HomeMy WebLinkAbout_02 02 2026 PCM Agenda_Full Packet
Phone 952.447.9800 / PriorLakeMN.gov
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Monday, February 2, 2026
City Council Chambers
6:00 p.m.
1. Call Meeting to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
2. Election of Officers
3. Approval of Agenda
4. Approval of the October 27, 2025, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
5. Public Hearings:
A. PDEV26-000001 – 15563 Ridgemont Ave SE – Combined Preliminary and Final Plat – Lisa
Burnham, on behalf of the homeowner Kathleen Hoff, is requesting approval of a combined
preliminary and final plat at 15563 Ridgemont Ave SE. The request proposes reconfiguration of
the single existing lot into two separate lots. (PID: 250540030)
B. Amendments – Consider amendments to the Prior Lake City Code Section 10-789 (g), Election
Signs, related to setback conditions.
6. Old Business:
None.
7. New Business:
None.
8. Adjournment
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: February 2, 2026
AGENDA #: 2
PREPARED BY: Casey McCabe, Community Development Director
PRESENTED BY: Casey McCabe
AGENDA ITEM: Election of Officers
DISCUSSION: Introduction
The purpose of this agenda item is to elect a Chair and Vice-Chair from among
the Planning Commission members.
Current Circumstances
Section 206, Officers, of the Planning Commission Bylaws state, the Planning
Commission shall elect from among its membership a chair and vice-chair.
The Chair shall be elected by majority vote of the Planning Commission prior to
the first meeting in November. The term of the chair shall begin in November and
run for one year. The duties of the chair shall include approval of meeting agen-
das, presiding at meetings, participating with the City Council in the selection of
Commission members, semi-annual reporting to the City Council and shall give
an accounting of its activities and any information the Commission may consider
relevant before the City Council annually or as directed otherwise.
The vice-chair shall be selected annually by the Commission and shall perform
the duties of the Chair in their absence. The vice-chair shall assume such other
duties as assigned by the chair.
Conclusion
All regular voting Planning Commission members are eligible to become Chair
and Vice-Chair.
ISSUES: The Commissioners selected to become Chair and Vice-Chair shall serve in that
role for the remainder of the current term, which expires on October 31, 2026.
ALTERNATIVES: 1. Motion and Second to nominate a member of the Planning Commission to
serve as Chair.
2. Motion and Second to nominate a member of the Planning Commission to
serve as Vice-Chair.
RECOMMENDED
MOTIONS:
Alternatives #1 & #2
1
PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Monday October 27, 2025
1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance:
Chair Ringstad called the Monday October 27, 2025 Prior Lake Planning Commission meeting to
order at 6:00 p.m. Commissioners: Dan Ringstad, Michael Tennison, Doug Johnson, Christian
Fenstermacher, and Kate Yurko. Also, present were Community Development Director McCabe,
Planner Jacob Skluzacek, Assistant City Engineer Luke Schwarz, and Deputy Clerk /
Administrative Assistant Megan Kooiman.
2. Approval of Monday October 27, 2025 Agenda:
MOTION BY TENNISON SECONDED BY FENSTERMACHER TO APPROVE THE MONDAY
OCTOBER 27, 2025 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA.
VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Fenstermacher, Tennison, Johnson, and Yurko.
Motion carried 5-0.
3. Approval of Monday, October 13, 2025, Meeting Minutes:
MOTION BY FENSTERMACHER SECONDED BY YURKO TO APPROVE THE MONDAY,
OCTOBER 13, 2025, PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES.
VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Fenstermacher, Tennison, Johnson, and Yurko.
Motion carried 5-0.
4. Public Hearing
A. PDEV25-000017 – 3950 Green Heights Trail SW– Variance – Prior Lake B Squared Ventures,
LLC on the behalf of Prior Lake Economic Development Authority to amend a previously approved
preliminary planned unit development (PUD) plan.
Community Development Director McCabe: Introduced item 4A as a public hearing to consider
a request for a Planned Unit Development Amendment to a previously approved Preliminary
Planned Unit Development Plan for a mixed-use apartment and commercial building located at
4662 & 4664 Dakota St (PIDs 255650020 & 255650030). McCabe explained the current
circumstances, physical site characteristics, and the changes between the last approval and the
current approval. City staff are recommending approval of the Preliminary Planned Unit
Development amendment.
Commissioner’s Questions:
Ringstad: Asked if the fire department can comfortably accommodate a building of this size with
the proposed rooftop accommodation for entertainment, etc.
McCabe: Replied yes.
Tennison: Asked if this area would accommodate food deliveries and parking of a semi-truck.
McCabe: Explained the area could accommodate delivery vehicles.
Johnson: Questioned city rules regarding overnight parking and repetitive parking in public stalls.
McCabe: Explained the on-street parking rules and regulations and said the outcome of illegal
parking would be enforced by the police.
Johnson: Pointed out the busy weekend parking and questioned the exterior building principal
materials gap.
McCabe: Commented on the building material changes, stating the applicant is still proposing
use of high-quality materials.
Johnson: Mentioned the large reduction from the previous PUD and questioned why we would
set the standards at 80 percent and then reduce it to 33 percent.
2
McCabe: Replied that the scale of the building is the reasoning for the reduction as most town
center buildings are one or two stories and it is more difficult to meet the higher standard of
building materials with a five-story building; suggested the applicant would be able to provide a
more thorough explanation on this matter.
Fenstermacher: Questioned if a City Code adjustment was needed due to the feasibility of the
exterior material requirement after the reduction from 80% for a larger scale building.
McCabe: Replied that it would be good to review, but currently the City does not have different
standards for different height buildings in City Code.
Fenstermacher: Asked what the requirement for the restaurant parking was and if it was entirely
public parking only.
McCabe: Said the Town Center has a parking requirement for the residential use, but not the
commercial use. Residential uses are required to provide 1.5 parking stalls per unit, commercial
uses are not required to provide parking. The plan proposes 28 public surface stalls on the
property and 6 on-street spaces. He explained the differences in hours of operation regarding the
existing uses in the area being more 8:00-5:00 versus the restaurant which will have more
demand during later hours of the day.
Fenstermacher: Questioned the market study regarding target vacancy rates/affordable rates.
McCabe: Replied that the developer may be more familiar with demand and referenced a study
that identified strong demand for market rate rental units in Prior Lake.
Fenstermacher: Asked if the study identified a target vacancy rate.
McCabe: Replied no.
Yurko: Asked if there was a loading dock associated with the building.
McCabe: Replied there was no loading dock proposed.
Yurko: Said without a loading dock, the delivery trucks would be larger in size, due to needing
their own lift.
McCabe: Replied yes.
Yurko: Questioned if the longevity and maintenance of the building’s exterior had been
considered, especially at grade and street level due to our climate.
McCabe: Said the applicant and their architect would have a better answer on this subject.
Yurko: Questioned if the Lakefront Plaza parking was full in their compacity and how many of the
residences park outside of their parking structure.
McCabe: Replied yes as they have 84 stalls for 80 units. Explained the ratio of residents to
parking spaces.
Yurko: Questioned if there has been a Town Center parking study recently and mentioned the
high demand for parking, especially with events and having a vibrant downtown.
McCabe: Stated there was a study done about five years ago.
Yurko: Asked where residents would park, if the underground is full.
McCabe: Stated the developers have experience with this type of parking in other communities
and feel comfortable with the ratio of parking to meet the demands of their tenants.
Applicant:
Bryan Farrell: Owner of Northland Real Estate Group, address, 3106 Priest Lane, Mound, MN.
He introduced the group that was in attendance tonight and stated that their team was proud of
what they have created. He explained some of the other properties/projects they have been
involved with.
Rob Miller: Team Member Development, address, 18578 Bear Path Trail in Eden Prairie, MN.
He addressed the parking questions by using the example of the OMRY at Canterbury, stating
they were confident that the underground car park at CORA will meet parking needs.
Craig Hartman: Momentum Design Group, 2132 Kings Terrace, Woodbury, MN. He addressed
the question relating to materials, stating they want to maintain the look and feel of the previous
PUD and explained the slight change of material, stating they were looking to mimic a sail. He
3
said it is a cementitious product with a masonry base, explaining this type of look and feel for the
front of the building.
Ringstad: Asked if the cost had anything to do with the further reduction in the building materials
from what was approved three and a half years ago.
Rob Miller: Replied that it had and said they were trying to make this project a reality. He pointed
out that economics are certainly a variable to the equation but also part of it is working with radius
materials in the sale area as well.
Ringstad: Commented on the size of this building in relation to hitting the 80 percent requirement.
Tennison: Asked for feedback on how many people the restaurant rooftop patio would hold and
who would be able to use it.
Farrell: Stated that the restaurant patio/deck would be open to the public.
Hartman: Replied that there would be about 15 square feet per person; about 100 people from
an egress and a general space standpoint.
Fenstermacher: Questioned the market rate; asking if there was some kind of target that was
reviewed to ensure the project would be viable and successful.
Farrell: Replied that 5% vacancy was considered market equilibrium; therefore, if you see a
number below 5% that means there is generally more demand in the marketplace.
MOTION BY YURKO, SECONDED BY FENSTERMACHER TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING
ON ITEM 4A AT 6:40 P.M.
VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Fenstermacher, Tennison, Johnson, and Yurko.
Motion carried 5-0.
Public Comment:
Shirley Gingras: Resides at Lakefront Plaza, 16154 Main Ave SE. Commented on liking the
small-town community and felt the 5-story building would change that feel. She said using the
building in Shakopee was not a good comparison, as a five-story building doesn’t belong in
downtown Prior Lake when there are already parking and delivery concerns. Commented that
only the people that live downtown understand the current parking issues and how residents take
pride in calling small downtown Prior Lake home but questioned how they can continue to call it
a small town.
Helen Rusert: Resides at Lakefront Plaza, 16154 Main Ave SE. Questioned the scale of the
building and why they were removing the penthouse units to add additional apartments, as this
will only lead to the need for additional parking. She echoed Gingras’ comments regarding
understanding parking issues only if you live downtown. She shared concerns for safety with the
daycare, traffic, lack of visibility on the road, changing materials of the building, and dropping
property values. She pointed out that some people paid more for their view of the land and now
will be looking at an apartment building.
Rob Miller: Replied the upper level apartments are still very large and the building is still
considered a luxury building. He said they have added slightly more density and tried to create
more efficient unit plans that will be a more desired. He said there is a unit count difference but
does not feel that there was any qualitative difference between what was previously reviewed and
the additions that were being proposed.
Susan Thompson: Resides at Lakefront Plaza, 16154 Main Ave SE. Thompson shared her
experience of living in other cities and how much they have changed into concrete jungles and
lost their small-town look. Thompson approved of forward progress and growth but had major
concerns regarding parking, traffic safety issues, and bringing additional people to live downtown.
Thompson commented on donations that were made and now going to be lost, citizens unaware
of the building going up and the gateway being removed. She hoped that the building would be
built, but not downtown.
4
Kathy Nelson: Resides at Lakefront Plaza, 16154 Main Ave SE. Shared concerns about parking,
delivery, and moving trucks leading to issues which will tie up public parking. She asked the
Planning Commission to be considerate of parking not just at farmer’s market time, but always.
Virgina Hamann: Resides at Lakefront Plaza, 16154 Main Ave SE. Had concerns with the dog
population, luxury apartments, bussing and parking at the senior center. She asked the Planning
Commission to consider changing the parking.
MOTION BY FENSTERMACHER, SECONDED BY JOHNSON TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC ON
ITEM 4A AT 7:06 P.M.
VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Fenstermacher, Tennison, Johnson, and Yurko.
Motion carried 5-0.
Commissioner’s Comments:
Tennison: Stated that this was a challenging conversation and a beautiful building. He
commented on parking issues, moving in and out of the building, and space for moving trucks.
He said he understood the frustration of the neighbors next door; however, he did intend to vote
in favor.
Johnson: Thanked everyone for speaking and was appreciative for all the feedback. He shared
his concerns with underground parking fees, parking in the streets, and the type of building
materials due to reductions in favor of profits. He suggested that the exterior materials should
stay at the level originally approved.
Fenstermacher: Echoed the comments of his fellow Commissioners and stated that he
appreciated the comments from residents. He shared his concerns regarding parking and that it
was hard to go above and beyond what was required; therefore, he would be in support of this
tonight.
Yurko: Echoed colleagues’ sentiments, stating there were several areas that have erupted. She
shared her concerns about the number of units and adding to the already crowded space without
other issues being resolved first. She shared additional concerns regarding underground parking
stalls not being included in rent, and the reduction in exterior materials.
Ringstad: Thanked Staff, developers, and the community for comments, concerns, questions,
and answers. He commented on when this project originally started and stated he was
comfortable with the adjustments; therefore, would be voting in favor of this agenda item tonight.
MOTION BY TENNISON, SECONDED BY FENSTERMACHER TO AMEND A PREVIOUSLY
APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PRIOR LAKE
LUXURY APARTMENT, NOW KNOWN AS THE CORA APARTMENT BULIDING.
VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Fenstermacher, and Tennison. Nay: Johnson and Yurko
Motion carried 3-2.
5. Old Business:
None.
6. New Business:
None.
7. Announcements & Adjournment:
Announcements:
McCabe: Was not anticipating having the November 10th Planning Commission Meeting. He
acknowledged this was the last meeting for Commissioners Johnson and Ringstad and thanked
them for their service.
5
MOTION BY JOHNSON, SECONDED BY YURKO TO ADJOURN THE MONDAY OCTOBER 27,
2025, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT 7:14 P.M.
VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Fenstermacher, Tennison, Johnson, and Yurko.
Motion carried 5 -0.
Respectfully submitted,
Megan Kooiman, Deputy Clerk / Administrative Assistant
Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245 / www.cityofpriorlake.com
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: February 2, 2026
AGENDA #: 5A
PREPARED BY: Jake Skluzacek, Planner
PRESENTED BY: Jake Skluzacek
AGENDA ITEM: Consider a Recommendation of Approval for a Combined Preliminary and
Final Plat to be known as Hoff Addition
DISCUSSION: Introduction
Lisa Burnham on behalf of property owner, Kathleen A. Hoff, has applied for
approval of a Combined Preliminary and Final Plat to be known as Hoff Addition.
The applicant is proposing to subdivide their existing approximate 1.03-acre
parcel into two parcels. The subject property is located north of Hope St. SE,
west of Condons St. SE and east of Ridgemont Ave. SE.
History
The property, which totals approximately 44,895 sq. ft. is currently occupied by
an existing single-family home that fronts on Ridgemont Avenue and two small
accessory structures. The applicant is proposing to create an approximate
20,354 sq. ft. parcel around the existing home on Ridgemont Ave. (Lot 1), an
approximate 20,354 sq. ft. vacant parcel along Condons St. for future single
family residential development (Lot 2), dedicate 16.5 ft. of right-of-way on
Ridgemont Ave. and dedicate 25 ft. of right-of-way on Condons St.
When the existing house was constructed, two separate utility services were
provided from the east along Condons Street with the expectation that another
home would eventually be built on the property. The existing home’s sanitary
sewer and water services run parallel with the northern property line. The
applicant is proposing to dedicate a private utility easement over the northern
30 ft. of Lot 2 in favor of Lot 1.
Subsection 9-34 of City Code allows for the combination of a preliminary and
final plat in one action due to the simplicity of the proposed subdivision provided:
➢ The resulting subdivision contains no more than 5 lots.
The resulting subdivision will contain two lots.
➢ The proposed subdivision is located in an area where streets and utilities
are in place and capable of serving the subdivision.
Streets and utilities are available and capable of serving the
subdivision.
➢ The proposed subdivision does not require the dedication or
construction of future streets and will not interfere with the development
of adjacent properties.
The proposed subdivision will dedicate the necessary right-of-way on
Ridgemont Avenue and Condons Street and does not require
construction of streets and will not interfere with development of
adjacent property.
➢ The resulting lots shall conform with all provisions of the Zoning Code
unless a variance has been granted.
The resulting lots will both conform with all provisions of the Zoning
Code and variances will not be necessary.
Current Circumstances
The following paragraphs outline the physical characteristics of the existing site,
the comprehensive plan and zoning designations, and a description of some of
the specifics of the site.
PHYSICAL SITE CHARACTERISTICS:
Total Site Area: The total site area is 1.03 acres which is proposed to be
subdivided into two approximate 0.47 acre lots and the dedication of necessary
public right-of-way.
Wetlands: There are no wetlands on the site.
Impervious Surface Coverage: The proposed lot with the existing house is
approximately 20,354 sq. ft. The property is located within the Shoreland
District, which allows for a maximum of 30% impervious surface coverage. The
maximum impervious coverage for Lot 1 and Lot 2 will be 6,106 sq. ft. Following
the lot split, the existing house lot (Lot 1) will have approximately 4,907 sq. ft. of
impervious coverage, or roughly 24%.
Access: Access to Lot 1 is available from Ridgemont Ave SE to the west and
access to Lot 2 is available from Condons St. to the east.
2040 Comprehensive Plan Designation: This property is designated for low
density residential on the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map.
Zoning: The subject property is currently zoned R-1, low density residential.
The subject property conforms with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map
guidance.
Parks / Trails: No park or trails are proposed.
Fees and Assessments: This development will be subject to the standard
development agreement. Related trunk utility service charges have been
satisfied with a previous subdivision. The property will be subject to an
additional parkland dedication fee.
Sanitary Sewer / Water Mains: Utilities are available and appropriately sized
to serve this area. A northern private utility easement in favor of the existing
home will be required in addition to the standard public drainage and utility
easements which are shown on the plat.
Grading / Storm water: No changes to grading or stormwater are proposed as
part of this action. Stormwater requirements and grading plans will be reviewed
by City staff as part of a future building permit review process.
Existing Accessory Structures: The existing detached accessory structure is
proposed to be owned by the purchaser of the newly created lot. The location
of this accessory structure will become nonconforming once the necessary
easements are dedicated. Therefore, this accessory structure shall be required
to be moved to an approved location in conformance with City Code setback
requirements.
Conclusion
City staff recommends approval of the request for Combined Preliminary and
Final Plat. The action proposed by the property owner has been anticipated as
the next required step prior to sale or further development of the property.
ALTERNATIVES: 1. Motion and a second to recommend the City Council approve the Combined
Preliminary and Final Plat for Hoff Addition subject to the comments listed
in the 1/20/26 Community Development / Public Works Memorandum dated
1/20/26.
2. Motion and a second to recommend the City Council deny the Combined
Preliminary and Final Plat request based upon findings of fact.
3. Motion and a second to table this item to a future Planning Commission
meeting and provide the applicant with direction.
RECOMMENDED
MOTION:
Alternative #1
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map
2. Preliminary Plat
3. Final Plat
4. Community Development / Public Works Memorandum 1/20/26
R:
9
5
2
.
7
8
R:
9
5
4
.
2
5
R:950.17
GV
W
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
HO
U
S
E
PO
R
C
H
PO
R
C
H
DE
C
K
SI
D
E
W
A
L
K
EXISTING
HOUSE
SHED
RI
D
G
E
M
O
N
T
A
V
E
EXISTING
HOUSE
EXISTING
HOUSE
EXISTING
HOUSE
EXISTING
HOUSE
19
.
2
1
15
.
0
1
14
.
7
1
EXISTING BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY
HOPE STREET
EXISTING
HOUSE
CURB STOP
CURB STO
P
SHED
94
8
9
5
0
950
952
954
956
9
5
6
95
4
9
5
2
9
5
0
9
4
8
9
4
6
9
4
4
9
4
2
9
4
8
9
4
6
9
4
4
9
4
2
9
4
0
9
4
0
9
3
8
9
3
6
9
3
4
9
3
2
9
3
8
9
3
6
9
3
4
93
0
92
8
BOEGEMAN KURTIS J
15585 RIDGEMONT AVENUE SE
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
MEYERS WAYNE A. & HERBERTA M.
5040 HOPE ST. SE
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
CLAUSON CARLA ANN
5060 HOPE ST. SE
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
NELSON AMY
5076 HOPE ST. SE
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
FUGERE-BURMEISTER JORDYN
& BURMEISTER CONNOR
15540 MITCHELL CIRCLE SE.
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
JUST RODNEY
5100 CONDONS STREET SE
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
LARKIN KATIE
15543 RIDGEMONT AVENUE SE
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
MI
T
C
H
E
L
L
P
O
N
D
H
O
M
E
O
W
N
E
R
S
15
6
9
7
M
I
T
C
H
E
L
L
C
I
R
C
L
E
S
E
PR
I
O
R
L
A
K
E
M
N
,
5
5
3
7
2
P
R
I
O
R
L
A
K
E
C
I
T
Y
O
F
&
C
I
T
Y
M
A
N
A
G
E
R
4
6
4
6
D
A
K
O
T
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
E
P
R
I
O
R
L
A
K
E
M
N
,
5
5
3
7
2
PR
I
O
R
L
A
K
E
C
I
T
Y
O
F
&
C
I
T
Y
M
A
N
A
G
E
R
46
4
6
D
A
K
O
T
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
E
PR
I
O
R
L
A
K
E
M
N
,
5
5
3
7
2
68.70
101.70
FD IP
FD IP
#42309
FD IP
FD IP
#6508
FD IP
FD IP
FD IP
#10183S89°55'58"E 444.82
N89°55'58"W 444.82
N0
0
°
3
6
'
1
6
"
E
1
0
0
.
9
3
S0
0
°
3
6
'
1
6
"
W
1
0
0
.
9
3
30
30
10
10
5 5
DRAINAGE &
UTILITY EASEMENT10
10
5
10
10
5 5
LOT 1
LOT 2
S0
°
3
6
'
1
6
"
W
10
0
.
9
3
N0
°
3
6
'
1
6
"
E
10
0
.
9
3
S0
°
3
6
'
1
6
"
W
10
0
.
9
3
201.6616.50 201.66 25.00
25.00201.66201.6616.50
5
#15585
#5040
#5076
25
41EASEMENT
20
20
10
1
MI
T
C
H
E
L
L
CI
R
C
L
E
S
E
APPROXIMATE SANITARY SEWER SERVICE
APPROXIMATE WATER SERVICE
REV.
SHEETCHECKEDDESIGNED
DATEDRAWN
SCALE
JOB NO.
DATE____________ REG. NO._________
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED
BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND
THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR
UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.LISA BURNHAM
NEED ADDRESS
XXX
JPM
AS SHOWN
19003.10
XXX
XXX
PRIOR LAKE MINNESOTA
PRELIMINARY PLAT
HOFF ADDITION
1
DRAFT
BUILDING SETBACKS:
FRONT=25 FEET
SIDE=10 FEET
REAR=30 FEET
FD IP
FD IP
#42309
FD IP
FD IP
#6508
FD IP
FD IP
#10183
30
N89°55'58"W 444.82
N0
0
°
3
6
'
1
6
"
E
1
0
0
.
9
3
S89°55'58"E 444.82
S0
0
°
3
6
'
1
6
"
W
1
0
0
.
9
3
1 2
30
S0
°
3
6
'
1
6
"
W
10
0
.
9
3
S0
°
3
6
'
1
6
"
W
10
0
.
9
3
N0
°
3
6
'
1
6
"
E
10
0
.
9
3
16.50 201.66 201.66
201.66 201.6616.50 25.00
25.00
DRAINAGE &
UTILITY EASEMENT
RI
D
G
E
M
O
N
T
A
V
E
N
U
E
CO
N
D
O
N
S
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
.
E
.
N89°55'58"W
16.50
N0
°
3
6
'
1
6
"
E
34
7
.
7
5
1
TH
E
W
E
S
T
L
I
N
E
O
F
TH
E
S
O
U
T
H
W
E
S
T
QU
A
R
T
E
R
25
41
EASEMENT
10
20
20
WEST QUARTER CORNER OF
SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 114,
RANGE 22
BEING 5 FEET IN WIDTH AND ADJOINING SIDE
LOT LINES,UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED,
AND 10 FEET IN WIDTH AND ADJOINING
STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES AND REAR LOT
LINES, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS
DENOTES 1/2" IRON MONUMENT FOUND,
UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN.
DENOTES 1/2" BY 14" IRON MONUMENT
SET MARKED BY LICENSE NUMBER 19086,
UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN.
ARE SHOWN THUS
THE WEST LINE OF THE SW 1/4 OF
SECTION 9 HAS AN ASSUMED BEARING
OF N 0°36'16" E.
5
5
10 10
[Phone] 952-447-9800 | [Fax] 952-447-4245 | cityofpriorlake.com
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Memorandum
To: Russell P. Damlo, Probe Engineering Company, Inc.
From: Jake Skluzacek, Planner
Luke Schwarz, Assistant City Engineer
Date: January 20, 2026
Re: Hoff Addition Review Memo
We have reviewed the Existing Condition, Preliminary Plat and Final Plat for Revere Addition prepared by
Probe Engineering Company, Inc. received on 1/6/26. The following comments were received:
General
1. Standard drainage and utility easements of 5’ shall be dedicated to the Public along the south and
north property lines. side lot lines. Standard drainage and utility easements of 10’ shall be
dedicated to the Public along the east and west property lines.
2. A private drainage and utility easement over the north 30’ of Lot 2 in favor of Lot 1 shall be
dedicated prior to the issuance of any permits for work on the property.
3. The existing shed located in the proposed easement area on Lot 2 shall be removed or relocated
in conformance with Prior Lake City Code setback requirements prior to issuance of any permits
for work on the property.
4. Right of way on Ridgemont Avenue (16.5’) and Condons Street (25’) shall be dedicated to the
Public on the final plat.
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 2, 2026
AGENDA #: 5B
PREPARED BY: JAKE SKLUZACEK, PLANNER
PRESENTED BY: JAKE SKLUZACEK
AGENDA ITEM: CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO PRIOR LAKE CITY CODE SECTION 10-789
(g), ELECTION SIGNS
DISCUSSION: Introduction
The purpose of this agenda item is to hold a public hearing and consider a rec-
ommendation to city council related to approval of proposed amendments to Sec-
tion 10-789 (g) of the Prior Lake Zoning Code relating to Election Signs.
Background
Staff have identified a section of the zoning code related to Election Sign condi-
tions which resulted in numerous complaints to code enforcement staff during the
2025 election season and proved difficult to enforce.
The term “Election Sign” is defined by Prior Lake City Code as a temporary sign
promoting the candidacy of a person running for governmental office or promoting
an issue to be voted on at a governmental election.
Section 10-789 (g) lists the conditions associated with permitting Election Signs
in the City including a requirement that election signs be placed on private prop-
erty and prohibiting Election Signs from locating within five (5) feet of all property
lines. This setback requirement led to several complaints this past election sea-
son for signs placed on private property where the complainant did not feel they
met the five-foot setback requirement.
Current Circumstances
In most cases, city staff does not have the ability to locate property lines to verify
whether the sign meets the five foot setback requirement; further, staff does not
feel it is a great use of time and resources to investigate election signs on private
property only to ultimately have the sign moved a few feet if it is found to be in
violation of city code requirements. Staff are recommending a City Code update
to remove the 5-foot setback condition in its entirety. If approved, election signs
would still be required to be located on private property; however, there would no
longer be a setback requirement from property lines.
Conclusion
The proposed zoning ordinance amendments would eliminate a five-foot property
line setback requirement for election signs and ease city staff’s ability to enforce
city code requirements.
Section 10-932 (i) (Policy for Amendments) states recommendations of the plan-
ning commission and final determinations of the city council shall be supported
2
by findings addressing the relationship of the proposed amendment to the follow-
ing policies:
In the case of amendments to the text of the Zoning Code:
➢ There is a public need for the amendments, or
➢ The amendments will accomplish one or more of the purposes of the Zon-
ing Code, the Comprehensive Plan or other adopted plans or policies of
the City, or
➢ The adoption of the amendments is consistent with State and/or federal
requirements.
In staff’s opinion, the proposed amendments are consistent with State require-
ments and will help accomplish the following findings and purpose of the Zoning
Code:
➢ Provide effective administration of this chapter and any future amend-
ments to this chapter and prescribe penalties for the violation of its re-
quirements.
➢ Establish a continuing system of review of this chapter to ensure it will be
amended to meet changing needs of the city and advances in science
and technology.
ISSUES: City staff are requesting the Planning Commission recommend approval of the
proposed amendments associated with Section 10-789 (g) of the Prior Lake Zon-
ing Code.
ALTERNATIVES: 1. Motion and a second to recommend approval of the proposed amendments
to Section 10-789 (g) of the Prior Lake Zoning Code.
2. Motion and a second to recommend denial of the proposed amendments to
Section 10-789 (g) of the Prior Lake Zoning Code.
3. Motion and a second to table discussion of the item to a future meeting date
and provide staff with direction.
RECOMMENDED
MOTION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Alternative #1
1. Proposed Amendment
SECTION 10-789 (g)
ELECTION SIGNS
(g) Election signs.
(1) Any election signs pertinent to Minn. Stats. § 211B.045 shall be allowed on private property
with the express consent of the owner or occupant of such property. In a state
general election year, such signs may not be posted more than 46 days before the date of
the election and must be removed by those responsible for the erection of the sign or the property
owner within ten days following the state general election. Such signs shall be located at least
five feet from all property lines.
(2) Election signs for elections held at other times than a state general election year shall be
located on private property and at least five feet from all property lines.
(Prior Code, § 1147.400)