HomeMy WebLinkAbout7D - Resolution 78-1 Lot Survey
.
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
BACKGROUND:
DISCUSSION:
STAFF AGENDA REPORT
7D (\(
FRANK BOYLES, CITY MANAGER x...
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF RES ION 95-64
AMENDING POLICY RESOLUTION 78-1 REQUIRING
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY UPON APPLICATION FOR
BUILDING PERMIT.
JULY 17,1995
In 1978 the City Council adopted Resolution 78-1 which
required the submittal of a certificate of survey upon
application of a building permit within the city limits of
Prior Lake. Since that time, this Resolution has been
interpreted to require a certificate of survey for all new
construction. In the case of accessory buildings and
replacement of existing structures such as decks, the
enforcement has varied over the years. Sketches were
acceptable early on. More recently a certificate of survey
has been required. This agenda item requests Council
clarification on this issue.
The Building/Inspection Department has received a
permit request from David and Jean Baudhuin to
reconstruct the existing deck on the back of their house.
In the last year the City has been requiring a certificate
of survey for replacement structures.
Mr. and Mrs. Baudhuin have stated that, since the City
has authorized the construction of an accessory building
in the past with the use of a sketch and not a certificate
of survey that a replacement of an existing deck should
be treated equivalently. They further argue that
requiring a $400 certificate of survey for an $800
replacement is ludicrous.
Most new home owners receive a certificate of survey
from their builder. Therefore a requirement of a survey
for subsequent building projects for new home is not a
major problem. In many cases, the Building Department
is able to locate surveys for existing homes as well. When
this occurs, a copy of the survey is provided to the home
owner and they may draw the addition on the survey.
162o%~~~~kDA~2, Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
ISSUES
AGDECKS.DOC
In other cases, homes were built prior to the requirement
of a certificate of survey. Such is the case with the
Baudhuin home at 5671 Woodside Road.
I do not believe it would be a prudent public policy to
reduce city requirements for a certificate of survey for
new construction. Nor do I think it would be prudent to
allow anything less than a certificate of survey for
properties lying within the floodplain or shoreland areas.
However, in the case of identical reconstruction of
existing decks, there may be an opportunity to provide
information the city needs without requiring a certificate
of survey.
In the case of a replacement deck only, the city could
accept a to scale sketch showing the lot and all structures
thereon, including the deck, together with locations from
the various lot lines. The home owner would be required
to locate each of the property pins for the parcel in order
that city personnel can verify the measurements in the
field. This alternative would not be available to lots
lying within the shore land management area or
floodplain. The replacement deck would have to be the
same size and in the same location as the existing deck.
At such time as the deck is replaced with a roof of any
sort, then a certificate of survey would be required since
the structure is no longer seasonal and constitutes new
construction to the house. The city should also preserve
the right to require a certificate of survey in those
circumstances where there is a question about setbacks,
easements or other ordinance issues.
The staff has periodically received concerns from the
public that a certificate of survey requirement is
financially onerous. We estimate that the cost of the
survey is between $300 an $500. The staffs perspective
has been that the certificate of survey has significant long
term value to the property owner and the city. When the
property changes hands the new owner quite often wants
a survey to know what the future development potential
of that property is. A sketch alone cannot be relied upon.
Moreover a certificate of survey provides staff members
with a better sense that the dimensions are accurate and
that no utility easements are being trespassed upon. The
Council needs to determine whether these potential long
term benefits are more or less important than the dollar
savings experienced by the existing property owner.
Attached is Resolution 95-64 revising Resolution 78-1 by
providing a means through which a dimensioned lot
sketch prepared by the property owner could be used in
lieu of a certificate of survey for the reconstruction of
decks lying on property which is outside of the shore land
management or floodplain zones.
Also attached is a letter from David Baudhuin which
expresses his concerns about the city's position in this
matter. I am told the letter will be included in this
Saturday's Prior Lake American.
ALTERNATIVES
Council has the following alternatives:
1. Approve Resolution 95-64 amending Resolution 78-1
to provide for an alternative to a certificate of survey
exclusively in those instances where a deck is to be
replaced on property lying outside of the shoreland or
floodplain districts.
2. Do not approve Resolution 95-64 and direct that
enforcement of Resolution 78-1 provide for a
certificate of survey for any and all construction
whether replacement or new.
RECOMMENDATION While Alternative 2 is preferred by staff because it
provides the city with better long term documentation,
Alternative #1 could provide at least minimum
documentation.
ACTION REQUIRED: Approve Resolution 95-64 amending Resolution 78-1 and
requiring the submittal of a certificate of survey upon the
application of a building permit within the city limits of
Prior Lake.
AGDECKS.DOC
RESOLUTION 95-64
A RESOLUTION REQUIRING THE SUBMITTAL OF A CERTIFICATE
OF SURVEY UPON THE APPLICATION OF A BUILDING PERMIT
WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF PRIOR LAKE
MOTION BY: SECONDED BY:
WHEREAS, the City of Prior Lake has ordinances dealing with and pertaining to the size and
placement of a home on a lot; and.
WHEREAS, in order to enforce such ordinances it is imperative to demonstrate to the City of
Prior Lake the dimensions of a lot and access thereto; and
WHEREAS, it is also necessary to demonstrate by the applicant of a building permit, the
placement of improvements on a lot; and.
WHEREAS, Resolution 78-1 established city policy In this regard and now requires
refinement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council that the City
Council of Prior Lake hereby requires a certificate of survey with all improvements shown
thereon, as part of the application for a building permit in the city of Prior Lake except as set
forth below:
In the case of a replacement deck only for property lying outside of the Shoreland
Management or Flood Plain districts, the property owner may in lieu of the certificate of
survey provide clear field identification of the lot pins and a to scale drawing accurately
portraying all current construction on the property to scale showing all dimensions from
the structures to the side, rear and front lot lines, provided that:
1. The replacement deck must be the exact width, depth and height of the
existing structure.
2. The property must be located outside of the floodplain or shoreland.
1t5~bC>~~gle Creek Ave., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPOR1lJNITY EMPLOYER
3. The plat plan must be accurate and specific to the satisfaction of City staff.
4. That the city has the right to request a certificate of survey be provided if in
the city staff s sole discretion it is considered desirable under the
circumstances. ,
5. That any subsequent addition to the replacement deck in width, depth, steps,
roof or amenities will require that a certificate of survey be completed and
submitted with that permit.
Passed and adopted this _ day of
, 1995.
YES
NO
Andren
Greenfield
Kedrowski
Schenck
Scott
Andren
Greenfield
Kedrowski
Schenck
Scott
Frank Boyles
City Manager
City of Prior Lake
(Seal)
RES9S64.00c
.',
~.. ~
.,;: ~>:..t}.
.e'" .:. .... ~
~'..:/."l
..1
:,..:.
~
0...
,Q.
:,. -
t.
.' \. .
'. \
L .
:l
1 '''C
. \"'"
\
I
\
\ I
\ ~.
. I
.. .
I '
--
..;;.,
.~
"~"-:r
.4f.~ J' f~~~~:t-.,.
''''~e' . . 1 ,"'.
.:ii~.r... ~. : '. ',.
i(J~~ : i~0;~
.~~~ ,~. ,..
.::.~ i! .~~~
C'~?
MOTION BY:
~
.;.
CITY OF
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA
eS372
ResollJtion 78-1
SECONDED BY:
Busse
Watkin~
Resolution requiring the submittal of a certified lot survey upon
the application of a building permit within the City limits of
P ria r La ke .
Whereas, the City of Prior lake has ordinances dealing with
and pertaining to the size and placement of a home
on a lot,
Whereas, in order to enforce such ordinances it is imperative
to demostrate to the City of Prior. lake the dimensions
of a lot and access thereto,
.~;..
.,~.
,;a.;.
Whereas, it is also necessary to demostrate by the applicant
of a building permit, the placement of improvements
on a lot,
?
~..
...
.~
THEREFORE BE I~ RESOLVED that the City Council of Prior lake
hereby requires a certified lot survey with all improvements
shown thereon, as part of the application fo~ a building permit
in the City of Prior Lake.
Passed and adopted this
1978.
3rd
day of January
YES
NO
Stock
Bissonett
Busse
Hafermann
Watkins
Stock
Bissonett
Busse
Hafennann
Watkins
x
x
x
x
x
Wftness of my hand and official seal of Prior lake, Minnesota
this 3rd day of January , 1978.
~'
~~ tie /VI ~~J;1~'
Mic ael A. McGuire
City Manager
--".'
THE CENTER OF LAKE COUNTRY
r-~_ ~
~ ""::=>
~--
1'. ~
: L \ -'-
f -.j::.....---
~I
-.
lJ:..N n v..r ..l1 t.... ''"1 t~ u,'( pOr"a..ty 01
t=fCD \v11crVla:hDy\a1 .th it 170
BOOV'l\~., N~ SI3Iz.S'
~++n: Ma.vc\~
A
tl PLAT DRAWING
~;;~~~ (THIS IS NOT A SURVEY)
ORDER NO.: ~j'7- f/..sia..s"- INSP. DATE: / d' - Z:3 -pi
~~ L)
STREET ADDRESS:
J~7/
INSP. BY: a c:z;:J
p//
c
LEGA;~RIPTION: ..5// rO/L~/J ~A-'~ IJ~ LiLJ
BUYER: LL~ ',t l..((\ I . ~ 1~L l!2{ .
/. 10 loA- .., -1 '3 lot. :t
A
~ ~ ...- ~
~
I ,e:. ~- -
\l.f
....... ~
"
- L1 IQC ..
I S ~ 01 1 Ir
r
~ --
1\ ~ ;'" lJ-
" ~K I r 1/\ ~
.. .
:~ . " r-. ~~ ". X '../ {T
~ T II ......... ~
- I~ I · t.. , -- ~... ~
..J ..-
I' ~ 1 f')( Ik,. "-
A
~ I ~
~ L.l)
L t--.,I
~
r\\
\\
I ~
l' '- - -')0 I
- ~
.2 , I. .r ", '" It\, " ~.~
,.- ... ...
'1 ", .....
c
1M eon.PMY IaUr.. the IMUftd tNt IN IbOW dietr.-n lftdicat.. tM difMMiOM of the alftd 1M tf\e loatlOftl of the ....men" and ifftOrovem.ntl on thl
IIfWI dlMt'''' 1ft IM!fttured M~. ~ 1ft..... .., "'.. County ~ ""'iCft under 'M ,ecordin.lewa imo.rt constructive nouet. nUl di..m II bMad
1ft. ....... ..... ....1MIIen.....1I'd It ___ te ..,...... .......... ~ ttwftfore It not . IUrwy of IIIfY type.
10ft (",,, . ~
~ .
,.
.
",
. ~
I
. ~.._-
" '*,-;'~~~~..r"f~it-.;;-'!i-:O;. .-.
_~..._:""~.~, . :~...~;<t..~;r
_:.~G
. _''J'.~
,....... -n, -...J ,\I
Sketch tor
Doyle P. K~ah~tn~
.~
---
,. .
1"~ ~O."
o
o
"
. ....:...,;. .~~\
f _. ...~- "
o
o
.- "
..
'-
. '
. .1
"'..1" . '.'
'.-;'. ...' '. ,
..,." ',....,..'
~ . '~~'.:#::~~ r .' ~',.~:, ~i'.
De!Scr1~~~~,\':.'. .
~ot 5 , Biock i~
I
,
l
: I
.; t:r. .. . ..~.
\ ,...'.
SOUTH
,
/~ I)Y
*!'-..
_-" .."'.....7. -::-'.. -.;..
. ....?~~(.
~.... '1 ~
..-
-... "
I
It
'''':.''-
.. ..f
. ..'
i_
'J
.
t,
.. .
;?O:ftM\IJOOQ
~. -
RO~D~
o
o
.~
...
'J
,4. .
---:,
plat or.O~,aIOOD~~"2frn AOU-'N'Scoc't- County. M1m1esota
t.:. ."....<1# . . ~_ .:..-s.-:",!_.'.
- .; :'.':~':.'':'.--:''f._'- '-:';"~~._".. -
~
~;"
~~.' ..;:.
-- ~5.00--
,. "I.
-
10- ",....., 'N
a~',.
-~~
2..
~
., ,
. j.,
r.
"'...... ..
. ....
,'': . ". .
:,.
.....~/:.
. .
. . .
.. .....
)., .
:' .
. ..
;
. :..
". ' . ........--....-;. -:
.;. '.
, .
'.
I~' ,,~...IN..4 c)''''~.. .~~
'.... .
. .
-- ~5.'OO~~'
'.....~... "'-."'.....
~
.' .~-_. .......
o
.~d
ill
. .
.!t.
,..' ""
- '.;-:1. "
'. ,. .
-.:':-
-.' .. ./'"
.,.
. .....
'.. .. J.....
. ::~.:t
....... ., ":...:...t- ,eo
..::::~~~>: .
'/,-. . ~ '"' ..... ...
'. ~~
~..-.(:. :'~", ".
_.:';- ":,1 ." ~
. .. a-
p . I;-ah~'-n~'
..~r~ '
-
/
! .. ,
.i:
-
.. .....
SouTH.
,.;:0 "'~u1OOC
- -
RO"D?
-~...
o
.
O.
f'
-!)5.00 --
I
I
-
10- .... t'-o' T"I t,
a.....,
J'j~
L
I
It
\
IS ~
o
o
"
..
-
I
.
f
-'
~
. '4 :
..;
'. ~
.
-~:~;:T:~~~I,~~;~:~
...," .,;....,
,.. ,'" ,.f
-..,.,.....
.'. "
. .
o
'-0
"
I
,
o
o
. .
1ft
...
A TAX PAYER SPEAKS OUT
LET ME SHARE WITH YOU THE MOST LUDICROUS RULE I
HAVE EVER HEARD OF. AS A RESIDENT AND HOME OWNER OF
PRIOR LAKE I DECIDED TO REPLACE AN OLD DECK. THE
EXISTING DECK IS ROTTING AND NOT UP TO PRESENT CODE.
WE HA VE THREE CHILDREN THE YOUNGEST BEING ONE, AND
FEEL THIS WOULD ENHANCE THEIR SAFETY AND WELL BEING.
NOT A BIG DEAL. MENARDS TELLS ME THE LUMBER WILL BE
$800.00 SO I DECIDED TO DO IT. NEXT STOP, CITY HALL FOR A
BUILDING PERMIT. THIS IS WHERE I LEARN ABOUT RESOLUTION
78-1. WOULD YOU BELIEVE I NEED A CERTIFIED LOT SURVEY IN
ORDER TO GET A PERMIT. BESIDES THE COST OF A PERMIT, I
NEED TO PUT OUT $400.00 FOR A LOT SURVEY. MY CITY IS
INCREASING THE COST OF THIS DECK BY OVER 55%. NOW I'M
NOT AGAINST BUILDING PERMITS. THERE IS A NEED TO
MONITOR AND INSPECT WHAT IS BEING BUILT. I SIMPLY CAN'T
UNDERSTAND WHY A LOT SURVEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO
REPLACE AN EXISTING DECK. MAYBE THIS "ONE RULE FOR ALL
OCCASIONS" P~OSOPHY ISN'T THE ANSWER. A LITTLE
COMMON SENSE MAYBE IN ORDER HERE. LET ME REMIND YOU
I ALREADY HA VE A DECK THERE AND ONL Y WANT TO REPLACE
IT FOR THE SAFETY OF MY CHILDREN. I'D ALSO LIKE TO SAY
THAT EVEN THOUGH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED IN 1978, IT
WASN'T UNTIL THIS YEAR THAT THEY DECIDED TO ENFORCE IT.
I'M SURE MOST OF YOU HAVE HEARD OF A "WIN-WIN"
SITUATION. WELL I WOULD CALL TillS A "LOSE-LOSE"
SITUATION. DO TO OUR CITIES OUTRAGEOUS DEMANDS MY
PRESENT DECK WILL HAVE TO SUFFICE. I GUARANTEE FROM
NOW ON I PAY MORE ATTENTION TO ELECTION DAY.
HOPEFULL Y YOU WILL TOO.
DAVID BAUDHUIN