented at the council meeting. However, it is out intent only to respond to
questions which the City might have, unless new information is added to the record.
Respectfully submitted,
cc: Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator, City of Prior Lake 1/
Frank Boyles, City Manager, City of Prior Lake
Suesan Lea Pace, Attorney at Law (via facsimile 612-338-7858)
J~
illa
JPF:bg
Mar-06-Z000 09:06am'
W81'1'en E. Peterson
Jerome Po Filla
DafJiel Witt Fram
Olel1n A. Refgman
John Michael Miller
Michael t Obetlt:
Steven Ii. Brunsv
Paul W. Fahl'ling
E"rher E. McCinnls
'efffey ,. Cohen
From-PETERSONFRAM BERGMAN
.._, --PETERS~_____
FRAM .' BERGMAN
:~ .::'2 ~-::''S':L-':' ~~:..~_ .:. ,-:,~,~~~[~..:.:!=,:;:,,;7 .
651 ZZ8 1753
T-Z94
P,ooz/OOZ F-07Z
Suite 300
50 E.st fifth Strtlet
St. p<lLlI. MN 55101.' 197
(651) 291-8955
(6511228'175~ facsimile
March 6, 2000
Direct Dial #(651) 290-6907
jfilla@p!b.pa.com
Via Facsimile (612) 447-4245
Mayor Wes Mader and City Council Members
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE
Prior Lake) MN 55372-1714
Re: Keyland Homes
Variance Request
Dear Mayor Mader and City Council Members:
I would like to correct a statem.ent contained in my correspondence of March 3) 2000. I
stated that a variance requested was only for a parcel recently acquired from the City. I made a
mistake. It was not intentional. I realize that the variance is necessary to allow expansion of the
building on the original parcel> as well as the recently acquired parcel. Please accept my apologies.
Very truly yours,
~ f?1/4/
Jerome P. Filla
cc:
JPF:hg
...-.r~-;Kansier, Planning Coordinator, City of Prior Lake (via facsinrile)
Frank Boyles, City Manager, City ofPriot' Lake (via facsimile)
Suesan Lea Pace, Attorney at Law (via facsimile)
'ALSO ADMITTED 'Ill WISCCl/1iSIN
0~/06/00 MON 17:26 FAX
141002
Minneapolis
London
1100 International Centre
900 Second Avenue South
~inneapolis,~~ 55402-3397
(612) 347-7000
FAX (612) 347-7077
www.fredlaw.com
FREDRIKSON & BYRON, :eA.
Attorneys and Advisors
Affiliated Offices:
Mexico City
Warsaw
Direct Dial No.
(612) 347-7136
dsellergren@fredlaw.com
March 6, 2000
Mayor and City Council
Attn: Don Rye, City Planner
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
VIA FACSIMILE
Re: Keyland Homes Variance Request - D.R. Horton Company
Dear Mayor and City Council Members:
I write on behalf ofD.R. Horton Company, developer of the Deerfield PUD.
D.R. Horton Company continues to oppose the granting of the variance requested by Keyland
Homes for an expansion of an existing industrial building. As you know, the proposed
expansion is immediately to the north of the residentially-zoned Deerfield PUD. We do not
believe there is a sufficient factual basis to make the findings required by your ordinance and
Minnesota Statutes relative to the granting of a setback variance under these circumstances. We
previously expressed our reasons at the City Council meeting of February 22, 2000. To be clear,
D.R. Horton does not oppose the expansion. It opposes the setback variance of 55 feet (20 foot
setback instead of required 75 feet).
If, however, the Council is inclined to grant the variance, D.R. Horton Company requests that the
Council add conditions to the approval of the variance, as follows:
1. Require Type I building materials along the south wall of the expansion. This request is
reasonable because Type I materials are required for the homes within the Deerfield PUD
and the buildings will face each other.
2. Require landscaping over and above that required by "Bufferyard E" under your
ordinance. We would ask that the additional plantings be evergreens of substantial
height.
03i06/00 MON 17:27 FAX
~003
FREDRIKSON & BYRON, P.A.
Attorneys and Advisors
Mayor and City Council
March 6, 2000
Page 2
3. Reduce the 55 foot setback variance to a 35 foot setback variance. This would create a 40
foot setback, providing an additional 20 feet within which more landscaping buffer can be
planted. Obviously, this would require ajog in the building and make its use somewhat
inefficient, but I doubt this would be fatal to any reasonable use of the property which is
the standard for granting a variance.
There is ample legal authority for imposing additional conditions. Minnesota Statutes,
~ 462.357, subd. 6(2) provides, in part, "The board or governing body as the case may be may
impose conditions in the granting of variances to ensure compliance and to protect adjacent
properties." D.R. Horton Company believes these conditions are necessary to protect its adjacent
property.
Don Patton ofD.R. Horton Company will be in attendance at your meeting tonight.
Sincerely yours,
/)=;Ie:
David C. S ergren
DCS/eka
cc: Don Patton, D.R. Horton Company
Suesan Lea Pace, City Attorney
::ODMA\PCDOCS\FBDOCS 1\2357574\1
Warren E. Peterson
Jerom~' P. Filla
Daniel Witt Fram
Glenn A. Bergman
John Michael Miller
Michael T Oberle
Steven H. Bruns'
Paul W. Fahning
Esther E. McGinnis
Jeffrey J. Cohen
PETERSCN
FRt\M BERGMANir::~~--.
Suite 300
50 East Fifth Street
St. Paul. MN 55101-1197
(6511 291-8955
(651) 228-1753 facsimile
;' ,':
MAl:) /; r:.
/,i_..iij <.,. v-
i
! ;~) ,
t:l~.,"-tiL__,,_
Direct Dial #(651) 290-6907
jfilla@pfb-pa.com
March 3, 2000
Via Facsimile (612) 447-4245
Mayor Wes Mader and City Council Members
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
Re: Keyland Homes
Variance Request
Dear Mayor Mader and City Council Members:
Our firm has experience in regard to land use planning and zoning matters. I have been asked
by Steve Nelson, who is the attorney for Keyland Homes (Keyland), to review and comment on the
variance requested by Keyland. I have reviewed the following documents, which I believe to be the
existing record in this case:
1. Prior Lake Variance and Non-Conforming Use of Standards;
2. Real Estate Purchase Agreement, dated December 22, 1997;
3. Development Agreement, dated March 1998;
4. Amendment to Real Estate Purchase Agreement, dated October 19, 1998;
5. Planning Commission for February 24, 2000;
6. Midwest Planning Memo, received by City on February 16,2000;
7. City Planner Memo, dated February 18,2000;
8. City Planner Memo prepared for meeting of February 22, 2000 and attached
Resolution;
9. City Council Minutes for meeting of February 22, 2000;
10. City Attorney Memo, dated February 28, 2000;
11. City Attorney Memo, dated March 1, 2000;
12. City Planner Memo prepared for meeting of March 6, 2000.
The City's Variance Regulations are consistent with the requirements to the Minnesota Land
Planning Act. Essentially, the City needs to be able to determine that an undue hardship exists
before it can grant a variance. According to state law and the city's regulations, an undue hardship
means (1) the Keyland property cannot be put to a reasonable use under the conditions allowed by
the city's zoning regulations; (2) the request for a variance is due to circumstances unique to the
Keyland property and not circumstances created by the owners of the property; and (3) the variance,
if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
'ALSO ADMITTED IN II'ISCONSIN
Reasonable Use. The variance is being requested only in regard to the land
acquired from the Prior Lake Economic Development Authority (parcel of land
approximately 100 ft. x 228 ft.). When this parcel was acquired, the City and
property owners anticipated, and the purchase documents reflect, that it would be
developed consistent with the then current 20 ft. set back requirement. The parties
also anticipated that the parcel would be used for an expansion of the Keyland
building located westerly of the parcel. Keyland would have not purchased this
parcel from the City if it could not have been used for the expansion. Given the
geographical location of this parcel of land, there is no other reasonable use
consistent with the City's regulations.
Unique CircumstanceslNot Created bv Property Owner. What is unique about this
parcel is its size, its adjacency to Keyland's current use, and the fact that it cannot be
reasonably used in connection with property located south, east, or north of the
parcel. The circumstance which requires variance was not created by Keyland, but
it was due to the annexation request of the property owner to the south. When
Keyland purchased the parcel from the City, the City's regulations allowed a 20 ft.
set back. After the City annexed the property to the south, amended its
Comprehensive Plan and then re-zoned the property to the south, the 75 ft. set back
requirement was imposed by the City's regulations. All of this occurred after
Keyland purchased the parcel from the City in anticipation of expansion.
Character of Neighborhood. The area south of the Keyland property is currently
undeveloped even though a development plan has been approved. It is difficult to
adversely impact the character of an undeveloped area. In addition, Keyland has
agreed to landscape in a manner that will soften the impact of the building expansion.
It is also possible for the owner of the southern parcel to add additional landscaping
on its north property line, if they choose to do so, even if the additional landscaping
is not required by the City.
The record before the City indicates that the variance of standards imposed by state law and
the additional standards contained in the City's zoning regulations have been satisfied. On behalf
of Key land, we encourage the City Council to accept the recommendations of the planning staff and
planning commission, which are consistent with the legal analysis done by the City Attorney.
Keyland will be represented at the council meeting. However, it is out intent only to respond to
questions which the City might have, unless new information is added to the record.
Respectfully submitted,
JPF:bg
fL&-
illa
cc: Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator, City of Prior Lake
Frank Boyles, City Manager, City of Prior LakeL./
Suesan Lea Pace, Attorney at Law (via facsimile 612-338-7858)
,'\"",
FiLE C
'.....1 ~ii'
~ .~
i i
March 2, 2000
D.R. Horton Custom Homes
Attention: Don Patton
3459 Washington Drive
Eagan, MN 55122
RE: Agenda and Agenda Report
Dear Mr. Patton:
Attached is a City Council Agenda and Agenda Report for the March 6, 2000,
meeting. If you have any questions, please contact me at the Planning
Department at 612-447-9810.
Sincerely,
~ a.1(~
UJane Kansier, AICP
Planning Coordinator
Enclosure
16200 E!i~RP'~B2W1\W\O!.lf!l,~~!jt~e, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (6f~~47-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
[.."'.~ l'\
,t ~
J ~
t.' (,
tea tl!
nl'~
.. 0
C" l.i
II ~
March 2, 2000
Deerfield Development
John and Mary Mesenbrink
7765 175th Street East
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Agenda and Agenda Report
Dear Mr. and Ms. Mesenbrink:
Attached is a City Council Agenda and Agenda Report for the March 6, 2000,
meeting. If you have any questions, please contact me at the Planning
Department at 612-447-9810.
Sincerely,
~Q.K~
()Jane Kansier, AICP
Planning Coordinator
Enclosure
16200 E'a~WI~g~WJ\~\o!5"~~~~}~e, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (6f~~47-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
March 2, 2000
Kevin Horkey
Keyland Homes
17021 Fish Point Road SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Agenda and Agenda Report
Dear Mr. Horkey:
Attached is a City Council Agenda and Agenda Report for the March 6, 2000,
meeting. If you have any questions, please contact me at the Planning
Department at 612-447-9810.
Sincerely,
~(), f{~
UJ~ne Kansier, AICP
Planning Coordinator
Enclosure
16200 a'aIWIt:f~~WJ!\~\O~~~~~}5tlgf{e, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (612) 447-4230 / Fax (6f~g447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
..
....~_.-.-
..
FILE COpy
Halleland
Lewis Nilan
Sipkins &
Johnson
Pillsbury Center South, Suite 600
220 South Sixth Street
~eapolis,~~ 55402-4501
Phone: 612.338.1838
Fax: 612.338.7858
MEMORANDUM
TO:
City Manager, Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Suesan Lea Pace, City Attorney
DATE:
March 1, 2000
RE:
Keyland Homes Variance
The purpose of this memorandum is to respond to an inquiry raised by the City Council at its
February 22, 2000 meeting. The City Council has asked for input regarding an appeal filed by
D.R.Horton, Deerfield Development and John and Mary Messenbrink to the decision of the
Prior Lake Planning Commission approving a variance to the required side yard setback
adjacent to a residential development for the construction of an addition to the existing .
Keyland Homes building.
BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission, after conducting a public hearing, voted to approve Keyland
Homes' application for a variance. The facts relating to the variance are set out in the staff
report that was included as part of your City Council agenda materials for your February 22,
2000 meeting. Part of the agenda materials contained an undated letter from Richard Krier,
Midwest Planning and Design, on behalf of his client D.R.Horton. The letter was received by
the City on February 16, 2000 and set out the appellant's arguments against issuing the
variance. At its February 22, 2000 meeting, the Mayor asked if the City Attorney had had
sufficient opportunity to address the allegations set out in Mr. Krier's letter. I responded to the
Mayor that I had not had sufficient opportunity to evaluate Mr. Krier's allegations. The Council
voted to defer action until its March 6, 2000 meeting.
At the Council's February 22,2000 meeting, the appellant was represented by counsel, David
Sellegren. Mr. Sellegren addressed the City Council. The substance of his comments
addressed the statutory criteria for issuing a variance, and why, in Mr. Sellegren's opinion,
Keyland Homes had failed to carry its burden of proving that its requested variance met the
"hardship criteria" necessary to support the approval of the variance.
DISCUSSION
The issue the City Council must consider is whether Keyland Homes meets the criteria to
support issuance of a variance as set out in the City Zoning Code. I have reviewed the entire
record before the City Council, including all of the background material submitted by Keyland
Homes in connection with its variance application. I have also met with City Planner Jane
Kansier to review the Keyland site plan and discuss Keyland's proposed expansion and the
alleged impact Keyland's expansion will have on Deerfield Development. I have analyzed Mr.
Sellegren's comments and Mr. Krier's correspondence. Finally, I have analyzed Minnesota
appellate cases dealing with appeals to the approval of a variance.
Attached is a copy of Rowell v. Board of Adiustments of the City of Moorehead 446 NW 2nd
914 (Minn. App. 1989). I have made annotations in the margins directing your attention to
those aspects of the Rowell decision which in my judgment are analogous to the allegations
raised by Mr. Krier and Mr. Sellegren.
CONCLUSION
Minnesota law is well established; where municipal proceedings are fair and complete and
there is legally sufficient evidence in the record before the Council to support its decision, a
Court will not substitute its judgment for that of a City Council. Swanson v. Citvof
Bloomington,421 NW 2nd 307,313 (Minn. 1988).
In my judgment, and relying heavily on the Court's analysis in Rowell, the record before the
Council contains legally sufficient facts to support a conclusion that Keyland has met its'
burden of proving undue hardship and the criteria relevant to variances as set out in the City's
Zoning Code. .
The Rowell case also deals with the issue Mr. Krier raised concerning expansion of a
nonconforming use. Interpretting Moorehead's ordinance regarding a prohibition against
expanding or enlarging a nonconforming use the Court said:
[The ordinance] does not specifically prohibit variances. Its prohibition
against enlarging, expanding or extending nonconformities can be
read to mean'that [the church] is prohibited from building its proposed
addition closer to the property line than the current three feet.
1Q at 919.
"Keyland's current building is set back 20 feet from the south property line, where it is adjacent
to a residential zoning district. The proposed addition to the [Keyland] building will also have a
20 foot setback".~. City Council Agenda Item 78 dated February 22,2000. Applying the
. analysis in Rowell, Keyland's proposed addition would not expand a nonconforming structure,
as alleged in Mr. Krier's letter.
I would be happy to respond to any further questions the Council may have.
H:\FORMS\PACEL TRH.DOC
t"',''''
,.._ It .,
Page 3
446 N.W.2d 917 printed in FULL format.
John Rowell, Appellant, v. Board Of Adjustment Of the City Of Moorhead, Respondent, Trinity
Lutheran Church, Respondent
No. C7-89-637
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
446 N.W.2d 917; 1989 Minn. App. LEXIS 1139
October 16, 1989, Decided
October 24, 1989, Filed
SUBSEQUENT HISTORY: Petition for Review Denied
December 15, 1989.
PRIOR HISTORY:
[**1] Appeal from Clay County District Court, Hon.
William Walker, Judge.
DISPOSITION: Affirmed.
CORE TERMS: variance, ordinance, municipal, undue
hardship, church, feet, setback, zoning variance, vot-
ing, zoning, nonconfonnity, neighborhood, landowner,
property owner, reasonable use, disqualified, locality,
build, property line, architect, space, green, existing
building, front line, fmancially, built, match, spoke,
practical difficulties, information required
SYLLABUS:
1. Failure to comply with procedural requirements
of a zoning ordinance is not grounds for setting aside a
city's grant of a variance.
2. A city's grant of a zoning variance did not violate
an ordinance prohibiting expansion of existing noncon-
fonnities.
3. A financially contributing member of a church is
not disqualified from voting on a zoning variance re-
quested by that church.
4. Aesthetic and functional considerations supported
city's fmding of undue hardship in grant of zoning vari-
ance.
COUNSEL: William Kirschner, Fargo, North Dakota,
for Appellant.
Gregory D. Lewis, Moorhead City Attorney,
Moorhead, Minnesota, for Resp~mdent Bd. of
Adjustment.
Randolph E. Stefanson, Moorhead, Minnesota, for
Respondent Trinity Lutheran Church.
JUDGES: Short, Presiding Judge, Foley, Judge, and
Lommen, Judge. *
* Acting as judge of the Court of Appeals by ap-
pointment pursuant to Minn. Const. art. 6, ~ 2.
OPINIONBY: SHORT
OPINION: [*918] Trinity Lutheran Church (Trinity) ob-
tained a zoning variance from the Board of Adjustment
(Board) of the City of Moorhead (Moorhead). Appellant
John Rowell brought suit [**2] against Trinity and
Moorhead to invalidate Moorhead's action. The trial
court granted summary judgment for the respondents.
Rowell appealed, and we affirm.
FACTS
On June I, 1988, Trinity's architect sent a letter to
Moorhead requesting a zoning variance to build an ad-
dition to an existing building three feet from the. front
property line. The Moorhead ordinance requires a front
yard setback of 25 feet. Moorhead notified local resi-
dents of a public hearing to be held regarding Trinity's
request for a variance. Rowell received notice.
On July 25, 1988, the Board held a public hearing.
Rowell spoke at the hearing arguinlUhe addition wOf
expand the existing encroAchment b4. Tri~it~ wou d
cause a loss of green space, and that neighborhood meet-
ings should be held to obtain neighborhood input on
Trinity's proposal. Trinity's architect explained that a
parsonage had been removed because it was no longer
needed. A run-down apartment building had also been
, ,
446 N.W.2d 917, *918; 1989 Minn. App. LEXIS 1139, **2
Page 4
LEXSEE
j
removed from the site and would be replaced by green
space. The architect said the strip in front of the addition
would be landscaped and maintained. The hearing was
continued to July 26.
On July 26, the Board met and again discussed the
[**3] matter. Rowell again spoke, arguing Trinity's
request for a variance had not been sufficiently publi-
cized. The Board decided to delay action until a neigh- .
borhood meeting could be held. On August II, a neigh-
borhood meeting was held. 1\venty-three people at-
tended, including Rowell and representatives of Trinity
and Moorhead. On August 15, 1988, the Board met
again. The architect ex lained that e addition w uld
match e eXlS III Ull it! 's matelJ s an 1
eSl&,n, an at the roof lines would match. He also
addressed concerns about parking congestion, saying
Trinity planned to expand the parking lot. Rowell spoke
against the variance, stating the addition would cause
a loss of green ~~e, increased traffic, and generally
detract from the attractiveness of the hist ric i h-
oor 09.9. He also argue e vanance would iol te
Moorhead, Inn., umclp 0 e 1O-2C-1 (1988),
which prohibits enlarging nonconforming uses. Rowell
aiSo-sm.d1h~daltlOIfWoufd Ill;: VISlbltHtoffih-rs residen e
anne cou ar wou not e a e uate green
e oar e erre a III vote on e van
pending advice from M()orhead' s attorney. .
[*919] On August 29, 1988, the Board resumed [**4]
its meeting, and Moorhead's attorney and Rowell's
attorney argued about whether the variance violated
Moorhead Municipal Code ~ 1O-2C-1 on nonconforming
uses. The Board approved the variance, with four mem-
bers voting yes, one member voting no, and one inember
abstaining. Four affirmative votes were required to ap-
prove the variance.
All the meetings, except the neighborhood meeting,
were taped and summarized in prepared minutes. On
October 8, 1988, Rowell filed a lawsuit seeking declara-
tory and injunctive relief. The Board and Trinity an-
swered and counterclaimed.
On November 8, 1988, the Board moved the trial court
to remand the variance to the Board for the Board to en-
ter a written decision containing formal findings. The
Board met on December 5, 1988, and approved a reso-
lution that was later filed with the trial court. Presented
with a record of undisputed facts, the trial court granted
respondents' motion for summary judgment.
~.
ISSUES
1. Does an applicant's failure to comply with procedu-
ral requirements of a zoning variance ordinance render
a city's action invalid?
@>oes a grant of a variance authorized by ordinance
VIOlate another ordinance prohibiting expansion of ex-
isting [**5] nonconformities?
III. Is a financially contributing member of a church dis-
qualified from voting on a zoning variance request from
the church?
~o aesthetic and functional considerations constitute
undue hardship under Minn. Stat. ~ 462.357, subd.
6(2) (1988)?
ANALYSIS
In reviewing a zoning action, we give no defer-
ence to the trial court's fmdings and conclusions.
lhnLandschoot V. City of Mendota Heights, 336 N.lv.2d
503, 508 (Minn. 1983). Where the municipal proceed-
ings are fair and complete, review is on the record before
the municipal agency. Swanson v. City of Bloomington,
421 N.lv.2d 307, 313 (Minn. 1988). This court is re-
luctant to interfere with the management of municipal
affairs. ld. at 311.
1.
The Moorhead Municipal Code provides that a vari-
ance shall not be granted by the Board unless: .
1. A written application for a variance is submitted
demonstrating:
a. That special conditions and circumstances exist which
are peculiar to the land, structure or building involved
and which are not applicable to other lands, structures
or buildings in the same district;
b. That literal interpretation of the provisions [**6] of
this Title would deprive the applicant of rights com-
monly enjoyed by other properties in the same district
under the terms of this Title;
c. That granting the variance requested will not cOnfer
on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by
this Title to other lands, structures or buildings in the
same district under the same conditions.
Moorhead, Minn., Municipal Code ~ 10-2-6(A) (1988).
Rowell argues the June 1 letter and the accompanying
site plan did not satisfy the requirements of this code pro-
vision, and that the Board's actions were thus ultra vires
and void. While the June 1 letter did not contain the
information required by section 1O-2-6(A), the defect is
446 N.W.2d 917, *919; 1989 Minn. App. LEXIS 1139, **6
Page 5
LEXSEE
~~t
~~
tM-"\v;-
~
technical. Technical defects made when complying with
procedural requirements do not suffice to overturn gov-
ernmental action, so long as the defects do not reflect
bad faith, undermine the purposes of the procedures, or
prejudice the rights of those intended to be protected by
the procedures. See City of Minneapolis v. mtrtele,
291 N. W2d 386, 391 (Minn. 1980). The information
required by section 1O-2-6(A) was presented at public.
hearings, of which Rowell had notice. In the absence of
[**7] any suggestion of prejudice, Moorhead's decision
[*920] to waive strict compliance with section 10-2-6(A)
will not be overturned.
Further, Rowell is estoEped from obiecting to the vari-
ance on the grounds that the application was defective
because he failed to raise the issue at the public hearings,
despite the fact that he had legal representati
o ortunity to speak at the public hearing The defects
m e app lcatlOn cou ve een easl y corrected if the
issue had been raised at an earlier stage of the process.
Under these circumstances, Rowell "sat on his rights"
and is estopped from raising these issues in a lawsuit.
See Pilgrim v. City of Winona, 256 N. W2d 266, 270
(Minn. 1977).
II.
The Moorhead Municipal Code defmes a variance as
a "relaxation of the terms of the zoning ordinance," and
it authorizes variances for, among other things, setback
requirements. Moorhead, Minn., Municipal Code ~~
10-1-5, 1O-2A-5 (1988).
The ..~_oo~ead Mu.9i.!fip-~ ~e ~J\ta:
It is further the intent of this Title that the nonconforny-
Jies sh~ll}?t !;>~~91. upon, expanded or extended,
nor be used as grounds for adding other structures or
uses not permitted in the district.
[**8] Moorhead, Minn., Municipal Code ~ 10-2C-l
(1988).
Nonconformities include conditions that were lawful .
when built, but are unlawful under existing zoning laws.
Id. The existing Trinity building is three feet from the
property line, but the distance is legal because it was
"grandfathered in." Rowell argues the addition expands
a nonconformity and thus violates section 10-2C-l.
The interpretation of an existing ordinance is a ques-
tion of law for the court. Amcon Corp. v. City of
Eagan, 348 N. W2d 66, 72 (Minn. 1984). The zon-
ing variance authorized by sections 10-1-5 and 1O-2A-5
arguably conflicts with the result otherwise dictated by
section 10-2C-l. We are required, however, to attempt
to construe the provisions together. See Minn. Stat.
~ 645.26, subd. 1 (1988). In doing so, we interpret
the provisions most consistent with the underlying pur-
poses of the zoning code and construe them in favor
of the property owner and against Moorhead. Amcon
Corp., 348 N. W2d at 72. The interpretation a city gives
its ordinances is entitled to some weighL Chanhassen
Estates Residents Association V. City of Chanhassen,
342 N. W2d 335, 340 (Minn. 1984). [**9]
Section 1O-2C-l does not specifically prohibit vari-
ances. Its prohibition against enlarging, expanding,
or extending nonconformities can be r9d to ~~ tqat
Trinity is prohibited from building its ro osed addition
c oser to e ro erty me an e curren ree ee.
o er wor s, U1 mg two eet om e property line .
would extend or enlarge the existing three foot noncon-
formity. The variance granted under section 1O-2A-5
can thus be read as consistent with section 10-2C-l, and
if so construed, d~s not Eohibit the variapce in this
case A. I'
-' ~nl\..Utcl.'tt~lI\ I ~ p. poto..o.."
III. ~20n' i\~ )
The deciding vote granting the variance was cast by
a fmancially contributing member of Trinity. A public
officer who is authorized to take part in any manner in
making a contract in his official capacity shall not volun-
tarily have a personal fmancial interest in that contract,
or personally benefit fmancially therefrom. Minn. Stat.
~ 471.87 (1988). The term "contract" in section 471.87
has been broadly construed. See E. T. 0., Inc. v. Town of
Marion, 375 N. W2d 815, 819-20 (Minn. 1985) (hold-
ing section 471.87 applies by analogy to issuance of a
liquor license).
The seminal case discussing an impermissible interest
[**10] is Lenz V. Coon Creek Wltershed District, 278
Minn. 1, 153 N. W2d 209 (1967). The Lenz court held
a public official is disqualified if he or she has a direct
interest in the outcome of the matter under considera-
tion. The factors to determine whether such an interest
exists include:
(1) the nature of the decision being made;
(2) the nature of the pecuniary interest;
(3) the number of officials making the decision who are
interested;
[*921] (4) the need, if any, to have interested persons
make the decision; and
(5) the other means available, if any, such as the oppor-
tunity for review, that serve to insure that the officials
will not act arbitrarily to further their selfish interests.
446 N.W.2d 917, *921; 1989 Minn. App. LEXIS 1139, **10
Page 6
LEXSEE
Id. at 15, 153 N. W2d at 219. The Lenz court applied
its test to find officials who owned land in the district
to be benefited by the official action were not per se
disqualified from voting. Id. at 16, 153 N. W2d at 220.
Here, the nature of the pecuniary interest was such
that it could not reasonably have influenced the voting
Board member. We agree that the Board member had .
a non-pecuniary interest [**11] in the general welfare
of Trinity. This interest, however, is not likely to be
contrary to the interests of the general public. To dis-
qualify city officials from matters in which their church
has an interest would unnecessarily tie the hands of city
agencies. City agencies would be particularly affected
in smaller towns, where the likelihood of a city official
being a member of the local church is greater. A Board
member's membership in Trinity, without evidence of a
closer connection, is not a sufficiently direct interest in
the outcome of the matter under consideration to justify
setting aside Moorhead's action. See Shelton v. City of
College Station, 780 F.2d 475, 485-86 (5th Cir. 1986)
(en banc) (church member not disqualified from voting
on zoning matter opposed by church), cert. denied, 479
U.S. 822, 93 L. Ed. 2d 41, 107 S. Ct. 89 (1986).
N.
Finally, Rowell argu~ ~e ~oard's &~ant of ~.Y..wi~~
is void because Trinity f!!J,ed.tQ demoIlstr~teund...9~h~d-
j~ir' A reVieWIng court will set aside a City's decision
m a zoning variance matter if the decision }s u~em;.Qn-
able. lbnLandschoot, 336 N. W2d at 5lm; Tuckner v.
Township of May, 419 N. W2d 836, 838 (Minn. Ct. App.
1988). [**12] Reasonableness is measured b the stan-
dards set out m e Cl r s or mances. nLantlsc oot,
336 N. iv.!a ar5'blj n.6,' Castle DiSlgn & Development
Co., Inc. v. City of Lake Elmo, 396 N. W2d 578,
581 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986). We.....will notJ,nvalidate
Moorhead's zoning variance decision if Moorhead acted
in ood faitfi ana within the broad dis~ eti;- cc .-+
b statutes or ces. lbnLandschoot, 336 N. W2d
at '09. Moorhead's decision will only be reversed if its
stated reasons are legally insufficient or without factual
basis. Northwestern College v. City of Arden Hills, 281
N. W2d 865, 868 (Minn. 1979).
A city's authority to grant variances cannot exceed the
powers granted by Minn. Stat. ~ 462.357, subd. 6(2).
Costley v. Caromin House, Inc., 313 N. W2d 21, 27
(Minn. 1981). The statuto~ authori~ allows varhm~cs
in cases of "undue harashiJ) where:
--: -::...
Minn. Stat. ~ 462.357, subd. 6(2) (1988).
The Moorhead Municipal Code also authorizes vari-
ances only upon a showing of "undue hardship."
Moorhead, Minn., Municipaf Code ~~ 10-1-5, 1O-2A-
5(B). By adopting the precise language of the enabling
statute, the Moorhead ordinances grant the zoning au-
thority the same power to grant variances as is allowed
by Minn. Stat. ~ 462.357, subd. 6(2). Thus, if the
variance is permitted by the statute, it is also permitted
by the ordinance.
According to the stipulated facts, strict enforcement of
Moorhead's setback requirement would re9-uire Trini!y"7s
addition to be built 22 feet back from the front line
of the existing building. The Board's written decision
found that enforcing the setback requirement would cre-
ate hardship for Trinity because the addition would not
be coordinated with the existing structure. The roof
lines and front line would not [*922] match, the inter~
nal corridors would be misaligned, and the classroom
windows, exit routes and [**14] classroom configura-
tions would be adversely affected. All these findings are
supported by the evidence presented to the Board at the
public hearings, either in testimonial form or from the
blueprints of the addition plans.
We believe these circumstances satisfy the re uire- l~LJI~
ments or undue hardshil;! as defmed by mn. Stat.
~ 462.357, subd. 6(2). The first requirement is that.
the property cannot be put to a reasonable use without
the variance. This provision does not mean that a prop-
erty owner must show the land cannot be put to any
reasonable use without the variance. In such a case the
constitution would compel a variance regardless of the
statute. See Holasek V. Village of Medina, _ 303 Minn.
240, 244, 226 N. W2d 900, 903 (1975). The statute is
clearly intended to allow cities the flexibility to grant
variances in cases where the constitution does not com-
pel it. Thus, we read the first part of the definition of
"undue hardship" as requiring a showing that the prop-
erty owner would like to use the property in a reasonable
manner that is prohibited by the ordinance. On the facts
of this case, the precise issue is whether it would be rea-
sonable to ex ect **15 Trinit to build its addition 22
feet ac from the front line of the existing buildin ..!.
evi ence supports e oard' s fmding that buildin 22
~et bac wou dean unreasonable use, we must affirm.
>c:' ~
446 N.W.2d 917, *922; 1989 Minn. App. LEXIS 1139, **15
Page 7
LEXSEE
The statute and ordinances unfortunately provide no
standard for determining reasonableness. Minnesota
courts distinguish between area and use variances. In
re Appeal of Kenney, 374 N. W2d271, 274 (Minn.
1985). An exemption from a setback requirement is
an area variance. Id. Practical difficulties may jus-
tify an area variance. See Merriam Park Community
Council, Inc. v. McDonough, 297 Minn. 285, 292,
210 N. W2d 416, 420 (1973) (holding sufficient "prac-
tical difficulties" existed to justify area variance), over-
ruled on other grounds, Northwestern College v. City of
Arden Hills, 281 N. W2d 865, 868 n.4 (Minn. 1979),'
Curry v. Young, 285 Minn. 387, 396-97, 173 N. W2d
410, 415 (1969) (holding variance required where set-
back requirement would force property owner to build
much smaller structure); see generally 3 R. Anderson,
American Law of Zoning ~~ 20.49-.52 (3d ed. 1986)
[**16] (analyzing court decisions on area variances).
The evidence before the Board supported its determi-
nation that requiring Trinity to build its addition 22 feet
back from the existing building is unreasonable. The
Board properly considered the practical difficulties strict
enforcement of the setbackrequirementwould cause, in-
cluding the functional and aesthetic concerns mentioned
above.
The second requirement is that the plight of the
landowner is due to circumstances unique to the properti
-t-
rlA.~h~ of ~l~~ ~Mj ~blM
MoE.~'5~~~ t ~~ a.'l\{)~~'t
~C7\I'" o...l"If\A.."o-~o~ 0\",\d ~ (....~
~ '\ht.c'(\~\ov.-p o-Cj ~ca. rl.j .tt:. Q&J1\~
~ ~~i- .
not created by the landowner. The record reveals the ex-
isting church has only a three-foot setback because it was
built before the enactment of the present ordinance. This
is a unique circumstance not created by the landowner.
The third requirement for undue hardship is that the \'" "A ~.I1 A~
variance, if. grant.ed, will not alter the essen~ial charact~r W ~
of the localIty. Smce the church already eXlstsL~ (l.(M....~
tion will not alter the character of the localit . The Board J.A/.1~.I6.
care ly conditIOned its variance on Trinity's promise t:\D.1. tdl)
to plant trees, place planters along the facade of the ().. of
addition, and preserve the existing courtyard and play- \o..n~\ ^.
grounds. We think these precautions guard a ainst any dl k,('
alteration 0 e c aracter * 1 of the localit . Thus, ,)IIf ~_J ~..
the variance ordinance and statute have been s isfied, ~~t.~
and Moorhead's finding of undue hardship is su ported ~ .
by the record. ...tC>"60l~
DECISION .
Trinity's failure to comply with the pro ural re-
quirements in applying for a variance is not gr unds for
setting aside the Board's decision. The varian did not
violate the ordinance prohibiting expansion 0 noncon-
formities. The Board's decision was not invali .because
a voting member was a member of Trinity. F" ally, the
Board's [*923] fmding of undue hardship was upported
by the record.
Affirmed.
I~~ ~'~C.L
~k \l'lA.v... {X-a.u-tca e. I
h-v.~ ~~)')
\~~ ~~
a..uA \.h,1.k.~
~~~.
~q~/2t/00 MON 15:40 F~! 6124474245
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
~002
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
CC:
. .
Suesan Lea Pace, City Attorney
Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator~
February 28, 2000
History of Keyland Homes Property
Frank Boyles, City Manager
Don Rye, Planning Director
In 1993. H & S Investments. L;LC, also known as Keyland Homes, purchased a
parcel ofland from the City of Prior Lake, legally described as Lot 2, Block 2.
waterfront Passage Addition. Subsequently, Keyland Homes constructed a
14,000 square foot warehouse/office building on this parcel.
In 1998, H & S Investments, LLC, signed an agreement to purchase an addition
1/2 acre ofland adjacent to its existing parcel on the east side. This parcel is
partially described as a part of Lot 1, Block 2, Waterfront Passage Addition. The
process of subdividing this 1/2 acre parcel from Lot 1, Block 2, was completed
through the Administrative Lot Subdivision procedure in October, 1998. As part
of this Administrative Lot Subdivision, the existing utility easementslocat~ on
the common lot line were vacated in October. 1998. The existing Keyland parcel
and the 1/2 acre parcel were ultimately combined under PID #25~296-003-0 on
October 22. 1998.
The purpose of the lot ~ombination and the easement vacation was to allow the
constroction of an addition to the existing Keyland Homes building. A variance
application to allow this construction was submitted in January, 2000.
I hope this information is helpful. Please let me know if you ha"Ve any questions.
l:\DOfilcs\OOappeal\GO-OO8\history.doc
. . --.,. -.'.'. ..-..,--.....-. ~~, .. -.-
FilE COpy
Memorandum
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Frank Boyles, City Manager
Jane Kansjer. Planning COOrdinator~
February 18, 2000
Additional Information for Council Agenda Item 7B, Keyland Homes
Variance
cc:
Don Rye, Planning Director
On February 16, 2000, we received a letter from Dick Krier, on behalf of the
appellants, D. R. Horton and John and Mary Mesenbrink, outlining their
objections to the variance for Keyland Homes. The variance will allow Keyland
Homes to build an addition to their existing building that will be located 20' from.
a residential lot line rather than the 75' required in the C-5 District. This letter
was included in the agenda materials; however, the staff did not have time to
respond to this letter before the agenda was mailed. The following is our response
to the relevant points of this letter.
Mr. Krier claims the building materials used for this addition are inconsistent with
the Ordinance requirements. Section 1107 .22021ists the general requirements for
architectural materials. The C-5 district, however, has a specific set of design
standards for buildings in that district. These standards are listed in Section
1102.1407. According to this section, metal panels with interlocking, concealed
or tongue-and-groove seams and concealed fasteners are an acceptable building
material in the C-5 district if the exterior finish is warranted by the manufacturer
for twenty years against blistering, peeling, cracking, flaking, checking or
chipping and ifnot more than 50% of the building elevation faces the street. The
attached description of the building material for the Keyland building shows that
it is clearly consistent with the requirements of the C-5 district.
In addition, Section 1102.1407 (2) specifically references additions and
alternations to buildings within the C-5 district constructed of materials that do
not conform to the current requirements. This section states "all subsequent
additions and exterior alterations built after the construction of the principal
structure(s) shall be of the same materials as those used in the principal structure
1:\OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\response.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
... .
and shall be designed to conform to the original architectural concept and
general appearance. This provision shall not prevent the upgrading of the quality
of materials used in a remodeling or expansion project". This section also allows
the materials used in the proposed addition.
Mr. Krier also references the nonconforming requirements (Section 1107.2300) of
the Zoning Ordinance and suggests variances to these requirements are also
necessary. It is true that the setback of the existing building is nonconforming.
This setback cannot be expanded without a variance to the setback requirement, as
requested by Keyland Homes. The setback variance is the appropriate variance.
A variance to the nonconforming provisions is unnecessary and redundant.
Mr. Krier also references Section 1107.2303 (5) which pertains to nonconforming
parking areas. First of all, he is correct in stating the setback of the existing
parking area from Fish Point Road is nonconforming (20' instead of the required
30'). However, this section of parking lot is not being expanded. No parking will
be located closer to the right-of-way than the existing area. A portion of the
existing parking lot is also located closer than 20' to south property line where it
is adjacent to a Residential district. Again, this section of the parking lot will not
be expanded. All new parking areas will meet the requirements of the ordimince.
Finally, this letter suggests the following criteria have not been met:
. Section 1107.305, off-street parking and loading. The use requires 49 parking.
spaces and one loading space. There are 59 parking spaces and at least 4 .
loading spaces on the site.
. Section 1107.1904, landscaping. The use requires a Bufferyard Type "E"
along the south property line for the length of the new building. This
landscaping is provided.
. Section 1107.2202 (1), rooftop equipment. There will be no rooftop
mechanical equipment.
. Section 1107.2202 (8,t), pedestrian areas. A total of936 square feet of
sidewalk or plaza is required. The existing sidewalks meet this requirement.
The criteria used to grant a variance are addressed in the agenda report.
. .
1:\OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\response.doc
Page 2
. ;. .. ~ . _' '..~'.'.. ;....~_...-=._'..... ."~' ... .... .', . _ ..' _... ...... w . ._,
. . ......
.~J'?:;3~r,',::! .
",~' ' '" '..;f. ':.7 .'
.~'....:... 'J'"
..
.... ..
'. '.":i :~'.~ .
. '.vp 002' " efS"m'3l<e.'tbls~ctfiC8Jtlaii' atfac!r 'more""ataiiteatrral~'lliiiresu'
..,.~ .. .t......,.....:-....,... ""'. 9 ..' ..~. 'I.
.:.......~:~~~..~.;~:~~~M~~.~...":~~.1-"~.l:~,"7.. ..\.:;~:..... .~..:-...: - .
. GENERAL DESCRIPTION :l;~;:;*~~':',,~ !,UQQati9l'1to eave n:m .' .
. T.he'.Hn,iquff~~s!g~:~tx~:~' :.:f:;)/~~(f.f~~iifPr" ,;;, if1l;f.4~;
architect. ural w~1I p'an.el~ provide. s. ,..~:.;::~~-i8ecause. ~.' . e Danel's lengt ""'11-"""'t' "';~9;"A-",,'v'>;'I..r 't" .'""!. ~'.l"
'.'_ ,...,,"",'" "'~....".'"'' ....__..."....,..>f'*s.,."""'~t.,.."'..;,r,-..;-.,-Ji-..""... -.nenor ppICaJons.~
. for many attractive budding . ,'::<'.'and ease'oflnstallatlon:const ,,:~......~.<,... '1",,_. .~.., : .., ""'-;<~'
'. . ......... . ,;". .... '" ."......;".....~;'>~.:"":$'<."'.,.-~"".......~,;..,...~..:. ..,,,,..~.. -Fast Construction !':.~.l_
,applications; -: V\J,2~.'~..~.:." .:. ...; .~;\J!~f.1.o;~~~~..Qa,E~,f?t!~~~.,E!!~.!R.~: - ':~""-'''','.;i''''~'''''''',,''o ....:.. ::.";:; t~:
sculptured exterior shadow panel :'>. mlt:lI'!lu~.:}lourbuIl91n9 .Is.};~~",.,",.,.,.>..;,..'. t.Ef]ergYE:ffJ<;~ent ;~i:':. ;:;:.
. .., .....~.. .... ..'. ..... .'. n'.:"..-;O._.I-.."':'.tU.,..,_.......,......~"",.:.;-.n.-~... .~'."."''''-.'.' '.~~"'" ~'~":.."" '..--'.. ,,,,;-''';'''"=.,- --.........~.. ... ":.' ...:.....~.,..:.
whl~~can be used 'Nlthmtenor.':,...; .:otherefor~more.economlcal and.:'ff~~i.~~. 2Ecoriomical Cost '.{'
. ..... ....... ,':' ............ _.' .....~......._:....;...".~.....-~-.....,..\'...~......t!'''''''~.,.~...~:....~........_...._....j..~"""'~..,... ~>. ......~..... "'.' .."-
Iiner:panels in combination with ~:.~.~~..~.readY:Jo,use.mo~eguickly.:~rn:.fac~; . . --;:.~~;;~S~:"'i::~:?~
fibe. rglass 'or rig' id tioarcfinsLilat:o-n;~i~;;~tf,Else:walts~yslems~aii'm~ . .:tt~~;"t;-;-
.~,.~. . ..' ~.'. ',z.!'"_. .#..>~...~.:.,.~~~,...I'~..,~~..~.;i: ~..~i..:ll.""
. This attractive panel is''.excellent/<c~!~econoJt:llcal~tIian:coricrete
. for 1~.ca~e a~d bu~l~i~~~rcir.t~ge .~:::...~j~i!!1J~~ti J.
applications. :'. .,;' . .. :~.~~
VP 002 is a f1ushpariel used ,''''''
either externally or as a liner
panel, especially appropriate for .
mai1ufacturjn~' \uarehous3 interior
applications. This panel is
excellent as an accent panel for
. 'VP ~1.QO walls and is widely used
for facades and soffits. With the
variety of insulation options
available, your Builder can help
you decide on the optimal
insulation approach, considering
up-front cost and long term energy
savings. These interlocking
panels come with built-in weather. .
seals for weathertightness.
All fasteners are completely ..
concealed on VP 100 and VP 002:/;
panels. VP 100 panels cOlTie in a ":':;:3
wide variety of co(cirs>yP.b~2;':f)~i'~~
panels are' available in, Egyptian' ':;.~:
White and Patrician,J?roiize asI.:.i.;:
standar,d. .Als~, th~.s~ 'p~n~I(:,~~r
come in lengths to'38feet,'provi.d-
...............- " ....
inQ a.continuou~ w~n,p.~~,e..I.fr~T.i;~~~j'oO:'~~siai~'i~~fiii~~Wm~~_.
cl:i~',~" . . ',~1!~';,,~~:1~~~;1g:~~J,i~':'
~WP 100 & VP 002;.:':.~~~.,~:....'. ':Y.2{,,' :'::.'.iF1NISH WAfUIA~TlES ..>.: . -
;tteCHNICALINFORMATlON '. . .' . 7 ":'::':::1";' '::.'~~..~;.K..:...X...,~t.;~..._.~,.:_:.....~..:'.~.'~~~_r.'~_;'.,.~..~!.;~.::.....~_.~..~,.'.:~.:.\.~~.::.;.~.'.\.'. h
~tif~YF;J90.@~Ye::Oo~wall pane'ls provide 121r .:.' not Cl:":' ... \.'" .1, .' .';:,"<' 2- - ~
~~~,.J~rigth~:oJ up.to 38.feet, Pan3ls are~: ~~,::" . .:: . ~~'" ~::rnf: :NARCo..PRlJ"OEN AND .
~;~.ptiol1al)' forVP'1 00 and 24 gage stan'jl:1:, ',' ~.;,,;' .. :,,,,j.J~onal) lor V.F . THE VP CONTRACTOR
;002.' Both panels r.ave a G90 galvanized steel coating and KXL paint 'Varco-Pruden h~ built its
jlnish. for~exter1or at~plications, KXL Is a.1 mil, KYNARf based finish . . reputation as a ieader in the .
::~appiie(ftothesOrfuce ofG90 galvanized steel to givE. a long~life color nonresidential 'construCtion ma.-ket
1i:~.;j~.;c..~... re.s1sts fa~ing and chalkln~..__ ---- -- ~j...~!~~f.';:~~:~s
,VP 100NP 002 PANEL CROSS SECTIONS acro~enca.,,- . . .
..;t;~.~. . -. ." . ,......,.~._~-.ay-- .... .... .
o .: ~-'~vp~Bunde(shave .constructed -, ..
~?";I':: ': 1'.0" h . ,;'thousarlds'oHa:cliitids'forvirtuciJly' :' . :\::.,;fB~'
:i~1:g:~ ~ . . ,'. (':__~' .... ~:';:_.' ':"\'every enduse~:-rariging;fromlarge> .. . ;:'. ~':'..~':.\~~!1!
';{i;i' . " '. ........J" '\ _:..~ :OffiC.tosiiiall~rag,; buillllngs, ,.,c:,";;l')T
.:~;t~.-- . .' . - '~o~~~i~~~.\'.'.'
_j~>':' . . . ~: :.l=xai~;l~~':~ "c_,
:; ~:;~;H>:; '..; . -, '. requirerT!.en~:~t1~e~frow '!he" ': : '. . .";:.,~/~~:
.~. ~ '..;oj.. _ ;., ,..... . 1'.0" ~' :. finest steel In a.control~ed plant .;:: "-' ,;,:"'.::.-:?f...-:-;:
. "'t""'r' o' . '.' '" - ..,-."',; .......:...$.........-.....d. 'f '.. .:~.'.....
:':::,;~:c"!. .,..i~:.:.... ....... :... .....:..-.. '.'. ,: '0;"':: .~ 'environment,yolJare'assure 0 ./.;..:.:;....:y::.
/.:::~qs... .. ,,,. . '.. ..' -~ . l':.~". ...... .............-. ;~...-. . I ..1..~'1.....-ffi...-;.. ..1"::...::'," '".;;':-;:: .,:-:....~..:
S ~!..<. . ~ '.'-;' .." ."". .'J' . ..... ". :;~...:: ,;.-". ....:...:. ,a high guahty,:hlgh y~ Ctem.:.~. ~.. :.:..-': '?;;"':~:-:"
~:: ~:>~:',":;~~~!'2;~'.i>}Z:':';\/...~" .",' ~> . .... . ,::~:,:\/-::.'.; . .'..~~~: '., ':: .... . ~ ,~ ':.~~i~.~J~~y~~~~~~y..~m~:~.~o ::>:)~i:?~:t
". ..'_ _" :....;.. '.. " ...'...., . ,.......'?..'. .....,.......'.,......,...-. ....t"come Ir.awldevanety ofco.ors ":"'''';'...;0''',.
;:. ..,}:~~~;[2::i::t~:7l~{/::'.:~: ::~.~~ . . '~j:: >:-:;:;. ': .;' ~5 }~~~:,:;.;.- .::':: ;:~;~~~'.~~l;;.f;~~;.i;-; \ ';-,ij;~~'-hf@i~E~1f.~!Yts~~W~d.~f;;2;:J~?':;'~
. . .' . . . ..' .... _. . ',:,'. . ..,....,_. ...' .V" '., ." ,.aest etic r~ulremen ~,'I"UI ,'<j.-.......,
~:. ~.:..:. ....:' :.';"; .. .' ._ ""',. '. . .," _ ..:......-.. _... ..' ~ '. ""..... ~,,;:~...""z..41:... eo ;J~'" '~.I'~'IoZ.:_'_ .;......v.. ...~~:1,,-.....
"r...'.--: ._..,;o.~ n'''; ..... .C' .' '.' .......... '... """.:' . ....;.,.~ ,:-,:<,~'l"""l'~:'; c, <:".when'non-metaf walls are deSIree, '~~~."
(>:tk.~;:;'sEC1ioN PROPERTIES OF ARCHITECTURAL' PANELS ..;::~,.;.. -':'''~ ...t'''' . '''':' ..-::'.. .-t.~"... .."". . ",. . ?,{.;'"
"'l'" _'.:<0,... . ..,. .' . '. . .'. ......'.. , ,. your VP Builder can construct your ,'."
.'~ ~fJ;:~ ~~~~:;~;~~~i~::(r .J::. '. : '.~~~r.one F~~ o~ ~~t~~.t;; '. -.' .'. ,:.:~...,:, -/"t.~'.:{ ~ .:.. ':)Uild.!~~(~~~:y!~~aiiY-'~{~~;:..~3.~.:':', :':" :,~:~~~~:~
,.~~.~.l"..';~,;,: ..",',',,'. :." '.. ..... ~"';,.::....' .........., ;'.,...;.;.-.,...alternativematenal,easIlY....~.:.,....:;..:~.'"l~~;~.~
111\~;f:[Of~." . ~~~,'~~~*~1', . .... ' .. ','_1.:r..&'(~},::.'~',c'. C-:'l:;~j~ :;
. :.i~~:'::.gx ~S8cticn'modu:us (incheSJ) . ':'!.~~;.':;:":~~' ~
:'~(: Ix;;' Moment 01 inertia (inches.) . ":":~l~::;:" ..~
'. ------- "',:~S:. .,
'~B~::;;:L DE::;;;~ FOR VP ~~~~~~e ...':1 ~
,. '. 2" 7.41 O. ~35 .:,:,-:~::,,"<.-, ~~
f" . 3" 11.80 CI.OS5 7.74 . 0.129
.:1'-" . 4" 15,10 0.066 8.45 0.118
l." '.CaIculated thermal values ,:3 based on full insulation thicl<ness.
. i '. "':In-Place thermal values are based on ASTM C~6 Gu~rded Hot eo~ Tes~ or are
[. '. . calculated accounting for effects of fasteners ane! Insulation compression when the.
. . ~". . Tests are not available, '. ". . ,
.. '..' -~----_...._-_._~- . " .~
!.:,;.,
...~. .:~~:.:x;:.:.;-; ~~:'::,,::.~.:'..',~,,:.':::.':'.'." .,. ,'0 ;'; .~.).;.:,..;~~..~: ':~:;;.~;".r.:' .~,.:.
,- ...~.. .
",.on
-' ...~
_.._.._,....... ....._. '.. h" .; _..._.._..__.,.,_9~. ......... ~... .'h_
..
. .
, -------------- ------.---, ---- -
_~~~~~.J.-~;;.'m,c,;~-'"""'~,..,..,,...,...~"&'""'~~
~ Valltc..Pruden
IW 8ijiidilfDgs
ft.. Unit~d Dom1nicn Co~~sn'l
Built :In Superior .$Jrlica
':J
.~
m~.
"
:t.
.'
p
~
t-.
'.
~.
'. ':"
'~"..'.!'
:;
. ~"
":":
,
-~
."
;jl
'~
':1
'..
.-~
1
,.;.
:.1
~\;'l
'..
: ,
~..
',-
t.,
>. .
.~:
t:
1':;.
e.
, -
.
". ,.,..: '.,
KOCOJ
.., (' "'.;. i\ l')
... -t.,J I ...r\i\
\q\,.,,,,, .\"'7.'1 .""!""\.....i~ -'\'o"-"~
1~ ;'-\1,;(:- j-J, ; :i::Il-'Vr,Sr:)v', ;:~"! ~
'J v; 'Q.\ 'H;"J "'1~~~~~
.'~'\:_ . ~~~"'.l.;:. i- ~"a..;:n
J.~ 1.: ~ '~~~~i"'; .Jl,,;nC';~i,O~. lJ ::,,",~~(1 -1; _'''II,''::~)!.l~..'t!J'',JC__.:L_
. .1' .......:N'.,~..", "".i c:. .'.,::w '.ni.:..":''::~::::'''f !C;;:!4'C.. ~ ,.
,.:." ~ ',.;':: ~ :: ~I ~i"" 'ye.; :O~"" >t-; ~,'. .,'1,:-:'
.::.;,; ~~t.==:~~' ,"l'~ "~C:;..,~~C~l' 1 ~c..,:n:;:::c.:j In .lJn;c:-:-:',.
C" ..;;"" "'A~c=.?qU~N ~ In !hIJ '~nlol L" ~ .:Ierei.
CJ~lIn;lnlci C:::nudll ~r><:I Aloslo.o, and ':Yhon .;;IIoo,od :o:lI)rmoi
a:mosen.\lrlC cend,/ioni ai d=iin_d boalow ",j~, \ubl"c;t 10 IhQ
~oncilll~n\ ;Jnd li.ni/ehon., :t'" lett.l i:'I :I.:. ....ef'f!1l'l>!, l10f croci. ch"c~.
OI/IW. p.tol. iio~" el chip, et dtc:ft;:t "" .color tllC:l'l:Ilhon Sf un'.'i <u
-:lcalYlild In occa'~enc~ witI'! ).37M Co214J.79 parao;:,opn
J J ~.s ~: chalk ,n 'lice's cl an ASTM !:).6~9-00 ~ 8 ralin') fer a
P3t10C 01 rwon"f.(:ZCl yeon ollor shipnt'MI.
;:;'1 ",rotlgnly eo~\ ~"I apply. hewsv"r 10 '001 ondjr;f ':\Id !,on."
U"!f':!H"d ~~ :::'ly b:.:Hd:n; IOCQ,::d i.-a Ih~ ';:Cihli"; ~ ~ ~uf"',
. e..al/::I Ineroline, or chomi~:::1 plonl or azry Cl:i.~ ~ suGcml
demos-- ro root and/or wall paneb lbQ' Is ltac=oble 10 on
,,:bnl,nabl. sourc~ ef corrOSlV" diiChap ........ 0( c~
",h.c!! hoyo, on 0 ,"gulo( basis, olf.c:ad :uda ~1I&1g.
In odOdion. Ihls worrcnty sholl nol .:lpply !o:
(oi 'oar end/or wall poneJslhol hov'l l:oan damo~ In IrCI'lri
. or en job S.I., or hov\} been improperly slored;
(bl roeF errl w.::\1 panels rho' hov~ boen sub,KI.:Jd lo ml:VM,
""lih9onc~. or 110ve 0-3on Inov~ from rho orisind ,IoC'l cf
.r.Cllon, ar roct end/or wail pano!: ,hot hGV'4 nol baon
er.c:~d In accord~nC3 w,lh 011 opplice~le V~CQ.?:U;DeN
draWIng' and Ins'rudions and goac .w)dion ~
Ic) colloleral building ma'<aric1s, .~c;:1lS30riIJs. !JqUis:meili ond
':/Inar I'~mi nOl'soid b', VARCC :-:WCEN Q"d ~ del1'~'
'10 :od onJ/or wdllX'neis resulting therofrom:
(dl domog" !~ or d"iltc~s In rooi and/or woil ponels -:CU1I):i 'i7,
. ,mprOPM .nsl'1l1onon
(e) comoc;,':o er del"cls in rool Qnd/or wall poftl'lls COVSlt~ by
Irlm a~eluiorll" or fOllon"" nol suppliac by VAR:O.
.PRuOEN or d"l~roor::llion .n IhQ r':lol ond/ar woll ponola
related rher~lo;
(11 Iho conditien known os .microcrac\:ing" 0; real and/or ..,cij
..., : poneis wlue!' is. Q common oc:;urronct in 110." forming
. pto'::ls~::I1 color :;ca"d rool ond/ar woll pc""ls c.,d is not
IQ b:! C:ll!m10 a cielecl warrcnlcd ~C2r.,!;"dor: end
. ;;; d:;"'cg~. rC:lIJt! ':)r d~fl!(:s c:cu:::c! by Act!. of Got:t f.:ifir.g
OOil:;'.. e=l~rnQI !orcos. e:CQlclIc.r:, fir." tlolS, clv.1
~::m"'o.ltCnl, ~crmfui fumes. !'a~:].'9n lub:/onc:n j" Iii"
.::~~~~.',~: 3. ~r :crrcs:cn ca...,,,d :.y ..).It;:Q~~'~ Ie ~Qrlr.'.'
~CSP"~(~. 1clt !prQ~'. ch~mlcc!s. C1n. cr otc:nic rcdia::c:I.
-"'! "':Jr:cnly 's a,.;endad solely to tho Cwn,.,r nc:n:eCl hor:)in one! :s
"CI"'.:ror.lf:robl-! an:! :"\0:1-c11Jg:'\~::!o. Thl~ CCildinon is a mc:~ncJ term
~;' rhll .Iltcrrc"ry one C":)"hc'~~~:ion cf ~he ,erm bv m:!J owr.OI 01 rt$ CC:~i1r
or re,=:'e~~nIQ:I"~.! )hall ;~I.,c~' V.A~:O..P~UD€;'-I f:cm it3 obJigOri'Oft1
"',,=re~nd~r
7:-!E W.l,~?;:'NTieS C.:Sc;:15EO A:-IO ~IM!1'~Q Af30Vi: ANO T!i:
~~.tDI:S SZ7 ::G:;rH 3etOW FO~ ReOr Al'i~!-::: W"'t~ ?p.Ne~S
:.H A:.l at: iN ~!~u :;F .t.~l OTHE~ 'NA~i!ANTlES OR ~~MED1::5
11'''f.::-iE:< ~;:i'~:s;:.o O~ IMrUrD, INCtlJi.:'!ND 91.1i NOT UMlii;::)
rc, M.V IM:'I.I;'O ,,.J,:,,,a,.),,'H1ES OF Mc~CH,,\NiA81t1i't AND
~Ir~~c3S FOR i~ ?AIiTlC!JtAR ?URPOSE.
UPO:'l w/lIIO" nolilic::hon r!)c"v.,d by '1A~CO,i'IlUDEN wilhin rho
7:~~ Qbo'!<:-SIOI~d warronty pnrioc and medoby Iho Ownar within 'hirly
. (:3 C I der/S from de'K.'ion a; any foilur8 of the malfii<lls to conicrm to
Iho ob'ov, werren",. u~on Fr~nanlolion bj' Ih. Owner of 'his fully
!uculod warrenty ogr..,emllnl. oi'ld upon insplaclton by VARCO.
PRUOEN 10 verify ~ojd nonconformity. VARCC.PRUDEN ,,'loll, 01 ils
sol~ oplion. r'3poir, ",pl.o:c, or ~p<!!nl toof end/or wall poMb ~
10 bo cafKiivo wiltloul cherg" '0 rho Owner. BoSe", any c~ c!lange
"~."',
,J"'.'':"..t;n-;.:u: ;n ;.:::c~ .s .~"'Q..vr,d ":'~..I'~~c.~ .:t -:u-: ~n ::(.:~.)i\ ......i ': :
}'-'~Tf1:": .,,;...,; .
..II: .: .. _ .':;.~.....-: ~:.
-..,.."" '. ~,
:'. ~;1.": :"....;;;' ;:~l: .."..';;'I!; ;:', . '. .: ~i' ~''':'!''!.
,':or::;.}t'I ..~~::l :., ;" /.:.. u:..: ..:,"" ::~':. .1;:.' -:J:.c~.,iJc:'! ... '."..;~~.
;,\,,:.,ccnr:':llhfh'S, ,n th. 'T:onna, one: ;.o:,r ;hIJ ;J'"rtod ooov~. snQII
':C.'HI.iUI" hJi;,ilm.,nl ,~i oil::i:;io~ot'onl'll '1,\:lCO.;>:CUOfN IQ lh" C...~..,
w;,,,m..r baled I;.,on canlrac!. rort (includinq "e91;90n,;,,). l'tlcl i,ab,li,.,
or ett..~twln. ,\ny rl'lr:;oi'!Xl, r..pOlnl.d or :oplec,o:I ~r..I, luppl",d .n
sClh:c:c:/,on 01 th;a obligctic:'ls und.,r .hlS '..orrcnty 1hcl: be 1ub'<ICIIO 'h.s
wcrNniy only for :h# r~ma"'d.Jr ~f :ho pollod a;:pl:ca=i. !o rhe ;)rac"cI ..
criglnaily purcna~ed. Failura Ollh" Own'!r :0 gl"" IImeiy nohce 10
'/ARC0.P!lUOEN or fQir.Jr~ to:: conform 'ei;~.,~~ VAR(O.P~UOt!'j or
:r.y ond ;,il obligctions une,r rhos worronl'f
T1;E aEMEiJlt~ :)El ~U'{!H HE~E!N All:: ExClllSIVE,WITHC'JT
::E.~..ao TO WHEiH~~ . I";" DE":KT WAS DISCOVEUalE Oll
LATENT ,1 T THE TIME \.. ~ C;~~IVE~Y OF iHE MATERIALS fO THE
OWNl:;t. Th<il onenlial purpose ollhis axclv"v" remedy :holl b. 10
prOVIde rh. O'Nnar wiltl rope" or tapiOCA' '''nl of pon../s rhOI prov. 10
bo dofodive wiltlin :l\c pon~d end r.r:j,: !"It =::no:lions prevIously sel
lorth, This udusiv. remedy Inail nol hove I. I." 01 ,Is enenllal p\:r~se
lo~ the: 'lIrm is used in the Uniform CommerCIal Cod.,) prov,ded
V.J.RCC-PRUiJEN remains w,iling !o repcir or repiac:! dolectivo paneit
wi/hin a camm..rciolly rtosC'n-:Jl,ie limo ahor il ob'Oln~ octuol
l:.nowled;" ollhe .luslonco 01 a parlicuio: a!li~. .
IN NO EVENT SHALL VARCO.P~UDEN BE liABLE FOR ANY
Si'ECIAl. CONS:~UENT1Al. !NCIOENTAl O~ iNDIRECT OAMAGES
WliH RESilECT TO nus SALE OR ANYTHING CONE IN
CONNECTION HERtWITH IINCtUDING, wm~OUi lIMITAilON,
nECilCN SE~V'CES i'~C"I(,\ED BY flUllDEi 0>: BY VARCO.
i'!!'JD~NI. Wl-'EiHE~ 3,~SED UPON CONTRACT. TORi
{INCJD1NG :-I::GLlGE~CEI. STi<!G llABllIT'l' OR OTHERWISE
i:;<C::PT TO THE EXTENf MODIFIED HEREIN. THE ~^,AIlRANTY
CO'w'E~C:-" ;'i'PllCAa~E ~O THIS 3ullDING SI~All aE AS STATED
iN '1Ai:C:).PRUDEN'S .'\iANDARO WAUANTY: AND All
~IMITATI()N:S, ;'XCtu51':" is AND OISCl.~IMEiS iN(;LU~ED IN
~~ .S"i.. NDAkfl ....,..~.::V.. .' N" SHAlt APPt Y ..,VliH FUll FORC:
HE:l:':"'C EX.:::PT F012 THE MF!VilATlVc o ,liGATIONS
l!ND':;,', ..XEN ~'t 'I,'~C-':'.PRU.JEN HE~EIN. AN'f
INCON~;.;TcN'1' aETWE:N 7ii~ 7::~MS Or THIS WAR~.~l'<iY ':'N~
ni~ iBM3 OF SAIO .S7ANOAllD WAUANTY. Sr'l.Ll !e
:HSClVED ,1'1 rA\fO~ Of TH: TE~MS CF SAIO .STANOA1C
W.~;!.-\NrY,'
Oct3 l~iJOd
V cre::-."ru.:kir. ':..u-;;Orizcrior.
O'.^'~,:.:r
V::J Jca ~j
Joo locclion
S' et:l--
.C:ty
SIOIO
evildl1r'~ Nom.,
Vcrct>Prudon Suildings, a ~ivision Qi
United Dominicm Industriss, Inc.
IC2~--, : 0/92 . 500 . AP 'o~ I
~..
ll!
"
i'!.
i
I
.
~~
~
~
;;;!
~
~
;;
I
...
f'~
t.
r
i
" J~'
--CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
16200 EAGLE CREEK AVENUE SE, PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
To: Suesan Lea Pace
Halleland Lewis Nilan Sipkins &
Johnson
Pillsbury Center South
220 South Sixth Street
Suite #600
Minneapolis, MN 55402-4501
Phone: 612-338-1838
Fax phone: 612-338-7858
CC:
Date: February 28. 2000
Number of pages including cover sheet: 2
From: Jane Kansier C\". .11
Planning Coordinatbr
"V
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE
Prior Lake. MN 55372
Phone: (952) 447-9812
Fax phone: (952) 447-4245
o Please comment
REMARKS:
o Urgent
~ For your review 0 Reply ASAP
Suesan: Attached is a memorandum described the history of the Keyland Homes parcel. I hope this is
helpful. Please let me know if you have questions. Thanks, Jane
FilE COpy
11111111111,11111,1111.:;111111111111111111.11111'.;:11111::lilll,lilllll:IIIIIIIIIII!III~!1
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
CC:
Suesan Lea Pace, City Attorney
Jane Kansier. Planning COOrdinator~
February 28, 2000
History of Keyland Homes Property
Frank Boyles, City Manager
Don Rye, Planning Director
In 1993, H & S Investments, LLC, also known as Keyland Homes, purchased a
parcel ofland from the City of Prior Lake, legally described as Lot 2, Block 2,
waterfront Passage Addition. Subsequently, Keyland Homes constructed a
14,000 square foot warehouse/office building on this parcel.
In 1998, H & S Investments, LLC, signed an agreement to purchase an addition
1/2 acre ofland adjacent to its existing parcel on the east side. This parcel is
partially described as a part of Lot 1, Block 2, Waterfront Passage Addition. The
process of subdividing this 1/2 acre parcel from Lot 1, Block 2, was completed
through the Administrative Lot Subdivision procedure in October, 1998. As part
of this Administrative Lot Subdivision, the existing utility easements located on
the common lot line were vacated in October, 1998. The existing Keyland parcel
and the 1/2 acre parcel were ultimately combined under Pill #25-296-003-0 on
October 22, 1998.
The purpose of the lot combination and the easement vacation was to allow the
construction of an addition to the existing Keyland Homes building. A variance
application to allow this construction was submitted in January, 2000.
I hope this infonnation is helpful. Please let me know if you have any questions.
1:\OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\history.doc
filE COPl
February 24, 2000
Steve Nelson
665 North Snelling Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55104-1893
RE: Deerfield Preliminary Plat
Dear Mr. Nelson:
Attached is a copy of the Deerfield Development preliminary plat. If you have additional
questions, please contact me at the Planning Department at 612-447-9810.
Sincerely,
~a,~
(1~ne ~ansier, AICP
Planning Coordinator
Enclosure
16200 E~8P~'~t2~!f~EV~~~~?,';gPig?1..ake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (6ftP4~7-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
\
l
, "//
'/./ .
/
/}
----
(J\ C::J
~ I<:J
8 ~::J
lill~1
~:~-~~~2
I
!
b
i ~IIU~
!
~
,
1. 0
k------
,/ )
/
~,.,.~~J
~ ;:
l~ I~ I
i! II
!' Iq
l~ ~3
~hl
.~ i
Ii ~
II i
8 D r\
Iii: ! I
11\1\: (JOG i f i
'j:!' 1.,,1
I I II I ~
I I I I Ii
---~
~~-ID~~~;~D
P ARAA.a.OUNT
ENClNt:,.,INC ... DUleN
---..............--
r.ur..._ _mIIM
lEl~I~1l:r:= .
-
DR. HORTON. INC. . Mn
_~CIIM
~-_..--
FilE COpy
Memorandum
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
cc:
Frank Boyles, City Manager
Jane Kansier, Planning COOrdinator~
February 18, 2000
Additional Information for Council Agenda Item 7B, Keyland Homes
Variance
Don Rye, Planning Director
On February 16,2000, we received a letter from Dick Krier, on behalf of the
appellants, D. R. Horton and John and Mary Mesenbrink, outlining their
objections to the variance for Keyland Homes. The variance will allow Keyland
Homes to build an addition to their existing building that will be located 20' from
a residentia1lot line rather than the 75' required in the C-5 District. This letter
was included in the agenda materials; however, the staff did not have time to
respond to this letter before the agenda was mailed. The following is our response
to the relevant points of this letter.
Mr. Krier claims the building materials used for this addition are inconsistent with
the Ordinance requirements. Section 1107.2202 lists the general requirements for
architectural materials. The C-5 district, however, has a specific set of design
standards for buildings in that district. These standards are listed in Section
1102.1407. According to this section, metal panels with interlocking, concealed
or tongue-and-groove seams and concealed fasteners are an acceptable building
material in the C-5 district if the exterior finish is warranted by the manufacturer
for twenty years against blistering, peeling, cracking, flaking, checking or
chipping and if not more than 50% of the building elevation faces the street. The
attached description of the building material for the Keyland building shows that
it is clearly consistent with the requirements of the C-5 district.
In addition, Section 1102.1407 (2) specifically references additions and
alternations to buildings within the C-5 district constructed of materials that do
not conform to the current requirements. This section states "all subsequent
additions and exterior alterations built after the construction of the principal
structure(s) shall be of the same materials as those used in the principal structure
.
1:\OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\response.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
and shall be designed to conform to the original architectural concept and
general appearance. This provision shall not prevent the upgrading of the quality
of materials used in a remodeling or expansion project". This section also allows
the materials used in the proposed addition.
Mr. Krier also references the nonconforming requirements (Section 1107.2300) of
the Zoning Ordinance and suggests variances to these requirements are also
necessary. It is true that the setback of the existing building is nonconforming.
This setback cannot be expanded without a variance to the setback requirement, as
requested by Keyland Homes. The setback variance is the appropriate variance.
A variance to the nonconforming provisions is unnecessary and redundant.
Mr. Krier also references Section 1107.2303 (5) which pertains to nonconforming
parking areas. First of all, he is correct in stating the setback of the existing
parking area from Fish Point Road is nonconforming (20' instead of the required
30'). However, this section of parking lot is not being expanded. No parking will
be located closer to the right-of-way than the existing area. A portion of the
existing parking lot is also located closer than 20' to south property line where it
is adjacent to a Residential district. Again, this section of the parking lot will not
be expanded. All new parking areas will meet the requirements of the ordinance.
Finally, this letter suggests the following criteria have not been met:
. Section 1107.305, off-street parking and loading. The use requires 49 parking
spaces and one loading space. There are 59 parking spaces and at least 4
loading spaces on the site.
. Section 1107.1904, landscaping. The use requires a Bufferyard Type "E"
along the south property line for the length of the new building. This
landscaping is provided.
. Section 1107.2202 (1), rooftop equipment. There will be no rooftop
mechanical equipment.
. Section 1107.2202 (8,t), pedestrian areas. A total of 936 square feet of
sidewalk or plaza is required. The existing sidewalks meet this requirement.
The criteria used to grant a variance are addressed in the agenda report.
1:\OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\response.doc
Page 2
. :..'
~. - ,_, ,.'L-' -_ ~ . ". __::.- ....... -~ i
...'...'.... . "_'JO.
. '.- ".
.' . ,"',' ~. .'
-.--:':-').~,(:Y;';:,;
. . ~:....:<
. .- ,.'~ \\:",:~~~,,~::;,; ..:~,>;."
~~E{~1
KEY BENEFITS":S~;0t*,~.
,,-'~_"'-"":':-.._~.:,,- >: :,.",-:~-,,;~.:-,:.-.~-.:- "'~":.'- :~;.~~~.<:~.'-:.
,1I,~~,E~~~l!~9tgt~!~P;p~~~~n.
..:~I.ntenor,Apphcatl~rJS)<
. <', ......;'''''$..,:.";.~,,,.~''''~.,:...,' "'. .......,:~...?FasrConstruction 'i,.~.)~
. .tlon tlm~and costlS heldt" a', ~~" ..8,.,,,J.,....,,,,... '", .",",....' ;:',;f,:'
. . . o. ..0.. 0 ....~~:t~~!~!~W~~r~\'~W..i~~~m~:lf~~~t)i:~.t
liner. panels in combination with..";read}tto;:use;f.lo1e--quiCkly~;!iini'faGf;'~r~~'" <>f:?-
.' ."_ _..... ,..~:.__;; _0,'. ...._: :": " ......'.-. '. ~:;' ":"''''~'4~~4.d",,-,~.,,:\>;j-~~~;'':I~''i:.:;.--:~_:-:lZ!..-'~'''''~ _.~;tr~,r-~.'-l~. -)...;'1. ...
fiberglass or ngld boardlnsulat:on;..<\thesewaILs stems.arelTlcr'e.
This attractive panel is"e~cellent"8\f~conomrc4 neret
. . ......., .._" '-~"~,_'_',.-,.,;,~_~~~it
for f~ca?e and building frontage ':',,~T~~~~~a.lte ,
applications. ,. .'
VP 002 is a flush panel used
either externally or as a liner
panel, especially appropriate for
mailufacturin~' \'/arehous3 interior
applications. This panel is
excellent as an accent panel for
, 'VP ,1QO walls and is widely used
for facades and soffits. With the
variety of insulation options
available. your Builder can help
you decide on the oplimal
insulation approach, considering
up-front cost and long term energy
savings. These interlocking
panels come with built-in weather
seals for weathertightness,
All fasteners are completely .
concealed on VP 100 and VP 002..
panels. VP 100 panels cOlTle in a. ;:;}
wide variety of colors.VP 002 '.' ..?';\~
panels are available in. Egyptian';
White and Patrician Bronze a~;~;~
standard. Also, th~se 'panels'f:~:,';
come in lengths to'38f~~t, pro~id~,;.
ina a continuous wall panel from' .;};s~.
. <.. . ,-: _ .:.- ~ '~~'~_;:~t<_,;::-it>:.,~,:., J.:,:.:~~~}:~!r'-
~ ~l . . ....:.~~.,~_-::r....:~.._:..::.:.':.
. \.;",:i,{:..:::~/: .~,_> c, '_"'_' '.' -:' :..-..:.:..;.:_...~.::;<'-~.~.~:~ . 'r,,; - .- - '''' ..-~
- "'~, - -.: . ..:....<.,- ~ .}~~'l,.~.~~....;;....,:;~....:.~-;.>.. '.,. .:. ',' ,-"..:; -;:'-'." ~.:; '-
;:...,.: - - - - -.,~~->':;:.-,'.,~:::-.~~-:.~-:
.' :;..{'~tf:;~;'- :..;:,,;:,,;~.::::.,:~;>t~~;4~.W~~.'.;>i;):\,';'::,:
_WP 100 & v,,002 '. FINISH WAftRANTlES. '.
l~c;rf~~~'~~~~~G~ne'. provhje 1211 :. not 0("' . KXL:;'~istil;#';;;"0
~;ithlerigthsofupto38 feet. Pan31s are ~~ ;,..t'!~., c.'" ~r.!nf.o VARCo-PRUDENANO
S.fOjitional) forVP 100 ana 24 gage stan'jl:i:, " ~,.;' w '..r,j:janal) lor VF THE VP CONTRACTOR
"002. Both panels t'ave a G90 galvanized steel coating and KXL paint 'Vareo-prudeh has built its
'finish for~exterior a'~plications, KXL Is a 1 mil, KYNARt based finish reputation as a leader In tho
:, :applied to the sOrfuce of G90 galvanized steel to givf. a long-life calor nonresidential construction maiket
:.,........t.;.:--.~, r. eS,.ists fading a~~ Chalk~.~~~.__n._ ___ _._.__-----.------I~~~l?!.~~. }::~~~V.,f. i.~~i~~S
~ir~..VP 100NP 002 PANEL CROSS SECT10NS acroSS'" o'Merica:";,-';
:'..:'1. ::.:>".~.t-:.:;~.. '-';:.vp~Bunaer;h'avifconstructed
..~':'."""".i."':':"':""'_~.".::"~"""".'i-"';:~-_.":",'...,...."I' !. ".' '.. --1'. -- T...thoiJsa~'Ofiadlltl.;Sfoi' Vl~ually
. . ~ .. _ ~ ~ every end liSe;ranliinglrOin large
-
: >L.' . . 'ree~~~I(~~~t~~~~~~nge~~ri~';t~
. ~- . meet the,most exacting c~stomer .
'; t 7. . requiremen~:-::;M#~E(fro.in!he ", ;. .'
...,......_'....:;i..;'.~.:~,.~..!.'.;~,.,...'.'.,.,.....:.:...,....."..........,..f,...'....."....,',. ;:". 1'~ ~- . \ :~~~~~~~~~. ;~~1~i~~~t~&~d~/ .-::,.. ..,~>i:
.' ". d' .... ~ .~~f~~~~%."'JIaiso -;;~~
:-':>'0" - ',.:/:j;:, :':.<".: " ,~, ':. ..-:\ ~,~~TfiJ~:a~l~_f~i~ty:~f.!;~!~~S ,,:';~/'~~'.::,,;~t
:~I~}lj~;!t;;::':~::";'f:":'<:' ..~:C_ :-;' ~~ :~:;;';, ~':'.; ': "1 ~', a~~ ~~~~.h.!~J~~~~!)~uJ.~~~~ ~~; ;~~i. :2~,..-
._.... '. .'"', .,.. '.. .'. .,' ..... ...., '..' . ". ,_;,. . '. ,. _ _ .;, aesthetic r~utref'\1E!nts:-.'.~d, ~.;.t-:. "')'. .
:~~ ::<:..~:~";'::~ ,7-:7," _: ',..--:~- . '." ".' .... .',"e' """j:'h:,i, " ::'wheif"non:metat walls-are"(jesirea, "::$."~~;'
f.:.:;.L..I.:".~..-;...S. E. CT. ..1. O. N... p.. R... OPERTlESOF A.RCHITECTU... RAL PA... N. E. lS. .'{.:~....:.;.,..c.. '. ..V.<..'P....B...";I'd. ..".-....'.;.... .....'.'.....".....'tru. '"., ;'ct'. '. '..' ....... ?"'.'.'.'.':.;:.;~.".i
:t',.:~?"",,- '."..'c''':''-' .' ".: .'':i .,'..... ..your_.,~.U1.~rca_I'1~~s.._"your......><\
~;~~:'"': ',.: . ,<,,,:.' '. (For One Foot of W1dth..:V" ....building with'lirtually ~nY);(i "-,'r,::.:JY':>,..,
~[lf~i~f::..;j'C1bo~r,~. .'I:~ti,;1,<t~i}'~. .... ~~m~~em~~ri~'~r'~;..'!";' .j5~;~
~1:~{~YK4,qg~l\::~~ :: 0.0279 O.21.l2 6.0820.085' u.o82
~'.:: ~'--,-~~ <;,'- ,"',
. .,f"'\'Sx .. S'ection'modulus (inches3)
-1<. Ix;;' Moment 01 inertia (inches')
.,', ~-
. .--:.:....:",::
.;~.j~.<' J
':11;~
',.:,:"/" ~ ';'1
,_.,: '..
n____ ___ .-----
r-- -- THERMAL DESIGN VALUES F~; VP 100~'P 002
'r . - Blanket InsulatIon
I Thlclmess
I', .
f'
l' "-Calculated thermal values ,:3 based on full insulation thickness.
I' . .''In.Place thermal values are based on ASTM C236 Guarded Hot Sox Tests or are
. '. c?:tlculated accounting for effects of fasteners and insulation C()mpressioll when the
L_!:s~~o:_~~ailabl~:~_____. __ _____ __. .. -' .
4"
Calculated'
R-Value U-Value
7.41 0.~35
11.80 O.OS5
15.10 0,066
In-Place"
R- Value U-Value
6,08 0.165
7.74 0.129
8.45 0.118
2"
3"
J
... :f
... ... ~..".r. -.I
-. ~ ;:::.)-i~JSi:/=' ~ :.~
.~ . "'... . ,.,-.,
. ,;-..~." ~!.
"'. ..'".- ."
. ., .; '.' ,:.~'
,. " .'
. ,.' .
. .~:- .:-,'"j/J " :~. .. .;~. "1:"'
.,;"'.~-~.~.. .-"..-...._~..~~"._.... .
o. 4: It
......: "
I ---.-.------.-..------.--- -.---. -.-.---------- ----..
~;:r~~~L~~.~1O'=~~:J~1o'::~"-J~;.$;;J~n-:~r-~rt?~1'~~~4;;';ik~~;:;
-. KOC OJ. ~ Varco,.Pruden
rte tp il:l~';~~'ii1l'''S,
S ~X:: iJaiJl1il~;jld'l~
C_ J'I. UI~itcri !Jrl.I"Tj';I"',I,'cn (r,,""",' r':",ril'y.
, . ...~..'- -..., . .' -- .~. ',.........'
:~
~.~~.:.....
.~
~~.
;t,
~
1
.t:
~
'f::
:~
:~
".1
,.
J
. }j
~~
~.'H
j
,
;~rii
.l....~.....-
I.~...
.....
.1
\:,
~.
,o,:'Ii.'
, (.:
-J l\ ",',~ f.\ 1"l
.. ~ 3...... i\
'tV.,\R :'V\ i'HY ~ l'" 1DO R S F. ivi ::"17
'JV' t"li\ 'l~) ~I'n~~
4\.F'!... 7,,~~~:~-:. ~.. ~~d~.'
V:~ ~ .': -: ';.c ~ eEl"'; '}~ ItC;~..uJ~. l,.] ::~,"ic.~n )f_' "I , <..U:: )!}''''I(',n;;
~ ,. -1\ tt't:f'fr:.,.,t\N~'1 :C1 ?c~ ~"\ .:,::C~ !P;;:l.~ -.:; ......
}~~.~.:: ._._;.,;::~:: ~1~/,,\..,ei;=0:"1'to1._ ,,';';<'j ;''':'~'1-'':''
,:;.;,; ~~r':=:~:J ..j'~'!'~C:"""~uc:'~i' } ~C.1'mC:~;lCi:'i.JO ;~t(l;C;:~'-'"
C' ";';Y '/AkC;:?'lUDt:N ~ ,n ,hlJ Ccn.1n.JnloILJ, ~d .':leIl31.
C.J~lIn;lnl(;i CrJn,],Ja -::nd Atul~C, al'ld ~ ,apo,,,d !O ~()f",ci
a1mOlph;J(lc cond,tionl 01 dolinod 1J.9low wiil, lub."el 10 rho
t,;oncilhon\ ;Jnd lilnifchon.\ SlJt f~ iiil ~~~, ~f cr~c1t. ch::,ck.
bi'lll)'. p<tol. flak" 0' cn:p, er ~ !ot ""lor __l'O !hen 5E u/1Ij, rn
"';lc,u,~d I.~ occoracnc, ""it!ol A5'7M o.21~.79 i'orosroph
J 3 ~ J 0: chalk In ,,'C!!., oE on ASTl'A !).65~ no. 8 rating for 0
pJ',od 01 rwonry[2Cl yeOrl oltor IhipmWII.
,S'I w<:rronly d03\ :l~t apply. ho....,".,r 10 'oof ond/Of ':VCli pen"l,
l""~l~i;~d ~!" o:"y b~i!d~n; locot:::d i..., fh;; ''';ci~.t ~ \J ~u'"''
C:'Ollel sh::roitne. Of cnomio:ol plonl or arty w;.~ ;lid suO::lfa
domog. to rooi ond/or wall ponels IbQ' Is lToc3obla Ie on
'.:hnrrlioblo ,ourc:a of corrOll"" dilCn~ ....... Ot ccrlCia10ru
wnlch no.". on 0 ,"Qule. b,ni.. off.c:.d wch ~Il&lg.
in oeOlllon, Inls warranty Inell nol oJpply !o:
101 roof ondiof woll pen. Is thaI no"" *" demcgod In Ircndl
. Of on job Illof or hay. been improperly Ilo"d;
(bl 'oof c,.~ well panels thaI :'Oylt b,en IUblKl.:Jd \\0 ml:VM,
MS"gO"co. or ho"e \:),en ,oo"ed from rho orisi"d plae') of
srll'Cllon. or rod ond/or wol! panel: Inot hGVId nol bun
erec:,d ,n occ:orcl'Jnct w,th 011 opplice~le V~CCH'~L;DEN
drowlng~ end Ins/tuc;lions and goo~ "r.,dlon prcdc::lK;
Ic) collol:)fol building mol~riols. .~ccessori..JS, !tqUipmeili ond
O:;lnar It~ms nor sold b'f VARCC :':lUDEN Or'lC: lJtIy dClT~-
10 rod on.:!/or wdl p.'Jocis resulhng Ihltrofrom:
:dl Jam(l9~:~ or d"l"c:s ,n roof ond/or woll panels -:au$Q~ !or:
Improp." 'nll'JIlOllon
~:!} dom09"'!0 or del1!crs in roo I ood/or wall po",,11 cousoi by
i"m Q~CQSlor:cu or fCltoners ~ol lupplillc by VAR :0.
PRUDEN or oehmo'otio" In rMo r-,ol and/or well ponala
relOled Iner~lo;
If 1 rno condition known os .microcrocxing" 01 roof and/or ~,6j
. : Donei; 'H!"e~ il 0 common occurronc~ in Ii'll! formIng
, P'O':OI~ of color :oot"d 'oof and/or wall pon.,1s o:\d is /lol
10 b~ cco",~d 0 defect warrented I,~r,!\:.,oor; end
;g; d:::::i"'og~, tcd'JUJ 1)( dof'!cts cov:ed by Act: cf God. bi!ir.g
Obi ~C'l. e":1f"ol forcas. e'i'lolI"l':, fir." rools. c",,1
c~~~ctlonl. ~armfui fume:., fo{;)'gn sue::onc:n if'! t~n
C:;'-:O~':);'0:3. or :crrC~ICI1 CQ\.;-,od b~ ')"~O:\ut~ to mcrlti'"
~""03-i:>"~(~. ~ch !P(O~~. ch<Jmlccb. C$tt, or atc.me rcdiohc.;1.
-~,! No"cnty I; !,,;endad lo!"iv 10 tno OWI'-.1r ncrr.eo ner.in on c.' ;~
...~t"I-:ro~)brobj~ on:] ~on..o'Uign~bb. Tht~ t:ondihon is Q mcr~rtaJ term
~;. th:) ',Norlen"j ond c~nlrQve~,hon cf ~he rerm by jr:~ QWr'!Of 01 ::" C9~nt
or rec~~~;:r.tarl'~'.! ~~all ..~I.'U'::,., VA~:O.P~UDEN f.-em 113 obJigoriOfj~
.,-:revI1d~..
:~E W",R~i~NiieS C,:SC;:15I:D A:--lD 1.IM!7~D AfJOV~ ,.\NO Hi;
~::"",,;EJIES SC7 .':'~TtH 3EtOV-I FO!{ ~CC.t A~O/JR \-VAlL ?~.NE~S
r,i"A,l aE iN ~lc\J ::;:llcl OTHE:l WARRANTIES OR ~;::"'~EDI::5
",:"~T:-jE~ e;~i'~:S:;;~D O~ IMrUfD, :NClUI)!~~G ~l:T NOT UMli:;::)
r:jAN'I IM?U;;O w,:",~!l.~I'lTlES OF Mc~Cli"\NTA6ll1i,( AND
:=i;~~c3S FOR ;:.. ?ARTICULAR ?URPOSE.
Upo~ ',,,,,lIon nolifiechon r9'::\'II""d by VAilCO.PRUDeN within tho
~:", ObO~~IIOI~d worranty pnriod and medo by tho Ownar within Ihirty
(301 dO'ls irom delK:ion of 0:\'1 fOilvrll of the materials 10 conform to
:h" cb'oY9 werronty. u~on prllsanlolion bi' th. Owner ollhis fully
,xeculod warrenty agr.,emtJnl, and upon inspllClicn by VARCO.
PllUiJEN 10 verify laid nonconformity. VARCO.jlRUOEN shall, al ill
lol~ oplion, r,pair, roploac, or r'3pcinl rool andlo, waR pon.!s p,owt'd
10 ~ cefltClivO without charge to tho Owner, Be/or. any colot cnango
;.,
'"
Built On Superior S3rlice
,:)\....::..Hcn:::.ld )n ~'::C8 Ti .~~a...u,..,d. 1./~'" :nc,~ ';r -ju",:, on pc:,.,!h I~'.~.l "; }
)''"'\'".;'rn:;.: .'-;..'1,--) _~~'.'';''' ....11;"';. ..,J .~i\...'.....l ;:. :<: ...~~ '''.-''
.:... ;~L-': :i.;.....;:;." ;:~l: 4;~lf'I;-=,... ... '". ; .,Oi~ ~'c'n .....,-..
''':O;-';Vif1 ,,'11..;!1 .~ i ;;' i ...H:::" .,;.,....::~':. ~l;'., 1l:;C~'-)ClC!" -..;. (':'.::'';',
i1,~.'ccnrc(lnlri"" In ~h. ."onnar and "':or :h" :Jerlod ocov,",. ~nl'JiI
,C.I"-IIIU'S h;JilillTl..n' '.)/ ail.cli~utlo", 'If '1;,~(::;,hUiJEN It) !h... 0...,,~..,
w;'~rh..r boled ~pon conn act. tort (including neglige",;.,!. lItlet i,ab,li'"T
or o'+-<t"""\1, ,'ny r"'p:li,9(j. '<'lpalnl.d Of '..plcc~-:l ::;or.." IUppll~d ,n
Iclil'cdlO<'l of In., oblig,;;/ic nl und"r Ih" .....or'cnry ~''';:i; be tub,,,,,;o rh.,
wermn", only io' lh,l r"mOlne,,1f d ~.. P<J/lod oppl;ca::i., to the ,Jloducr
origlnolly purenQ~lIld, Foilura of tne OwnlJr to g,va hmeiy nOhee 10
'IARCJ.PllUOEN of io.r'J(~ te conform reh~vel VARe::J.PRUCE~ 01
::r.y cnd "i1 obligations une:" ",II worronl'f
TliE ~EMEDIE5 :)El ~U~lH HBE!N A~E ExCLUSIVE. WITHOUT
:tEOAllD TO WHEi~:'~ 't"," DE~cCi W,J.,S DISCOVERABLE O~
LATi;NT .A T THE TIME 1..:' c.:eIV::RY OF THE MATERIALS TO THE
OWNE:l. Thw enentiol purpose 01 this tXc!UIIV6 remedy ~holl be 10
prOVIde the Owner with repaIr or ~.ploe~' '"nl 0/ pan.11 thol pfOV. to
bo dafacti"e within rile perl"d ,"nd 1Ir..:l6: ','01 :cno:rions PfOVloully ~el
lor';', This oxclusive remedy ~najJ not ne"e f. I.,J of III eucnllol p<.:rpole
{a;; the: lerm ;s used in the Unilo~m CornmcfClol Cod..} prOYldad
V,2,ilCC-PRUOEN romoins wlI!ing 10 r.perr or reploc3 dofectivQ penei.
wi/hin a comm.,rciolly r.,OH'r'!"Jbi. lima affor it oblo,ns actual
knowledg., 01 Ill, '1xl$tenc, 01 0 particulcr o!li..o:!.
IN :\10 EVENT SHALL VARCO.PllUDEN ae LIABLE FOR ANY
SPECIAl, CONS:~U;:NTIAl. ~NCIDENT.A,l OR iNDIRECT DAMAGeS
WITH RESPECT TO THIS SALE OR ANYTHING DONE IN
CONNECTION HERt:WITH !INCLUDING. WITHOUT LIMITATION.
EllEC'i'ION SERVICES P:lO,,'!C':D BY BUllDE~ 0;;: BY VAll CO.
P!l')DCN). WI-'EiHe~ 3.~SED UPON CCr-JTP.ACT. TORi
(INCtJOING :-.teGLlGCNCE). STRiCT lIA8111i'l' OR OTHEl/WISE
l:;<C::PT 1't.) THE EXTENT MODIFIED HEREIN. THE WARRANTY
CO'v'ERA0, ':"PPlICA8~E .0 .HIS 3\JIlDING SI~All Be AS STATED
Ii', VAi:C:).PRUDEN'S .qANDARD WA~l!ANTY" AND All
lIMITA1'IOl'J::i. :-xCtuSk." is AND OISCL~IMEl!S iNClU:JED IN
SAJ~ .5'(,. NuAkD ','i:'.~RA. .'fYo SHAll APPt'( '.'.'Ii;.l ~ULL FORCE
HE;ir;-c. E;(,:::Pi' FOil HiE Ar~!~MATIVE O,LlGA710NS
lll'IC':1.: "XEN ~'t '1.dC.':".PRUJEN HERE!N. AN':'
INCON$;.;,ci'l'Y BeTWEeN 7lii: TE~MS Or THIS WAR:Z.'V"TY AND
Ti'll: TE!V..,; Of SAID 'STANDAilD WARRANTY. Sri/,ll eE
llESClVEO .N ;:.'WO~ Of THE TEV-AS OF SAID .STANDA~~
W..:"xi!ANTY.'
Oct9 l~lJQd
Vorc::-?ruJ:;r. .:"u-;;:;OrizCI10n
O^i1;r
V:) Joo ;~
Joo LOCOlion
$' i!t:1
.ay
51.::18
euild\!r'~ Ncmo
Varcc-Prudon !uildings, a Division of
United Dominion Industries, Inc.
.C29 ;0/92,500..t,P I
.~~;~t.
....
.....
'"
r.
;.
!.
i*'.
:;.:.
~
~
j'~
~
~
~
~
r~
FILE COpy
February 17, 2000
D.R. Horton Custom Homes
Attention: Don Patton
3459 Washington Drive
Eagan, MN 55122
RE: Agenda and Agenda Report
Dear Mr. Patton:
Attached is a City Council Agenda and Agenda Report for the February 22,
2000, meeting. If you have any questions, please contact me at the Planning
Department at 612-447-9810.
Sincerely,
Q.~
~nsier, AICP
~~n~~ Coordinator
Enclosure
16200 E~'BIW'~~QW'@"W\O~~.~~!jt<t9fue, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (6f2}Qf47-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
February 17, 2000
Deerfield Development
John and Mary Mesenbrink
7765 175th Street East
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Agenda and Agenda Report
Dear Mr. and Ms. Mesenbrink:
ftLE COpy
Attached is a City Council Agenda and Agenda Report for the February 22,
2000, meeting. If you have any questions, please contact me at the Planning
Department at 612-447-9810.
Sincerely,
~().~~
Une Kansier, AICP
Planning Coordinator
Enclosure
16200 E'a~ffii'et~~WJ~\O~~~~lJF~e, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (6f2}Qf47-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
February 11, 2000
Richard Krier
Midwest Planning & Design
1491 Shoreline Drive
Wayzata, MN 55391
Dear Dick:
Enclosed are copies ofthe correspondence and report you requested on the Keyland
Home Variance file. The fee for copies is $5.75. As I mentioned to you this morning,
we do not send out copies until they are paid for, so please remit the fee as soon as
possible.
Thanks,
CeMu (j
Connie Carlson
Planning Secretary
enc.
~
16200 Eagle Creek Ave,S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
F~LE COpy
January 28, 2000
Kevin Horkey
Keyland Homes
17021 Fish Point Road SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Appeal to Decision of Planning Commission to Grant Variance
Dear Mr. Horkey:
As you know, on January 24, 2000, the City of Prior Lake Planning Commission
approved a variance to the side yard setback for the addition to the existing building at
17021 Fish Point Road. On January 27, 2000, a letter appealing this decision (see
attached) was filed in accordance with Section 1108.408 and Section 1109.400 of the
Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance.
The City Council will consider this appeal at a public hearing on February 22, 2000. We
cannot issue any permits or approvals until after the Council has made a decision. We
will send you official notice and a copy of the agenda and staff reports prior to the public
hearing.
If you have any questions about this matter, please contact me at 447-9810.
Sincerely,
~Q.-t{~
U~~~:_~ansier, AICP
Planning Coordinator
Enclosure
16200 E~~~I'e~I]:W~~<S~~~fUrde.ake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (6f2P1t47-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
January 25,2000
Zoning Administrator
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Appeal to the City Council: Variance Key Land Homes Board of Adjustment
decision of January 24,2000
Dear Zoning Administrator:
We are property owners within 350 feet ofthe subject property. We are filing an appeal
to the variance granted by the Board of Adjustment at it's January 24, 2000 meeting. We
make this appeal in accord with Section 1109.400 Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance. The
appeal is based on several inconsistencies in the application, and the fact that the criteria
for granting a variance have not been satisfied.
Sincerely,
_:_{cE~::
Donald Patton
Manager Land Development
~C;:~_ ___________________
Mary Mesenbrink
Ilr.w.rffi@ffiOWi' ffi ~
!I >1\ I IDt 2.,.
I:/lil '"'
!;,. I
jl I ~
/J,
C
January 25,2000
Zoning Administrator
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Appeal to the City Council: Variance Key Land Homes Board of Adjustment
decision of January 24, 2000
Dear Zoning Administrator:
We are property owners within 350 feet of the subject property. We are filing an appeal
to the variance granted by the Board of Adjustment at it's January 24,2000 meeting. We
make this appeal in accord with Section 1109.400 Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance. The
appeal is based on several inconsistencies in the application, and the fact that the criteria
for granting a variance have not been satisfied.
Sincerely,
_~_tt:_IEC:
Donald Patton
Manager Land Development
Jo
r-~
t!1f!#-_lJ:~
Mary Mesenbrink ::-~
1/27/00
Received Appeal letter to City Council re: Horkey Variance
and check #10600 - $75.00 fee
~------"-_._--,_.__.- - ~ -_.- -~----~'---' ......_-'"- .- ..-'._.__._~-_._----_._----,.._"-_.__._-~---_.__..............---- .".-- - ..._- . ._._-".~---- -- ._-...-_._-_.._------"~---,._---_.- --------------_.- ._.._-- ~.- - ----.--.-----..---------------.
,.; - ..~~- - ..::- ....
. -'-."---'
.':>-".~ ..... ,". ,.0:.-:;._
.._~", .~~~. '.',." r .. ....... ~_ ~~ u_~.........Il.....:. ~:';';t;'_.."__'; ..' -.... .....:.;., ....... ...i'- , ~__-'~ .... ':.,-,.:"~,"::/'''; :. .. J-.':;'.~_.__. .-'" -..... '. .......--..... - '._-;' "..... ,,,,-.,,. F---:-....'~..:...
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
16200 EAGLE CREEK AVE SE
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
(612)447-4230, FAX (612) 447-4245
RECEIPT # 36164
( Q--] -ff[)
\ v! .)
DATE:
R . d f ~\;/l,:( 1..( ~{ f~ f () " I J1j--1,"'- Of I l~/O~ (l.t~:...1t/L-,-J}i ,; /l /
ecelve 0 r, \,' ,/V'~ !' ~ .v....
;i ' f, I - f' i U :1
the sum of 'x: 1.)> ve--,\ - fL__ - t~ (J.L !A..() I L iO
./ \ Li l
for the purpose of
: ~ .-\ !
/ J j,';.^ I [: 1
IYJ~L/L,r:L{C
(.
'j dollars
/-\
--. (
KD'\
"t, U UJVLC(A,A--Iz.,
)
~7 ,,,-- ,
$ :\ I (JlJ
Invoice #
'......l...... ,- '--, '"':
.. l..;.~; ! _ "\i~ i /"(;' /f ( ,.,:/:
. ( 'J ' .!," L 1;1 I"', 'I \: i
(-.1.---1\ {: ilJ I L/ I C_..C:'''-u,<.!/,---
'Receipt Clerk for the City of Prior"Lake
... ~~ ....'\:e~-_:::....~\( ~//.#./ .,' ~ ~ ,(t;:...v~ / ~- - -"'~I('----~~' ~~ r 1\..'::'-"':--- f
i
w
>
I
i
MICHAEL J. OR CHRISTINE A. SUEL
~ I _ ~~U~381
13741 HUNTINGTON AVE. '" <> 1'1 j
SAVAGE, MN 55378
75-7562 10600
912
DATE I - z.r; - () 0
P~~6~RT~l L} I ~ oj! f+ 10 J La be.
SeVV\ ~ h\Je W\~ AJO II Oc ')
FIRST COMMUNITY BANK
14141 GLENDALE ROAD
SAVAGE, MN 55378
612.$5-9620
$ 75~
U U L LA R 5 r!15i?",'"::'
"
~
~
~
~
I
..
~J-J
M'
FOR
-t' f IrZl..(1
___..- "':-~~~ _ '/ ;>/ Xii ,"': ~ ('-'<"'~""'{ ,'-' - .,-"/,...{,, ,'-" . -. ~""'~~ -. .. . .-,,"
.... ~ ~...___.. {ll'(/'l{'fl ' \ ~"'V'"-""",,,,, ,,,'::r, ~.<<I~ (/'/f' .... ---/. .,- '~', ,\ ( i ...
Miscellaneous
L:\TEMPLA TE\FILEINFO.DOC
.,
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAIL
COUNTY OF scon )
)ss
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
of the City of Prior Lake Co ty of Scott, State of
Minnesota, b7ing duly s om, says on .the ~ day of _ 2000, she served
the "it-ed list of ~ have an mteIeFin the '-'tI.I>.
eo ~ . . by mailing to the c py thereof,
enclosed in an envelope, postage prepaid, and be depositing same in the post office at
Prior Lake, Minnesota, the last known address of the parties.
Subscribed and sworn to be this
_ day of ,2000.
NOTARY PUBLIC
L:\DBPTWORK\BLANKFRMIMAILAFF,DQC
NOTICE OF HEARING TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING:
AN APPEAL TO THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
TO GRANT A VARIANCE TO THE REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK
ADJACENT TO A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT IN THE C-5 (BUSINESS
PARK) DISTRICT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO
AN EXISTING BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 17021
FISH POINT ROAD SE
You are hereby notified that the Prior Lake City Council will hold a public hearing at
Prior Lake Fire Station #1, located at 16776 Fish Point Road SE on: Tuesday, February
22,2000, at 7:30 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible.
APPELLANTS: Deerfield Development
John and Mary Mesenbrink
D.R. Horton Custom Homes
SUBJECT SITE: 17021 Fish Point Road SE, Prior Lake, MN, legally described as
follows:
Lot 2, Block 2, WATERFRONT PASSAGE ADDITION, Scott
County, Minnesota together with that part of Lot 1, said Block 2,
described as follows:
Beginning at the southeast comer of Lot 2, Block 2, of said plat;
thence North 00 degrees 10 minutes 44 seconds East plat bearing
along the east line of said Lot 2, a distance of 228.00 feet to the
northeast comer of said Lot 2; thence South 89 degrees 49 minutes
16 seconds East along the easterly extension of the north line of
said Lot 2, a distance of 100.52 feet; thence South 00 degrees 10
minutes 44 seconds West a distance of228.00 feet to the
intersection with the south line of said Lot 1; thence North 89
degrees 49 minutes 16 seconds West along the said south line, a
distance of 100.52 feet to the point of beginning.
REQUEST:
The appellants are appealing the decision of the Planning
Commission to approve a variance to allow the construction of an
addition to the existing office/warehouse building located at 17021
Fish Point Road. The proposed addition will be located 20' from
the south property line rather than the 75' as required by Section
1102.1406 ofthe Zoning Ordinance.
16200 2a'BPJi~f~JWP)\6~~qg!?,8\9R8Ptrg\t8~Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
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 City Council
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
criteria listed in Section 1108.406 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Prepared this 1st day of February, 2000.
Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator
City of Prior Lake
Mailed on February 9,2000.
I: \OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\OO-008mn.doc
2
NOTICE OF HEARING TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING:
AN APPEAL TO THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
TO GRANT A VARIANCE TO THE REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK
ADJACENT TO A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT IN THE C-5 (BUSINESS
PARK) DISTRICT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO
AN EXISTING BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 17021
FISH POINT ROAD SE
You are hereby notified that the Prior Lake City Council will hold a public hearing at
Prior Lake Fire Station #1, located at 16776 Fish Point Road SE on: Tuesday, February
22,2000, at 7:30 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible.
APPELLANTS: Deerfield Development
John and Mary Mesenbrink
D.R. Horton Custom Homes
SUBJECT SITE: 17021 Fish Point Road SE, Prior Lake, MN, legally described as
follows:
Lot 2, Block 2, WATERFRONT PASSAGE ADDITION, Scott
County, Minnesota together with that part of Lot 1, said Block 2,
described as follows:
Beginning at the southeast comer of Lot 2, Block 2, of said plat;
thence North 00 degrees 10 minutes 44 seconds East plat bearing
along the east line of said Lot 2, a distance of228.00 feet to the
northeast comer of said Lot 2; thence South 89 degrees 49 minutes
16 seconds East along the easterly extension of the north line of
said Lot 2, a distance of 100.52 feet; thence South 00 degrees 10
minutes 44 seconds West a distance of228.00 feet to the
intersection with the south line of said Lot 1; thence North 89
degrees 49 minutes 16 seconds West along the said south line, a
distance of 100.52 feet to the point of beginning.
REQUEST:
The appellants are appealing the decision of the Planning
Commission to approve a variance to allow the construction of an
addition to the existing office/warehouse building located at 17021
Fish Point Road. The proposed addition will be located 20' from
the south property line rather than the 75' as required by Section
1102.1406 of the Zoning Ordinance.
16200 E~~PJi~~~P)\t~:og~~~~~f2Wtr~1?,cMinnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
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 City Council
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
criteria listed in Section 1108.406 ofthe Zoning Ordinance.
Prepared this 1st day of February, 2000.
Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator
City of Prior Lake
To be published in the Prior Lake American on February 5, 2000.
I: \OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\OO-008pn.doc
2
0 0 0 0 0 OlI-
O 0 0 0 0 Oil-
W I\) f-' I\) f-' f-'II-
0 01'0 01 ~I 01'01
~t!-f 0'\ 0 101 WI 1\)1 Oil-
lOll-
0'\ 10 U11 ~I WI U111-
0'\ 01'0 ~ U11 WI 0:>1 U111-
I I I II-
::0 '0 '0 '01 '01 '0 I 'Oil-
-, V .' P l::l ::0 ::0 ::01 ::01 ::0 I ::Oli-
n H H HI HI H I
~ ,- ~~ 0 I I I Hil-
II-
::0 'O~C-i 'O~O 'Of-'nnl nf-'Ol 'OU1r 'Of-'nnll- Z ,
0 ::o~O ::O~l::l ::OO'\HHI :I::O:J:;I ::OU1 I ::OO'\HHII- III "'.
r 3) ... to HO'\:I:: HO'\l::l HI\)"'3"'31 ~O:><:I HO I HI\)"'3~II- :I ,
OU1Z OU1::O 000<0<1 HI Of-':I:I 000< II- CD I\)
~ ~ r '0 ::0 ::0 "l ::00 I :I:: '0 0 I ::0 01 ::00 II- 0
~f ::0 f-'l::l f-'H :J:;01 :J:;H I to~' :J:;01l- R"
H t"~ t"~l::l t"l::l0"l1 toOOI t""'3 I t"l::l0""l1l- f-'
r! Z ~ ;l:'U1R" :J:;U1t" ;1:';1:'3: I toZ I :J:;:J:; I :J:;:J:;3: II- :J:; 01'0
"'3 ~ ~ 0 ~GJH'01 l::lC<:l:I:1 ~~C<:ll ~GJH'011- 0-
l::l C<:lto3: l::lto C<:lt"Z::O Zt::I~' t::I<: I C<:lt"Z::01l- 0-
0 "'3;1:' "'30 t::IHH ~ I HR'" t::IHHII- Ii
~ 3: ~ 3: t::I 3: toO 3: tol 3:t::I I 3: toOII- CD
ZC<:lO< ZC<:l<: Z("J"'3~ Z"'3C<:l1 Z~~I zn"'3::011- m
C<:l ~::o ~ZI 0' ::0::0 ?1- m
n t" C<:l;l:'t" t" I t"tol t::I;I:'t" II-
cJJ I U1 U1 0 U1t::1"'3;1:' U1 I U1ZC<:l1 U1t::1"'3:J:;1I-
;-\ ~ I U1 3: U1 '01 U1~0~ U1 I U1 3:1 U1~0~1I-
I W t::I W 3: W ~t::I W I W ;1:'1 W ::Ol::lll-
<t> I ~ to ~ t::I ~;I:' f-' I ~ ~I ~:J:; li-
I I\) l::l I\) ~ 1\)<: ~ I I\) 0<1 1\)<: li-
I ~ I I li-
I I tol li-
I ~ t" 1 :I: I li-
I H t" I ~: li-
I Z n I I li-
I ~ I I ~I li-
I I I tol li-
I I I I li-
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I\) I\) I\) I 1\)1 I\) I I\) 0
I 0 0 0 I 01 0 I 0 ",.
I 0 0 0 I 01 0 I 0 m
I I\) I\) I\) I 1\)1 I\) I I\) rt
I I I I
I 0 0 01 01 01 0 Z
I 0:> 0:> 0:>1 0:>1 0:>1 0:> "'3 III
I 0 0 01 01 01 0 ........ :I
I 0 0 01 0 01 0 n CD
I I I
I 0 0 0 I 0 01 0 to :J:;
I ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~I ~ n 0-
I f-' f-' f-' I f-' f-'I f-' ::r 0-
I 10 10 10 I 10 101 ID Ii
I I I CD
I I I m
I U1 U1 U1 I U1 U1 I U1 to m
I 0 0 0 I 0 0 I 0 'tl
I ID ID 1.0 I ID ID I 1.0 f-' I:"
I I I CD
I I I tI.l l!l
I I I 'tl III
1 I I I ~ .....
I I 1 I
I f-' f-' I f-' I f-' f-' I f-' to 3:
I 0'\ 0'\ I 0'\ I 0'\ 0'\1 0'\ 'tl 0
I 01'0 01'0 I 01'0 1 01'0 01'01 01'0 W 0-
I 1 I I CD
1 U1 U11 U11 U1 U11 U1 to .....
I 0 01 01 0 01 0 'tl CD
I U1 U11 U11 U1 U11 U1 01'0 Ii
1 I I I
I U1 U1 1 U11 U1 U11 U1 to
I 0 0 I 01 0 01 0 'tl
I ~ ~ ~I ~ ~I ~ U1
I I I
I I I tI.l
1 I I 'tl
I I 1 0'\
I I I
I I tIl
1 I 'tl
I I ~
I I
I I to
I I 'tl
I I 0:>
I I
I I tIl
1 I 'tl
I I ID
I I
I\) I\) N 1 I\) 1\)1 I\) ><
0 0 0 I 0 01 0 CD
0 0 0 I 0 01 0 III
0 0 0 I 0 01 0 Ii
I I
::0 ::0 ::0 1 ~ ::01 ::0 ::0
Z to I\) t::If-'~~ to I\) I:"~I\) I ~toznt"~1\) ~~W"'3~~~t"t"~1\)1 f-'0I'0~0'\:J:;~("J1:"1:"::e:1\) '0
t::IU1 :><:I\)~ t::IU1 OHU1 1 t::IOO:J:;U1 U1U1WO 0<0:J:;U11 0:>0:>0f-'1:" 00<0:J:;U1 III "'3t1l
W nID 0:> f-' nlO "'3t"W I 01'00:> 3:"'3"'31\) 1 - I H"'3"'31\) I U11-10 ::OH"'3"'31\) Ii ;I:'("J
f-' "'3f-' Z- C<:l........ "'3f-' 1 Of-' I f-'U11\) Il::lID 01'0- 01'0 'O:J:;;I:';I:' Z 1 C<:l 10 1 . 01'0- 01'0 Z;I:'- Z 1 t::I ID n IDO
~~ ."" ... , ,,~ C"'l<t> 1 OIO'\ZO~O'\ U1 U10t"t"t"GJO~0'\1 IDU1 U1GJI:" GJO::OO'\ CD 0"'3
.. ~ ,.-
I\) f-'O w:;tI f-'O I:;tIO I U'1' ~':>"JO ,::;::,ttlOOO 0""l01 IOlto' O::e: O"lo ..... f-''''3
U'1 1\)0 f-'I:"~R" 1\)01 t"ZU'1 I U'1IDO f-':;tIo ~0I'0~- ~~~~f-'~~: -U'1 U'1ZZ tIlf-'::Oo I:"
;I:' I\) to I:" f-' t::lo , I\)I000n 01\) O'\f-'O'\ GJE::t::l ON '**' C":l
"'30 I\) toZ ~o ttltoo I -0 -Ottl~1\) 1 0:> t/J ttl~f-" "'3 01'0 I:" tI:l~O 0
0 ::e: U1f-' t::I t"tIl I 01'0- ::0 t" ~I::e: ZZZOI:" I 02:I2:HZOOI:" ~
"l '0 f-'1.Of-' '0 0 I "'3 0 01'0 - - -""lO ' f-' Z Z""lO
I ;1:'01'00:>........ I n'O I Ol::lZl\)n'O f-'U1~0'\l::ll::ll::l n'O 1 ::e:O:>U1f-'t::lI:"GJ n'tl I:"
l::l f-' - 01'0 f-' ~~ , I~:J:; O:>IOf-'::O::O::OI:"~:J:; I ~10 H I:"~;I:' CD
f-' f-' OR" f-' I 'tlI\)O:>I\),tI.l O'\U1-It"t"t"HltI.l , t"-U1O'\U1ZZH'tI.l l!l
........ 01'0 "l ("Jt" 01'0 00 I Of-'I\)- Otl.l . 0'\- 01'0 >< >< >< Z 0 tI.l 1 H- 0'\ - 1.0 l::l Z 0 tI.l III
N ::000< oto I tll-JI 0:J:; 1.0 U1 tl30:J:; , Z - W t"l::l0:J:; .....
~ l::lt"ZH ~ :J:; I . WZI\)GJ l.O::e:tI.llt"t"t" I\)GJ 1 l::ltl.l~ . -JH NG)
~ If-'toOZ I 0'\0 tl3 _ U1HHHn l::l , tIlf-'IDzn l::l
I........ OGJ I ~1f-' O:>f-'O'\ZZZO I O~~ U1' l::lO
f-' GJ 11\)f-' GJ - U1 01'0 ~ "'3~0I'0 l::ll::ltl33: ~ , "lU1U1W-O:> 3: ~
........ t::I I l.O*tI.l t::I - O'\~ 0-1 ~ 1 I -W U1f-'
01'0 I :~ f-'~I\)I ~ - f-' U1-Jf-'tl3 ~ I t" 11'0- 11-3-W3: ~ 'tI
WO 0 NO to l::l- ~ U1f-'IDI.OW- 1 o U1 01'0 0- f-' 0 ~
f-'N If-' oOO:>N tolOW' f-'::O I "'3 I tI.l U1 . tI.l
I\) I........ 1.O"l' I\) f-'f-'("J t" U1O'\' 0:>' t" 1 U1 1'tl~0I'01-3 l::l
I\) 101'0 0 O:>I.O~ H 0'\-f-'U101'00< I R"O'\ U10 f-' tI.l
U1 I <:0 0I'0U1 Z - U1-f-' I O'\tll -tl3 rt
I ::O:J:; , . <: l::l ~ -n I l::l - ::0 III
:J:; I t"("J:J:; O'\~l::l to - 0 , ~ ~ rt
n I to n -W ::0 I tI.l ~ f-'
I , m
44,1DA
~
259010210
25GC)10150
~.l.P(Pfr
5.;;'0 A
2580102.0
~
I
0Ul0<
PASSAGE 2ND ADO'N
25812OC12O
3/,~5 A-
'J ?/B PI
258120010
~~g ,4
258120010
VARIANCE HARDSHIP STANDARDS
1. Where by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of a
lot, or where by reason of exceptional topographical or water
conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional conditions
of such lot, the strict application of the terms of this Ordinance
would result in peculiar and practical difficulties or exceptional
or undue hardship upon the owner of such lot in developing or
, using such lot in a manner customary and legally permissible
within the Use District in which said lot is located.
While the lot itself is not exceptionally narrow, the location of the
existing building on the lot limits the placement of an addition to the
building. If the addition were to meet all required setbacks, the
options for the placement of parking and loading docks are very
limited. This location would nearly eliminate the use of the building
for warehouse purposes.
2. Conditions applying to the structure or land in question are
peculiar to the property or immediately adjoining property, and
do not apply, generally, to other land or structures in the Use
District in which the land is located.
The existing building complied with the required setbacks at the
time it was constructed. The subsequent annexation and rezoning
of the adjacent property created the additional setback
requirement.
3. The granting of the proposed Variance is necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of
the owner.
The property owner purchased the property from the City for the
express purpose of building an addition to the property. This
addition cannot be built without granting of the variance.
4. The granting of the proposed Variance will not impair an
adequate supply of light and air to the adjacent property,
unreasonably increase the congestion in the public streets,
increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety.
The addition conforms to the location of the existing building, and
will not impair the supply of light and air to the adjacent property.
The addition will not significantly impact the public streets or
endanger public safety.
5. The granting of the Variance will not unreasonably impact on
the character and development of the neighborhood,
unreasonably diminish or impair established property values
in the surrounding area, or in any other way impair the health
safety, and comfort of the area.
The addition setback conforms to the setback of the existing
building on this site. The required landscape bufferyard located
along the south property line will provide screening between this
site and the adjacent residential district.
6. The granting of the proposed Variance will not be contrary to
the intent of this Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.
The granting of this variance is not contrary to the intent of the
Comprehensive Plan. When the applicant purchased this property,
he entered into a development agreement with the City. That
agreement notes the further development of this site by expanding
the existing building is consistent with the development objectives
set forth for the tax increment financing district.
7. The granting of the Variance will not merely serve as a
convenience to the applicant but is necessary to alleviate a
demonstrable undue hardship or difficulty.
The location of the existing building limits the options for the
location of any addition to that building. The granting of this
variance is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship.
8. The hardship results from the application of the provisions of
this Ordinance to the affected property and does not result
from actions of the owners of the property.
The annexation and rezoning of the adjacent property created the
need for the larger setback than originally required on this site.
9. Increased development or construction costs or economic
hardship alone shall not be grounds for granting a Variance.
This variance is not based on economic hardship.
1) The building materials used for this addition are inconsistent with
the Ordinance requirements (Section 1107.2202).
· Section 1107.2202 lists the general requirements for architectural
materials.
· The C-5 district, however, has a specific set of design standards for
buildings in that district (listed in Section 1102.1407).
· Metal panels with interlocking, concealed or tongue-and-groove
seams and concealed fasteners are an acceptable building material in
the C-5 district if the exterior finish is warranted by the
manufacturer for twenty years against blistering, peeling, cracking,
flaking, checking or chipping and if not more than 50% of the
building elevation faces the street.
· The building material for the Keyland building is clearly consistent
with the requirements of the C-5 district.
· In addition, Section 1102.1407 (2) specifically references additions
and alternations to buildings within the C-5 district constructed of
materials that do not conform to the current requirements and allows
all subsequent additions and exterior alterations built after the
construction of the principal structure to be of the same materials as
those used in the principal structure and shall be designed to
conform to the original architectural concept and general
appearance.
2) Variances to the Nonconforming requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance(Section 1107.2300) are also necessary
· The setback of the existing building is nonconforming.
· This setback cannot be expanded without a variance to the setback
requirement, as requested by Keyland Homes.
· Once a setback variance is approved, a variance to the
nonconforming provisions is unnecessary and redundant.
3) The proposal is inconsistent with Section 1107.2303 (5), regulating
nonconforming parking areas.
. The setback of the existing parking area from Fish Point Road is
nonconforming (20' instead of the required 30').
. This section of parking lot is not being expanded. No parking will
be located closer to the right-of-way than the existing area.
. A portion of the existing parking lot is also located closer than 20'
to south property line where it is adjacent to a Residential district.
Again, this section of the parking lot will not be expanded.
. All new parking areas will meet the requirements of the ordinance.
4) Section 1107.305, off-street parking and loading.
. The use requires 49 parking spaces and one loading space. There
are 59 parking spaces and at least 4 loading spaces on the site.
5) Section 1107.1904, landscaping.
. The use requires a Bufferyard Type "E" along the south property
line for the length of the new building. This landscaping is
provided.
6) Section 1107.2202 (1), rooftop equipment.
. There will be no rooftop mechanical equipment.
7) Section 1107.2202 (8,f), pedestrian areas.
. A total of 936 square feet of sidewalk or plaza is required. The
existing sidewalks meet this requirement.
m
1-;
-
m
-
:J:
><
W
~
at
I
....
lID
oU)
~~
"'I&.
'E~ ..,.
o ....
It iii Q)
.~il
~ii 1lO
~:r: U)
Co
w~.....
~.g C'I
".iiii
N:'; '""'
('~
WN
j!:1-
~9
"-
'-;.0
r:i~
~:::I
~j!:
Vl'"
15~
I-
W~
~i3
;!;Vl
~15
,
L
.,
~
, /'
.::~
.
ll.
C.)
()
/..
-~
(\'
_!.-J
I
/
Z. "
;"
I ..J,
<.. I I
I- V
"-
";-
" , '
"<;-~
--~
:3
lID
~
~
~
I&.
W 0
z". ~
~~~
~~ "-
i: g~
~:2 CO
'" m '""'
Ii
.~ I
;.
~ !
~
V>
w
::\:
o
::r:
o
z
<(
~
W
~
L:
o
"-
>.
<V
>
I....
::J
(f)
"-
a
<V
+J
o
U
;;::
+J
I....
<V
o
OVO~ lNIOd HSI.:I
-----? ~
15
h
~~g~
.. 5 5 ~ ~ Ol
~ IUlli
~ ~ ~ IH!lH!
~ BUn
Vl
UI:tH
z z
o 0
1= 1=
~ ~
~ 2
Iii ~ ~
~ ~ ~
I
<.. I I
~ V
j!:
:;;J
o
Vl"~~
il i
~
o ~
,:.
\j\
o
o
~
ClCl
ZZ
~~ N
~ffi it
'Ii
'f.... t;5
(J. ~~
.....> .... ./
". I'
'"
..,
~
-,
'"
~ ~ 'i
8 mill ;!;
-J~ 92 15
~~ ~~ g
~::i ~e.li ~
~~ ~~~ S ~ ~
$';/'" i~~ ~ ~ j!:
i ~~ lllt '" ~ 14 ~ ~
~~;/ ~~:;" ~ ~ ~
!l ~il ~"'/: ~~ ~. 'i
lj!!!g "~~ ~e ~ ~
If 't~ ~l!I~ it-5u ~ 8
i ~~~ iii
I g~~ ~~: ~~ i :
tl ~g~ ~~~ !~ ~ ;
5l ili~~ ~"'Z ~ '" Q
lj ~il~ u;!;1O ~~ ~ '"
I ~,,~ eU ~ili ~ fl
~~i e.~~ ",!i! ~ ~
ill!;~ iiilf H ~ .,
~ ~ ~ );! );!);!
i i i i i i
~Cl
:::II'!
F=<
:;;JU
<
oll>
Vl
wI-a:
~~~
~~o
<Vl
"'<>-
Clwm
::l
:;l
"-
o
Ii
o
U
w
Vl
,
,
,
,
,/
N
:lLO
~d
r
a
~
~~~;
:;j I
'" I
I
(
o
z
o
F=
<
I-
Z
W
Vl
W
'"
0.
W
'"
I-
U
W
'"
'"
o
U
o
z
<
w
:;;J
g:
>-
m
o
w
o
:>
o
'"
0.
Z
o
1=
D.
[5
'"
W
o
0"
z "- -'
-.;0 <
~'" Cl
w\!'! ~
ll:a:
<
g~
>-::J
,,-0
I=m
"'w
l:1j!:
>-"-
mo
w
"'>-
!l!~
~iil
<
!!!
'"
~
o
o
0>
"
.~ ;
:';2
z::.:E
I- Co>
Z "0
W 0
i3 ull
~.o
o't;:
u u
"'ll
."
~N
~iS
00
<m
~:s!
~a
Vl.
<-
a.~
1-.3
5'0
c:~
~8.
;:0
~
N
",:5
g ';
ml;
N:5
"
~'"
00
...J~
'c-===~
l!!!!J --..-
~ ~
=
l!!!:!l
<1:!) ~ OJ
I!!!:!l f<l
-..-.---..- OJ
@~)~,:::::::? ~
o w 0-
~ 'g ~
~ vi
:;;J J
Vl
'"
<
r-
~
o
Vi
15
W
Z
o
i[
Vl
<
I-
~ VI
U
x
W
vi
I-
Z
~ci
08
<N
~~
~~
w~
",'"
0,,-
VlO
~~
~o
~j!:
~'"
D.V1
~~
~t5
Oiiil
g~
W
1-0.
"'::J
0'"
&ti
:;;Jw
0.",
1-0
~~
Vl
w'"
Ow
00
'::~
I-
W
W
lL
o (;
ON tJ _
o (5 en ~ 0;2
t-'<O:5~~g
~:2 :5 b "=:5"
II g ij r:: ~:5
g '0 1Il :S.~ g g'
:svg_e,,~
~~5~2:5-;;
-[~ ..,~ =i~o.
~ : ~ J! i c~r~
a:5.3 ~"O:88'~
(; ~ ~ ~8 ll~.o
N ~ .: ~ :5 ~~ '0
g ~ 0 2 ~ Ol!; :Ii
iD'5~~u5:1o.
.U~4JU .s"
N DUO' ti .s E:5
'0 "0 W; g:5 ....en 0
:~ i~~]::
011I::5" "g"""
o l5 0_ V_
\;w C:WNaiiN
b.a u -3d ~"01f'!
o555o_OJg
"" ~ 0 ~.... Oel)_
~ " : ,,(; 3:5'0
~ ~ 1! ~ ~ .s~ 3
0" "C"C~
"~ 8.!~:;;~.2
:S ~ !Xi ~ '6 0 ii~ 6
_ 'E ~ 'E 0 .,:5 0 ,,;
00 o~t'i~;:.; ~
.~~ :; VJo~o~ en
.~::5~..J5...J:5
ll'~:; ll'~ ll~& ~!!!
m "0 "" " ., lit" I~
o
U)
:J:
U
E;
W
.J
<(
U
VI
~.~
Fr
U1~
~~
51:
r~
~~
Tit
o
_.-
RSH POINT ROAD
:f.f6H-P9M RQ~
_ft- _
'\
---
--(€C)l
I
I
I
I
I
"
,,/
t) ~ i
~
\
\
\
~
Cl
3
t -t ('"''
. I (
i; {l 1\
~ -rJ ( <.
l.r ~
,-,---~ ~
/ ~ i;J
c _ -J.)
\. . .-- ~..-... -" I {~
\
<:> ,,' ... .'
~~ ~ "-.... "'-!.' ,",.
~ "'" .~I /." .'
:J> ~,~ ".'.. ..
, o~~.., ' .'
~1:1 ~~~".",'~~"','l
"" i ~ ~r. ,'~ ,f..;,"
'-....... I-~. . z.... f
!~ ~ . .....~..._ ':~ I
" '----,,- =' '. ..'. " .,
- I' ...'....7. .'
01.: ...."; ',: . :....' . . '
00 i .~".' :'. .....: ',' '. ';'_.:' .
z:..
1ft lJ....... [n
o D '-"" ~
~AJ
~~~/Iir
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
w~~~B
~ or
~ ~
:c !-'
z:.
5'"
17021 Fish Point Road
4
C>IJACII
PASSAGE 2ND AWN
o
I
400
800 Feet
~
N
<C
I-
-
In
-
::J:
><
W
~
0)
I
iiO
olD
~~
"'I&.
~z
.~'" ~
o ~
Q) vi 0)
",- ~
.~~.!.
~~ ~
Co
~~'N
NC~
..." lD
N"'......
"'/-
" "-
"""
---""
~
10
I
I')
10
......
~
I&.
W 0
Z..,. CO
0"" 10
-j, ~~
"''''
o
t~ ,.....
I ~'N en
~:2 U; W
<om...... ::E
o
I
Cl
Z
<(
-1
>-
W
~
I ~
~ I
~ .
n
iil ~
~ ~
C'~ l-
S
I-
wZ ...
WN ",W 0
j!:1- <('" W
ZW Z
~g _Vl
<(<( :;
crw I
... ~~Vl >-0
..,:0 I-
(5~ ::0 ~~
W:Je} 0
Vl, f=<(
~:J ::oU
'~~ <(
0:: I ~>
I!! I- Vl
wl-O::
~15 ~ ",zw
wZ / " i " ~ <(~j!:
" ~wo
L i . <(Vl
0::<(>-
. . owm
.1-
/t5 :5
~)l.
~e5
~'a..
~,~
~~
:J.t>l
f=<(
........ ......... :J W
.::-. /,
"" I
{ ....... c>'"
\. \ ~~ I,
.J Vl-'
I~- ~1ii I'
/ "-
<.../ '-
/' "-
/ .-J-.:
<... / /
I '-/
'-
/
/
I
I
I
----~\,
~
w
o
VI
, /'
y
()
()
_-1
('('
_ !....J
N
~
I
OVO~ lNIOd HSI..:I
~
~!~~
:;l I
" I
,[
o
z
o
f=
<(
I-
Z
W
Vl
W
'"
a.
w
'"
I-
U
W
'"
0::
o
U
o
z
<(
W
::0
I!:
i...:
0 ffi
'+- ~~
>.
Q) z ~'"
> ~~i!~
l....
01 ::J J::~=:J
(f) ~dQ~
C :Z :Z :Z d ~~ '"
11:1. '+- 0 0 co~U~~
f= 1= 0
lUll 0 <( ~ 1= ~..zz~~
> ~ Cl)o:C:;C
*11I !it Q) w w Bg:2i~2
-' -' W
...... W W -'
*201* w ~~~~~~
0 0:: '" m
U 0 U 000000
* 9 c * 0 0 <( ~UU~
4:: -' -' -'
*D.II. LL m Vl
...... I- ~ w HlltH
it.* l.... 7~ Vl '"
Q) ~ <(
U Q. '"
0 g <(
-' '"
~
'"
""
~~
;i""
l'?lE
~~
~;
~ -J....
~ ~~
co ~;i
~ l!jF!
II ~~
ffi ~o
.. i~
~ *1iI",
.,; ","~
~ ~g~
~ ~~I
III ~~~
9~~
Dli!;~
~~
i i
~
,.
'"lJl
i:;a
~'" '"
~u ~
iE~ 0
~~o' ~
~~~ :I;
~"'~ lJl
~~~ ~
~~~ *
~e~
~~5
"'l;liD
~i!;~
g~~
V>:l'"
~h
~~~
~iE~
"'~Q
S>-l>l
31~~
~~~
z
~
:> l-
F! <(
"" j!:
Q
. ~
~ ~
,. z
~ ""
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
j ~
s ~
u ~
"" z
I! ..
~ ~
u '"
o
1-",
~~
~*
~8
~~
~~
"'~
g~
&;.,;
till!
!!!o
iEiE
~
Q
Z
~
o
z
~ ~
o 0
z z
I
IN
I
I l-
I 0
I I -'
,I
/(
...
o
Ii
o
U
W
lfl
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
N
~LO
r,:d
,.....
V
<(
!!?
Vl
~
o
'0
'"
"
.~ ;
"'E
>.]
c'"
5 0
U-o
"
-.0
>- "O.C
m UU
Vlll
~ .~
o ~N
1; f=
cr i5~
a. 00
Z <(jjj
~ ~~
~ ~ ~
Vl <(-
w 0._
c 1-.3
~ ~o
~ ~ t:
~&.
~'O
.c
N-
-":
g "j
jjj ~
"
N:5
"
-0>
.32
I-
Z
W
a
Vl
w
::l!
o
I
~~
;:'Vl
w!!'!
"''''
<(
00
I-z
~5
I=m
o::w
t!j!:
>-...
mo
w
0::>-
~~
0::
~~
Fr.~
= r-
~~ ~ ~
/-\i;~"-_.._...- ~
'1~1i}
lfl
'"
w
W
Z
o
a:
Vl
<(
~
o
I
Vl
Vl
<(
I-
a.
w
U
x
w
vi
I-
Z
~g
~~
~~
U<(
~~
0::""
0...
VlO
1->-
~~
~j!:
~<o
o.Vl
~I
;:1-
OZ
IO
VlVl
~~
w
1-0.
0::::0
Olfl
&:0
~t;t
>-0
o
z>-
lfl'"
WO::
OW
00
=5
'0
ON It)
~ "0 ~ ~ o~
"t-.Jco.t::~(IJ
~:a~~~~~
Q.I II) 0 c......._
~ (; ~ :5'~ g ~
:5~goEQ).g
;.; = :5 c ~ :SUi
..2 1;) 0 U).c G)
: g ~';'~ ~ =i~.t
'0 ~ "0 >: g' 5--g E
en... -.J t)-o:;;8'~
oC7l."2>.oMCD.o
.:S giO II)(/)_
N c; _ in :5 .!~ 0
g g' ~ ~ ~ .5 =~
iD'~ E ~ CLl :5"5 &
. Q) 0..... 0 c: Q)
: ~ ~ g' ~ .g"E:5
o 0 fIl 0.... -0'1 0
...Jo.. ~"6". ~..,._
'0 W :5 U; i :; ~t;
~ ~ g ~ ~ C!~.!
~~ \l)~~~-8~
ua:5gg_m8
~ ~ B ~ ~ ~~:
G.l.... V"" 0
~:]~~B~t:
~ ~ 0 :J g .~ Q.I a
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~;
.......~ ('\1'-, ..c"'O
.... ENE 0 in- 0
00 O~N::.:.:.,..
.~:; ~ en 0 ~o~
.s~ 6~~5~:5
I! ~ i'~ ~'gg
c:
, ~
o
-'
VI
I-
W
W
lI-
o
co
II
:J:
U
;!;
W
...J
<(
U
Vl
Vl
~
o
.,;
o
'"
.....
Ol
~
j
Ul Ul Ul Ul 0. 0. 0. OJ
g 9,~ 9,~ ~ ~ ~
......0..0 a....., 0 ..., _.
:Tr::Jr~::J~5
=:~g- ~ Ul ~ Ul 5'
::J <J:l
(1)~::EN.j:>O ~
-"(1) - (0- 00
o .....~ 0 3 N 3 .....
0. :T -, N -. .....
Ui'~ 0 9: ~ !=Xl E ~
..-pO a. ~ ,.-to 0 ......
o (1) -. 0 (1) 0 (l) Ul
~ z~ ::J Ul _ Ul g
(1) 0 g ~ ~ (l) -1'>.....
o ~(') (j) ~ .j:> ~
_:T(1) 0 Ul Ul 0
'-'0)0 =~ 0- ~ ~
0(0-00..... 0
!=> 0. N !=> g, :T g, g
(J1(1) N (J1 Ul (1) Ul '
N<J:l!=XlN ::J ::J
, 0 fTl fTl (1)
ro(1) - 0 Q 0 '
(1)(1)O(1)Ul""'UlO
......U> -'t\ ('I) ...... :T r+ -.....
""'.j:>~ :; 0 2 " r
o (0..... ..... 0' Ul 0 0
:r::::l ........ ...... ......
5=3 0' ~ <J:l (') 0- N
CD 5....... () ...... Q ('I)"
"c:T(1):T::J Q!!!
2. m (1) (/) (1) ~ 5' 0
~ w S' g ~ 0 <J:l ~
o met ~ ~ -..... Q. N
~cn ~ 0 ~ ~ g ..
~~ ~ 0-< 0: <J:l 2-
<J:lo::':o.(1) r""'w
5'::J 0 (1) x 0 :T 0
~.~::::I 'Q (b ...... (b 0:
::J ~ (l)::J N (l)
'fl ::E;:;: (1) !!l." 0"
~:Twg.....~o
......,-+ -" ::r ,!;
o~o~~ :5".....
- 3 (') (l) :T
g W _, 5= (l) 0 ~
<J:lgE(l)(/)-(')
5=5= m::J g w (1)
(1) =: w Q 5= 9. Z
::J .j:>"'" 0. Q
~(1).j:>:TQ)r.....
0:0 =: (0 ~ :T
- ~ ,!'J8
o
- 0
(0
'-l
(J1
o
?l
o
~
c....
c....
(/)
(f)
()
)>
r
f'TI
z
()
I
II
O'l
o
"
f'TI
f'TI
-l
" .
I I
~::::j
00
fTlO
;UfTl
;so;:(/)
-<Z
o
S2-l
;u'"'(J
fTlc
~;u
, 0
(/)0
C;U
'"'(J-l
fTl
;u-l
~O
~(/)
OI
zO
::E
-l
~~
(/)'"'(J
(j);u
-l0
Ir;;j
o;SO;:
)>fTl
-<~
0C/)
""0
c....;U
)>fTl
Zz
Co
)>I
;U;u
,-< 0
N)>
00
OI
!=>~
Z
-l
5fl
fTl
X
o
fTl
"'0
-l
~
)>
(/)
(/)
I
o
::E
z
"'0
o
Z
fTl )>
fTl (/)
;U
(/)
~~ !
; i~ ;
! -r'" 7"
~ I ~... \'ni':',./' I
NQ) I l U oi ,.:,:jl i
I fl> I :;0...-'1
,j /'-" 1
. I i.nJI
):r.-::! i
I j i I~I
I f~~-':::::"'-- I~~,~ii
~---~-=~:; ,
"--""~'_".-~':::.-:-.
r
o
,
~ "-
::J
.....r
o 0
<J:l .....
(l)
5=.!"
(1)
'Q::!
~. g
5=^
.....,!'J
:T
o ::E
.....)>
,,-l
ofTl
, ;U
......,.,
0;U
_0
Z
b'-l
....."'0
~)>
- (/)
w (/)
o )>
o:~
Q::!)>
00
~S2
-l
NO
- Z
0.'
(l)(/)
(J) (')
Q 0
0=:::
(l)
0.0
o g
Ul ::J
.....
Q:':;<
o ;so;:
~ 5'
!'! ::J
(l)
(J)
o
.....
o
OJfTlO
-<)>;U
(/))>
OfTl-
-l;SO;:z
IfTl)>
fTlZC)
;U-lfTl
(/)<Pi'
)>C
~:::!
-lr
fTl-
0:<
~~
;U
<I
fTlfTl
-<;U
fTl
OOJ
.,.,-<
I'~
fTl;U
OJ:::!
0""
c-<
Z-l
00
)>
;UA
r i'ii~
fTl (/) r
C) 0)>
)> .,., Z
r..o
~ I
(/) 0
() ;so;:
;0 fTl
=0 (/)
:::!
o
Z
"'0
;0
o
;S;
o
fTI
o
OJ
-<
()
r
iTi
Z
-l
z
o
r.1
z
o
-I
!":'
z
o
r.1
CD
",
)>
;u
Z
G)
Vl
Vl
I
o
~
()
o
z
:i:l
)>
()
b
;u
s::
C
Vl
-I
1ii
;u
:;;
-<
o
;u
<:
",
:e
)>
-<
o
m
Vl
Ci
z
:2:2
filUi
",()
~~
o::l
~?5
)>
~M
:28
"'Cl
;Uz
~8
o
;U'U
Oc
8~
~~
)>-1
=-<-1
o
Vl
:z::
o
:e
",
)>
Vl
",
;;::
m
z
-I
Vl
o
-I
:z::
",
::0
'UVlZ
~~o
~~!fl
Vl -<",
mO()
0::0-
,-.,
Ui:2(')
z",gl
~~~
:2~z
",!!!~
::OCVJ
"'-1:::1
!fl -< G)
00)>
z-.,:::1
\!lVl~
E~h
-IVl)>
-< Vl
-I
oOOJ
-., m
Vl'"
-ICZ
f!i ~()
Vl~~
C-I'U
::0 r
< :2'"
~mM
o 0
;UVl
. 'UO
",z
()
:S:2
()-
Vl
Ir
00
Vi-l
"'OJ
-<
-l
I
)>
-l
-l
I
(/)
)>
::0
",
OJ
)>
Vl
",
o
o
z
)>
z
)>
Vl
Vl
C
s::
",
o
o
)>
C
;;::
(/)
)>
:2
)>
z
-l
;U
C
fTl
)>
Z
o
o
o
;U
;U
fTl
o
-l
;0
fTl
'"'(J
;U
fTl
(/)
fTl
Z
-l
)>
:::!
o
Z
o
.,.,
CD
)>~
:..
/
I/~~O
.,., 10
fTl
Z
~~
CD
:E
o
CD
'"
...
(,.
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
C/)
fTl
o
o
;0
CD
'"
'"
u.
/
/
I I
r I I
o I \
-l I \
/
N/
/
I
o
.,.,
~
x
X
CD CD
~ ~
, ~~\
,
(/)
o
C
-l
I
c
~"'~
o .........
.,.,
r
o
-l
~
o
fTl
::E
)>
r
~~----
z
o
r.1
z z
o 0
r.1 r.1
HI
"'X
00
00
90
0'
08
C)
)>
;U
)>
C)
fTl
(/)
r
)>
OJ
fTl
r
fTl
<
)>
:::!
o
Z
-l r
o 0
"'0 ::E
fTl
o (/)
.,., -l "'0
;U
o
"'0
o
C/)
fTl
fTl fTl 0
r r I
~ ~ 0
)> )> c
:::! :::! (/)
o 0 fTl
Z Z fTl
fTl
<
)>
:::!
o
Z
-~~
:2
m
-"0 OJ 'U
g-" S; ;Q
ZVlr 0
o:i:l~ ~
~~ G) ~
~c~ ~
oAlm ::0
i:Vl~ E;
~~~ Cl
~~ Vl Vl
Z' Vl 5
Yl~ 5 :E
",~ %
)> 'U
~?O ~
:z:: m G)
~d ~
~::o ~
~5 G)
;u 'U
;2N I
~~ ~
Vl);! CD
." r- ~
~~
OJO
~~
0::0
Z:::I
G)()
)>
)>r
~5
()
)>
:::I
o
Z
000000
mmmmmm
zzzzzz
000000
MMMMMM
VlVlVlVlVlVl
0;;::00'U'"
-"o::O;u;ux
~~~~!ij~
-Is::)>)>filz
I~~~tlG)
C -l ",
CD "'T1>r'T1'
r Z r- ,."
~0!;2):
o C )> :::I
~?5~
",::;z
g-<
om
z ~
m
;;::
m
z
-I
OJ .,.,
r r
o 0
o 0
A ;U
FISH POINT ROAD
o
CD
1
r-t-
-to,
o
o
r-t-
(l)
o
-to,
(/)
C
1
<
CD
"<
-to,
o
1
^
rTJ
-<
r
)>
Z
o
I
o
~
rTJ
(/)
t;
z t;
0
'0 Z
r 0
> ~
z
z
'" '"
'" ~
(/)
. ~
r- (/)
> .
z
0 (')
1Il S
~ r-
'" '"
~ z
~
(') z
:z: J:l
~ '"
(') (/)
iil
- OJ (j)
0) oN
- -. (J1
N~-.-
-- =:
;SO;:<g.
Z~
Q
Ul'<
(J1~
to
.j:>Z
fTl
-;SO;:N
0)(1).j:>
_::IN
N o.N
- ~fTl
0::J
0) .....
00 I ro
- ~'-o
I <g. iii,
- ~(l)
COY>
- 0
... ;SO;:::l,
Z;;;
>~
~N
0)0
OJ
-
I
CO
it
00
......
00
~
I
-
OJ
OJ
o
>
~
......
OJ
~
I
-
OJ
OJ
"" ~
---
""..:::".
\ "-
_/-\
.........
. /'.. '/
I /)
/"'- /
~ ,-I
/)
........./"'- /
- 1
C-'-
.........~
OJfTl
Cx
rV;
O-l
ZZ
C)C)
"'~
......... .........
I
Y
fTlC
)>-l
(/),r
fTl-
;so;:-l
fTl-<
~'Pi'
"'O,~
g~
,Z
'"'(J )>/
rC)
)>fTl
-l'
i
4~SOO.1 0E44"\W ~ \\ 228.0~
\ \
x _/-\x ,II
~ f'- ~ /\\
u. \. J ~\ ~,v
f'-J _/ -\ OJ)>"'O
\. -<Z;U
""'- ( 00
'-........... -/ ') Sc~
V ( I-l(/)
""'- I ') gCfTl
"" -/ (/)-l0
......... c--.J _> -\ ~~
-- (/)z
\.; \ ~E;
/'.. -"" 2fTl
/ /) -l
/
X
CD
.j>
ex>
(:,
X
CD
.j>
-J
U.
7
/ ZfTl
0)>
;U(/)
-l-l
Ig
r
C-<
ZfTl
fTlx
O;-i
.,.,
rO
0""
-l-l
I
NfTl
ClJ
r-
()
(;
A
/ "
~~
~
~~:= ~ ~~ ~en
C -'0 -'.0 ~.o ~
.....0.0 A.., 0 ., <e.
::T,-::I,-l:::I l: 5
-0 a. 0 CII 0 CII -.
S......CII..... <D ::I
!,-4:EN~O 0.0
"<D' (0.... Q
o .....~ Q 3 N 3 .....
a. ::T -. N -. .....
iii' ~ 0 ~ ~ !:xl ~ if
.....0 a. CII ... 0 ...
o <D -. 0" <D 0 ~ CII
::I CII::I CII CII 0
~ ~~ ~ -4 iD' ~ ~
"0- m~~::T
0..... ... (1)
_::rlll 0 Ul Ul 0
-~ ,... ~ CII
oCXlo -4 nOn .....
0(0-00..... 0
. NO::l::r:JO
(}lOoN' a. ~ a. 0
NC'O 0) (}l CII CII 3
....~' NITI::I ITIC'O
C'O<Do_Q~Q"
1'0 <D 0 1'0 CII ..... CII 0
,..(1) tD'~"";- ,.... ~
"'~C'O Q 0 "0 ,-
o (0... ... 0 CII 0" 0
,.... ,.... i:J ,... ,... ,...
::r~,o :J.o 0 0" N
C'O::I...n.....~ 1'0'
"0 ~::r <D ::r,::I ~ Q:!
Q.C'O ~, Vl ~ ~ 5' 0
::I III _. 0 ~ .0 0
... ::Icoo ""
o met ;: ~ .... Q. N
-CII (;l ~ ~ g'
O"~ n~ 8-<' 0.-'.0 0
~n -
.oO~o.~ ,...
-'::1 0 )('-::r CII
5 0.::J .g ... ~ <D 9.
S.CII ~ ~ ~ ~ a.
.p :E;;: 1'0 !!!.!':3 Q "0
m::rCIIg.....~[
,...,.... _ :r ....
oifO~~ :i",...
- a nC'O::r
g CII _.;: <D 0 ~
.og~~Vl-o
;:;: et::J g :g <D
1'0 CII 0 ..... -. z
s:~~::ro.~
~<D~::r0l,--
a: 0 :=; (0 ~ ::r
_:J 0
C'O J'lo
o
.... 0
(0
-..J
01
o
!Jl
o
-4
t:
(I)
U)
()
)>
r
rrJ
.....
z
()
:I:
II
O'l
o
."
rrJ
rrJ
-i
~::j
00
ITIO
:01Tl
Vl
~
-<z
o
0-1
;0"'0
~e
:...:i;g
VlO
e:o
"'0-1
ITI-I
~o
!!!Vl
OI
zO
:E
:r-
-~
Vl"'O
m::U
:2~
ITI
o~
)>ITI
-<~
OVl
""0
L::U
)>ITI
Zz
e(')
)>I
::U::u
.-< 0
N)>
0(")
oI
9~
z
-I
Yl
ITI
X
(")
ITI
"'0
-I
!!!
)>
Vl
Vl
I
o
:E
z
"'0
<5
z
ITI
ITI
::u
~~
' ;i;
~ z ~
.p :::l 0
~ -:::-::::==~~:.::-:-
(0 r::---===~~=V
~ lfii1J
~ (f1)
/MJ
~
~ ~
~==- fiijj]
'-S _~~
--... ~.I
. )>
Vl
Vl
e
::u
... ,-
o 0
.0...
C'O
S:J'l
~Q:!
~.g
;:""
,...J'l
::T
o :E
...)>
"0-1
~~
......,
0;0
-~
b"-I
"''''0
-)>
. Vl
CIIVl
o )>
a:~
Q:!)>
00
no
""~
NO
. Z
0.-
C'OVl
CII 0
3.~
0"_
C'O
0.(")
o
o C
CII ::s
.....
Q:~
O~
~ 5'
!I! :J
(1)
CII
o
...
a
~~
::u
;i;~
-<:0
ITI
OCD
.....-<
:i!(')
ITI~
en::l
0""
e-<
Z-l
00
)>
::0';:
-ITI
M ~?
o 0)>
)> ~ Z
,- .:'0
I
o
~
ITI
Vl
z z
o 0
r.I r.I
o
ITI
Vl
(')
::u
:0
::l
o
Z
"'0
;0
o
S
o
ITI
o
CD
-<
(')
C
ITI
Z
-I
z
o
r.I
III 0 i!i!
)0 2 0-
:0 .... VlVl
~ ~ :e
Vl d 5::l
~ :0 ~fl
o i: >
~ ~ 2iil
~ -t i!8
1"1 ~ I"ICl
~ ~ :Oz
~ 0 ~S
:0 ~"lJ
2 ~ ~~
~ 0"lJ
~ -< ~S
)0 0 :-i-t
~ t!! 0
i: ~ ~
1"1 0
o :IE
o
:i! )0
)> 2
-I s::
"lJVlZ
2l~0
;g~se
l!!~8
8:U:!l
iii:i!o
Zl"IlS
~~:;;
:i!=i-
I"I~~
:OCVl
~~5
2!it~
laVl2
!!!o
C;=:J:
~1Il~
odm
"'I 1"1
:i!~!l!
1"1 :go
1"1 ~~~
)0 :o-t"lJ
Vl ~:i!M
~ ~l"Ia
!l! :Olll
iil . ~2
g:i!
Oiii
:J:r
go
Ill;
-<
~
Vl
Ui
)>
-I
;0
e
ITI
)>
Z
o
(")
o
;0
::u
ITI
(")
-I
::u
ITI
"'0
::u
ITI
Vl
ITI
Z
-I
)>
::l
o
Z
o
...,
U)
)>~
:.
o
:i!
1"1
:0
:i!
)0
Z
/
/ 0
I
I
.....
ITI
Z
(")
ITI
C
Z
ITI
1-
~
9
~
(JI
~
o
U)
(JI
L<
i.,.
"
"
/
/
"
"
,
Vl
f'Tl
(")
o
;0
U)
(JI
'"
u.
,
o )"
..., / I
,- I \
o I \
-I I \ I
I
NI
I
,
CDf'TlO
-<)>;0
Vl)>
01Tl-
-1~z
IITI)>
ITIZC>
:O-l1Tl
Vl<ll:'
~e
)>::1
r;:jC
0-1
-<
)C
)C
U) U)
g; ~
~ ~~"
,
Vl
o
e
-I
I
c
~~ ~
o ,
."
r
o
-I
Z
o
r.t
Z Z
o 0
r.t r.t
H I'~' C> a ,- ~
I ~ ~ )> 0 C- o
;0 "'0 ~
)> CD
I ~8 0 0 Vl ..,
ITI ..... -I rt-
~~~~~~ Vl CD ~ ::h
.. ..
)> 0 0 0
000000 en (') 0
ClClClClClCl ^ ;0 Q
ITI ITI rt-
,- ITI
~S::OO"lJ~ ITI M ,- CD
2:O~~ ~ ITI
C:~Z"D2 ~ <
-t~)o>~ ::l )> 0
:J: f;\f;\ Cl 0 ::l ::l
<:-1 ~ ~ 0 0 -t\
lD 5~~ ~ Z
:eO )' (f)
0C:)'5 C
;o::l::lz ..,
I"IC2 <
~~ z CD
2~ '<
!2 -t\
-t 0
::
:i!
1"1
"'IOlD "lJ
g"'l!:; :0
Zlllb ~
g;i1z oe
::IC: Cl
200
~~ 51
21"1!2 >
i:lIlla 0
!222 Cl
lar Vl VI
2;< :J:
Yl~~ !
~ I "D
Q~ !3
-1"1 51
iil~ >
0:0 0
2:J: ~
~o
:0 "lJ
~~ ~
1Il~ m
.....r ~
~~
mO
~~
Z::l
ClO
)0>
zr
oR
>
::I
o
Z
^
fT1
-<
r
)>
Z
o
:c
o
3:: "CD m
rT'I (J) is' N
... ~-.(JI
(J) ~j:J:
.0'
..... ~:J'
~ Z~
(JI"<
01_
~ ~o
Q) ~z
Q) .
o f'1
"TI
~
.....
Q)
u
I
~
~ ~
-
~~
" "-
_/~
I
4~SOO.1 O~4u-yv ~.~\\ 228. O~
\ \
)C _/ ~)C .....\\
~ f' ~ I\~
u. '\ J ~" u
(' .J _/ ~ ~~;g
......... (/" 000
" .,/) :re~
.........1(/") ~E~
,- , .,/ Vl~o
\ \" 0
,J _/~ ~~
....- VlZ
V " ~~
,..... ___ zITI
1 /) -I
1
FISH POINT ROAD
.r
."."
r-
0::0
OVl
::0-1
II
U)
(JI
~
j."
("
'J
~-\
,
,..... i
1 I)
'/" 1
-,-I
I)
'/,,-- 1
- /
c- '--
,~
~~
, '
CDf'Tl
ex
;=Ui
O::l
-z
~C>
CDITI
ex
;=Ui
II O::l
I -z
ZC')
,0
k
ITIC
)>::l
Vl.C
~~
ITI
~'F:>
~.~
;0 ~,
"'O.z
,- )>/
)>0
-I.ITI
-.-
'"
,/ ,
.....
,-
o
o
:0
11\
~'"
L< 10 .17
t:C
C
-
; II~~~~I~lII 5 9 ~ :~~~~~~~~~~I~ ~ \
: :::::::::::::::::::::::::: Z t:' :::::::::::::::. U)
: ;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;: ~ 0 !:::;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;
'1'11Ii11111;
Ql
r-
1
()
(;
)C
U)
~
o
)C
t
u.
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
7 '
./ zITI
0)>
::uVl
:i!~
c!::(
zITI
ITIx
0;-1
.....
,-0
0'"
-I:J!
NITI
~~
i i
i I
i .
~ ~
~ i
~ ~
iiI
" I:N
(J) 1'0 ~
~::IN
N o.N
-~ITI
O)Q~
Q) IC'O
..... !!.-a
I -g. a.
~""Ill
CO!"
..... 0
~ I::!.
z~
"TI(JI
~~
0)0
!!
I
CO
,
I
l
(J1 C.:J
t:5 /:J
8 c~::J
_'._ ._ ...\ Iii ill
~.-='-:=:~~.'~)
~
~
\I!
i l'ffiJ
~ I iI' !
!Ii.~
~
o
!!l
~
F
!fdA~
:::,::.::::::...-~I
~._,
~~'I
~JU
1/11/1
CCit't'1ON..-A.Ca-'l
~ c
j~ m~ ~
iil
I'll ..
I!j Q
GF ~~ I m I ~ ~ ~
~=t 't
~~ ~ ~ ~
m m ;II
1I~ i ~ ~
n ~
~2 i
~~
I 171 D;;;F~~~D
L -.....-.
..............
D.R. HORTON. INC. . Mn
--....
.......
WW\ IIItMIOI'A 118:I.......,..
PARAAAOUNT
ENCINEERINC .It DESleN
lNIA1CA1l1I11aT- un: .-51 r.u"MIfI5OrA..
fNl," m-SIrI .. r1NlM4
""__ CJ:RTIFIC4T1ON III .....10..
_.:n ~~rf.T.Jf~~ JI =~:...tcm'~
, ILJ...IAtftI IIaVINO .-D-.
-.IP.i:- _ .-vlIIQ I/&ININfCITT ~
I
-_.~~
--
-