HomeMy WebLinkAbout7C - 2009 Variance Report
O~ PR10/f
.... '("
t: '"J'
U :;.:::
",
~/NNE50'\ ~
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
AGENDA ITEM:
DISCUSSION:
4646 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MARCH 15, 2010
7C
JEFF MATZKE, PLANNER
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE 2009 VARIANCE SUMMARY REPORT
Introduction
This report provides the City Council with information regarding the 2009 variance
activity. It is intended to give the Council information that will be useful in evaluating
future variance requests, and in evaluating the need for ordinance revisions.
Historv
The Planning Commission acts as the Board of Appeals for all variance applications.
In the case of an appeal from a decision of the Planning Commission, the City
Council hears the appeal.
In the year 2009 the City of Prior Lake received 5 variance applications. These
applications included a total of 3 individual variance requests. All 3 requests were
approved by the Planning Commission. The properties which applied for variances
in 2009 were all within the shoreland district.
Table 1 is a summary of variance activity for 2009, and a comparison of activity for
the 5
2009 2008 2004
Number of Applications 2 5 3 6 8 10
Number of Requests 3 9 18 14 17 23
Requests Approved 3 9 16 14 13 14
Requests Denied 0 0 0 0 4 9
Requests Incomplete 0 0 0 0 0 0
Requests in Process 0 0 2 0 0 0
Requests Withdrawn 0 0 0 0 0 0
PC Decisions Appealed 0 0 2 0 2 5
PC Decisions Overturned 0 0 0 0 0 0
I Number Lots in SO 3 3 2 4 6 8
I Number of Riparian Lots 1 2 2 4 6 6
Note: If an applicant requested a variance and the Planning Commission approved a reduction of the
original request, then it is represented as one approved request and one denied request in the tables.
www.cityofpriorlake.com
Phbhe'952.447.9800/ Fax 952.447.4245 Page I
Table 2 compares the specific types of variance requests in 2009 to the requests for
the five preceding years.
VARIANCE REQUESTS 2009 2008 2007 I 2006 2005 20041
Lot Area 1 2 1 3
Lot Width (Front) 3 1
Lot Width (OHW)
Front Yard Setback 3 4 1 2 4 3
Rear Yard Setback 1
Side Yard Setback 3 4 4 2
Side Street Side Yard Setback
Side Yard Setback for 2 1 1
walls> 50'
Eave Encroachment (5')
Sum of Side Yard Setback 1 1 1 1
15' Building Separation 1 1 2 2
Structure Setback to OHWM 1 1 5
Bluff Setback 1 2
Bluff Impact Zone 1
Impervious Surface Coveraqe 1 2 2
Buildinq Heiqht
Wall Lenqth/Buildinq Heiqht Ratio
Accessorv Buildinqs
Driveway Setback 3 1
Driveway Width 1
Maximum Driveway Slope
Road Access Below the RFPE 2 1
(901')
Parkinq Stalls 2
Subdivision of contiguous
nonconforminq lots
Incomplete/PendinglWithd rawn 0 0 0 0 0
The 2009 variance requests are comparable to requests made in the previous 5
years. The variances were requested to make improvements in required front yards
of existing single family dwellings.
In 2009, the City amended various portions of its Zoning Ordinance including
modifications to zoning districts classifications (added TC-Town Center, TC-T
Transitional Town Center) and changes to residential accessory structures
requirements, bluff determinations, driveway and sign regulations, clarifying
language definitions, and adding more permitted land uses. The amendments were
to bring the former Zoning Ordinance up-to-date and consistent with the newly
adopted 2030 Comprehensive Plan. These amendments will have no affect on the
variance requests received.
Current Circumstances
The Planning Commission considered this summary report on February 22, 2010.
The Planning Commission concluded that the variances requested were site specific.
At this time there is no need to amend the Zoning Ordinance to address any
recurring issues due to variance requests.
Page 2
ISSUES:
The number of applications for variances has trended downward over time. This
suggests, first of all, that the staff's effort in working with permit applicants to identify
design alternatives to the variance process has been effective. The downward trend
of variances also suggests the amendments to the ordinance over time have been
effective in addressing concerns within the ordinance. Since a variance, by
definition, is noncompliance with the ordinance, it is desirable the number of
approved variances be minimized to those situations with a defined hardship.
It is no surprise to City Staff that shoreland properties continue to be the focus of
most variance requests. These are the most highly regulated lots under the
ordinance because of the environmental issues they represent. The lots are also
among the oldest in the City, and many tend to be nonconforming in terms of size
and width. These factors result in making building on these lots more difficult.
ALTERNATIVES: The City Council has the following alternatives:
1. . Motion and second to receive and file the 2009 Variance Report.
2. Provide the staff with additional direction.
RECOMMENDED Alternate 1. A motion and second to approve the variance summary report.
MOTION:
Reviewed by:
Page 3
FILE # APPLICANT ZONING V ARIANCE(S) PC ACTION & CC ACTION &
PROPERTY ADDRESS REQUESTED DATE DATE
09-124 Premiere One Landscapes R-1SD . A 10' variance from the Approved 9/24/09
4030 154th Street NW required 10' minimum
front yard setback for a
subdivision monument
SIgn
4035 Windsong Circle NW . A 10' variance from the
required 10' minimum
front yard setback for a
subdivision monument
SIgn
09-13 0 Memory Land Design-Build LLC R-1SD . A 8.3' variance from the Approved 1/11/10
4580 Lords Street NE minimum 25' front yard
setback
Page 4