HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-21 Variance Oversize Plans
-Ifoz:- Dl1
l!xn l)cJ~
Resolution
and Minutes
,
3-Z~/(jZ pc /l/LiL,!~~
Lj-t/VZ-- p~ !lu_nt~
4-l7-D"L f~ 77/[{fJ~
L:\TEMPLA TEIFILEINFO.DOC
RESOLUTION 02-003PC
A RESOLUTION DENYING A 23 FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT A 52 FOOT
STRUCTURE SETBACK FROM THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota;
FINDINGS
1. Donald B. & Betty Jean Scherer (applicant/owners) have applied for a variance from
the Zoning Ordinance in order to obtain a permit for a deck built and attached to a
single family dwelling on property located in the R-I (Low Density Residential)
District and the SD (Shoreland Overlay) District at the following location, to wit;
3894 Green Heights Trail NE, legally described as Lot I, Green Heights First
Addition, Scott County Minnesota. Together with that part of Government Lot
1, Section 3, Township 114, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, described as
follows:
Lot 1, Green Heights First Addition, Scott County, Minnesota. Together with
that part of Government Lot I, Section 3, Township 114, Range 22, Scott
County, Minnesota, described as follows: Starting at a point which is North
57 degrees 14 minutes East distant 165.00 feet from the northeast corner of
"Green Heights", in said Government Lot 1; and continuing thence North 57
degrees 14 minutes East 78.1 feet; thence South 27 degrees 40 minutes East
182.4 feet; thence South 62 degrees 5 minutes West 79.3 feet; thence North 27
degrees 15 minutes West 177.0 feet to the place of beginning and all land
lying north of the north line of the above described tract to the shore of Prior
Lake.
2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variances as contained in
Case #02-021PC and held hearings thereon on March 25, 2002, April 8, 2002, and
April 22, 2002.
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.
1:\02files\02variances\02-021 \dnyres2.doc 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
4. Because of conditions on the subject property and on the surrounding property, the
proposed variance will result in the impairment of an adequate supply of light and air
to adjacent properties, umeasonably increase congestion in the public streets, increase
the danger of fire, and danger to the public safety, unreasonably diminish or impair
health, safety, comfort, morals or in any other respect be contrary to the Zoning
Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan.
5. A legal building envelope exists that allows for a replacement deck that meets the
required setback for the structure on the subject lot. The hardship has been created by
the applicant when the deck was built without the necessary permits. Reasonable use
of the property exists without the requested variances.
6. There is no justifiable hardship caused by the required lakeshore setback as
reasonable use of the property exists without the granting of the variance.
7. The granting of the variance, as originally requested, is not necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The
variance will serve merely as a convenience to the applicant, and is not necessary to
alleviate demonstrable hardship. The factors above allow for an alternative deck
structure to be permitted with a reduced variance or none at all.
8. The contents of Planning Case 02-021PC 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 denies the
following variance request for an attached deck to an existing single family dwelling, as
shown in Attachment 1 Survey:
1. A 23-foot variance to permit a structure setback of 52-feet from the ordinary high
water mark of904 feet, rather than the required 75-foot structure setback.
Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on April 22, 2002.
~
Anthony J. Stamson, Cornmission Chair
~TEST:
~~-Q
Donald R. Rye, C
Development Director
1:I02filesI02variancesI02-021Idnyres2.doc
2
o~
~\
I
..~;:;g
~
//
~
.h
- CERTIFIC / OF SURVEY
.~/:::i;.-/ ..-/
/;:~~~~~
,/;;.';/'1 ',/, \
//--..........-, po
.,~/!.?/ ~ \ ":;
/';"-:
--:'---' ""...
/
0'- :
<J:f.~~\G'
\ ",:~"-,,-~,,, /
\ t-<:P-;::'-'
V/
"", ~'TC[l
/",,,' '2~.59
/' ---
./ gZ:.46
'f.'v
\.~
ATTACHMENT 1
,\
0'0
"p
~v
-,~/
\...."-:-- /
f?~//
C;,y..o/'~/
/0/ q
/;::~ /..../
/ / o.O~,~c;
,0'0' . ,'" "'~
Y .'./.:"",1 V
;":",-'00.
,,':>-{
<\K;\l~-.l"-
'"
!"'.
.//
921.1 .,..,..-(
/~
q." \,
\
6\C,~
x<
\
~i.
'\~d \
.... /. ,.
'O~ \0
\ Cl." 01
\ 't - ,
\ ~CSl
\~.:' 'if
\\"
~
Q
~
U\
"
.
"
,
\
~
4
/~
-'V
',,-
,-'
L,
~' ,,\,\~~~St.~C.
\0' ~O 'U,.'t..\ \ -:;J ./
0\1.\ .......'1..0 r__{' _ //
OO<~~~~~~~.: \ ~€> \..\€.\~./. ..;::.- /
c;~ ..:"" 'y\ ,,:~"" !US 0 {' _'
G~~'-'r>OO //
\c,~ /' -----r::. //./'
//./'" /~ tlS 04 ,//
...~.E. ~""/
t. G~0--/
~
-------
y
\
,")' 1
(., "
,
,
,
_/
/
/-/:~ //
,/,/_.~ .~I
/..,/,.-
/
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
March 25. 2002
Kansier: Advised that the current plan allows for a calculation of 44 trees, rather than the 107 required
by the ordinance, although physically there would be more trees, just smaller, on the site.
Gary Tushie (architect): Noted that the senior overlay district allows for a lesser landscape requirement
to allow for better utilization of the space for this use. Also advised that the tree requirement does not
allow a calculation for shrubs, which this site would have a lot of. Added that the original plan also
included a garage. Parking is now underground.
Kansier. Noted that the original building was a two-story with a one-story devoted to memory care,
The new proposal is for an additional floor in both instances.
Andrea Schook (16766 Brunswick Ave. SE): Asked for sensitivity by the Commissioners concerning
mitigation of the impact the development will have on her property. Would like to see one less story in
that specific location and more of a green screen for privacy,
Comments from the Commissioners:
Atwood: Supported the project and the conditions set by staff. Asked about the size of the strolling
garden, and if the south side is where the adjustment to the landscaping occurs.
Tushie: Commented that the strolling garden is approximately 150 foot long on the east side and that
the adjustment to the landscaping plan involves the whole site, Noted that some additional screening
with evergreen trees could be provided on the northeast corner which would limit the impact on the
adjacent property owner.
Crieao: Recommended that a number of sizable trees be added to the top of the retaining wall to
address the concerns of the adjacent property owner.
Tushie: Confirmed that the plantings could be on top of the retaining wail.
MOTION BY ATWOOD, SECOND BY LEMKE, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE SENIOR
CARE OVERLAY DISTRICT FOR A SENIOR FACILITY TO BE KNOWN AS KEYSTONE
COMMUNITIES SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS PROPOSED BY STAFF AND AS DISCUSSED
WITH RESPECT TO THE ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING PLAN.
VOTE: Ayes by Atwood, Criego, Lemke, Stamson and Ringstad, the motion carried.
This item will be considered by the City Council at its April 15, 2002 regular meeting,
C. Case File #02-021 Donald B. Scherer is requesting a 23-foot variance to allow a structure setback of 52.feet
from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) elevation of 904 feet, rather than the minimum required setback of 75
feet for property located at 3894 Green Heights Trail.
Zoning Administrator Steve Horsman advised that the applicant had requested this item be removed from the agenda and
continued to a later date.
MOTION BY CREIGO, SECOND BY ATWOOD TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ITS APRIL 8.2002 REGULAR
MEETING,
VOTE: Ayes by Atwood, Criego, Lemke and Ringstad, the motion carried,
L:\02FILES\02planning comm\02pcminutes\MN032502.doc
Planning Commission Meeting
April 8, 2002
5. Public Hearings:
A. Case #02-021 (Continued) Donald B. Scherer is requesting a variance to
structure setback to the ordinary high water mark to allow an existing deck
to remain on the property at 3894 Green Heights Trail.
On April 5, 2002, staff received a phone call from the applicants requesting a continuance
ofthis variance scheduled April 8, 2002, to the next scheduled meeting date of April 22,
2002, so their attorney could be present.
MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY LEMKE. TO CONTINUE THE HEARING ON
3894 GREEN HEIGHTS TRAIL TO APRIL 22, 2002.
Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
6. Old Business:
7. New Business:
8. Announcements and Correspondence:
9. Adjournment:
The meeting adjourned at 6:41 p.m.
Recording Secretary
Connie Carlson
L:\02FILES\02planning comm\02pcminutes\mn040802.doc 2
Planning Commission Meeting
April 22. 2002
A recess was called at 8:17 p.m. The meeting resumed at 8:21 p.m.
6. Old Business:
A. Case #02-021 (Continued) Donald B. Scherer is requesting a variance to
structure setback to the ordinary high water mark to allow an existing deck to
remain on the property at 3894 Green Heights Trail.
Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated April 22, 2002,
on file in the office ofthe City Planning Department.
The Planning Department received a variance application from Donald B. Scherer
(applicant/owner) to allow an existing deck to remain on the property located at 3894
Green Heights Trail. The deck was constructed in the year 2000 without a required
building permit.
The applicant requested a 23-foot variance to allow a structure setback of 52-feet from
the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) elevation of 904 feet, rather than the minimum
required setback of 75-feet.
On May 8, 2000, The City received a complaint regarding the construction of a deck on
the subject property. Upon inspection it was noted a new deck was under construction
and measured 16' x 16'. The applicant was notified of the building and zoning code
violations after which he applied for a building permit on June 8, 2000. Upon review of
the application staff determined a certificate of survey was required for this project and
notified the applicant. The applicant was given two written notices regarding denial of
the permit as submitted, and the additional information staff requested. When the
applicant did not respond, he was given a final notice and the case was then forwarded to
the prosecuting attorney for court action. The applicant/owner eventually submitted a
variance application for the deck as a result of a negotiated settlement with the attorney
for the ordinance violation.
The City Engineering Department felt the variance would promote "lake creep", the
encroachment of buildings and impervious areas toward the lakeshore,
The Department of Natural Resources concerns include the hardship for a 16' deep deck
versus a 12', and a wider deck such as 20' to accommodate more area and less of a
setback encroachment. If the Planning Commission approves a variance, the DNR
suggested a condition be the removal of the existing shed located near the lake. In
addition, the DNR is not supportive of issuing an after-the-fact variance for the deck
setback.
The staff concluded all of the required variance hardship criteria have not been met, and
the variance hardship was created by the owner when the deck structure was constructed
in violation of the zoning ordinance and without an approved building permit. Staff
recommended denial of the variance request.
L:\02FILES\02planning comm\02pcminutes\MN042202.doc 13
Planning Commission Meeting
April 22, 2002
Comments from the public:
Attorney Frank Muelken, represented the applicant Don Scherer, distributed letters and
pictures from adjacent neighbors. (Commissioners took time to review material)
Muelken noted the new construction covers an existing slab of concrete. Impervious
surface is not an issue. The new construction is the same as the concrete slab. He is
aware this matter has been going for some period oftime and hoped for some form of
closure. Muelken said Scherer admitted he should not have gone ahead and constructed
the deck. Muelken suggested a fair compromise would be to grant the variances, remove
the storage shed and improve the view ofthe property.
John Granlund, 3893 Green Heights Trail, said he has been attending the last couple of
meetings and has learned a lot. He felt the Scherer deck poses no problem. Setbacks and
allowances have been allowed for other lake homes and referenced other variances. The
deck would not reduce the value of surrounding homes. Requested the variance be
approved.
Horsman clarified the existing deck was over the slab.
The public hearing was closed at 8:38 p.m,
Comments from the Commissioners:
Ringstad:
. Cannot support the additional lake creep for the deck that currently exists.
Criego:
. As it relates to past variances, the Commissioners feel strongly about staying outside
the 75 foot boundary. Most decks already exist and people are asking for 3 season
porches.
. The question that comes before the Commission is what ifthis request came before
the deck was built? The existing deck was in the setback, but because it was there the
applicant could replace it. It should not have been extended.
. The applicant should have brought this matter forward, but 1 would have voted to
keep the existing deck and not allow the extension,
Lemke:
. Clarified the slab and deck as existing structures.
. Pointed out that Captain Jack's deck extends to the water. Horsman explained the
setback averaging. The adjoining structures did not allow the applicant to go past
what he has.
. Rye stated Captain Jack has been operating under a conditional use permit.
. Would have gone with the DNR compromise.
Atwood:
L\02FILES\02planning comm\02pcminutes\MN042202.doc 14
Planning Commission Meeting
April 22, 2002
. Not a fan of after-the-fact variances,
. Agreed with staff's recommendation.
. Not all neighbors agreed the deck was okay. Someone called and complained.
Stamson:
. Agreed with Commissioners, a building permit should have been applied for first.
. The Commissions has approved variances in the past, but some deck is necessary,
however, what is allowed is very minimal.
. The hardship does not warrant a 16' deck.
. Captain Jack's is a totally different use of property, It is a marina. Just because a
marina is built to the property line, a home does not have to be.
. Oppose the variance.
. Questioned staff if the applicant needs a variance to replace what was there. Horsman
said he could go back and replace the existing size deck.
Lemke:
Appreciate the point of view on Captain Jacks.
MOTION BY STAMSON, SECOND BY RINGSTAD, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION
02-003PC DENYING A 23 FOOT V ARlANCE TO PERMIT A 52 FOOT
STRUCTURE SETBACK FROM THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK
Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
Horsman explained the appeal process.
7. New Business:
A. Case File #02-041 Petition to vacate drainage and utility easement located
over the common area added to the lots in Deerfie1d 6th Addition.
Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated April 22, 2002,
on file in the office of the Planning Department.
D. R. Horton, Inc. has filed an application to vacate a 5' wide portion of the drainage and
utility easement located on Lot 45, Deerfield 2nd Addition, immediately adjacent to the
properties at 17252, 17254, 17256 and 17258 Deerfield Drive. This 5' strip ofland is to
be added to these properties, in the plat of Deer field 6th Addition. The easement must be
vacated in order to allowed the placement of decks on these units.
There is no need for the retention of an easement on this 5' strip of land. The Planning
staff therefore recommended approval ofthis request.
There were no comments from the applicant.
Comments from the Commissioners:
L:\02FILES\02planning comm\02pcminutes\MN042202.doc 15
Original
Reports
.
L:\TEMPLA TEIFILEINFO.DOC
, .~. ~ ->
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
SITE:
PRESENTER:
REVIEWED BY:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
PLANNING REPORT
7A
CONSIDER A VARIANCE TO STRUCTURE SETBACK TO
THE ORDINARY mGH WATER MARK (OHWM) ON
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3894 GREEN HEIGHTS TRAIL
FOR DONALD B. SCHERER, (Case File #02-021PC)
LOT 1, GREEN HEIGHTS 1ST ADDITION (PARTIAL
LEGAL)
STEVEN HORSMAN, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
_X_ YES NO
APRIL 22, 2002
The Planning Department received a variance application from Donald B, Scherer
(applicant/owner) to allow an existing deck to remain on the property located at 3894 Green
Heights Trail. The deck was constructed in the year 2000 without a required building permit.
The deck is attached to an existing single-family dwelling that was constructed in 1946
(Attachment 1 - Certificate of Survey),
On March 22, 2002, staff received a phone call requesting a continuance of this variance to the
next scheduled meeting date. On March 25, 2002, the Planning Commission continued this
agenda item to the public hearing on April 8, 2002, On April 5, 2002, staff received a phone call
requesting a continuance to April 22, 2002.
The applicant requests the following variance:
I) A 23-foot variance to allow a structure setback of 52-feet from the ordinary high water mark
(OHWM) elevation of 904 feet, rather than the minimum required setback of 75-feet
{Ordinance Section 1104.302 (4) Setback Requirements].
mSTORY
On or around the week of April 10, 2000, Mr. Scherer asked the City Building Department about
the process for obtaining a building permit for a new deck on an existing structure. The Building
Department explained the procedure regarding replacement decks and the waiver of survey with
a site plan versus the expansion of the existing deck which requires a new certificate of survey,
The applicant felt a survey was too costly, and he left City Hall without completing a building
permit application.
The staff followed up with a phone call to the property owner and scheduled an appointment to
inspect the subject property, On April 17, 2000, staff visited the applicant's property to verify
the existing deck dimensions of approximately 16' x 8', Staff explained the options to the
L:I02FILESI02variancesI02-021\VarRpt2,DOC Page 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave, S,E" Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
applicant: (I) replace the existing deck, as is, with a site plan, waiver of survey, and permit
approval; or (2) if he intended to build a larger deck or closer to the OHWM, obtain a new
certificate of survey to verify the OHWM setback for the permit application. The owner stated
he did not intend to apply for a building permit at this time.
On May 8, 2000, The City received a complaint regarding the construction of a deck on the
subject property. Upon inspection it was noted a new deck was under construction and measured
16' x 16'. The applicant was notified of the building and zoning code violations after which he
applied for a building permit on June 8, 2000. Upon review of the application staff determined a
certificate of survey was required for this project and notified the applicant. The applicant
submitted a site plan with the permit but this was deemed as insufficient submittal material, as
the zoning ordinance requires new survey depicting proposed additions and setbacks to property
boundaries and the OHWM, and the permit was denied.
The applicant was given two written notices regarding denial of the permit as submitted, and the
additional information staff requested, When the applicant did not respond, he was given a final
notice and the case was then forwarded to the prosecuting attomey for court action, The
applicant/owner eventually submitted a variance application for the deck as a result of a
negotiated settlement with the attomey for the ordinance violation.
DISCUSSION:
Lot I, Green Heights First Addition (partial legal), was platted in 1957, The subject lot is
riparian and located within the R-I (Low Density Residential) and the SD (Shoreland Overlay)
Districts. The lot dimensions are 121.15' front, by 202' side by 108.04' rear by 174,83' side, for
a total lot area of 21 ,284 square feet above the OHWM 904' elevation. The lot is considered a
legal conforming lot of record. The applicant does not own either of the properties adjoining the
subject lot.
The applicant is requesting a 23' variance to permit a structure setback of 52' from the ordinary
high water mark (OHWM). Setback averaging does not help the applicant in this case as the
averge setback for the structures on adjoining properties is 64' [(83' + 45 ') / 2 = 64 ']. The
applicant submitted deck plans that depict 16' x 16' deck dimensions, and attached to the
principal structure [Attachment 2 - Deck Plans],
The applicant also submitted an impervious worksheet that describes an impervious surface
coverage area for the subject property is 4,135 square feet of a total lot area of 21 ,284 square feet
or 19.4% coverage (Attachment 3 - Impervious Surface Calculations).
The City Engineering Department has submitted comments for this report, In essence, the
variance request would encourage the following: I) Promote "lake creep", the encroachment of
buildings and impervious areas toward the lakeshore.
The Department of Natural Resources submitted comments on this request, In essence, the
DNR's concerns include the hardship for a 16' deep deck versus a 12', and a wider deck such as
20' to accommodate more area and less ofa setback encroachment. If the Planning Commission
approves a variance, the DNR suggested a condition be the removal of the existing shed located
near the lake. In addition, the DNR is not supportive of issuing an after-the-fact variance for the
deck setback.
L:I02FILESI02variancesI02.021\VarRpt2,DOC
Page 2
VARIANCE HARDSmp STANDARDS
1. Where by reason of narrowness, shaUowness, or shape of a lot, or where by reason of
exceptional topographical or water conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional
conditions of such lot, the strict application of the terms of this Ordinance would result
in peculiar and practical difficulties or exceptional or undue hardship upon the owner
of such lot in developing or using such lot in a manner customary and legally
permissible within the Use District in which said lot is located.
The subject lot does not meet the variance hardship standards for narrowness, shallowness,
or shape, and is not exceptional with regards to topography or water conditions, Therefore,
staff has determined the request does not meet this hardship criteria,
2. Conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to the property or
immediately adjoining property, and do not apply, generally, to other land or
structures in the Use District in which the land is located.
The existing conditions of the lot area and dimensions are not peculiar to the property, and
generally do apply to most other lots within the Shoreland District. When all required
setbacks are applied, there was a buildable area for a replacement deck on this lot without the
need for a variance,
3. The granting of the proposed Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment
of a substantial property right of the owner.
The approved legal site precluded the need for the variance request. The hardship has been
created by the owner when the decision was made to build a deck of these dimensions and at
this location,
4. The granting of the proposed Variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and
air to the adjacent property, unreasonably increase the congestion in the public streets,
increase the danger of fire, or endauger the public safety.
The granting ofthe requested variance will not impair light and air to adjacent properties or
increase congestion, danger of fire or endanger public safety.
5. The granting of the Variance will not unreasonably impact on the character and
development of the neighborhood, unreasonably diminish or impair established
property values in the surrounding area, or in any other way impair the health safety,
and comfort of the area.
The granting of the variances will adversely affect the above stated values by increasing
structure encroachments upon the lakeshore and thereby affecting the adjacent properties.
6. The granting of the proposed Variance will not be contrary to the inteut of this
Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.
L:I02FILESI02variancesI02-021\VarRpt2,DOC
Page 3
The granting of the variance is contrary to the intent of the Ordinance or the Comprehensive
Plan by allowing increased encroachments of the shoreland setback regulations, contrary to
the intent of the zoning ordinance for structure setbacks from the OHWM, and setback
averagmg.
7. The granting of the Variance wiD not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant but
is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable nndue hardship or difficulty.
The granting of the variance request appears to serve as a convenience to the applicant. The
applicant/owner constructed the deck with full knowledge of the building permit and zoning
ordinance requirements prior to constructing the structure,
8. The hardship resnlts from the application of the provisions of this Ordinance to the
affected property and does not result from actions ofthe owners of the property.
The hardship results from the actions of the property owner when he constructed the deck in
the year 2000, A legal altemative building site existed that allowed for replacement of the
existing deck without the need for a variance,
9. Increased development or construction costs or economic hardship alone shall not be
grounds for granting a Variance.
Financial considerations alone shall not be grounds for granting this variance request. The
property owner stated that the expense of a survey was a reason for not applying for a
building permit.
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff has concluded that all of the required variance hardship criteria have not been met, and
the variance hardship was created by the owner when the deck structure was constructed in
violation of the zoning ordinance and without an approved building permit. Staff therefore
recommends denial of the variance request.
ALTERNATIVES:
I. Approve all the variances requested by the applicant. In this case, the Planning Commission
should direct staff to prepare a resolution with findings approving the Variance requests.
2. Table or continue discussion of the item for specific purpose,
3, Deny the application because the Planning Commission finds a lack of demonstrated
hardship under the zoning code criteria.
ACTION REQUIRED:
Staff recommends altemative #3.
I. Motion and second adopting Resolution 02-003PC, denying a 23' foot variance to permit
a 52' structure setback, rather than the required minimum 75' setback to the OHWM.
L:I02FILESI02variancesI02-021\VarRpl2,QOC
Page 4
RESOLUTION 02-003PC
A RESOLUTION DENYING A 23 FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT A 52 FOOT
STRUCTURE SETBACK FROM THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota;
FINDINGS
1. Donald B. & Betty Jean Scherer (applicant/owners) have applied for a variance from
the Zoning Ordinance in order to obtain a permit for a deck built and attached to a
single family dwelling on property located in the R-I (Low Density Residential)
District and the SD (Shoreland Overlay) District at the following location, to wit;
3894 Green Heights Trail NE, legally described as Lot I, Green Heights First
Addition, Scott County Minnesota. Together with that part of Government Lot
1, Section 3, Township 114, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, described as
follows:
Lot I, Green Heights First Addition, Scott County, Minnesota. Together with
that part of Government Lot I, Section 3, Township 114, Range 22, Scott
County, Minnesota, described as follows: Starting at a point which is North
57 degrees 14 minutes East distant 165,00 feet from the northeast corner of
"Green Heights", in said Government Lot I; and continuing thence North 57
degrees 14 minutes East 78,1 feet; thence South 27 degrees 40 minutes East
182.4 feet; thence South 62 degrees 5 minutes West 79.3 feet; thence North 27
degrees 15 minutes West 177.0 feet to the place of beginning and all land
lying north of the north line of the above described tract to the shore of Prior
Lake.
2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variances as contained in
Case #02-021PC and held hearings thereon on March 25, 2002, and April 8, 2002,
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.
1:I02fi1esI02variancesI02-021Idnyres2.doc 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave, S,E" Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
4. Because of conditions on the subject property and on the surrounding property, the
proposed variance will result in the impairment of an adequate supply oflight and air
to adjacent properties, umeasonably increase congestion in the public streets, increase
the danger of fire, and danger to the public safety, umeasonably diminish or impair
health, safety, comfort, morals or in any other respect be contrary to the Zoning
Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan,
5. A legal building envelope exists that allows for a replacement deck that meets the
required setback for the structure on the subject lot. The hardship has been created by
the applicant when the deck was built without the necessary permits. Reasonable use
of the property exists without the requested variances,
6. There is no justifiable hardship caused by the required lakeshore setback as
reasonable use of the property exists without the granting of the variance.
7. The granting of the variance, as originally requested, is not necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The
variance will serve merely as a convenience to the applicant, and is not necessary to
alleviate demonstrable hardship. The factors above allow for an alternative deck
structure to be permitted with a reduced variance or none at all.
8. The contents of Planning Case 02-021PC 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 denies the
following variance request for an attached deck to an existing single family dwelling, as
shown in Attachment I Survey:
1. A 23-foot variance to permit a structure setback of 52-feet from the ordinary high
water mark of 904 feet, rather than the required 75-foot structure setback.
Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on April 22, 2002.
Anthony J. Stamson, Commission Chair
ATTEST:
Donald R. Rye, Planning Director
1:I02filesI02variancesI02-021Idnyres2,doc
2
o~
l'
/
//
~
'f.'v
\.~
ATTACHMENT 1 -
"
h:'
, OF SURVEY
0''0
0,0
~v
oj<
/J
.~~\
' .
.
\
c,~
d'
X'
(:)~
~'"
(:)'"
"'l' )
1-' "
\
_of.
'\~::: \,
'V -:;. ......
'61. <S>
-0 u'
\ '1- - .
\ ~ ($)
\ c$l~ ' 'if
\~. .
\\~\
~
~
)
.J
1
,
,
,
,-'
[,
,0'
0\ ~
<J:f.,,~,G>(-.
",'tl~~'" '
G~~''''______---/
~O '______. .. '.'
~/______., e
/.,,/'
\)c,~
>(-.0
1
//'
--------
\ (:)"'~"'(:)~,f"
V
936.0
x
9lSl.4'
.. l'j.,'" ~ v."QL
...+;/ 'l."\ d"~'-'50~~'q~ S /
\0,1- \ /"Z-o <,:>0 IJ"'{\ ',,/'/
(0\ ~'" ' ~€) t::\(; /"/'
c,o{.(\e ~ ,GY- \ ..~ V /__ //
<;~ <.",'<',,,,/93'0.. /l'\ -,.,.
G~~ ~oo - //
,c} e
.../ teEt. -- .-
....----/ ...,"" ,,/
...,~.€.~/
~ G6~/-
r
--------
/
/
.//;//
///
/
"
r;~~f~~;
'...''''.....' ",
,.:~);<~/:., ;~;
{%i;;,/.
;~;r~;!;:".j
".;~:t~lr-j~:.:;' .1 '
'il'~"! . ..' j~..
~~\;~.l~'.. ." ~
..,,;t'i4........l:,'.,........ . ,J'I, '''--T--
'!: )~'~' ':','~:".t .~ ~'{ , .
"t'il'!~. ... " ,
~4\{'i:.~.~ "
:";;>-"" -~, . I
!' f:2(. I\)) <
I. ..
, \) ,
, I \ '
I
I
,'<-:
<AtT~~~ ·
,~ 'I
-t'
i' '
I.'
.
..
..f'
~""-.\<"'ii"'" ~'" .
.'~J.PJ"i~.::t.t.:. ,
i..,,';;.,~:.~.'
,
~'.. ~.'", .' .-
,
. -',.--".
'"
I,
",,,,-F
. ;
"',
\.:..
t\1 . "
~'~:..
I~:"
1 '
, ~
~I...~~,.
\ \
/,
, '
: I '
). '1""
. .
. ..
I,:. ".
~;
I
.~
, I
J'
l
\
1
"
.
~~, -'.' .~~.,'t"t. '"j
'_I'..~~'._>t-;,"'; .it
;;/\~.;;.~~'~-~:~. -*.-
",..::".:,~~xt-'~ "
~";f,,": ~,~-':. '1
.,';,r.~.'.,....,$'.:,.
.~~:.;,~;, '~~';;"':~
t.~'" " ' _';':.'{'
'if.:''''', to",.
'-' ....."t} '~'~'~';:'")
~_.t... ~I\':';''''t':~'-;;~
'rj~_ ;V.,'. ";~
,_.;.~\~.~:::':::~;:;.. -'L
~-_,l1:~,,::''i~:;;!'t_!; .
t,.Ji....."! "~,""'".
",;, > .f:k,~, . ~;;iil!<:;'"
"\~"b'
-.-.' '-.'-.' '.--
...... "...
,', :,c' ,
.... : I '
: \ -.
, 1'-
!
j\ll
i I"
,
!O
.
, \
'.
,N
i'<I-I'~---"
i (\ ,
, \)
, t
!
i:-...
-~
I"
D
t
..
:
(, i~
a Ill"
\' I .
. "\'
- i"...
\1 l.1)
, '\
~~
\)1.
~cl
f) i?
. t>
i ~
I
---~._.-
, .'
-
. I
,...
.1
I
-j I
I
1 I
I I
I I
, i
I'
~
! '
~
~
s.;
,
'i
\
....'
,
I"}
"
\I
\
t\
~
~
if)
~J
,
;;J/,k....;t..-i;......, "'1" '",4'''~ <'\~,.if:"' :
~~:..:if:$<.~;,;~'"'" j(j';~t<~... y:"-\"':"::
'~'~"" J.',';1v'?"'<<"'!ii',..o: 'J';)"~t."'-,.. ".. .''l''.,'
.tn-:".t:J "~.:' ~l:!~ =$'. ~ "/'1' jt;.' f',' .... '" , T
><\f,'m"'lX_ "'''.'L "" "'. 'Ji.~.: '", ~
; '"<.0"'. ~ ''''''.' c, J., "' ~ "
~~~~}~';~~':'.~~l:t ;;~";: '~
;l~~:'~:(:~':'} ;'",~\~:\ .,'?
, .t'~ ~:~~~':. . ';:1,S",~1:' , .. ",I'
" .:~;.
r-"
\
~
\: '
I'
~'
~,
I
"'1\\~~~
~lli;" '
il;~>i
~~..... i ; OJ
~~;
}N It''
!\j
&
\'
,,'~
.' l~
j'~
'~
j;
\'
'J ~
T ~
I-';-"-;~
jl,
, 'I
I '
,
i
il
"
,
.;;
"
"
t__,
~
\
~.
'.
-::=:7
.
.;
~
n
.~
,~
"f'
','J"" ..
:,:...
,,'
o
~
.
,;
~.:
~'
./,:
~
~
,
I,
I
I
,
,I
!:
.,
, '
..
~;\
~'--r~' ,"
~ "",
, i\'i'/.
'I '
"'~';~':
:~. '
l 1-
'~
'11
,I
~
,
:'Q'
'.
.
,_."
\'
\i
\\'
I
I
I
;,
;~: ,:~,r:'{:'~>,:,i)l/i:i:'~\-'i~"::~ i,
;,-".i '"><<"
'\<
,I'~
"':,..1':,
.
I
',;'
, ,
I!
Jl
I 'j
-". c' "".t
It
t. .
\~."
~ "."
"~
.~J'-('~'
. -'\1
/'!
; '~
. ~
~
'V. fl
II:
,),-:"
,~ I
,
-.,;j' i-
I
i
r+-~
I
!
7
\
~
-';"---'-'1':
/f);
; !
~
~
~:
I J
:"1
i
,
\
I
r
'.
!,..:..t...~
,-;~t':~P \
,~~"</j" - ~
i . ~'''t~::,
.~....,,,:~.
,,~../
i'~D rs rN rC! n ',", 7 ". N...
II 15 ~ 15 U Vf.J L' 'i i\/
CITY OF PRlORLAKEIL i '(!
Impervious Surface Calculations! .'.. \ DEe 2 7 200ln. :
(To be Submitted with Building permit Application) ie.'" Ie;
For All Properties Located in the Shoreland Distr.i:ct(SD)
The Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage Permitted in 30 Percent.
Property Address2>'C:)(\ "-\
bRC'2\-\ \tl:'_:)~\'" /(~~t~\ \ ::)~
Lot Area '2\)<...&>"-\ ',...&.\.,"M '2:L.Q 0,\.0 Sq. Feet x 30% = .............. Lor co..:;
************************************************************************
it
, LENGTH
q
II
z..c.,
WIDTH
x"S2....
x "3 I.e.
x 7._1
SQ. FEET
'l.'i.:,P,
lo\'L
c.} II (',f
HOUSE
=
III
=
ATIACHED G;f\RAGE
=
TOTALPRlNCIPLE STRUCTURE...................... _I'-ll\o
DETACHED BLDGS
" (Garag~
L2... x. \"2.
x '
\') -
<;....,C)
TOTALDET ACHED BUILDINGS....................... \ '.In
DRlVEW A YiP AVED AREAS
.""--.....--.--.;-.-,
c<D. rivewa.,Y, .pa. ved gr not)
........... .". . "-. .. /:"-,'
(Side\V~ik;p';:"king Areas)
=~
x
X
X
=
=
TOTAL PAVED AREAS......................................... ~
PATIOSfPORCHESIDECKS tbl'\L (\.Re"lIC. X
(Open Decks Y". min. opening ben.veen X
boards. with a p,ervioussurface below,
al:C not considered to b.:irnpervious)
=
0')6 \
=
x
=
TOTAL DECKS........................................................
'2;s I
OTHER
X
X
=
=
TOTAL OTHER.......................................................
TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE 11\1j~
80VER{") . ...'..('D ~2.S C>
Prepared By'\.j~'-'R. \< '-H\~ Date \'1.. "S - 0 \
,\ 7 \ \')
company\jd\"\~::>"R '"'ii"'] (" I X t\ . Phoo' # '\ '\~12.';1 "
~
ii,
n
::E:
3:
m
z
-I
(,)
I
if
1:J
~.
(5
c:
rn
rn
c:
:rJ
it
n
m
~
o
c:
....
~
i
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
SITE:
PRESENTER:
REVIEWED BY:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
PLANNING REPORT
SA
CONSIDER A VARIANCE TO STRUCTURE SETBACK
TO THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK (OHWM) ON
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3894 GREEN HEIGHTS
TRAIL FOR DONALD B. SCHERER, (Case File #02-
021 PC)
LOT 1, GREEN HEIGHTS 1ST ADDITION (PARTIAL
LEGAL)
STEVEN HORSMAN, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
_X_ YES NO
APRIL 8, 2002
The Planning Department received a variance application from Donald B.
Scherer (applicanUowner) to allow an existing deck to remain on the property
located at 3894 Green Heights Trail. The deck was constructed in the year 2000
without a required building permit. The deck is attached to an existing single-
family dwelling that was constructed in 1946 (Attachment 1 - Certificate of
Survey).
On March 22, 2002, staff received a phone call requesting a continuance of this
variance to the next scheduled meeting date. On March 25, 2002, the Planning
Commission continued this agenda item to the public hearing on April 8, 2002,
The applicant requests the following variance:
1) A 23-foot variance to allow a structure setback of 52-feet from the ordinary
hiQh water mark (OHWM) elevation of 904 feet. rather than the minimum
required setback of 75-feet [Ordinance Section 1104,302 (4) Setback
Requirements].
HISTORY
On or around the week of April 10, 2000, Mr. Scherer asked the City Building
Department about the process for obtaining a building permit for a new deck on
L:I02FILESI02variancesI02-Q21\VarRpl2.DOC Page 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave, S,E" Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
an existing structure. The Building Department explained the procedure
regarding replacement decks and the waiver of survey with a site plan versus the
expansion of the existing deck which requires a new certificate of survey. The
applicant felt a survey was too costly, and he left City Hall without completing a
building permit application.
The staff followed up with a phone call to the property owner and scheduled an
appointment to inspect the subject property. On April 17, 2000, staff visited the
applicant's property to verify the existing deck dimensions of approximately 16' x
8'. Staff explained the options to the applicant: (1) replace the existing deck, as
is, with a site plan, waiver of survey, and permit approval; or (2) if he intended to
build a larger deck or closer to the OHWM, obtain a new certificate of survey to
verify the OHWM setback for the permit application. The owner stated he did not
intend to apply for a building permit at this time.
On May 8, 2000, The City received a complaint regarding the construction of a
deck on the subject property. Upon inspection it was noted a new deck was
under construction and measured 16' x 16'. The applicant was notified of the
building and zoning code violations after which he applied for a building permit
on June 8, 2000. Upon review of the application staff determined a certificate of
survey was required for this project and notified the applicant. The applicant
submitted a site plan with the permit but this was deemed as insufficient
submittal material, as the zoning ordinance requires new survey depicting
proposed additions and setbacks to property boundaries and the OHWM, and
the permit was denied.
The applicant was given two written notices regarding denial of the permit as
submitted, and the additional information staff requested. When the applicant
did not respond, he was given a final notice and the case was then forwarded to
the prosecuting attorney for court action. The applicant/owner eventually
submitted a variance application for the deck as a result of a negotiated
settlement with the attorney for the ordinance violation.
DISCUSSION:
Lot 1, Green Heights First Addition (partial legal), was platted in 1957. The
subject lot is riparian and located within the R-1 (Low Density Residential) and
the SO (Shoreland Overlay) Districts. The lot dimensions are 121.15' front, by
202' side by 108.04' rear by 174.83' side, for a total lot area of 21 ,284 square
feet above the OHWM 904' elevation. The lot is considered a legal conforming
lot of record. The applicant does not own either of the properties adjoining the
subject lot.
The applicant is requesting a 23' variance to permit a structure setback of 52'
from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). Setback averaging does not help
L:I02FILESI02variancesI02-021\VarRpt2,DOC
Page 2
the applicant in this case as the averge setback for the structures on adjoining
properties is 64' [(83' + 45') I 2 = 64']. The applicant submitted deck plans that
depict 16' x 16' deck dimensions, and attached to the principal structure
[Attachment 2 - Deck Plans].
The applicant also submitted an impervious worksheet that describes an
impervious surface coverage area for the subject property is 4,135 square feet of
a total lot area of 21,284 square feet or 19.4% coverage (Attachment 3 .
Impervious Surface Calculations).
The City Engineering Department has submitted comments for this report. In
essence, the variance request would encourage the following: 1) Promote "lake
creep", the encroachment of buildings and impervious areas toward the
lakeshore.
The Department of Natural Resources submitted comments on this request. In
essence, the DNR's concerns include the hardship for a 16' deep deck versus a
12', and a wider deck such as 20' to accommodate more area and less of a
setback encroachment. If the Planning Commission approves a variance, the
DNR suggested a condition be the removal of the existing shed located near the
lake. In addition, the DNR is not supportive of issuing an after-the-fact variance
for the deck setback.
VARIANCE HARDSHIP STANDARDS
1. Where by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of a lot, or
where by reason of exceptional topographical or water conditions or
other extraordinary and exceptional conditions of such lot, the strict
application of the terms of this Ordinance would result in peculiar and
practical difficulties or exceptional or undue hardship upon the owner
of such lot in developing or using such lot in a manner customary and
legally permissible within the Use District in which said lot is located.
The subject lot does not meet the variance hardship standards for
narrowness, shallowness, or shape, and is not exceptional with regards to
topography or water conditions. Therefore, staff has determined the request
does not meet this hardship criteria.
2. Conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to
the property or immediately adjoining property, and do not apply,
generally, to other land or structures in the Use District in which the
land is located.
The existing conditions of the lot area and dimensions are not peculiar to the
property, and generally do apply to most other lots within the Shoreland
L:I02FILESI02variancesI02-021IVarRpt2,DOC
Page 3
District. When all required setbacks are applied, there was a buildable area
for a replacement deck on this lot without the need for a variance.
3. The granting of the proposed Variance is necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the owner.
The approved legal site precluded the need for the variance request. The
hardship has been created by the owner when the decision was made to
build a deck of these dimensions and at this location.
4. The granting of the proposed Variance will not impair an adequate
supply of light and air to the adjacent property, unreasonably increase
the congestion in the public streets, increase the danger of fire, or
endanger the public safety.
The granting of the requested variance will not impair light and air to adjacent
properties or increase congestion, danger of fire or endanger public safety,
5. The granting of the Variance will not unreasonably impact on the
character and development of the neighborhood, unreasonably
diminish or impair established property values in the surrounding area,
or in any other way impair the health safety, and comfort of the area.
The granting of the variances will adversely affect the above stated values by
increasing structure encroachments upon the lakeshore and thereby affecting
the adjacent properties.
6. The granting of the proposed Variance will not be contrary to the intent
of this Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.
The granting of the variance is contrary to the intent of the Ordinance or the
Comprehensive Plan by allowing increased encroachments of the shoreland
setback regulations, contrary to the intent of the zoning ordinance for
structure setbacks from the OHWM, and setback averaging.
7. The granting of the Variance will not merely serve as a convenience to
the applicant but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable undue
hardship or difficulty.
The granting of the variance request appears to serve as a convenience to
the applicant. The applicanUowner constructed the deck with full knowledge
of the building permit and zoning ordinance requirements prior to constructing
the structure.
L:I02FILESI02variancesI02-021\VarRpt2,DOC
Page 4
8. The hardship results from the application of the provisions of this
Ordinance to the affected property and does not result from actions of
the owners of the property.
The hardship results from the actions of the property owner when he
constructed the deck in the year 2000. A legal alternative building site existed
that allowed for replacement of the existing deck without the need for a
variance.
9. Increased development or construction costs or economic hardship
alone shall not be grounds for granting a Variance.
Financial considerations alone shall not be grounds for granting this variance
request. The property owner stated that the expense of a survey was a
reason for not applying for a building permit.
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff has concluded that all of the required variance hardship criteria have
not been met, and the variance hardship was created by the owner when the
deck structure was constructed in violation of the zoning ordinance and without
an approved building permit. Staff therefore recommends denial of the variance
request.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve all the variances requested by the applicant. In this case, the
Planning Commission should direct staff to prepare a resolution with findings
approving the Variance requests.
2. Table or continue discussion of the item for specific purpose,
3, Deny the application because the Planning Commission finds a lack of
demonstrated hardship under the zoning code criteria.
ACTION REQUIRED:
Staff recommends alternative #3.
1. Motion and second adopting Resolution 02-003PC, denying a 23' foot
variance to permit a 52' structure setback, rather than the required
minimum 75' setback to the OHWM.
L:I02FILESI02variancesI02-021\VarRp12,DOC
Page 5
RESOLUTION 02-003PC
A RESOLUTION DENYING A 23 FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT A 52 FOOT
STRUCTURE SETBACK FROM THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota;
FINDINGS
1. Donald B. & Betty Jean Scherer (applicant/owners) have applied for a variance from
the Zoning Ordinance in order to obtain a permit for a deck built and attached to a
single family dwelling on property located in the R-1 (Low Density Residential)
District and the SD (Shoreland Overlay) District at the following location, to wit;
3894 Green Heights Trail NE, legally described as Lot I, Green Heights First
Addition, Scott County Minnesota. Together with that part of Government Lot
1, Section 3, Township 114, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, described as
follows:
Lot 1, Green Heights First Addition, Scott County, Minnesota. Together with
that part of Government Lot I, Section 3, Township 114, Range 22, Scott
County, Minnesota, described as follows: Starting at a point which is North
57 degrees 14 minutes East distant 165.00 feet from the northeast corner of
"Green Heights", in said Government Lot 1; and continuing thence North 57
degrees 14 minutes East 78.1 feet; thence South 27 degrees 40 minutes East
182.4 feet; thence South 62 degrees 5 minutes West 79.3 feet; thence North 27
degrees 15 minutes West 177.0 feet to the place of beginning and all land
lying north of the north line of the above described tract to the shore of Prior
Lake.
2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variances as contained in
Case #02-021PC and held hearings thereon on March 25,2002, and April 8, 2002.
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.
1:I02filesI02variancesI02-021 Idnyres2,doc
16200 Eagle Creek Ave, S,E" Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
1
/ Fax (952) 447-4245
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
SITE:
PRESENTER:
REVIEWED BY:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
PLANNING REPORT
5C
CONSIDER A VARIANCE TO STRUCTURE SETBACK TO
THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK (OHWM) ON
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3894 GREEN HEIGHTS TRAIL
FOR DONALD B. SCHERER, (Case File #02-021 PC)
LOT 1, GREEN HEIGHTS 1ST ADDITION (PARTIAL LEGAL)
STEVEN HORSMAN, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
_X_ YES NO
MARCH 25, 2002
The Planning Department received a variance application from Donald B.
Scherer (applicant/owner) to allow an existing deck to remain on the property
located at 3894 Green Heights Trail. The deck was constructed in the year 2000
without the required building permit. The deck is attached to an existing single-
family dwelling that was constructed in 1946 (Attachment 1 . Certificate of
Survey).
The applicant requests the following variance:
1) A 23-foot variance to allow a structure setback of 52-feet from the ordinary
hiQh water mark (OHWM) elevation of 904 feet, rather than the minimum
required setback of 75 feet [Ordinance Section 1104.302 (4) Setback
Requirements].
HISTORY
On or around the week of April 10, 2000, Mr. Scherer asked the City Building
Department about the process for obtaining a building permit for a new deck on
an existing structure. The Building Department explained the procedure
regarding replacement decks and the waiver of survey with a site plan versus the
expansion of the existing deck which requires a new certificate of survey. The
applicant felt a survey was too costly, and he left City Hall without completing a
building permit application.
L:I02FILESI02variances\02-021\VarRpt02-021 ,DOC Page 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave, S,E" Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
The Planning staff followed up with a phone call to the property owner and
scheduled an appointment to inspect the subject property. On April 17, 2000,
staff visited the applicant's property to verify the existing deck dimensions
(approx. 16' x 8'). Staff explained the options to the applicant, replace the
existing deck, as is, with a site plan, waiver of survey, and permit approval, or (1)
if he intended to build a larger deck or closer to the OHWM, obtain a new
certificate of survey for the permit application. The owner stated he did not
intend to apply for a building permit at this time.
On May 8, 2000, The City received a complaint regarding the construction of a
deck on the subject property. Upon inspection it was noted a new deck was
under construction and measured 16' x 16'. The applicant was notified of the
building and zoning code violations after which he applied for a building permit
on June 8, 2000. Upon review of the application staff determined a certificate of
survey was required for this project and notified the applicant. The applicant
submitted a site plan with the permit but this was deemed as insufficient
submittal material, as the zoning ordinance requires new survey depicting
proposed additions and setbacks to property boundaries and the OHWM, and
the permit was denied.
The applicant was given two written notices regarding denial of the permit as
submitted, and the additional information staff requested. When the applicant
did not respond, he was given a final notice and the case was then forwarded to
the prosecuting attorney for court action. The applicant/owner eventually
submitted a variance application for the deck as a result of a negotiated
settlement with the Joint Scott Prosecutor for the ordinance violation,
DISCUSSION:
Lot 1, Green Heights First Addition (partial legal), was platted in 1957. The
subject lot is riparian and located within the R-1 (Low Density Residential) and
the SD (Shoreland Overlay) Districts. The lot dimensions are 121.15'-front, by
202'-side by 108,04' -rear by 174.83', for a total lot area of 21 ,284 square feet
above the OHWM 904' elevation. The lot is considered a legal conforming lot of
record. The applicant does not own either of the properties adjoining the subject
lot.
The applicant is requesting a 23' variance to permit a structure setback of 52'
from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). Setback averaging does not help
the applicant in this case as the averge setback for the structures on adjoining
properties is 64' [(83' + 45') /2 = 64']. The applicant submitted deck plans that
depict 16' x 16' deck dimensions, and attached to the principal structure
[Attachment 2 - Deck Plans].
L:I02FILESI02variancesI02-021IVarRpt02-021,QOC
Page 2
The applicant also submitted an impervious worksheet that describes an
impervious surface coverage area for the subject property is 4,135 square feet of
a total lot area of 21 ,284 square feet or 19.4% coverage (Attachment 3 -
Impervious Surface Calculations).
The City Engineering Department has submitted comments for this report. In
essence, the variance request would encourage the following: 1) Promote "lake
creep", the encroachment of buildings and impervious areas toward the
lakeshore.
The Department of Natural Resources submitted comments on this request. In
essence, the DNR's concerns include the hardship for a 16' deep deck versus a
12', and a wider deck such as 20' to accommodate more area and less of a
setback encroachment. If the Planning Commission approves a variance, the
DNR suggested a condition be the removal of the existing shed located near the
lake. In addition, the DNR is not supportive of issuing an after-the-fact variance
for the deck setback.
VARIANCE HARDSHIP STANDARDS
1. Where by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of a lot, or where by
reason of exceptional topographical or water conditions or other extraordinary
and exceptional conditions of such lot, the strict application of the terms of
this Ordinance would result in peculiar and practical difficulties or exceptional
or undue hardship upon the owner of such lot in developing or using such lot
in a manner customary and legally permissible within the Use District in which
said lot is located.
The subject lot does not meet the variance hardship standards for narrowness,
shallowness, or shape, and is not exceptional with regards to topography or water
conditions, Therefore, staff has determined the request does not meet this hardship
criteria.
2. Conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to the
property or Immediately adjoining property, and do not apply, generally, to
other land or structures in the Use District in which the land is located.
The existing conditions of the lot area and dimensions are not peculiar to the
property, and generally do apply to most other lots within the Shoreland District.
When all required setbacks are applied. there was a buildable area for a
replacement deck on this lot.
3. The granting of the proposed Variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right of the owner.
L:\02FI LESI02variances\02-021\VarRpI02-021,QOC
Page 3
The approved legal site precluded the need for the variance request. The hardship
has been created by the owner when the decision was made to build a deck of these
dimensions and at this location,
4. The granting of the proposed Variance will not impair an adequate supply of
light and air to the adjacent property, unreasonably increase the congestion in
the pUblic streets, increase the danger of fire, or endanger the pUblic safety.
The granting of the requested variance will not impair light and air to adjacent
properties or increase congestion, danger of fire or endanger public safety,
5. The granting of the Variance will not unreasonably impact on the character
and development of the neighborhood, unreasonably diminish or impair
established property values in the surrounding area, or in any other way
impair the health safety, and comfort of the area.
The granting of the variances will adversely affect the above stated values by
increasing structure encroachments upon the lakeshore and thereby affecting the
adjacent properties.
6. The granting of the proposed Variance will not be contrary to the intent of this
Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.
The granting of the variance is contrary to the intent of the Ordinance or the
Comprehensive Plan by allowing increased encroachments of the shoreland setback
regulations, contrary to the intent of the zoning ordinance for structure setbacks from
the OHWM, and setback averaging.
7. The granting of the Variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the
applicant but Is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable undue hardship or
difficulty.
The granting of the variance request appears to serve as a convenience to the
applicant. The applicant/owner constructed the deck with full knowledge of the
building permit and zoning ordinance requirements prior to constructing the
structure.
8. The hardship results from the application of the provisions of this Ordinance
to the affected property and does not result from actions of the owners of the
property.
The hardship results from the actions of the property owner when he constructed the
deck in the year 2000. A legal alternative building site existed that allowed for
replacement of the existing deck without the need for a variance.
9. Increased development or construction costs or economic hardship alone
shall not be grounds for granting a Variance.
L:\02FILESI02variances\02-021 IVarRpt02-021 ,DOC
Page 4
Financial considerations alone shall not be grounds for granting this variance
request. The property owner stated that the expense of a survey was a reason for
not applying for a building permit.
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff has concluded that all of the required variance hardship criteria have
not been met, and the variance hardship was created by the owner when the
deck structure was constructed in violation of the zoning ordinance and without
an approved building permit. Staff therefore recommends denial of the variance
request.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve all the variances requested by the applicant. In this case, the
Planning Commission should direct staff to prepare a resolution with findings
approving the Variance requests.
2. Table or continue discussion of the item for specific purpose.
3. Deny the application because the Planning Commission finds a lack of
demonstrated hardship under the zoning code criteria.
ACTION REQUIRED:
Staff recommends alternative #3.
1. Motion and second adopting Resolution 02-003PC, denying a 23' foot
variance to permit a 52' structure setback, rather than the required
minimum 75' setback to the OHWM.
L:I02FILESI02variancesI02-021\VarRpt02-021,OOC
Page 5
RESOLUTION 02-003PC
A RESOLUTION DENYING A 23 FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT A 52 FOOT
STRUCTURE SETBACK FROM THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota;
FINDINGS
1. Donald B. & Betty Jean Scherer (applicant/owners) have applied for a variance from
the Zoning Ordinance in order to obtain a permit for a deck built without a permit
attached to a single family dwelling on property located in the R-l (Low Density
Residential) District and the SD (Shoreland Overlay) District at the following
location, to wit;
3894 Green Heights Trail NE, legally described as Lot I, Green Heights First
Addition, Scott County Minnesota, Together with that part of Government Lot
1, Section 3, Township 114, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, described as
follows:
Lot 1, Green Heights First Addition, Scott County, Minnesota. Together with
that part of Government Lot 1, Section 3, Township 114, Range 22, Scott
County, Minnesota, described as follows: Starting at a point which is North
57 degrees 14 minutes East distant 165.00 feet from the northeast corner of
"Green Heights", in said Government Lot I; and continuing thence North 57
degrees 14 minutes East 78,1 feet; thence South 27 degrees 40 minutes East
182.4 feet; thence South 62 degrees 5 minutes West 79.3 feet; thence North 27
degrees 15 minutes West 177.0 feet to the place of beginning and all land
lying north of the north line of the above described tract to the shore of Prior
Lake,
2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variances as contained in
Case #02-02IPC and held hearings thereon on March 25, 2002.
3. The Board of Adjustment has considered the effect ofthe 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.
1:I02filesI02variancesI02-021Idnyres02-003,doc 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave, S,E" Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
4. Because of conditions on the subject property and on the surrounding property, the
proposed variance will result in the impairment of an adequate supply oflight and air
to adjacent properties, umeasonably increase congestion in the public streets, increase
the danger of fire, and danger to the public safety, umeasonably diminish or impair
health, safety, comfort, morals or in any other respect be contrary to the Zoning
Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan.
5. A legal building envelope exists that allows for a replacement deck that meets the
required setback for the structure on the subject lot. The hardship has been created by
the applicant when the deck was built without the necessary permits. Reasonable use
of the property exists without the requested variances.
6. There is no justifiable hardship caused by the required lakeshore setback as
reasonable use of the property exists without the granting of the variance,
7. The granting of the variance, as originally requested, is not necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The
variance will serve merely as a convenience to the applicant, and is not necessary to
alleviate demonstrable hardship. The factors above allow for an alternative deck
structure to be permitted with a reduced variance or none at all.
8, The contents of Planning Case 02-021PC 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 denies the
following variance request for an attached deck to an existing single family dwelling, as
shown in Attachment I Survey;
1. A 23-foot variance to permit a structure setback of 52-feet from the ordinary high
water mark of 904 feet, rather than the required 75-foot structure setback.
Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on March 25, 2002.
Anthony J. Stamson, Commission Chair
ATTEST:
Donald R. Rye, Planning Director
1:I02fi1esI02variancesI02-021Idnyres02-003,doc
2
4. Because of conditions on the subject property and on the surrounding property, the
proposed variance will result in the impairment of an adequate supply of light and air
to adjacent properties, umeasonably increase congestion in the public streets, increase
the danger of fire, and danger to the public safety, umeasonably diminish or impair
health, safety, comfort, morals or in any other respect be contrary to the Zoning
Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan.
5. A legal building envelope exists that allows for a replacement deck that meets the
required setback for the structure on the subject lot. The hardship has been created by
the applicant when the deck was built without the necessary permits, Reasonable use
ofthe property exists without the requested variances.
6. There is no justifiable hardship caused by the required lakeshore setback as
reasonable use of the property exists without the granting of the variance.
7. The granting of the variance, as originally requested, is not necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The
variance will serve merely as a convenience to the applicant, and is not necessary to
alleviate demonstrable hardship. The factors above allow for an alternative deck
structure to be permitted with a reduced variance or none at all,
8. The contents of Planning Case 02-021PC 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 denies the
following variance request for an attached deck to an existing single family dwelling, as
shown in Attachment 1 Survey:
1. A 23-foot variance to permit a structure setback of 52-feet from the ordinary high
water mark of904 feet, rather than the required 75-foot structure setback.
Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on April 8, 2002,
Anthony J, Stamson, Cornmission Chair
ATTEST:
Donald R. Rye, Planning Director
1:I02filesI02variancesI02-021Idnyres2,doc 2
Correspondence
L:\TEMPLA TEIFILEINFO.DOC
~i~:": l:,~~-1.5 LJ vv li~. '..- ~')
,r [) I 'j II
~ ! .21. ~
/-Z/ z6/cJ/
'(0 .' jh-CIJ-G,l ! k~
"'-otll I
/,'--,cD I' I __
J,L..ciV'\./ ,/~~ IV- L.( V
(~ ,"\ ~
....}. c.r...,/L.....{WU>...'L/l~j t"l &!--ti--?u-<"'if
J -: \..-z<-4'<"{/ J ;C/,-,,-_ v ~-'-- , '.,' ,
...i. AL-,u'--( ,-v-1-/U-/VU---Ci-,' tL/ ,vI...
'hAw.- /1/;~ A-1...~~f~ ~J€?'
J: 0v~( -}~ ,'VI- z;; .A~hJ)v
- " ~
I !. (! .-'-' /I ',' _ " / "Ji... 'c,/,L
\.'/\j-!~"//"""'--L./---""''''''''-V ' ,
lJ~
fCJ""'"
.::i:t9 /v...e...-,,,---- Wee ~1 ~tC/''___'.
r-;.A'.- ." '
"V"-t" ,~ ,
,,,G t"'-
..~'
...----.
)L.y-N ...(,iV,U/.Je...J....
: 6G[gU~ ~.:-
"I I "'"
~ i } "'I '
'~ 821_ m:
Final Notice
July 12, 2002
Donald Scherer
3894 Green Heights Trail
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Dear Mr. Scherer:
On April 22, 2002, the City of Prior Lake Planning Commission denied your
variance request to permit a structure (deck) setback of 52' from the 904' OHWM
(Resolution 02-003PC). The existing deck is in violation of the City Zoning Code,
1. Ordinance Subsection 1109.500: Building Permits: No person shall
construct, alter or expand a structure within the City of Prior Lake
without first obtaining a building permit.
2. Ordinance Subsection 1104.302: Setback Requirements:
This letter serves as your final notice to apply for a building permit to reconstruct
the deck to meet the required setbacks as permitted under the Zoning
Ordinance. Failure to proceed with corrections of the violation on or before July
31,2002, and your file will be referred to the City Attorney for civil court action.
The City of Prior Lake appreciates your cooperation on this matter. If you should
have any questions regarding this matter call me at 952-447-9854,
Sincerely,
~ 1';1 .
;/ i<."t4---~r--'----""""'-
Steven Horsman
Zoning Administrator/lnspector
SchrerAtmy
16200 Eagle Creek Ave, S,E.. Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372,1714 / Ph, (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
April 23, 2002
Anthony J. Stamson
Planning Commission Chair
16095 Wren Court SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Dear Mr. Stamson:
Enclosed is Variance Resolution 02-003PC as adopted by the Planning Commission on
April 22, 2002. Please review and sign the Resolution and return in the self-addressed
stamped envelope provided.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please call my direct phone
number at 447-9854 between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m" Monday through Friday, and I
will assist you.
Sincerely,
,~
Steven Horsman
Zoning Administrator/lnspector
16200 E'SijIFereekAve, S,E" Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
~dfG~
'f/J.-,>!o).-J
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
4/21/02
This is a letter to address the issues that the City of Prior Lake has of Don and Betty Scherer's new deck,
We, Dan and Melanie Sheedy reside at 3880 Green Hts Tr SW, Prior Lake, Mn, We live next door to
Don and Betty Scherer's property, We can not see this beautiful deck in its entirely from our deck, It is
not intrusive, nor Wlattractive, nor impede in anyway our view and nor does it detract from this
neighborhood. Nor should this said deck be viewed as any negative that our City has placed on it in the
future.
We believe that issues that The City of Prior Lake has of this said deck is unfounded and untrue, It is
Wlbelieveable to us that The City of Prior Lake would continue to drag these issues out for as long as it
has to date. We believe our City of Prior Lake's reputation is at stake presently, There has been no
negatives from this neighborhood or neighbors about this said deck. We wish to have these issues resolved
and over as soon as possible, We have watched as our City has continue to struggle with these issues and
the Scherer's. We feel sorry for all the trouble the Scherer's have had to deal with from our city's
government. We hope that our City can resolve these issues today,
I
~ aA- Ft~
tf/ a:J!o)-
Steven and Bonnie Scherer
3904 Green Heights Trail SW
Box 486
Prior Lake, MN 55372
952-447-4930
April 20, 2002
To whom it may concern,
This is in reference to a deck built by Don and Betty
Scherer. Our house is closer to the lake than Don
and Betty Scherer's deck. Captain Jack's decks
extend even further beyond our house, all the way
to water's edge.
Don and Betty Scherer's deck maintains continuity
from the lakeside view and adds to the value of the
property. From the lakeside it is a wonderful asset
to the neighborhood. It is not seen from the street
side so that should not be an issue.
All the neighborhood homes sit high on a hill and
has never had a problem with flooding the way so
may other homes in Prior Lake have had during high
water years.
Respectfully,
Steven Scherer
)~ ~(.fUl-v---J
Bonnie SCherej. /J. J... ...
~,~U../L--'
April 17, 2002
Donald B. Scherer
3894 Green Heights Trail
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Agenda and Agenda Report
Attached is a Planning Commission Agenda and Staff Report for the April 22, 2002
Planning Commission meeting, You or your representatives are expected to attend the
meeting. You will be given the opportunity to speak regarding your proposal and the
staff report. The meeting begins at 6:30 p,m. and is held at the Fire Station located at
16776 Fish Point Road (east of HWY 13 on the south side of CR 21). If you cannot
attend the meeting, please call me so your item can be deferred to the next Planning
Commission meeting. If you have any questions, please contact me at 447-9810,
Sincerely,
C~Ca+"4ont
Connie Carlson
Planning Dept. Secretary
Enclosure
1:ldeptworklblankfrmlmeetltr,doc
16200 Eagle Creek Ave, S,E" Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Memor'1n~um
Ap~iI8, 2002
TO:
SVBJECT:
Steve Horsm'ln, PI'lnning & Zoning Ac:lministt'lto~
Don Sche~e~ V'l~i'lnce
Steve, I received a phone call from the applicant's wife, Betty Scherer, on Friday, April
6, 2002, requesting a continuance on the April 8, planning commission meeting, to the
next meeting scheduled for April 22.
16200 Eagle Creek Ave, S,E" Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
April 3, 2002
Donald B. Scherer
3894 Green Heights Trail
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Agenda and Agenda Report
Attached is a Planning Commission Agenda and Staff Report for the April 8, 2002
Planning Commission meeting. You or your representatives are expected to attend the
meeting. You will be given the opportunity to speak regarding your proposal and the
staff report. The meeting begins at 6:30 p.m, and is held at the Fire Station located at
16776 Fish Point Road (east of HWY 13 on the south side of CR 21), If you cannot
attend the meeting, please call me so your Item can be deferred to the next Planning
Commission meeting. If you have any questions, please contact me at 447-9810,
Sincerely,
C~CCU"4orv
Connie Carlson
Planning Dept. Secretary
Enclosure
l:\deptwork\blankfrm\meetltr.doc
16200 Eugle Creek Ave, S,E" Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY' EMPLOYER
March 20, 2002
Donald Scherer
3894 Green Heights Trail
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Agenda and Agenda Report
Attached is a Planning Commission Agenda and Staff Report for the March 25, 2002
Planning Commission meeting, You or your representatives are expected to attend the
meeting, You will be given the opportunity to speak regarding your proposal and the
staff report, The meeting begins at 6:30 p,m, and is held at the Fire Station located at
16776 Fish Point Road (east of HWY 13 on the south side of CR 21), If you cannot
attend the meeting, please call me so your item can be deferred to the next Planning
Commission meeting. If you have any questions, please contact me at 447-9810.
Sincerely,
C~CVLf"4ow
Connie Carlson
Planning Dept. Secretary
Enclosure
I:\deptwork\blankfrm\meetltr,doc
16200 Eagle Creek Ave, S,E" Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNIlY EMPLOYER
I have reviewed the attached proposed request [VAR 02-021] for the following:
Water City Code Grading
Sewer Storm Water Signs
Zoning Flood Plain " County Road Access
Parks Natural Features Legal Issues
Assessment Electric Roads/Access
Policy
Septic System Gas Building Code
Erosion Control Other
Recommendation:
Approval
Denial
Conditional Approval
Comments:
-7 /A)ty... L u.:o '+kR. ,./>. 4 f)" -" ,01 ~..J1:Y~ I
-7~O1.l d mJJ.. N,d -to, pt'(')/.tid.J... J:{., JA\;,:/:::I1 .bc,,,i~.t~
O"n ~ rt,nJ,
Signed:
911/ ~
Date:
3/ jg/o>,
. I
Please return any comments by March 15, 2002, to
Steve Horsman, Planning Dept.
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Phone: (612) 447-9854
Fax: (612) 447-4245
1:I02filesI02variancesI02-021Ireferral,doc
Page 2
4~
#
/,\, ~\
\~~ \
~"f; ,.-
\ o~.p
\ i'l. u'
\ -0 d)
\<l>",.~: '"
\\~\
1<-
~
~
U\
",f>-'f.'v
l' 0 ~
10\
'/.0
\\1
'0
",00
~V'
\
~""c,~
c,""
)' I
l-' '"
1.---1
'1--
~
o
-0,
u'
t.l~
i:.
,
,
,
,-'
(..,
{ 0\ \
<J:f.~~,GY
",'-Il~~'"
G~f:)'''' ,/
1>0 ;.;;-.. ./
./:/ .'
vc,~
...0
,
v
,./
.,.' \ .' .. \<j....~. // /
c,~ oo<~~~,G"':': '\ /<"f,f/ ,.' ';;';,0' ~-:<l"fS ,",' ./;:>//
c,~~~~oo'''' ." 0 /"'/."~ ~6 \6'" ///
,c,~ / ~r. /~€. .~:-/
/.........---- ~,,~~ . /..>//
'" ~"€. ~ ~//
~y/
,
~2Sl.46
.J
SEC.
3
T. //4 R. 22
~'--...<:: ~
I, ~IJZ4UI' u~
~\ZO\lt; ~ \ \'
M\~" ..,.,,,
~ &'~~~~r'
,W.o 'I)
,\/'"/ J.... ~
~--=-
~\~~~ '
:~;.z\\ .~\... , . 10
~ . \.
-: ,f:) .,."'.
"'l!Y; . ... 12 r-- c, .
.;'ii
:-
i~~ I .1
Tit...;,
7/
?:.:..J:-
, "- ,
'CD "-
,"" to (
0 .
,
,~ .
u 'Ii .
.
. .
-
"""
/(5. "
$ ~ II to
2 .
. ~ L f
,E-'C~ .
---r ~,.,' u ~
0,
. . ...J...... ·
\ ~"'
. "
OlIfUlr 1.l"\fuc
L.AKE
T~.llCT ..
o'
.",\......
..,:--
~ TII..UI
,
.."
. 0
. ,
\ .
I ..
11 lIS . ~<) .
3
.
0 .;1, ..
-;;'
..
"
"
~ , ..
~ WIL ----
2ND 0
.
. ..
8 ,
0
. ..
. .
~ .
g,.: "
t .
.IA5S.000
"''''
,
~ -
~ w
,~~~
1"~2 0
...~. .--"
( ---:-i
;, 4 II:
I
OIlIV!
'''''I
~Mt....
=--
~
~~~.-
~~~~~~-~
~~ ,\ ~'"
S~~o'- ''P.: 0 _
,....,.--\~:>:'t\ ~ . . .,' i:'
I;' , . ' . ""'.\ 'd:-' '-"
(",\"-! .< " ~>...."'" ,
1,1' ~frJ ~ 'tt."'. ,
:: 11)" ,," ~ ~ ,:J~ X~~ \\\
II ... 11 ~ '.10
.... .. " p--::::" &D""" \" "
V It U II \ 11'11 " 14 ;-\ ,\
r-.. \\ 'c
,..- ..,,~
--::- n M If 1'__
V ..--c-~
~I~ V'
,
..,
r+-
1--,-
,
,
,
"
,
-'-
. ,,1f'1-
11"111
"
..
..
..
..i~
Sbl,\
14" II
o .
0' .
. 0
L.-'
........1,;.
-""
-\
"
,,-
---
---
-
-
o
-
.
-
'2
C--
.
f--
, .
-
. ' ~/. ~
"J:c
...Il.u.... ..'.....""N$
",.4'
4 .
, ~~
0 :5
~...."".
. ' STIfl1:1 '
: ....
.
, V
........ "....... ~ .-
...... .......--~ '~_ l-
e/
);/
-
~
...
..'
...
..'
...
..
,>
.,
-
-
-,
..
-
IILUA" .L StHMOIliEJ..
co.rwn SUIN(l'CMt
~. ICIIf'T ~. _wou
OC1.
-
...
"'"
...
._-~-------r
5 3 - 114.=;
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
ORC PROJECT REVIEW CHECKLIST
PROJECT NAME: VAR 02-021: 23' variance for an existing
deck structure setback of 52' to the
OHWM.
APPLICANT: Donald & Betty Scherer
CONTACT PERSON: Steve Horsman
SITE INFORMATION
PID#: 25-102-002-0
LOCATION: 3894 Green Heights Trail
EXISTING ZONING: R1, SD
DISTRIBUTE TO: D APPLICATION FOR:
T Frank Boyies T Bud Osmundson Administrative Land Division
Sue Walsh T Sue McDermott Comprehensive Plan Amend.
T Ralph Teschner Conditional Use Permit
Home Occupation
T Bob Hutchins Rezoning
T Don Rye Site Plan
T Jane Kansier T Fire Chief Preliminary Plat
T Bill O'Rourke PUD
T DNR - Pat Lynch T Minnegasco Final Plat
County Hwy, Dept. T Walershed Dist. T Variance
MNDOT T Phone Co. Vacation
Scott/Rice
SMDC T Electric Co. Excel
Mediacom Cabie Met. Council
Date Received Date Distributed 3/8/02 Date Due 3/15/02
Complete Application Date Distributed to DRC Meeting
Date DRC
Publication Date Tentative PC Date Tentative CC
Date
60 Day Review Date Review Extension
I :I02filesI02variancesI02-021 Ireferral,doc
Page 1
03/11/2002 15:38
9522253758
INTEGRA TELECOM PL
PAGE 01/01
I have reviewed the attached proposed request [VAR 02-021] for the following;
Water City Code Gradina
Sewer Storm Water Sians
Zoning Flood Plain County Road Access
Parks Natural Features Legal Issues
Assessment Electric Roads/Access .
Policy
Seotic Svstem Gas Building Code
Erosion Control X Other "TE:U:_
Recommendation: L Approval
Denial
Conditional Approval
Comments:
1\10 CONC.E'-N~
~_.
/ /ategra
TELECOM
/'
Don Bar1age
O,S,P, Engineering 8. De~lgn
4690 Coloraoo srr.t S.E.
PrIoc Lake, MN 55372
MoI>lo: (~lZJ 919.5887
Fax: 19521226-37511
don.bJn.gllOfnb;lgralalllOOfTl.[;(lm
www.lnteQratlllecol.l1.COIT1
Direct Oi",: (!l62J 226-7064
'''"od ~~~~
Dete:
.3 - \ \-Dl...
Please return any comments by March 15. 2002, to
Steve Horsman, Planning Dept.
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Phone: (612) 447-9854
Fax: (612) 447-4245
1:\02fl1esI02verianc...\02-021Ir..ferral,doc
Page 2
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
DRC PROJECT REVIEW CHECKLIST
~vd- "'_O,Do-
::> CL---
PROJECT NAME: VAR 02-021: 23' variance for an existing
deck structure setback of 52' to the
OHWM.
APPLICANT: Donald & Betty Scherer
CONTACT PERSON: Steve Horsman
SITE INFORMATION
PID#: 25-102-002-0
LOCATION: 3894 Green Heights Trail
EXISTING ZONING: R1,SD
DISTRIBUTE TO: APPLICATION FOR:
... Frank Boyles ... Bud Osmundson Administrative Land Division
Sue Walsh ... Sue McDermott Comprehensive Plan Amend,
... Ralph Teschner Conditional Use Permit
Home Occupation
... Bob Hutchins Rezoning
... Don Rye Site Plan
... Jane Kansier ... Fire Chief Preliminary Plat
... Bill O'Rourke PUD
... DNR - Pat Lynch ... Minnegasco Final Plat
County Hwy, Dept. ... Watershed Dist. ... Variance
MNDOT ... Phone Co. Vacation
Scott/Rice
SMDC ... Electric Co, Excel
Mediacom Cable Met. Council
Date Received Date Distributed 3/8/02 Date Due 3/15/02
Complete Application Date Distributed to DRC Meeting
Date DRC
Publication Date Tentative PC Date Tentative CC
Date
60 Day Review Date Review Extension
1:I02filesI02variancesI02-021Ireferral,doc
Page 1
I have reviewed the attached proposed request [VAR 02-021] for the following:
Water City Code Grading
Sewer Storm Water Signs
Zonina Flood Plain County Road Access
Parks Natural Features Legal Issues
Assessment Electric Roads! Access
Policy
Septic System Gas Building Code
Erosion Control Other
Recommendation:
Approval
Denial
Conditional Approval
Comments:
Signed:
Date:
Please return any comments by March 15.2002, to
Steve Horsman, Planning Dept.
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Phone: (612) 447-9854
Fax: (612) 447-4245
1:\02filesI02variancesI02-021 Ireferral,doc
Page 2
-----.--..-.,----,.-----T---'--
February 28, 2002
Donald & Betty Scherer
3894 Green Heights Trail SW
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: Review for Variance Application Completeness
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Scherer:
The City of Prior Lake has determined all of the necessary submittals for the above
application have been received, This letter serves as your official notification that the
application is now complete. The City will now begin formal review of this request. At
this time, the variance application is scheduled for the March 25, 2002, Planning
Commission meeting.
The City review process can be substantially less than 120 days, and we intend to
progress in a timely manner that provides a complete and professional review,
Occasionally, however, due to meeting schedules, it is sometimes necessary to extend
the 60-day review period, This letter also serves as your official notice that the City is
extending the 60-day deadline for an additional 60 days from April 27, 2002 to June 27,
2002.
If you have questions relative to the review process or related issues, please contact
direct dial phone number at 952-447-9854.
Sincerely,
'-:~1-'''-- ~~~-?~
t---
Steve Horsman
Zoning Administrator
.
1:\02fi1es\02variances\02-021\complete.doc Page 1
16200 Edgle Creek Ave, S,E" Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
January 9, 2002
Page 1 of 2
Donald Scherer
3894 Green Heights Trail
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Dear Mr. Scherer:
I have reviewed the certificate of survey for your deck addition and determined
that the deck setback of 52-feet from the OHWM is in violation of the zoning
, ordinance for setback averaging, which permits a minimum setback of 54-feet.
City Ordinance Subsection 1104.308 (2) Setback Requirements For
Residential Structures.
The City Ordinance requires variance approval from the Planning Commission in
order to construct a non-compliant structure (deck). Please be aware the
Planning Commission may deny your variance due to the request not meeting all
nine of the hardship criteria as required by City Code.
I have enclosed a variance application with instructions for you to complete and
submit to the Planning Department, along with the $150.00 Fee, and a certified
list of property owners that live within 350-feet of your property boundaries. The
owners list, mailing labels, and radius map shall be obtained from an abstract
title company and shall include the proper documentation that certifies said list of
property owners is current to date.
As you are aware, the timetable set for you to comply with these requirements
ends 5 months from December 13, 2001 or on June 13, 2002. The public
hearing process for variance requests may take up to 4 months long, therefore,
the City shall require a completed application be submitted to the City Planning
Department on/or before January 31,2002.
.
SchrUrVar
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S,E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNrIY EMPLOYER
Page 2 of2
If you should have any questions please call me at 952-447-9854.
The City appreciates your cooperation on this matter.
Sincerely,
Steven Horsman
Zoning Administrator/lnspector
CC: Todd P. Zettler, Scott Joint Prosecution Assc.
.
Sct",-"v...
(!)
.
I
I
This picture clearly shows our house
and Captain Jack's building (faD
being closer to the lake than
Don and Betty Scherer's deck.
~ ~ ?L ~ ~/d-~/o).--
This picture was taken
from the edge of our
house to show the steep
hill to the lake and
Captain Jack's docks on
waters edge.
~uWuJ M "Pc: ~ t//~;rJoJ.-
Scott County
Page 1 of2
3880
\
\
\
\
"
\
\
"
\
\
\
"
...
'\
".
\\
\
\
"
\
\.
\
\
"
\
o
3874
lli~ JIN\il.'inj!, jl<- l'lCidv.."t II kJ,!.dU~ ICO''tIfdCl.I fflllp 1!(If
~lar\'C)' lIl'l/J 1S ll{ll t1'Il"1ldtd IU be ~.d ~ t111....
Jlll:l dr.t.....inl!. ill iI olmplli1lilm tlr I'OI:"UfJ", U\.!Urm/lllUI1o.
dIIt.lll<ltl1lc-d. in ~'.lIIri<l1l.1 ci~, V1M:lI1Ity, ;u'I(l wtc
ffiC('jl.iUId,)Il~l<flL1fl:.C*llfft'>.'liol!thcatN-4II'J1/fl'\.
lJ;~ 1(1 bt:t.m:J fur rd(,-ntl:c f"'l'I1'.!'tStlf'lly. .x~/l:l
'l1"mly ri 1ll'llClp01I:.;ibk loc all)' lllil.CCUtlll:-l>l:!> lLL'f\.1D
IMlUincd Ifdl~cn:pilndc!;;lre f,"",lId, Jlka-w contML
h.c ~(Il1 '~oont)'. $II"\IC,,"'"<<''' nmn:
~
A
/ScoU
w$v
s
"./com,esri,esrimap,Esrimap?ServiceName=overview&ClientV ersion=3 ,I &F orm=True&Encode3/15/02
9'.1, - - ~
~'UC:;-l~~ / K ""'- ~
~ ~ N'7,~..." '''r----. -......;:~
\~::::"...V:~:; I~?' J~Len .. "r----. _ ~
t: ~ t t ~ ~^ ~ '''i:~~~.; 0 :: B~ZV"yc' \ ~
(Jl VI r'-~'" "8, \'\\
~ II!: J::> 01 $ liii: ...:..(~ \' \
\ J::> ~ I = VI ' Ul (,.1 f\) '711.5'" ..,." )A. "\S~ ~ \ ,
O'l .s 0' cD 0 (Q N f\) 'G;~ "-0 ... I
" ... ~1..'" --_ ;;; "'~"'~, ~I:
'\. -J J ~ CD -a. ~Ji '=?' J
\. ...',~ " '" "-1<t.- -'!I~~] J
- CO. ~ 'x ~ _'" '" '" '" 'I..~. N ~ {to en
11.(,,"0 \.~~ ~ ~ ~.w ':":~C:~ ~-::i~:~: ,y~~ ~~ I
q '''51 . O. ~ '" '" '" '" '" '" '" "'.... r Ii- / ~
Ol N 3 0- N Ol .A c.n en ...... CD I..D.J 11 tD
..
... - \\ lr\- I-v, \~ ~ '. ~ !:li;l - '~~\
'E.t t\t~\~.. . ,\' iD ~ ~ N_ ~-t
1"'1I~~ ~~ e-'<' ~ ~
11~ \ ' \ '~.l'~ ~''''''~i OJ v~'f'" .,
\~ "01 'Ol \ ~ T7 ft' <" ..., ~
\1 ro- '" :;:~~,_ ~ '" ~: '- \
lI'!i. ..... R -l,.~"
~ \\ ~ ~ ~ S:'''' '" \~ '"
fir ~ ,.;,. ~ -- 'i~ \
\\ N \ r-~,," -
\ t~\ \'" cD~ N=_n , i:i;lB'!>!> \
"."'~ '" '" ____~,.....' :t
'~a.. '" .-<- ..:-- ~'\~ '" _~_ \
\.tA~& ('>' ~" .'
\ = ~lioS5~ ~ \~ 0 ".;.,-
,\..-- v~" '
""1." ... . i' ,., \\
'1"" .-:.. <> "'( -e. "'.. \
\\11 ;;; () ~~J.~.. ... '" ~~ '\
-1 - ''''~'''-1~o)-- '"
}l ~ '" ,'..'a> en Ii'
- ",0'" - .\ ~ :s> N
~ ~. T' ~ ~. cD ~. ~,,~~ ~ ~ 0
..., '" (/) ';l -\~ .. ~
'V;;;~ \.; '~~ ~j
~ ~~ s ~~~ ~YJ': 1
, o~ ~ ~---', g l\ ;0
cD . a;;:! \~ ~
.m ~ ~ ~t\ "'~..
"'~ v)- \/"8~ \
~ - :1)7'0
~ ~O'~ ~, - ' "'.
,v -;;'7'- ,\........... ./1
. ..: j "l:~C:~_!'__ -n~~-~~~. --Ti
I ,",
,
I,
~
,I
~
f\)
I\)
.
,
, ~ h. e:;,; '""
, " 'l9.~} :r
, : \, z.' ':. ~) -1 It
~ 0.. ..' .... ~ ~ (A't/!
:I · -t .~ t,r,.'" 1"1 Z" ~
~i;' \ ~s~ \ :,cti:Z'~
. I.~ ,'\'.,.. 0 ~ "
r...... " ' ... ...
';t.. .. I ~\, '" 1"1 0"4
a ' I 1'1. '" ~6"'C
..-"... ) :)0-
... I I It ~-.
P.OA'O = , I I ::!, ~
j------..-- c ..,\ .~~o
I _ .... I ...., ""
1,.."....,'1, ... ...~
~.'.-\r.... :~.. VI' "" "0
-1. 0 It c:
(;01 ..
~ 0'
""."
o ,.
..,
A
~
C2p
\:-,.
\~
IV
o
\ 'to.
.." '0
0., ~.
'q".,
.-,
, "
\ \
\
\
~\z I
~t'
~ r" /
-, ...
....
\~:
\ I
, ~
.' --"..,
- '.
, ....."
~, .
W'r~
'\11' ...
ct~~
r~
."r ~ ;
.. II -:._
\i/6
I '0 '-'
I " .
I
I
I
o
C
-i
,..
o
-l
-
to
~l.
..
','
'I':iJ
..~
);..
.J
t,
"1'-
.
.
.<:
'''/
,~
. ,.,..
.
-
CII
~
r-
'"
. .
-
l
.
...
o
o
.
Original
surveys and
drawings
L:lTEMPLA TEIFILEINFO,DOC
,', ':".---:-;::::-[5:" '-~'7":"', ',:,.\1'
,:r'" <' u"v :: , :',
, ...s ~ V:!J 1.:""
CITY OF PRlORLAKEI:)! 'IU'i'!
. ' . ". \ Oft 2 7 2m 1111,.
ImpervIous Surface Calculations;". l0i
(To be Submitted with Building Pennit Application) J U \j. I
For All Properties Located in the Shore land DiSttf<.;L (3D). '
The Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage Permitted in 30 Percent.
Property Address 2> e,c\ "--\
GRt>\?!.\~ \.l~~:_J~\'" /(K~\ \ S) \)~
LotArea"2.\{<..~'-\c..\rm""" i.'L.'qol\.OSq.Feet x 30% =.............. Lor CO'?
************************************************************************
,,,,
HOUSE
II
LENGTH
Ii
n
'Z..t..~l
WIDTH
SQ. FEET
x'S2....
x ':2) 1.,;'.
x 7....-1
=
=
"10G
l---(..)C)
ATIACHED GARAGE
"
=
lDI'L
'-:Jqr"1
TOTAL PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE...................... _\ \.\ l\o
DEtACHED BLDGS
" (Garag~
10 x \"2
x
\'2,{)
TOTAL DETACHED BUILDINGS....................... \? ()
DRIVEW A YIP AVED AREAS
~;~~:ay~~;~;d)r not)
~"-.._.'...,~-,..,,--,.... .-/ "_.-
(Sidewalk/Parking Areas)
= -l14t) ,
x
x
x
=
=
TOTAL P A YED AREAS....,.................................... ~
PATIOSIPORCHES/DECKS tone f\a.'''Iti. x
(Open Decks W' min. opening bct\veen X
boards. with a pervious surface betow,
are not considered to bt: impervious)
=
t'>:;:::, I
=
x
=
TOTAL DECKS........................................................
,?,;?:, \
OTHER
x
X
=
=
TOTAL OTHER.......................................................
TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
80VER i.J '.' ". ffi
Prepared Byl, p..,'-R. \(". ('~ Date \'2.'_" ~ - 0 \
Compony \lc, \\"fS"R,.',~ Cb'l~ 1\ . Phon' # '\ '1-'- 2'~ ,~
\ 'J
11 \ '1()
"Z.2...S 0
REA G
NOTICES
L:lTEMPLA TEIFILEINFO.DOC
NOTICE OF HEARING TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING:
VARIANCE TO PERMIT A STRUCTURE SETBACK LESS THAN 75
FEET TO THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE F AMIL Y DWELLING ON PROPERTY
LOCATED IN THE R-I DISTRICT (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) AND THE
SHORELAND DISTRICT (SD) IDENTIFIED AS 3894 GREEN HEIGHTS TRAIL SW,
PRIOR LAKE, MN.
You are hereby notified that the Prior Lake Planning Commission will hold a public
hearing at Prior Lake Fire Station #1, located at 16776 Fish Point Road SE (Southwest of
the intersection of County Road 21 and Fish Point Road), on: Monday, MARCH 25,
2002, at 6:30 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible.
APPLICANT: Donald & Betty Scherer
3894 Green Heights Trail SW
Prior Lake, MN 55372
SUBJECT SITE: 3894 Green Heights Trail SW, Prior Lake, MN, legally
described as Lot I, Green Heights First Addition, Scott County,
Minnesota. Together with that part of Government Lot I, Section
3, Township 114, Range 22, Scott County Minnesota, described as
follows:
Lot I, Green Heights First Addition, Scott County, Minnesota.
Together with that part of Government Lot 1, Section 3, Township
114, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows:
Starting at a point which is North 57 degrees 14 minutes East
distant 165,00 feet from the northeast corner of "Green Heights",
in said Government Lot I; and continuing thence North 57 degrees
14 minutes East 78.1 feet; thence South 27 degrees 40 minutes
East 182.4 feet; thence South 62 degrees 5 minutes West 79.3 feet;
thence North 27 degrees 15 minutes West 177.0 feet to the place of
beginning and all land lying north of the north line of the above
described tract to the shore of Prior Lake.
REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting A variance to allow an existing deck,
attached to the principal structure, with a setback less than the
minimum required 75 feet from the ordinary high water mark.
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 447-9810
L:I02FILES\02variancesI02-021IPUBLlCNOTE,DOC I
16200 Eagle Creek Ave, S,E" Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
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 Zoning Ordinance and variance hardship criteria,
Prepared this 5th day of March, 2002.
Steven Horsman
City of Prior Lake
To be published in the Prior Lake American on March 9. 2002.
L:I02FILESI02variancesI02-021 \PUBLlCNOTE,DOC 2
NOTICE OF HEARING TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING:
VARIANCE TO PERMIT A STRUCTURE SETBACK LESS THAN 75
FEET TO THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING ON PROPERTY
LOCATED IN THE R-l DISTRICT (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) AND THE
SHORELAND DISTRICT (SD) IDENTIFIED AS 3894 GREEN HEIGHTS TRAIL SW,
PRIOR LAKE, MN.
You are hereby notified that the Prior Lake Planning Commission will hold a public
hearing at Prior Lake Fire Station #1, located at 16776 Fish Point Road SE (Southwest of
the intersection of County Road 21 and Fish Point Road), on: Monday, MARCH 25,
2002, at 6:30 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible.
APPLICANT: Donald & Betty Scherer
3894 Green Heights Trail SW
Prior Lake, MN 55372
SUBJECT SITE: 3894 Green Heights Trail SW, Prior Lake, MN, legally
described as Lot I, Green Heights First Addition, Scott County,
Minnesota. Together with that part of Government Lot I, Section
3, Township 114, Range 22, Scott County Minnesota, described as
follows:
Lot I, Green Heights First Addition, Scott County, Minnesota.
Together with that part of Government Lot I, Section 3, Township
114, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows:
Starting at a point which is North 57 degrees 14 minutes East
distant 165.00 feet from the northeast corner of "Green Heights",
in said Government Lot I; and continuing thence North 57 degrees
14 minutes East 78.1 feet; thence South 27 degrees 40 minutes
East 182.4 feet; thence South 62 degrees 5 minutes West 79.3 feet;
thence North 27 degrees 15 minutes West 177.0 feet to the place of
beginning and all land lying north of the north line of the above
described tract to the shore of Prior Lake.
REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting A variance to 'allow an existing deck,
attached to the principal structure, with a setback less than the
minimum required 75 feet from the ordinary high water mark.
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 447-9810
L:\02FILESI02variancesI02-021IMaiINote.DOC I
16200 Eagle Creek Ave, S,E,. Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
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 Zoning Ordinance and variance hardship criteria.
Prepared this 5th day of March, 2002,
Steven Horsman
City of Prior Lake
To be mailed on/or before March 14. 2002.
L:I02FILES\02variancesI02-021IMailNote,DOC
2
\o~
~
",~'f.'v
10\
~O
\,1
'0
r:;,O'
'"
~\.o
//
/.-:
.--;::;/
~
~.//\ \
, ~~
\~; \
~ .
~~ :....
\0'" \P
i ~ u'
~ '~
\ ,,"""
~;: 'it
\,Gl
\\
'*'
Q
~
"'
"c,~
,p
\
:<-
~"'<o
<0'"
,")' I
(.., "
J j
"7-
~
o
-0,
u'
t.\
f:.
,
,
,
,-'
[,
. \'
~ 0" ;
~ <J:f.,,~\Gy.
'" ~~'"
G~o~'''' "'..----
t- ./-:
\)c,'<-
Y,o
,
\ <o",~.,.6~ , ~
V
U6.0
~
.,
, '
, -.
" /
...' \ . , " <J .' /
OO,~e' ~~",\c, '\ ' r/ . '~'.'o'~'j.,~"" /:/ ./
,< "," / . /...f / ~.. vot.," / /
G'?--'<- 00'''' 0",0 V ~e ~6 d.t!:.\Gl'" //.--;//
\,,} .,. /Z' pV -- ' -
/ ~:.::; >/ /
. .
\)Jt.ltE,. tl
~ j$//
//
Mailing
Information
and Lists
L:lTEMPLA TEIFILEINFO,DOc
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAIL
COUNTY OF SCOTT )
)ss
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
Coll\;(\,~e Ctt/'2/VII\11 of the City of Prior Lake, County of Scott, State of
Minnesota, being duly sworn, says on the ~day of ~t\ , f002, she served
the attached list of persons to have an interest in the ~ 0~
\~mc.Q.. '*-02 -CiZ~ ,by mailing to them a copy thereof,
enclosed in an envelope, postage prepaid, and be depositing same in the post office at
Prior Lake, Minnesota, the last known address of the parties.
Subscribed and sworn to be this
_ day of , 2000,
NOTARY PUBLIC
L:\DEPTWORK\BLANKFRM\MAILAFFD.DOC
SEC.
3
r: //4 R. 22
"
~"----'" ,- ~~
:t):~2'Zlnt4u u 11 ~
~It.----'" .1... \'
~~'~~'~r~/
(t..,' YIII
W'I_ ~/
~~
-,-
,
,
,
,
"
,
.....
,
I.:
....L
,
.L. . ~--
/
\..~KE
T.~T
., ,---.,.
4;) lIlACT.
,
WtL,u... ~.""'IlI"S
liS'..'
)-/~ ,.-
e"" \.
,-~J.
. 0 ~ I. {
.
"
-
~
~ 1 (I.M
,~~,
DftWE
....
~V~
-;;rV
-
-
-
.,
..'
..'
~
.,.
IIOV It..
OCT. .'
".. 'I'
.... ..
... ..
... ..
.
u
a
'Ii
.
aLlAII ... SCHMQll;EL
c:au1fTY IUII'tUOIt
..' ~ ~. ........
5 3 - 114.: ;
NEW ABSTRACTS
CONTINUATIONS
CLOSING SERVICE
REGISTERED PROPERTY ABSTRACTS
TITLE INSURANCE
RECORDING SERVICE
SCOTT COUNTY ABSTRACT AND TITLE, INC.
223 HOLMES STREET, P,O, BOX 300 SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379
DAVID E, MOON EN
Phone: (952) 445-6246
Fax: (952) 445-0229
January 28, 2002
Donald Scherer
3894 Green Heights Trail
Prior Lake, MN 55372
To Whom it May Concern:
According to the 2002 tax records in the Scott County Treasurer's Office, the following persons
listed on Exhibit "A" are the owners of the property which lies within 350 feet of the following
described property:
All that part of Government Lot one (1), Section three (3), Township one hundred fourteen
(114), Range twenty-two (22), Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows: Starting at a point
which is North fifty-seven degrees fourteen minutes (57 degrees 14 minutes) East distant one
hundred sixty-five (165) feet from the Northeast corner of "Green Heights" in said Government
Lot one (1) and continuing thence North fifty-seven degrees fourteen minutes (57 degrees 14
minutes) East seventy-eight and one tenth (78.1) feet; thence South twenty-seven degrees forty
minutes (27 degrees 40 minutes) East one hundred eighty two and four tenths (182.4) feet; thence
South sixty-two degrees five minutes (62 degrees 5 minutes) West seventy-nine and three tenths
(79.3) feet; thence North twenty-seven degrees fifteen minutes (27 degrees 15 minutes) West one
hundred seventy-seven (177.0) feet to the place of beginning, containing thirty-three hundredths
(0.33) of an acre, and all land lying North of the North line of the above described tract to the
shoreline of Prior Lake,
Lot One (1), except the Westerly 15 feet thereof; Green Heights First Addition, according to the
plat thereof on file and of record in the Office of the Register of Deeds in and for said county and
state, Scott County, Minnesota.
,.-""--'" A
i ~f/l/ .,
,- L ~
,
David E, Moonen
President
~ < ,f' A,C. .~.... {I;:~ ".." '~'::~'.."'''' -"0', " '" ",',' ..
2'~DTi C'~:I'~.r:"/ P_~~''''~,:;C:T
n.'~j rTL~, :~:G.
I.':
':':,'f
,
,~
,
MEMBER MINNESOTA LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION
AGENT FOR CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
RICHARD E & JULIE D WARNER
2780 SOUTH SHORE DR
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
SCOTT B SCRIVNER
3834 GREEN HEIGHTS TRL
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
EL V A AFAHRENKAMP
3844 GREEN HEIGHTS TR SW
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
ERIC J & AMY C FRANK
3856 GREEN HEIGHTS TRL
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
JOSEPH P & CAROLYN D MORGAN
3868 GREEN HEIGHTS TRL SW
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372-2944
EARL A & MARL YS L DITTMAN
16530 DUNKIRK
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
KENNETH W & LESA M AILES
3859 GREEN HEIGHTS TRL SW
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
CARTER DON NARVESON
3845 GREEN HEIGHTS TRL SE
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
VALENTINE J & RHONDA K ZWEBER
15721 MITCHELL cm SE
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372-1784
MICHAEL P & LA YON AMRUGALA
3874 GREEN HEIGHTS TRL
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
JOEL G BORCHARDT
3841 ROOSEVELT ST SW
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
JOHN G HAHN
3857 ROOSEVELT ST SW
PRIORLAKEMN 55372
STEVEN M & KRISTIN MIKULA
16121 CREEKWOOD RD
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
ROBERT W & MILDRED L MILES
16560 DUNKIRK AVE
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
'~;:"''''I;,,,",,....,..-.........,_.LoIlI''''''~Jlf''':-- .".\'1
EXHIBIT..1J..-PA~aF ?-PAGeS
JERRY R SLATTERY
16582 DUNKIRK AVE SW
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
CITY ADMINISTRATOR
16200 EAGLE CREEK AVE
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
BETTY JEAN SCHERER
3894 GREEN HEIGHTS TRL
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
DANIEL L & MELANIE D SHEEDY
3880 GREEN HEIGHTS TRL
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
JON R THOMPSON
3915 GREEN HEIGHTS TRL
PRIORLAKEMN 55372
RICHARD H & ELIZABETH BUSSE
3931 GREEN HEIGHTS TRL SW
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
RANDY M DEMENT
16536 SPRING AVE SW
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
JOHN R GRANLUND
3893 GREEN HEIGHTS TRL SW
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
ALLAN C & VICKY J GIGS TAD
16556 SPRING AVE SW
PRIORLAKEMN 55372
KENNETH C & JANICE M BRIXIUS
4032 82 ST W
BLOOMINGTON MN 55437
DANIEL E & CYNTIDA D O'KEEFE
3281 BALSAM ST SW
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
DOCKSIDE LLC
3950 GREEN HEIGHTS TRL
PO BOX 513
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
STEPHEN D & BONNIE L SCHERER
3904 GREEN HEIGHTS TRL
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
DIRK E VOLSTED
3879 GREEN HEIGHTS TRL SE
PRIOR LAKE MN 55372
. ~IB~~~~~~~?~~-"AG~~
Property OJvners Within 350'
Scherer Variance
--
to'"
,0'
.
,0'
<
,
.
.
c
500
,
o
500
1000 Feet
~
N
SEC.
3
T.//4R.22
~,
"-.,,, ""''0
" ,," """,~~
' . " ~..::-"' ..-
,.>-::-';, ~
f:''''
r-:-
,
,
"
,
~~ -rt ~
;,1-@.,\,~\~;~"" "~
'~"'.::::l.'~'~': ,,,"-2f1
~ ~ ~ ~..~~. "yrf~
% 54
~.." ~
------=-
(~
~ ,,'L
-==- \~"~~y
,(; ')- "'~'~~'., ' ...
k\"';c:t]Ij:" ..' 1>. ~E' '>';""",
II II 10 -;- If~' II )k ~~1-'''' ,.
" U ~::!t.." " '1 ~ ;'~,-";/' w'
.0 It J~.I I <-l..,1 r'IO 'A~ _ II
I' UlQI"n t-.!!- .. U.4UIl ~ ~\II~I'I' "
L' " II ...!!..'I U II It 1\,.\ \_
L' )0 )l It ... .0 11 I\U\k' ---l.-- 1n.1~~ 0
~ ss II ~""""'4' f-"ftj\lU\M\, \\ _H p1 ,ie.~ ' . I
~ )4 U -!!.. 4J I ~u It.-l-l- _____ ' S II 10 I r.l1N
~ ~ ....!!..... 1"""::-:-- V "":I~il J,...~(;.O
~~ I.. .1'1 n I' II ~ lJ~~""""'"
. .. t:t 00./
r--:7- '''I....'
, .., ..41'" ,....:.._
~~ 17."" . . ."
----=" ~ vA ~ '-.. ~ 1 -- .\
~l\ .~~~:-\ \!I.-\.'\.y"\ I -;~ ..~
I" \- \ I ." r \!~I.l-- r-1-
" .' 0 oS . ", \ ~ 0 .~0";\ . \~.~.
.0," ~i \ \ \. ot> - \ 10 I -\. II _ _ _ _
~ .' ~ . -
~ ""....;,po 3 0 ~\':H ~ "'t:0 ---
, . . '2 '--... . .2~U" '.....-
: ..; ~ . .<~' .' "'U'. "".,,,.s
uac,.. I .....0. ".1.\ U ~ t--- 11".4'
~~ ..,,, ...' a
'" ~ ......1 . . I. ,t--
"'.) T...UI I .
"". , , ~r- t--
o .~~~\. ."'0' ~
V.A , . ' . '.J-:'\ "'';"' ~"I, n",..1 ~
7 L' \. ".( . .... 4 ','
J 0 ~"'" . ~j' r--
c .~ ~ II' II II ; 1.;'<) I'. ~ .
r.; ~ . .. 10 N lt~
. ... ( ..- - - :..:" ~'/f!:.
~ ,: :3 ~~
iSTlillJUT' 1 "-~:~~.:.,'"
: ...-
. .
."-
-~
,
",
.J.....
,
.
~/
L.~I<.E
0 , . ,
. . w I
. ~ w
'd . . . .
. II! .
. -
. 7
. ''': , .
~ w . 2 .
~I- Q
.
0 .
, . . .
- ~'~ ". QR!Y( '10111
....:. / \
. . ,
. , .
8 .
~F=1
. .
3 . .
~.:;
J
"
, ./'
--~~
7'C/
.';/'
.....
-
-
U'
-
'",
.
'M
..'
'"
OCl. .'
PM 1'1
.... ..
IV' .,
.... ..
"
..u.... oL ,CKMOltlL
CDUWfl SUlIVll'CMI
,.-,~._1OT&
S 3 - 114.~ ;
!
!
! I
!I ~ I
~ I
1\
iE
CJ
W
"
IS II I ~ ~ \
riiz ~z
;: I !Hi zljj zljj
.. I
" >->- ~ffi ~ffi
00
b ~~ :l:w :l:w
ISIS CJz CJz
~ I jjj;:j w:J I
IS 2525 I :l:w :l:w
Zo Zo
Z "" w>- w>-
CJ ;:;: w. ~~
z zz ffil<
5 "ISIS i5~ CJ;:
i5~
~ O:ww , "q "q
b p~ wN wN
~ u..&lfJ ZID ZID
~ 1\'" '1\'" '
0:>->- I .;1l .;1l
" Wo.o.
~ zoo ~ie;~ie;
x I 15>->- ~ol-l-~1-
~ ,,;:;: g~~glb~
>-zz I
a! 5:5 ~~~ ~-~r~
~ 8~~ ~~
w ' ~"" 15155
"z I ..,.z ....z
0:" ","'''' ~~~ o~:Jo~::i
;:51 ;!;;~15 IS ISIS Q:Il)WQ:lI)W
:::it; "'ww iiliiliil ~~"gj~"
2iiliil ~~~~~~
~;;; ~1\1\ ~~~
z>- I 0:0: z~:;iz~;i
0::1: ~qLl !,U a:~::a: :;H=
~Q l;~~ "''''''' ""1D~"'lD1G
~w :":"[;jH
.,:1: zz ;;:~<h:;:~<b
~lli i'?;:j:J ggre~~ ~F~F
~ISIS
1M 0: l5~~~~ I')N(lJC')NCI)........
qCJ o:ww ~fllffiffi" 9(1)l-q(/)I---
>-~ !,U(!)(!) I- -61- ..~ 1-1-
,,>- zzz ",,,,l:l:~ ~r&w~:gw99
wo ~SS
"'~ oo!IolloCloGooll OOW:I:oow:tCl!l""
~
12~
WW
[In
~IS
:;1>-
;:a!
",,"
>-z
OCJ
,:!~
a~
IS~
~Sl
""
~[;j
>-..
"1l
80.
~g
II'- W ie
b~ >;
~~ -
iS~ ffi
i5~ ~ is
~;ia;iflll5l5~l5u..
rn~;~~~~. ?
::E!'.t:a:>>-ffi~~
8tsU)~ti!~~t;t;
[;j~g[;jB[;jB
II
z
o
"
a.
ii:
"
'"
w
"
~
(!i
w~
~~
(!i
w
~
I~
..
0:
a.
r--r--~~~~~mm~;;~ M~I
zz zz zzzzz II !
00 co 00000 I
~!i ~~ ~~~~~ .' I
1-1- 1-1- 1-1-1-1-1-
~~ ~~ (l)U)ClH/.lOO '!
U)(I)(I)(I)(J)(lJOO;;;;;;;;;;;oo ClJU)
1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1- 1-1-
~~~~~:I:~~~~~~~ ~~I
_____12_______ --
wwWwWUJWWWWWWW WW
XXXX:I:XXJ:X:I:X:I:X x:t
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ zz
wwwwwwwwwwwww ww
~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~q~
C,!)Cl(!)"C1(!)Cl(!)ClClC,!)(!)(!) (!)(!)
NN....NN.."..,.NNNNN.... ~~
oocnoocnS!!.OOOOOOl CD
~~~~~~~~iij~~~~ N~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~.
o...o...o...o...o...o...c..c..c..c..c..c..c.. c..c..
g:~~~~
II
z
"
51
>-
'i!
>-
"'w
~,,-
~~~
wC2N
~"i
>w
o:='
~w~
o:O:w
wW!!.l
e;Gi:l
0:'"
a.
00000000
1-1-1-1-
aaea
jjjjjjjjjjjj
:I::I::I::I:
Z Z Z zl
wwww
ww~w
ffiffiCJffil
~~..,.~
>-iiliiI~;;;
:3NN~N
~~~~~
c..c..c..c..c..
,,;:;:;:
<000000
ool=~1-1-
cnOO 1-00 cn
W
0: '"
" >-
" :I:
< Cll-I-
~ jjjirlirl
uiU
c..ooClo::o::
~uw
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ ~~...J...J ...J...J...J
>0::0::>0:: 0::0::>>0::0::tr::1-
<I-F<I- I-~<<I-I-Fcn
cnoo oocncnoo cncncn I
1-1- 1-1-1-1- 1-1-1-
:I::I: :I::I::I: :I::I::I:
ClCl 0ClClCl ClClClI-
~~~~~~~~ ~~~irl
~zzg;;zzzzClzCJzzzz(ij
~WW:ll::WWWW__www~
~~~~~~~~g:If~~~C5
ClClClClClClClClenooClClCltr::
$MC;;g~~:$f8~f8C')~~r--.
l!!lllllll!!lllUl!l~l!!~U~
;:;:
"''''
~
>0:
,,>-
'"
~ il
e;z
'"'w
zw
Ilffi
~I
r--.NNNNNNNINNNNNN~NN
C')~r--.~r--.~r--.r--.~~~~r--.r--.~~r--.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Z Z Z Z 2;:.Z z zlz Zl:z z z z Z Z Z
~~~~~~~~I~~I~~~~~~~
~ ,I
i ~ ~ n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I~ ~l~!~ * ~ ~I
8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~IH ~ ~ ~I
...Jtr::o::o::o::o::o::tr::o::o::o::o::tr::O:::I:O::O::
mc..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..Q.c..c..Q.Q.cnQ.c..
I ~I !' iEiE ';: '! u!iE liEl
~.~ ~II ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'I~ ::' ~I
0:: 1-1-1- ~~ ~~~~::3:~~~eI31 ~I
W :I:encn :I::I: :I::I::I:~cncn:I::I:'~cnww:I:
~ Cll- I- Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl W W Cl Cl Cll- ...JI> CJ
5w~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~I~~~I
>tr::Zww:: ::zZg;;ZZZZClzCJzzzzw<le;z
I-FW~~I- I-WW~Wwww__wWW~Cl~W
ffi~~C5C5cn oowwzwwWWo::"wwWC5O::Z~:
~cnCl"O::~ ~ffi~g~~~~~~~~~o::~gffil
if ~ m ~11j~ N N ~ ~ goo i 0 ill ,. M M M ~ ~ I!
~,.,.~~ Mmm~~~ ~~~,.,.m"Mw
wi:si:si:s... ~C')C')....~C') ~......i:si:s~i:si!....
! \ ~ ~ ~I~ ~I 'I I~!~! !I!! !@!~II
II~ ~ HI~ ~ ,,~!~ I I i'i ~
I I 013) ~irlirl~ l!ao~l\! Il, ~~I
~ Cl 01 0013 .0 ~ ~ ~ "" "" 0:: 0:: "II .. a.
;: [w F F J:" :1:" ~ !W " "I" z ZIZ >:: :I:0.1
! ~~h ~~~~~g~~~~HqCJ~:;:~
! ~ ffi Cl W W Q 0 iij W ~ ~ !:? ~I:;( 0 OIC Z ~ ~ ...1
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ffi S Sl ~ 3 3 3 q ffi O::.-~l
If cn en o;;;! ;;;! en cn ~ ~ ~ 0:: z I- I- Z Z ; Z m I/JmCJ
~~ffi25~ ~33~8~~~~~~~~~~~i5
I/J<mmm mmmClC~~~ClClClClCl:I:~~~
I "l<"8 OU8!:l!:l~il!i!&1nil~~~I~1
9 ~ I ~ ~I ~ i ~ i ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ I ~ ~I~il
I~ ~ ~ ~i ~ N ~ N N ~ N ~ ~ N ~ N N N N ~I~
I
9:NNN~
~~~~~
J:zzzz
1/J~~~2
. ~
~~~~
~:'i::.:'i~
13~H~
:I:O::O::O::...J
OOQ.Q.Q.m
---~_._--'---_..,
~I~ ~ ~
w
'"
~
0:
>-
~I
~l
w
0:
CJ
~
:;;
M
I[ i5i5
5151
>->-
~~
I/JI/JI/JI/J
1-1-1-1-
~u~
jjjjjjjjjjjj
J::I::I::I:
zzzz
wwww
wwww
Uffiffi
;!;~NN
l:il ~ ~
N NN
~~~~
:'i:'i:'i:'i
Q.Q.Q.Q.
w;:;:
"'''''''
~~~
I!'I!'I!'
"'''''''
>->->-
5135
jjjjjjjjj
:1::1::1:
ZZZ
www
www
~~ffi
..,.on on 00
~U
N
~
~
Z
"
NNNNN
~r--.r--.~~
~nn
~!~!~
I:! I:!lw!l:!lw!
:'i:'i 5:'i 51
~ ~ ~ ~ ~1i
0::0::0::0::0::
Q.Q.c..Q.c..
II
I:!!
:'i
~I
I
a!l
~'l
CJ,
~l
tHl
ffi.
~I
~
.)
~I
:'i
..
a.
~
~
:I:
"
;;
il
~l
i!
I;:;:
"''''
...J....J...J
~~~
"'''''''
1-1-1-::::
a06cnI/J
jjjjjjiiil;jl;j
J::I:J:2~
zzz<
wwWoo
wWW...J...J
ffi~ffi~~
nu~
,,! III
~ ""
>! :!i:!i!
~ ~ ~ ~ ~.
o Cl 0 01
~0::0::""0I3
W~~WW
~O::O:::...J...J
!:?()()~~
~ . -< <
...~~qq
~ 00 00 wlw
WW~~
(3 > > W WI
~~~~~
:il~&S!~
g~~NN
&1il~~
~~N~~
~, .. 0..
6 II) ...,..... ... ~ & N N l/j ~ 0
ZZZZZZZZZZZZ
ClCClClClClCClCClClC
515151515151515151515151
1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-
~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~
~UU~UUU
jjjjjjiiijjjjjjjjjjjjiiijjjiiijjjjjj
J:J:J::J::J::I::I:J:J::J::I:J:
ZZZZZZZZZZZZ
WWWWWWWwWWWW
W~~~~W~W~~~~
ffiCJCJCJCJffiCJffiCJCJCJCJ
NNNNNNNNNNNN
000000000000
~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Q.Q.Q.c..Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.
;:;:;:;:;:;:;:
OOI/JOOOOl/Jcnl/J
~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~
60651360
jjjjjjjjjjjjiiijjjjjj
J::I:J:J::I::J::I:
~ ffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
C2 wwwwwww
~ ffi~~~ffiffi~
Ol!loooHililiin;
~ C')C')~~C')C')C')
iE
;;
NNNNNNNNNNNN
r--.~~r--.r--.~r--.~~r--.~r--.
::!"'''''''&l::!'''::!M&l::!M
oniiSiiSiiSononiiSon:8onon:8
zzzzzzzzzzzz
~2~~2~~~22~2
~ ~Iw ~ ~ W ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~
:'i:'i5:'i:'i5:'i5:'i:'i:'i:'i
251515151515151515251515
iEC2iEiEC2iEC2iEiEC2D:C2
c..Q.c..Q.Q.c..Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.
...J...J~...J...J;:;::!...J...JJ...J
~~~~~I=~~~~
cnr/)l/JcnOOOOl/Jl/Jcnl/J
~~I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-
>>:J:J;:I:J::I::I:J;:I:J::t
ecnClClClClClClClClCl(.:;l
I/J~~~~~~~~~~~
3!~zzzzzzzzzz
oo_WWWWWWWWWW
...JO::~WWWWWWWWW
::ii);~UffiUUffiffi
;;;~;!;;!;;!;~:<ilil~~!!l
~~~~~~~~~~~~
01 !~l~!" o! ~
:!it I ~~l~~" ! ~
~; w m m "" :; W
>-! m "" 0I3..J:' m
o ~~:ClCl~~ ffi
"" LIlUl ZZol3013 J:
wl-"gWW...J...Jo::o:::<5
~Z1::1::,,:I::I:~~zzO:
!:!:lWl=l=zQ.Q.!:!:l!:!:lOO~
z~wwo~~zz......m
<(cmmCll/Jcn<<~zffi
~~ffiffiffiffiffi~~I/J~~
~>o::o::o:::a::o::ClClQ.Q.<
WClwwwwwww~2>
~ Z.J: J: J: J: J: W woo ~
t"f~ ~ ~ ~ &l ~ ~ ~ F >
~t2~~~~~~~:il~~
~~U~~~i<I~U~
~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~
b
l~ I
Q
o.CJ
~~
:::i~
~8
~~
M w I
:::iz
HI
:': Iii '" ~11S
cL.~OOln
O;:;cn...J...JN
b F -l,i,. u. W
~~~?9~
Xl-;!:~~b
g::d::ww'"
.....cnz'"'''''::
~~~
I
I
"'''''''
>->->-
U~
jjjjjjjjj
:1::1::1:
zzz
www
www
ffiffi~
;!;;!;;!;
iiIiiIiiI
NNN
~~~
:'i,:'i:'i
0.0.0.
w;:;:;:
00 00 cnl/J
...J...J...J...J
I!'I!'I!'I!'
I/Jl/Jcnl/J
1-1-1-1-
J::I::I::I:
ClClClCl
jjjiiijjjjjj
J:J:J::J:
zzzz
wwww
wwww
uu
un
NNNN
r--.r--.r--.~
::!M::!'"
on:8oniiS
zzzz
2222
I:! I:! I:! [I:!
:'i:'i:'i:'i
15251515
D:C2iEC2
Q.Q.Q.Q.
w
'"
...J...J...J...J
I!'I!'I!'I!'
cnl/Jcnl/J
1-1-1-1-
:I::I:J::J:
ClClClCl
jjjjjjiiijjj
J::I::I:J:
zzzz
WWWW
WWWW
UU
~~n
! ! I
!!:!:l1::!:!!:!:l
zzz
",zz
"'''''''
0:0:0:
wwww
~~~~
g;;o::o::o::
Cl.000
"~~~
~zzz
~5B5
>>>->
gUll
~~;!;~
illh~
NNNN
1
~
.L
2-
~
~
'~
APPLICA TIONS
&
APPLICA TION
MA TERIALS
L:ITEMPLA TEIFILEINFO,DOc
Planning Case File No.
Property Identification NO~ -:-:-='__'_~"
.. ir;:--- ";":'@.U V:!J ~., " >.'\
CIty ofPnor Lake iii" '"'" ~ ';'::
ZONING/LAND USE APPLICATIJM-:)~ fa'S" :i\:1
'I!, \'
:v
Type of Application
----~
Brief description of propose..l!JlJ'JJ.iecL-
(Please describe the propdsecr-anrefiament, project, or variance
request. Attach additional sheets if necessary).
o Amendment to Zoning Map
o Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Text
o Amendment to Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map
o Conditional Use Permit
[RJ Variance
o Planned Unit Development
o Senior Care Overlay District
o Home Occupation
o Amendment or Modification to approved CUP or PUD
o Other
Applicant:
Address:
~~ Telephone:
hl{
(work)
(fax)
Property Owners (if different than applicant):
Address:
Telephone: (home)
Type of Ownership: 0 Fee
(work)
o Contract for Deed
(fax)
o Purchase Agreement
Legal Description of Property (Attach additional sheets if necessary):
To the best of my knowledge tbe information provided in this application and other material submitted is correct. In
addition, 1 have read the relevant sections of the Prior Lake Ordinance and procedural guidelines, and understand that
application on not be rocesse ot" eemed complete by the Planning Director or assignee.
~
Date
Applicant s Signature
Fee Owner's Signature
Date
ADDITIONAL PROJECT INFORMATION
(Required for POO, CUP and SC Overlay District applications)
Will tbe developers request financial assistance from the City?
DYes
o No
If yes, please describe the arnountand type of assistance requested (attacb additional pages if necessary).
Will anyone other than the applicant be involved in the ownership, development & management of this project?
o Yes (If yes, please attach a list of the names and the role of all personS involved in the project.) ~
1:\handouts\2001 handouts\zoning\zoning app.doc
of recording to the city and received a building permit within one (I) year from the date of approval or
the variance becomes null and void.
APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS
. Application Fee: Check payable to the "City of Prior Lake". The filing fee is $150.00.
. Signed Application: A completed application form signed by the owner or owners of the property.
Include authorization from the property owner on the application form or by attached letter of
authorization if an agent signs the application,
. Application Checklist: The attached checklist identifies the necessary information, Failure to
provide any of the required information will result in an incomplete application. The Application
Checklist will expedite the review of your application. Attach the checklist with the application
materials.
1:\handouts\2DOl handouts\zoning\variance app.doc
Page 3
Memorandum
TO: All Applicants for Land Use Applications
FROM: Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator
DATE: July 18, 2001
RE: Required Information for Notification Requirements
Several Land Development Applications require published notice as well as mailed notice
to nearby property owners, It is the applicant's responsibility to submit a list oftbe
names and addresses of the property owners. This list must be prepared and certified by a
certified abstract company.
IN ORDER TO ENSURE PROPER NOTIFICATION, ALL PROPERTY
OWNERS LISTS MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A MAP IDENTIFYING THE
SUBJECT SITE AND THE REQUIRED NOTIFICATION RADIUS. THE MAP,
AS WELL AS THE LIST, MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A STATEMENT
CERTIFYING THE LIST HAS BEEN PREPARED BY A CERTIFIED
ABSTRACT COMPANY. THE STATEMENT MUST BE SIGNED BY THE
ABSTRACT COMPANY.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please contact me
at 447-4230,
I: \handouts\certlist.doc
16200 Eagle Creek Ave, S,E, Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
\
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
16200 EAGLE CREEK AVE SE
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
(952) 447-4230, FAX (952) 447-4245
RECEIPT #
DATE: 2-/2-.7/oL
Received of
f)0-~~/:;r~A '-(
for the purpose of
L!;Vvzvw"R
+-t98~
,
~~L~1
,
.,
dollars
the sum of
(02-----02-(
Invoice # ~,........ - ~ ~~
$ 160 r5f!2
~
Receipt Clerk for the City of Prior Lake