HomeMy WebLinkAbout4A 3800 Green Heights Trail Variance Report
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: MARCH 25, 2019
AGENDA #: 4A
PREPARED BY:
PRESENTED BY:
JEFF MATZKE, PLANNER
JEFF MATZKE
AGENDA ITEM: PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER VARIANCE REQUESTS FROM THE MINI-
MUM REAR YARD SETBACK AND MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RE-
QUIREMENT ON A PROPERTY IN THE R-1 SD (LOW DENSITY RESIDEN-
TIAL SHORELAND) ZONING DISTRICT
DISCUSSION: Introduction
Scott Theilen owns the property at 3800 Green Heights Trail SE and is requesting
variances from the minimum rear yard setback and maximum impervious surface
requirement to construct a new dwelling on a single-family residence. The prop-
erty is located along the eastern shores of Upper Prior Lake, south of Dunkirk
Avenue. The following variances are requested:
A 6.9-foot variance from the required minimum 25-foot rear yard setback
(Section 1102.405 (3))
A 7.5% variance from the required maximum impervious surface (Section
1104.306)
Regulation Requirement Proposed Variance
Rear yard Setback (Minimum) 25’ 18.1’ 6.9’
Impervious Surface (Maximum) 30% 36.9% 6.9%
History
The property is zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential), and is guided R-LD (Urban
Low Density) on the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The property is
in the Shoreland Overlay District of Upper Prior Lake.
Current Circumstances
The property is 12,400 square feet in size with a single-family residence. The
applicant is requesting to demolish and replace the existing dwelling.
Rear Yard Setback: Generally, lakeshore properties do not have difficulty meet-
ing the required 25-foot rear yard setback since, in many cases, the rear property
line is near or coincides with the ordinary high water mark of Prior Lake (904
elevation) and the minimum lake setback requirement is 50-75 feet. In this case
however, the rear property line is 40-45 feet from the lakeshore. Therefore, the
rear yard setback from the proposed deck to the rear property line is 18.1 feet.
The proposed lake setback is 56 feet which will meet the ordinance requirement
using the average lake setback of adjacent properties.
2
Impervious Surface: Subsection 1104.306 lists the maximum impervious sur-
face requirement for properties in the shoreland as 30% of the total lot area. The
lot area of 3800 Green Heights Trail is 12,400 square feet since the waterfront
area near the lake is not exclusively owned by the property owner. The proposed
construction would constitute 36.9% of the total lot area (a 36.9% variance re-
quest). However, if the area of the “waterfront” were included in the calculation
the total lot area (16,270 square feet in total) the impervious surface amount
would be 28.1% of the total area.
The applicant has submitted a court order from 1999 which details property
owner’s testimony as to the use and care of the “waterfront” area. As a result of
the court order, the lake lot owners were directed to care for the waterfront area
adjacent to their lots. The City Attorney has reviewed the court order and pre-
pared a memorandum (see attached) explaining the situation.
Conclusion
City Staff believes that the variance request for the rear yard setback is warranted
since the placement of the proposed dwelling in respect to the lake setback is in
character with other dwellings of the neighborhood. As identified in the attached
City Attorney memorandum City Staff believes the Planning Commission has the
option to approve or deny the impervious surface variance request based on the
opinion of ownership of the waterfront area.
As mentioned in the City Attorney memorandum, the City Staff is prepared to
draft a resolution of approval/denial based on the findings of the Planning Com-
mission. If the Planning Commission chooses to approve the variances, City Staff
recommends the following conditions be met:
The variance resolution shall be recorded at Scott County.
A Building Permit shall be obtained from the Building Department prior to the
commencement of construction.
ISSUES: This project includes a request for variances. Section 1108.400 states that the
Board of Adjustment may grant a variance from the strict application of the provi-
sions of the Zoning Ordinance, provided that:
(1) There are practical difficulties in complying with the strict terms of
the Ordinance. “Practical difficulties,” as used in connection with the
granting of a Variance, means the property owner proposes to use
the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning
Ordinance. Economic considerations alone do not constitute
practical difficulties.
There are practical difficulties in complying with the strict terms of the Or-
dinance in regards to the rear yard setback. While the rear yard setback of
25 feet is not met, the typical lake setback of the property will meet the City
requirement.
(2) The granting of the Variances are in harmony with the general
purposes and intent of the City Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances
and the Comprehensive Plan.
3
The granting of the rear yard variance appears to be in harmony with the
general purposes of the Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan. A purpose
of the Zoning Ordinance is to “Promote the most appropriate and orderly
development of the residential, business, industrial, public land, and public
areas”. Furthermore, the Shoreland Ordinance (Section 1104) policy’s in-
tent is “in the best interests of the public health, safety, and welfare to pro-
vide for the wise development of shoreland of public waters.” The pro-
posed dwelling’s placement on the lot in relation to the rear yard is in har-
mony with these purposes and policies.
(3) The practical difficulty is due to circumstances unique to the property
not resulting from actions of the owners of the property and is not a
mere convenience to the property owner and applicant.
The proximity of the rear yard property line to the proposed dwelling is
unique. The dwelling will meet the required minimum lake setback of more
than 55.5 feet.
(4) The granting of the variances will not alter the essential character of
the neighborhood or be detrimental to the health and safety of the
public welfare.
The placement of the proposed dwelling in respect to the lake setback is in
character with other dwellings of the neighborhood.
(5) The granting of the Variances will not result in allowing any use of the
property that is not permitted in the zoning district where the subject
property is located.
The requested variances would allow the construction of a single-family
residential dwelling which is an allowed use within the R-1 SD (Low Density
Residential in Shoreland) Zoning District.
ALTERNATIVES: 1. Motion and a second directing City Staff prepare a resolution approving the
variances requested for 3800 Green Heights Trail with the listed conditions or
approve any variance the Planning Commission deems appropriate in the cir-
cumstances.
2. Motion and a second to table or continue discussion of the item for specific
purpose as directed by the Planning Commission.
3. Motion and a second directing City Staff to prepare a resolution denying the
variances requested because the Planning Commission finds a lack of
demonstrated practical difficulties under the zoning code criteria.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 19-XXPC
2. Location Map
3. 1928 Green Heights Plat
4. Survey Dated 3-20-19
5. Conceptual Building Plans dated 2-12-19
6. 1999 Court Order
7. City Attorney Memorandum
8. Narrative from Applicant
GREEN HEIGHTS TRL SW
R O O S E V E L T S T S W
RAMSEY AV SWINGUADONA BEACH CIR SWUpper Prior Lake
Scott County GIS
Ü
3800 Green Heights Trail SWVariancesLocation Map
UPPER PRIOR LAKE
GD(904)
SPRING LAKE
GD(912.8)
BLIND
LAKERD
(948.7)
ARTIC
LAKENE
(906.7)
MARKLEY
LAKERD
( )
HOWARD LAKE
NE(957.3)
CRYSTAL LAKE
NE(943.3)
Spring Lake
Upper Prior Lake
Scott County GIS
SUBJECTPROPERTY
SUBJECTPROPERTY
ر
WAYZATA, MN 55391
401 EAST LAKE STREET
FAX: 952.473.8222
Phone: 952.473.8777
ØWAYZATA, MN 55391
401 EAST LAKE STREET
FAX: 952.473.8222
Phone: 952.473.8777
±±
WAYZATA, MN 55391
401 EAST LAKE STREET
FAX: 952.473.8222
Phone: 952.473.8777
WAYZATA, MN 55391
401 EAST LAKE STREET
FAX: 952.473.8222
Phone: 952.473.8777
±±
±
WAYZATA, MN 55391
401 EAST LAKE STREET
FAX: 952.473.8222
Phone: 952.473.8777
Sarah Schwarzhoff | Of Counsel | 952.746.2713 | sschwarzhoff@hoffbarry.com
Hoff Barry, P.A. | 775 Prairie Center Drive, Suite 160 | Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 | hoffbarry.com | 952.941.9220
MEMORANDUM
To: Planning Commission
From: Sarah Schwarzhoff, City Attorney
Date: March 5, 2019
Re: Green Heights Waterfront
The Planning Commission has received a variance request from a property owner in the Green Heights
subdivision. The property owner is requesting that he be permitted to include the “waterfront” between
his property and the lake, as part of his lot area.
The City has numerous plats that include “waterfront” areas which are areas between the lake and the
lakeshore lots (because of the waterfront the lakeshore lots do not actually abut the lake but I will refer
to them in this manner throughout the memo to distinguish these lots from the back lots). The waterfronts
are generally dedicated on the plat for the use and enjoyment of all the lot owners. This means that a
strip of land between the lakeshore lots and the lake are commonly owned by all lot owners within the
plat.
These waterfront areas are often a source of dispute between the lakeshore lot owners who prefer to
treat the waterfront as part of their property and the back lot owners who prefer to use the waterfront
as a common area. In addition, often these plats are fairly old and as such are not accompanied by
declarations or home owners associations to regulate the use of the waterfronts.
Current City policy is to treat all such waterfronts as common area. This means lakeshore lot owners
cannot count the waterfront area as part of their lot because the waterfront is commonly owned. This can
make a difference for calculations related to size of the lot such as impervious surface. When questioned,
City staff has consistently informed residents that absent a court order or written agreement of all the lot
owners the City will continue to consider the waterfronts as commonly owned property.
Green Heights was platted in 1928 with such a waterfront. However, in 1999 several of the lakeshore lot
owners filed a lawsuit in Scott County Court seeking to claim ownership of the waterfront. The Court
performed an extensive analysis of the history of the use and ownership of the lots and waterfront and
denied the lakeshore lot owners claims of ownership. The Court found that the waterfront was properly
dedicated to all the lot owners and that the lakeshore lot owners had not proven that they had obtained
legal ownership.
Hoff Barry, P.A. | 775 Prairie Center Drive, Suite 160 | Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 | hoffbarry.com | 952.941.9220
However, as part of the Court order a “Declaration of Rights” relating to the waterfront and two related
access aisles were agreed to by the lot owners and incorporated into the Court order.
The property owners agreed that the back lot owners would have exclusive use of the access aisles and
could install one straight dock at the end of each access aisle. The back lot owners were also responsible
for maintenance of the access aisles. Use and maintenance of the access aisles was to be regulated by
majority vote of the back lot owners.
The property owners also agreed that the lakeshore lot owners would have the exclusive right to place
docks, boat lifts and fire rings on the waterfront adjacent to their lots and that the lakeshore lot owners
would have the sole obligation to maintain the waterfront adjacent to their lot.
There was no finding of ownership and the back lot owners were not prohibited from using the waterfront,
but the lakeshore lot owners were granted exclusive rights to install structures/docks and the obligation
to maintain the waterfront.
Had ownership of the waterfront been decided, had the court held that the lakeshore lot owners also
owned the abutting waterfront, the City would consider the waterfront area as part of the lakeshore lot
and no variance would be required.
Had no declaration been made by the lot owners, the City would continue to consider the waterfront to
be commonly owned and thus not part of the lakeshore lot.
Instead, Green Heights is a middle ground where lakeshore lot owners do not own the waterfront but do
have some exclusive rights to it and have the obligation to maintain it. Therefore, it is reasonable for the
Planning Commission to either approve or deny the variance. The Planning Commission can find that
because ownership was not determined, and the waterfront is still commonly owned, the waterfront
cannot be counted toward the lakeshore lot area. Or the Planning Commission can find that because the
lakeshore lot owners have some exclusive rights to the waterfront and have the obligation to maintain it
that the waterfront can be counted toward the lakeshore lot area. Once the Planning Commission has
made findings based on the public hearing, staff can bring back a resolution containing those findings.
Staff does recommend that the City continue to handle waterfront issues on a case by case basis through
the variance process due to the numerous factors involved in each case.