HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-26-98REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
MONDAY, OCTOBER26, 1998
6:30 p.m.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Call Meeting to Order:
Roll Call:
Approval of Minutes:
Public Hearings:
Old Business:
New Business:
A. Case File #98-143 Thomas Mansk is requesting a front yard setback of 22.9 feet
rather than the required setback of 25 feet; and an Ordinary High Water setback of 41
feet instead of the required 50 foot Ordinary High Water setback.
7. Announcements and Correspondence:
A. Proposals for Planning Commission Bylaw changes.
B. Joint meeting with City Council.
8. Adjournment:
16200 ~t~ ~ve~i ~nor [a~e, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
· OCTOBER 12, 1998
1. Call to Order:
The October 12, 1998, Planning Commission meeting was called
Vonhof at 6:30 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Cfie
and Vonhof, Planning Director Don Rye, Planning
Jenni Tovar and Recording Secretary Connie Carlson.
Planner
2. Roll Call:
Vonhof Present
Kuykendall
Criego Pres
Cramer Absent
Stamson Absent
3. Aoproval of Mlnut s.
Correct Cne o at the bottom of age 2 ':
The Minutes from the S~
as corrected.
Commission meeting were approved
A. Cases
permit a
4.5 pi
37 Pat Hayes is requesting a 10 foot variance to
required setback of 25 feet; and a
~ervious surface coverage of 34.5 percent
,ervious surface coverage of 30 percent; #98-137
}ortion of drainage and utility easements adjacent to Lots
Maple Park Shore Acres.
12, 1998 on file in the
office of the
The Planning D~partment received a variance application from Pat Hayes who is
proposing to construct a single family dwelling with attached garage and deck. The
proposed structure will be located 15 feet from the rear lot line, instead of the required
setback of 25 feet and the proposed impervious surface will be 34.5% rather than the
maximum permitted of 30%. The structure is also located 5 feet over an exisfmg 10 foot
wide easement, for which a vacation of the easement is being requested.
l:\98files\98plcomm\pcmin~m 101298.doc 1
Staff concluded the variance and vacation requests do not meet all four hardship criteria.
The house could be redesigned to meet setbacks and located out of the easement.
Criego questioned the building envelop and the impervious surface. Tovar responded
with the percentages.
Comments from the public:
Patrick Hayes, 7361 West Highway 13, Savage, explained the'
intent to follow the tree preservation ordinance
impervious surface is within the setback requirements.
help reduce the impervious surface.
Criego questioned how the drainage would take effect.
the east. Tovar explained the engineering dep
drainage easement. It is only five feet.
the prol;
with the
can. The
e home to
Joe Tupy,
concerned with what will happen.
same.
Tupy said his other concern was for
accommodate the lot.
Tovar explained the
Comments from the (
Kuykendall:
· Complemented the a
,, Agreed
s within the setbacks.
attractive home.
)s that were not initiated by the applicant.
S.
It is not wise within the short term. Would
· Does not
important. The DNR states the
25%. A home can be built within 30%.
Vonhof:
· Agreed with Commissioners.
· The home is beautiful, but the hardship criteria is not met.
MOTION BY KUYKENDALL, SECOND BY CRIEGO, APPROVING RESOLUTION
98-3 IPC DENYING A I0 FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT A 15 FOOT REAR YARD
SETBACK INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 25 FOOT SETBACK AND A 4.5%
l:\98filcs\98plcoram\pcminh'nn 101298.doe
VARIANCE TO PERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE OF 34.5 PERCENT
RATHER THAN THE lvLAXIMUM PERMITTED OF 30 PERCENT
Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION BY KUYKENDALL, SECOND BY CRIEGO, APPROVING RESOLUTION
98-032PC RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THE VACATION I
UTILITY EASEMENTS LOCATED ON LOTS 43 AND 44,
PARK SHORE ACRES.
Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
Vonhof explained the appeal process.
5. Old Business:
A. Case #98-019 Consider an official map for a
corner of Highway 13,
Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier
on file in the office of the City Planner.
The purpose of the proposed '
on the southwest side
street. In the past year
which would
and provide
south. The
October 12, 1998
properties
traffic from Highway 13 to a local
proposed alignments
Franklin Trail to Toronto Avenue,
13 and the properties to the
Commission was presented.
Map as proposed or with changes specified
ap provides for the alignment of the future
j acent property owners to plan development
stated her concern with the mute taking her
parking lot.. ~ rents the building and has owned it since it was built about 30 years.
Her fear is that there will not be enough parking if the proposed road goes through. Borka
is opposed to it because losing the parking or building will affect her income. Mrs. Borka
asked the Commissioners to consider her request.
Larry Borka, son of Lorraine Borka, explained how the family business started 30 years
ago and renting the building is his mother's only source of income. If the proposal goes
through the building will be worthless. He asked if the road could be moved. Mr. Borka
asked the Commissioners to think about reconsidering.
1:\98files\98plcomm\pcmin~m 101298.{toc 3
Dean Williamson, representing Health Systems Minnesota, (Park Nicollet Clinic) said
they met with staffand understands the proposal. Mr. Williamson pointed out their
concerns stated in the submitted letter.
Criego questioned Williamson's concern for finances. Williamson said it was one of the
concerns. He also said they were aware of the proposed ring road when th~,s~arted
construction. There are constraints with the lot. .::~?}ii::~i!ili~ii?;~iiiiii~i?:ii::
Lorraine Borka questioned the cost and assessments to her.
proposal is for the Official Map and not for construction.
assessments would be decided later.
decisions have not been made. The Capital Improvement
in the program at this time.
years out
osts and
not
Larry Borka questioned the use.
feasible alignment of the property. Borka
precedence over a business that has been
years.
Criego explained a
should not be any financial loss. There is
City is concerned with. There are
to take Borkah Mr. BC
in and the
There
property the
does not want
and concems.
Dean
Bo~a's.
the proposal until
led. clinic and
Rye said the '
have a
Borka
Planning
been round a long time. The City fully intended to
Rye stated he tmderstands Mr.
He
anything in the newspaper stating there was going to be a
didn't his mother have notice to vote on this
with the zone use and did not come before the
The ring road has been in the proposal for 10 to 12 years.
Comments from the Commissioners:
Criego:
· The amount of area proposed is how much of the total (ofBorka's property)? One of
the criteria was to reduce the impact on the neighbors. The Commissioners talked
about this issue at length. Engineering has looked at this 3 or 4 times. This is their
1:\98files\98plcomm\pcmin~nn 101298.doc
best judgment. The impact is less than earlier proposed. This is only for pla~'lng
purposes. It may never be developed.
· We as a community must layout and plan so future developers can look ahead. This
proposal may enhance your property.
· I have had property taken away from me, but there are legal ramifications for the City
and there is a lot of direction for that.
· It is only for map purposes. This is very preliminary.
· I have lived in many communities, Prior Lake is not restrictive
here.
Kuykendall:
· Empathetic to Borkas and explained he
other cities.
· Financially, it is reasonable to conclude
· This is a'
This is a very fast developing community.
development. Look at County Road 42.
· Concern for the parking requirements.
· Kansier explained the im~
· Rye said simply designating
· Kuykendall explained to Borkas the'
· Asked staff for the
that and create
would also
road to
area.
s in
· Highway
' of the City,
properties?
business.
defined later.
chaotic access roads
purpose was to alleviate
It
the ring
provide better access for the general
field and take a look at it.
is a need for
as the Borkas.
There may be a positive to the property owners.
Criego:
· In general,
property.
see ring road but would also like to see impact to the Borka
Kuykendall agreed. Recommend tabling.
MOTION BY KUYKENDALL, SECOND BY VONHOF, TO TABLE THE HEARING
AND HAVE THE PROPERTY STAKED BY STAFF.
Kansier explained the engineering department would have to do the work and right now
they would be tied up for about a month.
1:\98files\98plcomm\pcminXnml 01298.doe 5
Vote taken signified ayes by Vonhof and Kuykendall, nay be Criego. MOTION
CARRIED.
6. New Business:
Rye gave feedback on City Council's public hearing on the proposed Zoning Ordinance.
Council continued the hearing to November 2, 1998.
Rye also gave an update on the downtown development study. ~ is to
identify actual projects.
7. Announcements and Correspondence:
8. Adjournment:
The meeting adjourned at 8:01 p.m.
Don Rye
Director of Planning
1:\98filcs\98plcorran\pcmlnh'~m 101298.doc
PLANNING REPORT
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
SITE:
PRESENTER:
REVIEWED BY:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
6A
CONSIDER FRONT YARD SETBACK AND OHW
SETBACK VARIANCES FOR THOMAS MANSK, Case
File #98-143
14840 OAKLAND BEACH
JENNI TOVAR, PLANNER
JANE KANSlER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
YES X NO
OCTOBER 26, 1998
INTRODUCTION:
Thomas Mansk is proposing to construct a 32 foot by 26 foot residential addition.
Part of the existing house will be converted back into a garage, as originally built,
and the proposed addition will accommodate additional living area. The lot area
above the 904 OHW of Prior Lake is 10,000 square feet. There is an existing
house on the lot located 0.7 feet from the property line. The applicant is
requesting the following variances:
A 2.1 foot variance to permit a front yard setback of 22.9 feet rather than
the required setback of 25 feet; and
A 9 foot variance to permit an OHW setback of 41 feet instead of the
required 50 foot OHW setback.
DISCUSSION:
RLS #97 was approved by the City Council in December of 1981. The property
is a riparian lot located within the R-1 (Suburban Residential) and the SD
(Shoreland Overlay) district. The lot contains 10,000 square feet above the 904
elevation. It is 100 feet wide and approximately 100 feet deep. There is not a
bluff on the property and the existing structure is located above the regulatory
flood protection elevation. The applicant does not own either of the adjacent
parcels. As a part of this proposal, the applicant will be removing the existing 10
foot by 8 foot room located 0.7 feet from the westerly lot line.
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. $.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
The legal building envelope is approximately 16 feet wide by 65 feet long. The
existing structure is located out of the legal building envelope. In the vacant area
on the lot, the building envelope is 12 feet deep at the narrowest point. The
existing structure is 20 feet deep and 42 feet wide. The garage was converted to
living space by a previous owner, so there is no garage on this site. It is
unknown when the house was originally built, but a permit was issued in 1984 for
alterations. The off-street parking consists of a gravel driveway and parking
area. impervious surface will be under 30% with the proposed addition and
driveway.
In 1996, the applicant received a variance to allow a OHW setback of 40 feet to
allow the construction of a 7 by 14 foot addition and 22 by 32 foot detached
garage. Attached is Resolution 96-24PC detailing the approval. Upon receiving
this variance, the Planning Commission had suggested a redesign of the site.
The applicant took this under advisement, and never built the garage or addition
as originally proposed. The plan has been revised as presented in this variance
application.
VARIANCE HARDSHIPSTANDARDS
1. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would result in undue hardship
with respect to the property.
This criteria goes to whether reasonable use can be made of the property if
the Ordinance is literelly enfomed, There is a hardship with respect to the
property because the legal building envelope cannot reasonably
accommodate a garege. It is reasonable for a property owner to have a
garege. The proposed 32 foot by 26 foot addition is reasonable and literal
enforcement of the ordinance would not allow such an addition,
2. Such unnecessary hardship results because of circumstances unique
to the property.
The unique circumstance is the lot depth and the fact the lot is riparian. The
lot is approximately 100 feet deep. Considering the front yard setback is 25
feet and the OHW setback is 50 feet, this leaves a building width of 25 feet.
However, because the OHW 904 el. meanders to cut into the lot, the actual
buildable width is 12 feet at the narrowest width and 23 feet at the deepest.
There is hardship with respect to the property.
3. The hardship is caused by provisions of the Ordinance and is not the
result of actions of persons presently having an interest in the property.
The lot is considered to be substandard. The lot area is 10,000 sq. feet, the
required lot area for a riparian lot is 15,000 square feet. There is no existing
L:\98FILES~98VAR\98-143\98-143PC.DOC
Page 2
garage on the property and the lot area or depth cannot be modified to meet
the ordinance provisions. The proposed 32 foot by 26 foot addition is
reasonable and the hardship is not the result of the property owner.
4. The variance observes the spirit and intent of this Ordinance, produces
substantial justice and is not contrary to the public interest.
Considering the existing structure is setback 36 feet from the OHW and 22.9
feet from the front property fine, the proposed OHW setback of 41 feet and
front yard setback of 22.9 feet can preserve the spirit and intent of the
ordinance as the encroachments are less than what is existing. The granting
of the variance is not contrary to the public interest as a garage will be
created, providing for storage and screened off-street parking.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff has concluded the variance requests for OHW setback and front yard
setback are substantiated with hardships pertaining to the lot that the applicant
has no control over.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the variances requested by the applicant, or approve any variances
the Planning Commission deems appropriate in the circumstances.
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 RECIUIRED:
Adoption of the attached Resolution ~J8-33PC approving the variances as
requested.
L:\98FILES\98VAR\98-143\98-143PC.DOC
Page 3
RESOLUTION 98-33PC
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A 2.1 FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT A 22.9
FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 25 FOOT
FRONT YARD SETBACK AND A 9 FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT A 41 FOOT
SETBACK FROM THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK (OHW)
RATHER THAN THE REQUIRED 50 FOOT SETBACK
FROM THE OHW OF PRIOR LAKE
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota;
FINDINGS
1. Thomas Mansk has applied for variances fi:om the Zoning Ordinance in order to
permit the construction of a residential addition to an existing structure on property
located in the R-1 (Urban Residential) District and SD (Shoreland Overlay) District at
the following location, to wit;
14840 Oakland Beach Avenue, legally described as Tract A, Registered Land
Survey No. 97, Scott County, Minnesota.
2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variances as contained in
Case #98-143 and held hearings thereon on October 26, 1998.
The Board of Adjustment has considered the effect of the proposed variances 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 variances on the
Comprehensive Plan.
Because of conditions on the subject property and on the surrounding property, it is
possible to use the subject property in such a way that the proposed variances will not
result in the impairment of an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties,
unreasonably 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.
The existing house is located 22.9 feet fi:om the fi:ont property line and 36 feet fi:om
the OHW of Prior Lake. This proposed addition will not encroach any closer to the
property lines than what is existing.
l:\95files\98var\98-143~re9833pc.doc 1
16200 Ea§le Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 4474245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
In 1996, the applicant was granted a variance to the OHW setback for residential
addition and detached garage. Upon approval of the variance, the Planning
Commission suggested a re-design of the site. The applicant took the advice of the
Planning Commission and has now re-designed the site.
The granting of the variances are necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property fight of the applicant. The variances will not serve merely as a
convenience to the applicant, and are necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship.
The factors listed above do not allow for an alternative reasonable location for the
closet addition to be permitted without the variances.
8. The contents of Planning Case 98-143 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 approves the
following variances:
1. A 2.1 foot variance to permit a 22.9 foot front yard setback instead of the required
25 foot front yard setback for proposed residential addition; and
2. A 9 foot variance to permit a 41 foot setback from the OHW of Prior Lake instead
of the required 50 foot setback;
subject to the following condition:
1. The improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the survey
submitted by the applicant, and attached hereto as Exhibit A.
Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on October 26, 1998.
ATTEST:
Anthony Stamson, Chair
Donald R. Rye, Planning Director
l:X98files\98var\98q 43Xre9833pc.doe 2
lYE.
SUITE 120-C-, 16670 FRANKLIN TRAIL'~jl'~
Valley Surveying Co.,
P.A HIBIT A
FRANKLIN TRAIL OFFICE CONDOMINIUM 3
PRIOR LAKE ~ MINNESOTA '553~
TELEPHONE ~ 61~ ~ 447 - 2570
Ezl~HncJ
etered Land Survey No. 97, Scott County, Minnesota. Also showing all
;ements and encroachments onto and off from said property if any.
925.17 top nut of hyd. near the NW corner of property. __ _..
:7'- -
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE ...:.,
Impervious Surface Calculations
(To be Submitted with Building Permit Application) OCT 3
-' For All Properties Located in the Shoreland District (SD)._ .
The Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage Permitted in 30_P_er_c_em ....
Property Address [~0 (~) ~-\,~,,~ n ~-e ~c~
~ ~.~"-oq- LENGTH WIDTH SQ. FEET
HOUSE
~o x-l = 'lO
ATTACHED GARAGE
TOTAL PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE ......................
DETACHED BLDGS x
(Garage/Shed) x
DRIVEWAY/PAVED AREAS
(Driveway-paved or not)
(SldewalkIParking Areas)
TOTAL DETACHED BUILDINGS .......................
X
TOTAL PAVED AREAS .........................................
PATIOS/PORCHES/DECKS
(Open Decks 'A" min. opening between
boards, with a pervious surface below,
are not considered to be impervious)
TOTAL DECKS ........................................................
OTHER
TOTAL OTHER....i ..................................................
TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
Date
Phone
TELEPHONE (612) 447- 257'0
LEGAL BUILDING ENVELOPE
Por~h
DESCRIPTION:
tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 97, Scott County, Minnesota. Also showing all
~isible improvements and encroachments onto and off from said property if any.
~enchmark El. 925.17 top nut of hyd. near the NW corner of property.
)16.B denotes existing grade elevations.
OT AREA ABOVE EL. 904.0 = I0,~000 SO, FT.
FOR'
C/O
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Volley Surveying Co., PA.
SUITE 120-C , 16670 FRANKLIN TRAIL
FRANKLIN TRAIL OFFICE CONDOMINIUM
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
TELEPHONE {612) 447-2570
'~e/o/~
~, ~o~ ~L4/rt-
~CRIPTI~:
~c~ A~ Re~£s~e~ed ~and Su~vey No. 97, Scott Coun~¥~ Minnesota. Also showing all
~ible improvements and encroachments onto and off from said property if any.
LOCATION
SEC 50 T. 115 R 21
~- ~5o- oo7-~
,.q58- da~-/
5.iA .4
R. L.$'I.
76
id. ~A ~
S
,
RESOLUTION 9624PC
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT A LAKE SHORE
SETBACK OF 40 FEET INSTEAD OF ~ REQUIRED 75 FEET TO PERMIT
1) THE REMOVAL OF A PORTION OF THE EXISTING HOUSE WITH A.
LAKESHORE SETBACK OF APPROX~VIATELY 37 FEET AND TI-rE
CONSTRUCTION OF A 7' BY 14' ADDITION; AND 2) THE CONSTRUCTION
OF A 22' BY 32' DETACHED GARAGE
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota;
FINDINGS
1. Thomas Mansk has applied for a variance fi:om Section 9.3 '(A,2) of the Zoning
Ordinance in order to permit the construction of a 7' by 14' addition to a single
family dwelling amd the construction of a 22' by 32' detached garage on property
located in the R-1 (Suburban Residential) District and the SD (Shoreland Overlay)
District at the following location, to wit;
14840 Oakland Beach Avenue, legally described as Tract A, Registered Land
Survey No. 97, Scott County, Minnesota.
2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variance as contained in
Case #96-035 and held heatings thereon on May 13, 1996.
The Board of Adjustment has considered the effect of the proposed variances 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 variances on the
Comprehensive Plan.
Because of conditions on the subject property and on the surrounding property, it is
possible to use the subject property in such a way that the proposed variance will not
result in the impairment of an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties,
unreasonably 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.
I
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E.. Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNFF? ~MPLOYF-R
The special conditions applying to the subject property are unique to such property,
and do not generally apply to other land in the district in whicfi such land is located.
Among the conditions applying to the subject property which the Board of
Adjustment relied upon are its steep slopes.
The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant. The variance will not serve merely as a
convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship.
The application of the required setbacks leave no legal buildable area.,
The contents of Planning Case 96-035 are hereby entered into and made a part of the.
public record and the record of decision for this case. Pursuant to Section 5-6-8 of the
Ordinance Code these variances will be deemed to be abandoned, and thus will be
null and void one (1) 7ear from the date of approval if the holder of the variance has
failed to obtain any necessary, required or appropriate permits for the completion of
contemplated improvements.
CONCLUSION
Based upon the Findings set forth above, the Board of Adjustment' hereby grants and
approves the following variances;
A variance to permit a 7' by 14' addition to the south side of the existing house which
will be located 40' from the Ordinary High Water Mark instead of the required 75
feet. The construction of this addition involves the removal of a portion of the house
which is setback 37' from the lakeshore.
2. A variance to permit the construction of a 22' by 32' detached garage which will be
setback 40' from the Ordinary High Water Mark instead of the required 75 feet.
These variances are granted with the following terms and conditions;
1. The improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the site plan
submitted by the applicant, and attached hereto as Exhibit A.
Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on July 22, 1996.
Donald R. R~'e, P{anniflq~ Director
Kuyke-nd l, Chair
SHE[
L4k' -
/95'
~eced Land Survey No. 97, Scott County, Minnesota. Also showing all
~ments and encroachments onto and off front said property if any.
925.17 top nut of hyd. near the NW cornet of pcoperty.
:x[sting g~'ade elevations.
EL. 904.0 : ]0,000 S(~. FT1
FACE COVERAGE NET PROPOSED :24,6%
96-032 - MICHAEL LEITCHMAN - VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE PROPERTY
AT 3044 170TH STREET TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
Michael Leek presented information from the Planning Report dated April 22, 1996.
Staff recommended approval of the requested variances. Staff feels the hardship criteria
had been met.
Mike Peters, 4048 134th Cir, Savage, the builder for the applicant, explained the layout
of the home on the property.
Comments from Commissioners:
Vonhof:
· Hardship criteria has been met. In favor of request.
Wuellner:
· Agrees
Criego:
* Mr. Peters pointed out the common driveway for the neighbors on the back of the
property.
* In favor.
Loflus:
· No comments from the DNR.
Kuykendall:
· In favor
MOTION BY LOFTUS, SECOND BY CRIEGO, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 96-
13PC.
Vote taken signified ayes by Loftus, Criego, Wuellner, Vonhof and Kuykendall.
MOTION CARRIED.
96-035 - THOMAS MANSK - VARIANCE REQUEST FOR PROPERTY AT 14840
OAKLAND BEACH AVENUE TO CONSTRUCT AN ADDITION AND GARAGE.
Michael Leek presented the information from the Planning Report dated May 13, 1996.
There was no recommendation by Staff.
Hydrologist Pat Lynch from the DNR had no objection.
Comments from public:
Tom Mansk, 14840 Oakland Beach, explained the home layout. He has very little space
in his home and would like to have a two car garage for storage.
Comments from the Commissioners:
Wuellner:
A garage is a necessity.
· Reduce the amount of variance on the addition. Would rather see a street variance
over a lakeshore variance.
· Supports granting the variance to the garage.
Criego:
· Distance from the garage and the from yard is 25'.
· The only request is for the lakeshore setback.
· Standard garage depth is around 22 feet.
· Fine with variances.
Loftus:
· No additional comments.
Vonhof:
· Rather see the off street parking spaces.
· Criteria is met.
· Garage is a necessity.
Kuykendall:
· Applicant explained the reasons for not attaching the garage.
· Supports the variances.
MOTION BY LOFTUS, SECOND BY VONHOF, TO DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE
A RESOLUTION GRANTING THE REQUESTED VARIANCES.
Discussion: Hardship has been met.
Vote taken signified ayes by Loftus, Vonhof, Criego, Wuellner and Kuykendall.
MOTION CARRIED.
Commissioner Lofam left at 11:21 p.m.
OLD BUSINESS:
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
OCTOBER 21, 1998
DON RYE, PLANNING DIRECTOR
FRANK. BOYLES, CITY MANA
JOi
At their October 19 meeting, the City Council members agreed that it would be
appropriate to meet with members of the Planning Commission within the next three
months to discuss issues of mutual importance.
The Council suggested three items for discussion:
Criteria for Variance Issuance.
Discussion of Reasonable Use.
Bluff Ordinance Issues.
Would you ask the Planning Commission whether they would be interested in conducting
a dinner meeting with the City Council? If so, it would be helpful to know what
additional topics the Planning Commissioners would like to discuss with the City
Council. Finally, please provide alternate dates and times to conduct the meeting.
Alternatives might include the first Monday of December, or January 15om 5:00 p.m. -
7:00 p.m. which is the Council's normal workshop meeting dates. Or the Planning
Commission may wish to meet immediately prior to or during one of their regular
meetings.
Would you solicit Planning Commission feedback on these subjects and let me know
their response by October 27th so I can share this information with the Council?
16200 F:i~i~Ki~L~kl~I~M~rj~iVltO~C.I)I~JO~sota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
CC:
October 21, 1998
Planning Commission
Jenni Tovar, Planner
Bob Jader Variance Request
Don Rye, Planning Director
For Your Information, on October 21,998, the Planning Department received a
letter of withdrawal from Mr. Jader regarding his variance request. His request
had been continued by the Planning Commission on September 21, 1998 to a
date uncertain. Let me know if you have any questions.
L:~98FILES~98VAR~98-070~WITHMEMO.DOC