Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4A_14416 Watersedge Trail NE Variances PC report 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: AUGUST 11, 2025 AGENDA #: 4A PREPARED BY: PRESENTED BY: PAUL MORETTO, PLANNER PAUL MORETTO AGENDA ITEM: PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM IMPERVIOUS SURFACE REQUIERMENTS ON A PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE R-1 (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICT AND SHORELAND OVERLAY DISTRICT AT LOT 25 BOUDIN’S MANOR, 14416 WATERSEDGE TRAIL NE. DISCUSSION: Introduction Jeffery Milkie and Amy Goin, the property owners, are requesting a variance from the zoning code for the construction of a four-season porch addition. The subject property, Lot 25 of Boudin’s Manor, is located at 14416 Watersedge Trail NE, PID: 251190210. This is a riparian lot. The requested variance is listed below: • A variance to allow 38.9% impervious surface; currently 43.2%. (Subsection 10- 435(5)) Regulation Requirement Proposed Variance Impervious Surface* 30% 38.9% 8.9% *Current impervious is 43.2%. History The property is zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential) and is guided R-LD (Urban Low Density) on the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The property is in the Shoreland Overlay District of Prior Lake. The existing house was originally constructed in 1977 according to Scott County. Current Circumstances 14416 Watersedge Trail NE Current Condition Side Yard Front Yard Impervious Driveway Width Adjacent Dwelling Lot Width 5 ft / 10.3 ft 20.5. 43.2% 30+ ft. 15+ ft. 63 ft. 14416 Watersedge Trail NE Proposed Condition (Garage) Side Yard Front Yard Impervious Driveway Width Adjacent Dwelling Lot Width 5 ft / 10.3 ft 20.5 ft. 38.9% 24 ft. 15+ ft. 63 ft. The property owner proposes to remove an existing rear deck, construct a four-season porch, 13 ft. X 14 ft. (182 sq. ft.) and a replacement deck of 16.5 ft. x 11.5 ft. in the rear yard. The rectangular lot is 63 feet wide and approximately 6,964 square feet; the lot 2 is considered nonconforming as it is substandard for the shoreland district in both lot width and area. The subject property currently contains more than 30% impervious surface, mainly due to an approximate 32 ft. X 14 ft. rear patio that has existed on the property for many years. Staff were unable to find permits for the increase, so the impervious surface is not considered legally non-conforming. The applicant originally proposed keeping the impervious surface at 43.2% and build- ing the replacement deck within the OHWL setback at 47’ and within the required 5’ setback at 2.5’. Due to the non-conforming status of the impervious surface and inabil- ity of find a practical difficulty with reduced setbacks, staff recommended an in-person meeting to find a practical path forward. Staff and the applicant met and explored measures to reduce the amount of impervious surface coverage, including removal of rear patios, reduction in driveway and possible path reductions. The property owner is willing to move the deck out of the setbacks and to reduce the width of the driveway and removal if the rear patio under the pro- posed deck. A site visit was conducted on August 5, 2025. It was observed that many single-family homes near the subject property had a similar, challenging lot with similar accommo- dations. Impervious Surface: Subsection 10-435(5) states, Impervious surface coverage for lots in all Use Districts shall not exceed 30% of the lot area. The subject lot currently contains 43.2% impervious surface. The applicant proposes to reduce their impervious surface to 38.9% which is composed of the existing dwelling, the proposed four-season porch, and a driveway. ISSUES: This project includes a request for a variance. Section 10-906 states that the Board of Adjustment may grant a variance from the strict application of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, provided that: 1) Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Zoning Code. The granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purposes of the Zoning Code. The purpose of the Zoning Code is to “Promote the most appropriate and orderly development of the residential, business, industrial, public land, and public areas”. 2) Variances shall only be permitted when they are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The granting of the variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and its goal to maintain and improve physical character and identity. This is accomplished by achieving compatible relationships between different types of land uses by utilizing design standards, appropriate buffers, land use transitions, and high-quality design. 3) Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the Zoning Code. “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 Code, the plight of the landowner is due 3 to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Substandard Lot Width and Area: The lot is only 63 feet wide 6,964 square feet in area, both of which are below the minimum standards for the Shoreland Overlay District. This narrow lot width creates an unusually constrained buildable area, especially when factoring in required setbacks and existing building footprint. Reasonable Use Consistent with Neighborhood: The applicant is seeking to construct a four-season porch over an existing patio, a common residential improvement that is found on many nearby lots. Reduction in Existing Impervious Surface: Although the requested impervious surface exceeds the 30% maximum, the proposed plan would reduce the current impervious surface coverage from 43.2% to 38.9%, moving the property closer to compliance. Reduction of Driveway Width to 24 ft.: The applicant is proposing removing impervious surface related to the width of the driveway. Their proposal will make the driveway width conforming at the front property line. Not Self-Created: The unique constraints of the property, including the lot size and width, and location of the existing home were not created by the applicant and predate their ownership. These factors result from historic platting and development patterns that do not align with current zoning standards. No Alteration to Neighborhood Character: The proposed addition would be located in the rear yard, minimizing visual or spatial impact. The structure is consistent with the residential character and scale of surrounding properties, and it would not alter the essential character of the locality. 4) Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations alone are not the reason for the variance request. Conclusion City Staff believe this variance is warranted and necessary to allow for construction of a four-season porch due to the narrowness of the lot width (63 feet), substandard lot size (6,964 square feet), and location of an existing patio and landing. Other neighbor- hood homes surrounding the subject property have similar side yard setbacks on nar- row lots and most homes in this neighborhood have similar features. If the Board of Adjustments finds the applicant has met all necessary criteria and sup- ports approval of the variance, then staff recommends the following conditions: ➢ The applicant shall provide a grading plan confirming all stormwater drainage from the development will be managed on their property. ➢ The variance resolution shall be recorded at Scott County. ➢ Building Permit shall be obtained from the Building Department prior to the com- mencement of construction. If the Board of Adjustments finds the applicant has not met all necessary criteria and would like to see further revisions to reduce the impervious surface, staff recommends 4 providing direction to the applicant related to reasonable impervious surface coverage and table the item for consideration at a future meeting. ALTERNATIVES: 1. If the Board of Adjustment finds the requested variance is warranted in this case, a motion and a second to adopt a resolution approving a variance requested for 14416 Watersedge Trail NE with the listed conditions, or approve any variance the Board of Adjustment deems appropriate in the circumstances. 2. If the Board of Adjustment finds the requested variance is not warranted in this case, a motion and a second to deny the variance requested because the Board of Adjustment finds a lack of demonstrated practical difficulties under the zoning code criteria and direct staff to prepare a resolution of denial for consideration at the next Board of Adjustment meeting. 3. If the Board of Adjustment would like additional information from the applicant about the requested variance or would like to see further plan revisions to decrease the variance request, a motion and a second to table or continue discussion of the item for specific purpose as directed by the Board of Adjustment. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: Alternative No.1 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Applicant Narrative 3. Survey 4. Resolution 25-0xPC 14416 WATERSEDGE TRL NE VARIANCE LOCATION MAP Rut g e r s S t N E Boudin St NE L o i s A v e N E Timothy Ave NE W a t e r s e d g e T rl N E 42 44 12 2721 21 14 16 23 82 83 1817 0 280 560 840 1,120 Feet Subject Properties Subject Property SUMMARY OF THE PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS: BOUDIN'S MANOR, LOT 25, SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA. * FULL LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS AVAILABLE AT PRIOR LAKE CITY HALL. µ SPRING LAKE A written narrative describing the request and how it meets the flve (5) variance criteria 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 • We are requesting to build a 4-season family room on the main fioor (currently the deck is here) and concurrently build a new deck to the side of this new family room (off of the kitchen) in order to maintain the same outdoor footprint. • We purchased our home on Prior Lake in August of 2022. At the time, we knew it could flt us in the short-term, but we would need to make improvements and do an addition quickly given our family of 7. • Before we purchased the home, we talked to area real estate agents and contractors to ensure that what we were thinking was feasible. From our understanding, we could not exceed the current impervious surface footprint and we based our initial plans on this. We felt we were being diligent upfront to ensure our purchase could accommodate our family going forward. • We began working with a contractor in June of 2024 and started the design work for an addition. The contractor was in communication with the city planning department as the design work was in process. • In the Spring of 2025, we met with city planning and building officials to share our designs and seek their guidance. We were told that our plans did not fully comply with all ordinances, which we were unaware of since we assumed the previous owners had received the proper approvals. • We took their feedback and scaled back our desired plans. i. We eliminated the basement addition, the roof over the deck and several other components. ii. We adjusted our proposed improvements dramatically and believed this design was the minimum necessary for our family to stay in the home. • On July 14th, we submitted our Variance Request and then on July 29th we met again with Paul Moretto on the city staff. He worked with us a second time to formulate another plan that better meets the city’s requirements. • Paul’s guidance was very helpful; he requested we make additional changes, which we have done: i. We moved the stairs further off from the side yard setback ii. We reduced the size of the new deck to comply with the rear setback iii. We reduced the amount of impervious surface that the previous owners put in; again we were unaware that the previous owners increased the pervious surface without the proper approvals. • In order to remove impervious surface: i. We are removing our patio pavers and plan to use pervious pea gravel (or similar) under the deck. ii. We will also shrink the driveway that the previous owners put in so that the end of it is 24’ wide. • Our goal is to have a successful, long life in Prior Lake. We have fallen in love with the community and have quickly become regulars at the local restaurants, farmers market and stores. • Again, Paul and his team have been very helpful as we navigate this process, and we believe the revised plans refiect their guidance. Unfortunately we inherited a situation from the previous owners and are making steps to rectify their mistakes at additional cost and compromises to our original plans. We hope that the multiple changes and reductions show that we are working with the city in good faith. 2) The granting of the Variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the City Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances and the Comprehensive Plan. • We believe this to be true as we are not asking for any enhancements that would increase the percentage of impervious surface on the property. 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. • When we purchased the property the impervious surface was at 43.2%. The owner of the house prior to the previous owner (2 owners ago) made enhancements to the driveway and the patio that took it to this level. We were unaware of any issues related to the impervious surface at the time of purchase, and were of the understanding that any enhancements/additions would be flne as long as we did not increase the impervious surface beyond this level. As described in #1 above, we purchased the property knowing that an addition would be needed to accommodate the size of our family (5 kids, 7 total people) and have been operating under this understanding. • Reducing these surfaces presents hardship for us in terms of time and cost that will be added to the project that we weren’t anticipating but are willing to make these changes in order to expand the indoor living space and keep the same outdoor footprint to accommodate our family size. 4) The granting of the variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or be detrimental to the health and safety of the public welfare. • The improvements will not pose any inconvenience for any neighbor or the neighborhood at large. • The improvements will enhance the property’s curb appeal from the lake. • No neighboring sight lines to the lake will be impacted by the improvements. 5) The granting of the Variance 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 variance is adding a 4-season family room and extended deck to maintain the outdoor access and footprint. The property use will remain the same. 1 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 RESOLUTION 25-07PC VARIANCE FROM THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE MAXIMUM TO ALLOW FOR A HOME ADDITION ON A PROPERTY IN THE R-1 SD (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL SHORELAND) ZONING DISTRICT WHEREAS, The Prior Lake Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Adjustment, conducted a public hearing on August 11, 2025, to consider a request from Jeffery Milkie and Amy Goin, the property owners, requesting a variance from maximum impervious surface to allow construction of a home addition on a property located in the R-1 SD (Low Density Residential Shoreland) Zoning District at the following property, legally described as: Lot 25 Boudin’s Manor, Scott County, Minnesota. (PID 251190210) Address: 14416 Watersedge Trail NE, Prior Lake, MN 55372; and WHEREAS, Notice of the public hearing on said variance request was duly published in accordance with the applicable Prior Lake Ordinances; and WHEREAS, The Board of Adjustment proceeded to hear all persons interested in this variance request, and persons interested were afforded the opportunity to present their views and objections related to the variance request; and WHEREAS, The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for the variances as contained in Case #DEV25-000013 and held a hearing thereon on August 11, 2025; and WHEREAS, The Board of Adjustment has considered the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety, and welfare of the community, the existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on property values in the surrounding area and the effect of the proposed variance on the Comprehensive Plan. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA as follows: 1. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein. 2. The Board of Adjustment hereby adopts the following findings: a. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Zoning Code. The granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purposes of the Zoning Code. The purpose of the Zoning Code is to “Promote the most appropriate and orderly development of the residential, business, industrial, public land, and public areas”. b. Variances shall only be permitted when they are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2 The granting of the variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and its goal to maintain and improve physical character and identity. This is accomplished by achieving compatible relationships between different types of land uses by utilizing design standards, appropriate buffers, land use transitions, and high-quality design. c. Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the Zoning Code. “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 Code, the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Substandard Lot Width and Area: The lot is only 63 feet wide 6,964 square feet in area, both of which are below the minimum standards for the Shoreland Overlay District. This narrow lot width creates an unusually constrained buildable area, especially when factoring in required setbacks and existing building footprint. Reasonable Use Consistent with Neighborhood: The applicant is seeking to construct a four-season porch over an existing patio, a common residential improvement that is found on many nearby lots. Reduction in Existing Impervious Surface: Although the requested impervious surface exceeds the 30% maximum, the proposed plan would reduce the current impervious surface coverage from 43.2% to 38.9%, moving the property closer to compliance. Reduction of Driveway Width to 24 ft.: The applicant is proposing removing impervious surface related to the width of the driveway. Their proposal will make the driveway width conforming at the front property line. Not Self-Created: The unique constraints of the property, including the lot size and width, and location of the existing home were not created by the applicant and predate their ownership. These factors result from historic platting and development patterns that do not align with current zoning standards. No Alteration to Neighborhood Character: The proposed addition would be located in the rear yard, minimizing visual or spatial impact. The structure is consistent with the residential character and scale of surrounding properties, and it would not alter the essential character of the locality. d. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations alone are not the reason for the variance request. 3. Based upon the findings set forth herein, the Board of Adjustment hereby approves the following variance to allow the construction of a four season porch and rear deck per the proposed survey in the R-1 SD (Low Density Residential Shoreland) Zoning District: a. A variance for impervious surface from 30% to 38.9%. (Subsection 10-435(5)) 4. The variances are subject to the following conditions of approval: a. The applicant shall provide a grading plan confirming all stormwater drainage from the driveway will be managed on their property. 3 b. The variance resolution shall be recorded at Scott County. c. Building Permit shall be obtained from the Building Department prior to the commencement of construction. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025. _______________________________ Jason Tschetter, Commission Chair ATTEST: _________________________________ Casey McCabe, Community Development Director VOTE Tschetter Johnson Fenstermacher Tennison Ringstad Aye ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Nay ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Absent ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Abstain ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐