HomeMy WebLinkAbout3 - 08 28 2023 PCM Minutes
1
PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MONDAY, AUGUST 28, 2023
1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance:
Chair Tschetter called the MONDAY, AUGUST 28, 2023 Prior Lake Planning Commission meeting to
order at 6:00p.m. Those present were Commissioners Jason Tschetter, William Kallberg, Doug Johnson,
and Christian Fenstermacher. Also present were City Council Liaison Kim Churchill, Community
Development Director Casey McCabe, Planner Jeff Matzke, and Planner Paul Moretto.
2. Approval of MONDAY, AUGUST 28, 2023 Agenda:
MOTION BY KALLBERG SECONDED BY JOHNSON TO APPROVE THE MONDAY, AUGUST 28, 2023
PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA.
VOTE: Ayes by Tschetter, Kallberg, Johnson, and Fenstermacher.
The Motion carried 4-0.
3. Approval of MONDAY AUGUST 14, 2023 Meeting Minutes:
MOTION BY JOHNSON, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO APPROVE THE MONDAY AUGUST 14, 2023
PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES.
VOTE: Ayes by Tschetter, Kallberg, Johnson, and Fenstermacher.
The Motion carried 4-0.
4. Public Hearings:
A. PDEV23-000024 – 15305 Breezy Point Road SE – Variance - Murphy & Co Design, on behalf
of property owner, Lance Anderson, is requesting variances from the minimum lake setback and
minimum driveway setback to construct a new dwelling. PID: 250260080.
Planner Matzke: Introduced the public hearing and stated Murphy and Company, on behalf of the
property owner, Lance Anderson, is requesting a variance from the minimum front yard setback and
minimum lake setback for construction of a new dwelling. The property is located at 15305 Breezy Point
Road SE along the southern shores of Lower Prior Lake. The requested variances include a 5.0-foot
variance from the required minimum 25-foot front yard (Section 1141.500 (3)) and a 33.3-foot variance
from the required minimum 50-foot setback from the Ordinary High-Water Mark of Prior Lake using the
averaging of the adjacent properties (Section 1130.407 (2)). Matzke provided an overview of the property
and stated the applicant is proposing to remove the existing dwelling and detached garage and place a
new two-story dwelling with attached garage on the property. Matzke reviewed the variance criteria of
Section 1152 and recommended approval of the variance request.
Commission Comments/Questions:
Johnson: asked if Lot 17 to the south of the subject property is owned by the applicant or the City.
Matzke: stated the owner Lot 16 (subject property) has use of Lot 17, but the lot is “made land” without
specific ownership. A previous court order established use of Lot 17.
Fenstermacher: asked if Public Works evaluated opportunities to improve the turnaround area.
Matzke: responded public works has reviewed the turnaround and expanding the turnaround would
require expanding the public easement area.
Fenstermacher: stated it sounds like public works has determined it was infeasible to expand the
turnaround.
Matzke: stated public works has determined the turnaround area was suitable at this time.
Kallberg: asked if the pavement within the easement area is included in the impervious surface
calculation.
2
Matzke: replied the area within the roadway easement is excluded from the impervious surface
calculation and the property is under the 30% maximum impervious allowance.
Applicant:
Dan Demeules, Murphy & Co. Design, 235 Lake Street East, Wayzata: representing the property owner
stated they have coordinated with staff on the design and are attempting to respect other properties within
the neighborhood. The house will conform to building codes.
MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY FENSTERMACHER TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON
ITEM 4A AT 6:21 P.M.
VOTE: Ayes by Tschetter, Kallberg, Johnson, and Fenstermacher.
The Motion carried 4-0.
Public Comment:
None.
MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY FENSTERMACHER TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON
ITEM 4A AT 6:22 P.M.
VOTE: Ayes by Tschetter, Kallberg, Johnson, and Fenstermacher.
The Motion carried 4-0.
Commission Comments/Questions:
Kallberg: stated he was impressed they were able to design a larger structure with very little impact on
impervious surface. He recommended increasing the turnaround area; the neighbors are in support of
this, and he is as well.
Fenstermacher: Felt the applicant did a good job balancing issues and appreciates the property owner
reaching out to the neighbors and adjusting the driveway.
Johnson: applaud the applicant for working with the city and reaching out to the neighbors. He will be in
support.
Tschetter: will be supporting as well. Stated his initial concern with lake setback but acknowledged this
request meets the variance criteria.
MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY JOHNSON TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
VARIANCES REQUESTED FOR 15305 BREEZY POINT ROAD SE WITH THE LISTED CONDITIONS.
VOTE: Ayes by Tschetter, Kallberg, Johnson, and Fenstermacher.
The Motion carried 4-0.
B. PDEV23-000022 – 15347 Breezy Point Road SE – Variance - Roncor Construction Inc, on
behalf of property owners, Charles & Mary Carlson, is requesting variances for a home remodel
and construction of an attached one-stall garage. Requested variances include the minimum sum
of side yard and side yard setback, lake setback, and maximum impervious surface. PID:
250260050
Planner Moretto: Introduced the public hearing and stated Charles and Mary Carlson, the property
owners, are requesting variances from the zoning code for the construction of a single-stall garage
addition with livable space above. The subject property, Lot 9 of Breezy Point, is located at 15347 Breezy
Point Road Southeast along the shore of Lower Prior Lake. The requested variances include a 7.1-foot
variance from the required minimum sum of the side yard setbacks on a nonconforming lot. (Subsection
1123.201 (6)); a 1.8-foot variance from the required minimum side yard setback on a nonconforming lot.
(Subsection 1123.201 (6)); a 4-foot variance from the required minimum separation of principle
structures. (Subsection 1123.201(6)); a 19-foot variance from the required minimum setback from the
3
Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL). (Subsection 1130.407(2)); and a variance for impervious surface
from 30% to 42.7%. Currently 58.6%. (Subsection 1130.405). Moretto provided an overview of the
property and recommended approval of the variance request.
Commission Comments/Questions:
Tschetter: commented on the roof pitch is changing considerably, stating it appears to be a full
reconstruction of the home. Asked if this would trigger other rules or changes on a limitation to
improvements of the home.
Matzke: stated property owners can remodel homes as long as the cost is less than 50% of the current
structural value of the home. Improvements will be less than 50% of the existing home in this case so it
is considered a remodel, not new construction.
Tschetter: asked if there is a public safety concern if the distance between the homes smaller than the
size of an emergency response vehicle.
Matzke: stated the city’s public safety departments have equipment available to respond to emergencies
without the need to get vehicles in the rear yard.
Tschetter: appreciates the reduction in impervious surface.
Kallberg: stated it is difficult to see detail of what is proposed within the structure based on the plans
provided.
Moretto: replied questions about the interior finishes can be directed to the builder.
Fenstermacher: asked about the distance between the walls or eves from this structure and the adjacent
structure.
Moretto: replied there will be 11 ft. separation from wall to wall.
Fenstermacher: asked if all paver areas are being removed.
Moretto: replied that is correct.
Johnson: expressed concern for how a property gets to 58% of impervious and about the reduction in off
street parking. He is concerned about this structure being 3.2 ft. from the property line and near the
adjacent home.
Matzke: state some of the patio pavers have been in existence for several decades and may be legally
non-conforming.
Applicant:
Ron Baker, builder: stated there is a desire to get an attached garage to the home. He worked with staff
on several design options. The house, garage and driveway will be the only hard surfaces, everything
else will be removed. A detached deck may be built off the rear, but it would be built to not impact the
impervious surface percentage.
Tschetter: asked if the construction cost has been estimated to be less than 50% of structure value.
Ron Baker: stated that is correct.
Tschetter: requested confirmation on the proposed detached deck.
Matzke: stated a detached deck, or platform, is not considered hard surfaced if there is 1/4 inch spacing
and a pervious surface underneath. If the deck is not attached to the home, it is not considered part of
the structure.
Tschetter: asked if a detached deck is considered in the setback.
Matzke: No, it is not considered for the setback.
Tschetter: asked if the stormwater runoff been addressed.
Ron Baker: yes. The area between the new garage and neighboring property will include a trench with
rock and drain pipe to assist in water runoff.
Kallberg: questioned the existing area of pavers located outside of lot boundaries and how that factors
into the impervious surface calculation.
Matzke: stated staff includes the areas between the property and the ordinary high water level in the lot
area calculation, so the existing pavers are included in the impervious surface calculation.
4
Fenstermacher: asked for confirmation that the paver area outside of the lot will be removed as well.
Ron Baker: Yes, those paved areas will be removed. Mr. Baker commented they will be working with the
neighboring property to make sure the drainage works well.
Fenstermacher: asked for confirmation that construction costs greater than 50% of the current market
value of the home would be considered a total rebuild.
Matzke: that is correct. The lower level is below the floodplain elevation so any improvement greater than
50% of value would require the home to be brought out of the floodplain.
Johnson: asked if the proposed drain tile system will capture water and bring it directly to the lake?
Ron Baker: Yes
Johnson: stated pervious surface is important to allow water to drain slowly, the proposed system will
send water directly to the lake.
Matzke: clarified stormwater will be brought to the street and the lake. Staff is requesting as much
drainage as possible be directed to the street.
Johnson: asked how many cars will fit in the driveway.
Ron Baker: one
Johnson: asked if the value of the property is public record.
Matzke: yes. The value will be reviewed at building permit issuance to make sure it stays under 50%.
MOTION BY JOHNSON, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 4A
AT 6:51 P.M.
VOTE: Ayes by Tschetter, Kallberg, Johnson, and Fenstermacher.
The Motion carried 4-0.
Public Comment:
None.
MOTION BY JOHNSON, SECONDED BY FENSTERMACHER TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON
ITEM 4A AT
6:52 P.M.
VOTE: Ayes by Tschetter, Kallberg, Johnson, and Fenstermacher.
The Motion carried 4-0.
Commission Comments/Questions:
Tschetter: commented that he is torn on this one. He is sensitive to this being an existing home in need
of a garage and they have a small lot. The proposal includes a benefit to stormwater management. He
appreciates the collaboration with staff and feels this is as good of a proposal as we can see without a
full rebuild. He can support.
Kallberg: commented on the need for a garage in Minnesota. It is a tight fit and historically summer cabins
did not need a garage. The removal of existing pavers and reduction in impervious surface is an
improvement. He can support.
Fenstermacher: stated it is a reasonable expectation to have a garage. He applauded the applicant for
removing existing impervious surface. Short of full rebuild, this is a good plan. Will support.
Johnson: commented on struggling with the number of variances needed and how tight the home will be
to the property line. Cannot support as he feels this may set a precedent for future requests.
MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY FENSTERMACHER TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION
APPROVING THE VARIANCES REQUESTED FOR 15347 BREEZY POINT ROAD SE WITH THE
LISTED CONDITIONS.
VOTE: Ayes by Tschetter, Kallberg, and Fenstermacher. Opposed by Johnson.
The Motion carried 3-1.
5
5. Old Business:
None.
6. New Business:
None.
7. Announcements & Adjournment:
Matzke: The Planning Commission will have a meeting on September 11, 2023. Staff anticipates
the September 25th meeting will be canceled.
MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY FENSTERMACHER TO ADJOURN THE MONDAY,
AUGUST 28, 2023, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT 6:58 P.M.
VOTE: Ayes by Tschetter, Kallberg, Johnson, and Fenstermacher.
The Motion carried 4-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Casey McCabe, Community Development Director