Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980 July Planning Commission Minutes(612) 447 -4230 4629 DAKOTA STREET S.E. PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372 PRIOR LAKE PLANNTNG COMMISSION - AGENDA - JULY 17, 1980 7:30 P.M. Call to Order 7:35 P.M, Denny McWilliams Discussion - Utility Building 7:45 P.M. Roxanne Svoboda Variance 8:00 P.M. John Trulson Rezoning 8 :45 P.M. John Trulson Subdivision 9:15 P.M. Kenneth Swanson Variance 9:30 P.M. Manfred Buetler Variance 9:45 P.M. Jim Filippi Concept Review (612) 447 -4230 4629 DAKOTA STREET S.E. PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COP:91ISSIO> - AGENOA REPORT - JULY 17, 1980 7:35 PI - DENNY Md 4ILL T ANI S - DISCUSSI LOCATION OF UTILITY BUIL Staff has been contacted by Northwestern Bell Telephone and Denny McWilliams as to a site for a transformer station for the aforementioned utility company. The utility company states the site must be in the vicinity of intersection County Road 42 and Crest Avenue. The southeast corner of Crest and County Road 42 is owned by Denny McWilliams and zoned R -3. The southwest corner is also owned by Denny McWilliams and zoned R -2. The north side of-County Road 42 is zoned R -1. Public utility buildings are a conditional use in R -1 zones with minimum lot size 15,000 square feet. Prior Lake comprehensive water report calls for a second water tower in the northeast corner of intersection County Road 42 and Crest. The size of the site will be about S acres. Staff recommends a development in conjunction with City plans. The Planning Commission should consider a site and recommendation to utility company. 7:45 PM - ROXANNE SVOBODA - VARIANCE Attached please find staff recommendation. 8:00 PM - JOHN TRULSON - - REZONING Attached please find map and area map. 8:45 PM - JOHN TRULSON - S UBDIVISION Attached please find map and area map 9:15 PM - KENNETH SWANSON - VARIANCE Attached please find analysis and recommendation. 9:30 PM - MAINFRED BEUTL - VARIANCE Attached please find staff analysis and recommendation. 9:45 PM - JIM FILLIPPI - SUBDIVISION CONCEPT REVIEW Attached please find a sheet containing the preliminary plat of Howard Lake (612) 447 -4230 4629 DAKOTA STREET S.E. PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372 AGENDA REPORT CONTINUED: Estates. The applicant is plating under section 6.3 paragraph C, which allows five acres in A -1 zones if properly subdivided. Several points which must be addressed: 1. There is a discrepency on the zoning map. Howard Lake is mis- represented on the zoning map bringing up a question of zoning. 2. If the property is zoned A -1, subdivision may proceed with five acre parcels only. Lot 3 is 3.4 acres and is land locked. A public street must be shown and dedicated and improved to this parcel. 3. Only the back portions of lots 4 and 5 are buildable. An easement is shown serving these two lots. This is not acceptable. 4. The appropriate environmental studies need to be prepared. 5. The minimum width for five acre lots in A -1 zones is not listed in the Zoning Code and therefore has to be promulgated. 6. Our overlay plat for future resubdivision into smaller lots has to be prepared. PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION - Minutes - JULY 17. 1980 The July 17, 1980 meeting of the Prior Lake Planning Commission was called to order at 7:30 P.M. Present at the meeting were Commissioners Fitzgerald, Johnson. Arnold, Wilker, City Planner Graser and Ceimcilman Bissonett. Commissioner Warmka was absent. The minutes of the June 19, 1980 Planning Commission meeting were reviewed. Motion was made by Arnold to approve the minutes as published, seconded by 11ilker. Upon a vote taken the motion was duly passed. Item I, a discussion on the location of a proposed utility building requested by Denny McWilliams. Mr. McWilliams was not present at the meeting. City Planner Graser stated that he had been contacted by Northwestern Bell Telephone and Denny McWilliams as to a location site for a transformer station. Staff noted that the pr Lake Comprehensive water report calls for a second water tower in the northeast corner o1 Intersection County Road 42 and Crest Avenue. The size of the site will be about 5 acres. Staff's recommendation was that this utility building site be in conjunction with City Plans. The Planning Commissioners commented on this item. Motion was made by Arnold to recommend to Northwestern Bell Telephone that the utility building be constructed on the northeast corner of Intersection County Road 42 and Crest Avenue as it would fit into the long range comprehensive plans, seconded by Johnson. Upon a vote taken, the motion was duly passed. Item II, a variance request by Mr. 6 Mrs. Svoboda. hlr. and Mrs. Svoboda were present at the meeting to answer questions. Staff gave a presentation to the commission. He noted that the variance request is to consider a 29' Lakeshore variance for Lot 4, Block 1, Blohm's lst Addition. The subject parcel was platted in 1973 with a number of restrictive covenants. The covenants call for 1S' side yard setbacks which would necessitate the proposed home to be moved closer to the lake. He noted that there is an existing home and trailer on the parcel which are scheduled to be removed prior to construction of the new home. Staff also noted that the subject home would have a southwesterly view and would benefit greatly from a variance. Staff's recommendation was to deny the request but recommend a 25' lakeshore variance subject to the removal of the trailer. This lot Could be developed with a 50' lakeshore setback without hardship. He also stated that the garage would have to remain some distance from �'�• side property lines in order for a vehicle to turn around and remain on the property. Mr. and Mrs. Svoboda commented on this variance request. It was their feeling that in order to meet the restrictive covenants they would need the 29' variance as requested. (612) 447 -4234 4629 DAKOTA STREET S.E. PRIOR LAKE MINNESOTA 55372 Page two, Planning Commission " mutes cCONii;Iuad s variance request was discussed among the Planning Commi ss i oners. They questioned whether' the home could be situated a different wa'+ on the lot. 7h y also felt that a better determin- ation could he made if a plan of the proposed home find been submitted. Motion was made by Wilker to grant a 29' lake-shore variance because of the following conditions: the 904 elevation produces a restrictive h•ailding package: the restrictive covenan'rs on the property; and the driveway being unique, this is subject to the removal of the trailer on the lot. Also, the existing home is now at this distance, s,-onded by .Johnson. Upon a vote taken, the motion was passed. Chairman Fitzgerald voted no. Item III, a public hearing request for rezoning ny John 1 "_ulson was called to orcer at 8:00 P.M. by Chairman Pitzgerald. Commissioner Fitzgerald stated that because of a conflict of interest he would not partake in any discussion and duly removed himself from the commission and asked Councilman Bissonett to chair the meeting. Planning Commissioners present were Arnold, ,Johnson and Wilker. Planner Graser gave the following staff analysis and recommendation. The current Comprehensive Plan does not address this area since it was in Savage at the time that the plan was developed. The zoning of the entire parcel currently is C -1 conservation which does not address the existing uses and the realistic use of the adjacent use of the parcel to the west. The current Compre- hensive Plan now under consideration by Council outlines a B -1 zone for the existing business uses and a low density zone for the adjacent uses to the West. The requested B -1 zone addresses the current business uses and would be consistent with past rezonings directly North of the subject site. Tract A and Outlet B lying adjacent to and westerly of the requested B -1 zone request for R -2. The current Comprehensive Plan under review calls for low density zoning!`°`o-'` S.� units per acre for these two parcels. Staff found that potential of ten units on these two parcels would not be detrimental to the existing single family neighborhood to the north. Furthermore, traffic circulation and sewer and water availability are of capacity and would not be detrimental to existing systems. An R -2 use would also provide potential developers with a degree of flexibility in light of the B -1 zone to the Last and recreational property adjacent to the West. Staff recommended to rezone the parcels as requested. Six residents from the Boudin's Manor Area were present and provided comments. The residents wanted to see the property left as is with no buildings. The residents were not opposed to rezoning although they did prefer an R -1 single family. They did not simply want the property rezoned without having an opportunity to continent on any development plans. Planner Graser made several attempts to explain the uses and procedures to be followed under the various zones by developers for proposed developments. The Planning Commission found that the proposed uses are consistent with and within the intent of the proposed Comprehensive Plan. The proposed B -1 zone reflects the existing uses and is also in the proposed Comprehensive Plan. The proposed R -2 zone reflects the adjacent B -1 uses and does provide a degree of flexibility to a potential developer. The City in this case would retain all control over development greater than single family and duplex development. The motion was made by Arnold to recommend to the Council to approve the zones as requested on the grounds that it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as proposed and the zones would reflect the constraints of the land and provide a degree of flexibility in the develop- ment of the property. ion was made by Arnold to adjourn the Public I- learine for Pezoning, seconded by Wilker. Up, - "= a vote taken, the motion was duly passed. 1%G Page thre'. Plannin^ Commission '•hnUtes continued g Chairman kissonett called the Subdivision Public He arinc to order at 9:li P.V. 'Members - ;cut o1 the Planning Commission were Arnold, Johnson and Pilker. Staff gave the presentation and outlined staff recommendation. The primary reason for the division for this property is t^ separate the two existing uses with the remaining usable nroperty. The entire division consists of 3.8 acres. Tract C and U are not in direct com- pliance with subdivision ordinance, however, under the circumstances an exceptable solution to staff. Under existing code Tract C € U would have to he serviced by a public road but since there is an existing use and Tract D will more than likely not be developed the existing situation is acceptable to staff. Tracts A and Outlot 8 would be two separate parcels with one building permit issued to each. There are stubs every one hundred feet for Tract A and Outlot B. Park dedication fee has not been determined since the zoning will effect the amount to be dedicated. Since the two existing uses will now have defined lot boundaries the parking re- quirement must be met. Staff recommends approval contingent upon parking requirements and park dedication. The public was asked to respond but since most of the questions were answered at the rezoning hearing there were no responses or additional questions by the six residents from Boudin's Manor. The residents did acknowledge that they did had no problem or conflicts with the pro- posed subdivision as presented. The Commission found that the existing traffic circulation system and parking arrangement should not be altered or changed but rather accepted because of the existing situation. Com- pliance to the present subdivision ordinance would cause undue hardship to the developer and would actually not be in the best interest to the City since the City would be getting a public road and cul -de -sac in an undesirable location. /' kl�, was made by Arnold to approve the subdivision contingent upon parking requirements being met and'the appropriate park dedication fee being charged, seconded by Johnson. Upon a vote taken the motion was duly passed. Motion was made by Johnson to adjourn the Subdivsion Public Hearing, seconded by Wilker. Upon a vote taken the motion was duly passed. At this time Chairman Fitzgerald retained his duties as Chairman. Item V, a variance request by Kenneth Swanson was called to order. Mr. Swanson was present at the meeting to answer questions. Staff gave a presentation to the Commission noting that Mr. Swanson is requesting a variance to relocate and rejuvenate a boathouse back from shoreline for Lots 77 and 78 of Northwood. The parcel is a steep pie shaped lot 200' at the road and 92' at the lake of Prior Lake. The applicant is proposing major repairs and he would like to move the structure back 10' to eliminate problems with high water. Staff noted that the zoning code does not address boat- houses nor has it ever been comprehensively addressed to develop a policy for setback restrictions therefore, staff recommended to deny the request. At this time Mr. Swanson took the podium and stated his reasons for requesting a variance. The Planning Commissioners discussed this request. Commissioner Johnson and Commissioner Wilker stated that they would rather see the boathouse remodeled as this would give a more pleasing view aesthetically from the lake side. Mon was made by Johnson to grant the variance as requested to relocate and rejuvenate the existing boathouse on Lots 77 and 78 of Northwood because of lake elevation and that this would be more aesthetically pleasing, seconded by Arnold. Upon a vote taken, the motion was passed. Chairman Fitzgerald abstained from voting. Page four, Prior Lake Planning Commission Minutes continued: Item VI, a variance request by Manfred Beutler was called to order. Mr. Bender was present the meeting to answer questions. 0 Staff gave a presentation to the Commission noting that Mr. Beutler is requesting a 5' side yard variance from the West property line for Lot 24 and the West 1/2 of Lot 25, Eastwood. The applicant lives on the adjacent property and is proposing to move a 28' x -4' home onto the lot. The lots in Eastwood Addition are very long lots with homes developed close to the lakeshore. Staff recommended denial of the request since the property is only S' less than minimum required width according to zoning law. There is no hardship involved nor is the property unique with respect to the other lots in the immediate area. Mr. Beutler stated his reasons for the variance request to the Planning Commission. He stated that the way the house has been built would require an attached garage. This is a new home that is not quite finished. Commission members determined that a garage c.)uld be built as a detached garage or situated,.: in some other way that it would not require a variance. Motion was made by Arnold to deny the variance' :requestfor a S' side yard variance, seconded `- by Johnson. Upon a vote taken the motion was duly passed. Item VII, Subdivision Concept Review for Jim Fillippi was called to order by Chairman Fitzgerald' Staff gave a presentation to the Planning Commission. At this time the Plat was presented °and ments were made. Staff recommended tablangrof the matter for two weeks until a legal bite; p_vtation of the.zoning could be determined by the City Attorney. Mr. Fillippi gave a presentation and commented on this. He was available to answer questions: from the Commissioners. :.Motion was made by Johnson to table the Concept Review of this Subdivision for two weeks legal interpretation devises an opinion on zoning, seconded by Arnold. Upon a vote. take 'motion was duly passed. The Concept review for this subdivision was scheduled for Augus at 8:00 P.M. Motion was made by Johnson to adjourn the Prior Lake Planning Commission meeting, second Wilker. Upon a vote taken the motion was duly passed and the meeting was adjourned at 1 s;:` P.M..