Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8A Pole Building in R-1 Sub Res AGENDA #: PREPARED BY: SUBJECT: DATE: INTRODUCTION: ANAL YSIS: STAFF AGENDA REPORT SA R. Michael Leek Associate Planner/Acting Assistant Planner Consider approval of Resolution No. 96- 64 denying a request of Robert W. Ostdiek to permit the construction of a pole building in the R1-Suburban Residential District June 3, 1996 The Planning Department received a request from Mr. Ostdiek to 1) permit the construction of a pole building in the R 1- Suburban Residential Zoning District, and 2) grant a variance to permit said pole building to have an area of 1,792 square feet instead of the maximum permitted 832 square feet. The proposed building would be used for the storage of personal property such as collector cars. The City Council has sole discretion to permit pole buildings under Section 4-7-4 of the City Code; that section does not vest any authority for the decision in the Planning Commission. Acting as the Board of Adjustment, the Commission's role was to evaluate the efficacy of the requested structure area variance. Because the 2 issues are related, the Commission discussed the appropriateness of such a building on the property, and adopted Resolution 96-17PC only to advise the Council of its perspective on the issue. The property is in the plat of Titus 2nd Addition, which was approved by the Prior Lake City Council in 1974. The house and attached garage on the subject site were constructed in 1976. The Planning Commission has already approved an area variance if the Council approves construction of a pole building. The only issue for the Council to determine is whether to approve the construction of a pole building on the property. Section 4-7-4 of the Prior Lake City Code regulates "pole buildings". Specifically, the Ordinance provides that such buildings are permitted only in the A 1-Agricultural and C 1- Conservation zoning districts unless specifically approved by the City Council in another zoning district, in cases where the proposed structure is compatible with the surrounding area. "Such structures may be authorized by the Council for use as warehouse, heavy equipment storage or other uses which 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER RESOLUTION 96-64 RESOLUTION DENYING A REQUEST BY ROBERT W. OSTDIEK TO CONSTRUCT A POLE BUILDING ON PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE Rl- SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT AND IDENTIFIED AS 4510 JACKSON TRAIL NE. MOTION BY: SECOND BY: WHEREAS, Robert W. Ostdiek has applied under Section 4-7-4 of the Prior Lake City Code to permit the construction of 1,792 square foot pole building for the storage of personal property on property located in the R 1- Suburban Residential zoning district at the following location, to wit; Lots 11 and 12, Block 1, TITUS 2ND ADDITION, Scott County Minnesota; and WHEREAS, The City Council reviewed the request to construct the pole building at its meeting of May 20, 1996; and WHEREAS, The City Council has concluded that the request does not meet the criteria for pole buildings set forth in Section 4-7-4 of the City Code in that the proposed use of the building is neither consistent with the zoning district or the nature of a pole building. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE, that the request to allow construction of a pole building on property identified as 4510 Jackson Trail NE. is hereby denied. Passed and adopted this 3rd day of June, 1996. YES NO Andren Andren Greenfield Greenfield Kedrowski Kedrowski Mader Mader Schenck Schenck {Seal} City Manager City of Prior Lake 16200 ~~6et~~~S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER RESOLUTION 9617PC A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A REQUEST BY ROBERT W. OSTDIEK TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF A POLE BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4510 JACKSON TRAIL NE. IN THE RI-SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT; BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. Robert W. Ostdiek has applied under Section 4-7-4 of the Prior Lake City Code to permit the construction of aI, 792 square foot pole building for the storage of personal property on property located in the RI-Suburban Residential zoning district at the following location, to wit; Lots 11 and 12, Block 1, TITUS 2ND ADDITION, Scott County Minnesota. 3. The contents of Planning Case 96-030V A 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 Board of Adjustment hereby recommends approval of the request to permit a pole building in the RI-Suburban Residential zoning district. Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on May 28, 1996. Richard Kuykendall, Chair ATTEST: Donald R. Rye, Planning Director 16200 ~~~1~O-e. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER RESOLUTION 9618PC A RESOLUTION APPROVING A REQUEST BY ROBERT W. OSTDIEK TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF A 1,792 SQUARE FOOT ACCESSORY BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4510 JACKSON TRAIL NE.IN THE Rl- SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT; BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. Robert W. Ostdiek has applied for a variance from Section 6.2 of the Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance to permit the construction of 1,792 square foot accessory building for the storage of personal property on property located in the Rl- Suburban Residential zoning district at the following location, to wit; Lots 11 and 12, Block 1, TITUS 2ND ADDITION, Scott County Minnesota. 2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variance as contained in Case 96-030V A and held a hearing thereon on May 13, 1996. 3. The Board of Adjustment 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. 4. The request meets the Ordinance criteria, in that reasonable use of the property would not be obtained if the Ordinance is literally applied. 5. The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The variance would not serve merely as a convenience to the applicant, but is not necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship. 7. The contents of Planning Case 96-030V A are hereby entered into and made a part of the public record and the record of decision for this case 16200 ~ggf~e. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER CONCLUSION Based upon the Findings set forth above, the Board of Adjustment hereby approves the requested variance to permit aI, 792 square foot accessory building in the RI-Suburban Residential zoning district. Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on May 28, 1996. Richard Kuykendall, Chair ATTEST: Donald R. Rye, Planning Director 9618PC.DOC/RML 2 PLANNING REPORT AGENDA ITEM: SUBJECT: SITE: PRESENTER: PUBLIC HEARING: DA TE: 4.D Consider variance for Robert W. Ostdiek 4510 Jackson Trail NE. R. Michael Leek, Associate Planner YES --1LNO APRIL 22, 1996 INTRODUCTION: The Planning Department received a variance application from Robert W. Ostdiek. Mr. Ostdiek wishes to build a 32'x 56'(1,792 square foot) pole building for the storage of personal property, such as collector cars. The proposed building "vould be located 74.68' from the East property line and 147.62' from the front property line. DISCUSSION: The subject property is zoned RI-Suburban Residential. The property is in the plat of Titus 2nd Addition, which was approved by the Prior Lake City Council in 1974. The house and attached garage on the subject site were constructed in 1976. Section 4-7-4 of the Prior Lake City Code regulates "pole buildings". Specifically, such buildings are permitted only in the AI-Agricultural and C I-Conservation zoning districts unless specifically approved by the City Council in cases where the proposed use is compatible with that type of structure, and when a pole building would not be offensive to other property o\vners or persons within the City. Because the use of a pole building can only be approved by the City Council, the Commission's role in this variance is to make a recommendation to the Council as to whether or not a pole building should be allowed, as opposed to actually granting the variance. The maximum size of detached, accessory structures in the Rl zoning district is limited to 832 square feet by Section 6.2(A)3 of the Zoning Ordinance. In 1994, a number of variances were granted to permit the construction of a 3,500 square foot pole building on the property identified as 13151 Pike Lake Trail. (Case No. 1994-0032). At the time tills report was written the file was being microfilmed, and thus could not be reviewed. However, conversations with the Building Official indicated that the variance was granted on the condition that the building be used only for hay storage in connection with an active farming operation. The use of such a building for agricultural purposes can be distinguished from its use for the storage of personal property. 16200 E>8~EY~IeW~rs.E.. Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQCAL OPPORTC:'-HTl E::.-\PLOYER .J The subject property is anomalous in that it is in the Rl-Suburban Residential zoning district, which is designed for urban-style, sewered residential development. However, the 2010 Land Use Plan assumes that this area will remain unsewered, thus limiting development potential. Thus, while the area is likely to remain rural residentiaVagricultural in character, its use is limited by regulations intended for smaller lot residential development. For these reasons, the Commission may want to consider whether a zoning change of some sort would be appropriate for this area of the City, and may want to recommend to the Council that it consider such a change. Variance Hardship Standards: 1. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would result in undue hardship with respect to the property. . This criterion goes to whether reasonable use can be made of the property if the Ordinance is literally enforced. It also goes to whether the applicant has legal alternatives to accomplish the intended purpose without the requested variance. In past decisions, the Commission has concluded that a component of reasonable residential use is the provision of 2 covered (i.e. garage) parking spaces. The subject property does currently have a garage. In addition, the applicant doe have a legal, if not as desirable, alternative available without the requested variances. Specifically, the applicant could construct up to an 832 square foot detached garage for the storage of additional personal property. For these reasons, there would not be undue hardship with respect to the property if the Ordinance were literally enforced. 2. Such unnecessary hardship results because of circumstances unique to the property . Because staff has concluded that there would be no undue hardship with respect to the property, this criterion is de facto not met. Nfr. Ostdiek's request is in part based on the contention that the property is unique because of its size and its character, and the character of the surrounding area. Staffhas concluded that because reasonable use is available, this argument is not compelling. However, as stated above, it is an anomalous situation that the Commission may wish to address independently of this request. 3. The hardship is caused by provisions of the Ordinance and is not the result of actions of persons presently having an interest in the property. To the extent there is a perceived hardship, it relates specifically to choices made by the applicant in acquiring property requiring storage. It is not a result of the application of the provisions of the Ordinance to the subject property. 9630V APC.DOC/RML 2 4. The variance observes the spirit and intent of this Ordinance, produces substantial justice and is not contrary to the public interest. The proposed use of the building does not appear to be the type of use contemplated under Section 4-7-4 of the City Code. In this respect, the request to permit a pole building does not appear consistent with the spirit and intent of the Ordinance. Similarly, because the proposed use is for the storage of personal property, as opposed for example for agricultural use, the area variance would be inconsistent with the provisions in Section 6.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the building area variance requested by the applicant, and recommend approval of the variance to permit a pole building in the Rl zoning district. 2. Approve a building area variance as requested or as modified by the Commission, but recommend denial of the variance to permit a pole building in the Rl zoning district. 2. Table or continue discussion of the item for specific purpose. .. , 3. Deny the request for building area variance and recommend denial of the variance to permit a pole building In the Rl zoning district because the Commission finds u. lack of demonstrated hardship under the Zoning Ordinance criteria. RECOMMENDATION: Because staff has concluded that the request does not meet the Ordinance criteria, staff recommends Alternative No.4, denial of the request. ACTION REQUIRED: A motion adopting Resolution 9617PC recommending denial of the request to permit construction of a pole building in the RI-Suburban Residential zoning district, and Resolution 96l8PC denying the request for a variance to permit a detached accessory structure with an area of 1,792 square feet. 9630V APC.DOCRML 3 J ~ VA9fL - O~O PID# ~:r -- or;-, n /t-C> CITY OF PRIOR LAKE APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE ~licant: fol~l+ tJ. .Odd'el: Address: '15/0 ,jd t' k ~o h lit AI S. /",',,'" La.k~ prot:erty Oimer: ~ta 17'1 -c:...- Address: .s ~ yr.-e-. Type of CWnership: Fee Consul tantlContractor:. Home Phone: If t,7~ - V 1 ~ ~ 55""37-" Work Phone: '-ILl S--1..:l ~7 Hcme Phone: Work Phone: Purchase Agreenent Phone: Contract Existing Use (J I...L I of Property: n -es ; I(en fa Legal Description cI of Variance Site: L ~ + / / tIC It I:J Variance Requested: tA~~ Present Zoning: , I M..-so/~. Bas the applicant pr~liously sought to plat, rezone, obtain a variance or conditional use permit on the subject site or any r:art of it? - Yes X! ~ wret was requested: Wha~: Disposition: DeSkribe thi ~ of improveneni:7~ proposed: Po/~ !3 t.{ /Id,'^ r, - t::!.1'~ bAd ~ fcJY~Oj ~ - Co/IV'c.7rJY' far < ../ ./ -.../ .J. SUBMISSION RECUIREMENI'S: (A)Completed application form. (B) Filing fee. (C) Property SUrvey indicating the prot=Osed developnent in relation to property lines and/or ordinary-higlrwater mark; prot=Osed building elevations and drainage plan. (D)Certified frem abstract firm, names and addresses of property owners within' 100 feet of the e..~erior botmdaries of the subject property. (E)Ccmplete legal description & Property Identification Number (pm). (P)Deed restrictions or private, covenants, if applicable.. (G)A parcel wap at 1"-20'-50' showing: The site developne..'1t plan, buildings: parking, loadir:g, access, surface drainage, landscaping and utility service. B tA ,. /t-I/~c, '512~ ?:;. 'x ~t t/ ONLY COMPLETE APPLIO\TIONS SHALL BE ACCEPI'ED AND REVIEWED BY THE PLANNIN:i CCMMISSION. To the best of my IGlowledge the infoonation presented on this form is correct. In addition, I have read Section 7.6 of ~'e Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance which specifies requirenents for variance procedures. I agree A provide infoanatio~rj follcw t..'le procedures as outlined in the Ordinance. l~ w- OiJJii,uYj (~jJ>.~ pee. r77 111 / Alr_ APPlicants Signature Ow~) SUbmitted this~day of 111~rcn 19~~ Fee Owners Signature THIS SPACE IS 'IO BE FILLED OUT BY TEE FT..ANNTIG DlRECrOR APPROVED APPROVED DENIED DENIED DATE OF HEARIN; CATE OF HE.ARnX; PLANNING CCMMISSION ' CITY COmt:IL APPEP-L mNDITIONS: Signature of ~~e Plannir.g Director Date --l </ #:t(~~\ I, ~'5 ~.,j \'~~'.J/ ! -....... .....'::' ~ . CERTIF1CATE OF SURVEY ( 10 10 I I I ; ;----m~ - -- - --f..<..:',~~ - ll--i--P.:e~w.. ~.I-----",-A"'.~L lj I ~ I I - - - -,m/I.;;:;- I~'?l;) - I~ i/.;~l/~ ~ ~I ~ I 0.: I P~OPO.s I:U) cur ~I' ,.., I O(/(Lal;/q c:; ~Im / "41> I d I ~I I I ~~ ! I I I -l <1: 0:: r- ,~. ~ '" ~I ;;-;;) \... . . ill \J 'l: ll. ~ ~ IJ) ~ "" w ~ <t --1 ~ -0) 0 NO -~ 'Ii """ 0;" z -...j 'JI .). <r ~ '0 Dt::1c~ SIt..:... !-9Z. all l '"lie ~1::l:.Y" : ,~, A::< ~ :;"AMe .C'W4"~,I#'o/! '-' ';l ~ "1510 ' w ~ 0... I <101 7.~ I Dc",~ .s,,-,- ... i~ ! 85:41 '.; /'00. =.~) ~;~...-Y:. ~I .... ~l I ! ,J 9i?3-} ~,!.7 "'-. -.' <1<J. 5.' JACKSON ;:>1~I~Pf"~T,( ;)F:SCR I?T j()N :0"- l: -lnd ;:2, 3!oc.... ~!~CS 2Nn ^nnrTION, . ~~~~~~~_~~n~~ ~~~n~:~~:;e~ ~{:-:) r: ': o l)'2'~':';:"~S i ~:)I) :n()nume:1;: . uencr.'?5 I ~''")n :nOnlJmerl C. ('1Z:;I) l"='~H}t~s e"<~S::lng {?3 57 ;)(:)"nr: ~~ or"posed iJ ~: \; i '-f ~.1 i\ r\ r< ;'~;::~~; r,li:,-j,~~ ~.~ ,~~~ :;:~,:1~~~~~~:.r; ,~~; BOERHA VE LAI'iO SUR VEYING. !NC. :424Jvfilo~a Circle N.~~~ i"'~!or :"'ake. .\1inn~:-iOf" 5~ J 1_ ~12''''''~.~1 ~.. N 89059'52":: 352.00 1"Z./1 1111i_1 '/s;:::-:7~"""e:.,< ,. ~.t- ./ ........o.c-c:. 111//0.( ~v .:::Ot<oc~R:T. _ . ~f /3~89 ~319.19 S 89021'31"W 8 I;"VX'"I>.J'oU_<5 ( 79'Or) TRAIL ;) j a:: :~e r-?,,": f , SE>>t-_, 3E:''? .'0~0 found el<eVdtlon ~ 1 ~ '/-3 t 1 (j n 96-30VA i I I f~ 'x !? \) '" f I 7;;;;) - --1!:f 7-::t1,;r;~:J.' ~ / 1') I R.~(J,~ 'I / [~~.G!] / LJ--- - ~~':-..-r- r"z ';".J ~7_ ~ I 1.!fZ:7~ I~ . ' 1'\/ .~! (;J ~ i ,: .<. <95" 3; '~,6Z I NOTE ~'i..R ,'" ~ - 10.. R.L.;:' \0 70~5 ^-OJ! ~1t,..,- _-<-..J)r ~ 24' 1.0NG IRON "'ONU"'ENT -'NO lOENTlFIC.A TlON OISC (.ACTUAL SIZEI SET .l T ALL POINTS INOICA TED. ""NN AEC. LANO SURVeYOR ~ 709S ~ I -N I i] IN =C"=j SC~LE: --, I /00 :; z...t; 50 .=V 1..5=:0 ~ / U/'~6 ~.fJ . .h~c chis survey, ~lan ~r ,epor: ! hereby cerclfy " d ~y direct supervision 'J~~ prepared bv lTIe nr un. er ""d 'and )'Irve'lot" . -1m -1 duL', Re'2:1Sce. _ ~ , . -1nd ::h-1t , f"h -cate of ~inne~oc~. 'Jnrier -he la....s C) ",e ~i /) /7 '_'" ,/ :-; ~~~_ :.--~/!/~~ -. . :: ~n"r~-1ve ::tr.s _ .'In. 7()Q5 ;:=~ 1'/1,4RCH /J... /906 ,"\t!lit. ~ NOTICE OF HEARING FOR THE FOLLOWING VARIANCES; 1. A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 4-7-4 OF THE CITY CODE TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A POLE BUILDING IN THE R1-SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT; 2. A VARIANCE TO PERMIT A DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WITH AN AREA OF 1,792 SQUARE FEET INSTEAD OF THE MAXIMUM 832 SQUARE FEET PERMITTED UNDER SECTION 6.2(a)3 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE. You are hereby notified that the Prior Lake Planning Commission will hold a hearing at Prior Lake Fire Station #1, located at 16776 Fish Point Road SE (Southwest of the intersection of C.R. 21 and Fish Point Road), on: Monday, April 22, 1996, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible. APPLICANT: Robert W. Ostdiek 4510 Jackson Trail NE. Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 SUBJECT SITE: Lots 11 and 12, Block 1, Titus 2nd Addition, Scott County, Minnesota, also known as 4510 Jackson Trail NE. REQUEST: The applicant proposes the construction of a 32' x 56' pole building for the storage of personal property, such as collector vehicles. The proposed building would be located as shown on the attached survey copy. The Planning Commission will review the proposed construction and requested variance against the following criteria found in the Zoning Ordinance. 1. Literal enforcement of the-Ordinance would result in undue hardship with respect to the property. 2. Such unnecessary hardship results because of circumstances unique to the property. 3. The hardship is caused by provisions of the Ordinance and is not the result of actions of persons presently having an interest in the property. 9630PN.DOC 1 16200 ~'gle Creek Ave. S.E.. Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQL:AL OPPORTLNITY E:V1PLOYER 4. The variance observes the spirit and intent of this Ordinance, produces substantial justice and is not contrary to the public interest. 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 Planning Commission 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 above-listed criteria. Prior Lake Planning Commission Date Mailed: April 11, 1996 9630PN.qOC RML 2 _....._..__.............~.,.._,~~~.~.J_....-.. r~.' . ..'.0 ...~.. ..', RESOLUTION 9617PC A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF A REQUEST BY ROBERT W. OSTDIEK TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF A POLE BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4510 JACKSON TRAIL NE. IN THE R1-SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT; BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. Robert W. Ostdiek has applied for a variance from Section 4-7-4 of the Prior Lake City Code to permit the construction of 1,792 square foot pole building for the storage of personal property on property located in the RI-Suburban Residential zoning district at the following location, to \-vit; Lots 11 and 12, Block 1, TITUS 2ND ADDITION, Scott County ivIinnesota. 2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variance as contained in Case 96-030V A and held a hearing thereon on April 22, 1996. 3. The Board of Adjustment 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. 4. The request does not meet the Ordinance criteria, in that reasonable use of the property can be obtained if the Ordinance is literally applied, and legal alternatives exist for placing a detached, accessory building on the property. 5. The granting of the variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment. of a substantial property right of the applicant. The variance would serve merely as a convenience to the applicant, but is not necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship. 7. The contents of Planning Case 96-030V A are hereby entered into and made a part of the public record and the record of decision for this case 16200 ~Sg1~<(92~. S.E.. Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 .-\N EQLOAL OPPORTL:"<ITy. E:"IPLOYER CONCLUSION Based upon the Findings set forth above, the Board of Adjustment hereby recommends denial of the requested variance to permit a pole building in the Rl-Suburban Residential zoning district. Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on April 22, 1996. Richard Kuykendall, Chair ATTEST: Donald R. Rye, Planning Director 96 I 7PC.DOC/RJvtL 2 RESOLUTION 9618PC A RESOLUTION DENYING A REQUEST BY ROBERT W. OSTDIEK TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF A 1,792 SQUARE FOOT ACCESSORY BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4510 JACKSON TRAIL NE. IN THE R1-SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT; BE IT RESOL YED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota~ FINDINGS 1. Robert W. Ostdiek has applied for a variance from Section 6.2 of the Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance to permit the construction of 1,792 square foot accessory building for the storage of personal property on property located in the Rl- Suburban Residential zoning district at the following location, to \\lit; Lots 11 and 12, Block 1, TITUS 2ND ADDITION, Scott Coun:.)' Minnesota. 2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variance as contained in Case 96-030V A and held a hearing thereon on April 22, 1996. 3. The Board of Adjustment 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. 4. The request does not meet the Ordinance criteria, in that reasonable use of the property can be obtained if the Ordinance is literally applied, and legal alternatives exist for placing a detached, accessory building on the property. 5. The granting of the variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The variance would serve merely as a convenience to the applicant, but is not necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship. 7. The contents of Planning Case 96-030Y A are hereby entered into and made a part of the public record and the record of decision for this case 16200 e'8~~<tI?2~l.e. S.E.. Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQLAL OPPORTLNITY E:vlPLOYER CONCLUSION Based upon the Findings set forth above, the Board of Adjustment hereby denies the requested variance to permit a 1,792 square foot accessory building in the R I-Suburban Residential zoning district. Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on April 22, 1996. ATTEST: Richard Kuykendall, Chair Donald R. Rye, Planning Director -- ~ 9618PC.DOC/RML 2