HomeMy WebLinkAbout051994REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
Thursday, May 19, 1994
7:30 p.m.
7:30 p.m. 1.
8:00 p.m. 2.
8:30 p.m. 3.
8:50 p.m. 4.
9:05 p.m. 5.
Call meeting to order.
a) Review minutes of previous meeting.
VARIANCE - Consider application for Harold Bohlen
VARIANCE - Consider application for David Norling
VARIANCE - Consider application for Lawrence Hartmann
VARIANCE - Consider application for Richard Berko
VARIANCE - Consider application for City of Prior Lake
All times stated on the Planning Commission Agenda, with the exception of Public
Hearings, are approximate and may start a few minutes earlier or later than the scheduled
time.
A5199a
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
PLANNING COMMISSION
May 19, 1994
The May 19, 1994, Planning Commission Meeting was called to order by Chairman Arnold at 7:30 P.M.
Those present were Commissioners Roseth, Arnold, Loftus, Vonhof, Director of Planning Horst Gmser,
Assistant City Planner Deb Gal-ross, Associate Planner Gina Mitchell, and Secretary Rim Schewe.
REVIEW MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
MOTION BY ROSETH, SECOND BY VONHOF, TO APPROVE THE MINU'IF~ AS WR1TrEN.
Vote taken signified ayes by Roseth, Vonhof, Kuykendall, Loftus, and Amold. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEMI - VARIANCE. HAROLD BOHLEN
Harold Bohlen, 13380 Hickory Avenue, stated he was granted a variance for his property over a year ago
but that variance had since expired. IVk Bohlen also stated that he has sold 10 acres of his property and is
now requesting the same variance to allow 5 dwelling units per quarter/quarter section of the subject site.
Deb Garross, Assistant City Planner, presented the information as per planning report of May 19, 1994. In
1992, the applicant applied for a variance requesting approval of four additional units above the four
permitted per quarter/quarter section in which the subject site is located. The Planning Commission denied
his request but granted one additional unit subject to the facts and fundings as listed in the Planning
Commission minutes of October 15, 1992. The applicant appealed that decision to the City Council and
they affumed the decision and facts and findings of the Planning Commission. A variance application is
valid for one year following issuance which in this case expi~vxt in November of 1993. Mr. Bohlen is
requesting the same variance granted by the Council in 1992. No changes have occun'ed in the Zoning
Ordinance or the district in which the subject site is located since the 1992 variance approval that would
negatively affect this application.
Recommmdation from Staff is to approve the variance as requested subject to the condition that the
applicant f'fle and record an agreement with the City of Prior Lake restricting the issuance of additional
building permits for any residential units on the 26 acres until public sewer and water is available. The one
additional residential unit granted under this permit shall be restricted to the 10 acre subject site. The
agreement must be reviewed and accepted by the City Aaomey prior to filing with Scoa County.
Comments from the Commissioners were; acres remaining, reason for reapplication of variance and in view
of past action there were no further comments.
MOTION BY LOFILIS, SECOND BY VONHOF, TO APPROVE A VARIANCE FROM ZONING
ORDINANCE SECTION 4.1M TO ALLOW FIVE (5) DWELLING UNITS PER QUARTER/QUARTER
SECTION BASED ON THE FACTS AND FINDINGS AS LISTED IN THE PLANNING REPORT OF
MAY 19, 1994, AND CONTINGENT UPON ITEM #8.
PLANNING COMMISSION
May 19, 1994
Page I
Vote taken signified ayes by Loftus, Vonhof, Roseth, Kuykendall, and AmolcL MOTION CARRIED.
Discussion followed on Bylaws, meeting schedules, and time changes until the next scheduled agenda item.
ITEM II - VARIANCE - DAVID AND LIZ NORLING
David Norling, 15239 Fairbanks Trail, stated they are requesting a variance to rebuild a deck that is
deteriorating to the point of being unsafe as part of the deck has fallen off. Mr. Norling would like to build
a 4' x 22.5' walkway, a 17.5' x 14' deck, and a furore 14'x 14' four season porch addition. After having a
survey done it was found the stairs had encroached on the adjoining lot.
Gina Mitchell, Associate Planner presented the information as per planning report of May 19, 1994. The
request is for a 9 foot south sideyard variance and a 15 foot lakeshore variance. The subject site is a 50'
substandard lot and was platted under the jurisdiction of a previous governing body. The proposed
conslruction would not encroach onto the adjacent pmpmy as is now the case. Conm~nts from DNR were
to place the sidewalk on the north side of house or reduce the 9 foot south side variance.
Cormmnts from the Commissioners were; walkway dimensions, future expansion, altemative location for
walkway to decrease variance, safe ingress and egress into the house, floor plan desc~bed, decrease 9 foot
variance to 5 foot, and precedent has been set. There are altematives to access the deck that do not require a
9 foot sideyard variance such as: relocation of the stairway, walkway, and installation of a retaining wall
and platform that would not require variances.
MOTION BY VONHOF, SECOND BY KUYKENDALL, TO APPROVE A FIFIEEN (15) FOOT
LAKESHORE VARIANCE FROM THE SEVENTY-FIVE (75) FOOT LAKESHORE SETBACK
REQUIREMENT AND A FIVE (5) FOOT SOUTtt SIDE YARD VARIANCE FROM THE TEN (10)
FOOT SIDEYARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT FOR LOT 4, MAPLE PARK SHORE ACRES, 15239
FAIRBANKS TRAIL N. E. RATIONAL BEING THE LOT IS A SUBSTANDARD LOT OF RECORD,
PRECEDENT HAS BEEN SET, HARDSHIP IS CAUSED BY THE APPLICATION OF CURRENT
ZONING REGULATIONS AND NOT THE ACIIONS OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, THE EXISTING
STRUCTURE IS SET BACK FIVE (5) FEET FROM THE SOUTH SIDE LOT LINE, AND IT WOULD
NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
Vote taken signified ayes by by Vonhof, Kuykendall, Roseth, Amold, and Loftus. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEMIH- VARIANCE- LAWRENCE HARTMAN
Lawrence Hartman, 3582 Basswood Cimle SW, stated he is requesting a fi'ont yard vau'iance in o~rler to
build a rambler type home on the adjacent lot. This is to be a retirement home and as his wife is
handicapped it needs to be accessible for her.
Gina Mitchell, Associate Planner; presented the information as planning report of May 19, 1994. The
variance requested is a 6 foot north front yard variance from the 25 foot front yturt setback requirement.
The requested variance would allow the proposed home to be set back along a similar visual line as the
homes on the adjacent properties. Due to the City's street consmaction project the applicant has a linger
boulevard than most of the homes and the variance would not be noticeable. The proposal is reasonable
under the circumstances, it observes the character of the area and would not be detrimental to the health and
welfare of the community.
Comments from the Commkssioners were on; replacement of trees that me lost, setback averaging, and all
were in consensus of the application.
MOTION BY ROSETH, SECOND BY VONHOE TO APPROVE A SIX (6) FOOT NORTH FRONT
YARD VARIANCE FROM THE TWENFY-F1VE (25) FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK
PLANNING COMMISSION
May 19, 1994
Page 2
REQUIREMENT FOR 3576 BASSWOOD CIRCLE SW, LOT 4, BLOCK 3, WILLOWS 3RD
ADDmON, WITH THE CONTINGENCY ANY TREES LOST BE REPLACED. RATIONALE BEING
THE STYLE OF HOME WILL ACCOMMODATE THE PHYSICAL NEEDS OF THE FAMILY, THE
FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE WILL PUT THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION IN ALIGNMENT
WITH TIqE EXISTING HOMES, THE PROPOSAL IS REASONABLE UNDER THE
CIRCUMb~FANCES, IT OBSERVES THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA AND WOULD NOT BE
DETRIMENFAL TO THE HEALTH AND WEI ,FARE OF THE COMMUNITY.
Vote taken signified ayes Roseth, Vonhof, Arnold, Kuykendall, and Lofms. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM IV - VARIANCE - RICHARD BERKO
Richard Berko, 2953 Terrace Circle SE, stated he is requesting two variances to construct a deck. After
seeing the recommendation from Staff, he would agree to a 25 foot variance lakeshore instead of 27 feet as
originally requested.
Deb Garross, Assistant City Planner, presented the information as per planning report of May 19, 1994.
The subject site is a substandard lot of record and was subdivided via an administrative land division by the
City of Prior Lake in 1985. There is a 60 foot public right-of-way where a storm sewer is located northerly
of the site. A variance was granted at the time of construction but expired. Staff recommends that a 5 toot
north sideyard and a 25 foot lakeshore variance be granted. The variance requested would be consistent
with variances granted to the structure on the adjacent parcel and with previous actions of the Planning
Commission related to lakeshore setback variances.
Comments from the Commissioners were on; street right-of-way, alternative desigm tbr deck, and all were
in consensus of the 5 foot sideyard and the 25 foot lakeshore variance.
MOTION BY LOFFUS, SECOND BY VONHOF, TO APPROVE A FIVE (5) FOOT NORTH SIDEYARD
VARIANCE FROM THE TEN (10) FOOT SIDEYARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT AND A
TWENTY-FIVE (25) FOOT LAKESHORE VARIANCE FROM THE SEVENTY-FIVE (75) FOOT
LAKESHORE SETBACK REQUIREMENT FOR TRACT A (PART OF LOTS 9, 10, 11, AND 12,
BLOCK 25, SPRING LAKE TOWNSITE). RATIONALE BEING IT DOES MEET THE HARDSHIP
CRITERIA AS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT, IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ADJACENT
PARCEL AND WOULD NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF THE
COMMUNITY.
Vote taken signified ayes by Loftus, Vonhof, Roseth, Kuykendall, and Amold. MOTION CARRIED.
A recess was called at 9:08 P.M. and the meeting reconvened at 9:10 P.M.
ITEM V-VARIANCE-CITY OF PRIOR LAKFJBECKER ARENA PRODUCTS
Bonnie Carlson, Assistant City Manager, repremnting the City and the applicant Becker Arena Bx)ducts,
presented the information as per planning report. The request is to consider a 10 foot east sideyard variance
from the 20 foot side ymd setback requirement of the I-1, Business Park Zoning Disu-ict. The development
could not occur on the original site intended due to the wet conditions within the plat, theretbre an alternate
site was chosen. There are more stringent setback requirements within Block 1 which requires a vahance
for the proposed construction. The City and developer have spent considerable time and effort in an
attempt to accomplish the objective of the Business Park. It is in the City's best interest to facilitate this
project.
Comments from the Comrrfissione~ woe; tuming radius, setback ~equimrnmts, dollm,'s invested,
redesigning building, and type of building material used.
PLANNING COMMISSION
May 19, 1994
Page 3
MOTION BY ROSETH, SECOND BY VONHOF, TO APPROVE A TEN (10) FOOT EAST SIDEYARD
VARIANCE FROM THE TWENTY (20) FOOT SIDEYARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT OF THE I-1
BUSINESS PARK ZONING DISTRICT. RATIONAL BEING THE APPLICATION MEETS THE
HARDSHIP CRITERIA, OBSERVES THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE AND
BUSINESS PARK DISTRICT, AND IT WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
Vote taken signified ayes by Roseth, Vonhof, Amold, Kuykendall, and Loftus. MOTION CARRIED.
Discussion followed on the changes in the Bylaws, meeting day changed to second and fourth Mondays and
starting time changed to 7:00 P.M. A city-wide tour will be scheduled for June 30, 1994, at 6:00 P.M.
MOTION BY LOFIIJS, SECOND B Y VONHOE TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.
Vote taken signified ayes by Loftus, Vonhof, Roseth, Arnold, and Kuykendall. MOTION CARRIED.
The meeting adjourned at 9:58 P.M. Tapes of the meeting are on file at City Hall.
Horst W. Graser Rita M. Schewe
Director of Planning Recording Secretm'y
PLANNING COMMISSION
May 19, 1994
Page 4