The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03-112 Balaam/Huemoeller Ord. Amend. J}03 - It c pu{QQlIV\ Resolution and ~inutes /D-r3-03 f~ {mtw-&:' //-3-()3 {!e,~ L:\TEMPLA TE\FILEINFO.DOC Planning Commission Minutes October 13, 2003 Stamson: . Explained the permitted with conditions requirement has to be spelled out in the ordinance. Lemke said he could agree to that. . Kansier explained the ordinance. MOTION BY ATWOOD, SECOND BY RINGSTAD, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AMENDING SECTION 1102.1500 OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY CODE. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. This item will go before the City Council on November 3,2003. D. #03-112 Susan Balaam is requesting an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to reduce the lot width of riparian lots on General Development lakes from 90 to 75 feet. Planner Cynthia Kirchoff presented the Planning Report dated October 13, 2003, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. Susan Balaam is requesting an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance text to reduce the minimum lot width for riparian lots on General Development lakes from 90 feet to 75 feet to accommodate a subdivision of property located at 6096 150th Street. The proposed amendment would establish the minimum lot width based upon the area of the lot. Essentially, the greater the lot area, the less the minimum required lot width, but in no case would it be less than 75 feet. In 1994, an Administrative Land Division and lot width Variances were approved to subdivide the subject property into two lots with five conditions. At that time, staff recommended approval of the subdivision because the property was considered three lots of record and approving administrative land division for two lots would reduce the density. Staff also pointed out that approval of prior subdivisions created precedent. It must be noted the City approved the subdivision against the recommendation of the DNR Area Hydrologist. Furthermore, the subdivision was approved contrary to Minnesota Rule 6120.3300, which prohibits the conveyance or development of nonconforming contiguous lots under single ownership. The applicant has prepared an amendment to the shoreland ordinance that would reduce the minimum lot width to allow a subdivision of property located at 6096 150th Street. The applicant owns Lots 10, 11, and 12, Eastwood. The three platted lots on their own do not comply with current ordinance requirements, and the total property width is 151.3 feet. To create a new riparian lot it must be demonstrated the lot is 90 feet in width at the front yard setback. In this case, the property cannot be subdivided into two lots without a variance or an ordinance amendment. The proposed amendment does not seek merely to accommodate existing lots of record but allow for the creation of new riparian lots on L:\03 Files\03 Planning Comm\03pcMinutes\MNlO1303.doc 11 Planning Commission Minutes October 13, 2003 General Development Lakes. Prior and Spring Lakes are the only such lakes within the City. The ordinance amendment would serve only the interest of the applicant, not the public. It is inconsistent with Prior Lake adopted official controls and plans, as well as State and Federal law. The applicant contends the amendment should be approved because it is consistent with the minimum shoreland standards set forth in Minnesota Rules. State law allows local governments to adopt shoreland regulations that are more restrictive. Prior Lake has chosen to use its discretion to adopt more restrictive minimum standards. The subject property was subdivided in 1994 into two lots, and the applicant combined the two lots into one in 2001. At present, the applicant wants to amend the ordinance to allow a subdivision of the property. There is an issue with a subdivision because a pool was constructed after the lots were combined. An accessory structure cannot exist on property without a principal structure. Staff cannot support the applicant's amendment because it does not promote the pubic interest and is discriminatory. Comments from the Public: Bryce Huemoeller represented Sue Balaam on the ordinance amendment. Huemoeller stated this is an interesting section of the Zoning Ordinance. People forget about the 90 foot width frontage requirement for riparian lots. Where did the 90 foot recommendation come from? After researching the matter Huemoeller did not come to any conclusion. This requirement is standing in the way for someone to have full use of their property. It is also a good time to look at this ordinance requirement and the impact it has on a certain number of lots in Prior Lake. Balaam's property is a combination of three 50 foot lots for maybe 57,000 square feet. Her proposal is to give a homeowner some flexibility to deal with their property and still comply with the philosophy ofthe Comprehensive Plan. It also provides reasonable assurance there will be adequate environmental protection. Northwood and Eastwood additions were platted at 50 foot widths and approximately 300 feet long. Huemoeller felt the requirement came into play sometime in the mid-80's but could not track it down. It is a requirement that does exceed the minimum DNR rules and therefore has the flexibility as a City to make this change. The DNR's regulations are 50 foot setbacks and 25% impervious surface and the City's trade offis 75 feet and a 30% impervious surface. The City still has 15,000 square foot lot requirements and they are not asking to change it nor intend to change it. Huemoeller felt their proposal is consistent with DNR rules and the old lake lots need more flexibility because of their design and terrain. All of the standard protections apply. Lakeshore lots are regulated more than other lots and that reason alone is a reason to treat lakeshore lots differently. Non-riparian lots do not have 75 foot setbacks and lots not in the Shoreland District do not have to meet the 30% impervious surface. Huemoeller L:\03 Files\03 Planning Comm\03pcMinutes\MNlO1303.doc 12 Planning Commission Minutes October 13, 2003 stated the proposal is reasonable, fair and still meets the DNR requirements. He felt it would be easy to administer but there might be other ways to look at it. In summary, Huemoeller and Balaam asked to recommend approval to the City Council or to send it back to staff for tweaking. He felt it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. There were no comments and the public hearing was closed. Comments from the Commissioners: Stamson: . This ordinance was not just carried over from the previous ordinance. This was debated very heavily. At one point we discussed 90 and 90 feet, but do not remember why. Commissioner Criego would know. . Concur with staff - it has not been a problem around the City. For the most part, the ordinance works. . There is no public need for the amendment. . Appreciates the applicant's desire to have something more flexible but this works for the community. . Stick with the existing ordinance. Atwood: . Agreed, this is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. . The State allows local government to be more restrictive. If Prior Lake errors, it errors on the side of what is in the best interest ofthe community. . This is not in the best interest of the community. . Support staff's findings. Ringstad: . Agreed with the Commissioner's reasoning. There does not appear to be a public need for the amendment, it is just for the benefit of the applicant. . Agreed with staff's recommendation. Lemke: . The concern seems to be an equitable situation. How is that different in equity in having a 15,000 square foot lot size versus 12,000 square foot for non-riparian lots? Kansier and Rye stated it is a State Rule. There is an environmental public interest in requiring the larger lot area adjacent to the lake. . Some inequity is built into the system by virtue of it being a riparian lot. . In doing a quick calculation, it would seem that in order to get the width at the front yard from 90 feet to 75 feet it would require a minimum lot size of25,000 square feet. This does not appear to be unreasonable. Where there is a public need, I don't know. . Support the amendment. L:\03 Files\03 Planning Comm\03pcMinutes\MNlOI303.doc 13 ___.:..._-:..<:....J..-~~:. . ", .'" ,~. - ,'- -, ,. ',,', :.".-,', . . ~.,_.,..--.-........:..- - --_... ........,. -_. Planning Commission Minutes October 13. 2003 MOTION BY ATWOOD, SECOND BY RINGSTAD, RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. Vote taken indicated ayes by Atwood, Ringstad and Stamson. Nay by Lemke. MOTION CARRIED. This will go before the City Council on November 3,2003. 6. Old Business: None 7. New Business: A. #03-115 Consider a request to vacate the existing drainage and utility easements and a portion of the Duluth Avenue right-of-way located on and adjacent to Lots 1 & 2, Block 1, Enivid 1st Addition. Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated October 13, 2003, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. The purpose of this application is to facilitate both the construction of the post office and the ring road. The vacation of the existing utility easements will provide additional land, and a better arrangement for the new building. At the same time, the Postal Service will dedicate new easements to cover the existing utilities and the new storm water pond. The Postal Service will also dedicate a road easement for the realignment of Duluth Avenue as part of the ring road construction. The vacation of this easement and the dedication of the new easements will facilitate the construction of the post office and the ring road, and is therefore within the public interest. The Planning staff recommended approval of this request. Comments from the Commissioners: Stamson: . The hurdle on vacations is in the public interest. Cannot see any reason this is not in the public interest. Lemke, Atwood and Ringstad: . Agreed. MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECOND BY ATWOOD, TO RECOMMEND CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE VACATION OF THE EASEMENTS AS REQUESTED. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. This matter will go before the City Council on October 20,2003. , L:\03 Files\03 Planning Comm\03pcMinutes\MNlOI303.doc 14 J3~ City Council Meeting Minutes November 3, 2003 use permit. The intent is that the conditional use process would provide an applicant more flexibility although the process could take 45-60 days. MOTION BY ZIESKA, SECOND BY LEMAIR, APPROVING ORDINANCE 03.15 AMENDING CITY CODE CONCERNING OUTDOOR STORAGE IN THE 1-1 USE DISTRICT (Case File #03-107). VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen, Zieska and LeMair, the motion carried. NEW BUSINESS Consider Approval of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment Concerning Minimum Lot Width for Riparian Lots on General Development Lakes (Case File #03-112). Kirchoff: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report. LeMair: Asked for clarification as to whether the applicant's rationale for claiming a lesser front width is because the lot size is large. Kirchoff: Confirmed that that is the staff understanding. Zleska: Asked if a lot can be split into riparian and non-riparian lots. Kansler: Explained that a lot is required to have dedicated access on a public street. Access across a private property is not considered direct access. Hauaen: Asked the rationale for the 90 foot width and clarified the history with combining and splitting the property in the past. Kansler: Explained that the 90 f'1ot lot width seems to be a product of the 86 foot lot width required for non-riparian lots. Riparian lots are deemed to require more lot width because of environmentally sensitive nature. 86 feet was typically what was required for an average sized home and double garage. Zleska: Believed that changing the 90 foot lot width opens a whole can of worms regarding issues on the lake. Did not believe a change is necessary for the public good as a whole. LeMair: Agreed with Councilmember Zieska. Hauaen: Agreed. MOTION BY ZIESKA, SECOND BY LEMAIR, TO DENYING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE CONCERNING MINIMUM LOT WIDTH FOR RIPARIAN LOTS ON GENERAL DEVELOPMENT LAKES (Case File #03-112). VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen, Zieska and LeMair, the motion carried. Consider Approval of a Joint Resolution for Orderly Annexation Between the City of Prior Lake and Spring Lake Township Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 414.0325 (Busacker). Kansier: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report. " 7 APPLICA'l'IO~S & A.P.PLICA'l'IO~ ~Ar 1 'ERIALS '\ L:\TEMPLA TE\FILEINFO.DOC Planning Case File No. Property Identification No. 03-1lL City of Prior Lake ZONING/LAND USE APPLICATION:> I~ '-". , i\ i-'\ !~~ (~~ ii Iii ---'-.'-. -'l ,~: roo'''~ . . SEP I 6 2003 Type of Application Brief descriptio.n ~~P!oposed project_ (Please describe the proposed amendment, project, or variance reQuest. Attach additional sheets if necessary). [J Amendment to Zoning Map I:! Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Text [J Amendment to Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map [J Conditional Use Permit 1m Variance [J Planned Unit Development [J Senior Care Overlay District [J Home Occupation [J Amendment or Modification to approved CUP or PUD CJ Site Plan Application See attached Exhibit A See attached ~xh1D1t A Applicant: Address: Telephone: Susan A. Balaam c/o Bryce D. Huemoeller, Esq., 16670 (home) 952-447-2131 Franklin Trail, Prior Lake, MN '5:372 (work) 952-447-5628 (fax) Property Owners (if different than applicant): Address: Telephone: (home) Type of Ownership: m Fee (work) [J Contract for Deed (fax) [J Purchase A2reement I Legal Description of Property (Attach additional sheets if necessary): Lots 10, 11 and 12, EASTWOOD, Scott County, Minnesota To the best of my knowledge the information provided in this application and other material submitted is correct. In addition, I have read the relevant sections of the Prior Lake Ordinance and procedural guidelines, and understand that applications will not be pro~es~dfrtil deemed complete by the Planning Director or assignee. -s.~"U{-_ September lL, 2003 Applicant's Signature -~usan A. J:Sal.a~m Date Fee Owner's Signature Date ADDITIONAL PROJECT INFORMATION (Required for PUD, CUP and SC Overlay District applications) wm the developers request financiaT assistance from the City? DYes o No If yes, please describe the amount and type of assistance requested (attach additional pages if necessary). wm anyone other than the applicant be involved in the ownership, development & management of this project? o Yes (If yes, please\ttach a list of the names and the role of all persons involved in the project.) o No 1:lhandoutsl200 I handoutslzoninglzoning app.doc EXHIBIT A [To Combined Application for Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Text and Variance] Applicant/Owner: Susan A. Balaam Property: Lots 10, 11 and 12, EASTWOOD, Scott County, Minnesota AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT Applicant requests that Section 1104.302 of the Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance be amended to add the following Subdivision (5): (5) Riparian Lots Width: In the case of single family lots that are riparian to sewered general development lakes, the front lot width may be reduced by 1.5 feet for each 1,000 square feet of lot area in excess of 15,000 square feet, to a minimum front lot width of not less than 75 feet. Explanation: 1. Minnesota Rule 6120.3300, Subp. 2a, requires riparian single family lots adjacent to sewered general development lakes to be a minimum of 15,000 square feet in area and 75 feet wide. 2. The proposed amendment complies with the DNR Rule and allows reasonable flexibility to oversized lakeshore lots. I (5) Riparian Lots Width: In the case of single family lots that are riparian to sewered general development lakes, the front lot width may be reduced by 1.5 feet for each 1,000 square feet of lot area in excess of 15,000 square feet, to a minimum lot width of not less than 75 feet. IIEA1U~G ~O'l'ICES L:\TEMPLA TE\FILEINFO.DOC Cynthia Kirchoff To: Prior Lake American (E-mail) Subject: Riparian lot width ZOA public hearing notice Deb- Please publish the attached public hearing notice in the September 27th edition of the Prior Lake American. Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Cynthia Kirchoff, AICP Planner City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 (952) 447-9813 (952) 447-4245-fax 9/19/03 ., Page 1 of 1 , q " I I i :1 I' : : r '! I NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 1104.302 (SEWERED LAKES, LOT AREA, WIDTH, AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE 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, on Monday, October 13, 2003 at 6:30 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible to consider the following request. REQUEST: The applicant requests that Section 1104.302 of the Zoning Ordinance be amended to add the following Subdivision (5) to read: (5) Riparian Lots Width: In the case of single family lots that are riparian to sewered general development lakes, the front lot width may be reduced by 1.5 feet for each 1,000 square feet of lot area in excess of 15,000 square feet, to a minimum front lot width of not less than 75 feet. APPLICANTS: Susan Balaam/Bryce Huemoeller If you wish to be heard in reference to this item, you should attend the public hearing. The Planning Commission will consider oral and written comments. If you have questions regarding this matter, please contact the Prior Lake Planning Department at (952) 447-9810 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. Prepared this 22nd day of September, 2003 by: Cynthia R. Kirchoff, AICP, Planner City of Prior Lake To be published in the Prior Lake American on September 27, 2003. L:\03 Files\03 Ordin Amend\03 Zoning\Riparian Lot Area\hearing notice.doc 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER I i ~' ~~, ~' II ~ 1 I I,',:.,. i! i I, :~'.:"" '.' ! I ~ , ~ I, ,~. i~ .~ f\ It ft [1\ ,~ i .. ~ j Correspondence L:\TEMPLA TE\FILEINFO.DOC 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E. Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 November 4, 2003 Mr. Bryce Huemoeller, Esq. Huemoeller, Bates & Gontarek PLC 16670 Franklin Trail, P.O. Box 67 Prior Lake, MN 55372 RE: Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Riparian Lot Width Case File No.: 03-112 Dear Mr. Huemoeller: This letter is to officially inform you that on November 3,2003, the City Council denied your request for an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to reduce riparian lot width to 75 feet on general development lakes. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 447-9813. Sincerely, -- I 2f!f) LcJ1)-'t1li ~ - /~--. '\ .. Cynthia R. Kirc~p Planner c: Susan Balaam www.cityofpriorlake.com Phone 952.447.4230 / Fax 952.447.4245 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E. Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 October 30,2003 Mr. Bryce Huemoeller, Esq. Huemoeller, Bates & Gontarek PLC 16670 Franklin Trail, P.O. Box 67 Prior Lake, MN 55372 Attached is a City Council Agenda and Staff Report for the November 3, 2003, City Council meeting. The meeting will begin at 7:00 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 or have any questions, please contact me at 447-9810. Sincerely, Connie Carfson Connie Carlson Planning Secretary Enclosure .. I:\deptwork\blankfrm\meetlrcc.doc www.cityofpriorlake.com Phone 952.447.4230 / Fax 952.447.4245 ..---=- HUEMOELLER, BATES & GONTAREI': PLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW 16670 FRANKLIN TRAIL P.O. BOX 67 PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372 (952) 447-2131 Fax: (952) 447-5628 E-mail: hbl!Ca!oriorlakelaw.com. OOT '\8 am \ ~. ,. ;..., JAMES D. BATES ALLISON J. GONTAREK BRYCE D. HUEMOELLER E-mai1ofsender:bdh@priorlake1aw.com October 15,2003 Cindy Kirchoff City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 RE: Balaam Variance Dear Cindy: I have received the letter setting the October 13 hearing on the zoning ordinance amendment. Do you still need a separate application for the amendment to the zoning ordinance? Weare having the surveyor update the Balaams' survey to show the proposed division, lot widths, areas and improvements. I am told by Sue Balaam that only the pool improvements have been constructed. To assist you with your report, you may be interested to know that the property was originally two lots that were owned by Johnson-Reiland Construction, Inc. Initially, Dan Reiland constructed a house on the westerly lot and sold it to the Balaams. Subsequently, in a transaction separate from the house purchase, the Balaams bought the easterly lot from Reiland, although Reiland had previously obtained a building p\Juuit for a house on the lot. In connection with the construction of the pool and other landscaping improvements, the Balaams elected to combine the two parcels into the existing single parcel. So historically, the property was composed of separate parcels. Sue Balaam is currently trying to sell the property. To date, the offers she has received to purchase the entire property have been at a substantial discount to the current value. Splitting the property into two parcels will greatly facilitate the sale of the property at a fair price. We do recognize that fmancial considerations alone do not justify the granting of a variance. However, Minn. Stat. ~ 462.357, Subd. 6(2), does allow reference to Cindy Kirchoff City of Prior Lake October 15,2003 Page 2 economic considerations so long as they are not the sole basis for the decision. Consequently, it does appear that the economics of the situation can, and should be, considered by the Planning Commission. The "accessary use" issue should be resolvable through the use of conditions to the variance approval. The granting of a variance subject to conditions is expressly authorized by Minn. Stat. ~ 462.367, Subd. 6 (2), which states the board may impose conditions to the granting of variances to insure compliance and to protect adjacent properties. It seems to me that as long as the two parcels are under common ownership and one tax parcel number, the pool on the easterly parcel could be considered to be assessory to the westerly parcel. At the time of sale of the easterly parcel, the variance approval could require that the buyer commit to constructing a residence on the parcel within a specified period of time or be required to remove the pool. Since these types of lakeshore lots are typically sold for immediate development, this would be a workable arrangement to assure that the existing use is properly dealt with. I can provide suggested language for such a condition at the time that we file the revised survey. In summary, the 90 foot width requirement came into effect long after the plat of Eastwood was filed, so compliance with the requirement is impossible. Nevertheless, the proposed division is consistent with DNR regulations and public policy. The proposed lots will also conform to the prevailing lots in the neighborhood. It seems to us that the narrowness and shape of the lots in Eastwood create a peculiar and practical difficulty in complying with the provisions of the zoning ordinance within the meaning of Section 1108.406(1) of the Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance. Please advise if we should be filing any additional information for either of the applications. ( Sin~. yY1o. urs, ~~.~~ 'Ck~;;;. H~emoeller ~ BDH: Enclosures cc: Susan A. Balaam Page I of 1 Cynthia Kirchoff From: Cynthia Kirchoff Sent: VVednesday, October 22,20037:51 AM To: 'bdh@priorlakelaw.com' Subject: Balaam Zoning Ordinance Amendment Bryce- I received your letter dated October 15, 2003. I don't need a separate application for the subject application. It can proceed through the process with both the Variance and Zoning Ordinance Amendment on the same application. Thank you for the history of the Salaam property. Contact me with any questions. Cynthia Kirchoff, AICP Planner City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 (952) 447-9813 (952) 447 -4245-fax 10/22/03 SEP 3 0 2003 I have re~iewed the attached proposed request (RiDarian~ot Width Amendmentl for the following: J ,L._._. -- - . Water Sewer Zoning Parks Assessment Policy Septic System Erosion Control Recommendation: Comments: City Code Storm Water Flood Plain Natural Features Electric Grading Signs County Road Access Legal Issues Roads/Access Gas Other Building Code Approval Denial Conditional Approval 'tV 0 e... ....,.",u" -Is. /)1 () .J);z:, .;::J~~ /'}r~:.6~ U oJ , " h ll~;~hS t/ a#1t'.R7dH1ek-f . Signed: _ ~[_ bate: ~~~ L '(~~(t)lo ~ Please return any comm~hurSdav. aafober 2. 2003, to 9/~(,/(X3 f Y Cynthia Kirchoff City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 Phone: (952) 447-9813 Fax: (952) 447-4245 e-mail: ckirchoff@cityofpriorlake.com 1:\03 files\03 ordin amend\03 zoning\shoreland lot area\referral.doc Page 2 / Page I of 1 Cynthia Kirchoff From: Cynthia Kirchoff Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 2:00 PM To: Suesan Pace (E-mail) Subject: Zoning Ordinance Amendment-Riparian Lot Wdth Hi Suesan- I have a zoning ordinance amendment for your review. The Planning Commission is scheduled to hear a public hearing on October 13th, so the report will need to be completed October 8th. I apologize for the last minute notice. Please review the attachments and provide comments. Thank you. Cynthia Kirchoff, AICP Planner City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 (952) 447-9813 (952) 447-4245-fax 9/29/03 TO: Suesan Pace, City Attorney FROM: Cynthia Kirchoff, Planner DATE: September 29,2003 RE: Zoning Ordinance Amendment Case File No.: 03-112 Susan Salaam is requesting a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to reduce the minimum lot width for single family residential riparian lots. Ms. Salaam would like to subdivide her property into two lots. The subject property is three platted lots, but is only 151.3 feet in width. The Shoreland Ordinance requires that newly created riparian lots on general development lakes maintain 90 feet of width at the required front yard setback. Thus, Ms. Salaam has applied for the subject amendment to the Zoning Ordinance text, as well as a Variance; however, the latter application is incomplete for review. The proposed amendment is attached. Please review the amendment and provide comments. The Planning Commission is scheduled to hold a public hearing on this item October 13, 2003. EXHIBIT A [To Combined Application for Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Text and Variance] Applicant/Owner: Susan A. Salaam Property: Lots 10, 11, and 12, Eastwood, Scott County, Minnesota AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT Applicant requests that Section 1104.302 of the Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance be amended to add the following Subsection (5): (5) Riparian Lots Width: In the case of single family lots that are riparian to sewered general development lakes, the front lot width may be reduced by 1.5 feet for each 1,000 square feet of lot are in excess of 15,000 square feet, to a minimum lot width of not less than 75 feet. Explanation: 1. Minnesota Rule 6120.3300, Subp. 2a, requires riparian single family lots adjacent to sewered general development lakes to be a minimum of 15,000 square feet in area and 75 feet wide. 2. The proposed amendment complies with the DNR Rule and allows reasonable flexibility to oversized lakeshore lots. CITY OF PRIOR LAKE ORe PROJECT REVIEW CHECKLIST I PROJECT NAME: REQUEST: . RIPARIAN LOT WIDTH An amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to reduce the lot width of riparian lots on General Development lakes from 90 to 75 feet. I APPLICANT: Susan Balaam/Bryce Huemoeller I PROPOSED AMENDMENT The ordinance currently requires 90 feet of width at the front yard setback for riparian lots on General Development lakes. The applicant proposes the following amendment: (5) 'Riparian Lots Width: In the case of single family lots that are riparian to sewered general development lakes, the front lot width may be reduced by 1.5 feet for each 1,000 square feet of lot area in excess of 15,000 square feet, to a minimum front lot width of not less than 75 feet. I I PROJECT REQUEST: Review language and provide comments. . I DISTRIBUTE T6":-----.-----.-'.------ ____.lOr .!,PPLlCATION FOR: ,+ Frank Boyles + Bud Osmundson - --1---1- Administrative Land Division i + Sue Walsh + Sue McDermott I' Comprehensive Plan Amend. I + Ralph Teschner II + Larry Pop pier Conditional Use Permit i + I Chris Esser I. Fire Chief II I Home Occupation ~I Bob Hutchins l,...!.- . Don Rye . Jane Kansier f_ I \- - + DNR - Pat Lynch County Hwy. Dept. MNDOT SMDC Mediacom Cable Bill O'Rourke I I Rezoning - -"-- Site Plan Prelimina PUD r- I Final Plat Minnegasco Watershed Dist. I Variance Telephone Co. I I Vacation ry Plat , II II Electric Co. Met. Council II I + Zoning Ordinance Amendment II, II I . .I Date Received 9/16/03 Date Distributed I 9/16/03 Date Due 10/2/03 Complete Application incomp Date Distributed to 9/19/03 DRC Meeting 10/2/03 Date DRC Publication Date 9/27/03 Tentative PC Date 10/13/03 Tentative CC 11/3/03 Date I I 60 Day Review Date Review Extension J 1:\03 files\03 ordin amend\03 zoning\shoreland lot area\referral.doc Pa I have reviewed the attached proposed request (Riparian Lot Width Amendment) for the following: Water Sewer Zoning Parks Assessment Policy Septic System Erosion Control Recommendation: City Code Storm Water Flood Plain Natural Features Electric Grading Signs County Road Access Legal Issues Roads/Access Gas Other Building Code Approval X Denial Conditional Approval comments~ L w ~ w~U ~~ ~S---;-\~~ ~ j~~ CQDJl k -e'~LN 'V-l ~ (2-) w:tt4 cD - -- . /;L ~~J<. fI f) \' LV/ V ~~ I \ / ~ /.;/J SiQnedL ))~K ~ 0 ( / 0,( 21 (OJ Date: Please return any comments by Thursdav. October 2.2003, to Cynthia Kirchoff City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE Pri.or Lake, MN 55372 Phone: (952) 447-9813 Fax: (952) 447-4245 e-mail: ckirchoff@cityofpriorlake.com 1:\03 files\03 ordin amend\03 zoning\shoreland lot area\referral.doc Page 2 EXHIBIT A [To Combined Application for Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Text and Variance] Applicant/Owner: Susan A. Balaam Property: Lots 10, 11 and 12, EASTWOOD, Scott County, Minnesota AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT Applicant requests that Section 1104.302 of the Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance be amended to add the following Subdivision (5): (5) Riparian Lots Width: In the case of single family lots that are riparian to sewered general development lakes, the front lot width may be reduced by 1.5 feet for each 1,000 square feet oflot area in excess of 15,000 square feet, to a minimum front lot width of not less than 75 feet. Explanation: 1. Minnesota Rule 6120.3300, Subp. 2a, requires riparian single family lots adjacent to sewered general development lakes to be a minimum of 15,000 square feet in area and 75 feet wide. 2. The proposed amendment complies with the DNR Rule and allows reasonable flexibility to oversized lakeshore lots. 1 September 29, 2003 Mr. Bryce Huemoeller, Esq. Huemoeller, Bates & Gontarek PLC 16670 Franklin Trail, P.O. Box 67 Prior Lake, MN 55372 RE: Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Riparian Lot Width Case File No.: 03-122 Dear Mr. Huemoeller: On September 16, 2003, the City of Prior Lake received the above referenced development application. This letter is to inform you that the item has been scheduled on the Monday, October 13, 2003, Planning Commission agenda. You or your representative must attend the 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 November 15,2003, to January 14, 2004. Should you have any questions regarding this letter or the development review process, please feel free to contact me at (952) 447-9813. Sincerely, L~~:e~ Cynthia R. Kirch~ff, AICP Planner c: Susan Balaam . 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNrIY EMPLOYER 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E. Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 October 9,2003 Mr. Bryce Huemoeller, Esq. Huemoeller, Bates & Gontarek PLC 16670 Franklin Trail, P.O. Box 67 Prior Lake, MN 55372 Susan Balaam 6096 150th Street Prior Lake, MN 55372 RE: Agenda and Agenda Report Attached is a Planning Commission Agenda and Staff Report for the October 13, 2003, 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, Connie Carfson Connie Carlson Planning Dept. Secretary Enclosure .. I:\deptwork\blankfrm\meetltr.doc www.cityofpriorlake.com Phone 952.447.4230 / Fax 952.447.4245 ~ CITY OF PRIOR LAKE ORC PROJECT REVIEW CHECKLIST I I PROJECT NAME: REQUEST: RIPARIAN LOT WIDTH An amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to reduce the lot width of riparian lots on General Development lakes from 90 to 75 feet. I APPLICANT: Susan Balaam/Bryce Huemoeller I PROPOSED AMENDMENT The ordinance currently requires 90 feet of width at the front yard setback for riparian lots on General Development lakes. The applicant proposes the following amendment: PROJECT REQUEST: Review language and provide comments. I DISTRIBUTE TO: - .-JU' APPLICATION FOR: r+ I -,-,---_.__._.~_.- Frank Boyles . Bud Osmundson Administrative land Division I. Sue Walsh . Sue McDermott 1 I Comprehensive Plan Amend. I. Ralph Teschner . Larry Poppler 1 Conditional Use Permit I. Chris Esser . Fire Chief II Home Occupation ,. Bob Hutchins . Bill O'Rourke Rezoning I. Don Rye 1 Site Plan I. Jane Kansier 1 Preliminary Plat 1 PUD . DNR - Pat lynch Minnegasco 1 Final Plat County Hwy. Dept. Watershed Dist. Il Variance MNDOT Telephone Co. Vacation SMDC Electric Co. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Mediacom Cable Met. Council I~ , i I j 1 j (5) Riparian Lots Width: In the case of single family lots that are riparian to sewered general development lakes, the front lot width may be reduced by 1.5 feet for each 1,000 square feet of lot area in excess of 15,000 square feet, to a minimum front lot width of not less than 75 feet. '. Date Received 9/16/03 Date Distributed 9/16/03 Date Due 10/2/03 Complete Application incomp Date Distributed to 9/19/03 DRC Meeting 10/2/03 Date DRC Publication Date 9/27/03 Tentative PC Date 10/13/03 Tentative CC 11/3/03 I Date 1 60 Day Review Date Review Extension . 1:\03 files\03 ordin amend\03 zoning\shoreland lot area\referral.doc Page 1 I have reviewed the attached proposed request (Riparian Lot Width Amendment) for the following: Water Sewer Zoning Parks Assessment Policy Septic System L Erosion Control _ City Code Storm Water Flood Plain Natural Features Electric Grading Signs County Road Access Legal Issues Roads/Access Gas Other Building Code Recommendation: Approval Denial Conditional Approval Comments: Signed: Date: Please return any comments by Thursdav. October 2. 2003, to Cynthia Kirchoff City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 Phone: (952) 447-9813 Fax: (952) 447-4245 e-mail: ckirchoff@cityofpriorlake.com 1:\03 files\03 ordin amend\03 zoning\shoreland lot area\referral.doc " j, I: I I I t I Page 2 I have reviewed the attached proposed request IRiDarian Lot Width Amendment} for the following: I L Water Sewer Zoning Parks Assessment Policy Septic System Erosion Control Recommendation: ./ City Code ./ Storm Water Flood Plain Natural Features Electric Grading Signs County Road Access Legal Issues Roads/Access Gas Other Building Code Approval ~ Denial Conditional Approval Comments: . ~ ~~ ~ ~ o..-J.. 1.. l;..,)~ ~ ~ ~?,~ ~1- & 4\_1-u-.:..... JJ,4- ..~ ~d.""~ i.L. ~ b.t 'QA~~'~AII:J ~ ~ ~ L'~-l..^,. \~O ~+. ~J- i~ ~,~,.--Jvu:J "vv- ~ ~~ ~ +0 ~p .Lrw..- '-f \-0 ~ ~. . Signed: 1v-4 M~-H / Date: to /7..1/>3 Please return any comments by Thursdav. October 2.2003, to Cynthia Kirchoff City of Prior Lake . 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 Phone: (952) 447-9813 Fax: (952) 447-4245 e-mail: ckirchoff@cityofpriorlake.com 1:\03 files\03 ordin amend\03 zoning\riparian lot area\referral.doc Page 2 ().... . .... .... 1 ,:v!';:rlllMac! v HIJ()rts .'...,;">:.., L:\TEMPLAT.E\EILEINFO.DOC 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E. Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA ITEM: NOVEMBER 3, 2003 10A CYNTHIA KIRCHOFF, AICP, PLANNER JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CONCERNING MINIMUM LOT WIDTH FOR RIPARIAN LOTS ON GENERAL DEVELOPMENT LAKES (Case File No.: 03.112) MEETING DATE: AGENDA #: PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: INTRODUCTION: History: The purpose of this agenda report is to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance concerning minimum lot width for riparian lots on General Development Lakes. Susan Salaam is requesting this amendment to reduce the minimum lot width required for riparian lots on General Development lakes from 90 feet to 75 feet. The proposed amendment would allow the subdivision of property located at 6096 150111 Street. According to the applicant's amendment, the minimum lot width would be based upon the area of the lot. Essentially, the greater the lot area, the less the minimum required lot width, but in no case would it be less than 75 feet. On October 13,2003, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this amendment, and recommended denial by a vote of 3 to 1. The majority of the Commission supported staffs recommendation. They felt that there was not a public need for the amendment. DISCUSSION: Current Circumstances: Prooertv Historv: In 1994, an Administrative Land Division and lot width Variances were approved to subdivide the subject property into two lots with five conditions. At that time, staff recommended approval of the subdivision because the property was considered three lots of record and approving an administrative land division for two lots would reduce the density. (Note: A single family dwelling was present on the property at time of subdivision application, thus the three lots were considered one parcel of land.) The argument in support of the subdivision with variances was that when and if the existing house was destroyed it would not be considered one parcel, but three lots. At that time, staff pointed out that approval of prior subdivisions created precedent. It must be noted the City approved L:\03 Files\03 Ordin Amend\03 Zoni~@li96fpflbMij~~port.doc Phone 952.447.4230 / Fax 952.447.4245 1 the subdivision against the recommendation of the DNR Area Hydrologist. The subdivision was also approved contrary to Minnesota Rule 6120.3300, which prohibits the conveyance or development of nonconforming contiguous lots under single ownership. The Zoning Ordinance currently states that two or more contiguous non-conforming lots under single ownership are considered one parcel, and no portion may be sold or subdivided to create lots that do not comply with minimum ordinance requirements (Sec. 1101.501 (3)(c)). The ordinance also permitted property owners to convey ownership of one or more of the lots to another owner until January 20, 2000. In 2000 and 2001, the City approved a Lot Combination of the two lots created in 1994. A vacation of the drainage and utility easements was also approved. These actions allowed the applicant to create one lot, and install a pool on the property in 2001. The current application seeks to amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow for the subdivision of the property once again. The applicant also applied for lot width Variances to subdivide the property, however, the application is still incomplete for review. Shoreland Ordinance: The Shoreland Ordinance requires that newly created riparian lots on General Development lakes (Le., Prior Lake and Spring Lake) meet the following standards: Area Lot width at front yard Lot width at setback Ordinary High Water Level Single Family 15,000 sq. ft. 90 feet 75 feet Lots The minimum lot width is measured at the minimum required front yard setback. A front yard setback is defined as "an area which extends along the full width of the front lot line between side lot lines and toward the rear lot line a distance as specified in the required yard regulations for the district in which such lot is located." Since the majority of lots on Prior and Spring Lakes are zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential), the minimum front yard setback for most riparian lots is 25 feet. Minnesota Rules 6120.3300, Subp. 2a. requires that riparian lots on General Development lakes may be no less than 15,000 square feet in area and 75 feet in width. Minnesota Rule 6120.2800, Subpart 1. establishes "minimum standards and criteria [that] apply to those shorelands of public waters of the state which are subject to local L:\03 Files\03 Ordin Amend\03 Zoning\Riparian Lot Area\cc report. doc 2 government land use controls. They are intended to be incorporated into local government shoreland management controls. Each local government is responsible for administration and enforcement of its shoreland management controls adopted in compliance with these standards and criteria. NothinQ in these standards and criteria shall be construed as Drohibitina or discouraaina a local aovernment from adoDtina and enlorcina controls that are more restrictive." (Emphasis added. ) The minimum lot area and width requirements adopted by the City of Prior Lake were reviewed and approved by the Department of Natural Resources pursuant to state law. (Minn. Stat. 9103F.221, Subd. 1 9 (a) (2003).) While this standard is more restrictive than state rules, the DNR has allowed the City flexibility in other areas (e.g., 30 percent impervious surface coverage). The applicant has prepared an amendment to the shoreland ordinance that would reduce the minimum lot width to allow a subdivision of property located at 6096 150th Street. The applicant owns Lots 10, 11, and 12, Eastwood. The three platted lots individually do not comply with current ordinance requirements. The total property width is 151.3 feet. As noted in the previous section, to create a new riparian lot it must be demonstrated the lot is 90 feet in width at the front yard setback. In this case, the property cannot be subdivided into two lots without a Zoning Ordinance Amendment or a Variance. The proposed amendment does not seek merely to accommodate existing lots of record but allow for the creation of new riparian lots on General Development Lakes. Prior and Spring Lakes are the only such lakes within the City. The applicant's proposed amendment reads as follows: (5) Riparian Lots Width: In the case of single family lots that are riparian to sewered general development lakes, the front lot width may be reduced by 1.5 feet for each 1,000 square feet of lot area in excess of 15,000 square feet, to a minimum lot width of not less than 75 feet. Non-riparian lots in the shoreland overlay district are not addressed in the proposed amendment. Non-riparian lots are required to be 12,000 square feet in area and 86 feet in width at the front yard setback. These minimum standards also apply to non-shoreland lots in the R-1 (Low Density Residential) use district. (Note: Minnesota Rules 6120.3300, Subp. 2a. F. sets forth the following minimum standards for non-riparian lots: 10,000 square feet in area and 75 feet in width.) L:\03 Files\03 Ordin Amend\03 Zoning\Riparian Lot Area\cc report.doc 3 Issues: Local Government Discretion: Minnesota Statute ~103F.221, Subd. 5 states "a municipality may adopt and enforce ordinances or rules affecting the use and development of shoreland that are more restrictive than the standards and criteria adopted by the commissioner." The City of Prior Lake adopted more restrictive lot width requirements, not unlike many other communities. Local governments are given the discretion to adopt shoreland regulations that are consistent with goals and polices of their Comprehensive Plan and Official Controls. The applicant offers the following justifications for the amendment: 1. Minnesota Rule 6120.3300, Subp. 2a, requires riparian single family lots adjacent to sewered general development lakes to be a minimum of 15,000 square feet in area and 75 feet in width. 2. The proposed amendment complies with the DNR Rule and allows reasonable flexibility to oversized lakeshore lots. Minnesota Statutes and Rules do not preclude a local government from adopting more restrictive shoreland regulations. The state rules are minimum guidelines, and local governments are given the authority to promulgate regulations consistent with goals and policies. Prior Lake can have higher minimum shoreland standards. The existing ordinance complies with Minnesota Rules and does allow reasonable flexibility to develop riparian lots. A local government can use its discretion to determine what is "reasonable." Inconsistencv with ComDrehensive Plan and Zonina Ordinance: The proposed amendment creates an inequitable situation. Under the proposal, non-riparian lots would be required to have 86 feet of width regardless of lot area, whereas, a newly created riparian lot could have only 75 feet in width. It does not appear to "preserve and enhance the quality of surface waters, conserve the economic and natural environmental values of shorelands, and provide for the wise use of water and related land resources of the state." (Minn. Rules 6120.2600 (2003).) Zonina Ordinance Amendment Findinas: Section 1108.600 of the Zoning Ordinance states that recommendations of the Planning Commission and final determinations of the City Council shall be supported by findings addressing the relationship of the proposed amendment to the following policies: L:\03 Files\03 Ordin Amend\03 Zoning\Riparian Lot Area\cc report.doc 4 1. There is a public need for the amendment. There is no public need for this amendment. The amendment would benefit one individual. It is inconsistent with the past practice of the combination of nonconforming lots by pure operation of law of the Zoning Ordinance. If approved, non-riparian lots would have more restrictive lot width requirements than riparian lots. Riparian lots are more environmentally sensitive than non-riparian lots, so it is imperative that they are larger to protect water quality 2. The amendment will accomplish one or more of the purposes of this Ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan, or other adopted plans or policies of the City. The Zoning Ordinance intends to: . Conserve natural resources and environmental assets of the community. . Prevent overcrowding of land and undue concentration of structures and population by regulating the use of land and buildings and the bulk of buildings in relation to the land surrounding them. A goal of the Comprehensive Plan is to: . Ensure fair and impartial hearings and application of ordinances. All ordinances must be developed and enforced in the public interest. The proposed amendment neither accomplishes the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance nor furthers the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. It is in direct conflict with the purpose of conserving natural resources and environmental assets (Le., Prior Lake), because it would permit riparian lots to be reduced in width. Furthermore, smaller lots would increase the density of development on General Development Lakes, and possibly overcrowd environmentally sensitive land. The proposed amendment is discriminatory as it provides greater protection to riparian lots, than to non-riparian lots within the shoreland overlay district. 3. The adoption of the amendment is consistent with State and/or Federal requirements. This amendment is inconsistent with City Code provisions and City Council policy directing the combination of nonconforming lots. CONCLUSION: The ordinance amendment would serve only the interest of the applicant, not the public. It is inconsistent with Prior Lake adopted official controls and plans, as well as State and Federal law. The applicant contends that the amendment should be approved because L:\03 Files\03 Ordin Amend\03 Zoning\Riparian Lot Area\cc report.doc 5 it is consistent with the minimum shoreland standards set forth in Minnesota Rules. State law allows local governments to adopt shoreland regulations that are more restrictive. Prior Lake has chosen to use its discretion to adopt more restrictive minimum standards. The subject property was subdivided in 1994 into two lots, and the applicant combined the two lots into one in 2001. At present, the applicant wants to amend the ordinance to allow a subdivision of the property. There is an issue with a subdivision because a pool was constructed after the lots were combined. An accessory structure cannot exist without a principal structure. Based upon the findings in this report, staff recommends denial of the applicant's proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment. The City Attorney is opposed to the applicant's proposed amendment in light of previous ordinances requiring the automatic combination of nonconforming lots held in common ownership and the effects of the amendment on riparian property owners. ALTERNATIVES: The City Council has three alternatives: 1. Adopt the ordinance amendment permitting riparian lot width on General Development lakes to be reduced to 75 feet. 2. Deny the ordinance amendment. 3. Defer this item and provide staff with specific direction. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Staff recommends Alternative #3. This requires the following motion: REVIEWED BY: 1. A motion and seco d to deny the applicant's proposed ordinance amendment conc ning the minimum width for riparian lots on o D elo ent lakes. Frank BtyCit Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Applicant's Proposed Ordinance Amendment 2. October 13, 2003, Planning Commission meeting minutes L:\03 Files\03 Ordin Amend\03 Zoning\Riparian Lot Area\cc report. doc 6 EXHIBIT A [To Combined Application for Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Text and Variance] Applicant/Owner: Susan A. Balaam Property: Lots 10, 11 and 12, EASTWOOD, Scott County, Minnesota AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT Applicant requests that Section 1104.302 of the Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance be amended to add the following Subdivision (5): (5) Riparian Lots Width: In the case of single family lots that are riparian to sewered general development lakes, the front lot width may be reduced by 1.5 feet for each 1,000 square feet of lot area in excess of 15,000 square feet, to a minimum front lot width of not less than 75 feet. Explanation: 1. Minnesota Rule 6120.3300, Subp. 2a, requires riparian single family lots adjacent to sewered general development lakes to be a minimum of 15,000 square feet in area and 75 feet wide. 2. The proposed amendment complies with the DNR Rule and allows reasonable flexibility to oversized lakeshore lots. 1 ~ ATTACHMENT 1 Planning Commission Minutes October 13, 2003 Stamson: . Explained the permitted with conditions requirement has to be spelled out in the ordinance. Lemke said he could agree to that. . Kansier explained the ordinance. MOTION BY ATWOOD, SECOND BY RINGSTAD, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AMENDING SECTION 1102.1500 OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY CODE. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. This item will go before the City Council on November 3,2003. ... D. #03-112 Susan Balaam is requesting an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to reduce the lot width of riparian lots on General Development lakes from 90 to 75 feet. Planner Cynthia Kirchoff presented the Planning Report dated October 13, 2003, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. Susan Balaam is requesting an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance text to reduce the minimum lot width for riparian lots on General Development lakes from 90 feet to 75 feet to accommodate a subdivision of property located at 6096 150th Street. The proposed amendment would establish the minimum lot width based upon the area of the lot. Essentially, the greater the lot area, the less the minimum required lot width, but in no case would it be less than 75 feet. In 1994, an Administrative Land Division and lot width Variances were approved to subdivide the subject property into two lots with five conditions. At that time, staff recommended approval ofthe subdivision because the property was considered three lots of record and approving administrative land division for two lots would reduce the density. Staff also pointed out that approval of prior subdivisions created precedent. It must be noted the City approved the subdivision against the recommendation of the DNR Area Hydrologist. Furthermore, the subdivision was approved contrary to Minnesota Rule 6120.3300, which prohibits the conveyance or development of nonconforming contiguous lots under single ownership. The applicant has prepared an amendment to the shoreland ordinance that would reduce the minimum lot width to allow a subdivision of property located at 6096 150th Street. The applicant owns Lots 10, 11, and 12, Eastwood. The three platted lots on their own do not comply with current ordinance requirements, and the total property width is 151.3 feet. To create a new riparian lot it must be demonstrated the lot is 90 feet in width at the front yard setback. In this case, the property cannot be subdivided into two lots without a variance or an ordinance amendment. The proposed amendment does not seek merely to accommodate existing lots of record but allow for the creation of new riparian lots on L:\03 Files\03 Planning Comm\03pcMinutes\MNlO1303.doc 11 ATTACHMENT 2 Planning Commission Minutes October 13, 2003 General Development Lakes. Prior and Spring Lakes are the only such lakes within the City. The ordinance amendment would serve only the interest of the applicant, not the public. It is inconsistent with Prior Lake adopted official controls and plans, as well as State and Federal law. The applicant contends the amendment should be approved because it is consistent with the minimum shoreland standards set forth in Minnesota Rules. State law allows local governments to adopt shoreland regulations that are more restrictive. Prior Lake has chosen to use its discretion to adopt more restrictive minimum standards. The subject property was subdivided in 1994 into two lots, and the applicant combined the two lots into one in 2001. At present, the applicant wants to amend the ordinance to allow a subdivision ofthe property. There is an issue with a subdivision because a pool was constructed after the lots were combined. An accessory structure cannot exist on property without a principal structure. Staff cannot support the applicant's amendment because it does not promote the pubic interest and is discriminatory. Comments from the Public: Bryce Huemoeller represented Sue Balaam on the ordinance amendment. Huemoeller stated this is an interesting section of the Zoning Ordinance. People forget about the 90 foot width frontage requirement for riparian lots. Where did the 90 foot recommendation come from? After researching the matter Huemoeller did not come to any conclusion. This requirement is standing in the way for someone to have full use of their property. It is also a good time to look at this ordinance requirement and the impact it has on a certain number of lots in Prior Lake. Balaam's property is a combination of three 50 foot lots for maybe 57,000 square feet. Her proposal is to give a homeowner some flexibility to deal with their property and still comply with the philosophy ofthe Comprehensive Plan. It also provides reasonable assurance there will be adequate environmental protection. Northwood and Eastwood additions were platted at 50 foot widths and approximately 300 feet long. Huemoeller felt the requirement came into play sometime in the mid-80's but could not track it down. It is a requirement that does exceed the minimum DNR rules and therefore has the flexibility as a City to make this change. The DNR's regulations are 50 foot setbacks and 25% impervious surface and the City's trade offis 75 feet and a 30% impervious surface. The City still has 15,000 square foot lot requirements and they are not asking to change it nor intend to change it. Huemoeller felt their proposal is consistent with DNR rules and the old lake lots need more flexibility because of their design and terrain. All of the standard protections apply. Lakeshore lots are regulated more than other lots and that reason alone is a reason to treat lakeshore lots differently. Non-riparian lots do not have 75 foot setbacks and lots not in the Shoreland District do not have to meet the 30% impervious surface. Huemoeller L:\03 Files\03 Planning Comm\03pcMinutes\MNlOI303.doc 12 Planning Commission Minutes October 13. 2003 stated the proposal is reasonable, fair and still meets the DNR requirements. He felt it would be easy to administer but there might be other ways to look at it. In summary, Huemoeller and Balaam asked to recommend approval to the City Council or to send it back to staff for tweaking. He felt it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. There were no comments and the public hearing was closed. Comments from the Commissioners: Stamson: . This ordinance was not just carried over from the previous ordinance. This was debated very heavily. At one point we discussed 90 and 90 feet, but do not remember why. Commissioner Criego would know. . Concur with staff - it has not been a problem around the City. For the most part, the ordinance works. . There is no public need for the amendment. . Appreciates the applicant's desire to have something more flexible but this works for the community. . Stick with the existing ordinance. Atwood: . Agreed, this is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. . The State allows local government to be more restrictive. If Prior Lake errors, it errors on the side of what is in the best interest ofthe community. . This is not in the best interest of the community. . Support staff's findings. Ringstad: . Agreed with the Commissioner's reasoning. There does not appear to be a public need for the amendment, it is just for the benefit of the applicant. . Agreed with staff's recommendation. Lemke: . The concern seems to be an equitable situation. How is that different in equity in having a 15,000 square foot lot size versus 12,000 square foot for non-riparian lots? Kansier and Rye stated it is a State Rule. There is an environmental public interest in requiring the larger lot area adjacent to the lake. . Some inequity is built into the system by virtue of it being a riparian lot. . In doing a quick calculation, it would seem that in order to get the width at the front yard from 90 feet to 75 feet it would require a minimum lot size of25,000 square feet. This does not appear to be unreasonable. Where there is a public need, I don't know. . Support the amendment. L:\03 Files\03 Planning Comm\03pcMinutes\MNI0 1303.doc 13 Planning Commission Minutes October 13, 2003 MOTION BY ATWOOD, SECOND BY RINGSTAD, RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. Vote taken indicated ayes by Atwood, Ringstad and Stamson. Nay by Lemke. MOTION CARRIED. This will go before the City Council on November 3. 2003. 6. Old Business: None 7. New Business: A. #03-115 Consider a request to vacate the existing drainage and utility easements and a portion of the Duluth Avenue right-of-way located on and adjacent to Lots 1 & 2, Block 1, Enivid 1st Addition. Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated October 13, 2003, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. The purpose of this application is to facilitate both the construction of the post office and the ring road. The vacation ofthe existing utility ea~ements will provide additional land, and a better arrangement for the new building. At the same time, the Postal Service will dedicate new easements to cover the existing utilities and the new storm water pond. The Postal Service will also dedicate a road easement for the realignment of Duluth Avenue as part ofthe ring road construction. The vacation of this easement and the dedication of the new easements will facilitate the construction ofthe post office and the ring road, and is therefore within the public interest. The Planning staff recommended approval of this request. Comments from the Commissioners: Stamson: . The hurdle on vacations is in the public interest. Cannot see any reason this is not in the public interest. Lemke, Atwood and Ringstad: . Agreed. MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECOND BY ATWOOD, TO RECOMMEND CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE VACATION OF THE EASEMENTS AS REQUESTED. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. This matter will go before the City Council on October 20,2003. L:\03 Files\03 Planning Comm\03pcMinutes\MNlOI303.doc 14 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E. Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 AGENDA ITEM: SUBJECT: PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: PUBLIC HEARING: DATE: CASE NO.: I. INTRODUCTION PLANNING REPORT 5D PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CONCERNING MINIMUM LOT WIDTH FOR RIPARIAN LOTS CYNTHIA KIRCHOFF, AICP, PLANNER JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR X YES NO OCTOBER 13, 2003 03-112 Susan Salaam is requesting an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance text to reduce the minimum lot width for riparian lots on General Development lakes from 90 feet to 75 feet to accommodate a subdivision of property located at 6096 150th Street. The proposed amendment would establish the minimum lot width based upon the area of the lot. Essentially, the greater the lot area, the less the minimum required lot width, but in no case would it be less than 75 feet. II. BACKGROUND A. Property History In 1994, an Administrative Land Division and lot width Variances were approved to subdivide the subject property into two lots with five conditions. At that time, staff recommended approval of the subdivision because the property was considered three lots of record and approving administrative land division for two lots would reduce the density. (Note: A single family dwelling was present on the property at time of subdivision application, thus the three lots were considered one parcel of land.) The argument in support of the subdivision with variances was that when and if the existing house was destroyed it would not be considered one parcel, but three lots. Staff also pointed out that approval of prior subdivisions created precedent. It must be noted the City approved the subdivision against the recommendation of the DNR Area Hydrologist. Furthermore, the subdivision was approved contrary to Minnesota Rule www.cityofpriorlake.com 1:\03 files\03 ordin amend\03 zon~mi~~.if4;~4~rt'J'Ol=ax 952.447.4245 Page 1 6120.3300, which prohibits the conveyance or development of nonconforming contiguous lots under single ownership. The Zoning Ordinance currently states that two or more contiguous non- conforming lots under single ownership are considered one parcel, and no portion may be sold or subdivided to create lots that do not comply with minimum ordinance requirements (Sec. 1101.501 (3)(c); See Attachment 2). The provision permitted property owners to convey ownership of one or more of the lots to another owner until January 20, 2000. In 2000 and 2001, the City approved a Lot Combination of the two lots created in 1994. A vacation of the drainage and utility easements was also approved. These actions allowed the applicant to create one lot, and install a pool on the property in 2001. The current application seeks to amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow for the subdivision of the property once again. The applicant also applied for lot with Variances to subdivide the property, however, the application is incomplete for review. B. Shoreland Ordinance The Shoreland Ordinance requires that newly created riparian lots on General Development lakes (Le., Prior Lake and Spring Lake) meet the following standards: Single Family Lots Area 15,000 sq. ft. Lot width at front yard setback 90 feet Lot width at Ordinary High Water Level 75 feet The minimum lot width is measured at the minimum required front yard setback. A front yard setback is defined as "an area which extends along the full width of the front lot line between side lot lines and toward the rear lot line a distance as specified in the required yard regulations for the district in which such lot is located." Since the majority of lots on Prior and Spring Lakes are zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential), the minimum front yard setback is 25 feet. Minnesota Rules 6120.3300, Subp. 2a. requires that riparian lots on General Development lakes may be no less than 15,000 square feet in area and 75 feet in width. Minnesota Rule 6120.2800, Subpart 1. establishes "minimum standards and criteria [that] apply to those shorelands of public waters of the state which are subject to local government land use controls. They are intended to be incorporated into local government shoreland management controls. Each local government is responsible for administration and enforcement of its shoreland management controls adopted in compliance with 1:\03 files\03 ordin amend\03 zoning\riparian lot area\pc report.doc Page 2 these standards and criteria. Nothina in these stal]qards and criteria shall be construed CJ~ Drohibitina or discouragina a local government from adoDtina and_ enforcina controls that are more restrictive." (Emphasis added.) The minimum lot area and width requirements adopted by the City of Prior Lake were reviewed and approved by the Department of Natural Resources pursuant to state law. (Minn. Stat. 91 03F.221, Subd. 1 9 (a) (2003).) While this standard is more restrictive than state rules, the DNR has allowed the City flexibility in other areas, e.g., 30 percent impervious surface coverage. III. DISCUSSION The applicant has prepared an amendment to the shoreland ordinance that would reduce the minimum lot width to allow a subdivision of property located at 6096 150th Street. The applicant owns Lots 10, 11, and 12, Eastwood. The three platted lots on their own do not comply with current ordinance requirements, and the total property width is 151.3 feet. As noted in the previous section, to create a new riparian lot it must be demonstrated the lot is 90 feet in width at the front yard setback. In this case, the property cannot be subdivided into two lots without a variance or an ordinance amendment. The proposed amendment does not seek merely to accommodate existing lots of record but allow for the creation of new riparian lots on General Development Lakes. Prior and Spring Lakes are the only such lakes within the City. The applicant's proposed amendment reads as follows: (5) Riparian Lots Width: In the case of single family lots that are riparian to sewered general development lakes, the front lot width may be reduced by 1.5 feet for each 1,000 square feet in excess of 15,000 square feet, to a minimum lot width of not less than 75 feet. Non-riparian lots in the shoreland overlay district are not addressed in the proposed amendment. Non-riparian lots are required to be 12,000 square feet in area and 86 feet in width at the front yard setback. These minimum standards also apply to lots in the R-1 (Low Density Residential) use district. (Note: Minnesota Rules 6120.3300, Subp. 2a. F. sets forth the following minimum standards for non-riparian lots: 10,000 square feet in area and 75 feet in width.) IV . ANALYSIS A. Local Government Discretion Minnesota Statute 9103F.221, Subd. 5 states "a municipality may adopt and enforce ordinances or rules affecting the use and development of shoreland that are more restrictive than the standards and criteria adopted by the 1:\03 files\03 ordin amend\03 zoning\riparian lot area\pc report. doc Page 3 commissioner." The City of Prior Lake adopted more restrictive lot width requirements, not unlike many other communities. Local governments are given the discretion to adopt shoreland regulations that are consistent with goals and polices of the Comprehensive Plan and Official Controls. The applicant offers the following justification for the amendment: 1. Minnesota Rule 6120.3300, Subp. 2a, requires riparian single family lots adjacent to sewered general development lakes to be a minimum of 15,000 square feet in area and 75 feet wide. 2. The proposed amendment complies with the DNR Rule and allows reasonable flexibility to oversized lakeshore lots. Minnesota Statutes and Rules do not preclude a local government from adopting more restrictive shoreland regulations. The state rules are minimum guidelines, and local governments are given the authority to promulgate regulations consistent with goals and policies. Prior Lake can have higher minimum shoreland standards. The existing ordinance complies with Minnesota Rules and does allow reasonable flexibility to develop riparian lots. A local government can use its discretion to determine what is "reasonable." B. Inconsistency with Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance The proposed amendment creates an inequitable situation. Under the proposal, non-riparian lots would be required to have 86 feet of width regardless of lot area, whereas, a newly created riparian lot could have only 75 feet in width. It does not appear to "preserve and enhance the quality of surface waters, conserve the economic and natural environmental values of shorelands, and provide for the wise use of water and related land resources of the state." (Minn. Rules 6120.2600 (2003).) C. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Findings Section 1108.600 of the Zoning Ordinance states that recommendations of the Planning Commission and final determinations of the City Council shall be supported by findings addressing the relationship of the proposed amendment to the following policies: 1. There is a public need for the amendment. There is no public need for this amendment. The amendment would benefit one individual. It is inconsistent with the past practice of combination of nonconforming by pure operation of law of the City Code. If approved, non- riparian lots would have more restrictive lot width requirements than riparian 1:\03 files\03 ordin amend\03 zoning\riparian lot area\pc report.doc Page 4 lots. Riparian lots are more environmentally sensitive than non-riparian lots, so it is imperative that they are larger to protect water quality. This amendment would serve to benefit only riparian lot owners. This amendment does not seek to serve the general public. 2. The amendment will accomplish one or more of the purposes of this Ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan, or other adopted plans or policies of the City. The Zoning Ordinance intends to: . Conserve natural resources and environmental assets of the community. . Prevent overcrowding of land and undue concentration of structures and population by regulating the use of land and buildings and the bulk of buildings in relation to the land surrounding them. A goal of the Comprehensive Plan is to: . Ensure fair and impartial hearings and application of ordinances. All ordinances must be developed and enforced in the public interest. The proposed amendment neither accomplishes the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance nor furthers the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. It is in direct conflict with the purpose of conserving natural resources and environmental assets (Le., Prior Lake), because it would permit riparian lots to be reduced in width. Furthermore, smaller lots would increase the density of development on General Development Lakes, and possibly overcrowd environmentally sensitive land. The proposed amendment is discriminatory as it provides greater protection to riparian lots, than to non-riparian lots within the shoreland overlay district. 3. The adoption of the amendment is consistent with State and/or Federal requirements. This amendment is inconsistent with City Code provisions and City Council policy directing the combination of nonconforming lots. V. CONCLUSION The ordinance amendment would serve only the interest of the applicant, not the public. It is inconsistent with Prior Lake adopted official controls and plans, as well as State and Federal law. The applicant contends that the amendment should be approved because it is consistent with the minimum shoreland standards set forth in Minnesota Rules. State law allows local governments to adopt shoreland regulations that are more restrictive. Prior Lake has chosen to use its discretion to adopt more restrictive minimum standards. The subject property was subdivided in 1994 into two lots, and the applicant combined the two lots into one in 2001. At present, the applicant wants to 1:\03 files\03 ordin amend\03 zoning\riparian lot area\pc report. doc Page 5 amend the ordinance to allow a subdivision of the property. There is an issue with a subdivision because a pool was constructed after the lots were combined. An accessory structure cannot exist on property without a principal structure. Staff cannot support the applicant's amendment because it does not promote the pubic interest and is discriminatory. VI. ALTERNATIVES 1. Recommend the City Council approve the amendment as proposed, or with changes specified by the Planning Commission. 2. Recommend the Council deny the proposed amendment. 3. Table or continue discussion of the item for specific purpose. VII. RECOMMENDATION The staff recommends Alternative #2. VIII. ACTION REQUIRED A motion and second recommending denial of the proposed amendment as recommended by staff. IX. ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Ordinance Amendment 2. Zoning Ordinance Section 1101.501 1:\03 files\03 ordin amend\03 zoning\riparian lot area\pc report.doc Page 6 ATTACHMENT 1 [To Combined Application for Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Text and Variance] Applicant/Owner: Susan A. Salaam Property: Lots 10, 11, and 12, Eastwood, Scott County, Minnesota AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT Applicant requests that Section 1104.302 of the Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance be amended to add the following Subsection (5): (5) Riparian Lots Width: In the case of single family lots that are riparian to sewered general development lakes, the front lot width may be reduced by 1.5 feet for each 1,000 square feet of lot are in excess of 15,000 square feet, to a minimum lot width of not less than 75 feet. Explanation: 1. Minnesota Rule 6120.3300, Subp. 2a, requires riparian single family lots adjacent to sewered general development lakes to be a minimum of 15,000 square feet in area and 75 feet wide. 2. The proposed amendment complies with the DNR Rule and allows reasonable flexibility to oversized lakeshore lots. ATTACHMENT 2 Zoning Code Zoning Administrator. The individual(s) authorized to administer the regulations of the Zoning Ordinance. Zoning District See Use District. Zoning Map. The map or maps which are a part of this Ordinance and delineate the boundaries of the Use Districts. 1101.500: GENERAL PROVISIONS. The intent of this subsection is to provide a set of regulations applicable to all Zoning Use Districts. The specific requirements for each Zoning Use District are listed in subsections 1102.100 through 1102.1600. The General Provisions are 6sted for the following: ~ Lot Provisions ~ Required Yards/Open Space ~ Yard Encroachments ~ Fences ~ No Sewer and Water ~ Traffic Visibility ~ Pedestrian Access ~ Height Limitation ~ Grading, Filling, Land Reclamation and Excavation ~ Temporary Uses -. 1101.501 Lot Provisions. Unless permitted by this Section: - .;t! c. (1) A lot which does not conform with the lot area or lot width requirements of the Use District in which the lot is located shall not be a buildable lot unless the Id already contains an occupiable structure. (2) A structure on a lot which does not meet the area or width requirement of this Ordinance shall not be expanded or enlarged unless the lot is combined with one or more abutting lots or parcels of land to create a lot meeting the requirements of this Ordinance. (3) Lots of record. Buildable: a. A lot of record existing upon the effective date of this Ordinance in the "R 1", "R-2", or "R-3" Use District, which does not meet either the area or the width requirements of this Ordinance may be utilized for single family detached-e:welling purposes if the dimensions of its area and width are at least 66 2/3% of the requirements of this Ordinance. b. Any single family detached dwelling unit which exists on May 1, 1999, the effective date of this ordinance, on any nonconforming lot located in. the R 1, R-2, or R-3 Use District which is later destroyed by fire or other natural disaster may be rebuilt if a building permit for reconstruction is issued within 365 da)S of its City of Prior Lake May 1. 1999 11 0 l/p32 Zoning Code destruction and if it otherwise conforms with the provisions of this Ordinance. This provision allows a structure to be rebuilt as long as it meets setback, lot coverage. impervious surface and other applicable provisions. If the structure does not meet these standards, a variance will be required. c. If 2 or more lots or combinations of lots and portions of lots with continuous frontage in single ownership are of record at the time of or subsequent to the passage or amendment of this OrdinanCB, and if all or part of the lots do not meet the requirements established for lot area and lot width, the lands involved shall be considered to be an individual parcel for the purpose of this Ordinance, and no portion of said parcel shall be used or sold in a manner which diminishes compliance with lot area or lot width requirements established by the Ordinance, nor shall any division of any parcel be made which creates a lot with area or width below the requirements of this Ordinance. If necessary to aSSJre compliance with other provisions of this Ordinance, the lots shall be combined, except that owners of nonconforming lots of record in common ownership may convey ownership of one or more lots to another owner until January 20, 2000. ~md. Ord. 99-18 - pub. 11/20/99). d. Two or more nonconforming lots of record under single ownership separated by a private road or driveway may be combined and used as a single buildable lot under the following circumstances: )> The property owner must apply to the Oty for approval of a lot combination. )> The property owner must file a deed restriction or covenants with the Scott County Recorder in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. This deed restriction or covenant must include provisions that restrict the resubdivision of the lot. )> There must be an existing principal structure on one lot. )> The location of the principal structure on the lot must preclude the ability to construct a legal accessory structure on that lot. )> Any structures on the combined lots must rreet the minimum setbacks of the Use District in which it is located. )> In those cases where a detached accessory structure is to be located on the portion of the lot which is separated from the principal structure by the private road or driveway and there are existing residential structures adjacent to or in close proximity to the proposed structure, the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on the request upon receipt of an application and following the notice requirements for a variance pursuant 10 subsection 1108.404 of the C~ Code. In evaluating the application, the Planning Commission shall- not apply the hardship criteria for variances. The Planning Commission review shall determine whether the design and location of the detached access~ry structure is compatible with the surrounding properties in terms ct architecture, buildings materials and placement on the lot. If the Planning Commission denies the application, the applicant shall May 1, 1999 City of Prior Lake 110l/p33