Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11 17 2014 PC meeting minutes PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Monday, November 17, 2014 1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance: Commissioner Hite called the Monday, November 17, 2014 Prior Lake Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Adam Blahnik, Bryan Fleming, Perri Hite, Wade Larson and Mark Petersen; Community and Economic Development Director Dan Rogness and Development Service Assistant Sandra Woods. 2. Approval of Agenda: MOTION BY FLEMING, SECONDED BY BLAHNIK TO APPROVE THE MONDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2014 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA. . VOTE: Ayes by Blahnik, Fleming, Hite, Larson and Petersen The Motion carried. 3. Approval of Monday, November 3, 2014 Meeting Minutes: MOTION BY HITE, SECONDED BY BLAHNIK TO APPROVE THE MONDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2014 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES SUBJECT TO SOME NON- SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES TO BE COMMUNICATED TO STAFF BY HITE. . VOTE: Ayes by Blahnik, Fleming, Hite, Larson and Petersen The Motion carried. 4. Public Hearings: A.DEV14-001034 3280 Todd Road SW Variance Custom Homes & Contracting is requesting a 17 foot variance from the lake setback from Upper Prior Lake to construct a deck to the exterior of the home within the Low Density Residential Shoreland (R1SD) Zoning District. The property is located at 3280 Todd Road SW; southeast of Upper Prior Lake and th north of 170 Street SW. PID: 25-266-001-0. Director Rogness introduced the variance and explained the current circumstances, issues, conclusion and alternatives. Staff recommends a motion to approve the requested lake setback variance. He provided a resolution, location map and survey. Commission Comments/Questions: Larson asked about the notch in the parcel and wondered how it was created. Director Rogness replied he was unsure of how the notch was created other than the survey clearly shows the notch. He stated there was rip-rap constructed along the shoreline to allow this notch to be at a lower elevation. He suggested asking the applicant if present. Blahnik asked if the only construction is an upper deck on the house and if there were any impervious surface issues. Director Rogness stated correct on the construction and said there are no impervious surface issues. 1 Petersen asked if the brick pavers were part of the plan or if they are being removed. Director Rogness replied the ground-level brick pavers exist and will remain in their position as the deck is proposed at an upper level. Applicant: Not present. MOTION BY HITE, SECONDED BY BLAHNIK TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARINGAT 6:11 P.M. . VOTE: Ayes by Blahnik, Fleming, Hite, Larson and Petersen The Motion carried. Public Comment : No Comment. MOTION BY HITE, SECONDED BY LARSON TO CLOSE THE PUBLICHEARING AT 6:12 P.M. . VOTE: Ayes by Blahnik, Fleming, Hite, Larson and Petersen The Motion carried. Commission Comments/Questions: Hite stated she will be supporting this request for the variance since practical difficulties exist due to the circumstances of the unique property. The property owner cannot make the proposed improvements to the property absent of this variance. She said the granting of the variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood nor block any views; there are no impediments to neighbors on either side of the applicant. Petersen stated he is in agreement with Commissioner Hite and will be supporting this variance. Fleming stated he concurs as the request is reasonable for all the information given tonight. Blahnik stated he will be supporting this variance as the upper level deck does not further encroach on the setbacks that already exist with the house. There is no negative impact on the use and enjoyment on that side of the property, and no one has objected. He stated it is clear that practical difficulties do exist with the layout of this property. Larson echoes fellow commissioner comments; the shape and size of the property does create a practical difficulty to construct the deck on this property in a reasonable manner. He stated it does support the Comprehensive Plan, practical difficulties exist with unique property features such as the notch, and it the existing character of the neighborhood. MOTION BY BLAHNIK, SECONDED BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REQUESTED LAKE SETBACK VARIANCE AS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT . VOTE: Ayes by Blahnik, Fleming, Hite, Larson and Petersen The Motion carried. B.DEV14-001035 3063 Spring Lake Road SW Variance Chris Logan is requesting and approval of a variance from the front yard and lake setback requirements in order to construct a second story addition on the property. The property is located within the Low Density 2 Residential Shoreland (R1SD) Zoning District on the northeastern side of Spring Lake, south of Spring Lake Road SW. PID: 25-134-010-0 & 25-134-011-0. Director Rogness introduced the variance and explained the current circumstances, issues, conclusion and alternatives. Staff recommends a motion to approve the requested front and lake setback variances. He provided a resolution, resolution change, location map, aerial map of lot and survey (of adjacent properties) and floor plans. Commission Comments/Questions: Larson asked Rogness about the bump-out and the kind of door that enters from the kitchen into this area. Director Rogness replied this back bump-out already exists today; he does not have the floor plan and suggested that the applicant be asked about this living area. Blahnik asked if the actual setbacks are changing with the house addition. Director Rogness replied no; however, it is an expansion of a non-conforming structure. Blahnik asked about the proposed height and whether that is conflicting with any ordinances. Director Rogness replied no, there is not any conflicts with any ordinance on the height. Fleming asked what history may suggest regarding these type of variances. Director Rogness replied that staff has seen a number of these variances where the lake property is of such size or configuration as to be challenging for home construction without variances. He stated that staff always encourages property owners to consider ways to that they can eliminate or minimize a variance request. He said that there are certain lots that are unavoidable for variances. Fleming asked whether there is any responsibility of the planning commission when it comes to the integrity of the structure, or is this a homeowner and builder responsibility. Director Rogness replied that this is the homeowner and builders responsibility. He said that staff must believe that they have done their diligence with the integrity of the structure. Petersen asked about water run-off with the pitch of the roof and whether it affects property. He stated it appears the water is now going to the front, but that with the new pitch, the water would flow to the sides and to the neighboring property. Director Rogness replied this has not come up as a concern in staff reviews of this application. Applicant : Chris Logan introduced himself; he resides at 3063 Spring Lake Road SW. Larson asked about the bump-out and if it is an open space. 3 Applicant Logan replied it is an open four season porch, with a slider door that enters into this space from inside the house; a separate door is used from outside. Larson stated the angle of the roof is low and wondered if it was already an addition; he asked if the house was like this prior to Applicant Logan owning the home? Applicant Logan replied the house is the same as when he purchased it. Hite asked if they were tearing down to the foundation or using the existing structure. Applicant Logan stated they will be using the existing structure. MOTION BY HITE, SECONDED BY BLAHNIK TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARINGAT 6:34 P.M. . VOTE: Ayes by Blahnik, Fleming, Hite, Larson and Petersen The Motion carried. Public Comment : None. MOTION BY HITE, SECONDED BY LARSON TO CLOSE THE PUBLICHEARING AT 6:35 P.M. . VOTE: Ayes by Blahnik, Fleming, Hite, Larson and Petersen The Motion carried. Commission Comments/Questions: Blahnik stated he is supporting this requested variance for the setbacks as the setbacks are not changing from what exists; more of a procedural matter since it is a major overhaul with adding a second floor to the structure. He mentioned there were no public comment for disagreement or objections of this; therefore that is not an issue. He said this is a small lot with practical difficulties that do appear to exist, is consistent with the neighboring property and does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Larson stated he echoes Commissioner Blahniks comments, as it does not alter the character of the neighborhood and the practical difficulties due to circumstances unique to the property created by the size and the shape of the property and location of the existing dwelling and where it is located on the lot. He said it does conform to the general character of the neighborhood as mentioned with the adjoin lot as this location also had the same circumstance. He stated he will be supporting this variance request. Hite stated she is supporting this variance request for the reasons stated by her two fellow Commissioners. Fleming stated he would like to add the variance is for the front yard and lake set back is in harmony with the general purposes and subdivision and zoning ordinances as well as the comprehensive plan. Petersen stated he will be supporting this to the surrounding property or neighborhood. MOTION BY FLEMING, SECONDED BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REQUESTED VARIANCE FOR THE MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK AND MINIMUM LAKE SETBACK FOR PROPERTY IN THE LOW DENSITY (R-1) ZONING DISTRICT. . . VOTE: Ayes by Blahnik, Fleming, Hite, Larson and Petersen The Motion carried. 4 C.DEV14-000022 Eagle Creek Commercial Variance KRB Development Group, Inc. is requesting a variance from the 1.0 acre minimum lot area for a commercial lot in the C-2 (General Business) Zoning District. The property is located on the east corner of Fish Point Road and the northeastern side of Eagle Creek Avenue; legally described as Outlot G, Eagle Creek Estates. PID: 25-500-066-0. Director Rogness introduced the variance and explained the current circumstances, issues, conclusion and alternatives. He explained the differences of Lot 1 and Lot 2, stating this request is for Lot 1. Staff recommends approving the requested minimum lot size variance. He provided a resolution, location map, final plat and internal drive layout design. Commission Comments/Questions: Blahnik asked about the restrictions on this lot related to access and driveway alignments. Director Rogness replied yes, the city has established those access points. Kwik Trip need more than Lot 2, so one more commercial lot is necessary at the west end of the commercial area. Hite asked if staff had any concerns about the lot size and the ingress/egress points. Director Rogness replied no, the right project needs to fit on this property such as a small fast food restaurant or small stand-alone office building. Hite asked about parking requirements in Lot 1; can we look ahead to avoid a parking variance? Director Rogness replied they have talked with staff about possibly a planned unit development approach for the remaining commercial property, which might allow for shared parking. He suggested that whatever is proposed would need to meet parking standards for that type of use. Petersen commented on the alignment of exits from this area across from other streets; is it safer? Director Rogness replied aligning an access point has mutilate benefits, including safety and residential privacy from traffic and lights. Petersen asked if this land is too small to be used and if there is something comparable. Director Rogness replied that the applicant looked at different uses that would work in that size of a lot. The Commission should ask the applicant for comparable situations to what would be used in this area. He noted that research shows other cities having smaller minimum commercial lots down to a half-acre; the average from limited research is .64 acre lots for commercial use. Applicant : Jonathan Adam stated he is with Silver Stone Realty 165 Luisa Ct., Chaska, MN. He thanked staff and stated there is a Civil Engineer with him for any questions. Hite asked Mr. Adams if he anticipated the need to come back for additional variances on Lot 1. 5 Applicant Adam stated they do not. He said they have a couple ideas with fast food being the primary use, such as a Taco Bell. A site that is smaller than .85 acre will fit a drive-thru, stacking and parking. Larson asked if it is desirable to be by a gas station convenience store. Applicant Adam replied that it does help; it is more of a destination to bring the traffic into the development and anticipated that Lot 1 would be the next site to develop. MOTION BY HITE, SECONDED BY PETERSEN TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARINGAT 6:51 P.M. . VOTE: Ayes by Blahnik, Fleming, Hite, Larson and Petersen The Motion carried. Public Comment : None. MOTION BY HITE, SECONDED BY FLEMING TO CLOSE THE PUBLICHEARING AT 6:52 P.M. . VOTE: Ayes by Blahnik, Fleming, Hite, Larson and Petersen The Motion carried. Commission Comments/Questions: Petersen stated he will be supporting this variance based on City staff support, and the applicant knows that the site can be developed. Fleming will be supporting this variance and thanked the applicant for the vision of how this may develop in the future. Hite will be supporting the variance and finds that practical difficulties do exists due to the circumstances unique to the property which were created by the location of the access points between the Kwik Trip parcel and Eagle Creek Circle. Blahnik will be supporting this variance; in addition one of the purposes of the zoning ordinance is to promote the most appropriate and orderly development of business and industrial areas and feels that this is most appropriate. Because the applicant worked with the City in the layout of this development to align the roads and accesses, it would seem that practical difficulties exist. The applicant indicated there does not seem to be a problem to fit a desired business in this lot with the proper parking. Larson said the commercial area is planned to share the internal driveways throughout the site; therefore, less area is required for the infrastructure for each individual lot. MOTION BY BLAHNIK, SECONDED BY LARSON TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REQUESTED MINIMUM COMMERCIAL LOT SIZE VARIANCE AS PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT. . VOTE: Ayes by Blahnik, Fleming, Hite, Larson and Petersen The Motion carried. 5. Old Business: A.Ordinance Amendments Architectural Design Standards (Continued) The City of Prior Lake is proposing an amendment to the Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance to change the 6 architectural design standards for commercial and industrial development, including the prohibition of pole buildings. Director Rogness recommended a motion to table this item to the December 1, 2014 Planning Commission Meeting. MOTION BY HITE, SECONDED BY BLAHNIK TO TABLE THIS ITEM TO THE NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON DECEMBER 1, 2014. . VOTE: Ayes by Blahnik, Fleming, Hite, Larson and Petersen The Motion carried. 6. New Business: No New Business 7. Announcements: No Announcements. 8. Adjournment: MOTION BY HITE, SECONDED BY PETERSEN TO ADJORN THE NOVEMBER 17, 2014 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. . VOTE: Ayes by Blahnik, Fleming, Hite, Larson and Petersen The Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 6:57 p.m. Sandra Woods, Development Services Assistant 7