HomeMy WebLinkAbout9G - CUP for Open Land Recreati
4
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
AGENDA ITEM:
DISCUSSION:
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
JUNE 7, 1999
9G
STEVEN HORSMAN, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 51
DON RYE, PLANNING DIRECTOR ~
'O:I!i c}J ~
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 99-
AUTHORIZING A CONInTIONAL USE PE~~R OPEN .
LAND RECREATIONAL USE ON AN OUTLOT IN THE R-l
DISTRICT
Historv
On April 26, 1999, and on May 10, 1999, the Planning Commission
held a public hearing for a conditional use permit application for
Bradley Overby to conduct "Open Land Recreational Use" on part of
Outlot B, Island View 2nd Addition. This property is located on the
south side ofIsland View Circle, east of North wood Road and Island
View Road.
The applicant is proposing to use the outlot for personal recreational
purposes including the use of three docks and two sheds currently
placed on the lot. In addition, he requested permission to park and
store recreational vehicles, including a camper and boat trailers, on the
outlot as he has done for several years. The property is zoned R-l
Shore land District and the city code requires a conditional use permit
for "Open Land Recreational Use".
The Planning Commission heard testirnony from residents of the area.
They presented a letter and signed petition that states, in brief, their
three rnain objections are: I) the use and storage ofthe trailer is
inconsistent with the neighborhood; 2) the expansion of the number of
docks and boats from two to three; and 3) the sheds, if approved,
should be sited, oriented and landscaped to produce a relationship that
is consistent with the neighborhood, and not exceed the two existing
sheds for the property.
The Planning Commission continued this hearing to May 10, 1999, in
order to receive comments frorn the DNR. Patrick Lynch, DNR Area
Hydrologist, subrnitted a letter that comments on the existing
conditions at the site and states, in general: the rock riprap provides
shore protection; the wood retaining wall along the shore rnust be
L:\98FILES\98CUP\98-173\98173CC.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
removed and restored with riprap or a permit from the DNR rnust be
obtained to keep it; lirnit the number of watercraft rnoored to docks to
four (4); and the DNR would not be opposed to allowing, with
variance, a single storage shed.
Current Circumstances
On May 10, 1999, the Planning Commission rnade a rnotion
recommending the City Council approve the conditional use permit
with the specific conditions as follows:
1. One water-oriented accessory structure shall be permitted on this
site.
2. The structure/shed shall meet all flood proofing and building code
requirements. A building permit is required.
3. The number of structures/sheds and required setbacks are subject
to all conditions imposed as part of the variance case 98-172.
4. The existing parking area shall not be expanded or relocated. It
rnay be maintained including surfacing materials (paving).
5. A revised survey including all conditions required by the variance
and conditional use permit must be submitted prior to final permit
approval.
6. Recreational vehicle parking is restricted to daylight hours
between April 1st and November 1st in any given year, and no
parking daytime or evening from November 1st to March 31st.
7. Shoreline improvements (existing or future) rnust be approved by
the Department of Natural Resources. The approval rnust be
received prior to the issuance of a building permit for the water
oriented accessory structure.
8. No rnore than four (4) watercraft may be moored or docked at the
site at any given tirne.
The rninutes ofthe Planning Commission meeting are attached for
your information.
Issues
Open land recreational uses were allowed in the R-l district with a
conditional use permit under the previous Zoning Ordinance. The
Planning Commission concluded this use was reasonable without the
recreational vehicle storage. The reason for limiting storage on this lot
is the fact that the lot does not include any principal structures. The
L:\98FILES\98CUP\98-173\98173Cc.noc
2
ALTERNATIVES:
RECOMMENDED
MOTION:
REVIEWED BY:
Planning Comrnission felt the recreational vehicles should be stored at
either the applicant's horne or in other storage areas. The applicant
would like to store recreational vehicles on this lot, and would like the
conditional use permit approved without that condition. The attached
letter outlines his arguments for this use and for parking recreational
vehicles on this lot.
This use also required a variance to the number of water oriented
structures and the setback for those structures. The Planning
Commission approved a variance allowing one water oriented structure
with a reduced front yard setback. The variance is subject to approval
ofthe conditional use permit.
Conclusion
The Planning Commission found the conditional use permit cornplies
with the conditional use criteria, subject to the listed conditions. The
Commission therefore recommends the City Council approve the
conditional use permit with the specific conditions listed in this report.
The City Council has three alternatives:
1. Approve Resolution 99-XX authorizing the conditional use permit
with specific conditions as recommended by the Commission.
2. Approve Resolution 99-XX as requested by the petitioner without
condition 6.
3. Deny Resolution 99-XX, and direct the staff to prepare a resolution
denying the conditional use permit based on specific findings of
fact.
4. Defer action on this request and provide staff or the applicant with
specific direction.
Staff recommends Alternative #1. A motion and second adopting
Resolution 99-XX and approving the conditional use permit subject to
the listed conditions is appropriate.
L:198FILESI98CUPI98- I 73198 I 73Cc.noc
3
RESOLUTION99-~ 51
APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONDUCT OPEN LAND RECREATIONAL USE
PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE R-I SHORELAND ZONING DISTRICTS FOR BRADLEY OVERBY
MOTION BY: SECOND BY:
WHEREAS, the Prior Lake Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on April 26, 1999, and on
May 10, 1999, to consider an application from Bradley Overby for a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) to allow open land recreational use in the R-l Shoreland Districts; and the
City Council heard the case on June 7, 1999; and
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing on said CUP has been duly published in accordance with the
applicable Prior Lake Ordinances; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission proceeded to hear all persons interested in this issue and persons
interested were afforded the opportunity to present their views and objections related to the
amendment to the CUP; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and City Council find the proposed CUP with the specific
conditions in harmony with both existing and proposed development in the area
surrounding the project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and City Council find the proposed CUP is compatible with the
stated purposes and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as they relate to conditionally permitted
uses, and further, that the proposed CUP meets the criteria for approval of CUP as
contained in Section 7-5 C 1-6 of the Zoning Ordinance and Section 3 of the City Code.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE that it approves
the CUP for "Open Land Recreational Use" for property legally described as follows:
That part of Outlot B, ISLAND VIEW 2ND ADDITION, Scott County, Minnesota lying westerly of a
line drawn parallel with and distant 225.00 feet westerly of the east line of said Outlot B
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the conditional use permit is subject to the following conditions:
1. One water-oriented accessory structure shall be permitted on this site.
2. The structure/shed shall meet all flood proofing and building code requirements. A building permit is
required.
3. The number of structures/sheds and required setbacks are subject to all conditions imposed as part of the
variance case 98-172.
4. The existing parking area shall not be expanded or relocated. It may be maintained including surfacing
materials (paving).
5. A revised survey including all conditions required by the variance and conditional use permit rnust be
submitted prior to final permit approval.
1:\98fi1es\98cup\98-173\rs99xxcc.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
6. Recreational vehicle parking is restricted to daylight hours between April 1st and November 1st in any
given year, and no parking daytime or evening from November 1st to March 31st..
7. Shoreline improvements (existing or future) must be approved by the Department of Natural Resources.
The approval must be received prior to the issuance of a building permit for the water-oriented accessory
structure.
CONCLUSION
Based upon the findings set forth above, the City Council hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit for "Open
Land Recreational Use". The contents of Planning Case File #98-173 are hereby entered into and made a part of
the public record and the record of the decision for this case.
Passed and adopted this 7th day of June, 1999.
Mader
Kedrowski
Petersen
Schenck
Wuellner
{Seal}
1:\98fi1es\98cup\98-173\rs99xxcc.doc
YES
Mader
Kedrowski
Petersen
Schenck
Wuellner
NO
City Manager,
City of Prior Lake
Page 2
,-~-- -- --.,--.,.---.
,
. -.-....;......-.-.......
. :.;~ <
,~-""...._.- '--~
\ ~:!~,:~.:::~.~;.t~ =-
\ r.::~~:~ :," :;~~::-:l."'~"
.t... ...,...;:...,:~
I ~_~:.: :~'~'_-~:":':;:"..a.
"
\..0-'
C'K,'33
.,'
_M:I"LAT 0' LOTS 1,%,3,.,!l,..
IL.OCX 3 ISLAMO VI(W 1ST U10'1l
: \-'
".
,-, :
,
i
!
,SITE
,:..,
...-
LOCATION
,
.r
("
~ :Gr
/
..
.' .4
.., I UG
5~~;U
,r .
, 31-13'/-
~_J?'I.OD
1,iP
I
_.~7
:; .110"0011
ISI.Ull
~
~
~
~
^ S
r
.9"".
"'."~
oah;f1
ca-
.,
't
(':,L
'.J
.T1IUCOO''',
~,
.~
."
1-d'
,k()\
/il~
)"7
I.
;
~ ;' . j.':
. .~;
'J
, ':1
:.:i1
.... j
!
~~ .?
6
~
,,,\oll.
/
t
:-'i-'t
,:-,J II~
..;~
5 rl'C:-
...M.,l......w J. SQUIOK[L
COUNTY 5UR'\1(TOIt
SCOTT C(Uln. .,.oar"
OCT. "...
_.,"'1
S 34 - 115 - 2,
I
---_._~----------
---...;
f n
or:
~ 0 i".)
'"~ -'
en -'
< -' .....,
;: -'
< Qo
z ;:
.-: Vi ~
w < .-:
'" (!) w 0
0 w I '"
Z z '-' 0 <;
'" 0 0- 0
W 0- <
0 Vl '-' 0 ~
N c:> ;:
en W
~~ <:Q-? m = ~
~~
4 ~
\ ~ ' ~
\\ ~ 4,~
\'0 ~~~ ~
~ '
\ ~t ~ ~
\ ,..: G> ~
\\ ,
\ ~
o ~~~
\ ~ \ '
\ \\ ~
S.
\
\
\
\ \
\ ~
\ <>'.
n 0
'" ~
\
<C \ ~
~
.... \
- \ .~.
m
\ n
- <0
:I: <ti
\ 0;
>< ..w
\ :>::-'
W n:O
<(~
\ 2<
I"
\ u"-
ZO
w"-
\ m~ ~
~o;
\ )(
\ o.
\
\
EET .
QD
EXHIBIT B
I
[
[
.C
"
~
JNE X
G
~~F.<
,
Thi~
a^O
c~a
=ic:
po:,
pu ~
COil'
CiJL
ma\
Ser
Are:
V, a:
Ce:-
eel"
BCL:
bet.
witr
Floc:
WIO'
For
NC-
an::.:
DatL
son"
ins
Tht:,
FIA'.
ATT
Geo
ta ,
mal'
a/ .
Geo
Verll
Natl'
Silvt
___13'~.
-
...
May 4, 1999
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Metro Waters - 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 5. fr7@ ~ 0 \::7 ~ ~
Telephone: (651) 772-7910 Fax: (651) 772 I
\ MAY 6 1999 \
Ms. Jenni Tovar
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E.
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714
RE: BRADLEY OVERBY VARIANCE AND CUP, ISLAND VIEW SECOND ADDITION
Dear Ms. Tovar:
Please extend my apologies to the Planning Commission for not providing timely comments on the subject
zoning matter for their April 26 meeting. I do appreciate their interest in DNR comments, and willingness
to defer a decision on the matter until such time I replied.
I stopped by the property last week to inspect the site, and made the following observations:
Although well-kept, the use and improvements to the small parcel are intensive.
The rock rip rap shore protection appears to be effective, and complies with that which can be done without
a DNR permit. .
The wood retaining wall along shore does not show up on the survey that was submitted to me. It is
constructed below the Ordinary High Water Elevation of 904', and was not permitted by DNR. I
recommend the applicant either remove the wood wall and restore the shoreline with riprap, or apply for
a DNR pennit to keep it. Application for a DNR permit does not guarantee it will be granted pennit, and
will likely result in a requirement to modify the wall.
I noted several seasonal docks on the property. DNR rules exempt seasonal docks frorn permitting.
However, five or more watercraft (including PWC's) moored at a site requires a DNR pennit, regardless
of the number of docks. At the time of my inspection, fewer than five watercraft were moored. I
recommend the city limit the number of allowable watercraft to be moored to no more than four.
Seasonal swim rafts are also exempt from permitting by DNR
Two existing sheds on the property do not meet the required structure lake setback. Given the small size
of the parcel, and the nature of its use, some secure storage seems reasonable to me. If the applicant can
successfully argue hardship to the Planning Commission, DNR would not be opposed to allowing, with
variance, a single storage shed. I would also ask that the shed be located such that it maximizes the
DNR Infonnation: 651-296-6157 . 1-888-646-6367 . TTY: 651-296-5484 . 1-800-657-3929
J
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Who Values Diversity
"\ Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a
".... Minimum of 10% Post-Consumer Waste
"
Jenni Tovar
May 4, 1999
page 2
,
setback from the lake. Perhaps the northwest corner of the property, where the survey indicates "bark
landscaping with plastic" would accommodate a small shed.
If you would, please ask Mr. Overby to contact me regarding the wood retaining wall. His address ana
phone number was not on the notice I received.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the subject zoning matter. If you have any
questions, please call me at 651-772-7917.
Sincerely,
\fJ;J
Patrick 1. Lyn III
Area Hydrologist
'J
...
._..11
5-3-99
City of Prior Lake
Att: Jane Kansler
I am requestln<j an opportunity to speak at the upcomln<j Plannln<j commission
meetln<j. My reasonln<j IS due to the lack of information provided to them.
Specifically the letter from Donald Rye (attachment # I). It IS the position the
city took and resulted In a lar<je Investment on my part. This would make 2.
commitments the city made to me that resulted In expenses on my part that you
now expect me remove. I also do not a<jree with your written statement of my
request. I do not want to " use" the camper on my lot, only store It as outlined
In Mr. Rye's letter.
I have asked for, but not <jlven the new ordinance statln<j no stora<je of
recreational vehicles on an out lot. I also applied for a permit prior to the
chan<jln<j of the ordinance.
Attachments # 2,3,4,5 are photos of how other "lakes shore" owners store
their campers dUrln<j seasonal use. Remind me how thiS IS visually different? They
do not appear to be screened from view as the ordinance was hopln<j for.
Also some concern was raised about available parkln<j. As you can see on
attachment #f" I have Circled several locations for off street parkln<j both In the
street rI<jht of way and not In the street rI<jht of way. I visually Inspected several
outlots for recreational use and their parkln<j IS off street but In the rI<jht of way.
ThiS appears to be,the normal. I would ask for the same.
A comment was made that <jave me the Impression that the commission does not
think I live In the nel<jhborhood. By line of sl<jht my reSidence IS only I 0 houses
away from my lake lot.
I'm a bit concerned about comments like "I don't know why some one would need
3 docks" Why do people have 3 stall <jara<jes? 10,000 sq.ft. houses? A house
In town and a lake home? I have a dock for my boat With lift and canopy, a short
one for my Personal watercraft and I for the kids to fish from. Remember thiS IS
not crammed Into a 50' Wide lot, there IS over 100' of shore thiS IS spread out
over.
I thou<jht that the commission would have received a copy of the letter as well
known what my intentions are. If I can use my camper on the lot durln<j the day It
contradicts Mr. Rye's letter and my intentions to store It seasonally for vacation
purposes outSide of city limits.
Thank you. Brad Overby
'J
,
.] ,b.-q-: .~~
~~ ~c>>\
. ,~.p.~o~..(
~~~~o~.
Dear lVfr. and lVfrs. Payne:
,,;
The City has received several complaints concerning the trailer parked on Outlot B,
Island View 2nd Addition. The complaints primarily relate to concerns that persons are
inhabiting the trailer on a periodic basis. While the trailer may be stored on the property
as long as it is not located on the street right-of-way, City ordinances do not allow the
trailer to be occupied, either on a short-term or long-term basis.
.' ~.
---....:..-
I am calling this to your attention as you are listed as the owners of record on County
files_.A~ou may not have been aware of ordinance requirements, I am sending this letter
to inform you that occupancy of the trailer on this property is not permitted. I am asking
. r. .
your cooperation in seeing'that such occupancy does not continue. In the event that
further cornplaints are received, the City will pursue more formal means of enforcing the
City ordinance. Such enforcernent could consist of a citation and fine. I hope that it is not
necessary to reach that point.
Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions, you may call me at 447-4230.
Donald Rye
Planning Director
O. incerely,
.'~
'J
16200 l!'g~Pe"ef!{WAve. S.L Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fa" (612) 447-4245
-. -..--
A-Tf * Z.
m~3
,10
J
A1'T"' ~ 4-
."
~:
Ii
i . -
50 j ATf iIo (p
\
\
\
\ ~
\
'" \
!J' \
CD "
'"
~. \ ~~
~ \
\
~
\ ()~
~
\ ;}-l
\
\ I
r \
\ ~
S \
\ <0
\ \
~ \\ ~.:
~ \
~. ~ .o:-~ ~ \
~ V' 0
~:\ ;-
~~.'%\ ~ \
~........ ~ s \ \
~ .@ 1-'i "
~ I ~
~ ~%\\
~~ ~p ~ \
~ /\
~ ~ \
~, ~ / \
~~ "~\
~
= III c;PO r ';;> X
g fTl <0
'"
C) 0
~ (') VI fTl CD
> -<
~ 0 --I ~ Z ~
" (') 0
::c ,..,
'"
,.., to '"
.:-f > ,..,
\Q VI :-f ".\\-
:e z
CQ --> :e
...... .F > ~
...
'''' ~';.-_.. ...
- 'J
-
II
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
APRIL 26, 1999
1. Call to Order:
The April 26, 19 , Planning Commission rneeting was called to order by Chairman
Stamson at 6:30 p. Those present were Commissioners Cramer, C . go, Kuykendall,
Stamson and Vonhof, lanning Coordinator Jane Kansier, Planner nni Tovar, Zoning
Administrator Steve Ho an, Assistant City Engineer Sue Mc rmott and Recording
Secretary Connie Carlson.
Pres t
Pr ent
resent
Present
,
\fresent
"
\
"-
\,
Cramer correction on page 4 c ge comment to sa'},,'Look into a right turn lane from
"
Pike Lake Trail to Fountain ills." "\
"
ri112, 1999 Planning Commissiort~eeting were approved as
\.
4. Public earings: "'-
Commissi er Stamson read the Public Hearing staternent and opened~rneeting with
the first itern.
2. Roll Call:
Vonhof
Kuykendall
Criego
Cramer
S tamson
3.
Approval of Minutes:
The Minutes from the
corrected.
-t
CASE FILES #98-172 AND #98-173 BRADLEY OVERBY IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE
FOR AN R-1 DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF ISLAND
VIEW CIRCLE.
A.
Zoning Administrator Steve Horsman presented the Planning Report dated April 26, 1999
in reference to the Conditional Use Permit on file in of the office of the City Planner.
The City received an application for a Conditional Use Permit and a Variance from
Bradley Overby. The applicant is proposing to use part of an outlot with two existing
sheds for open land recreational use with a parking area for camper use during the
Summer daylight hours with no over night camping. The property is located on the south
side ofIsland View Circle and begins approxirnately 375 to 400 feet east ofIsland View
Road. This property is zoned R-1 and Shoreland District. Open land recreational uses
require a conditional use permit in the R-1 District.
1:\99flles\99plcomm\pcmin\nm042699.doc
Staff recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit with the 6 conditions listed in
the Planning Report.
Criego questioned how long the sheds had been in the area. Horsman responded several
years. There are also 3 docks.
Planner Jenni Tovar presented the Planning Report dated April 26, 1999, on file in the
office of the City Planner. The application is for a variance to the required setbacks for a
water oriented accessory structure as part of the Conditional Use Permit to allow "Open
Land Recreation."
Stafffelt hardship was rnet with respect to the required front yard setback. However,
only one water oriented accessory structure is permitted. Therefore, the srnaller, rnore
non-conforming shed should be removed and a 9.7 foot front yard variance for the other
shed should be granted. A condition of the variance should include a building permit,
required flood protection, and conforming architectural materials (non sheet-rnetal).
Comments from the public:
Bradley Overby, 15901 Fremont Avenue, Prior Lake stated two farnilies bought the
property several years ago and has since then bought the other party out. The shed was
put up because of security reasons. Overby stated they contacted the City years ago and
were told there would be no problem with the sheds. He would like to use the outlot as
an extension of his property and has not seen an ordinance violating these issues. Overby
said he is only asking for seasonal storage. Overby presented overhead pictures of the
property as well as neighboring boats and campers stored on the property all year long.
He stated he does have 3 docks and explained the storage. Overby said he was happy to
comply with the shed requirernents and but is concerned with the storage of his camper.
Kansier explained the ordinance.
Sally Schmidt, 3791 Island View Circle, representing the neighbors, prepared a letter for
the Commissioners which she read into the record. They do not object to the use ofthe
property but object to the way the applicant is using the property as well as the dockage.
Marie Piette, 3595 Island View Circle, stated the applicant is maintaining the land but
feels it looks like a KOA campground. She supports the homeowners association and
does not want to look at the storage.
Steve Kopetzki, 3845 Island View Circle, pointed out the letter read by Ms. Schmidt does
have 25 signatures.
The public hearing was closed.
1:\99fi1es\99plcomm\pcmin\mn042699.doc
2
Comments from Commissioners:
Vonhof:
. Agreed with staffs recommendation. A Conditional Use Permit is in order. The real
bone of contention is the recreational vehicles.
. Restrict to use to daylight hours allowing for appropriate use of the property.
Kuykendall:
. Agreed with staff's recommendation.
. Address the daylight hours.
. The use of the land for this purpose does just that. It is not large enough to build a
horne. '
. Would like to know what the DNR feels about the number of docks.
Stamson:
. Concurred with staff.
. Variance allows reasonable use with the conditions.
. The vehicle and trailer storage is not appropriate. However, the use is consistent with
the neighborhood.
Criego:
. Would like to hear frorn the DNR regarding the docks and the timber wall near the
shoreline.
. Camper use should not be in that area. There is not enough parking.
. Recommend only camper for parking.
. Agreed with staffs recommendation.
Cramer:
. Agreed with staff and Criego' s concern for parking.
. Supportive of staff s recommendation with one water-oriented shed.
. Asked for clarification with Condition #6 regarding recreational vehicle parking.
Horsrnan explained the ordinance.
. Would like to see the parking for the entire year addressed in this rnatter.
Criego:
. Questioned the definitions for recreational property and recreational storage. Kansier
said it was not specifically addressed in the ordinance.
Stamson:
. Suggest DNR cornplies with dockage and suggested a condition that applicant
cornplies with DNR regulations.
V onhof and Kuykendall suggested continuing.
1:\99fi1es\99plcomm\pcmin\rrm042699.doc
3
MOTION BY VONHOF, SECOND KUYKENDALL, TO CONTINUE THE MEETING
TO MAY 10, 1999, FOR SPECIFIC RESPONSE FROM THE DNR ON DOCKAGE
AND SHORELAND MODIFICATIONS ON THE TIMBER WALL.
Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
B. CASE FILES #99-003 AND #99-004 (CONTINUED) PRIOR LAKE OAKS, LLC IS
REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND A PRELIMINA~Y' LA T FOR THE
PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS WILD OAKS LOCATED SOUTH OF C UNTY ROAD 42, WEST
F GREENWAY AVENUE AND NORTH AND EAST OF CONROY REET.
/
Planning C ordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Rejort dated April 26, 1999
on file in the ffice ofthe City Planner. This is a continuatipll ofthe public hearing from
the February 8, ~999, Planning Commission rneeting. Staff recommended approval of
the Prelirninary Pi{lt and Conditional Use Permit subject/i, the conditions listed in the
Planning Report. \\ /
Criego asked for c1aritkation on the driveways andiee caliper replacernent. Kansier
responded. \ /
Comments from the PUbli~ /
Robert Speed, 11792 Acron A vue, Inver prove Heights, one of the developers, stated
they met the neighbors concerns d 24 nditions. They spent a lot oftirne and effort to
comply to neighbors' needs.
Scott Roth, 6394 Comoy Street, stat . s concerns were not addressed. First, sorne of
the trees to be excavated are over 1 0 ye s old. The excavation will disturb all the
remaining trees and they will not urvive. other tree disturbance concern is the
construction of the retaining wa s. The addi 'onal drainage from the irnpervious surface
ofthe new developrnent will r se the wetland 2 feet. Therefore, the adj acent trees to
the wetland will be lost. Rot disagrees with th andscaping plan the developer is
proposing and went on to ote the vegetation sel tion in the Shoreland Management
Ordinance. Another conc rn is for the stress on the isting wetlands. Savage already has
drainage into the area. e is not sure if the setbacks frorn the existing Comoy Street
or the platted street ar correct stating some residents w 1 have cars sticking out into the
street if the street is oved as platted. Roth would like r ssurance the existing street
will rernain as is.
Dave Frees, 634 Comoy Street, commended staff with the re rt, however he felt the
area is in the b ff zone. Frees read a partial paragraph of a lett dated April 19, 1999 to
Jane Kansier om Pat Lynch, Hydrologist with the DNR. His sec d concern is the srnall
wetland. Fees' interpretation ofthe Zoning Ordinance wetland de ition would be
violated a proposed.
Ted Schweich, 6436 Comoy Street, brought up the PUD proposal sever years ago and
why it was denied. He stated he has never seen a development corne in as a conditional
1:\99files\99plcomm\pcmin\mn042699.doc
4
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MAY 10, 1999
1. Call to Order:
The May 10, 99, Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Ch' an
Stamson at 6:30 rn. Those present were Commissioners Cramer, Criego uykendall,
Stamson and V 000 f.. Planning Director Don Rye, Planning Coordinat Jane Kansier,
Planner Jenni Tovar, Z~ng Adrninistrator Steve Horsman, Assist t City Engineer Sue
McDermott and Recording Secretary Connie Carlson.
"
"
"
"
"
'.
,
,
""
2.
Roll Call:
3.
VoOOof
Kuykendall
Criego
Cramer
Stamson
t
esent
1'resent
P~'esent
Pres~
"^",,-
Kuykendall noted p of the audio/video tape did not work d
1999 rneeting.
/
The Minuu{s frorn the April 26, 1999 Planning Commission meeting w approved as
presented.
'"
4. Public Hearings:
w
A. Case Files #98-172 and #98-173 (Continued) Bradley Overby requesting a
variance for structure setbacks and a conditional use permit for open land
recreational use in an R-1 District for the property located on the south side of
Island View Circle.
Zoning Administrator Steve Horsman present!ld the Planning Report dated May 10, 1999
on file in the office of the City Planner.
On April 26, 1999, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on a conditional Use
Permit for Brad Overby to conduct "Open Land Recreation" on an outlot located in Island
View 2nd Addition. The Planning Commission heard frorn the public and the applicant.
The public hearing was closed and the itern was continued to seek input frorn the DNR
regarding the shore restoration and the number of docks permitted on site.
Pat Lynch, DNR Area Hydrologist suggested the shore be restored with riprap as
permitted without a DNR permit, or an application for a permit for the wall as constructed
be subrnitted to the DNR. There is no lirnit on the nurnber of docks on this site.
1:\99fi1es\99ptcomm\pcmin\mn051099.doc
However, the site is limited to the mooring of 4 watercrafts at any given time. The DNR
supports an accessory structure being placed on the lot. Only one water oriented
accessory structure is recornmended. These concerns have been added to the conditions
of the CUP.
Staff recommended City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit with specific
conditions outlined in the Planning Report.
The Commissioners briefly discussed the ownership with outlots.
MOTION BY KUYKENDALL, SECOND BY CRIEGO, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC
HEARING IN THIS MATTER.
Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
Commissioner Stamson read the Public Hearing Staternent.
Comments from the public:
Brad Overby, 15901 Frernont Avenue, stated last year two families owned the lot, he is
now the sole owner. Overby's concern was to store his camper on the outlot. Living only
ten houses away, his family does not plan on staying in the camper overnight. He would
just like to store it on the outlot and take it camping on weekends. His purpose of having
it on the outlot is because it will not fit next to his house. He is not opposed to visually
shielding the carnper with a fence or vegetation. Overby also had photos of the
neighborhood storage. Overby explained the letter he received frorn the City several
years ago stating he could store the camper on the outlot. Overby eXplained he has a lot
ofrnoney on surveys and permits to address an issue that should not have been an issue.
He has contacted the DNR and is applying for a permit for the retaining wall.
Marie Piette, lives on the second lot from Overby's and sees the trailer every tirne she
looks out her bedroorn window. She wanted the Commissioners to realize Overby's
camper is full size and visually does not fit in the neighborhood.
The public hearing was closed at 6:47 p.rn.
Comments from the Commissioners:
Kuykendall:
. Questioned the seasonal storage. Overby responded the neighbors store vehicles year
round.
. Pointed out Item #4 ofthe Conditional Use analysis. This would be a legitirnate
parking feature ifthere was a home on the property. This is not the real argument.
. Not opposed to the camper being on the property.
. Three docks are too rnuch for one property.
1:\99files\99p1comm\pcrnin\mn051099.doc
2
. Rye explained if a cornplaint or violation carne to the City regarding the Conditional
Use Permit, the Commissioners would have the opportunity to review before one year
elapsed.
. The DNR does not regulate the docks, but one cannot have more than 4 boats. The
City does not have any jurisdiction.
. Not unreasonable to use the property for year round storage if it meets certain design
criteria in terms of screening.
Stamson:
. Generally supports staff s recommendation.
. Does not agree with Kuykendall's comments <In vehicle parking. Concern for turning
every undeveloped lot in the City into an unregulated storage lot.
. Views this as a park.
. This use is for outdoor recreation not a storage area.
. Prefers to see what is allowed in City parks and other recreational facilities.
. Not against the 3 docks - there is 150 feet oflakeshore. The DNR regulates.
. Should be rnore restrictive on vehicle parking.
Criego:
. Agreed with Starnson and staff s report.
. Does not agree with the number of docks, but not the City's problem.
. Prior Lake has a number of vacant lots with storage, but feels it is unsightly.
Cramer:
. Agreed with staff, Criego and Starnson's concerns on storage for a recreational
vehicle. Should be at primary residence.
. The dockage issue has been addressed.
. The owner is working with the DNR with the shoreline issue.
Criego:
. With the new Ordinance, it seerns that as of May 1, recreational storage should be on
the side or back ofthe property. Most of the photos the applicant presented of the
neighborhood had storage in the front of the property. It is up to the community to
start flagging those residents.
Kuykendall:
. When is there another piece of property next to a residence for storage that requires
screening? Rye explained the screening requirernents were rernoved during the public
rneetings.
. If the applicant is willing to visually care for the storage, it is not unreasonable.
. The issue of dockage should be looked at outside of this rnatter.
Criego:
. Conditions can be placed on this request.
1:\99files\99plcomm\pcmin\mn051099.doc
3
Kuykendall:
. Dockage will becorne an issue ifthe City allows it.
. Favors fewer docks.
. The storage could be landscaped and allowed.
MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY CRAMER, DIRECT CITY COUNCIL TO
APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WITH THE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
AS FOLLOWS:
1. One water-oriented accessory structure shall be permitted on this site, unless a
variance is granted to the contrary.
2. The allowed shed shall rneet all flood proofing and building code requirernents. A
building permit is required.
3. The number of sheds and setbacks are subject to any conditions irnposed as part of the
variance request (Case 98-172).
4. The existing parking area shall not be expanded or relocated. It rnay be rnaintained
including surfacing materials (paving).
5. A revised survey incorporating all conditions placed on the variance and CUP must
be subrnitted prior to final CUP approval.
6. Recreational vehicle parking is restricted to daylight hours and between April 1st and
November 1st in any given year.
7. Shoreline irnprovements (existing or future) rnust be approved by the DNR. Such
approval rnust be received prior to the issuance of a building permit for the water
oriented accessory structure.
8. No rnore than 4 watercraft may be rnoored or docked at the site at any given tirne.
Discussion by Commissioners:
. No 24 hours storage of boat on land, but allowed in the water, does not rnake sense.
. Clarified summer recreational storage.
. As a friendly arnendrnent Criego added "No parking daytirne or evening from
Novernber 1 to March 31" to Condition #6. Cramer agreed.
. What is the logic of this proposal that sorneone should not have recreational
equiprnent, not even a boat 24 hours a day during the summer rnonths, on land?
. This condition is consistent with the City Ordinance.
Vote taken signified ayes by Stamson, Criego, Cramer, nay by Kuykendall. MOTION
CARRIED.
MOTION BY CRAMER, SECOND BY CRIEGO, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 99-02PC
GRANTING A 9.7 FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT A 15.3 FOOT FRONT YARD
SETBACK INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 25 FOOT SETBACK TO PERMIT A
WATER ORIENTED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE ON AN OUTLOT.
1:\99files\99p1comm\pcmin\mnOS 1 099.doc
4
Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION BY CRAMER, SECOND BY CRIEGO, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 99-03PC
TO DENY A 15.7 FOOT V ARlANCE TO PERMIT A 9.3 FOOT FRONT YARD
SETBACK INSTEAD OF THE 25 FOOT SETBACK FOR A WATER ORIENTED
ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
The Conditional Use Permit will be heard before the City Council on June 7, 1999.
B. Case Files #99-013 and #99-014 (Continued) D.R. Horton requesting an
amend nt to the City of Prior Lake Year 2010 Comprehensiv Ian and a zone
change re est for the property known as Deerfield located so th and west of
County Roa 21, south of Fish Point Road and Wilderness T. ail and east of the
Ponds Athleti Facility.
Planning Coordina r Jane Kansier presented the Planning eport dated May 10, 1999 on
file in the office of City Planner.
D.R. Horton and Deerfie ,Development filed an app . ation for a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment and a Zone Ch'ap.ge for the property loc ted south and west of CSAH 21,
south ofFish Point Road and'Wilderness pond~r and east of the Ponds Athletic
Facility. The proposal included'qn amendment t e Land Use Plan Map frorn the current
R-LIMD (Low to Medium Residehtial) and C- 0 (Business Office Park) designations to
the R-HD (High Density Residential) design ton on 62.92 acres on the west side of this
property. This proposal also included\ rez ing from the current A (Agricultural) and
C-5 (Business Park) district to the R-4 .' h Density Residential) district for the 62.92
acres on the west side ofthe site, and fr 't1;1e A (Agricultural) district to the R-2 (Low to
Medium Density Residential) district fi r the r~siduall 01.31 acres.
. \
\
The Planning Commission conside d this propo~l!l at a public hearing on April 26, 1999.
After considerable testirnony and iscllssion, the Planning Commission voted to
recommend denial ofthe propo d Land Use Plan ~endment. There seerned to be
\
sorne consensus sorne R-2 zo . g should be permitted 0 the property. The Commission
decided to table action on thO item to allow the applican 0 subrnit a revised description
of the R-210cation.
val of the R-l and R-2 district as pres ted by the applicant.
MOTION BY C
ER, SECOND BY CRIEGO TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
Vote taken indicate ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
1:\99files\99plcomm\pcmin\mn051 Q99.doc
5
V\WJI \\t~ ,
/{/N 7- l(l"'~ C,Jf - l>tr~~~ fel,o~
S~'\t;} ~~"f \ <(ftk ~ ~,,~ \..[ 111 - Q) fr 4f-: t11^ Rwq~ (j)~f @ I i1lt
1~b ~cXo -\1l.,SSY~~~'vl,-(j)~(i)I~ G)~
t,~<1 0\"" l1o<.f1 M..#,,,,,,(U - E",,,, p~ ""'11~
- sr 1. h~ · lw-t 11''W- (9\""f ' hi';.)'Fh)
_ ~*ro\ l"'>-<Mil
~~~ ~tSwW\~-> ~~ A-wl~
ll\-{ J()~Y\~
_ y~s wi, wfJ~/t6Ir>J4
- ~~~ ^rrf VJft-;) b/J1r.J.J,v"i pi,'!
Vh.r ~ '6 p'VP
'71>'\ '\ 31 C, ul1<< w{Tf,J ~ hf wtfv
_ ~Q;,0~ L~ /'
_ <;~ rw1b r~ ~
<$ l$t v-~ ~D{ rtvr~ - ~.J cJr),f
_ li:!* for ),wT / W'6"'(i. Vrvfo,v. -e